Changes v Tigers (aka will ROK get a farewell game?)

[Ampersand]

Really strange if he doesn't. Could he have come to terms with another club? Can't recall a player leaving for another club getting a lap of honour.

[Dosser]

Sounds very omnibus.

[ernie koala]

Whether he retires or not, I'm glad he'll get the send off he deserves.

Hopefully this means he leaves as a satisfied Swan.

[Ampersand]

Looks like he's just "moving on" rather than retiring. I expect he'll be approached by a few clubs over the offseason.

[southsideswan]

At a guess it is likely he has spoken to the Swans about a transition into coaching and they have been unable to offer what he wants. So he has spoken to other clubs about this role and received positive feedback. They both may think this is a good option all round. If the Swans do the right thing (they seem to) then who knows, in say 5 years time he may be back here in a coaching capacity.

[RogueSwan]

.. Teams have already exploited Goodesy on this basis,....

I don't recall Goodesy ever being that defensively minded throughout his career. I don't mean that he doesn't run both ways and doesn't tackle, but he never been considered a good defender. Remember the failed CHB attempts?

A lot of RWO'ers love to harp on about pace. Sure it is good to have speed but it is of no use if you can not use it at the end of a mammoth finals game where the "gut-runners" come into their own.
I am not advocating a call up for ROK but even though he isn't considered quick enough anymore, not that this has been mentioned anywhere other than RWO, I can picture him still running flat out after 120 minutes of gruelling footy to get to the next contest. Do our young "speedsters" have that in them? Hanners isn't considered quick (no facts to prove this either way) but he will still be going at the same speed in the last five minutes as he was in the first five (relatively speaking, everyone will slow down but Hanners would slow down less).
I still value good hands and feet over leg speed. You can have a great burst of speed but if you kick it straight back to the opposition it is all for nought (see criticism of Shaw). This year I have noticed that Jetta has not really been breaking the lines like he has in the past. His field kicking has been great and I haven't noticed anyone complaining that he is not tucking the ball under the arm enough, well not much criticism compared to earlier this year and last year. The reason - his kicking has been very good and penetrating.
Sure, it is great to see a blistering run down a wing or a chase down from behind. These things are uplifting and a great spectacle and get the crowd involved but great skills are what separates the good from the great.
I think this shows in the Swans recruiting over the last few year too, they seem to be recruiting more footballers and less athletes (D. Spriggs and J. White, I am looking in your direction )
[/my two cents]

[barry]

Which teams would ROK get a game with on current form?

Cant think of many.

[RogueSwan]

Which teams would ROK get a game with on current form?

Cant think of many.

You would have to think all of our Ressies would get a game with the Dees and Aints.
Maybe the Suns and Giants could use a strong, experienced body around the packs?

[Matt80]

I don't recall Goodesy ever being that defensively minded throughout his career. I don't mean that he doesn't run both ways and doesn't tackle, but he never been considered a good defender. Remember the failed CHB attempts?

A lot of RWO'ers love to harp on about pace. Sure it is good to have speed but it is of no use if you can not use it at the end of a mammoth finals game where the "gut-runners" come into their own.
I am not advocating a call up for ROK but even though he isn't considered quick enough anymore, not that this has been mentioned anywhere other than RWO, I can picture him still running flat out after 120 minutes of gruelling footy to get to the next contest. Do our young "speedsters" have that in them? Hanners isn't considered quick (no facts to prove this either way) but he will still be going at the same speed in the last five minutes as he was in the first five (relatively speaking, everyone will slow down but Hanners would slow down less).
I still value good hands and feet over leg speed. You can have a great burst of speed but if you kick it straight back to the opposition it is all for nought (see criticism of Shaw). This year I have noticed that Jetta has not really been breaking the lines like he has in the past. His field kicking has been great and I haven't noticed anyone complaining that he is not tucking the ball under the arm enough, well not much criticism compared to earlier this year and last year. The reason - his kicking has been very good and penetrating.
Sure, it is great to see a blistering run down a wing or a chase down from behind. These things are uplifting and a great spectacle and get the crowd involved but great skills are what separates the good from the great.
I think this shows in the Swans recruiting over the last few year too, they seem to be recruiting more footballers and less athletes (D. Spriggs and J. White, I am looking in your direction )
[/my two cents]

Have a look at things this way. You have Jeff White at 195cm or you have Dene Cox at 204cm both playing in the ruck. Both are good mobile ruckman. Who has the advantage?

The same concept applies for pace. You have two good midfielders. One has medium pace and the other has electric pace. The quicker player will eventually win out because they can run further without being tackled and can affect more pressure due to their pace. Let's look at Dangerfield v ROK. Both are similar size, both are good in and under, both are good overhead. Both would have equal skill levels. One hold a significant advantage over the other due to having electric pace.

The Swans are looking for more pace because pace and spread will win out in the modern game.

[Nico]

I don't recall Goodesy ever being that defensively minded throughout his career. I don't mean that he doesn't run both ways and doesn't tackle, but he never been considered a good defender. Remember the failed CHB attempts?

