Round 13: Sydney v Richmond

[Ludwig]

If, after round 5 ... confronted by a 3:2 W/L record ... someone posted "don't worry, I guarantee we'll be 9:3 by round 13, sitting 3rd on the ladder & only off 2nd by %" I think most on RWO would have either mocked them into submission or taken that guarantee in a heartbeat. It's not doom & gloom quite yet!

Only the Hawthorn game was a surprise win, and a bit of a lucky one at that. You would have picked us to win last night, so 9-3 was a likely outcome.

It's not doom and gloom, but a good coach should see the inevitable before the inevitable sees him first. Longmire knows we are in trouble. It is just a matter of how often he has to be hit in the head to see the light.

[Ampersand]

Main points for me:

Richmond have a game style similar to the Hawks with slightly less efficiency. They are happy to chip away down the ground with short passes or switch if that's not working and our zone style defence just doesn't counter that well.

We should have gone man on man in the third quarter particularly on the extra man back for Richmond who absolutely slaughtered us.

I've said it before but the rules as they are interpreted nowadays don't suit our game style, which is forcing turnovers by bringing the ball to ground and then tackling hard. How many times did a Richmond player dispose while lying tackled on the ground? In the past if you had prior opportunity and you were tackled you were holding the ball. Now you are given an eternity to force it out or just drop it altogether before you are pinged.

Interesting that McVeigh went forward late. It was almost like Longmire was trying to replicate the result against the Hawks.

The umpiring was particularly atrocious but it was Meredith more than Chamberlain that couldn't keep his ego in check. Made the game particularly frustrating to watch for both sets of supporters.

[mcs]

[QUOTE=Ampersand;675026]
I've said it before but the rules as they are interpreted nowadays don't suit our game style, which is forcing turnovers by bringing the ball to ground and then tackling hard. How many times did a Richmond player dispose while lying tackled on the ground? In the past if you had prior opportunity and you were tackled you were holding the ball. Now you are given an eternity to force it out or just drop it altogether before you are pinged.

[QUOTE]

That interpretation really bugs me, especially as many players make no effort to try and dispose of the ball correctly - a lot of them literally just drop it and it spills out and its play on. Good tackling teams often don't get the rewards they should because players get away with just dropping the ball far too often. The problem is as much about players not getting pinged when they have prior opportunity (Even if it is only relatively short) as much as it is because players get away with dropping the ball so much.

[giant]

It looked to me in the 3rd quarter that we quickly ran out of legs. Coming off a bye; mmm. Richmond played the same last week. I guess some clubs just don't do the bye well. The midfield simply went missing. Hanners must have been on the bench all the 3rd quarter. Worst disciplined game I have seen from a Swans side since the mid nineties. And Goodes appeared to lead the charge. A rubbish attitude tonight.

I thought Jack was the only midfielder to play a genuine 4 qrts. Parker was ok and Kennedy had a go towards the end but...they got done like a dinner by a couple of quality mids. By the way who was on Cotchin in the 3rd stanza.

Mitchell had a howler. 3 kicks 7 handballs.
Cunningham my old mate was not interested in contact. He was timid to say the least for the whole night. Surely Hewett and Jones are better options than him. He fails every time when the heat is on or we play a better team. A dead set soft rooster.
Jetta went missing very quickly. And you wonder why.
Reid did a bit in the last quarter but boy is he hesitant when he has the footy and made poor decisions. Finally we should say he is over rated.
I am a fan of LLoyd but he was very erratic and has developed the habit of turning back into an opponent. Too much finessing. Just move it on. Great with his disposal when not under pressure.
Rampe played like he was on the turps for 2 weeks.
Smith's kick for goal really gave them the break they wanted. Lamentable, unforgiveable.
Jones, yep he probably gifted them the game but when he had the footy he was very poised off half back. Will they have the balls to replace Shaw with him, because Shaw looked so slow.
Goodesy had his mandatory short pass brain fade in the first half then decided on a sabbatical in the second half.
Rohan looked like he was going take the game by the scruff of the neck, but again only goes for a half. Doesn't appear to have a tank. Like Reid, over rated.
Again Laidler was our best backman.
That loss has been coming for a while. We have allowed bottom sides to stay in the game and we have looked in second gear, or were we. A team comes to town with some quality players and takes it up to us, and we fold. We looked really slow and old in the second half. Look at other sides; they have been getting senior games into young players and it is paying dividends. Lets hope the horse hasn't bolted for us.
All I can hope is that it was poor player management with the bye.

Hard to disagree with any of this. After our best qr of footy for weeks, that second half was just appalling, an amazing fall off that was accentuated by Richmond's great work rate. Coaching staff aren't let off the hook either - we were comfortably out-coached as well.

Umpiring deserves a special mention - certainly didn't dictate the result, heck, we got the benefit of some of the more bizarre examples, but that was the worst performance from some of the senior umpires in the competition I've seen in a very long time. I've been watching the game for 40 years and I reckon about 1 in 3 decisions were inexplicable. That such senior umps could get it so seriously wrong time and time again was baffling.

