Changes for Rnd 2 V Port.

[Conor_Dillon]

If McGlynn and McVeigh both play this week then it's probably fair to assume that they would have played last week if it was a grand-final, similar to K.Jack not playing Round 1 last year.

Agree about port not being fast as well...when commentators laud their running power it's in terms of endurance and power running...not pure speed. Their only genuinely quick players are White, Wingard, Impey, Pittard and Neade. Their main mids in Boak, Gray, Wines, Ebert, Cornes, Hartlett etc aren't 'electric' as Matt80 would say

[liz]

Pittard??? He might be able to run quite quickly in a straight line, but his brain is pretty slow. He gets caught in possession an awful lot, or turns the ball over because he makes really poor decisions, sometimes under not much pressure.

Polec is reasonably pacey, though.

[Ludwig]

Hard-running is probably a better term to describe PA than pacey. They like to move the ball quickly so the opposition need to work hard on their 2-way game, something the Swans usually do well. We will have to be switched on to beat them Saturday.

[frankee]

Port seem to be favorites that will help us. if Laider keeps playing like that he'll play all year.

[Jewels]

Port seem to be favorites that will help us. if Laider keeps playing like that he'll play all year.

Port deserve to be favourites. Our win was unconvincing whereas they went down fighting and its being played at the "Portress", a huge advantage and whilst we beat them there last year, from memory they had some important outs that day. Not saying we can't win, just that Port deserve to go into the game as favourites.

[goswannies]

Port deserve to be favourites. Our win was unconvincing whereas they went down fighting and its being played at the "Portress", a huge advantage and whilst we beat them there last year, from memory they had some important outs that day. Not saying we can't win, just that Port deserve to go into the game as favourites.

Just how we like it

[Beerman]

Changes for Rnd 2 V Port.

[oops! ]

[mcs]

Port seem to be favorites that will help us. if Laider keeps playing like that he'll play all year.

Best news I've heard all day - put the pressure all on Port.

[Flying South]

I am so tired of hearing about electric pace and slow inside extractors. How do the likes of Ablett, Rockliff, Fyfe, Kennedy, Heppell, Selwood, Ablett, Lewis, Pendlebury, Boak and Rockliff make it as AA without that electric pace.

Just give me 22 good 'footballers'. 22 players with a brain for football. Ones who know how to get the football and use the football. Ones who know how to beat an opponent and defend an opponent. Ones who play their natural position where they can use their natural skills. And above all, 22 blokes who will play with some heart and stand up for their mates. For that reason I have questions about several of our players. Particularly Rohan, Jetta, Reid and Pyke. I am always questioning their decision making, skills, commitment to the contest and brains.

With that said, I wouldn't be making too many changes to the team. We did win the game. We weathered the expected storm from Essendon, who I might say were very lucky on occasions. We were very rusty early and then finished powerfully to win. We scored 53-0 once we kicked into gear. It is only Rnd1 and we will work into the season. The problem with playing Grand Finals is that most other teams get a head start on us for the next season.

I can't see us bringing both McVeigh and McGlynn back in the same game. So I would give McGlynn another week. Mitchell just has to come in. Don't give me any crap about too many slow inside extractor types. He is a natural footballer pure and simple. I don't see any long term future in playing Shaw, so he comes out. I'm giving some established players some more chances so Towers makes way for McVeigh.

In: Mitchell, McVeigh
Out: Shaw, Towers

D: Laidler Richards Smith
HB: Rampe Grundy Reid*
C: Lloyd Hannebery Parker
Fol: Pkye* Kennedy Mitchell
HF: Jack Franklin Heeney
F: Cunningham Tippett Rohan*
Int: Bird Jetta* McVeigh
Sub: Goodes*

* these players are under pressure with the likes of McGlynn, Jones, Robinson, Naismith waiting in the wings.

Selection Notes
- Goodes gets some more chances because he's Goodes. But use him as a sub in a game breaking role.
- Reid was drafted as a defender and should play in defence. As Matt suggested, maybe run with Westhoff.
- Rohan is not a HB so play him deep in forward line were he can lead, mark and kick goals.
- Jetta ditto. Play him wing or HF where he was at his best in 2012
- Laidler may not possess pace or KPD height, but he is a smart footballer and natural defender.