A lot of RWO'ers love to harp on about pace. Sure it is good to have speed but it is of no use if you can not use it at the end of a mammoth finals game where the "gut-runners" come into their own.
I am not advocating a call up for ROK but even though he isn't considered quick enough anymore, not that this has been mentioned anywhere other than RWO, I can picture him still running flat out after 120 minutes of gruelling footy to get to the next contest. Do our young "speedsters" have that in them? Hanners isn't considered quick (no facts to prove this either way) but he will still be going at the same speed in the last five minutes as he was in the first five (relatively speaking, everyone will slow down but Hanners would slow down less).
I still value good hands and feet over leg speed. You can have a great burst of speed but if you kick it straight back to the opposition it is all for nought (see criticism of Shaw). This year I have noticed that Jetta has not really been breaking the lines like he has in the past. His field kicking has been great and I haven't noticed anyone complaining that he is not tucking the ball under the arm enough, well not much criticism compared to earlier this year and last year. The reason - his kicking has been very good and penetrating.
Sure, it is great to see a blistering run down a wing or a chase down from behind. These things are uplifting and a great spectacle and get the crowd involved but great skills are what separates the good from the great.
I think this shows in the Swans recruiting over the last few year too, they seem to be recruiting more footballers and less athletes (D. Spriggs and J. White, I am looking in your direction )
[/my two cents]

Goodes played CHB because he was carrying a PCL that restricted his turning ability. He played CHB so he would mostly be running in one direction. Nothing to do with experimenting with him in defence.

[ScottH]

Have a look at things this way. You have Jeff White at 195cm or you have Dene Cox at 204cm both playing in the ruck. Both are good mobile ruckman. Who has the advantage?

The same concept applies for pace. You have two good midfielders. One has medium pace and the other has electric pace. The quicker player will eventually win out because they can run further without being tackled and can affect more pressure due to their pace. Let's look at Dangerfield v ROK. Both are similar size, both are good in and under, both are good overhead. Both would have equal skill levels. One hold a significant advantage over the other due to having electric pace.

The Swans are looking for more pace because pace and spread will win out in the modern game.

His prolific tackle count might disagree with your argument.
He may not have been able to tackle someone like Dangerfield on the fly, but he could stop them getting out of a pack in the first place.

[jono2707]

Have a look at things this way. You have Jeff White at 195cm or you have Dene Cox at 204cm both playing in the ruck. Both are good mobile ruckman. Who has the advantage?

The same concept applies for pace. You have two good midfielders. One has medium pace and the other has electric pace. The quicker player will eventually win out because they can run further without being tackled and can affect more pressure due to their pace. Let's look at Dangerfield v ROK. Both are similar size, both are good in and under, both are good overhead. Both would have equal skill levels. One hold a significant advantage over the other due to having electric pace.

The Swans are looking for more pace because pace and spread will win out in the modern game.

Or you could compare, say, Craig Bird (Age 25 1.80m 85kg) to someone like Denis Armfield (Age 27, 1.81 cm 79kg). Armfield has lots and lots of pace. Birdy is sometimes maligned for his supposed lack of pace. I know who I would prefer.

[chammond]

Goodes played CHB because he was carrying a PCL that restricted his turning ability. He played CHB so he would mostly be running in one direction. Nothing to do with experimenting with him in defence.

Nice to see you setting the record straight. "Failed CHB" . . . I nearly choked on my beer when I saw that. Goodes was our best option for CHB at the time, even with a bung knee. He also played his very first season with the Swans at full-back in the reserves, and would have made a top defender if he wasn't so outrageously good at every other position on the ground.

[RogueSwan]

...The Swans are looking for more pace because pace and spread will win out in the modern game.

Based on what?
Pace and spread are nothing if the skills are not there. The fast footballers can run far and wide, but if the rest of the team can't get the ball and kick it directly to them, it is all for nothing. The ability to run someone down means nothing if you don't have a good tackling skill.
The teams that win finals are the ones that can will themselves to the next contest when their opponent won't. The teams that win finals are the ones that don't butcher the ball. Cats, Hawks and Swans are all lauded for their skills, pressure and two way running. Not for being the fastest team over 20m. 20m sprint time aren't much when you consider how far the modern footballer runs.
BTW I am not saying pace isn't good, just not more important/as important, than other attributes.

- - - Updated - - -

Nice to see you setting the record straight. "Failed CHB" . . . I nearly choked on my beer when I saw that. Goodes was our best option for CHB at the time, even with a bung knee. He also played his very first season with the Swans at full-back in the reserves, and would have made a top defender if he wasn't so outrageously good at every other position on the ground.

okay, sorry, poor choice of words. He probably could have made a decent CHB as long as he wasn't stuck in wrestling matches, maybe more of an intercepting/marking/rebounding type of back?

[ernie koala]

Tiresome repetition of the same point, in this case, 'pace' being the be all and end all, doesn't make it right.. IMO that's just simplistic rubbish.

Anyone with half a clue about Aussie rules will tell you, it's about having a balanced team, full of different attributes..

.ie Some basics are : Strong bodies for inside, pace for outside, height and strength for key positions...

Other requirements are : Agility, good quick decision makers, ability to read the play, competitive instincts, endurance.

Pace is no more or less important than all these other attributes. Running fast on it's own, doesn't win the ball, doesn't deliver the ball.