Changes Round 16 - vs Geelong

[S.S. Bleeder]

Kieren has been a lot worse than Hanners and that's saying something!

I agree. Jack seems to be flying under the radar; probably because a few of his colleagues are playing so poorly too. Jack hasn't been anywhere near his best for at least a couple of years now. I'd go as far as saying that the team has been carrying him for that period. He no longer has any pace or evasive skills, maybe it's his age. I don't think that he will ever be of value to the team again, especially when we have better options playing in the NEAFL. The really sad thing is that he has another year on his contract. Who on earth agreed to that?

[mcs]

I really don’t think Dan has been that bad in recent weeks. Against WC he had 24 disposals (4th highest for swans), 12 contested possesions (4th), 3 clearances (3rd) and 13 pressure acts (8th). Against Richmond 20 disposals (4th), 5 tackles (6th), 9 CP’s (4th), 3 clearances (4th) and 20 PA’s (7th). So that puts him up in our top4 players as far as stats go. Unfortunately his kicking was poor during these games. Not that that has been a particularly strong point over the years. But in terms of numbers which most on RWO point to, he was one of our better contributors.

Now I will put something to you. If any of those neafl players you suggested come in this weekend and get those numbers, I bet you and other posters would be saying that they played well. But when Hannebery puts them up he is playing poorly, embarrassing himself and letting the team down.

The players you are talking about, have playing consistent football in the neafl. And I agree they should be rewarded when their chance comes up. But not at the expense of an elite player like Hannebery. Robinson has had 19 games with a career high of 20 disposals (coincidentally against Geelong earlier). Fox has played 7 games, with a career high of 15 disposals. Newman has had 3 games this year for a high of 19 disposals. I agree Dawson could be interesting if had more games fitness under his belt. But essentially these players are producing the sort of numbers that your saying isn’t good enough for Hannebery. So I can’t see the point in dropping a champion swan’s player, who we know has a high ceiling, in order to bring in a player who in all likely-hood will not match or better his output.

FWIW, in round 8 or 9, I called for Hannebery to be given an extended break (10-12 weeks) to rest the OP I believe he is playing with. Bring him back in around 18 or 19 and build for the finals. The experts in the club, believed that wasn’t required and he could be nursed through it. That’s good enough for me. Horse has indicated that he believes he has turned the corner and is happy with his recent output. Rampe has given his tick from a player’s perspective as well. Again, good enough for me.

Raw numbers don't tell the full story though with Hanners - its not his ability to still get reasonable amounts of the pill. Its his inability to use it, and obvious distress around the ground (compared to what we are used to seeing with him) that has lots of us worried about him.

[stevoswan]

I really don’t think Dan has been that bad in recent weeks. Against WC he had 24 disposals (4th highest for swans), 12 contested possesions (4th), 3 clearances (3rd) and 13 pressure acts (8th). Against Richmond 20 disposals (4th), 5 tackles (6th), 9 CP’s (4th), 3 clearances (4th) and 20 PA’s (7th). So that puts him up in our top4 players as far as stats go. Unfortunately his kicking was poor during these games. Not that that has been a particularly strong point over the years. But in terms of numbers which most on RWO point to, he was one of our better contributors.

Now I will put something to you. If any of those neafl players you suggested come in this weekend and get those numbers, I bet you and other posters would be saying that they played well. But when Hannebery puts them up he is playing poorly, embarrassing himself and letting the team down.

The trouble is, most of Hanners possessions are handballs and most of those and his kicks go to the oppositions advantage. He's at 14% efficiency for the season! If a player up from the two's was doing that, we'd be saying 'back to the two's'..... Hanners is a club legend who deserves better than to be tarnishing that legacy in the seniors.....at the moment.....but he is in the team and his numbers have been improving week by week, so we can just hope his skills and speed and gut running improve as well. They have to.....

[AnnieH]

I really don’t think Dan has been that bad in recent weeks. Against WC he had 24 disposals (4th highest for swans), 12 contested possesions (4th), 3 clearances (3rd) and 13 pressure acts (8th). Against Richmond 20 disposals (4th), 5 tackles (6th), 9 CP’s (4th), 3 clearances (4th) and 20 PA’s (7th). So that puts him up in our top4 players as far as stats go. Unfortunately his kicking was poor during these games. Not that that has been a particularly strong point over the years. But in terms of numbers which most on RWO point to, he was one of our better contributors.

Now I will put something to you. If any of those neafl players you suggested come in this weekend and get those numbers, I bet you and other posters would be saying that they played well. But when Hannebery puts them up he is playing poorly, embarrassing himself and letting the team down.

