2019 Round 1: Western Bulldogs v Sydney Swans @ Marvel Stadium

[liz]

Lots of obvious negatives in that game, but I was very impressed with the fight back in the last quarter.

Balance of the team does seem off - and looked that way on paper too.

Annoyed that the throw for that last goal wasn’t paid (looking at the replay, the umpire near the boundary had turned his head right at that moment - not sure if he was the officiating one). Bewildered it was not mentioned by the commentators - it was an obvious free kick to the Swans.

The Dogs were much slicker over the course of the game - and yet we nearly won. I will take the positive role at this early juncture.

The comeback is a positive in the sense that it shows the team hasn't forgotten how to play football, though I wonder whether the greater effort by the Dogs in the first half meant they were more fatigued and whether this helped the Swans gain the ascendency around the ground.

It's a negative in the sense that we have no answer to the question that has plagued the team for a few seasons now - why aren't they able to sustain a good level of effort for an entire game, rather than relying on a super level of endeavour for a short period of the game? Is it physical? If so, you'd expect to see them over-run towards the end of games, rather than start sluggishly and then come back with a head of steam.

That suggests there must be mental elements to it (unless the comeback is explained purely by the Dogs fatiguing more).

The balance of the team did seem to be an issue - as you say, it looked off before the game began. Certainly one too many tall defenders and maybe too tall up foward as well, though the limited supply to the forward line for much of the game makes that hard to assess. It also didn't help that two of our players who ought to be able to run were largely unsighted, in Dawson and Florent. With the benefit of hindsight, the short interruption that Florent suffered in his pre-season might have warranted a run in the reserves.

I also think the Swans need to make up their minds on the primary roles/positions of a couple of players. The selection of three tall defenders (plus Rampe) meant that it wasn't clear how they intended to use Aliir. When they made up their mind he belonged in the backline in the second half, he looked like that's where he belonged.

And they've been tantalising us with where to use Mills for a couple of seasons now. He was very effective in the midfield in the practice game against the Giants, but then as the JLT wore on, he seemed to move more and more back to playing as a defender. And that's where he started last night. They claim they went out and recruited Thurlow to free Mills up to play in the midfield, so why not pick Thurlow and play Mills in the midfield for an extended period to see how it pans out?

[111431]

We have all the pre season to adjust to the rule changes and we still think it is ok to do 20 metre sideway kicks from the kick in. It only creates pressure on players up the ground and limits our ability to create the loose man. Lloyd, Rampe and McVeigh did it continuously last night - very frustrating

- - - Updated - - -

For those bagging Melican (yes he did appear slow) but the way the dogs moved the ball quickly out of the middle to a leading forward does make it pretty hard on the defenders. I suspect Melican had more telling spoils than all of our other defenders combined. There is a lesson there for our midfielders - win it, spread and move it quickly to a leading forward

- - - Updated - - -

For those bagging Melican (yes he did appear slow) but the way the dogs moved the ball quickly out of the middle to a leading forward does make it pretty hard on the defenders. I suspect Melican had more telling spoils than all of our other defenders combined. There is a lesson there for our midfielders - win it, spread and move it quickly to a leading forward

[mcs]

The comeback is a positive in the sense that it shows the team hasn't forgotten how to play football, though I wonder whether the greater effort by the Dogs in the first half meant they were more fatigued and whether this helped the Swans gain the ascendency around the ground.

It's a negative in the sense that we have no answer to the question that has plagued the team for a few seasons now - why aren't they able to sustain a good level of effort for an entire game, rather than relying on a super level of endeavour for a short period of the game? Is it physical? If so, you'd expect to see them over-run towards the end of games, rather than start sluggishly and then come back with a head of steam.

That suggests there must be mental elements to it (unless the comeback is explained purely by the Dogs fatiguing more).

The balance of the team did seem to be an issue - as you say, it looked off before the game began. Certainly one too many tall defenders and maybe too tall up foward as well, though the limited supply to the forward line for much of the game makes that hard to assess. It also didn't help that two of our players who ought to be able to run were largely unsighted, in Dawson and Florent. With the benefit of hindsight, the short interruption that Florent suffered in his pre-season might have warranted a run in the reserves.

I also think the Swans need to make up their minds on the primary roles/positions of a couple of players. The selection of three tall defenders (plus Rampe) meant that it wasn't clear how they intended to use Aliir. When they made up their mind he belonged in the backline in the second half, he looked like that's where he belonged.

And they've been tantalising us with where to use Mills for a couple of seasons now. He was very effective in the midfield in the practice game against the Giants, but then as the JLT wore on, he seemed to move more and more back to playing as a defender. And that's where he started last night. They claim they went out and recruited Thurlow to free Mills up to play in the midfield, so why not pick Thurlow and play Mills in the midfield for an extended period to see how it pans out?

