Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NMWBloods
    Taking Refuge!!
    • Jan 2003
    • 15819

    Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

    Since 1996, our stellar year of the past 60, we have really struggled for consistency during a season. Until we rectify this we will never be a true challenger.

    In 1996, after a slow start we were able to win 12/14 games. However, instead of falling off, we maintained this effort, and won 6 of the next 8 to make the GF.

    In 1997, we struggled for the first half of the year. Then we won 7 of the next 8 games. Suddenly we hit a form slump - we lost a game at home to St Kilda after leading comfortably at 3QT, we beat the lowly Hawks, and then lost 3 games in a row to crash embarrassingly out of finals.

    In 1998, we started on fire winning our first 5 games. Another form slump, winning only 3 of the next 9 games. Regain some form to win 5 in a row, but then lose it again, to win only 2 of the next 5 games to drop out of finals.

    In 1999, never gained form and not managing to win more than 3 games in a row at any stage. Destroyed by Essendon in finals.

    In 2000, same as '99 but missed finals.

    In 2001, very mixed form early, had a run toward end of the year with 5 wins in a row, but then form deserted us again, winning only 1 of next 5 games, being thrashed by a sadly out of form (going into finals) Hawthorn.

    In 2002, generally struggled.

    In 2003, good form through middle of the year with 11 wins from 13 matches. Form drops off at end, with only occasionally recoveries (eg: Port finals) and win 3 of 7 games, smashed in final match.

    In 2004, mixed form all year, although short periods of winning form in middle and late, although inexplicable lapses during that time, in both games won and lost. Form completely deserts team from opening bounce in last final.

    At least under Roos we haven't been thrashed more than a few times, but we really struggle with form and have done for a long time. When we are up, we seem to become overconfident or careless or something, perhaps believing the good press about the team.

    The key to our success is to solve this perennial Swans problem.
    Last edited by NMWBloods; 11 September 2004, 05:04 PM.
    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."
  • swansrule100
    The quarterback
    • May 2004
    • 4538

    #2
    agree totally

    its frustrating every year we let games slip that we should have won easily..

    and we loose games we have in the bag

    and always finish lower than we should


    just one or two of those years needed to be different


    i dont see a solution ....bar a constant injection of youth
    Theres not much left to say

    Comment

    • sharpie
      On the Rookie List
      • Jul 2003
      • 1588

      #3
      Re: Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

      Originally posted by NMWBloods
      In 2004 .... Form completely deserts team from opening bounce in last final.
      form is not based on one game. it is something that can only be judged over a number of games. we had good form going into this game. we played badly on friday night, this is a difference to having bad form.
      Visit my eBay store -

      10% off for mentioning RWO when you buy. Great Christmas presents!

      Comment

      • Nico
        Veterans List
        • Jan 2003
        • 11339

        #4
        We a short a few players to go all the way. We have what might be termed honest toilers, who can get us so far. Excite us but let us down. Reading between the lines of Roos's comments I am sure he knows this.

        Somehow we need to pull a rabbit or rabbits out of the hat to go all the way. And soon.
        http://www.nostalgiamusic.co.uk/secu...res/srh806.jpg

        Comment

        • NMWBloods
          Taking Refuge!!
          • Jan 2003
          • 15819

          #5
          Re: Re: Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

          Originally posted by sharpie
          form is not based on one game. it is something that can only be judged over a number of games. we had good form going into this game. we played badly on friday night, this is a difference to having bad form.
          I thought our form had been mixed for a while.

          We'd put together 5 solid to good wins from 6 matches running into that match, however I don't think our form had been fantastic and certainly before those half dozen games it had been all over the place.
          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

          • sharpie
            On the Rookie List
            • Jul 2003
            • 1588

            #6
            Re: Re: Re: Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

            Originally posted by NMWBloods
            I thought our form had been mixed for a while.

            We'd put together 5 solid to good wins from 6 matches running into that match, however I don't think our form had been fantastic and certainly before those half dozen games it had been all over the place.
            5 wins out of 6 is good form regardless of how they are won. And the one we lost was after giving up a 40 point lead for various reasons. These wins included Brisbane & Melbourne when up the top of the ladder, as well as West Coast coming off good form. Not to mention the close game with Geelong which we arguably should have won, before those 6 games.

            Sure our form before that was patchy, but so what, we got our form going at the right time of the year. You can never be up for the entire season. Once we got over our injuries from mid year we won 5 out of 6 games. That says to me that we had good form.

            Which all gets me back to friday's game - it was just one bad game, not bad form.
            Visit my eBay store -

            10% off for mentioning RWO when you buy. Great Christmas presents!

            Comment

            • NMWBloods
              Taking Refuge!!
              • Jan 2003
              • 15819

              #7
              Re: Re: Re: Re: Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

              Originally posted by sharpie
              5 wins out of 6 is good form regardless of how they are won.
              Have to disagree with that statement as it is. Winning is good, but it does not mean great form. Struggling to win against particularly weak teams isn't good form.

