#AFL Round 5, Sydney Swans v Adelaide Crows, 7:50pm 20/04 SCG @sydneyswans #AFLSwansCrows

[Flying South]

I found it interesting looking at some of the stats. Buddy spent 122min on the ground. Assume he didn't come off much, if at all. But
Rohan - 76min
KJ - 87
Jones - 90
Towers - 90
Hannebery - 94
Hewett - 94
So Rohan was brought back as another marking target up forward but played 2/3rds a game. Towers is useful in forward 50 as well but reduced time on ground. And when our midfield was well beaten, Jones, KJ, Hannas and Hewett all had limited time on the ground. Are they not fit? Or did we get our rotations wrong?

[Matt79]

OH my goodness...that was an incredibly frustrating and hard game to watch. Just home from the SCG and my blood is still boiling. Some thoughts...
* Our midfield...so lauded and yet our big names are seriously out of touch. JPK, Hanners, Parker, Jack just having next to no impact around the ball. After the Crows 'B Grade mids' ripped us a good one, I shudder what may happen at the Cattery next week.
* The coaching - to continually allow Crows to have 3-5 loose men in our forward line up until final 5 minutes was baffling. The number of times we kicked to an outnumbered contest was disgraceful.
* Missing Naismith and Reid really showed tonight....we do not have a marking option for the quick get out of trouble kick long down the line, someone to at least bring the ball to ground. When Naismith was rucking, Sinclair could provide that role but currently as the sole ruckman he is too busy and puffed chasing his man all around the field. I thought Allir last week actually provided the 'get out' option quite well and yet dropped tonight. We also need another lead up forward desperately...is McCartin ready for a debut? Something needs to change.
* Lastly the umpires...so consistently inconsistent it was abysmal. Same 2 out of the 3 umps that poorly umpired the Swans v Port game too. Free kicks paid to Crows were not paid to the Swans. 4-5 goals for them from direct free kicks. Nothing ever changes here so why am I surprised??

Now onto next week, the Cattery. This will go two ways...either a fighting, back to wall 6 point win or we'll lose by 10 goals. Nothing in between.

[rojo]

It's not the size of the man but the size of the heart. You don't have to be a big man to make a tackle stick or take a contested mark. You just need to be willing to commit to the contest and have some footy smarts.
Besides Hayward made 7 tackles, 2nd highest swan and 3rd most pressure acts on the ground. He had a crack.

Yes, but how many effective tackles! Sure, individually they are all good players and each has their good moments during the game but collectively the team is unbalanced. Kicking out of defence down the line you have Isaac Heeney flying above the pack taking marks. The others are just pushed out of the contest, just like at centre bounces.

[jono2707]

Never suggested he would of made a big difference, all i was saying was we need another tall up forward to give some structure in the forward line. Buddy cant do it all.

Exactly. At least Aliir last week was making some contests and taking a bit of pressure of Buddy. Strange that we tried that for one game and then dumped him. Tonight was a succession of bombing it long to a Buddy outnumbered 2 or 3 to one. He's not even a high making forward. Dumb stuff, but few other options. No structure up there.

Buddy should be free to roam and do his thing, not try to pluck an unlikely mark from a pack. That's not his thing.

[Markwebbos]

Horse out coached and mids destroyed. The scoreline flatters us.

I cannot believe how many times we kicked long down the line from our defensive 50 to a contest (which we lost).

They seemed to have no problem moving the ball except in the third quarter when we put some pressure on.

Josh Francou just moved from the Swans to the Crows. I wonder how much inside information he took with him? Otherwise how else do you explain the complete shellacking our mids received? I didn?t realise how badly they were beaten AND Sinkers did ok in the ruck.

If we continue to play and move the ball like that, this year is a write off.

Maybe it?s time for the annual truth session?? Amongst the players? I?m not convinced that Longmire is the man for the job?

