The Sponson Assessment

[Spong]

1. Denunciations - recruitment stinks!, Longmire should be sacked!, tactics are questionable at best, Wallace v Roos?
2. Goodes - out of position, out of form, out of confidence.
3. 2nds - what do they gain by winning by 20+ goals every week.
4. Skills are deplorable!1. Denunciations - recruitment stinks!, Longmire should be sacked!, tactics are questionable at best, Wallace v Roos? 1. Denunciations - recruitment stinks!, Longmire should be sacked!, tactics are questionable at best, Wallace v Roos?

[Nico]

Great start to your career on RWO, Spongo.

Keep up the anger.

[ScottH]

Re: The Sponson Assessment

Originally posted by Spong
2. Goodes - out of position, out of form, out of confidence.

Goodes had some great touches last night, if you forget the two that were intecepted by Davey!

[DST]

Re: The Sponson Assessment

Originally posted by Spong
1. Denunciations - recruitment stinks!, Longmire should be sacked!, tactics are questionable at best, Wallace v Roos?
2. Goodes - out of position, out of form, out of confidence.
3. 2nds - what do they gain by winning by 20+ goals every week.
4. Skills are deplorable!1. Denunciations - recruitment stinks!, Longmire should be sacked!, tactics are questionable at best, Wallace v Roos? 1. Denunciations - recruitment stinks!, Longmire should be sacked!, tactics are questionable at best, Wallace v Roos?

Spong I don't know what game you were watching last night but one of the shining lights was the form of Goodes. Hit the contest hard, had plenty of run and didn't muck around with the pill when he got it. Hopefully the extra space at Subi this week will see him step-up even further.

As for one of your other points, I have consistently said that there are 3 fundamental issues that face the club which they need to address for us to be succesful in the long term.

{Some of this stuff will takes years and may not even be able to be acheived at all}

1) We must increase the dimensions of the SCG to that of roughly the same as the MCG & Telstra Dome. Either that or play more at Telstra Stadium. We are not going to be in a position to have and implement a game plan that allows to us win consistently on the bigger grounds without having a bigger home ground. Hopefully the work on the scoreboard end of the SCG will allow the SCG trust to do something about this.

2) We need to raise the standard of the compertition we play our reserves in. This can only be acheived by combining the ACT League with the Sydney Leagie to form a state super league. Money then needs to be pumped into it to attract a better standard of player to stengthen the standard of the comp across the board. Week in & out hard footy is needed for the development of our young kids not the occasional hard game.

3) This has something to do with the above, but at present we are disadvantaged in relation to every other club (besides Brisbane) when it comes to drafting rookier listed players. Unfortunately due to less number of players in junior levels we are behind the eight ball when it comes to uncovering and then cultivating talent for our rookie list. Fremantle for instance had at least 6 players who played yesterday who came via the rookie list. They are able to look deeper into the WAFL and other compertitions then draft locally and leave them in a stronger comp to develop, something we can not do. With the draft rules being so tight, the rookie list has become an important part of list building.

If we can addrees the above (and it may take 25 years) IMHO the club will be in a better position to see success.

DST

[OldE]

Re: Re: The Sponson Assessment

Originally posted by DST
. Hopefully the work on the scoreboard end of the SCG will allow the SCG trust to do something about this.

I doubt very much that the SCG trust will do that for the sake of the Swans. It will only happen if it's in the best interest of cricket as well (and primarily)

[ugg]

Yep we'll always be second-class tenants at the SCG. Just look at our training schedule during the pre-season if the cricket is still going.

[Schneiderman]

Re: Re: Re: The Sponson Assessment

Originally posted by eirinn
I doubt very much that the SCG trust will do that for the sake of the Swans. It will only happen if it's in the best interest of cricket as well (and primarily)

They may change their mind if they risk losing a tenant altogether.

All that needs to happen is to be able to temporarily remove four or five rows at each end of the ground (similar to what StadeOz does on the wings) to increase the length of the field by 20-30m. This would equate to an extra 10-15m between the centre square and 50m arc, and force us to play a proper CHF and CHB.

[sfan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: The Sponson Assessment

Originally posted by Schneiderman
They may change their mind if they risk losing a tenant altogether.

All that needs to happen is to be able to temporarily remove four or five rows at each end of the ground (similar to what StadeOz does on the wings) to increase the length of the field by 20-30m. This would equate to an extra 10-15m between the centre square and 50m arc, and force us to play a proper CHF and CHB.

I thought the same thing the other night. It would not be that hard. The ground is never full and you would only lose about 1000 seats. It should be part of any redevelopment.