Last night's loss in perspective

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

I thought we'd get flogged by the Saints, so a 2 point loss was a win in my books.
Considering how much the saints flooded in the 1st q.

I love the way the dhead guy behhind us (who gave a running commentary of the St Kilda game ALL night), started complaining when sydney were chipping the ball around, looking for options. But could'nt see that every Saints player was in, or very close to being in, there D50. What a knob.

There was this typically mouthy Sainter tool abusing us after the game telling us to "@@@@@@ off with your bull@@@@ defensive tactics that are destroying footy". I simply yelled "Win a @@@@@@ing flag & come back to me dickwit!" The security guards behind me started laughing as the guy got so shirty!

I hope he enjoys his seasons under Ross Lyon this season. Who said there was a water shortage at Moorrabin this winter?

JF

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

I actually heard Malcolm Blight on Channel 10 last night describing St Kilda's tactics as flooding.
I was dumbfounded - aren't we the only team to 'flood' while other clubs 'get numbers behind the ball'?

Robert Walls comes out with rippers like "Here we go. Here come's Sydney's flooding again."

Then when a Victorian team does it it is "Gee, the .... are realliy getting behind the ball well tonight, aren't they?"

Jealousy is a curve. All because we won a flag!

JF

[BSA5]

Maybe it's just me, but I thought Grundy's game was probably the best since his debut. Got to contests. Made good position. Seemed to know what to do with the pill when he got it. Didn't look worryingly slow.

For all the talk of Marty Mattner being a hard-running HBF in the Malceski/Kennelly mould, so far as I could tell on last night's showing he's barely qualified to tie Tadhg's bootlaces. He looked about as dynamic as Luke Brennan. Which isn't very.

I had been concerned that Moore's salad days with the club were way, way back in 2005 and he was now on the outer. Well, the good news from last night is that he's back. And, injury permitting, going all the way. He's a natural footballer; a steal at draft pick #31. Presumably he only fell that far because his build is not that of a natural athlete. But his athletic ability now seems to be well and truly up to par required for an AFL midfielder.

Amazing how fast things can change. For years talk of our midfield has been all 'drab 4, honest but untalented slow scraggers, no talent coming through when they retire'. In a matter of a night, you've got Moore, McVeigh taking a step up, Jack showing that he wasn't a one-season wonder, and Bird demonstrating some potential, and the future looks a whole lot brighter.

PS Not giving Ed Barlow a game was absolute freaking insanity unless it was some kind of disciplinary thing. It's blokes like him, who win games like that.

Agree with you on Grundy. I'm still not convinced by him, but it was a great relief to see him played forward, as he is quite frankly a useless defender. He'll never be more than a forward-favouring utility, and will never be as good as the likes of Adam Hunter, but unlike last year, he looks as though he might be able to break into our best 22, even without injuries. We'll have to see though. When Playfair gets his body right, he might have a little competition, but at the moment, Grundy>Playfair. And as far as I'm concerned, Brennan is way behind both. And Richards is way in front of both.

Were you at the game, or did you watch it on TV? Because while Mattner certainly wasn't massively influential, I thought he did alright. He played like Kennelly on a badish day. I reckon he'll improve over the next couple of weeks.

Also agree with you completely in regards to Moore. I thought he was on the outer as well. Now I see that those comparisons to Robert Harvey weren't too far off the mark. Obviously he isn't as good as Harvey, at least not yet (fingers crossed, eh?), but there is a resemblance. And is it just me, or does he look like he has grown taller? Maybe he has just lost weight or something, so proportionally he looked taller. Did anybody else think that?

It was good to see McVeigh stepping up, especially after I'd talked him up so much! His disposal doesn't seem to have improved, but at least he got a lot of the ball. I would still like to see him played as a small forward though.