[Meg]

Talking about momentum; why on earth did Hayward kick back to Jones on 50, instead of kicking on 45 degrees at about 20 metres.

Because Buddy told him to in quite vehement terms. With a nanosecond to think through his options Hayward did as instructed. Hayward is a good kick for goal so I agree it was a shame. Then again, Jones should probably have kicked it anyway.

[MattW]

Because Buddy told him to in quite vehement terms. With a nanosecond to think through his options Hayward did as instructed. Hayward is a good kick for goal so I agree it was a shame. Then again, Jones should probably have kicked it anyway.

Sort of connected to this comment, but Buddy was well off tonight. One of those nights he loses confidence, gets frustrated and it unravels.

[Ludwig]

I don't know how the AFL Player Ratings work, but Gary Rohan was our highest rated player for the game, followed by Heeney, McVeigh, Jones, Lloyd, Towers and Cunningham.

The lowest rated was Hayward, followed by Papley, JPK, Reg and Hanners.

See:AFL Player Ratings (@AFLPlayerRating) | Twitter

[Captain]

I think we currently have the worse mid fieldin the AFL. Kennedy, Parker and Hannebury look like old men trying to play a young man's game. So bloody slow.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The funny thing, when defending the Mitchell trade, a poster on here rates them all above Mitchell!!!

[Auntie.Gerald]

My gut feeling is that a line has been drawn in the sand after the loss to Adelaide

That was a very disappointing midfield display.

Quite frankly we need to probably see another player rotate thru midfield as a minimum plus at least one player forfeit the right to be in our 22

We got out hunted at the contest and it was embarrassing........ there a few players who need to seriously question their willingness to compete

Interested but not committed !

[Blood Fever]

Too often we (the Swans), win the games we aren't meant to, and loose those we should.
I've long thought our natural habitat is the underdog.
I'm always more confidant going into games when we are given little chance of winning, and conversely worried in games like tonight.
I often wonder if this is a flaw in our clubs psyche....
It helped us in 2005 and 2012....but hindered us in 2014 and 2016. So I guess it sometimes helps and sometimes hinders.
Tonight it was a hinderance.
Next week will be another story.......I hope.

Because of our sustained success and the acquisition of Buddy, we are now always talked up as a gun team when in fact our talent is over rated. This means that we are seldom the under dog any more. Agree with EK that it was our natural habitat (and a koala should know!) Should definitely not be favourite next week.

[Nico]

Lot of dumb and dumber players are enlisted at the Swans... Buddy needs to quit spreading his arms wide - trying pressure a team mate to kick the ball just to him, there MAYBE a better option Buddy!

Anyways, Swans still doing better then this time last year A Positive lol

Why not put Cameron up front as a like for like replacement for Reid for structure. At least that puts the opposition defence on notice. Sinkers is good resting at FF also. We need to change things up a bit to be less predictable and we need some young legs.

- - - Updated - - -

Something wrong with the headspace of the players at the moment. Buddies judgement way off tonight.Heeney with the yips. Many players not prepared to have a crack.

Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk

Dew has gone to the Gold Coast.

[Nico]

Because Buddy told him to in quite vehement terms. With a nanosecond to think through his options Hayward did as instructed. Hayward is a good kick for goal so I agree it was a shame. Then again, Jones should probably have kicked it anyway.

The point I make is that there is often pivotal moments in a game. We were on top and running. Hayward needs to think for himself and back himself. As soon as it went to Jones I knew it was less than 50/50 that he kicks the goal. He was kicking from outside 50 and he is not such a strong standing kick.

[Nico]

Parker spent a lot of time up forward as he did last week. Kennedy was off last week also. Hanners has more tape on him than a mummy and slowed to a walk. Jack for whatever reason hasn't been near the footy much the last 2 weeks. Could it be that at least 2 of those are carrying injuries, particularly Kennedy and Parker. Or could it be how they are being used. If that is the case get them back where they belong. Papley has to stay as a forward where he is most dangerous. He looked clueless as a midfielder.

