Rnd 15 MDT Sydney V Western Bulldogs. SCG 16.35pm

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Maltopia
    Senior Player
    • Apr 2016
    • 1556

    #91
    Very frustrating as we could have won that. Lack of effort and concentration in the final minute - no one leading for Lloyd, and no one covering/watching the space/loose player in after Bont took the mark.

    Comment

    • neilfws
      Senior Player
      • Aug 2009
      • 1821

      #92
      Originally posted by aardvark
      We didn't play well enough to win. We got the result we deserved.
      Dogs were better for longer, no doubt. Our forward line structure was shocking for most of the day. Just thought Bud might lift them over the line, but defending less than a goal for 5 minutes is always a dicey business. Especially when someone inexplicably kicks backwards 25 m into the opponents 50.

      Disappointing because we so nearly could have sneaked a win, but just too many bad decisions today. Think there could be a few nervous players next selection round.

      Comment

      • Nico
        Veterans List
        • Jan 2003
        • 11336

        #93
        Our set shot goal kicking was poor, whereas they converted. Probably the difference.

        McGlynn is surely cooked; 7 kicks, 2 hand passes and a couple of smothers. He has lost a lot of pace. He had a chance to break clear into an open goal in the last minutes but couldn't get the wheels moving.
        Rohan; he continues to disappoint. 6 kicks, 1 hand ball, 2 tackles. Howler of a game. He looked lethargic. Is he playing to be drafted? The Geelong rumour is around. Very poor effort.
        Heeney; 19yo, but he had 3 kicks and 1 handball. Certainly not performing as well as Rose.
        Rose and Hewett Impressed again in patches but need consistency. That's the inexperience factor. Hewett holds onto the footy for a second option and gets caught. Frustrating that he doesn't take the first option. Too much finessing.
        LLoyd; plenty has been said. My problem with him is that when he has the footy he is indecisive. Takes a mark and holds on to it for a month, gets a free and does the same when the situations cries out for moving it on quickly. Gets plenty of the pill but squanders it.
        Mills is a star and needs to move into the midfield.
        The defence played a great game.
        Franklin was super. Just a couple of vital misses.
        http://www.nostalgiamusic.co.uk/secu...res/srh806.jpg

        Comment

        • Ludwig
          Veterans List
          • Apr 2007
          • 9359

          #94
          I don't understand blaming Lloyd for what happened during that last minute of play when there were so many other reasons for the loss. There were plenty of mistakes made by lots of players during the game and we probably should have put the game away during the last 10 minutes when we were dominant. I thought we let them break too many tackles when we should have stopped them in their tracks.

          Sinclair and Nanka took 1 mark between them for the game against a team that's not particularly tall. I thought Roughead had a big influence and beat them both, including taking 4 important marks. Time to bring Naismith in for one of them, probably Nanka.

          McGlynn tries hard, but I think his career looks to be coming to a close. Let's bring Papley in next week in his place.

          I know Heeney is the golden child, but he's been in a serious form slump and a short stint in the reserves wouldn't hurt. He's not doing much in the seniors anyway. We might even try Abe Davis to give us a bit more height and bulk up forward.

          Aliir had a super game in the reserves and should come into the senior side. We can move Mills into the midfield. Mills has been great, but shouldn't have to find himself matched up against a powerful player like Stringer. That cost us too.

          Comment

          • Nico
            Veterans List
            • Jan 2003
            • 11336

            #95
            Originally posted by neilfws
            Dogs were better for longer, no doubt. Our forward line structure was shocking for most of the day. Just thought Bud might lift them over the line, but defending less than a goal for 5 minutes is always a dicey business. Especially when someone inexplicably kicks backwards 25 m into the opponents 50.

            Disappointing because we so nearly could have sneaked a win, but just too many bad decisions today. Think there could be a few nervous players next selection round.
            They beat us in 2 bursts. The 2nd quarter with 3 consecutive goals and 3rd quarter with a run of 7. You have to be able to stop a run on like those. The rest of the game we controlled.
            http://www.nostalgiamusic.co.uk/secu...res/srh806.jpg

            Comment

            • barry
              Veterans List
              • Jan 2003
              • 8499

              #96
              I thought towers played well. He was involved in the 3 goals that got us back in the lead. Made a few poor decisions but that comes from being in and out of the team.

              Mcveigh wasnt bad but he is very poor one on one. When the ball goes to him one out i just pray he breaks even.

              Agree on mcglynn. I think papley has moved past him.

              We desperately need to be less buddy focused.

              Comment

              • Mug Punter
                On the Rookie List
                • Nov 2009
                • 3325

                #97
                Originally posted by Nico
                Our set shot goal kicking was poor, whereas they converted. Probably the difference.

