Round 9: Swans v Essendon.

[UUaswan]

I don't think Cox has an effing clue

Hamling, Mclean, Francis
21 touches, 5 marks 1.4
This match committee is disgraceful

Amazing call to tag Taylor, with a defensive tall fwd, not required this week, look at your f&^=&=ng opposition. How do 6 coaches sit at a table and not see it

[UUaswan]

Also agree about Sheldrick- give him a full game, see how he goes. Forward line is a huge problem, should we keep Heeney there? Play Blakey there? Wicks? I know the latter two are doing Ok down back, but both are attacking players and we seem to need that in the forward line at the moment.

Blakey yes Wicks no

[imuninformedtwo]

Not sure whether I’m more frustrated by the poor footy in the first half or poor goal kicking in the second half. It’s a game we both probably should have won, but didn’t deserve too, if that makes sense.

The first half was just listless. The Bombers are known for using intercept marks in the back half, chipping it round, then going once they get some space once they get to the middle of the ground. Yet we didn’t execute a f50 tackle in the first half. No pressure and no overlap run once we got the ball. The lack of handball chain through the midfield was glaring.

i also worry about Grundy’s approach as a ruckman. He taps in tight and ‘down’, meaning he’s easy to predict and give our players no chance to win the ball with room to handball to a player in space. It’s one dimensional and easy for the opposition to plan for, and prevents us using our skills on the outside. He was very good around the ground tonight, so tick for that. In fact, one of the few to play four quarters. But his ruck work is garbage.

I’d also love to know why Roberts’ kicking has gone to poo. He’s gone from terrific short kick to someone with the ball use of me after 14 beers.

And Ollie really needs a run in reserves.

A negative night, but some pats on the back to Chad, Rowie, Blakey, McCartin, Wicks, Cleary for his defensive work, plus Gus as sub.

[Hotpotato]

When the bombed ball is halfway in its trajectory into the forward line
you know theres another turnover coming,

Then theres no manning up coming back.
I guess thats the coaching strategy tho.

How boring am I saying this every week.
Apols.

[UUaswan]

Not sure whether I’m more frustrated by the poor footy in the first half or poor goal kicking in the second half. It’s a game we both probably should have won, but didn’t deserve too, if that makes sense.

The first half was just listless. The Bombers are known for using intercept marks in the back half, chipping it round, then going once they get some space once they get to the middle of the ground. Yet we didn’t execute a f50 tackle in the first half. No pressure and no overlap run once we got the ball. The lack of handball chain through the midfield was glaring.

i also worry about Grundy’s approach as a ruckman. He taps in tight and ‘down’, meaning he’s easy to predict and give our players no chance to win the ball with room to handball to a player in space. It’s one dimensional and easy for the opposition to plan for, and prevents us using our skills on the outside. He was very good around the ground tonight, so tick for that. In fact, one of the few to play four quarters. But his ruck work is garbage.

I’d also love to know why Roberts’ kicking has gone to poo. He’s gone from terrific short kick to someone with the ball use of me after 14 beers.

And Ollie really needs a run in reserves.

A negative night, but some pats on the back to Chad, Rowie, Blakey, Wicks, Cleary for his defensive work, plus Gus as sub.

It's hard to lay a F50 tackle when the opposition marks it lace out 10+ times.
I'd say it was very generous to call them "intercept" marks, what i saw were kicks straight to a defender and most of them were uncontested.

Huge cross against the coaches for the fwd setup, cost us the game, no question

[Nico]

Agree with Sheldrick

Also would like
Defenders out of our fwd line
Legit 2nd Ruck

But im at a loss what to do with Roberts/Jmac/Floreant/Lloyds kicking, we may as well start the game 4 goals down because collectively that's the minimum they give up thru turnover

The field kicking by these 4 is appalling. Those misses by Jmac were rubbish. The second grubber was fairly typical of him. Looks like a star plays like a pauper. Roberts is so predictable. Takes a mark looks up forward, then back tracks to either a player in defence or a little chip kick that creates nothing. Ollie is running sideways. Lloyd, see Roberts. The best sides move the ball on quickly. Jmac is the biggest turnover merchant I can recall recall.

The disposal stats show a story. We had 96 less than Essendon. We supposedly had 22 more contested possessions!!! We have to be the worst in the comp in the keeping the ball in the forward line.

Why now are we refusing to go through the centre? Last night the 2 sides refused to go through the centre and I thought at least we don't go around in circles. How wrong was I.

5/10 centre clearances. In the last quarter Warner was facing his opponent when the ball was bounced.

