Anyone for Roosie's head yet?

[Nico]

Lets face it, all AFL coaches I am sure, are well up with every game plan imaginable.

Up until now Roos has done a pretty reasonable job, however, he must now realise that he is short a few genuine contributors. That's all it is.

Replace 3 players who are the "guilty party" every week with 3 who can hit a forward on the chest and can handpass accurately over more than a metre, then bingo, we turn it round big time.

If next week their skills are top notch, which has happened, and the ball is delivered correctly to the forwards we win. One proviso, can the coaching staff please remind the so called crumbing forwards/ midfielders what "front and centre" means.

By the way my observation that our midfielders will be sacked if they dared step over the F50 metre line was borne out once again. Where were they when the ball hit the deck up forward? Probably standing with the HFF's who moved up the ground to build a wall when Adelaide predictably ran it out with ease.

Adelaide I believe kicked 8 goals from inside 50. Brisbane's 3 flags had a high % of goals from inside 50 as did North under Pagan. Notice where Barry Hall got most his marks - on or outside 50 apart from the 3 Q shocker.

Something is missing in our game plan methinks.

[footyhead]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nico
[B]

Replace 3 players who are the "guilty party" every week with 3 who can hit a forward on the chest and can handpass accurately over more than a metre, then bingo, we turn it round big time.

.......
They don't have the balls to do that though.
Player managment is actualy a form of manipulation. It takes abit of genius and madness to perform it well. I don't think Roos has it like the greats do.

[Thunder Shaker]

Originally posted by Jeffers1984
One Word. Predictability. Teams have figured that we go short and wide with the first kick (Leo Barry) and then long to the side for a tall. One thing Adelaide did was let us have the first short kick but already blocked both sides of the F50 to make us kick long to a 50-50. It is definately not working.

Something that's needed is alternative game plans and set plays. At the SCG we should be trying to get it to the other end as quickly as possible. That means straight up the middle. Simple mathematics shows that going around the circle is pi/2 times as far as going through the middle. It should be possible to get the ball from the kickout to F50 with two kicks. Yet that's the last thing we seem to do.

I think it's time for a bit of heat. One cannot make a good sword without heating the steel.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Get a grip yourself - how well did we do in 2004 or 2003 or 2002 or 2001 or 2000 or...

What would it matter to you? You were telling us we were crap even after last Saturday and you continue to moan about it now.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by Diego
heh look at your username. Enough said.

Tell me what it says?

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
What would it matter to you? You were telling us we were crap even after last Saturday and you continue to moan about it now.

It matters to me because naturally I'd like to see us do well yet we fail to do so every year.

I was simply commenting on the game last week and saying that it was not a great game and had warning signs, which were loud and clear last weekend.

So when we play crap you think we should celebrate our players anyway or perhaps simply ignore it and wait until next time?

If you want to be one of those supporters who puts their head in the sand when we do badly and not recognise poor performances and never bother to understand exactly how we are playing, then do so, but mind your own business if other people don't want to.

[footyhead]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
What would it matter to you? You were telling us we were crap even after last Saturday and you continue to moan about it now.

The thing is we were crap last saturdy. Except for about the last 20 minuets. In fact at one stage it was looking like we were going to go down to brissy by about 50 points.

[Red@WhiteBaron]

Originally posted by footyhead
The thing is we were crap last saturdy. Except for about the last 20 minuets. In fact at one stage it was looking like we were going to go down to brissy by about 50 points.

As happy as I am that we won, I agree. The first 3 quarters were amongst the most insipid I've see for a long time.

We were very lucky to walk away with the points. Hopefully the club will realise how close they were to staring a big defeat in the face, otherwise they won't learn a great deal.

PS - footyhead, I know I may earn the wrath of some of my fellow supporters for saying this, but I quite enjoy your posts.

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I was simply commenting on the game last week and saying that it was not a great game and had warning signs, which were loud and clear last weekend.

So when we play crap you think we should celebrate our players anyway or perhaps simply ignore it and wait until next time?

I know I'm sounding like a broken record but I still reckon there is a big difference between last weekend and this.

The Swans didn't play well for three quarters against the Lions but it was largely - not totally, I accept, but largely - attributable to the Lions playing pretty well. Yes, they were well down on full strength and it would have been depressing had we got the 50pt defeat that we probably deserved, but I don't think I'd have been angry about it.

