Round 20 Cats gameday thread

[hammo]

Kennelly needs to go home. He has too many injuries. He could have been great, but unfortunately like alot of footballers, injury has taken him too soon. We can keep with him and hope he gets better, or cut him and go forward!!!!

He's contracted for next year so I don't see why we'd even entertain the prospect of cutting him! Hopefully with an op at the end of the season, some rest and a full pre season he will be back to his best next year.

To think about cutting one of our best and most skillful players defies logic.

[SassySwan]

To think about cutting one of our best and most skillful players defies logic.

This must be one of the most positive comments I've seen you make in quite a while.
If he is one our best and most skillful players why does he not get the ball out of our backline on a consistent basis?
IMO he consistently holds the ball up, props, stops, cant make a decision, rushes... @@@@s it up, opposition gets the ball... score!
Put Him on a Plane and Send Him Home!

[swantastic]

I heard he is out in the carpark munching on a Chicko Roll with Darren Jolly and Ryan O'Keefe.

I wondered where they were tonight.

BTW..Benny would have been a lot better than a few players out there tonight.Crouchy was ok untill he got injured and so was Fossie.

[SimonH]

As comprehensive defeats go, that's about the most positive one you could have. Yes, there were too many handballs that either missed their mark, went to stationary targets, or represented that one handball too many. Yes, more of their tackles stuck and not enough of ours did. Yes, LRT is and remains LRT. Yes, we suffer from the fact that neither Keneally or Malceski are 100% fit. Yes, if you turn the footy over against Geelong they will punish you badly. Yes, if you don't take each and every opportunity that Geelong give you in front of goal, they'll make you regret it.

But pull back a moment, folks. What have people been saying after every Sydney loss for ever? Not prepared to back themselves. Not prepared to take the game on. Playing an old-fashioned and predictable style of footy that other sides can easily work out and counter. Moving the ball too slowly.

None of this applied tonight. With the occasional dishonourable exception, we ran in numbers, we took chances, we gave our forwards every opportunity with rapid movement in. How could a guy who was double-teamed for most of the night wind up with 13 grabs and 5 goals? The way that we played tonight is capable of beating any other team in the comp, and if you cut down on the skill errors and give us a sizeable slice of luck (and get rid of the 'only one team can have holding the ball paid against them' umpiring), it might even beat Geelong. If we back up with this performance vs Collingwood, we should win that game. In fact, it's exactly this kind of busting-open that has been missing in all of our long series of losses vs the Woods.

Individual players come and go, but if the trend that we've seen vs Carlton, Fremantle and now in a loss vs Geelong endures, then Roos will have set up the Swans to play an exciting brand of footy beyond 2009.

I'm pleased that we seem to have lifted our eyes above the horizon, rather than trying to win the 2005 premiership over again.

[Seagoon]

I know what you are saying but when you handball to a statue against Geelong they pounce so quickly, and it looks like players are slow to get rid of it. Hence the saying "a hospital handpass".

Ahh, yes, i get you. There were plenty of hospital passes tonight i totally agree. In fact i think i was saying the exact words to the mrs at the game...

[cruiser]

Ahh, yes, i get you. There were plenty of hospital passes tonight i totally agree. In fact i think i was saying the exact words to the mrs at the game...

That also had a lot to do with the incredible pressure constantly applied by Geelong.

[swantastic]

That also had a lot to do with the incredible pressure constantly applied by Geelong.

That was partly to do with it but in the end it was our @@@@ful decision making that stuffed us in the end.

[cruiser]

A positive from the game: we outscored them in the final quarter and our losing margin was less than a lot of other teams playing them this year (hey, that's two positives!! )

[schwattasboots]

it thought the umpires cost us the game

even that hadyen kennedy regards tim peace

[Lohengrin]

it thought the umpires cost us the game

That's really pretty ridiculous, even for it! Umpiring was poor but Geelong was clearly the better side. The first four goals Geelong kicked were from frees but none of them seemed particularly controversial.

