Mike Sheahan predicts 6-8 finish

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • SWANSBEST
    On the Rookie List
    • Jan 2003
    • 868

    Mike Sheahan predicts 6-8 finish

    Still boasting the Goodes
    03 March 2004 Herald Sun
    Mike Sheahan

    NO ONE, from Bob Carr or Bob Skilton down, dared predict a top-four finish for Sydney in 2003.

    Those of us dealing in logic rather than hope tipped the Swans to struggle.

    OK, some of us thought they might finish bottom.

    A month into the season, with one win from four starts, the prophets of doom looked to be on the money.

    Deep into September, deep into a preliminary final at Telstra Stadium, the Swans were three points down against Brisbane in the fight for a Grand Final berth.

    While teams can't actually play above themselves, Sydney played at its peak for the best part of six months.

    As many as 10 players produced career-best seasons, from Brownlow medallist Adam Goodes down.

    Barry Hall was another, Leo Barry, Brett Kirk, Jude and Craig Bolton, too.

    Eleven players played all 24 games, three others missed just one. No other club had more than seven players for every week.

    Then there was Sydney's accuracy in front of goal. The Swans kicked 343.240. That's a conversion rate of 58 per cent; that's good. Brisbane's figures were 394.340 (53 per cent).

    No club got even close to Sydney's efficiency rate.

    The doubters say it was fluky and won't happen again.

    The Swans would say they have blokes who can kick straight: Hall (64.35), Michael O'Loughlin (41.20), Nick Davis (32.19) and Adam Schneider (30.23).

    Team rules might be a factor, too. The Swans seem to minimise risks kicking for goal, preferring to square the ball if they're not confident of converting. Possession is too important these days simply to blaze away in hope.

    While reservations persist about Sydney, the Swans seem to be in good shape.

    Goodes and Hall have become elite players, Goodes and Paul Williams made the All-Australian team, Leo Barry should have; Hall and Kirk had to be in the mix.

    The expected return of Jason Ball to rucking duties might make Goodes even more dangerous.

    Ball is critically important and was a big loss after dislocating his shoulder in Round 17.

    In 2002, when the Swans finished 11th, Ball didn't play a game because of a groin injury. The previous year, when he finished fourth in the best-and-fairest, they finished seventh.

    Sydney kept personnel changes to a minimum over summer. Daryn Cresswell was the best of those who retired or moved elsewhere, while the newcomers were youngsters.

    The Swans went close to securing Daniel Bradshaw from Brisbane before he decided to stay with the Lions. An ex-Lion, Craig Bolton, was a major success story last year.

    He managed only 29 games in three seasons with Brisbane, but played all 24 games last year, finishing sixth in the best-and-fairest.

    He played tall and short, spending time in defence and the midfield. He might share centre half-back this year with Lewis Roberts-Thomson, tall enough to play ruck, talented enough to play key position.

    Of the newcomers, Jarrad McVeigh, Nick Malceski and Mark Powell look prospects.

    McVeigh, younger brother of Essendon's Mark, is skilled and an excellent runner. The Bombers were keen to get him to Windy Hill; this time, Sydney hung on to local talent.

    Fourteen players on the Sydney list, rookies included, have links with Sydney clubs, New South Wales towns or the NSW/ACT under-18 team, a healthy development.

    While the Swans have had a lengthy injury list between seasons, they should start the season at full strength.

    O'Loughlin, perhaps the major concern, is on track to start against Brisbane in Round 1. His 41 goals came from 16 games. He was flying when he ripped a hamstring in Round 22 against Melbourne, when he kicked five goals.

    Hall, O'Loughlin, Davis and Schneider kicked 167 goals between them, an excellent return from a quartet.

    The Swans play with the confidence cultivated by a coach who believes footballers perform better when they feel good about themselves.

    The self-belief was such they beat Brisbane (twice), Collingwood and Port Adelaide.

    We saw enough last year to know this group can play exciting, winning footy.

    Twelve games in Sydney (nine SCG, three Telstra Stadium) is handy, too.

    Likely finish: 6-8.

    WMP
  • Reggi
    On the Rookie List
    • Jan 2003
    • 2718

    #2
    Funny the conclusions he draws - at least he doesn't find reasons for us finishing outside the 8 - other than our disturbing injury list which seems to gain two every week.

