Cheer Cheer the Red and the Blight

[AnnieH]

Nice Swanage.

A batch of Mrs Fields triple choc cookies would be fabo.

We stopped watching the 07 granny after the first quarter.
Watching paint dry was more exciting.

[AnnieH]

I would prefer our team to man up (we dont) limit stoppages (we dont) - play free flowing footy ( we rarely do) they have to move with the times - because the current plan as it is isnt working. Sure it worked in the past - but we have been found out and teams run rings around us and lets not forget we only just beat Freo!. Roos is moving along with all these new ideas with coaching from the bench etc, but the game plan hasnt changed.

Wardy, I'd be very happy if a few of them went back to roving school.
We don't seem to have anyone who knows how to rove the ball (ala Kels).

[swanage]

As I've said a few times before, sport isn't just about winning. It's also about entertainment. Otherwise why would certain sports be popular and others not.

How could anyone say that Swans games weren't entertaining for the fans of the teams involved? For us the entertainment came from watching close hard fought games in which our team prevailed more often than not, while the anticipation to knock off a hated foe would have sufficed for our opposition.

Like I said for many people the way the Swans played IS exciting (there was nothing exiting about Saturday night). It's not as free flowing as what you see from Geelong and co nowadays, but scrap around the stoppages made the game more exciting when it did break out.

And although I agree that winning isn't everything, it is the primary purpose of the contest. Playing pretty and winning often goes hand in hand, but if it doesn't I know which option 99.9% of supporters would prefer to see from their team. Ask Port Adelaide players/supporters after last year's GF if they would have liked to "win ugly".

[swanage]

A batch of Mrs Fields triple choc cookies would be fabo.

Mmm sounds delicious. I'll have to get an extra pack

[Wardy]

Wardy, I'd be very happy if a few of them went back to roving school.
We don't seem to have anyone who knows how to rove the ball (ala Kels).

exactly - roving leads to flowing footy - we just get it and go to ground - drives me crazy and I tend to lose interest. But I'm sure that had the team in the Granny last year been wearing red and white and winning by 119 points- you would all be waxing lyrical about how bloody fantastic they were!

[hammo]

Swanage, I read it too. And largely agree. Last year's grand final was the uncontested aerial ping pong that I long derided AFL as throughout my NSW youth.

Geelong limit contested possessions but they don't play aerial ping pong.

Aerial ping pong referred to a style of play when players would roost the ball down field to a large pack of players and the ball would often be quickly returned the same way. Almost every mark was contested in contrast to the modern game when keeping possession is the priority.

I heard Warren Ryan of all people talking about the 2007 grand final on the ABC a few weekends ago and he likened Geelong's style to touch football, where any contested possessions were minimised as much as possible through rapid hand passes. He admitted he didn't know the first thing about AFL but was transfixed by the style Geelong were playing as it was so similar to the rugby codes.

[AnnieH]

exactly - roving leads to flowing footy - we just get it and go to ground - drives me crazy and I tend to lose interest. But I'm sure that had the team in the Granny last year been wearing red and white and winning by 119 points- you would all be waxing lyrical about how bloody fantastic they were!

... absolutely.

Bloody boring, yet fantastic!!

[swanage]

As I've said a few times before, sport isn't just about winning. It's also about entertainment. Otherwise why would certain sports be popular and others not.

How could anyone say that Swans games weren't entertaining for the fans of the teams involved? For us the entertainment came from watching close hard fought games in which our team prevailed more often than not, while the anticipation to knock off a hated foe would have sufficed for our opposition.

Like I said for many people the way the Swans played IS exciting (there was nothing exiting about Saturday night). It's not as free flowing as what you see from Geelong and co nowadays, but scrap around the stoppages made the game more exciting when it did break out.

And although I agree that winning isn't everything, it is the primary purpose of the contest. Playing pretty and winning often goes hand in hand, but if it doesn't I know which option 99.9% of supporters would prefer to see from their team. Ask Port Adelaide players/supporters after last year's GF if they would have liked to "win ugly".

[swanage]

But I'm sure that had the team in the Granny last year been wearing red and white and winning by 119 points- you would all be waxing lyrical about how bloody fantastic they were!

I don't think anyone is criticizing Geelong as a team nor the way they play. There's no question they're a cut above and watching them is enjoyable for the sheer skill in their play. Put simply they ARE bloody fantastic. But as a spectacle, a 100+ drubbing in a game that's supposed to the crowning game of the year isn't really a good advertisement for an exciting game.