[RogueSwan]

I am so tired of hearing about electric pace and slow inside extractors. How do the likes of Ablett, Rockliff, Fyfe, Kennedy, Heppell, Selwood, Ablett, Lewis, Pendlebury, Boak and Rockliff make it as AA without that electric pace.

Just give me 22 good 'footballers'. 22 players with a brain for football. Ones who know how to get the football and use the football. Ones who know how to beat an opponent and defend an opponent. Ones who play their natural position where they can use their natural skills. And above all, 22 blokes who will play with some heart and stand up for their mates. ...

Well said. Look at the top players in every team, they are footballers first and foremost. And for some lucky ones they also possess an exceptional acceleration.

I agree with your Rohan suggestion. He has been tried off the half back but hasn't worked out. He could be that Micky O forward that the fans just love when he gets near the ball. He can do the exciting things and back it up with the 1%er's when he is on song.

[Doctor]

Fantastic post from Flying South. I've just read through the last 3-4 pages and, while I don't agree with everything, there has been good analysis and opinion from everyone. We don't all have to agree, it is an opinion based forum after all, but I love the thought and passion for the Swans that has gone into so many of the posts.

I'm an irregular poster but I have been banging on about structure and "like for like" for years. You can call it anything you want, but the fact is that Roos and now Longmire have always selected on that basis. My predictions on that basis over the years have generally been right, even if I haven't agreed with them. It's not the "next in line" who comes in, it's the one who best fits the balance and structure that they want to use. If Longmire only wants 3 inside mids (which is all we need in terms of terminology for that position) then that's all he'll pick, regardless of who else we have that can play that position.

Personally, I agree with elements of most of the recent posts. I certainly see far more in Rohan as a forward than as a defender, and I now see Reid as far more effective as a defender. Part of our problem is the trade ban, and that we missed out on Joel Patful. Anyone who watched the St Kilda v GWS game would have seen exactly what we missed and how we would have used him. If you weren't angry about it before, you would have been after watching that game.

I'm not sold on Goodes as sub. We have, IMO, been one of the worst teams in the AFL at picking and using our sub well. We did get it right on Saturday though as Lloyd (who should have started mind you) did a superb job when coming on. The sub may have to come on early if there is an injury, so it has to be someone who is able to do that job too. The way the Dogs used Giansiracusa in that role was great, but Goodes is a different kind of player. Give him a few games in better conditions before we cast judgement. One game is not enough to make a call, especially in that weather.

My thoughts? If McGlynn is right to go he'll come in for Heeney. McVeigh will come in for Laidler or Rohan. Not saying I agree, just what I think will happen. Towers is essentially playing where Reid used to and Reid is now the extra defender, with a licence to be forward sometimes. Cunningham will be retained in a run-with role and sent to someone like White. I like Matt80's idea of Reid on Westhoff to be honest.

Lastly, I wish we still had Mummy. What a gun he is.

[Matt80]

Fantastic post from Flying South. I've just read through the last 3-4 pages and, while I don't agree with everything, there has been good analysis and opinion from everyone. We don't all have to agree, it is an opinion based forum after all, but I love the thought and passion for the Swans that has gone into so many of the posts.

I'm an irregular poster but I have been banging on about structure and "like for like" for years. You can call it anything you want, but the fact is that Roos and now Longmire have always selected on that basis. My predictions on that basis over the years have generally been right, even if I haven't agreed with them. It's not the "next in line" who comes in, it's the one who best fits the balance and structure that they want to use. If Longmire only wants 3 inside mids (which is all we need in terms of terminology for that position) then that's all he'll pick, regardless of who else we have that can play that position.

Personally, I agree with elements of most of the recent posts. I certainly see far more in Rohan as a forward than as a defender, and I now see Reid as far more effective as a defender. Part of our problem is the trade ban, and that we missed out on Joel Patful. Anyone who watched the St Kilda v GWS game would have seen exactly what we missed and how we would have used him. If you weren't angry about it before, you would have been after watching that game.

I'm not sold on Goodes as sub. We have, IMO, been one of the worst teams in the AFL at picking and using our sub well. We did get it right on Saturday though as Lloyd (who should have started mind you) did a superb job when coming on. The sub may have to come on early if there is an injury, so it has to be someone who is able to do that job too. The way the Dogs used Giansiracusa in that role was great, but Goodes is a different kind of player. Give him a few games in better conditions before we cast judgement. One game is not enough to make a call, especially in that weather.