[dimelb]

...
I've said it before but the rules as they are interpreted nowadays don't suit our game style, which is forcing turnovers by bringing the ball to ground and then tackling hard. How many times did a Richmond player dispose while lying tackled on the ground? In the past if you had prior opportunity and you were tackled you were holding the ball. Now you are given an eternity to force it out or just drop it altogether before you are pinged. ?

The one that really ticked me off was Cotchin, tackled with the ball and brought to ground, who then lets go the ball and is allowed to poke it through for six points. Sheesh.

[dimelb]

I've been thinking much the same thing. Look at the way Rance went for Buddy from the moment the players walked to their positions before the first bounce. We never see Ted or Reg do that to their opposing player and I for one don't want to see them do it. I don't understand why the umpires don't give more protection to players like Buddy who are clearly being targeted.

Yes, an aspect of the umpiring that peeved me: they could stop it with one free kick.

Failing that, as Rojo pointed out, we need to go in against Richmond with the same refusal to be stood over that we brought to the Hawks game, and pile in to help the ones being picked off.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I'm not sure the whole ' they got physical and unsettled us' line Is accurate. Plenty of argy Bargy went on in the first half when we dominated. It was when the Tiges concentrated on playing footy that they started beating us. We looked lethargic, missed tackles, no gut run, no desperation. It really was bloody disgraceful

[Ampersand]

I do think Buddy's report really did affect the whole team. They started worrying about next week instead of focusing on the contest they were in.

[stevoswan]

Well, nearly a day has passed and I am still seething! I declare this now; "WE WILL NOT WIN THIS YEARS PREMIERSHIP!!". There was nothing in that second half that we as fans, or anyone who was at the ground, including our past stars from '05(back in the REAL glory days, when the Swans played like SWANS), could be proud of. It was a @@@@ing disgrace......

[stevoswan]

I do think Buddy's report really did affect the whole team. They started worrying about next week instead of focusing on the contest they were in.

Agree. When it happened, I thought 'just move on boys, get over it, there's a game to be won!'. Well, they @@@@ themselves, it was pathetic, they lacked character and showed they are not up for the fight this year. Most disappointing loss in years..........it is a wake up call that I'm not convinced will wake us up. Next week against Port will answer some questions, and we will be doing it without Buddy, so there's the first question to be answered.........

[stevoswan]

.Equally for me at the ground the Tippett incident didn't look as bad as it does on the replay. It was late and clumsy not deliberate but that might not help him.

Longmire looked pretty devastated in the press conference. As did Shaw in his video interview in the rooms. We are not the only ones who are shattered.

Considering Firrito got a fine for basically punching Buddy in the back of the head, Tippett should be fine.

[liz]

Well, nearly a day has passed and I am still seething! I declare this now; "WE WILL NOT WIN THIS YEARS PREMIERSHIP!!". There was nothing in that second half that we as fans, or anyone who was at the ground, including our past stars from '05(back in the REAL glory days, when the Swans played like SWANS), could be proud of. It was a @@@@ing disgrace......

I am not going to declare the Swans premiership possibles or otherwise for 2015. But they played plenty of ordinary football in 2005 before finally clicking into gear as the season progressed. Indeed, one particularly woeful performance against St Kilda had the AFL CEO declaring we would never win a premiership playing that style of football. While I have always thought his comment well out of line (ie he shouldn't have made comments of that nature about particular teams), it was a particularly dreadful performance by the team.

[Meg]

Round 13: Sydney v Richmond

Considering Firrito got a fine for basically punching Buddy in the back of the head, Tippett should be fine.

I agree that on the Firrito precedent Tippett SHOULD be ok. But then I thought Firrito got off far too lightly. His punch was worse because it was deliberate, though the MRP chose to believe otherwise. I fear however that the MRP will classify Tippett's impact as more severe.

[chalbilto]

I agree that on the Firrito precedent Tippett SHOULD be ok. But then I thought Firrito got off far too lightly. His punch was worse because it was deliberate, though the MRP chose to believe otherwise. I fear however that the MRP will classify Tippett's impact as more severe.

I think so too because of the "Bondi Billionaires" perception, ergo - the tall poppy syndrome.

[Ludwig]

The Tippett one is a hard call. There have been plenty of incidents with forearms to the head late in marking contests that have gone without penalty or just a fine.

I somehow feel that we will play better without both Tippett and Buddy because everyone else will know that they have to be at the top of their game to win and I believe they will rise to the occasion, i.e. unless Longmire decides to concede the game by playing Tom Derickx, for which a fog of hopelessness will descend over the team.

It will also force the team to find a plan B game with other stoppage setups as well as other forward options. It will hard to bomb the ball into the forward line without anyone to bomb it to. In the long run it should be a benefit to our game.