[liz]

Not sure whether I’m more frustrated by the poor footy in the first half or poor goal kicking in the second half. It’s a game we both probably should have won, but didn’t deserve too, if that makes sense.

The first half was just listless. The Bombers are known for using intercept marks in the back half, chipping it round, then going once they get some space once they get to the middle of the ground. Yet we didn’t execute a f50 tackle in the first half. No pressure and no overlap run once we got the ball. The lack of handball chain through the midfield was glaring.

i also worry about Grundy’s approach as a ruckman. He taps in tight and ‘down’, meaning he’s easy to predict and give our players no chance to win the ball with room to handball to a player in space. It’s one dimensional and easy for the opposition to plan for, and prevents us using our skills on the outside. He was very good around the ground tonight, so tick for that. In fact, one of the few to play four quarters. But his ruck work is garbage.

I’d also love to know why Roberts’ kicking has gone to poo. He’s gone from terrific short kick to someone with the ball use of me after 14 beers.

And Ollie really needs a run in reserves.

A negative night, but some pats on the back to Chad, Rowie, Blakey, Wicks, Cleary for his defensive work, plus Gus as sub.

I had different emotions each quarter - or different beefs with the team. The first quarter the lack of discipline was obviously costly as the Bombers weren't that dangerous going forward without the help we gave them. The 50s were all a little different - Cleary's was a lack of concentration; McCartin's and Warner's a lack of discipline, though McCartin's probably wasn't costly in the sense that Essendon were already in a good scoring position.

Otherwise our fist quarter was mostly dumb football, with a completely dysfunctional forward line. The only slight solace was that Blakey was doing to the Bombers in their forward line what all the Bombers defenders were doing to us.

The second quarter was just unimaginative, listless, skill-less football. A bit like our second quarter against GWS last week, except that we didn't start the quarter with a four goal buffer. There were a few Swans who had the odd good moment in that quarter, but the team as a collective was woeful in how it defended Essendon's ball movement. There were numerous times where we seemed to outnumber the Bombers by two or three in a loose ball situation yet the Bomber came away with the ball. And other moments where they outnumbered us and also came away with the ball.

The third quarter was mostly frustration at our poor conversion, and concern over two "key" forwards who really have no confidence taking shots on goal.

And then the fourth quarter we finally played some decent enough footy, but the accuracy! The accuracy! (Or inaccuracy.)

It was a bit like the Port game, where we (mostly) toiled hard but always felt like the second best team out there, only to be surprisingly close at the end. We were the better team today for longer periods than we were against Port, so if we had managed to win it wouldn't have felt so undeserved. But we just have a malaise this year in front of goal that is the complete mirror of last season. When you have Heeney, in particular, missing shots he would normally eat for breakfast, and Chad just not quite having his radar adjusted, it's hard to win.

And while it's not the reason we lost - we made far more mistakes than the umpires - we didn't get much support from the umpires in that final quarter. Corey clearly seemed to be taken around the neck when he had the ball on the goal line, while that "dangerous free" against Hamling was baffling.

There were also parallels between the way Merrett's swinging arm collected Blakey and the way Melican's caught Bedford last week. I guess the biggest distinction was that Bedford was more clearly hurt straight away than Blakey was. But it should, at least, have been a free to Blakey, rather than the behind that the Bombers scored. Luckily it wasn't a significant behind in the final score. If it turns out that Blakey was concussed, I wonder if the media commentary re Merrett and swinging arms will mirror that against Melican over the past week. I don't take issue with Melican's suspension, but I do think it was accidental (yet still careless), and had none of the malice that some in the media read into it.

I'm not sure anyone could claim to have had a good game for Sydney over the whole four quarter. Maybe Blakey, though he had a few gormless moments in the second and third quarters. For most of the game he saved us against what might have been much worse. When the commentators were musing about McCartin being sent forward, I wondered if, instead, Cox might be tempted to move Blakey forward. But you could see why he would have been loathe to do so.

Otherwise, Roberts was decent in winning and handling the ball. And I was happy to see Sheldrick have an impact after he came on.

I thought Wicks was quiet in the first half, though I guess Kako was mostly invisible too. He became lively and important in the second half, and especially in the final quarter. I also thought Campbell was lively. Livelier than usual. But I think he should be capable of that kind of contribution most weeks so he only gets a bronze star from me, not a silver one.

