What changes are needed to go from also rans to a contender?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • hammo
    Veterans List
    • Jul 2003
    • 5554

    #31
    Originally posted by BeeEmmAre
    How quickly they turn.
    We haven't gone close to beating a top team all year, don't you think some changes are needed?
    "As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk

    Comment

    • DeadlyAkkuret
      Veterans List
      • Oct 2006
      • 4547

      #32
      Originally posted by BeeEmmAre
      How quickly they turn.
      What does that even mean? We're supposed to have our heads in the clouds as our team serves up this crap each weekend?

      Comment

      • hot potato
        Sir Ashmole Gruntbucket
        • Jun 2007
        • 1122

        #33
        Stop stufffing around with that psycho dude, who i've never heard of before.
        FFS how the hell is he going to know when BATS IN THE BELFREY BIG BAD BUSTLING BARRY HALL has beaten his habit, it is a sheer impossibility.
        Even my mother in law reckons she would have done exactly what he did with all the niggling.
        He's serving no useful purpose up country with a friend.
        He's no longer suspended, bring him back for the Blues game immediately. Every single other team in the comp would.
        It's a bloody joke, and I'm grumpy. and ready to deck someone.
        "He was proud of us when we won and he was still proud of us when we lost' Tami Roos about Paul Sept 06.

        Comment

        • mcs
          Travelling Swannie!!
          • Jul 2007
          • 8166

          #34
          its all nice and well to say we need a wholesale change in our gameplan, but do we really have the personnel to be able to make the change? Our younger blokes no doubt in the medium term I believe can be led along that sort of path, but the older blokes especially really do know only one style of footy. I think the game plan is somewhat now redudant, but I dont think it is completely broken. It no doubt now is a burden against the better teams, and in the medium-long term I definetly want to see us change the way we play (Which no doubt will happen, as all teams go through different phases), but in the short term I want to see us have maybe one last shot at a real tilt for the flag, and I dont think wholesale changes will help us at all.

          I am simplifying it greatly but there are four things that imo need to change desperately and I reckon we would look a different team, even though we could conceivably (Except for point 2) stick to a fairly similar gameplan.

          1) Get the boys revved up before the game (Not at 3/4 time when we are 40 points down) so that they hit the ground running. Right through this great period for our club, we have so often let teams get away from us only to fall short at the death. Id be very interested to see the stats over the last 3 or 4 years (say 2005 to now) on how many games we have lost when we have led at say 1/4 time. Id be very suprised if we werent somewhere up around 65-70% of these matches won. For we are a good leading team. We have been good at creating pressure and holding onto the lead, but not good at chasing teams down (The great exception to this imo apart from Davis in 05 was the Saints prelim in 05).

          2) Take a leaf out of the book of Geelong and also now the dogs and the Hawks and play on (As a lot have been saying) at all costs. It is the way footy works best in the current situation and rule setup. We may not be good enough for it, but we can look mighty dangerous when we do it and can pour on a lot of points very quickly. The lack of trying this really bugs me, because I know we can do it well- as we have seen in patches of games when we have to throw the floodgates open to do it to try and chase the game down. And when you consider we have the backline to do it imo- Malceski, Mattner and Kennelly (Fitness problems aside for the moment) are three damaging players running out, Leo Barry always is willing to take players on and still does alright more times then not, and Richards and Bolton also are not at all bad distributors and runners of the ball. We could do it imo and make a success of it. But for this to work with our current gameplan we need the following, imo most important point.

          3) RUN HARDER AND WORK HARDER! We simply dont run hard enough to create leads, and far too many of our players (especially bringing the ball back in) are far too stationary. Whereas in 05 our skills were fantastic and we could take almost every mark on a lead of only 1 or 2 metres on an opponent, now we make many mistakes. The way to combat this though is to work far harder round the ground and get on real leads. Watch Geelong especially and so many players get on leads where they are 5 metres minimum away from their opponents and have run 50 or even 100 metres to create space. If you work hard and run hard, even if you stuff up there is a fair chance you can get the ball. Now I fully acknowledge we probably dont have the leg speed in most players to do what Geelong can, but its not to say we cant still imitate them quite well. We simply dont work hard enough, and with the slower tempo 3 years ago and better skills we got away with it, but now we are getting shown up as teams like the Pies simply shut down our midfield and our precision game does not work. Its a myth imo that our gameplan of precision passing is incompatible with playing on quickly- if we worked hard enough around the ground (And granted moved the ball quicker after taking marks) then we could still successfully use a precision sort of game.

