Freo matchups

[hammo]

B2 on Pavlich is a no brainer. I'd expect B2 to win this match-up.

I like the idea of McVeigh on Black and our midfield should be able to do the hard stuff against the Carrs, Cook etc quite well.

I am not sure who the last small forward was to really damage the Swans - it's the gorillas who we struggle against. Mathews is an experienced player and should be given first crack. i can't see Bevo coming in.

The problem for Freo is who to play on Goodes because he'll tear them up. I wouldn't mind seeing Goodes spend some time on Sandilands to run him off his feet, although I don't expect this to happen.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
Nooooooooooooooooooo!

Amazing how observers can things events so differently. I had the impression that Mathews was a total screw up in that game. Bu then, I am somewhat biased against him. I shall rewatch the game objectively.

That's how I saw it too, nearly cost us the match, not just with the free kicks, but continually looked like a startled rabbit caught in headlights when he got the ball...just stood there stunned, thinking, "I got the ball, what do I do with it now?"

[Industrial Fan]

B.L.T. on Pav. Who cares if he gets it on the lead?? Congestion should force him outside 50, then he has noone to kick to. Change to stupor ted if B.L.T. gets in trouble.

B2 on Farmer. Farmer will have no answers, and we really want him to be smashed and melt down. Disrupts the whole team when he goes off.

Schneider on Black. Can hurt him, and can play close enough.

Ted to Murphy.

How can they stop Goodesy?? M. Carr?

[Lucky Knickers]

I can't believe I'm saying this but a couple of the frees against Matthews were due to blindness by the umpires. The only deserved one was the holding on Cousins. However, that is completely offset by the stupid handball that could have cost us BIG.

I also agree with Liz that the Dees didn't show up. The number 1 tackling team in the comp (pardon me for sounding like Walls) and there was little or no pressure around the ground. I'm not putting down Freo's efforts - good on them.

If swans show up with their man on man game, Freo will have to play 120 minutes entirely of stoppages and hard-ball gets - they won't have any legs left to run with.

I'd be interested to know who they are going to match up on Goodes, ROK, Hall, MOL, Eski, Kennelly.

[SimonH]

I for one am worried about Farmer. I witnessed him in a Melbourne v Collingwood game at the MCG about 5 years ago. He did absolutely nothing in the first half. He was even benched for a while (back in the day when being benched was a definite insult, not just a part of endless rotations). In the second half, he turned on one of the most dominating individual performances I've ever seen and kicked 9 goals (and should have nailed a chance for a 10th in the dying minutes).

And that's Farmer's career in a nutshell. He has more off days than on ones (see, among a cast of hundreds of candidates: SCG Round 13 2006), but when he's on, watch out.

Bevan is actually the best man-matchup on Farmer in the absence of Crouch, but it would be poor form to drop anyone, including Mathews (as if!) or Dempster, after participating in that win. I guess start with Mathews and then look at other candidates including McVeigh, Malceski and Kennelly if he does start running hot.

Let's also not forget the extraordinary job the seemingly too-slow and not-agile-enough Stevie Nicks did in blanketing Phil Matera at Homebush a couple of years ago. So a left-field matchup on Farmer like CBolt or Dempster could actually work out okay.

We have to trust LRT with Pav, at least at the beginning. He's our CHB. Pav's their CHF. LRT has the size and aerobic strength to go with him. He's proved he can take the big assignments.

Of course, this doesn't mean he's on his own-- if Pav starts going for contested marks inside 50 rather than playing a 'pushing up the ground' role, the others can and will help out. Pav is their best player and biggest threat, but if we can make him push up out of 50 to get his footy, he can't win the game for them by himself.

[liz]

Originally posted by SimonH
I
Bevan is actually the best man-matchup on Farmer in the absence of Crouch, but it would be poor form to drop anyone, including Mathews (as if!) or Dempster, after participating in that win. I guess start with Mathews and then look at other candidates including McVeigh, Malceski and Kennelly if he does start running hot.

Let's also not forget the extraordinary job the seemingly too-slow and not-agile-enough Stevie Nicks did in blanketing Phil Matera at Homebush a couple of years ago. So a left-field matchup on Farmer like CBolt or Dempster could actually work out okay.

