Round 1: Saints (match thread)

[liz]

I think last night was a combination.

The "ugly" tag is usually applied when the game gets mired into stoppages. I don't think that was particularly the case last night.

And the tactics certainly weren't all of the Swans' making. Even at the start of the second term, when the Saints had a handy lead and had reason to believe they were on top around the ground, they went the uber-flood early.

Ugly games happen and they are rarely the fault of just one team. The Saints were involved in a fair few last year that were labelled as not so pretty on the eye. And probably the three worst all involved the Hawks, despite Hawks fans being convinced they play pretty football.

I think what was disappointing last night is that at no time did the Swans try to change things around and try to take a few more risks moving the ball forward quickly.

And the dreadful skills by both teams didn't help the cause either.

[giant]

- Bolton (J) who I thought might be OK this season after some goodish pre-season games, but was a complete non-existent factor out there apart form his goal

You've gone too easy on Bolton - it was his shameful turnover handball that lost us momentum in Q4 and should have ended the game if the Saints could kick straight. And there were at least two other egs where he was relatively free and missed critical targets - not good enough for someone of his experience and you get the feeling the coaching staff's patience will run out soon.

[Fat Cat]

The "ugly tag" is based on more than last nights game.

All teams flood....... When you over use the ball, opposition teams have more time to get into your forward 50.

[hammo]

I think what was disappointing last night is that at no time did the Swans try to change things around and try to take a few more risks moving the ball forward quickly.

To what extent I wonder was this due to Roos sitting on the bench. Hopefully this experiment only lasts one week.

[ScottH]

To what extent I wonder was this due to Roos sitting on the bench. Hopefully this experiment only lasts one week.

Apparently it is going to be commonplace.

[ugg]

He said in the press conference that either Longmire or himself would be on the bench at every game.

[Robbo]

Unfortunately from some of them you only learn how stupid the poster is.

Tell me why I'm wrong instead of taking cheap little pot shots like you usually do.

[Robbo]

are we an ugly boring as watching paint dry team? or is it other teams flooding?

or are we just ugly when we lose?

i think when we play last night we deserve the ugly tag, judging by other places like big footy we must be the least popular to watch afl side. I think too many people jump on the bandwagon there and believe what they read.

When we play ugly we lose when we play half decent footy we win more often than not.

I think in some ways we need a few floggins to wake up the coaches

That post wasn't exactly dripping with intelligence let me tell you.

[goswannie14]

Tell me why I'm wrong instead of taking cheap little pot shots like you usually do.

It wasn't directed at you in particular, it was a generalisation. If anyone wants to take it personally then it comes down to the old adage, if the cap fits.....

In the end, no matter how some people will deny it (and some do) we all make stupid comments in our posts at times.

[Robbo]

OK then.

[goswannie14]

I think I have also been frustrated at some of the crap posted today, when I saw some positives in some of the newer players that we had on the ground last night.

[Zlatorog]

I'm not the least surprised that the Swans have lost. The slow starts are our speciality. It was only one year since 1996 (I think it was 1998) when they won first 5 games after which they faded away in a mid-year slump.
So much so that I think that some players even believe that and don't put 100% of their efforts expecting to loose anyway. I know it's dreadful thing to say, but after a longer period of preparations (they played only 1 week in the finals) there's no excuse for a sluggish start. I don't know what Roos is happy about? That the game was not a blow out and the Swans got smashed? If that is the case I'm much more pessimistic about our prospects this year than I was since 2003.

[swansrule100]

That post wasn't exactly dripping with intelligence let me tell you.

well when you start setting a standard and i will be sure to follow you.

[LaDoleCheckVida]

That post wasn't exactly dripping with intelligence let me tell you.

Well you're set a new standard in ridiculous posting. Relax and watch a few games before you decided that our season is over.

Round 1 and the doomsayers and ego trippers are out in force on RWO.

[JudesaGun]

Have we all forgotten it's Round 1 and we are notorious slow starters?!

I remember a very similar style game (though the result was a bit different) against Carlton at the Dome last year or the year before. That year we were at about the same level (in terms of style of play and result) at Round 6 or 7, than we are now at Round 1. Plus we didn't have the same amount of kids in the team and we were playing against a far inferior opposition. In my mind, the attractiveness of the footy (or lack thereof) has clouded many points of view on the result against the Saints and exactly where we stand at this point in the season. Given, at least 7 of our top 10 (Goodes, Hall, Barry, Kirk, Jolly, Davis etc) played below their best and many others had shockers, to only lose by 2 pts in a scrap fest was a fair result and something I think we can definitely build on in the season ahead.