I noticed Paton got his own special spray from Cox at the very end of the first quarter time huddle. And it's unusual for a tactical sub to be made so early in a game, especially a small(ish) for a small. So I won't be surprised to see Paton omitted for next week's game, so long as we actually have someone available to come back in. Adams as sub? I suspect not. I think they'll want him to play for longer in a VFL game first.

[Velour&Ruffles]

Sorry but some of the comments tonight are hysterical nonsense. We kick vaguely accurately (as we normally do) and we win, makeshift forward line and all. Calm the F down.

[UUaswan]

I had different emotions each quarter - or different beefs with the team. The first quarter the lack of discipline was obviously costly as the Bombers weren't that dangerous going forward without the help we gave them. The 50s were all a little different - Cleary's was a lack of concentration; McCartin's and Warner's a lack of discipline, though McCartin's probably wasn't costly in the sense that Essendon were already in a good scoring position.

Otherwise our fist quarter was mostly dumb football, with a completely dysfunctional forward line. The only slight solace was that Blakey was doing to the Bombers in their forward line what all the Bombers defenders were doing to us.

The second quarter was just unimaginative, listless, skill-less football. A bit like our second quarter against GWS last week, except that we didn't start the quarter with a four goal buffer. There were a few Swans who had the odd good moment in that quarter, but the team as a collective was woeful in how it defended Essendon's ball movement. There were numerous times where we seemed to outnumber the Bombers by two or three in a loose ball situation yet the Bomber came away with the ball. And other moments where they outnumbered us and also came away with the ball.

The third quarter was mostly frustration at our poor conversion, and concern over two "key" forwards who really have no confidence taking shots on goal.

And then the fourth quarter we finally played some decent enough footy, but the accuracy! The accuracy! (Or inaccuracy.)

It was a bit like the Port game, where we (mostly) toiled hard but always felt like the second best team out there, only to be surprisingly close at the end. We were the better team today for longer periods than we were against Port, so if we had managed to win it wouldn't have felt so undeserved. But we just have a malaise this year in front of goal that is the complete mirror of last season. When you have Heeney, in particular, missing shots he would normally eat for breakfast, and Chad just not quite having his radar adjusted, it's hard to win.

And while it's not the reason we lost - we made far more mistakes than the umpires - we didn't get much support from the umpires in that final quarter. Corey clearly seemed to be taken around the neck when he had the ball on the goal line, while that "dangerous free" against Hamling was baffling.

There were also parallels between the way Merrett's swinging arm collected Blakey and the way Melican's caught Bedford last week. I guess the biggest distinction was that Bedford was more clearly hurt straight away than Blakey was. But it should, at least, have been a free to Blakey, rather than the behind that the Bombers scored. Luckily it wasn't a significant behind in the final score. If it turns out that Blakey was concussed, I wonder if the media commentary re Merrett and swinging arms will mirror that against Melican over the past week. I don't take issue with Melican's suspension, but I do think it was accidental (yet still careless), and had none of the malice that some in the media read into it.

I'm not sure anyone could claim to have had a good game for Sydney over the whole four quarter. Maybe Blakey, though he had a few gormless moments in the second and third quarters. For most of the game he saved us against what might have been much worse. When the commentators were musing about McCartin being sent forward, I wondered if, instead, Cox might be tempted to move Blakey forward. But you could see why he would have been loathe to do so.

Otherwise, Roberts was decent in winning and handling the ball. And I was happy to see Sheldrick have an impact after he came on.

I thought Wicks was quiet in the first half, though I guess Kako was mostly invisible too. He became lively and important in the second half, and especially in the final quarter. I also thought Campbell was lively. Livelier than usual. But I think he should be capable of that kind of contribution most weeks so he only gets a bronze star from me, not a silver one.

I noticed Paton got his own special spray from Cox at the very end of the first quarter time huddle. And it's unusual for a tactical sub to be made so early in a game, especially a small(ish) for a small. So I won't be surprised to see Paton omitted for next week's game, so long as we actually have someone available to come back in. Adams as sub? I suspect not. I think they'll want him to play for longer in a VFL game first.

Didn't see Cox give Paton a spray, should give himself an uppercut for selecting him in the first place

[Velour&Ruffles]

And by the way, I think what Merrett attempted to do with Blakey is EXACTLY what Melican was attempting last week with Bedford. The consequences will no doubt be wildly different but that’s on the system

[UUaswan]

Sorry but some of the comments tonight are hysterical nonsense. We kick vaguely accurately (as we normally do) and we win, makeshift forward line and all. Calm the F down.

You just talking about accurate shots on goal or kicks around the oval ?

