Round 6 - Richmond

[Mike_B]

This I never really understand. The SCG, according to the AFL's website, is 149m x 136m. Ethihad is 159.5m x 128.8m*. That's not a great difference, and I can't think it's enough to jar anyone. Home ground advantage is one thing, but can someone point out to me just how different the SCG is to the other grounds?

The AFL need to update these stats because the SCG is now over 150m thanks to the new stand. The 50m arcs no longer intersect the centre square, so the ground has to be over 150m (unless someone is pulling a shifty).

[satchmopugdog]

I am at slitting wrists stage..so have predicted a dire loss.In doing so have broken Kanga's evil spell.


But then again I'm not going to this game so we might win...have now cast myself as the superjinx.

[Leeroy]

It's not just size, it's shape. The SCG has very shallow pockets, like the narrow end of an egg. The MCG, in contrast, is shaped like the wide end of an egg.

[Cheer Squad]

This I never really understand. The SCG, according to the AFL's website, is 149m x 136m. Ethihad is 159.5m x 128.8m*. That's not a great difference, and I can't think it's enough to jar anyone. Home ground advantage is one thing, but can someone point out to me just how different the SCG is to the other grounds?

*These playing dimensions are almost identical to ANZ Stadium, btw.

The surface area isn't that much different to the other grounds. The issue is that the SCG is unusually wide, and much shorter, than every other ground in the country. There's virtually no gap between the centre square and the 50m arcs.

There's a school of thought that this has encouraged us into the habit of playing out wide rather than straight down the middle.

It's one of the reasons why I support the club playing several games a year at Homebush. It has helped diminish "the SCG effect", which, IMO, has had a positive effect on our playing style.

[anniswan]

I am not a statistitian, but just look at the pattern, loss, win, loss, win, loss, ?????????

We are pretty predactable at the moment.

[swantastic]

We will get belted if we hand over @@@@ like saturday nite.

[Wardy]

We will get belted if we hand over @@@@ like saturday nite.

exactly, this game cant be considered a "given". Everyone predicted it would be a walkover against Freo, all over bar the shouting even before they stepped foot onto the ground, and look at the result. Richmond will be buoyed by the win against North last week knowing full well that the Swans will still be a bit shellshocked about the Freo farce. Lets just hope they can re group and have a win. A comfortable thrashing is preferable of course, but we cant get carried away. Swans hopefully by about 23.

[Dalai Lama]

The toothless tigers winning run will be short lived. Swans will keep the LWLWL.... sequence in order.....

[top40]

I have a very negative deju vu feeling about this game against Richmond.

We have a situation where the Richmond coach, Terry Wallace has recently been under the pump, with the sack hanging around him like a very bad smell. A fortnight ago, I was worried that he would go after a predicated loss against North Melbourne, and the Swans would be faced with Richmond players fresh, pumped out, and ready to please with a new, caretaker coach. Always a danger game for the opposing team. Surely their Round 5 win against North has giving the Swans a break. Wallace stays, and there is no way a team like Richmond can win two in row. least of all at the SCG.

Well, almost exactly five years ago, the then Richmond coach Danny Frawley was massively under the pump, with huge media speculation about him getting the sack. In the Round 5 game between Richmond against Adelaide, the Tigers were thrashed at Docklands by nearly 13 goals. Frawley suffered the humilation of being spat on by his own team supporters as he left the ground. A week later, Frawley "survived", when Richmond won in a major upset one point win against Hawthorn. So by the time of the next SCG game in Round 7 against the Swans, we Sydney supporters were all relieved. No fresh caretaker coach to worry about. And there was no way that the very poor Richmond could win two straight, particularly a win against the Swans at the SCG. Wrong! Richmond went on to win by 13 points in terrible wet and windy conditions. Richo had a blinder, kicking in such poor conditions 7 of the Tigers' 10 goals, and kicking them from all angles. It represents the only time since 1992 that Sydney has lost a game to the eventual wooden spooners.

PS For the record, in their first eleven seasons, (1982-1992), Sydney had a bad record against eventual wooden spooners, losing games to St Kilda twice (1983 and 1984), the Brisbane Bears twice (1990 and 1992), and Richmond once (1989). But since 1992, as I state above, that 2004 Round 7 SCG lost against Richmond represents the only lost against the evenutal wooden spooners. The 2004 lost was also the only time in Sydney's history that they have been September finalists, but lost still lost a game to the eventual wooden spooners. It was also one of only two times (the other being against St Kilda in Round 13 1984), where the Swans lost a game in Sydney against the eventual wooden spooners.

[swantastic]

exactly, this game cant be considered a "given". Everyone predicted it would be a walkover against Freo, all over bar the shouting even before they stepped foot onto the ground, and look at the result. Richmond will be buoyed by the win against North last week knowing full well that the Swans will still be a bit shellshocked about the Freo farce. Lets just hope they can re group and have a win. A comfortable thrashing is preferable of course, but we cant get carried away. Swans hopefully by about 23.

Ah Wardy you should know we never thrash any 1,but i will take any sort of win out of this game,and it is a danger game for SURE.

[Wardy]

Ah Wardy you should know we never thrash any 1,but i will take any sort of win out of this game,and it is a danger game for SURE.

Actually in 2006 we did beat the Tiges at the MCG by about 80 odd points which gave the percentage a major boost (that sounds a bit smart arsy doesnt it - sorry about that chief! ) but alot has changed in that time. Whilst Richmond are still not crash hot, we are not as crash hot as we used to be either! However, if we win by 1 point, a wins a win.

[swantastic]

Actually in 2006 we did beat the Tiges at the MCG by about 80 odd points which gave the percentage a major boost (that sounds a bit smart arsy doesnt it - sorry about that chief! ) but alot has changed in that time. Whilst Richmond are still not crash hot, we are not as crash hot as we used to be either! However, if we win by 1 point, a wins a win.

Smart arse ha ha ha...but your right a wins a win.

[Triple B]

Actually in 2006 we did beat the Tiges at the MCG by about 80 odd points which gave the percentage a major boost (that sounds a bit smart arsy doesnt it - sorry about that chief! ) but alot has changed in that time. Whilst Richmond are still not crash hot, we are not as crash hot as we used to be either! However, if we win by 1 point, a wins a win.

We beat them by 118 pts at the Dome for Willo's 300th.

[Kanga]

Rooboy sorry to break this to you but the Bloods actually have enough money in the kitty to pony up some plane fares. Your impecunious mob hitchikes over and back do they?

Another constructive comment from Connolly. Thanks

[ShockOfHair]

I have a very negative deju vu feeling about this game against Richmond.

I had the tremors last week but my chakra is glowing weakly over the prospect of Richmond at SCG. The friendly crowd will help our young brigade. Swans by 2-3 goals.