The players you are talking about, have playing consistent football in the neafl. And I agree they should be rewarded when their chance comes up. But not at the expense of an elite player like Hannebery. Robinson has had 19 games with a career high of 20 disposals (coincidentally against Geelong earlier). Fox has played 7 games, with a career high of 15 disposals. Newman has had 3 games this year for a high of 19 disposals. I agree Dawson could be interesting if had more games fitness under his belt. But essentially these players are producing the sort of numbers that your saying isn’t good enough for Hannebery. So I can’t see the point in dropping a champion swan’s player, who we know has a high ceiling, in order to bring in a player who in all likely-hood will not match or better his output.

FWIW, in round 8 or 9, I called for Hannebery to be given an extended break (10-12 weeks) to rest the OP I believe he is playing with. Bring him back in around 18 or 19 and build for the finals. The experts in the club, believed that wasn’t required and he could be nursed through it. That’s good enough for me. Horse has indicated that he believes he has turned the corner and is happy with his recent output. Rampe has given his tick from a player’s perspective as well. Again, good enough for me.

Effective disposals is one of favourite stats to look at.
No point in getting the ball if disposal efficiency is well below par.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyhews, I like this weeks changes, although they didn't specifically mention ruthless. We're gunna need him.
I'm as nervous as.

[O'Reilly Boy]

I don't mind Robinson in. There are players now at the heart of the team—Lloyd, Cunningham, Towers (before the eye-poke) Florent, Hayward, even Hewitt come to mind—who benefited from long periods of getting senior games even when they were not lighting it up. Robinson I think would similarly benefit from putting a string of games together—12 or 15—rather than the two weeks in, three weeks out yo-yo.
That's not to say that Dawson and CO'R should not feel hard done by. I've been looking forward to seeing Dawson in particular for ages.

[KTigers]

Re Hanners ; basically he is part of the old guard (JPK, Parker, Jack, Grundy, Smith, McVeigh, the 2012 premiership players) all who have been extremely good
players for a long time. These guys are all really smart players and leaders on the field and they need to be there. If you were a 19 or 20 year old player starting
out you couldn't learn from a better set of experienced players than these guys. This is a big part of the reason we are still playing in September every year despite having only one top ten draft pick in the last decade. It's not an accident. Do you think that if Melican (pick 52 in the rookie draft) or Rampe (pick 37 in the rookie draft) or Hewett (a pick 32) went to Carlton or St Kilda they would be the potential 200 game players they are today? The club, the coaching staff and the senior players have made these guys into what they are today. I just think there is a wider picture sometimes than jumping on an out-and-out champ like Dan just cause his stat count isn't what it was. Sure, he sprays a few, but they all do. Hanners still could have five years left in him if he can get his body right. Hopefully he can.

[mcs]

Re Hanners ; basically he is part of the old guard (JPK, Parker, Jack, Grundy, Smith, McVeigh, the 2012 premiership players) all who have been extremely good
players for a long time. These guys are all really smart players and leaders on the field and they need to be there. If you were a 19 or 20 year old player starting
out you couldn't learn from a better set of experienced players than these guys. This is a big part of the reason we are still playing in September every year despite having only one top ten draft pick in the last decade. It's not an accident. Do you think that if Melican (pick 52 in the rookie draft) or Rampe (pick 37 in the rookie draft) or Hewett (a pick 32) went to Carlton or St Kilda they would be the potential 200 game players they are today? The club, the coaching staff and the senior players have made these guys into what they are today. I just think there is a wider picture sometimes than jumping on an out-and-out champ like Dan just cause his stat count isn't what it was. Sure, he sprays a few, but they all do. Hanners still could have five years left in him if he can get his body right. Hopefully he can.

I agree KT in broader terms around leadership and the like of Hanners - I don't think anyone is really questioning that and his role in that space.

But the issue this year is he is more than just spraying a few - his disposal recently has been almost completely ineffective, its been the exception when he gets the ball to a teammate, especially by foot.

I hope he comes out and has a cracker tonight to prove us all wrong, but I don't think its unreasonable to wonder if the current approach is working.

[Flying South]

Re Hanners ; basically he is part of the old guard (JPK, Parker, Jack, Grundy, Smith, McVeigh, the 2012 premiership players) all who have been extremely good
players for a long time. These guys are all really smart players and leaders on the field and they need to be there. If you were a 19 or 20 year old player starting
out you couldn't learn from a better set of experienced players than these guys. This is a big part of the reason we are still playing in September every year despite having only one top ten draft pick in the last decade. It's not an accident. Do you think that if Melican (pick 52 in the rookie draft) or Rampe (pick 37 in the rookie draft) or Hewett (a pick 32) went to Carlton or St Kilda they would be the potential 200 game players they are today? The club, the coaching staff and the senior players have made these guys into what they are today. I just think there is a wider picture sometimes than jumping on an out-and-out champ like Dan just cause his stat count isn't what it was. Sure, he sprays a few, but they all do. Hanners still could have five years left in him if he can get his body right. Hopefully he can.