Both those accurate we win by 10 goals, but not for thr first time this year, they werent

[Velour&Ruffles]

You just talking about accurate shots on goal or kicks around the oval ?

Both those accurate we win by 10 goals, but not for thr first time this year, they werent

If so, how is that on Cox as a coach?

[UUaswan]

If so, how is that on Cox as a coach?

I think ive highlighted skills and selection as an issue. Both cost us multiple games this year

But ehen the bloke they select at FF has slotted 1 goal in 100games, it's probably a bit much to expect alot from him.
Likewise accuracy from Francis who is a defender

[crackedactor 01]

And by the way, I think what Merrett attempted to do with Blakey is EXACTLY what Melican was attempting last week with Bedford. The consequences will no doubt be wildly different but that’s on the system

Yes it was exactly the same, but I bet the AFL will view it differently. Please no more Hamling in the side. Can we give Jack Buller a go? Maybe it not a great option but at least he knows how to play like a forward.

[imuninformedtwo]

I had different emotions each quarter - or different beefs with the team. The first quarter the lack of discipline was obviously costly as the Bombers weren't that dangerous going forward without the help we gave them. The 50s were all a little different - Cleary's was a lack of concentration; McCartin's and Warner's a lack of discipline, though McCartin's probably wasn't costly in the sense that Essendon were already in a good scoring position.

Otherwise our fist quarter was mostly dumb football, with a completely dysfunctional forward line. The only slight solace was that Blakey was doing to the Bombers in their forward line what all the Bombers defenders were doing to us.

The second quarter was just unimaginative, listless, skill-less football. A bit like our second quarter against GWS last week, except that we didn't start the quarter with a four goal buffer. There were a few Swans who had the odd good moment in that quarter, but the team as a collective was woeful in how it defended Essendon's ball movement. There were numerous times where we seemed to outnumber the Bombers by two or three in a loose ball situation yet the Bomber came away with the ball. And other moments where they outnumbered us and also came away with the ball.

The third quarter was mostly frustration at our poor conversion, and concern over two "key" forwards who really have no confidence taking shots on goal.

And then the fourth quarter we finally played some decent enough footy, but the accuracy! The accuracy! (Or inaccuracy.)

It was a bit like the Port game, where we (mostly) toiled hard but always felt like the second best team out there, only to be surprisingly close at the end. We were the better team today for longer periods than we were against Port, so if we had managed to win it wouldn't have felt so undeserved. But we just have a malaise this year in front of goal that is the complete mirror of last season. When you have Heeney, in particular, missing shots he would normally eat for breakfast, and Chad just not quite having his radar adjusted, it's hard to win.

And while it's not the reason we lost - we made far more mistakes than the umpires - we didn't get much support from the umpires in that final quarter. Corey clearly seemed to be taken around the neck when he had the ball on the goal line, while that "dangerous free" against Hamling was baffling.

There were also parallels between the way Merrett's swinging arm collected Blakey and the way Melican's caught Bedford last week. I guess the biggest distinction was that Bedford was more clearly hurt straight away than Blakey was. But it should, at least, have been a free to Blakey, rather than the behind that the Bombers scored. Luckily it wasn't a significant behind in the final score. If it turns out that Blakey was concussed, I wonder if the media commentary re Merrett and swinging arms will mirror that against Melican over the past week. I don't take issue with Melican's suspension, but I do think it was accidental (yet still careless), and had none of the malice that some in the media read into it.

I'm not sure anyone could claim to have had a good game for Sydney over the whole four quarter. Maybe Blakey, though he had a few gormless moments in the second and third quarters. For most of the game he saved us against what might have been much worse. When the commentators were musing about McCartin being sent forward, I wondered if, instead, Cox might be tempted to move Blakey forward. But you could see why he would have been loathe to do so.

Otherwise, Roberts was decent in winning and handling the ball. And I was happy to see Sheldrick have an impact after he came on.

I thought Wicks was quiet in the first half, though I guess Kako was mostly invisible too. He became lively and important in the second half, and especially in the final quarter. I also thought Campbell was lively. Livelier than usual. But I think he should be capable of that kind of contribution most weeks so he only gets a bronze star from me, not a silver one.

I noticed Paton got his own special spray from Cox at the very end of the first quarter time huddle. And it's unusual for a tactical sub to be made so early in a game, especially a small(ish) for a small. So I won't be surprised to see Paton omitted for next week's game, so long as we actually have someone available to come back in. Adams as sub? I suspect not. I think they'll want him to play for longer in a VFL game first.

Droll, very droll complementing Roberts on his hand balling skills.