And next week, bring in Barlow for Ablett. And when Ablett returns, drop Bevan down to Canberra where he belongs. Early on in his career, when he impressed everybody with his hardness at the ball, not having a footy brain was excusable. We just hoped it would develop, but it quite clearly hasn't. That's what separates Jack from Bevan in my mind. Jack has adapted to AFL. Does anybody here think Bevan would have noticed Hall running into that space in the second quarter that Jack not only saw, but delivered the ball so perfectly into (I tell you, watching that sent shivers down my spine)? Jack will be playing Bevan's role, but on top of that, he will be able to counter-attack effectively, and hit targets. He is three times the player Bevan is. And Barlow, well, we need another guy with that sort of height AND athletic ability in our side. There were times when we just needed another target up forward. If we can draw on our midfield to do that, well then that is just fantastic. Goodes eventually did it towards the end of the game, but if Barlow can do that as well, then that's potentially very dangerous.

And I'll just mention Bird. I know he didn't do much, but what he did do was generally really good, and when it wasn't (running and slipping into those two Saints players), well, at least he was trying to create. Very good signs.

[timtayla]

it's round 1. Let me know when you want me in the bomb shelter.

Sheesh.

Last nights loss in perspective - we lost by 2 points to a side everyone is tipping to finish top 2 and most were expecting us to be pumped by.

Agree season over, when should tank and get a Judd. So we can be smashed by Richmond.

LaDoleCheckVida;364486 good post

[Legs Akimbo]

Honestly there are some ridiculous views here about our team. I have no diificulty taking the view that we are a dull side to watch and that we are not a patch on geelong. but neither are 15 other sides and we are competitive with every other team because of our game plan.

The reality is that a side which has 5 short defenders who cant chop arms or use their hand to push players under the ball will never be able to beat other sides unless the midfield makes the delivery of the ball always contested. realistically player for player how many of our team make a combined side bolton, kennelly goodes, o keefe ? you would choose riewoldt over hall, kosy over micky o, hayes over bolton, del santo over ablett, hudgton over barry, king over jolly, montagna over mattner, ball over monty, etc etc. We should accept that this style keeps us in many games and makes the best of a largely committed but unskilled side - a side epitomised by brett kirk frankly.

what i actually have problems with is that we dont execute using our style as well as we used to. this is partly because we lack enough players who can kick a goal from outside 50. this means other teams can create a much tighter zone. so we simply have no-one who can kick the goal which drags defeners out of the space to lead into. its partly because umpires sweat on our dinky little passes to say not 15, and partly because until we get a giansiracusa who can kick 60 m accurately we offer no threat from outside 50.

actually i could say so much more but all i really want to say is that we have to accept that the side massively achieved for two years and that the side needs a complete overhaul relying on about 10 draft picks. so if you are prepared to wait 10 years before we are competiutive again thenaccept it. but i wont because i still reckonm this side can win 13-14 games and then anybody on its day.

Here's what you have said.

1. We have no key position backmen
2. Ever StKilda player is preferred to their Sydney counter part
3. We can't dispose accurately to play our gameplan
4. The umpires are on our hammer
5. Can't get a goal beyond 50 (Davis?) and forward line congested
...

5. We will win 13-14 games (i.e borderline top 4) then beat anyone on their day. Sorry, struggling with the logic of this.

[Nico]

Honestly there are some ridiculous views here about our team. I have no diificulty taking the view that we are a dull side to watch and that we are not a patch on geelong. but neither are 15 other sides and we are competitive with every other team because of our game plan.