As you so often do Liz, you summed it up really well, in particular around those few players that do not seem to have had a decision made as to their permanent role. I would add Papley and Dawson to that as well. In particular Papley I just don't feel he should play midfield as his kick in general play just isn't good enough. He can get a bit of contested possession but that doesn't help if you can only back it away.

Dawson to me has some potential to play midfield, but I really think at this stage half forward is where he should play.

[Melbourne_Blood]

We have all the pre season to adjust to the rule changes and we still think it is ok to do 20 metre sideway kicks from the kick in. It only creates pressure on players up the ground and limits our ability to create the loose man. Lloyd, Rampe and McVeigh did it continuously last night - very frustrating

- - - Updated - - -

For those bagging Melican (yes he did appear slow) but the way the dogs moved the ball quickly out of the middle to a leading forward does make it pretty hard on the defenders. I suspect Melican had more telling spoils than all of our other defenders combined. There is a lesson there for our midfielders - win it, spread and move it quickly to a leading forward

- - - Updated - - -

For those bagging Melican (yes he did appear slow) but the way the dogs moved the ball quickly out of the middle to a leading forward does make it pretty hard on the defenders. I suspect Melican had more telling spoils than all of our other defenders combined. There is a lesson there for our midfielders - win it, spread and move it quickly to a leading forward

To be fair , I watched one of the footy shows recently that discussed the new kick in rules and the impact they had in the JLT. It was minimal, most teams still opted for the short chip kick from the kick in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ralph Dawg]

+1

+1 for me too. I will do my nana if someone like Dawson is dropped for Jack.
As I have alluded to in another post, a call on the merits of our current lineup moving forward needs to be made early in the season. If we look like only challenging for a mid table finish, let's keep / bring in the younger players, give them defined roles to play and back them by not dropping them after one bad game. If they are not up to it, then look to trade / draft for the future, in particular in the midfield. It may not be pretty but we need to undergo renewal if we are to eventually challenge for the flag.

[S.S. Bleeder]

I really hope that the coaches have planned for a slow start to the season in the expectation that we will peak at the end of the season. It looked like that because so many players seemed underdone. There were a few players who put in poor games but I don't necessarily think that they need to be dropped. We need to show faith in our best 22 and give them time to find form.

I still think our biggest issue is that we don't have an elite midfielder who can accumulate possessions, has great disposal by foot and can evade the traffic in stoppages. Someone like Coniglio would be perfect be he will probably be going to Victoria. A lack of high draft picks over the last 15 years is hitting us hard. Yes, I know that Heeney and Mills were high draft selections but we haven't been able to draft on our needs with those selections. Our gameplan is way too slow and stagnant. I don't know how much of this can be attributed to poor coaching and how much can be attributed towards not having the right cattle to get the job done.

[MattW]

The comeback is a positive in the sense that it shows the team hasn't forgotten how to play football, though I wonder whether the greater effort by the Dogs in the first half meant they were more fatigued and whether this helped the Swans gain the ascendency around the ground.

It's a negative in the sense that we have no answer to the question that has plagued the team for a few seasons now - why aren't they able to sustain a good level of effort for an entire game, rather than relying on a super level of endeavour for a short period of the game? Is it physical? If so, you'd expect to see them over-run towards the end of games, rather than start sluggishly and then come back with a head of steam.

That suggests there must be mental elements to it (unless the comeback is explained purely by the Dogs fatiguing more).

The balance of the team did seem to be an issue - as you say, it looked off before the game began. Certainly one too many tall defenders and maybe too tall up foward as well, though the limited supply to the forward line for much of the game makes that hard to assess. It also didn't help that two of our players who ought to be able to run were largely unsighted, in Dawson and Florent. With the benefit of hindsight, the short interruption that Florent suffered in his pre-season might have warranted a run in the reserves.

I also think the Swans need to make up their minds on the primary roles/positions of a couple of players. The selection of three tall defenders (plus Rampe) meant that it wasn't clear how they intended to use Aliir. When they made up their mind he belonged in the backline in the second half, he looked like that's where he belonged.

And they've been tantalising us with where to use Mills for a couple of seasons now. He was very effective in the midfield in the practice game against the Giants, but then as the JLT wore on, he seemed to move more and more back to playing as a defender. And that's where he started last night. They claim they went out and recruited Thurlow to free Mills up to play in the midfield, so why not pick Thurlow and play Mills in the midfield for an extended period to see how it pans out?

Good points, particularly re Thurlow and Mills. Grundy replaced by Thurlow might resolve a couple of those issues. I think they need to give Mills a proper go in the midfield.

Speaking of odd comments, Longmire mentioned Clarke's attributes as including the capacity to gut-run late, highlighting his fitness. But then he played less time on the ground than any other Swan. I'd replace him with Ronke.

[liz]

Good points, particularly re Thurlow and Mills. Grundy replaced by Thurlow might resolve a couple of those issues. I think they need to give Mills a proper go in the midfield.