    After not spotting big problems 6 - 8 hmmmmmmmmmm
    You don't ban those who supported your opponent, you make them wallow in their loserdom by covering your victory! You sit them in the front row. You give them a hat! Toby Ziegler

    Comment

    • jixygirl
      On the Rookie List
      • Jun 2003
      • 432

      #3
      I found it suprising after how Mike Sheehan was saying fantastic things about us that he predicted us to finish 6-8. Maybe he's trying to be cautious so he doesn't end up eating his words as badly as he (and others) did last year.
      Sydney Swans Premiers 2005 - The Mighty Bloods

      Comment

      • lizz
        Veteran
        Site Admin
        • Jan 2003
        • 16778

        #4
        Originally posted by Reggi
        Funny the conclusions he draws - at least he doesn't find reasons for us finishing outside the 8 - other than our disturbing injury list which seems to gain two every week.

        After not spotting big problems 6 - 8 hmmmmmmmmmm
        I think his reasons (if Sheahan ever has sensible reasons) are implied by the following quotes

        "While teams can't actually play above themselves, Sydney played at its peak for the best part of six months.

        As many as 10 players produced career-best seasons, from Brownlow medallist Adam Goodes down. "


        "Eleven players played all 24 games, three others missed just one. No other club had more than seven players for every week."

        Implications are that those players did, in fact, play above themselves and won't repeat it, and that we had a dream run with injuries that we have no right to expect will happen again.

        Have very little time for the intellectual might of Mike Sheahan so not going to worry too much...

        Personally, I reckon we'll either be top 4 or bottom 6 - ie either it will all hang together again or it will all fall completely apart. Only a hunch though.

        Comment

        • TheHood
          On the Rookie List
          • Jan 2003
          • 1938

          #5
          Originally posted by lizz
          Personally, I reckon we'll either be top 4 or bottom 6 - ie either it will all hang together again or it will all fall completely apart. Only a hunch though.
          And that is the reason you're not asked to draw an estimation of the table at season's end. You'd probably have 2 tables to hedge your bets??

          (the Hood says knowing full well Lizz will come back at him hard)

          This is the reason Sydney supporters have a reputation of being soft, fickle, jonnycomelately, band wagoners!

          When you get on your team, you get on your bloody team. We have no reason to go into this season pessimistic. Since when has the Melbourne media known exactly what goes on up here - almost bloody never!
          The Pain of Discipline is Nothing Like The Pain of Disappointment

          Comment

          • chammond
            • Jan 2003
            • 1368

            #6
            Originally posted by TheHood
            When you get on your team, you get on your bloody team.
            Except for Jason Saddington?

            Personally, I reckon we'll either be top 4 or bottom 6 - ie either it will all hang together again or it will all fall completely apart. Only a hunch though.
            I don't know what Liz's reasoning is, but I've got no doubt that her conclusion is right.

            The equation is simple. Ball and Goodes are two of the very best rucks in the comp. If they both stay fit for the whole season we will finish top 4.

            If they both suffer serious injury we will finish bottom 4.

            If only one of them stays fit, we will finish somewhere in between.

            Comment

            • NMWBloods
              Taking Refuge!!
              • Jan 2003
              • 15819

              #7
              Originally posted by chammond
              I don't know what Liz's reasoning is, but I've got no doubt that her conclusion is right.
              Given she has selected 10/16 spots, there's probably a fair chance she will be.

              The equation is simple. Ball and Goodes are two of the very best rucks in the comp. If they both stay fit for the whole season we will finish top 4.

              If they both suffer serious injury we will finish bottom 4.

              If only one of them stays fit, we will finish somewhere in between.
              So you're saying either we'll finish top 4 or we'll finish bottom 6 or we'll finish 5-10. I reckon there is a pretty good chance you'll be right...
              Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

              "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

              Comment

              • lizz
                Veteran
                Site Admin
                • Jan 2003
                • 16778

                #8
                Originally posted by chammond


                The equation is simple. Ball and Goodes are two of the very best rucks in the comp. If they both stay fit for the whole season we will finish top 4.

                If they both suffer serious injury we will finish bottom 4.

                If only one of them stays fit, we will finish somewhere in between.
                That was part of it.

                I have few doubts that our forward line will fire if it gets even half decent service. And I don't worry too much about our defence so long as it receives support from further upfield.

                But there is still a great question mark over a midfield that has now lost Cressa on the back of PK the previous year. Even if B1 and Kirk reproduce last seasons form (of which I am optimistic) and Maxfield and Willo show no signs of ageing, and Fossie, Crouch and Mathews at least retain their recent form, we still need to find another body or two to help out. When it is confident, the skills are up and the boys are working hard, our midfield can function well. But just a tiny drop away and it is in danger of being over-run by a dozen other midfields that have greater ball winning pedigree.

                If our midfield can at least hold its own, I believe our forward and defensive strength makes us better than most other teams. However, if it can't, I believe we are worse than most other teams in spite of our superiority in other departments. Hence I don't see us as a middle of the table team but one that could sit at either end.
                Last edited by liz; 4 March 2004, 12:23 PM.

