Originally posted by NMWBloods
If not for a freakish performance by Davis and injuries to Geelong, he would have been right. Pretty hard to predict those things.
If not for a freakish performance by Davis and injuries to Geelong, he would have been right. Pretty hard to predict those things.
Even if one asserts that the Swans' around the ground errors were purely and simply the result of the Cats' tactics and pressure skills and thus beyond the control of the Swans, it is hard to entirely attribute misses by Bolton, Kennelly, O'Keefe and Jolly (amongst others) to the Cats tactics.
Yes, you're going to say, but how about the sitter that Rooke missed? Or the Ablett one? I say, so what. Those have nothing to do with our blokes missing sitters due to their own failings, not Geelong's play.
Would things have been different had King not been injured? Who knows? Would things have been different had Williams not laboured all game after reinjuring his thigh? Who knows?
We didn't play well. Geelong didn't take full advantage of our errors. Nick Davis is a freak. But we still landed up with 3 more scoring shots than they did, after having by far the better of the second half.
To say that the only reasons the boys won is Geelong mistakes, an injury and one individual's freak performance does our boys' a disservice IMO - not to mention distorts the story of how the game really unfolded.

Comment