Why all the hysteria?

[Bart]

well said Charlie.

[SXP]

PEACE, let's move on and watch how the rest of the season will evolve!

[Schneidergirl]

What a breath of fresh air can do for this board!!!!

Well said Charlie.

[ScottH]

Has Charlie thought about running for Parliament!!!

It would be a novelty to have a smart arse in government, that actually knew what they were talking about!!

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by hemsleys
Has Charlie thought about running for Parliament!!!

So Charlie - is Murali a chucker or not???

In all seriousness though, I think that starting a new thread to counter an argument seems to be more effective at making people sit up and see things clearly than a reply within a thread. Dunno why....but anyway....well said Charlie.

[Charlie]

Cheers everyone. Wasn't expecting such a positive response. I will try to answer several posts within the one reply.

Lizz - fair point wrt Roos. Even more so when you factor in that he only had 35 games as an assistant before taking on the top job. The pedigree, though, is excellent. Walls, Parkin, Barassi were amongst his coaches as a player. Eade, Austin and Shaw are all well-respected as well.

'Tanking' games is something I hope never, ever happens in this game. Any team that does it would be the laughing stock of the century... if the Swans ever did it... I don't know exactly what I'd do/feel... I'd be very, very conflicted. Luckily, I'm 100% certain that the current team, both on and off field, has too much pride to do it.

Parliament? Would I have to wear a tie? More to the point, would I have to master the art of lying without looking up and to the left?

Mike - I don't know that much about the bowling rules... but if I could do what he does, I'd be looking to try my hand at baseball, not cricket... I posted this as a new thread, because the issue I've tried to address isn't specific to one thread.

[timthefish]

Originally posted by Snowy
Talking about 'tanking', which is surely premature, would you think that the AFL would be concerned that there are fans of about four clubs urging their teams to 'tank'. Doesn't that suggest there is something inherently wrong with the system of draft picks and oncessions to poor performers. Is it time for a ballot or something else along those lines. It cannot be good for footy for fans to start thinking of next year so early in the season.

talk of tanking absolutely disgusts me. i don't care how effective it is, it is just a gutless, spineless, loser attitude. i'm aware of the current riches of the saints, the lions and a number of other teams and how much of it came out of ladder position 15 and 16 but i'll be damned if i'll applaud my team adopting a losing mentality under the conviction that it is ever justified.

i think you're right in that the afl should discourage this from happening. perhaps the priority picks should go or at least come in a later round. they could also be held off until the second draft where there's a greater chance of picking up a ready-to-play player, which is what a bottoming out team really needs for the next year.

apart from the ethical issues, i just prefer to watch a more balanced competition, not just a few teams of stars beating up others made of old men and children.

that said, i don't believe there is anything wrong with playing inexperienced players or experimenting with methods and plans. the motivation for these actions has to be to give experience, instill a sense of daring and uncover new abilities, not to deliberately throw games.

nice post charlie.

[dread and might]

Originally posted by timthefish
talk of tanking absolutely disgusts me. i don't care how effective it is, it is just a gutless, spineless, loser attitude.

that said, i don't believe there is anything wrong with playing inexperienced players or experimenting with methods and plans. the motivation for these actions has to be to give experience, instill a sense of daring and uncover new abilities, not to deliberately throw games.

nice post charlie.

agree wholeheartedly. fools on the collingwood bandwagon were suggesting it after round 4, i am amazed that it hasn't taken much longer for some swans supporters to suggest the same.

the hawthorn forum had a few mentions of it, but i think everyone agrees that it's the way the draft is set up which is to blame. the AFL has to look at this issue seriously, i can see the desire to keep the competition level but it's ridiculous when supporters start suggesting taking advantage of the system after only a month!!

[Bart]

Originally posted by dread and might
agree wholeheartedly. fools on the collingwood bandwagon were suggesting it after round 4, i am amazed that it hasn't taken much longer for some swans supporters to suggest the same.

the hawthorn forum had a few mentions of it, but i think everyone agrees that it's the way the draft is set up which is to blame. the AFL has to look at this issue seriously, i can see the desire to keep the competition level but it's ridiculous when supporters start suggesting taking advantage of the system after only a month!!

It is akin to throwing games as has occured in cricket IMO. Priority picks are wrong IMO. Would love to be at a round 22 game where both teams were sitting on 5 wins. A draw methinks ?

[dread and might]

what's the answer though. we recognise the problem which is half the job but how does the draft fulfil it's function of keeping the competition even without going down some road which would lead to abuse.

a straight out lottery? probably seems like the most fair solution.

[Bron]

Re: Why all the hysteria?

Originally posted by Charlie
Amidst all the bloodlust, all the hysteria and the occasional hatred... the actual problems have been ignored. It is not the ability of these players - most of them contributed to the good performances of 2003 and most of them had excellent, consistent seasons. The answer to returning to the top is NOT a massive bloodletting of experienced, talented players.

The answer is to be found in what has actually happened to the Swans system - looking past the individuals to the collective way the team functions. In round 3, we were outplayed. Bloody Cressa, his cheekiness was much more fun when he was on our side. He knew our game, and knew how to counter it. But we won the game. In round 5, it was countered again, but we lost.

....

The players dropped their heads, and stopped believing in themselves. Gone was the carefree confidence and touch of pride that made our 2003 season what it was. This is something that can come back. I'm not saying use the same gameplan, just the same attitude. This is what the real problem is at the moment, not the players.

Because if the confidence comes back, so will the form of those players. Jude will start to get the pill again. Tadhg will run with it. Players will start to become aware of how much time they have again, and not turn it over due to rushing their possessions. With faith in the tall blokes being able to mark it, we'll start to play more direct football again.

I'm not saying not to criticise. I'm not saying that we've been good enough the last week. But really, it's gotten so far off the track it's not funny. It's only round 8. It's too early to talk about delistings, because they can't happen for months. And it's too early to assume that what is lost can't be found again.

Some sanity at last.

I don't have time to read all the posts, just a few. But thankfully this was one that I got to read. Haven't read the replies.

[dendol]

can someone actually define the term "tanking"? Is it to throw games, or is it just not fielding your best 22? Or is used to describe the blooding of youngsters and experimentation of new tactics and positions?

I wouldnt be too disappointed if we "experimented" once it is clear we cant play finals. Who wouldnt want an extra pick in the top 3???? Its that gun midfielder that we're all wishing we had.

I dont know if there have been cases of other clubs doing this, but its pretty stupid to have a system in place that encourages teams to lose when they know they have no chance of finals. We all know its better to finish 16th than 9th.

[Bear]

Re: Why all the hysteria?

Originally posted by Charlie
Amidst all the bloodlust, all the hysteria and the occasional hatred...

I thought you were talking about the latest bombing in Iraq there for a minute...

A bit of an over-reaction I think.

[Charlie]

Re: Re: Why all the hysteria?

Originally posted by Bear
I thought you were talking about the latest bombing in Iraq there for a minute...

A bit of an over-reaction I think.

Perhaps. But one of my overall points has been that the posts I'm referring to are over-reactions. And, misdirected, a bit like those 'smart bombs'.

I'm guilty of it, too. Especially in posts immediately after games - before I've thought deeply about what happened.

[Bart]

Originally posted by dread and might
what's the answer though. we recognise the problem which is half the job but how does the draft fulfil it's function of keeping the competition even without going down some road which would lead to abuse.

a straight out lottery? probably seems like the most fair solution.

I believe leave the draft as is, i.e. 16th gets 1st pick, but no priority pick for finishing on less than 6 wins.