          4) Learn to KICK STRAIGHT. We have so often been wasteful in front of goals. I dont care if they have to be up to midnight every night for 2 weeks, get them out there practicing set shots and on the run attempts time and time again until every player who is every up forward can kick say a minimum of 4 out of every 5 on a fairly regular basis. For while we have been comprehensively outplayed by the Hawks and the Pies, especially against the pies if we had of kicked straight we could of still had a shot when we got our roll on in the last quarter. The outstanding example of this this year was the Dogs against us. We dominated most of the match, but they barely missed a goal all day and not only kept themselves well and truly in a contest they should have lost but won it fairly comfortably in the end.

          It all sounds so simple when I read it back to myself what I just typed and I know it is not, but I really feel a decent improvement in these 4 sort of areas could make a huge difference. We could still base our gameplan on tight controlled footy, but if we looked to take them on when we have the ball we could conceivably cause a lot of teams problems. For even though there are teams that have our measure now (Especially the pies), it is more down to the fact that we dont go out to take teams on enough, when we have the potential to do it very well. For I think the Pies now just think "Ah well block up the middle zone with lots of players, crowd their space and theyll soon enough @@@@@@ up and turn it over and we'll smash em on the counter attack." If we go out from the first bell and try to, not even necessarily all the time just sometimes try to take them on and move it quickly, I think you put a seed of doubt in their minds and that is when you can unsettle their game plan, and make them play into our hands.

          Thats my very elongated view of it all. A new gameplan will have to happen in the long run, but a few changes all of which I think we are capable of and we could yet give it one last big shake for now.
          "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

          Comment

          • hot potato
            Sir Ashmole Gruntbucket
            • Jun 2007
            • 1122

            #35
            Originally posted by mcs
            its all nice and well to say we need a wholesale change in our gameplan, but do we really have the personnel to be able to make the change? Our younger blokes no doubt in the medium term I believe can be led along that sort of path, but the older blokes especially really do know only one style of footy. I think the game plan is somewhat now redudant, but I dont think it is completely broken. It no doubt now is a burden against the better teams, and in the medium-long term I definetly want to see us change the way we play (Which no doubt will happen, as all teams go through different phases), but in the short term I want to see us have maybe one last shot at a real tilt for the flag, and I dont think wholesale changes will help us at all.

            I am simplifying it greatly but there are four things that imo need to change desperately and I reckon we would look a different team, even though we could conceivably (Except for point 2) stick to a fairly similar gameplan.

            1) Get the boys revved up before the game (Not at 3/4 time when we are 40 points down) so that they hit the ground running. Right through this great period for our club, we have so often let teams get away from us only to fall short at the death. Id be very interested to see the stats over the last 3 or 4 years (say 2005 to now) on how many games we have lost when we have led at say 1/4 time. Id be very suprised if we werent somewhere up around 65-70% of these matches won. For we are a good leading team. We have been good at creating pressure and holding onto the lead, but not good at chasing teams down (The great exception to this imo apart from Davis in 05 was the Saints prelim in 05).

            2) Take a leaf out of the book of Geelong and also now the dogs and the Hawks and play on (As a lot have been saying) at all costs. It is the way footy works best in the current situation and rule setup. We may not be good enough for it, but we can look mighty dangerous when we do it and can pour on a lot of points very quickly. The lack of trying this really bugs me, because I know we can do it well- as we have seen in patches of games when we have to throw the floodgates open to do it to try and chase the game down. And when you consider we have the backline to do it imo- Malceski, Mattner and Kennelly (Fitness problems aside for the moment) are three damaging players running out, Leo Barry always is willing to take players on and still does alright more times then not, and Richards and Bolton also are not at all bad distributors and runners of the ball. We could do it imo and make a success of it. But for this to work with our current gameplan we need the following, imo most important point.

            3) RUN HARDER AND WORK HARDER! We simply dont run hard enough to create leads, and far too many of our players (especially bringing the ball back in) are far too stationary. Whereas in 05 our skills were fantastic and we could take almost every mark on a lead of only 1 or 2 metres on an opponent, now we make many mistakes. The way to combat this though is to work far harder round the ground and get on real leads. Watch Geelong especially and so many players get on leads where they are 5 metres minimum away from their opponents and have run 50 or even 100 metres to create space. If you work hard and run hard, even if you stuff up there is a fair chance you can get the ball. Now I fully acknowledge we probably dont have the leg speed in most players to do what Geelong can, but its not to say we cant still imitate them quite well. We simply dont work hard enough, and with the slower tempo 3 years ago and better skills we got away with it, but now we are getting shown up as teams like the Pies simply shut down our midfield and our precision game does not work. Its a myth imo that our gameplan of precision passing is incompatible with playing on quickly- if we worked hard enough around the ground (And granted moved the ball quicker after taking marks) then we could still successfully use a precision sort of game.