                Comment

                • Doctor J.
                  Senior Player
                  • Feb 2003
                  • 1310

                  #9
                  @@@@ey Mikey strikes again

                  I read that article and thought I was reading a Mad Comic.

                  Never laughed so much in all my life.

                  Love the way he started out kinda justifying why /how he got it so wrong last year. On the basis of where this fool puts us this year, we could safely assume that the flag will be waving from atop the SCG members stand throughout season 2005.

                  Comment

                  • DST
                    The voice of reason!
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 2705

                    #10
                    That article by Sheehan is actually very balanced.

                    He makes a very good case as to how he got it so wrong last year. When you see the facts like how many players played every game, how many had career best years and how acruate we were in front of goal it does go along way to explaining the year we had.

                    Pound for pound on pure talent you would say we are around the 4th to 9th mark, but we all know that you are not always going to have your most talented on the field every week and even if you do they may not always fire.

                    6 to 8th for mine looks a reasonable estimate, we then see during the year how the opposition are travelling and whether we are able to consistently get our best team on the park.

                    DST
                    Last edited by DST; 4 March 2004, 09:48 AM.
                    "Looking forward to a rebuilt, new, fast and exciting Swans model in 2010"

                    Comment

                    • Charlie
                      On the Rookie List
                      • Jan 2003
                      • 4101

                      #11
                      Have the guts to back your side.

                      They earned it last year.
                      We hate Anthony Rocca
                      We hate Shannon Grant too
                      We hate scumbag Gaspar
                      But Leo WE LOVE YOU!

                      Comment

                      • NMWBloods
                        Taking Refuge!!
                        • Jan 2003
                        • 15819

                        #12
                        The difference between wanting them to do well and realistically assessing where you think they may finish has nothing to do with guts. It's a difference between a subjective and objective view, and has no effect on your support for the side and has no effect on the outcome of the games.
                        Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

                        "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

                        Comment

                        • DST
                          The voice of reason!
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 2705

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Charlie
                          Have the guts to back your side.

                          They earned it last year.
                          I always back my side to the hilt and beleive you me they did earn it last year. I was commenting on the article by Sheehan, which on the face of it looks balanced.

                          I don't think any of us would tell you that based on pure talent we are in top 4 or 5 in the league and that is what Sheehan is in effect doing, coming up with a ladder based on each sides best. he can't possibly now factor in things like injuries, form slumps, bad umpiring etc

                          I beleive we will finish in the top four this year but it will mean we would have had to have at least a good a year in terms injuries and form from last year. Especially since we have not added anything in the way of expeirenced players to slot into the side straight away this year.

                          I love the club and would dearly love to see them win a premiership this year, but I am also a realist who knows that all things being equal other clubs out there are more of a legitimate chance than we are at present.

                          DST
                          "Looking forward to a rebuilt, new, fast and exciting Swans model in 2010"

                          Comment

                          • TheHood
                            On the Rookie List
                            • Jan 2003
                            • 1938

                            #14
                            To be perfectly honest with you. I really don't care where we are on the ladder and I don't care much for table predictions either.

                            Personally, I will be satisfied if we play hard each game and make every contest. Results should follow. Gone are the days of Rocket's honourable 1 goal losses.

                            If we play as a team ALL year, we will do fairly well. One thing this group of blokes has is ticker!

                            I can't imagine Team Roos letting the Sydney Swans fall apart or go backwards.
                            The Pain of Discipline is Nothing Like The Pain of Disappointment

                            Comment

                            • Steve
                              Regular in the Side
                              • Jan 2003
                              • 676

                              #15
                              The 'experts' got it wrong last year by underestimating the quality/depth of our list.

                              Goodes, Hall, O'Loughlin and Barry were predicted to be (on the whole) decent contributors at best - too inconsistent with as many poor performances as good ones.

                              Guys like Kennelly and J.Bolton were just straight-out underestimated.

                              The young players (eg. second year players) were thought to be average - Schneider, LRT, Powell and Meiklejohn played 50 games between them and rather than battling and just filling up the numbers they (especiially the first two) really contributed.

                              Without going back and checking their articles, this time last year (from memory) the experts were basically saying we had no top-end quality, no depth, and after losing so many experienced players in the previous couple of years our leadership was shaky.

                              Maybe they can argue on the depth point, as I guess in the overall scheme of things we didn't have to go too deep into our list which would have really tested us.

                              Continually pointing to our goal accuracy is a long bow to draw IMO.

                              Comment

                              Working...