Bravo

[KTigers]

I agree KT in broader terms around leadership and the like of Hanners - I don't think anyone is really questioning that and his role in that space.

But the issue this year is he is more than just spraying a few - his disposal recently has been almost completely ineffective, its been the exception when he gets the ball to a teammate, especially by foot.

I hope he comes out and has a cracker tonight to prove us all wrong, but I don't think its unreasonable to wonder if the current approach is working.

For sure his last SCG performance by foot or hand was not pretty. Players even as experienced as him go thru bad runs where it looks like they are doing nothing right, but I think it's important to remember he has a lot of petrol tickets up his sleeve. A really fat wad of them actually. He's a champ and he'll come out of it for sure. That's what great players do.

[barry]

The swans weakness is the "long tail" they have (in cricket terms). Our bottom 5 players (in the 22) are far weaker than anyone else in the top 8.
This is the challenge longmire must address before september. When you have players like Kirk, Rohan and Hannerbury in your tail. Players who should be in their prime and contributing, its a worry. I dont mind having Rose, McCartin, maybe Ronke as a small tail, but right now our tail is probably 6 or 7 players deep!

[Markwebbos]

The swans weakness is the "long tail" they have (in cricket terms). Our bottom 5 players (in the 22) are far weaker than anyone else in the top 8.
This is the challenge longmire must address before september. When you have players like Kirk, Rohan and Hannerbury in your tail. Players who should be in their prime and contributing, its a worry. I dont mind having Rose, McCartin, maybe Ronke as a small tail, but right now our tail is probably 6 or 7 players deep!

I think you mean Jack not Kirk!

Geelong are a side with a weak bottom 6-8, and it’s a problem for them too.

I’m hoping that Horse is working on improving those players by bringing back Reid, Melican, Heeney to the team, getting Hanners back in form, and getting improvement out of Towers / Newman / Dawson / O’Riordan etc.

I’m sure he’d like to figure out the best 22 for finals in the next 4 weeks too. He’s not a big tinkerer.

[Ludwig]

The swans weakness is the "long tail" they have (in cricket terms). Our bottom 5 players (in the 22) are far weaker than anyone else in the top 8.

I would suggest that many of the players once considered part of our long tail,

baboon-fanimals.jpg

have moved up our anatomy this year and are now congregating in one particular area causing a lot of (may I use another cricket term) offensive constipation, leading to slow bawl movement and hardly any Inside 50s.

Once the season is over we should put a hose through the list and clean it up, tail and all.

gor.jpg

[Sandrevan]

We've got umpires Mollison, Stephens and Stevic (again).

If you're going to the game please make a lot of noise - the 'noise of affirmation' so they say.

Stevic will be teaming up with his old mate Duckwood. Geelong seem to have a few new faces in their team and Blicavs got picked as well. I'm nervous about this game (like most games) and if we make as many mistakes as last week we could be in trouble. On the team sheet, they've picked Hannebery as a forward; let's hope his disposal will be better than last week.

[mcs]

For sure his last SCG performance by foot or hand was not pretty. Players even as experienced as him go thru bad runs where it looks like they are doing nothing right, but I think it's important to remember he has a lot of petrol tickets up his sleeve. A really fat wad of them actually. He's a champ and he'll come out of it for sure. That's what great players do.

No doubt KT he has plenty of tickets, no doubt. Its just awful to see him so far from his best - lets hope he can turn it around soon!

- - - Updated - - -

We've got umpires Mollison, Stephens and Stevic (again).

If you're going to the game please make a lot of noise - the 'noise of affirmation' so they say.

Stevic will be teaming up with his old mate Duckwood. Geelong seem to have a few new faces in their team and Blicavs got picked as well. I'm nervous about this game (like most games) and if we make as many mistakes as last week we could be in trouble. On the team sheet, they've picked Hannebery as a forward; let's hope his disposal will be better than last week.

Damn cheat boy Stevic again - Hawks #1 member back for another go grrr.

[Mel_C]

According to my brother, Stevic also hates Geelong so maybe Stevic will be neutral tonight ????.

We have to be brave tonight and go through the middle of the ground. I watched the bulldogs game live last week and they were constantly playing on through the middle leaving Geelong constantly chasing. Against Richmond we were too stagnant.