                McGlynn is surely cooked; 7 kicks, 2 hand passes and a couple of smothers. He has lost a lot of pace. He had a chance to break clear into an open goal in the last minutes but couldn't get the wheels moving.
                Rohan; he continues to disappoint. 6 kicks, 1 hand ball, 2 tackles. Howler of a game. He looked lethargic. Is he playing to be drafted? The Geelong rumour is around. Very poor effort.
                Heeney; 19yo, but he had 3 kicks and 1 handball. Certainly not performing as well as Rose.
                Rose and Hewett Impressed again in patches but need consistency. That's the inexperience factor. Hewett holds onto the footy for a second option and gets caught. Frustrating that he doesn't take the first option. Too much finessing.
                LLoyd; plenty has been said. My problem with him is that when he has the footy he is indecisive. Takes a mark and holds on to it for a month, gets a free and does the same when the situations cries out for moving it on quickly. Gets plenty of the pill but squanders it.
                Mills is a star and needs to move into the midfield.
                The defence played a great game.
                Franklin was super. Just a couple of vital misses.
                Agree with most of these comments and tonight confirms to me that whilst we will be about in September I do not think we will be in the final two weeks of the finals. Next year is our final chance before GWS dominate this comp for 5-10 years. And when that happens the AFL will be a joke of a comp for that period given their advantages and list strengths.

                Rohan did bugger all tonight as did McGlynn and Heeney needs a kick up the arse and spell in the twos.

                Reid, Ted and Papley to come in for the finals team for me.

                Comment

                • Bexl
                  Regular in the Side
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 817

                  #98
                  Watching the last quarter again i think the moment that cost us was with about 6 1/2 minutes to go. McVeigh burst through the middle and passed to 3 Sydney players on there own 25 m out straight in front. Towers dropped the mark ( ducked head .... not sure). Parker was right behind him and also could have taken the mark with better talk. Massive golden chance to go 1 and a bit goals up.

                  Comment

                  • Mel_C
                    Veterans List
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 4470

                    #99
                    The 50 metre penalty by Hanners cost us. There was not one bulldogs player where he kicked it . Surely he didn't think it was a swans free? Don't know why he seemed surprised when he was penalised.

                    Comment

                    • Meg
                      Go Swannies!
                      Site Admin
                      • Aug 2011
                      • 4828

                      Originally posted by dimelb
                      Nor were the umpires at fault, apart from the Minson/Hanneberry blue (which admittedly would have won us the game, all other things being equal).
                      What did you mean by this comment Don? It certainly was a pivotal moment in the match. It seemed like a very bad mistake by Hannebery, but he was quite distraught as though he had misunderstood whose free kick it was.

                      Comment

                      • cheersquadsteve
                        Pushing for Selection
                        • Aug 2003
                        • 85

                        towers must never play again
                        several times he had opertunities to take the game on and he decided to pass the ball, not kick the goal
                        im sick of him showing glimpses of potential, that he could be a very good player, he flashes into games and then totally underwhelms when the heat is on
                        if your head is made out of chocolate dont stand out in the sun

                        Comment

                        • Bexl
                          Regular in the Side
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 817

                          You know what. We are a young team with 6 players playing there first game this year and a pile of other young and inexperienced players who are having a real go. We still have a chance to win the flag this year. So we lost today in a close one, we lost a few in 2012 too.
                          Go swannies.

                          Comment

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

                            Originally posted by Meg
                            What did you mean by this comment Don? It certainly was a pivotal moment in the match. It seemed like a very bad mistake by Hannebery, but he was quite distraught as though he had misunderstood whose free kick it was.
                            That's what I was thinking - a genuine mistake on his part when he is a law-abiding player as a rule. I think the commentary looked at the possibility of high contact and perhaps that contributed to Hannebery's confusion.
                            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

                            • kilroy
                              Suspended by the MRP
                              • Jun 2016
                              • 133

                              The thing that stood out for me is how slow we are. Also hold possession suck swans players into the contest win the ball and then run and spread and goal.

                              Also I am sick and tired of watching a code that has the worst officiating of any code in the world, consistently week in week out fans need to focus on umpiring and they have to second guess if the umpires will be for them or against them. What other code does this? I am honestly done, i have been thinking about it all night but the only reason i watch AFL is because of the swans, I do what they call hate watching.

                              Comment

                              • kilroy
                                Suspended by the MRP
                                • Jun 2016
                                • 133

                                Originally posted by dimelb
                                That's what I was thinking - a genuine mistake on his part when he is a law-abiding player as a rule. I think the commentary looked at the possibility of high contact and perhaps that contributed to Hannebery's confusion.
                                A 50 metre penalty because a player assumed wrong or didnt hear the call. 50 metre penalty is the most pathetic rule i have ever seen in any code, a massive penalty that turns matches and 9/10 never fits the crime. Stupid irrelevant crap like "Not throwing the ball back correctly" and it could cost you the game while others things like players flopping all over the place is ignored.

                                Comment

                                Working...