Tweet
Coming to terms with Sydney's stagnation
Comment by Nikki Tugwell
May 17, 2004
RESULTS are the best wonder-cure in football. Just ask Danny Frawley.
The Swans' game is being dissected, cross-examined and trisected to work out where they are going wrong.
Is it the ruck? The midfield? The backline? Stoppages? Transition from defence to attack? Sustaining intensity for a full game?
Last year the Swans often suffered from poor starts. They would give oppositions a jump start and then miraculously work back into games. Usually they would win.
The results meant Sydney mostly escaped public criticism for their sluggish starts, although it was addressed internally.
This season Sydney have been better starters but have notably stagnated in the past four weeks in second quarters.
The signs were there in their unconvincing round three victory against Geelong at the SCG.
The Swans opened the door that night for the Cats after leading 20-14 at quarter-time to trail 45-47 at half-time. Geelong had their chances to win but the Swans coughed and spluttered over the line.
The Swans played their best football against the Kangaroos in round four in which they dominated the second quarter. In the period from late in the first quarter to early in the third Sydney kicked 12 unanswered goals.
* In their loss to Melbourne they led 37-14 at quarter-time and trailed 55-64 by half-time.
* In their loss to Essendon the Swans failed to register a goal in the second quarter.
* In their loss to Richmond the Swans managed just 1.1 in the second quarter.
* In their loss to West Coast scores were 33-33 at quarter-time and West Coast dominated the second quarter to lead 70-53 at half-time.
Perhaps as significantly as loss and gain of goals and points in the second quarters is the air of authority that drains from the Swans in these spells and the confidence their opponents are gaining by getting "a sniff".
Last year the term X-factor was often associated with Sydney.
The Swans grew into the belief that they collectively were the superior side and the manner in which they played reinforced that mindset. There was an individual and team spirit of setting the agenda. So what does it take this season to switch on the Swans?
At the moment it is the challenge of a big game. Few teams, perhaps only St Kilda, have troubled three-time premiers Brisbane like the Swans. And a scoreboard deficit.
The problem is both are reactive and lend themselves to inconsistency within a game or season.
Sydney, far from disgraced in any game this season, have been scaling the fine pleasure-pain line and regularly coming off second best.
Losing games that they have been in positions to win, they now find themselves at the crossroads.
But perhaps Richmond, sitting at the T-junction three weeks ago, best demonstrate how quickly things can turn from being on the winning side of even the smallest of margins.
The Daily Telegraph
Comment by Nikki Tugwell
May 17, 2004
RESULTS are the best wonder-cure in football. Just ask Danny Frawley.
The Swans' game is being dissected, cross-examined and trisected to work out where they are going wrong.
Is it the ruck? The midfield? The backline? Stoppages? Transition from defence to attack? Sustaining intensity for a full game?
Last year the Swans often suffered from poor starts. They would give oppositions a jump start and then miraculously work back into games. Usually they would win.
The results meant Sydney mostly escaped public criticism for their sluggish starts, although it was addressed internally.
This season Sydney have been better starters but have notably stagnated in the past four weeks in second quarters.
The signs were there in their unconvincing round three victory against Geelong at the SCG.
The Swans opened the door that night for the Cats after leading 20-14 at quarter-time to trail 45-47 at half-time. Geelong had their chances to win but the Swans coughed and spluttered over the line.
The Swans played their best football against the Kangaroos in round four in which they dominated the second quarter. In the period from late in the first quarter to early in the third Sydney kicked 12 unanswered goals.
* In their loss to Melbourne they led 37-14 at quarter-time and trailed 55-64 by half-time.
* In their loss to Essendon the Swans failed to register a goal in the second quarter.
* In their loss to Richmond the Swans managed just 1.1 in the second quarter.
* In their loss to West Coast scores were 33-33 at quarter-time and West Coast dominated the second quarter to lead 70-53 at half-time.
Perhaps as significantly as loss and gain of goals and points in the second quarters is the air of authority that drains from the Swans in these spells and the confidence their opponents are gaining by getting "a sniff".
Last year the term X-factor was often associated with Sydney.
The Swans grew into the belief that they collectively were the superior side and the manner in which they played reinforced that mindset. There was an individual and team spirit of setting the agenda. So what does it take this season to switch on the Swans?
At the moment it is the challenge of a big game. Few teams, perhaps only St Kilda, have troubled three-time premiers Brisbane like the Swans. And a scoreboard deficit.
The problem is both are reactive and lend themselves to inconsistency within a game or season.
Sydney, far from disgraced in any game this season, have been scaling the fine pleasure-pain line and regularly coming off second best.
Losing games that they have been in positions to win, they now find themselves at the crossroads.
But perhaps Richmond, sitting at the T-junction three weeks ago, best demonstrate how quickly things can turn from being on the winning side of even the smallest of margins.
The Daily Telegraph