[Lohengrin]

Yes but 5 of those were from dodgey free kicks.The umps got them into the game.

The first four goals didn't seem to be "dodgy".

[swansrule100]

in my heart of hearts i did not expect to win. I thought the players took it up to geelong and was probably our best performance in a month or so really. Just we played a team that is way better than us.

They do the little things so well, like lead straight or make position or create play. We look too slow and still and we go wide too often.

I dont think you could fault the endevour out there today, except for some junk time play the cats were about 70 points better, but that maybe says more about how great the cats are as opposed to how bad the swans are.

Positives for me: being at the ground seeing the cats play was good. Bird looked composed and assured out there he has the best footy brain of our midfield in my opinion.

Hall looked back in form, and was beating taylor, but we did not use that, we force him wide and kick poorly toward him.

I also think the guys did not chuck in the towel, i know its a bit touchy feely and so what but they never gave an inch despite the flogging.


The negatives: well goodes, i guess he has an injury but he is a leader at this club and does not stand up. Okeefe is being tagged out of games and played out of position.

Roberts-thompson on mooney was the worst match up of the night. Having him there did not help the team nor lrt at all. He either needs to improve a hell of a lot or nick off, because he is not up to standard.

[sharp9]

[QUOTE=Nico;404943]

What game did you watch tonight? I respectfully suggest that you wouldn't know if your bum was on fire.

Respectfully siggest you watch the tape and see quicker players going around under ansd through Kennelly and beating him one on one. All I'm saying is that at the moment he is not the player he was and the road back to 100% looks a long a difficult one....does he really want to do it?

Someone mentioned McVeigh no good at tagging....I think you will find HE WAS TAGGED by big red (and well beaten).

[sharp9]

I appreciate the fact that we attempted a bit of "running in waves" it's just that the brain also needs to apply in that if there are six Geelong players in the centre square then the running in waves should stop and the bloke with the ball should kick it to one of the players who should be free further upfiedl....that is what Geelong do. Also the time between receive and give for Geelong is very, very short....we take too long. Also a lot of our handballs in waves go up, up, up in an arc...or behind to the ground.. I presume that this is simply lack of execution skill.

The very, very scary thing, though was our complete ineptitude when confronted with a zone..There were several great examples of down the ground camera shots showing a Clarkson cluster up the lin...players every 20 metres without a man...plus the same 20 metres inboard. The Swans must have been standing still in the corridor, but we are so drilled to go up the line that we several times kicked up the line to a 3 on 1. Very weird. every knows that the cluster is broken either by switching or by handpass/short kick through the centre followed by long kick over the zone. When we switched we stopped and propped far too often, it has to be "Switch and go." Again a big difference between us and themm is that our wingers and half forwards just could not seem to break into space for a 30-40 metre kick whereas they did it with ease most of the time.

Other big difference (as noted by many) was the inability to stop them getting a handball away when "tackled." They never looked rattled when pressured, just kept handballing through almost tackle after almost tackle until a man was well in the clear. I think maybe 2 times in the game we stopped them (for a ball up). In the other hand they must have stopped us 15 or 20 times, with 7 or 8 going for goals or HTB at the least.

This has been a big problem for some time and was the reason MOD came in...in the game against Carlton we only stopped them rebounding 50 a couple of times in the entire match (and the first was in the 3rd q IIRC).

[swansrule100]

i agree with a lot of what you say sharp9. I also found it frustrating to see one G.Ablett running free a few times, wouldn't someone be his shadow all night?

not only do players not find the space that often when they do its usually backward from the play, and that is a waste against geelong.

Also mattner for instance was a victim of his team mates play quite a few times, we get a bit of dash going and handball back to him when he is stationary, perhaps he should be moving forward.

As a club we are poor decision makers which shows up time and time again against face pace committed opposition