It's Over

[cruiser]

Originally posted by Tuesday
Until such time as the Swans install Goodes as captain; they drop Hall, MO'L, Mathews and Richards; and bring in Vogels, Schmidt, Moore and Dempster, then you are fine to whinge about the state of affairs at the club.

Hall?!! Be serious! I agree that Matthews, Chambers, Richards and MOL need to be dropped for Vogels, Malceski, Schmidt and Shaw or Doyle.

[Tuesday]

I stand tall.

[The Undertaker]

It aint over just yet.

The 2006 Sydney Swans model is not as sleek,cohesive and as strong as the 2005 model but there is still time for fine tuning i believe.

I haven't been impressed with the past two games and i do have my doubts as do some others but there is still a long way to go.

[sharp9]

Originally posted by The Undertaker
It aint over just yet.

The 2006 Sydney Swans model is not as sleek,cohesive and as strong as the 2005 model but there is still time for fine tuning i believe.

So you're agreeing with me then. If you read past the title you will see that I am saying that we cannot win without changing the team...therefore the dream of repeating the flag without changing personell is over.

[Go Swannies]

This thread seems based on the premise that the team that played last night and against the Saints were playing as well as they possibly can. The facts don't support that. Last night's ineptitude was very special - and began within seconds of the first bounce when none of our forwards could hold a simple mark.

I had to check that this thread wasn't from this time last year - exactly the same things were being said after R11 last year. Last year was special as the team dug deep and maintained an astonishing level of 100% footy for the second half of the season.

That hunger may no longer be there. At the start of the season I thought the players were playing like they thought they were better than they were. In the last two games they looked as if they have no confidence at all.

As always, how far we go will depend on the players head space. Will we do the old Swan thing of beating the Crows and Eagles then lose to Carlton or the Bombers? Will we continue to fold when a team takes it up to us as the Saints and Pies did?

We are certain to regret not making the most of of opportunities over the past two games. But saying the season is over is ridiculous.

By the way, when MOL plays one of his best games of the year - in the midfield - why is he suddenly selected as one of the whipping boys of the week who should be dropped?

And Roos has stated that he will not drop players to show them he can when they are playing badly. He seems to be walking a tightrope with the way so many of our best players are already down on confidence.

I'd love to see some of young players get a start - we need them - but it looks like Roos is running the team to get the best results he can this year. Then again, I guess that's his job.

[katie-scarlett]

Originally posted by Go Swannies

By the way, when MOL plays one of his best games of the year - in the midfield - why is he suddenly selected as one of the whipping boys of the week who should be dropped?

For that reason exactly.
Because all season his other ames have been average or below, more the latter.

[CureTheSane]

Very strange.

Your suggestion is that a player should be dropped if he starts showing form?

[katie-scarlett]

I never directly agreed to dropping Mickey.
But his form all season has been blah as opposed to the slightly above blah of last weekend.

[CureTheSane]

So I say keep him in the side and hope his form goes from blah to slightly above blah to between well above blah and onwards.

I though he did exceptionally well when moved down the groung on the weekend.

[hammo]

Originally posted by Go Swannies

I'd love to see some of young players get a start - we need them - but it looks like Roos is running the team to get the best results he can this year. Then again, I guess that's his job.

Some planning for the future would be nice though. How can you maintain moral at the club when you can be in great form for the reserves but never get a look in for senior selection because Roos plays favourites?

[SimonH]

Originally posted by hammo
Some planning for the future would be nice though. How can you maintain moral at the club when you can be in great form for the reserves but never get a look in for senior selection because Roos plays favourites?

1. You would be pretty naive to think that Roos and the club don't have a plan for the future. Whether you can work out what it is or (if you can) agree with it, or think it's the best plan, is another issue.

2. "Plays favourites" is a cheap shot used against managers, coaches and selectors in all team sports around the world. Eriksson "plays favourites" by picking Beckham as England captain and midfielder despite the fact that his game has some deficiencies. By definition, if player A is selected and player B is not, player A is favoured over player B. Someone who says that the coach/selector "plays favourites" really means that they disagree with the result, i.e. on form (or whatever) player A did not deserve selection. But they use the phrase to create some vague perception of underhand dealings or corruption in the process. It's a short road from there to accusations that player A has incriminating photos, does favours etc; which is juvenile rubbish unworthy of (even!) an internet fan forum. When it comes to disputing selection decisons: play the ball, not the man.

3. The #1 fillip to team morale is to win. Trying to develop morale by promoting players is a waste of time, because it's a zero-sum game: for every player whose morale you improve by promotion, you damage another's by dumping. It would be great for the morale of all of the individual players in the 2nds if there were 18 changes this week, and every eligible reserves player got a senior game. It wouldn't be so great for the morale of the club as a whole.

[NMWBloods]

"Plays favourites" often also means that a coach will have a preconceived notion of a player's worth to the team and will stick with that notion even when it becomes apparent to others that either that worth has dropped or the worth of others has increased. This can occur if a coach particularly likes a certain player or how he plays or has some sort of misguided loyalty or is basing his decision more on the past than the present.

[chammond]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
This can occur if a coach particularly likes a certain player or how he plays or has some sort of misguided loyalty or is basing his decision more on the past than the present.

But 99.9% of the time it only exists in the minds of disappointed fans.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by chammond
But 99.9% of the time it only exists in the minds of disappointed fans.

Saying "99.9% of the time" doesn't make your opinion fact.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by chammond
But 99.9% of the time it only exists in the minds of disappointed fans.

Suuure... it never happens in sport...