[liz]

I'm going to offer a contrarian view to that expressed by pretty much every comment I've read in the last few pages.

I thought it was a highly entertaining, hard fought contest against a side that might have been missing a few personnel (as we were - maybe not so many in quantity but structurally concentrated) on a rebound from being embarrassed last week. From the middle of the second quarter onwards, I thought most of the team played its best, most intense around the contest, footy for the season so far. We did create enough chances but weren't good enough to take them. And while we could have won, we probably didn't quite deserve to.

Having said that, there clearly are some areas for concern. While our around the ground contests were good for most of the game, our centre square work was awful. We almost never got first use of the ball from the centre, meaning that we couldn't get quick ball into the forward half. Whether this is form (or injury?) to our historically gun midfield group, or whether it is structural, I'll leave to the armchair (and real) coaches to determine. But clearly we're not going to have a great season if we can't pick this up.

I thought Buddy played a strange game. Right from the start he looked pent up, as if he thought the game needed to be won by his brilliance up forward. He ran to poor spots to try and get a feed off from a team mate when they had the ball in and around the forward 50, rather than trying to help create space for them. His work rate looked good, but it seemed like something of a selfish game from him, which is very unusual. It's almost like he's read the press that says we can't win without him playing well and its got into his head. It's probably true that we can't win without him playing well, but that doesn't mean we can't win without him doing the outrageous and spectacular.

Of course, structuring up a forward line is a challenge and we really need Buddy to be able to roam further up the ground. Indeed, given we need to try and pinpoint passes into the forward line, ideally we need him delivering.

Not only do we need more height actually in the forward 50, we also need more height pressing up the ground to provide a target when the ball comes out of defence. We were clearly outmarked by the Crows tonight, not just by their tall forward line.

When I said up front that I thought the team produced some of its best, most intense contested work around the ground for much of the game, this was mostly the younger and less heralded players - the likes of Jones, Florent, Cunningham, Towers, Hayward, Papley, Heeney. Until/unless the senior midfielders are able to contribute at similar levels, we're going to struggle.

I thought Marsh was terrific. There were a couple of times where I thought his lack of recent experience playing at the top level was going to catch him out and he was going to succumb to pressure, but he stayed calm and was involved in some terrific plays. He used his speed, and his kicking was better than the majority of his team mates. If there is any justice, he's booked himself a place in the team for the next few weeks at worst.

If that means he takes Mills' place in defence, that might not be a bad thing. He's not as good overhead as Mills but he's no slouch either. With a bit more consistent time in the defensive unit, he may approach the same level of reading the play and getting to the right spots. And at some point we need to find out whether Mills can help reinvigorate the midfield. His marking prowess further up the ground will be valuable, and as a junior I saw him play some terrific games in the guts, both at U18 and at NEAFL level.

I actually thought the defence held up pretty well, despite being too short - ideally - for their opponents. Given the midfield provided so little protection and, especially in the first half, they only had to touch their opponent in marking contest to concede a free kick, they managed to keep one of the highest scoring teams to a score that was matchable. McVeigh carried on his great work from last week. He was Mr Cool back there.

Heeney's contested marking was a joy to behold. Yes, he let himself down by not nailing those two very kickable shots but I doubt anyone will be dirtier on him than he himself. It's an area that he needs to improve on as he gradually elevates himself into a top flight player but I'm pretty confident he will. He's so focussed and determined.

It was great to see Gary out there, looking like he was enjoying himself. I have no idea how many touches he had but I am sure some on here will point out it was fewer than 20 and hence he was a "fail". And I agree he was little sighted in the first half. But he worked his way into the game in the second half, and that juggling mark nearly the boundary which he was probably the only player on the ground who could have got to it, was fantastic. He's a pretty reliable converter of set shots and a good mark. His pace means that, on the lead, few opponents will get to him. Using him as a forward target needs to be part of the solution of creating a more effective forward set up.