              Which all gets me back to friday's game - it was just one bad game, not bad form.
              Or it was simply the disappearance of form because we'd held our good form for long enough. This was the point of the thread - we don't seem to be able to hold good form for a long enough period.
              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

                #8
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

                Originally posted by NMWBloods
                Or it was simply the disappearance of form because we'd held our good form for long enough. This was the point of the thread - we don't seem to be able to hold good form for a long enough period.
                IMHO, almost all teams in the compertition find it hard to maintain their best form for more than 6 or 7 games. The compertition these days is just too close for anyone to really dominate like Carlton did in 1995.

                If there is to be another team that does it, I also think they will come from Victoria only. With 10 games on the road compared to say 4 or 5 it is nigh on impossible for an interstate team to maintain form over the whole season compared to a Vic based team that can have runs of neutral games in their home state.

                Have a look at Brisbane, despite the best team in the last 3 years (and probably ever) they have not been able to maintain their form over the whole year and have had losing streaks.

                I also think our current playing style and list also have alot to do with our form fluctuations.

                Our energy sapping style of high intensity footy, where we like to play close inside footy and work very hard back into defence to help our undersized KP backman takes it toll. On Friday night despite working their butts off to get back within 11 points in the 3/4 we just had nothing else to give once St Kilda went up another gear.

                As for our list, only a big KP defender(s) and quick free running midfielder(s) will help us change our game plan and ultimately improve our consistency. How much would Roos love to have a big KP defender like Scarlett or Leppa that he could rely upon to win one on one contests and allow our midfielders/half forward line the chance to retain position and not have to work back hard to create congestion. A quick free running midfielder would also take the pressure off Kirk and Bolton having to be the ones playing inside and then having to work their butt off pushing back to congest.

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

                Comment

                • dimelb
                  pr. dim-melb; m not f
                  • Jun 2003
                  • 6889

                  #9
                  We were more than competitive in the first quarter, fell off in the second and staged a mini-revival later. But no way were we going to win without Williams and Mathews, and with a limping Maxfield and O'Loughlin. We do not have too many stars, we need to be all on the field and all switched on. We weren't, and we don't have the depth to carry those sort of injuries. If we can trade well we will likely do better. We need an extra midfielder, a good one, a backup ruckman and a big fast CHB. Perhaps LRT can be trained to take this role. And for god's sake play Goodes on the wing or at ruck rover.
                  He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

                  Comment

                  • JohnnyNova
                    Banned by Moderators for constant swearing and abuse of other posters
                    • Sep 2003
                    • 72

                    #10
                    I say trade Jeckyll. The punk's been carried to long. Not hard enough.
                    Play Hyde at CHB and drop Goodes back onto the ball and you may find some consistency creep back into the game.

                    Personally I would like to see the club go after Dracula in the draft. I hear he's ready to leave the Transalvanian U19s. Him or Wolfman, anyway.

                    Comment

                    • sharpie
                      On the Rookie List
                      • Jul 2003
                      • 1588

                      #11
                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Jeckyll & Hyde - the struggle for consistency

                      Originally posted by NMWBloods
                      Have to disagree with that statement as it is. Winning is good, but it does not mean great form. Struggling to win against particularly weak teams isn't good form.
                      ok, if you had 6 wins from 7 and they were all against lowly teams your form might be questionable, but that was not the case with our run of 6 from 7.

                      Brisbane (near the top at the time we played them)
                      Kangaroos (should have buried them, one bad quarter for various reasons, and they were close to top 8)
                      Melbourne (were on top when we played them)
                      Essendon (still finished top 8)
                      Richmond (No brainer)
                      West Coast (arguable the form side going into this game)

                      ok, so our form was only 5 from 6 as it turns out, but this makes little difference in this argument. but it can easily be seen that we were not playing particularly weak teams.
                      Visit my eBay store -

                      10% off for mentioning RWO when you buy. Great Christmas presents!

                      Comment

                      • footyhead
                        Banned indefinitely by Moderators for posting totally inappropriate material
                        • May 2003
                        • 1367

                        #12
                        Originally posted by JohnnyNova
                        I say trade Jeckyll. The punk's been carried to long. Not hard enough.
                        Play Hyde at CHB and drop Goodes back onto the ball and you may find some consistency creep back into the game.

                        Personally I would like to see the club go after Dracula in the draft. I hear he's ready to leave the Transalvanian U19s. Him or Wolfman, anyway.

                        hahahahahahahahaha

                        Comment

                        • ROK Lobster
                          RWO Life Member
                          • Aug 2004
                          • 8658

                          #13
                          Originally posted by JohnnyNova

                          Personally I would like to see the club go after Dracula in the draft. I hear he's ready to leave the Transalvanian U19s. Him or Wolfman, anyway.
                          Dracula - you're joking right. Since the introduction of the blood rule he is only on the paddock 10 mins a Qtr. And Wolfman only has eyes for the Doggies. More imagination is needed in your posts JN, really...

                          Comment

                          • dawson
                            Senior Player
                            • Mar 2003
                            • 1007

                            #14
                            Originally posted by ROK Lobster
                            Dracula - you're joking right. Since the introduction of the blood rule he is only on the paddock 10 mins a Qtr. And Wolfman only has eyes for the Doggies. More imagination is needed in your posts JN, really...
                            And the Mummy takes a shining to the Hawks which is why they were renamed Mummy's Boys......

                            Comment

                            Working...