The reality is that a side which has 5 short defenders who cant chop arms or use their hand to push players under the ball will never be able to beat other sides unless the midfield makes the delivery of the ball always contested. realistically player for player how many of our team make a combined side bolton, kennelly goodes, o keefe ? you would choose riewoldt over hall, kosy over micky o, hayes over bolton, del santo over ablett, hudgton over barry, king over jolly, montagna over mattner, ball over monty, etc etc. We should accept that this style keeps us in many games and makes the best of a largely committed but unskilled side - a side epitomised by brett kirk frankly.

what i actually have problems with is that we dont execute using our style as well as we used to. this is partly because we lack enough players who can kick a goal from outside 50. this means other teams can create a much tighter zone. so we simply have no-one who can kick the goal which drags defeners out of the space to lead into. its partly because umpires sweat on our dinky little passes to say not 15, and partly because until we get a giansiracusa who can kick 60 m accurately we offer no threat from outside 50.

actually i could say so much more but all i really want to say is that we have to accept that the side massively achieved for two years and that the side needs a complete overhaul relying on about 10 draft picks. so if you are prepared to wait 10 years before we are competiutive again thenaccept it. but i wont because i still reckonm this side can win 13-14 games and then anybody on its day.

Excellent post. I think also along with the "blue collar" tag some our blokes are not the sharpest knives in the drawer. There was some pretty unintelligent disposals, but instead of trying little chips to no space a kick the top of the square occasionally would have put so much more pressure on their defence.

I too think we can win 13-14 games but to do that we need quick breaks from half back and amazingly we don't break and run hard to a wing often enough for that to work. Sometimes we do and players ignore those breaks.
If we play smarter and deliver a lot better this squad could do anything given its toughness.(McVeigh excluded in the toughness stakes)

I know we slow down play to stop runs very effectively, but so often there are times when we should play on to beat players getting back and deliver to an open forward line.

[Nico]

Maybe it's just me, but I thought Grundy's game was probably the best since his debut. Got to contests. Made good position. Seemed to know what to do with the pill when he got it. Didn't look worryingly slow.

For all the talk of Marty Mattner being a hard-running HBF in the Malceski/Kennelly mould, so far as I could tell on last night's showing he's barely qualified to tie Tadhg's bootlaces. He looked about as dynamic as Luke Brennan. Which isn't very.

I had been concerned that Moore's salad days with the club were way, way back in 2005 and he was now on the outer. Well, the good news from last night is that he's back. And, injury permitting, going all the way. He's a natural footballer; a steal at draft pick #31. Presumably he only fell that far because his build is not that of a natural athlete. But his athletic ability now seems to be well and truly up to par required for an AFL midfielder.

Amazing how fast things can change. For years talk of our midfield has been all 'drab 4, honest but untalented slow scraggers, no talent coming through when they retire'. In a matter of a night, you've got Moore, McVeigh taking a step up, Jack showing that he wasn't a one-season wonder, and Bird demonstrating some potential, and the future looks a whole lot brighter.

PS Not giving Ed Barlow a game was absolute freaking insanity unless it was some kind of disciplinary thing. It's blokes like him, who win games like that.

Moore looks to have trimmed down a bit so you might be on the money Simon, that he is back on the salads.

[Reggi]

I have made the psychological adjustment to enjoy watching losses by taking pleasure from the development of our next generation. I don't care if we lose this season as long as they continue to restructure and rebuild and the players on the field give 100%. I think they did last night.

I'd much rather that than Roos and Longmire fall into last year's trap of thinking the 2005 cohort have another premiership in them. They don't. Our next window will be in 3 - 5 years. Start preparing.

Apologies, but worst post I have ever read. Need to re-fresh your list, nothing beats a winning culture.

"I believe in youth" has been the refrain of St Kilda & Richmond for 25 years

[Legs Akimbo]

Apologies, but worst post I have ever read. Need to re-fresh your list, nothing beats a winning culture.

"I believe in youth" has been the refrain of St Kilda & Richmond for 25 years

Apology accepted because I had a good old belly laugh at your infantile reply which conclusively demonstrates your simplistic broadbrush mentality. I have no idea who you are quoting there. You confuse tanking with bringing on new players. Fact is that the Sydney Swans have introduced fewer new players than any other club in the last three year period (go look it up). If we continue to play by rote guys like Bolton, Mathews, Crouch, and to an extent, Barry, Hall and Kirks, we are stuffed and will suffer for it. I think blind freddy could see (and read) that this has been the case for the last two years (e.g. the infamous 'premiership credits' remark from Paul Roos).

