Tempo

[liz]

It targets unattractive football. If the Swans play unattractive football they will be affected. That's not the same as saying it was deliberately put in place to counter the Swans.

My problem with this is that the definition of "unattractive football" is very subjective. Personally, I'd much rather watch a well-executed defensive and ultra-competitive, man-on-man style such as the Swans play (when they're going OK) that an end-to-end shoot out. And I'd rather watch either of those than the uncontested, roundabout style that the Hawks, in particular, used in 2005-6.

I accept that's a personal choice and others will disagree but that doesn't make one style inherently better than the others.

More to the point, I'd rather watch a variety of different styles and games than one homogeneous style, forced into by short-sighted administrators having one particular style they think is "best" and tweaking rules to create that style.

[swantastic]

I agree there Liz a variety of styles is good,i like the Swans play(some times) tough man on man footy but i also like the way Carlton have been playing attacking footy.On saying that if Carlton had a good defensive back line like we do they would win a lot more games.We are tight arses in defence which is good,but some times we use "tempo" footy too much and let the opposition flood back and fill all the holes which in stuffs up Hall,Mol,Davis etc etc.When players like Goodes,Melcho,Tiger,Schneider,Monty and Rok get the ball in the middle/wins they should just bang it in there quickly to give our key forwards a one on one opportunity to win the ball with the crumbers roving the area IMHO.I dont give a stuff how we play just as long as we win.

[NMWBloods]

My problem with this is that the definition of "unattractive football" is very subjective. Personally, I'd much rather watch a well-executed defensive and ultra-competitive, man-on-man style such as the Swans play (when they're going OK) that an end-to-end shoot out.

I've known no one but Sydney supporters who think that.

As I frequently point out, it is possible to have either;
(i) a highly-competitive and tough shoot out; or
(ii) Something inbetween, which is most typical - a game with a mix of attack and defence.

And I'd rather watch either of those than the uncontested, roundabout style that the Hawks, in particular, used in 2005-6.

And this is something that the AFL is also talking about, hence the rules trials in the pre-season matches on kicking backwards and the change in rules to increase the distance of marks to 15m from 10m.

I accept that's a personal choice and others will disagree but that doesn't make one style inherently better than the others.

As I say, most people prefer to see an open game, with great marks and goals. Not too many people get excited about a game of ball ups.

[NMWBloods]

of course the new rules were meant to slow us down. you're very naive if you believe otherwise.

This is as ridiculous as what you read on BF, but in reverse!

[swantastic]

As I say, most people prefer to see an open game, with great marks and goals. Not too many people get excited about a game of ball ups.

I take it your one of those people where as me i dont care either way as long as we win.IMO some of the best games of "05"06"were between us and wet toast tough hard at it with heaps of stopages and they were great games too watch for the contest."05"06" were two of the best games i have ever seen.

[NMWBloods]

In the short term if we win I don't care how. However, I don't want us to win mainly that way. Most of our games are bereft of highlights and aren't particularly exciting enough to be rewatched.

A close game is always exciting to watch, but a close game with a lot of goals is more interesting. As I've said in other threads, a win of 15 goals to 14 is probably going to be more entertaining than 7 goals to 6.

[swantastic]

In the short term if we win I don't care how. However, I don't want us to win mainly that way. Most of our games are bereft of highlights and aren't particularly exciting enough to be rewatched.

A close game is always exciting to watch, but a close game with a lot of goals is more interesting. As I've said in other threads, a win of 15 goals to 14 is probably going to be more entertaining than 7 goals to 6.

As they say a wins a win,either a high scoring or low scoring game and any win is worth watching again.

[liz]

In the short term if we win I don't care how. However, I don't want us to win mainly that way. Most of our games are bereft of highlights and aren't particularly exciting enough to be rewatched.

A close game is always exciting to watch, but a close game with a lot of goals is more interesting. As I've said in other threads, a win of 15 goals to 14 is probably going to be more entertaining than 7 goals to 6.

But you're stating that is if it's fact - not opinion.

I acknowledged that others have differing views, but it doesn't make them right.

And I repeat, the most important facet for me is to have variety rather than homogenity.

[NMWBloods]

I'd be amazed if (excluding Swans supporters) there would be many people with the same view of what constitutes an enjoyable game to watch.

[liz]

I'd be amazed if (excluding Swans supporters) there would be many people with the same view of what constitutes an enjoyable game to watch.

I've read many opinions in various places that state they far more enjoy watching contested than uncontested footy, and many that specific note the Swans as a team they admire. Indeed, many who complain of the Swans being boring clearly never watch us play because the specific reasons they give for the boredom have little resemblance to what the team generally does.

I don't expect the Swans game style to appeal to everyone but it certainly isn't as one-sided as you make out. And yes I acknowledge that sometimes the style results in unattractive games but I could point out equally unattractive games by every other side in recent years. Did anyone, other than Hawks fans, find their massacre of Carlton entertaining? I realise that's an extreme case and it's not the Hawks' fault but it was dull as ditchwater because there was absolutely no contest right from the offset.

[originalswan]

well, they're not going to come right out and say that, are they?

funny how the swans are the only ones referred to (in the media and by theo andrew) as playing ugly or unattractive football (doesn't matter what you want to call it).

who would have thought that the umpires had a list of protected players? or that they would have admitted to having one?

of course the new rules were meant to slow us down. you're very naive if you believe otherwise.

Annie now you're sounding paranoid...although I agree with your sentiments!

In Melbourne the majority of talk back callers blame the Swans for "negative" tactics that they believe destroys the game as a spectacle. I say stiff, I got to see my team win a Premiership that others couldn't in their lifetime (72 YEARS BETWEEN DRINKS) and i am forever grateful for that.

I like Liz am not concerned about style, but rather substance and being able to account for other teams on our terms. The league wants to stamp out "boring" games as such and restrict teams such as the Swans, as do most Melbourne based commentators and opposition supporters. I say good luck to them but still hold my breath believing that we will find an answer to the current form slump.

By the way who's willing to place a bet on the Swans at the current odds of over $3.00 against Geelong? I think I might place a $50 on it!!!

[NMWBloods]

I've read many opinions in various places that state they far more enjoy watching contested than uncontested footy

Yes, but you seem to equating contested football only with low scoring contests. The complaint about Swans' ugly football was that there was stoppage after stoppage, little open football and low scoring. It is certainly possible to have contested high pressure football in a relatively high scoring game. Indeed a lot of the game has been based on that. This is what I think people want to see.

Did anyone, other than Hawks fans, find their massacre of Carlton entertaining? I realise that's an extreme case and it's not the Hawks' fault but it was dull as ditchwater because there was absolutely no contest right from the offset.

Yes, but at no stage have I suggested this is the sort of football people want to see as it is at the other end of the extreme. Rules were put in place to try to reduce the number of this type of game.

[NMWBloods]

To take the ultimate extreme, I wonder how many people would be happy if we won a premiership by winning every game 5 goals to 3?

[reigning premier]

I'd be amazed if (excluding Swans supporters) there would be many people with the same view of what constitutes an enjoyable game to watch.

If they won a few of those type of games they would. But unfortunately, we generally win them!

[originalswan]

To take the ultimate extreme, I wonder how many people would be happy if we won a premiership by winning every game 5 goals to 3?

Count me in!!!!!!!!!