            4) Learn to KICK STRAIGHT. We have so often been wasteful in front of goals. I dont care if they have to be up to midnight every night for 2 weeks, get them out there practicing set shots and on the run attempts time and time again until every player who is every up forward can kick say a minimum of 4 out of every 5 on a fairly regular basis. For while we have been comprehensively outplayed by the Hawks and the Pies, especially against the pies if we had of kicked straight we could of still had a shot when we got our roll on in the last quarter. The outstanding example of this this year was the Dogs against us. We dominated most of the match, but they barely missed a goal all day and not only kept themselves well and truly in a contest they should have lost but won it fairly comfortably in the end.

            It all sounds so simple when I read it back to myself what I just typed and I know it is not, but I really feel a decent improvement in these 4 sort of areas could make a huge difference. We could still base our gameplan on tight controlled footy, but if we looked to take them on when we have the ball we could conceivably cause a lot of teams problems. For even though there are teams that have our measure now (Especially the pies), it is more down to the fact that we dont go out to take teams on enough, when we have the potential to do it very well. For I think the Pies now just think "Ah well block up the middle zone with lots of players, crowd their space and theyll soon enough @@@@@@ up and turn it over and we'll smash em on the counter attack." If we go out from the first bell and try to, not even necessarily all the time just sometimes try to take them on and move it quickly, I think you put a seed of doubt in their minds and that is when you can unsettle their game plan, and make them play into our hands.

            Thats my very elongated view of it all. A new gameplan will have to happen in the long run, but a few changes all of which I think we are capable of and we could yet give it one last big shake for now.
            Well constructed Vossy, sounds good to me.
            "He was proud of us when we won and he was still proud of us when we lost' Tami Roos about Paul Sept 06.

            Comment

            • SimonH
              Salt future's rising
              • Aug 2004
              • 1647

              #36
              I couldn't be bothered responding to all of your thoughtful points mcs (although I think you're generally on the money), but on point 3:

              Kirk proved again on the weekend what an absolutely unbelievable asset to the team he is in this respect. He just presents and presents and presents to provide an option where no-one else is doing so. Honourable mentions in that respect go to ROK and Goodes.

              Comment

              • NMWBloods
                Taking Refuge!!
                • Jan 2003
                • 15819

                #37
                Originally posted by mcs
                Thats my very elongated view of it all. A new gameplan will have to happen in the long run, but a few changes all of which I think we are capable of and we could yet give it one last big shake for now.
                Overall a pretty good and thoughtful range of comments there!
                Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

                "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

                Comment

                • ROK Lobster
                  RWO Life Member
                  • Aug 2004
                  • 8658

                  #38
                  Originally posted by SimonH
                  I couldn't be bothered responding to all of your thoughtful points mcs (although I think you're generally on the money), but on point 3:

                  Kirk proved again on the weekend what an absolutely unbelievable asset to the team he is in this respect. He just presents and presents and presents to provide an option where no-one else is doing so. Honourable mentions in that respect go to ROK and Goodes.
                  Kirk will keep you in a game. He wont win one though.

                  Comment

                  • liz
                    Veteran
                    Site Admin
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 16773

                    #39
                    Originally posted by SimonH
                    I couldn't be bothered responding to all of your thoughtful points mcs (although I think you're generally on the money), but on point 3:

                    Kirk proved again on the weekend what an absolutely unbelievable asset to the team he is in this respect. He just presents and presents and presents to provide an option where no-one else is doing so. Honourable mentions in that respect go to ROK and Goodes.
                    And in the case of Kirk, it shows that footspeed is far far less relevant than determination and sheer hard work.

                    In 2005 and 2006, savvy commentators labelled the Swans as the team that worked the hardest when they didn't have the ball. They don't deserve that label at the moment. The question is whether it's because not enough players are able to work as hard as they were (either through injury or ageing), whether it's because they aren't willing to work as hard as they were, or in the case of the younger players, it's because they don't yet know when or where to run to provide maximum benefit to the team.

                    Originally posted by ROK Lobster
                    Kirk will keep you in a game. He wont win one though.
                    But that's why you have 22 players in a team - and a mix of them. Kirk won't win a game off his own boot, but he might inspire enough of his team mates to lift to get the team over the line. He came within one point of achieving that with a supreme second half in the 2006 GF.

                    The 2005 SF is always going to be remembered for Nick Davis but it was Crouch who almost singlehandedly kept the Swans in the game in the first half, and then Kirk who took over in the 3rd quarter. Without those two, it would taken another half dozen goals from Davis to win the game.

                    Comment

                    • swansrule100
                      The quarterback
                      • May 2004
                      • 4538

                      #40
                      i think theres a reluctance for change around the club. Maybe its because this group of coaches and players are basically the ones who finally got us a premiership, and we are not moving on.

