Tweet
...it is now OK to suggest that maybe the "Spirit of the Bloods" is not without its flaws? Seriously, the threads that are discussing both issues are bubbling along with rational, sceptical discussion, unlike the angry, hysterical outcries that have followed such suggestions before. What difference has a 1 point Rd 1 loss made?
-
-
Ya gotta love fickle supporters. -
Maybe the difference is in the way the questions were posed - ie as articulate, considered and without a hint of snideness anywhere to be read.Comment
-
Possibly because they aren't presented as angry and hysterical outcries ROK. The 1 point margin, as we all know, is a mirage - this will be possibly the worse loss of the season simply because of the pre-game anti-slow-start rhetoric, the revenge from the GF, 60K home ground advantage and loss of serious WCE personnel. Every key factor was in our favour and we didn't take advantage, therefore we need to reflect, question and reassess.
Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water, but certainly lets stop drinking our own bath water blindly.Comment
-
Don't ask me mate, ask your audience. You're the one who's complaining they're not listening. I'm only whispering in your ear.Comment
-
I wasn't specifically referring to you. I can't recall any threads from you addressing the culture. Not that I'm saying you haven't started such - just that I cannot specifically recall any that you have begun.
But for me your message often gets lost amidst the way you seem to find fault in almost everything Roos does, even while acknowledging you respect him in some regards. It all comes across as a bit personal.
FWIW I don't think that the Bloods culture had anything to do with the reasons the team lost on Saturday. From my perspective, it was about not enough Swans attacking the ball with purpose in the first half, too few of them truly willing to put their heads over the ball, and too many passes that caused players to stop and prop, thereby slowing down ball movement and allowing the Eagles to get all 18 players behind the ball.
There was a noticeable increase in intensity and fluency in the second half and I don't believe that the Bloods culture was suddenly rediscovered during the 15 minute half time break. It was just about basics of playing footy.
That doesn't mean that the Bloods culture can't be discussed. However, it is such an internal thing to the club - the media soundbites we get are just that, soundbites - that I think it is very hard for us to assess what impact it does or does not have.
If anyone really is interested in it, they should go and read Ray McLean's book if they haven't already. Only two or three pages are dedicated to the Swans. A much larger portion describes his work with Central Districts in the SANFL and with St Kilda. But it does give you a gist of the principles he has developed and why they have worked better in some organisations that others. It is a fairly lightweight book in terms of style compared to many management tomes but definitely worth a read.Comment
-
rok, i think what you're perceiving is not that the tide has turned without you, but just that those that have previously remained silent on this issue in the absence of evidence (as they perceive it) have decided now to speak up. the sudden transformation of public opinion is an illusion that dates back to before christendom.
to be honest, i can't recall much strong debate about the "bloods" culture. perhaps that's because chest-thumping rhetoric is something i just don't care about or rate either way - well i guess i just think it's a bit naff. i think it's is one of those things that works for a while but eventually turns into hollow rhetoric - like every other motivational tool. for example, i've not heard much about that old shinboner spirit for a while.then again, i think it would be worth trying 15-16 players on field so what would i knowComment
Comment