[NMWBloods]

I would prefer our team to man up (we dont) limit stoppages (we dont) - play free flowing footy ( we rarely do) they have to move with the times - because the current plan as it is isnt working. Sure it worked in the past - but we have been found out and teams run rings around us and lets not forget we only just beat Freo!. Roos is moving along with all these new ideas with coaching from the bench etc, but the game plan hasnt changed.

Yes, it's one thing to have a strategy that is not the most attractive in the world, but it does need to work as well. It's really important in the modern game for the strategies to continue to evolve, which actually makes it easier to cope with less attractive football if it is successful. There is always a temptation though to stick with what worked in the past.

[NMWBloods]

Like I said for many people the way the Swans played IS exciting (there was nothing exiting about Saturday night). It's not as free flowing as what you see from Geelong and co nowadays, but scrap around the stoppages made the game more exciting when it did break out.

As I said, it's not entertaining for neutral supporters and some Swans supporters too. Stoppages are not exciting - AFL is not rugby.

And although I agree that winning isn't everything, it is the primary purpose of the contest. Playing pretty and winning often goes hand in hand, but if it doesn't I know which option 99.9% of supporters would prefer to see from their team. Ask Port Adelaide players/supporters after last year's GF if they would have liked to "win ugly".

But the attractiveness of a sport in the bigger sense is important for attracting fans. It's been one of the great advantages and differentiators of AFL.

[NMWBloods]

I don't think anyone is criticizing Geelong as a team nor the way they play. There's no question they're a cut above and watching them is enjoyable for the sheer skill in their play. Put simply they ARE bloody fantastic. But as a spectacle, a 100+ drubbing in a game that's supposed to the crowning game of the year isn't really a good advertisement for an exciting game.

But that's not a negative for the way Geelong play or a positive for the way Sydney play. In both the 05 and 06 GFs the side in front should have put the game beyond doubt at half time or early in the third quarter but both of them were unable to convert their opportunities. Geelong was able to convert their opportunities.

[swanage]

But the attractiveness of a sport in the bigger sense is important for attracting fans. It's been one of the great advantages and differentiators of AFL.

True, but should this really be the concern of coaching and playing staff? If the current rules aren't producing a spectacle worthy of being watched than it's the rules that need changing not the teams playing within them. The Swans doing what they did with the roster they had should be applauded as a modern day masterpiece, irrespective of how they achieved it (assuming it was legal).

I don't think I need convince too many of that here though

But that's not a negative for the way Geelong play or a positive for the way Sydney play.

I see what you mean. You would never say that the unwillingness to take the foot off the oppositions throat is a negative in Geelong's game. But just the same there's nothing as entertaining as a close contest particularly in AFL.

Sydney would have been a "better" team if they won every game by 50 points, but imo the closeness of many of the encounters more than made up for the lack of free flowing play. A by-product of their style if you like.

[NMWBloods]

Last year's grand final was the uncontested aerial ping pong that I long derided AFL as throughout my NSW youth.

Last year's GF was modern football executed to perfection by its best current proponent. It was about controlling the ball, moving it quickly into the forward line and keeping it from the opposition. It had nothing to do with "aerial ping pong" which by its very nature was about contested football - it was the style of football in the past where players would kick the ball long to a pack where players attempted to take a contested mark. Often it would come back again, hence the ping pong component. Very little of it was uncontested - it was nearly all man-to-man. It also produced some of the greatest highlights of VFL.

I find watching a high scoring game where players won't man up REALLY frustrating - including last Saturday at Telstra Stadium. I like contested footy and the Swans have given me plenty of that over the past few years and largely explains my passion for the team.

It's possible to play contested football and still move the ball quickly and score goals. It doesn't need to be a low-scoring stoppage-ridden game to be exciting. Witness the 1989 GF as an example.

[NMWBloods]

True, but should this really be the concern of coaching and playing staff?

No - definitely not. I think the club needs to focus on winning within the current rules. If I complain about the standard of football I don't expect them to change and start losing games. However, I would prefer more attractive football to watch.

I see what you mean. You would never say that the unwillingness to take the foot off the oppositions throat is a negative in Geelong's game. But just the same there's nothing as entertaining as a close contest particularly in AFL.

Agree with some caveats - a close game of AFL is good, but a close game with high intensity is much better, and a close game with great skills and high intensity is exponentially better again.

Sydney would have been a "better" team if they won every game by 50 points, but imo the closeness of many of the encounters more than made up for the lack of free flowing play. A by-product of their style if you like.

And this the point where a lot of neutral fans will disagree, particularly the games where the difference is more than a couple of goals.