                      I guess looking for massive changes in a side that is 4th on the ladder seems silly. I think thats the problem with the club. Yes we are 4th but with a normal draw we would be lower i imagine and the teams around us have beaten us easily.

                      But the club internally seems to hang on to us being 4th and the fact that yes we did lose to other top teams, but not by much. Geelong only beat us by 40 odd and we were within 10 at 3/4 time we got back into the hawks game, it was only a 30 point loss, the dogs 12 or 18 or whatever, even collingwood was not a flogging. I think thats the problem, the game plan is grinding and wearing on even the best opponent that we dont ever get smashed.

                      We all know that in the four games ive mentioned (less so in the dogs) we were essentially flogged and out of the game for most of it, just the old late charge or grinding game plan flatters the team.

                      I think that stops any real change instead its just this attidude where if only a few things went our way or if hall was fit in body and mind, or we had fosdike or whoever.

                      I think until we start getting thrashed we wont see any change, because the club thinks its all fine, and just luck and persistance will switch it around
                      Theres not much left to say

                      Comment

                      • hammo
                        Veterans List
                        • Jul 2003
                        • 5554

                        #41
                        If Buddy could kick straight we would have lost by 60.
                        "As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk

                        Comment

                        • ScottH
                          It's Goodes to cheer!!
                          • Sep 2003
                          • 23665

                          #42
                          Originally posted by ROK Lobster
                          Kirk will keep you in a game. He wont win one though.
                          May not have won any games for us, but he has sure saved our asses more than once.

                          Comment

                          • Boodnutz
                            On the Rookie List
                            • Mar 2004
                            • 131

                            #43
                            Originally posted by mcs
                            Thats my very elongated view of it all. A new gameplan will have to happen in the long run, but a few changes all of which I think we are capable of and we could yet give it one last big shake for now.
                            spot on analysis. only point i would make is that the problem lies in the midfielders who are appointed to get back and across the ball when in the opposition's forward line. For example, there should always be someone free at the back of a defensive contest who a player under pressure knows he can give off to. That player is normally a Malceski who then relieves pressure by giving off to a running defensive midfielder with 1 or 2 midfielders in support (handball give/short pass etc). Those players (McVeigh in particular) aren't there and it's left to individuals to just try and work their own way out of trouble. They then have to give the ball to the best available one on one and hope it doesn't come back.

                            So, the run doesn't develop and skills begin to look ordinary cos they're being executed under pressure. Often on Sunday the ball then came back into the defensive zone to one on ones (Franklin/Bolton, Mattner/Williams etc) where the defender will always be at a disadvantage.

                            I think Roos is being a little disingenous by saying the defenders are the problem here. Collingwood had no trouble running groups between each end of the ground, but Sydney seem to have stopped to a walk. No-one is presenting as options at the grunt end of the ground and there should be a lot of finger pointing at team meetings this week. Many of those fingers should be pointed at McVeigh, Ablett, O'Keefe and Bird.

                            Comment

                            • RogueSwan
                              McVeigh for Brownlow
                              • Apr 2003
                              • 4602

                              #44
                              There seems to be a recurrent theme on here that we can create a run in the second half of the game and that if we were closer we would have a chance of winning.
                              I actually think that the reason we often have a strong run in the second of a game, chasing a big lead, is more because the other team has taken their foot off the pedal than anything we do. The opposition then goes back to playing how they should and win the game.
                              "Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017

                              Comment

                              • Mr Magoo
                                Senior Player
                                • May 2008
                                • 1255

                                #45
                                The major area we were killed on the weekend was the midfield and it wasnt just our inability to get forward fifty entries but also our defensive pressure and tackling on the Hawks midfield.

                                For a team that seemingly is renowned as a midfield defensive unit , I couldnt believe how many times hawks players broke through our tackles or ran from the midfield uncontested.

                                In these circumstances it is nigh impossible to defend against as a forward gets on their bike and leads to a nice pass coming in from the uncontested midfield possession.

                                Even if we are to maintain the same game plan, we are not executing it well enough. Roosy is probably somewhat right in saying it wasnt the forwards fault on the weekend although I believe our missed shots on goal were significantly easier than many of franklins . Where I believe he was wrong was the problem didnt lie in the defense of the back line but moreso the defense of the midfield.

                                What I am at a loss to work out is who could come in to overcome the midfield problems. Besides Kirk, no one is really starring at the moment but having read the injury problems with the next gen in the magoos, I cant see any easy solution to this.

                                The only players in the magoos who seem to perfrom consistently in the twos (and I am basing this on ROW reports) is Grundy, Schmidt and Currie. The others seem to be up and down. Even considering the three above , if I was a selector, I dont know really how much Grundy would bring to the side over LRT, nor schmidt over buchanan or even currie over everitt.

                                Comment

                                Working...