Not sure how you have interpreted that I am promoting a 'losing culture' (which I inferred by your comment), however, it is intuivitely obvious that playing less experienced players will tend to lead to more erratic performances and most likely some losses. This year, and probably next year, should be transition years. 'Transition' means bringing in less experienced but promosing players while the core of the older experienced brigade are still contributing. This is where other teams have come unstuck. They develop a losing culture because they hang on to playing the stalwarts to get 'one more year' out of them. When that fails, the next generation core of players left at the club have no actual experience of winning.

Like any enterprise, running a footy club is the basic balancing act of maximising current performance (sweating your assets) and bringing on disruptive change in anticipation of future benefits.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Apology accepted because I had a good old belly laugh at your infantile reply which conclusively demonstrates your simplistic broadbrush mentality. I have no idea who you are quoting there. You confuse tanking with bringing on new players. Fact is that the Sydney Swans have introduced fewer new players than any other club in the last three year period (go look it up). If we continue to play by rote guys like Bolton, Mathews, Crouch, and to an extent, Barry, Hall and Kirks, we are stuffed and will suffer for it. I think blind freddy could see (and read) that this has been the case for the last two years (e.g. the infamous 'premiership credits' remark from Paul Roos).

Not sure how you have interpreted that I am promoting a 'losing culture' (which I inferred by your comment), however, it is intuivitely obvious that playing less experienced players will tend to lead to more erratic performances and most likely some losses. This year, and probably next year, should be transition years. 'Transition' means bringing in less experienced but promosing players while the core of the older experienced brigade are still contributing. This is where other teams have come unstuck. They develop a losing culture because they hang on to playing the stalwarts to get 'one more year' out of them. When that fails, the next generation core of players left at the club have no actual experience of winning.

Like any enterprise, running a footy club is the basic balancing act of maximising current performance (sweating your assets) and bringing on disruptive change in anticipation of future benefits.

Brilliant post. Hard to disagree with any of that.

[goswannie14]

Who are the new young (<=25yo) players established in our team now?

Malceski (inj), LRT, Buchanan, Ablett, Richards

Borderline:
Bevan, McVeigh

Trying:
Jack, Moore, Bird, Grundy

On the Outer?
Barlow

Injured:
Schmidt, Laidlaw (?), Thornton

15 names, that's not too bad a list.

[Bleed Red Blood]

Who are the new young (<=25yo) players established in our team now?

Malceski (inj), LRT, Buchanan, Ablett, Richards

Borderline:
Bevan, McVeigh

Trying:
Jack, Moore, Bird, Grundy

On the Outer?
Barlow

Injured:
Schmidt, Laidlaw (?), Thornton

15 names, that's not too bad a list.

Yes it is. Besides Richards, Ablett and Buchanen all being 25 already, and LRT 24, Bevan hasn't improved for years and should not be playing seniors. McVeigh truely is borderline. Some say Grundy is too slow for AFL, but we have no other young KPPs anyway. Thornton and Laidlaw may never make it to more than five games anyway.

[ugg]

McVeigh is not borderline - he's played in the last 49 games straight.

[top40]

Let?s all take a big deep breath, and remember four things:

Number One: We lost to St Kilda by just 2 points

Number Two: It was away from home. Since 1988 the Swans have won just three games in Round One out of a possible eleven, away from Sydney

Number Three: We lost to a side that was competitively very match fit, having won 4 straight NAB cup games

Number Four: Most importantly, ITS ONLY ROUND ONE!!!

[bandwagon]

I think it was the quality of football we played rather than the loss itself.

That, and the fact that our gameplan doesn't appear to have evolved since last year.

In truth I was not expecting a win, given that St Kilda appeared to be in form, and we had a number of new-ish players. However if we continue with the 2007 gameplan I do not expect a better finish to 2008.