Speaking of odd comments, Longmire mentioned Clarke's attributes as including the capacity to gut-run late, highlighting his fitness. But then he played less time on the ground than any other Swan. I'd replace him with Ronke.

I'd replace one of Grundy or Melican with COR to provide a bit more run. I'd replace Mills in defence with Thurlow to play the role he was recruited to play.

On yesterday's evidence, there are a few from the midfield that you could drop to move Mills into the onball brigade but I'd start by moving Papley to play predominantly as a forward (with short bursts onball as a relief midfielder, something I think will benefit his development and help the team, but mean he spends more of the game in the forward line, adding crumbing power and pressure). Then I'd drop one of the "medium forwards/half-forwards to enable this switch - Hayward, Blakey or Dawson. No comments on which one at this stage. We don't have enough evidence of their current "form" and all are talented and young. I'd like them all to get more opportunities. My observations are based purely on team balance, rather than the abilities of the individuals.

[Blood Fever]

We still just bomb the ball on the top of our forward's heads. Bomb to Buddy one out against three. Same old same old predictable game plan. Nothing much has changed. The players in the exit meetings apparently identified the game plan as being a problem. So I can see players deserting a sinking ship sooner rather than later. Probably why Lloyd only took a two year deal.

Sent from my ANE-LX2J using Tapatalk

Thought Lloyd signed for four years

[Blood Fever]

I'd replace one of Grundy or Melican with COR to provide a bit more run. I'd replace Mills in defence with Thurlow to play the role he was recruited to play.

On yesterday's evidence, there are a few from the midfield that you could drop to move Mills into the onball brigade but I'd start by moving Papley to play predominantly as a forward (with short bursts onball as a relief midfielder, something I think will benefit his development and help the team, but mean he spends more of the game in the forward line, adding crumbing power and pressure). Then I'd drop one of the "medium forwards/half-forwards to enable this switch - Hayward, Blakey or Dawson. No comments on which one at this stage. We don't have enough evidence of their current "form" and all are talented and young. I'd like them all to get more opportunities. My observations are based purely on team balance, rather than the abilities of the individuals.

Melican has been out for ages. Need to cut him some slack and persevere with him. His best is very good. Reg has been fantastic but Melican should be in front of him in the queue.

[stellation]

Thought Lloyd signed for four years

He did.

[Auntie.Gerald]

For me I am absolutely amazed our midfield can not adjust and respond to what’s before them??

If this was a boxing match we were completed left hanging like amateurs !!!

our issue , above all , was not dominating the midfield contest !!!

We at the swans like the contest in tight when fighting for the ball on a throw in or centre clearance - this works well for Parker, Kennedy and or Heeney in close qtrs muscling over their opposite player

The Bulldogs know this

They proved it when we played them in the GF 2016

So what do u do when you fight a heavy handed heavy bodied boxer ? You stand on the outside and pick ur moments !!!!!

the doggies did this perfectly.....pealing back from the contest with a player south or north of the scramble and then the bulldogs player in tight paddles the ball / tunnel balls / punches it out north or south when we rush in to tackle

This leaves us in tight in numbers and looking like absolute amateur idiots because the ball has rushed out of scramble and the doggies have possession on the outside with players flooding forward away from our players

It is simply embarrassing that we can not adjust and see this

There is not always enough time to handball traditionally these days in the - sometimes the punch along the ground is the quickest exit and catches out the in tight heavy opposition midfielders like ours

If ur the opposition Do anything u can to get it away from Kennedy and Parker getting their hands on the ball and letting them clear

Make sure they don’t get the ball

[0918330512]

We still just bomb the ball on the top of our forward's heads. Bomb to Buddy one out against three. Same old same old predictable game plan. Nothing much has changed. The players in the exit meetings apparently identified the game plan as being a problem.

Care to source/validate that claim?

So I can see players deserting a sinking ship sooner rather than later. Probably why Lloyd only took a two year deal.

4

Enough doomsday prepping with unsubstantiated conjecture please. The ship is buoyant yet

[liz]

Melican has been out for ages. Need to cut him some slack and persevere with him. His best is very good. Reg has been fantastic but Melican should be in front of him in the queue.

He has, and he looks rusty. That doesn't mean he can't rub off that rust in the NEAFL for a few weeks.

I have no particularly strong preference between the two. If we're looking towards the future then that sits with Melican rather than Reg. I think Reg is probably (still) capable of playing at a more consistent level than Melican. All my comments were based more on overall balance - ie picking the best team rather than picking the best 22 players.

[wolftone57]

Care to source/validate that claim?


4

Enough doomsday prepping with unsubstantiated conjecture please. The ship is buoyant yet

Tom Harley said there were some very honest assessments of the game plan. Including players assessments. He also added change is inevitable in the game anyway.

Sent from my ANE-LX2J using Tapatalk