Swans Not Ugly ... This Time

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • AnnieH
    RWOs Black Sheep
    • Aug 2006
    • 11332

    Swans Not Ugly ... This Time

    Now it's a "swans insider" complaining.

    Ugly Football - Richard Hinds

    IN PAST instalments of the AFL's "ugly football" debate, an exercise in self-loathing during which a game that by every reasonable measurement is thriving declares itself to be at death's door, one thing could be taken for granted: it was always the Swans' fault.

    First it was their evil genius coach Rodney Eade whose floods made those described in the Old Testament seem like duck ponds. But where Biblical floods were negotiable by ark, nothing, the critics warned, would save the AFL from Eade's monsoon.
    "It's far worse than anything we did," said one Swans insider. "We're seeing some horrible football now. With the zone in place and loose men back it's getting like soccer. Kick back to a loose man. Handball side-ways. Is that better than a tough man-on-man contest?"
    Who's been blabbing?
    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
  • dimelb
    pr. dim-melb; m not f
    • Jun 2003
    • 6889

    #2
    Same sort of stuff in The Hun: Rolling zone stumps AFL Laws of the Game panel | Herald Sun
    There is a rising tide of anger at people fiddling with the rules.
    He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

    Comment

    • AnnieH
      RWOs Black Sheep
      • Aug 2006
      • 11332

      #3
      That's probably why they should leave the bloody rules alone.
      Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
      Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

      Comment

      • Wardy
        The old Boiler!
        • Sep 2003
        • 6676

        #4
        you have to admit though the Swans did turn kicking the ball backwards to go forwards into a bit an artform.
        I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure..................
        Chickens drink - but they don't pee!
        AGE IS ONLY IMPORTANT FOR TWO THINGS - WINE & CHEESE!

        Comment

        • dimelb
          pr. dim-melb; m not f
          • Jun 2003
          • 6889

          #5
          Originally posted by Wardy
          you have to admit though the Swans did turn kicking the ball backwards to go forwards into a bit an artform.
          Provided they go forwards that's OK with me. It's when we turn it over that I get peeved.
          He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

          Comment

          • Wardy
            The old Boiler!
            • Sep 2003
            • 6676

            #6
            Originally posted by dimelb
            Provided they go forwards that's OK with me. It's when we turn it over that I get peeved.
            I'm with you on that one!!!
            I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure..................
            Chickens drink - but they don't pee!
            AGE IS ONLY IMPORTANT FOR TWO THINGS - WINE & CHEESE!

            Comment

            • dimelb
              pr. dim-melb; m not f
              • Jun 2003
              • 6889

              #7
              More from an unexpected source on tinkering with the rules:

              "Of course, this AFL administration thinks everything is its business and, in 2025 when it owns Etihad Stadium outright, the Docklands ground will be its business.

              But the problem with this current AFL administration is that it is an impatient control freak. I mean, why, for example, does it think it can change the rules of our game whenever it gets the urge?

              Quite frankly, this is bizarre, autocratic behaviour.

              The AFL doesn't own Australian rules football; the AFL is one league in a country that has thousands of leagues.

              This all started because the AFL thought Sydney played ugly; but the Swans played in two of the most thrilling grand finals of all time."

              See the whole story at http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/...842577506.html
              He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

              Comment

              • johnno
                On the Rookie List
                • Apr 2008
                • 1102

                #8
                What i hated was ignorant supporters like my work colleague who sits next to me who would say things like..."god i hate the way the swans always flood, I hate the swans game style", and no matter how much you try to explain to them that the swans' game style was not flooding but man on man, contested, creating stoppages and possession football, their ignorance would come out and say nah, nah, nah, its flooding and it looks crap. I might add that this work colleague is a collingwood supporter and has always stated, especially after the coll vs rich NAB cup game last week, that if collingwood floods, she wont bother watching her team anymore. I didnt have the heart to tell her that she doesnt really know that much about the game because if she did, she would have been able to tell that collingwood were flooding like a tsunami in that game over and over again.

                Comment

                • connolly
                  Registered User
                  • Aug 2005
                  • 2461

                  #9
                  Originally posted by AnnieH
                  That's probably why they should leave the bloody rules alone.
                  And rule interpretations. We have seen "policy umpiring" where rule interpretations are enforced by the crazy gang. Dermetriou never got over being flattened by Lethal off the ball by a truely beautiful hip and shoulder in a final. He has tried to outlaw hard contested football ever since he ascended to the Sun Throne.
                  Bevo bandwagon driver

                  Comment

                  • AnnieH
                    RWOs Black Sheep
                    • Aug 2006
                    • 11332

                    #10
                    Originally posted by connolly
                    And rule interpretations. We have seen "policy umpiring" where rule interpretations are enforced by the crazy gang. Dermetriou never got over being flattened by Lethal off the ball by a truely beautiful hip and shoulder in a final. He has tried to outlaw hard contested football ever since he ascended to the Sun Throne.
                    Don't start me on @@@@ing "rule interpretations".