If Farmer is identified as the main worry, my first choice (after Crouch - this is one game where we could really rue his absence) would be B2. That depends on either LRT or Teddy being trusted with Pavlich. If Bolton needs to play on Pavlich, Schneider would be my next choice for Farmer, though that would be robbing Peter to pay Paul as his role up forward could also be important.

Things could get interesting if they throw Longmuir down forward for extended periods as Leo would probably have to move to him, which would mean someone else would need to be found for the dangerous Murphy.

Of course, it doesn't matter too much if the midfield is doing its job and creating enough chances for Baz, Mick and co.

[giant]

Originally posted by SimonH
He has more off days than on ones (see, among a cast of hundreds of candidates: SCG Round 13 2006), but when he's on, watch out.

He's been more on than off lately & It's not just the flashy things. His forward pressure has been outstanding & he's set up as many goals as he's kicked (if not more).

Clearly a danger player & someone with real footy smarts & a cool head is required. That doesn't sound like Bevan on the face of it. A fit Crouch would be perfect! In his absence, maybe Schneider is not such a bad call. He did a good job on Davey earlier this year, did he not?

[hammo]

Originally posted by liz

Of course, it doesn't matter too much if the midfield is doing its job and creating enough chances for Baz, Mick and co.

Good point Liz.

Defence is probably the least of our worries.

Since we lost to Adelaide, no team has kicked 15 goals in a match against the Swans.

Geelong kicked 14 and last week West Coast kicked 12.

So that tells me that if Sydney kicks 15 goals we will definitely win the match (although on recent finals experience this is most unSwans like)

12 may be enough if our defence is as stingy as usual.

[SimonH]

Originally posted by hammo
Good point Liz.

Defence is probably the least of our worries.

Since we lost to Adelaide, no team has kicked 15 goals in a match against the Swans.

Geelong kicked 14 and last week West Coast kicked 12.

So that tells me that if Sydney kicks 15 goals we will definitely win the match (although on recent finals experience this is most unSwans like)

12 may be enough if our defence is as stingy as usual.

Ross Lyon agrees with you.

"Prior to Saturday night the Swans had lost their previous two encounters to the Eagles at Subiaco Oval by less than a goal and Lyon earmarked several key areas that would be essential for them to get over the line.

"He felt they needed to play their very best footy, take their opportunities, get on top early to silence the crowd, keep the scoreboard ticking over and not miss shot on goal while also not 'butchering' the football."

While most of the rest of the criteria are, like, derr, I'm particularly interested in the 'keep the scoreboard ticking over' issue. Increasingly, what I barrack for is for Sydney to kick 4 goals a quarter; because I know that if we do that (or close to it) for 4 quarters, our defence is tight enough that we'll win. The last time Sydney kicked 15 goals and got beaten in a game was the infamous (and tragic) round 19, 2004 game against the Roos. That's a long, long time in footballing terms. Compare, for example, the Western Bulldogs who kick 15 goals in virtually every second loss.

The last time Sydney kicked 15 goals and got beaten in a final? 7 September 1986!

[Go Swannies]

Big game so Farmer may be susceptible to getting in his head space. Unleash the secret weapon - LRT. By the time Farmer has to deal with sorting out what LRT is planning - and what direction Leo is running - we should 10 goals up.

Barring that, anyone got a poster of an AVO?

[satchmopugdog]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
Big game so Farmer may be susceptible to getting in his head space. Unleash the secret weapon - LRT. By the time Farmer has to deal with sorting out what LRT is planning - and what direction Leo is running - we should 10 goals up.

Barring that, anyone got a poster of an AVO?

Exactly..I have posted on this before...play to LRT's strength...his awkwardness. It's all so unexpected.

Having watched the replay again when LRT was on Hunter he wasn't able to take a mark what with LRT jumpimg early (hopefully intentionally)or falling over and using Hunter as support to cushion the fall. Beautiful to watch.

At one stage I did see a Dummy pass a la Union on the half back flank that was delibarate and I thought, "You ripper, he's getting confident enough to improvise."

[BigBadBarryNo1]

Guys who do you think they would have on Goodesy?

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by BigBadBarryNo1
Guys who do you think they would have on Goodesy?

Matthew Carr is my guess.

[Lucky Knickers]

Who do you think will play on ROK?

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by Lucky Knickers
Who do you think will play on ROK?

Possibly McPharlin.
I'd say
Hall vs Parker
MOL vs MJ
ROK vs McPharlin
Davis vs Mundy