For me the Crows and Roos games were different in that the Swans poor performances were largely self-inflicted. Sure, both teams looked a million dollars in the finals quarters of the respective matches once the Swans had completely disintegrated but neither did anything in the first halves of the game to which I can attribute the Swans' lousiness.

We can say all we like about whether the game plan is the "right one", whether it creates an interesting spectacle, but just as consistently bombing long to a contest in the way we did against the Lions is nothing like any game plan I have ever witnessed before from the Swans, nor is leaving Crows players completely unmarked, lousy tackling and lack of chasing any game plan the Swans have ever played under Roos, except when they've been well off their game.

Being beaten by a better team is depressing but you have to live with it (or get yourself drafted and do something about it). Being beaten by teams at a similar level who do nothing to cause the poor performance is the stuff that makes us all pissed off and angry that we invest so much emotional energy in a team that doesn't look like it cares.

[The Undertaker]

Originally posted by Nico
I don't think so. I am sure he was out coached today in some areas, but surely now he must be privately saying that he just doesn't have the cattle to go to the next level.

My only thought on his coaching and/or use of players is predicability. Rotations are rotations but players appear to be stereotyped into positions. There is no fear of being dropped at Sydney, at least from where we sit. They should be playing for their position every week.

.

I agree.

I Like Roosy but i think he needs to be more tougher on the players.

[OldE]

Originally posted by liz
Being beaten by a better team is depressing but you have to live with it (or get yourself drafted and do something about it). Being beaten by teams at a similar level who do nothing to cause the poor performance is the stuff that makes us all pissed off and angry that we invest so much emotional energy in a team that doesn't look like it cares.

Absolutely spot on once more!!!!

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by liz
I know I'm sounding like a broken record but I still reckon there is a big difference between last weekend and this.

The Swans didn't play well for three quarters against the Lions but it was largely - not totally, I accept, but largely - attributable to the Lions playing pretty well. Yes, they were well down on full strength and it would have been depressing had we got the 50pt defeat that we probably deserved, but I don't think I'd have been angry about it.

I think they were playing quite well (certainly better than this week) however if they had been even remotely accurate and disciplined we would have been smashed by 10 goals. I don't think we should consider ourselves 10 goals worse than any side in the competition and I would have been angry with a result like that.

Playing well and being beaten by a better team is disappointing but acceptable, however those games don't translate into huge losses usually and that's the way it looked like going last week. Fortunately for us, Brisbane's last qtr was much like their whole game this week.

For me the Crows and Roos games were different in that the Swans poor performances were largely self-inflicted.

Definitely self inflicted - Adelaide weren't particularly good IMHO. However, I believe that we had a fairly large part to play in our poor three qtrs the previous week too.

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
Something that's needed is alternative game plans and set plays. At the SCG we should be trying to get it to the other end as quickly as possible. That means straight up the middle. Simple mathematics shows that going around the circle is pi/2 times as far as going through the middle. It should be possible to get the ball from the kickout to F50 with two kicks. Yet that's the last thing we seem to do.

Here is an interesting picture I found about the SCG dimensions.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/swansbear/HomebushvsSCGdimensions.bmp

I completely agree that at a totaly circular ground like the SCG you can very easily get lost on the wide expenses on the wings. I know the Swans like to use that extra width to get around the oppositions defensive net at our kick offs. But seeing it at close range, it remains clearly visible that they NEVER opt to kick long to the centre square.

And excuse my ignorance, but why are the Swans seemingly so afraid of a contested possession?! Can somebody who has played the game at a high level explain this to me? are we saying that we do have the body strevgth to take a pack mark? Or the desire to want to get hit in the interests of getting the pill?

JF

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by JF_Bay22_SCG

And excuse my ignorance, but why are the Swans seemingly so afraid of a contested possession?!

Given that Hall led the comp in contested marks last year your puzzlement is not suprising. Nor are you alone in this regard. Bomb it long and let him use his strength.

[Glenn]

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
Given that Hall led the comp in contested marks last year your puzzlement is not suprising. Nor are you alone in this regard. Bomb it long and let him use his strength.

Ditto on that, I am not sure if Roos feels Hall doesn't get enough protection to do this, or he doesn't have the faith that someone would be there to get the crumbs.
Unless we are missing something glaringly obvious, you have to wonder why Roos is trying this possesion Footy