                    It's really annoying when your doing your commentary for the crowd (from six flights up in the brewongle) and I pick out an indescretion and the maggot who is standing two feet away can't see it. My imaginary whistle is a "boo".

                    They wonder why we hate them.
                    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
                    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

                    Comment

                    • ShockOfHair
                      One Man Out
                      • Dec 2007
                      • 3668

                      #11
                      I'm still enjoying Roos' comments in those stories.


                      Feels good to be proven right. Even better to prove the AFL wrong. Again.
                      The man who laughs has not yet heard the terrible news

                      Comment

                      • Nthblood
                        On the Rookie List
                        • Jan 2009
                        • 59

                        #12
                        I'd rather watch a game that is a contest with man on man and not this crap some teams are putting out with this rolling 18 man rolling defence. If I wanted to watch contested circle work I'd go down to the local club on a Thursday night and watch them train. Its just absolute crap for professional players, no one takes responsibility for any players on the field.
                        Four players run it up the wing with little opposition and kick to the main forward who has many opponents. Bang the opposition get the ball and take it back down the opposite wing where they have four of thier players with very little opposition. There we have it up and down the field just like basketball with no real physical contest. As i call it crap football.

                        So what are the AFL going to do, fiddle with the rules, thats how we got in this mess with them changing the rules to stop Sydneys ugly football ( man on man ) strange thats what I was taught as a kid, pick up a man and contest. I'd rather watch the 2005 and 2006 grand finals cause they where a contest and edge of your seat stuff, unlike the last two grand finals, 2007 only one team turned up, well thats what it sounded like on the radio and 2008 well what can I say, boring for the neutral watcher, no contest.

                        Comment

                        • AnnieH
                          RWOs Black Sheep
                          • Aug 2006
                          • 11332

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Nthblood
                          I'd rather watch a game that is a contest with man on man and not this crap some teams are putting out with this rolling 18 man rolling defence. If I wanted to watch contested circle work I'd go down to the local club on a Thursday night and watch them train. Its just absolute crap for professional players, no one takes responsibility for any players on the field.
                          Four players run it up the wing with little opposition and kick to the main forward who has many opponents. Bang the opposition get the ball and take it back down the opposite wing where they have four of thier players with very little opposition. There we have it up and down the field just like basketball with no real physical contest. As i call it crap football.

                          So what are the AFL going to do, fiddle with the rules, thats how we got in this mess with them changing the rules to stop Sydneys ugly football ( man on man ) strange thats what I was taught as a kid, pick up a man and contest. I'd rather watch the 2005 and 2006 grand finals cause they where a contest and edge of your seat stuff, unlike the last two grand finals, 2007 only one team turned up, well thats what it sounded like on the radio and 2008 well what can I say, boring for the neutral watcher, no contest.
                          Three of my favourite words ...

                          "@@@@ing MAN UP".

                          The other two are ...

                          "@@@@ing TACKLE".

                          How hard is it?
                          Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
                          Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

                          Comment

                          • goswannie14
                            Leadership Group
                            • Sep 2005
                            • 11166

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Nthblood
                            I'd rather watch a game that is a contest with man on man and not this crap some teams are putting out with this rolling 18 man rolling defence. If I wanted to watch contested circle work I'd go down to the local club on a Thursday night and watch them train. Its just absolute crap for professional players, no one takes responsibility for any players on the field.
                            Four players run it up the wing with little opposition and kick to the main forward who has many opponents. Bang the opposition get the ball and take it back down the opposite wing where they have four of thier players with very little opposition. There we have it up and down the field just like basketball with no real physical contest. As i call it crap football.

                            So what are the AFL going to do, fiddle with the rules, thats how we got in this mess with them changing the rules to stop Sydneys ugly football ( man on man ) strange thats what I was taught as a kid, pick up a man and contest. I'd rather watch the 2005 and 2006 grand finals cause they where a contest and edge of your seat stuff, unlike the last two grand finals, 2007 only one team turned up, well thats what it sounded like on the radio and 2008 well what can I say, boring for the neutral watcher, no contest.
                            I've said else where that if this is footy 2009 style, I won't be watching much of it this year.
                            Does God believe in Atheists?

                            Comment

                            • ShockOfHair
                              One Man Out
                              • Dec 2007
                              • 3668

                              #15
                              While we're on the theme of 'it's not us this time', how about Hawthorn fielding just one - count him! - one grand final player in a trial match! If that were the Swans...
                              The man who laughs has not yet heard the terrible news

                              Comment

                              Working...