My thoughts? If McGlynn is right to go he'll come in for Heeney. McVeigh will come in for Laidler or Rohan. Not saying I agree, just what I think will happen. Towers is essentially playing where Reid used to and Reid is now the extra defender, with a licence to be forward sometimes. Cunningham will be retained in a run-with role and sent to someone like White. I like Matt80's idea of Reid on Westhoff to be honest.

Lastly, I wish we still had Mummy. What a gun he is.

I think the sub rule can be used effectively to freshen up young players. Before the sub rule young players would play for 6 weeks, start struggling to keep up with the week to week intensity, then be dropped to a lower grade or be rested with general soreness.

Every 3-4 weeks you can put Heeney, Cunningham and Lloyd in the subs vest to keep them fresh and firing. They will come back cherry ripe to the starting 21 the next week after playing 25 minutes of sub footy. I would start Heeney this week, but a large Adelaide Oval and a hard running Port side will exhaust a player of 18 years of age. The next week Heeney should be the sub against GWS to help his recovery from the Adelaide Oval exertion.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Wouldn't be dropping Heeney for anyone. He's improved with every game so far and by finals he could be a real wildcard. I would have Mcglynn in the side but not at his expense. Could win the risung star the way he's tracking

[MattW]

Fantastic post from Flying South. I've just read through the last 3-4 pages and, while I don't agree with everything, there has been good analysis and opinion from everyone. We don't all have to agree, it is an opinion based forum after all, but I love the thought and passion for the Swans that has gone into so many of the posts.

I'm an irregular poster but I have been banging on about structure and "like for like" for years. You can call it anything you want, but the fact is that Roos and now Longmire have always selected on that basis. My predictions on that basis over the years have generally been right, even if I haven't agreed with them. It's not the "next in line" who comes in, it's the one who best fits the balance and structure that they want to use. If Longmire only wants 3 inside mids (which is all we need in terms of terminology for that position) then that's all he'll pick, regardless of who else we have that can play that position.

Personally, I agree with elements of most of the recent posts. I certainly see far more in Rohan as a forward than as a defender, and I now see Reid as far more effective as a defender. Part of our problem is the trade ban, and that we missed out on Joel Patful. Anyone who watched the St Kilda v GWS game would have seen exactly what we missed and how we would have used him. If you weren't angry about it before, you would have been after watching that game.

I'm not sold on Goodes as sub. We have, IMO, been one of the worst teams in the AFL at picking and using our sub well. We did get it right on Saturday though as Lloyd (who should have started mind you) did a superb job when coming on. The sub may have to come on early if there is an injury, so it has to be someone who is able to do that job too. The way the Dogs used Giansiracusa in that role was great, but Goodes is a different kind of player. Give him a few games in better conditions before we cast judgement. One game is not enough to make a call, especially in that weather.

My thoughts? If McGlynn is right to go he'll come in for Heeney. McVeigh will come in for Laidler or Rohan. Not saying I agree, just what I think will happen. Towers is essentially playing where Reid used to and Reid is now the extra defender, with a licence to be forward sometimes. Cunningham will be retained in a run-with role and sent to someone like White. I like Matt80's idea of Reid on Westhoff to be honest.

Lastly, I wish we still had Mummy. What a gun he is.

I really can't see them dropping either Rohan or Heeney. Longmire plays Rohan when he's fit, and he wouldn't drop Heeney after such a debut when he was hard and influential. McVeigh for Laidler, yes. McGlynn for Towers.

Earlier in this thread I suggested that Cunningham would be the one to go, but I agree he'll be given a run-with role. Better play a good game, though - last week was a shocker.

[S.S. Bleeder]

I certainly see far more in Rohan as a forward than as a defender, and I now see Reid as far more effective as a defender. Part of our problem is the trade ban, and that we missed out on Joel Patful. Anyone who watched the St Kilda v GWS game would have seen exactly what we missed and how we would have used him. If you weren't angry about it before, you would have been after watching that game.

???? great points. Especially re Patful. I'm very confident that he was the real reason behind our trade ban. the VFL is doing everything possible to ensure that GWS is a success. Unfortunately for us, we are competing for the same market which means that the VFL wants us to be less successful.