Match Thread: Swans v Demons.

[Aaron]

According to Match review: Port ruck sent to Tribunal, Giant and Sun banned, fines galore :
Steven May, Melbourne, has been charged with Striking Lance Franklin, Sydney Swans, during the first quarter...as Careless Conduct, Low Impact, High Contact.. The player can accept a $2000 sanction with an early plea.

Hayden McLean, Sydney Swans, has been charged with Striking (Fixed Financial Sanction) Harrison Petty, Melbourne, during the third quarter...The player can accept a $1500 sanction with an early plea.

[bennyfabulous]

Papley’s behaviour towards umpires has to improve. Last year he was fined $500 for staging. Last night he abused an umpire and gave a 50m penalty away.

I know most people on here are huge Papley supporters and probably blame the umpires for Papley’s behaviour.

I think in fact it’s become “Swanism” to blame umpires and AFL house if things are not working out.

Absolute rubbish comment. Are you a new Swans supporter? or just an internet Troll?, we have been dudded at every turn by the AFL and the umpiring. Im happy for everyone to have their opinion but seriously i cant reconcile this particular one of yours. Puke emoji!

[Bangalore Swans]

Absolute rubbish comment. Are you a new Swans supporter? or just an internet Troll?, we have been dudded at every turn by the AFL and the umpiring. Im happy for everyone to have their opinion but seriously i cant reconcile this particular one of yours. Puke emoji!

Appreciate your feedback. My view of umpiring differs from many. I believe over time that you win some decisions and you lose some decisions with umpiring. I teach my son these principles. I believe to get caught up in the umpiring decisions that don’t go your way is not leading your fullest life.

Some decisions do go the Swans way.

In the round one game against Brisbane, what appeared to be an intercept mark was taken by the Brisbane defender (I think it was Harris Andrews). The ball was held longer than the Hayden McLean one. A Swans player knocked the ball out from the Brisbane defenders hand and a goal was scored quickly after.

That decision and that goal gave the Swans all momentum and they kicked some quick goals after that point.

That was an example of a decision going the Swans way. The Jeremy Cameron decision and Dane Rampe Spider-Man also went the Swans way.

I get frustrated by all the angst and focus on umpiring decisions that don’t go the Swans way.

I don’t visit opposing teams fan sites. Is every fan site littered with people who all believe that the umpires are unfair to their clubs?

I love Leigh Montagna’s idea of an AFL DRS. At least a team would have an opportunity to correct at least one incorrect decision.

[Blood Fever]

I reckon one of the things the team did pretty well yesterday was preventing intercept marks. In that regard, the coaches' decision to play an extra tall paid reasonable dividends. We couldn't mark in the forward 50 but we did keep it in our forward half quite well, especially in the second half. Unfortunately, our ground level players just weren't able to manufacture much at ground level.

The Dees similarly weren't great at ground level in their forward 50. They beat us in the air, but our small and medium defenders did an exceptional job of limiting scores by other means.

Our tactic of having three talls did stifle their intercept marking and we did spill a few marks close to goal. Wet weather didn't help but game could have gone either way.

[Rod_]

I thought we played as well as we were allowed. Swans were good enough to kick a goal or 2 and win. (Reid, Heeney and Hewitt (and Naismith) could lift our skills and give us 5-10% more..)

Questions is in my mind can we play Wicks and Gulden at the same time in all matches? Is Sinclair the best 2nd forward? Will an un match-fit Buddy give us a final drive? Is our best good enough? Yes (but we need out best all the time! )

[liz]

I thought we played as well as we were allowed. Swans were good enough to kick a goal or 2 and win. (Reid, Heeney and Hewitt (and Naismith) could lift our skills and give us 5-10% more..)

Questions is in my mind can we play Wicks and Gulden at the same time in all matches? Is Sinclair the best 2nd forward? Will an un match-fit Buddy give us a final drive? Is our best good enough? Yes (but we need out best all the time! )

I'd give us a bit more credit than that. We came closer to knocking off the Dees than anyone else has this year, and their midfield guns were up and about (Oliver, Petracca and Gawn in particular). That's different to our wins against the Lions and Tigers, where both teams played well below their ability, irrespective of how well we played. Their forward line was in good marking form and they converted pretty accurately. So the fact we got reasonably close says we did a lot right. Our midfield was great in the second half, when they might have been "excused" after the second quarter of thinking that maybe they weren't just good enough.

Wicks and Gulden are both young and inexperienced, and Gulden, in particular, a long way from having an AFL mature body. But you could ask whether the Dees can play, say Fritsch and Pickett in the same team, given they contributed as little as Wicks and Gulden on Saturday. (The answer, for the Dees, is clearly "yes" based on output from other games.) Just as relevantly, is there anyone in our reserves side who can be relied upon to do better? Bell is probably the closest match to Wicks, but I think Wicks shades him on most aspects. Taylor could come in for Gulden but he's got different attributes and none of them as valuable, IMO. He'd drive most of us mad, I suspect.

Sinclair isn't the best 2nd forward. I think Longmire acknowledged that in his press conference, but also gave sound reasons why they selected the team as they did. I don't think we'll see Sinclair and McLean together again in the same forward line unless we are bereft of all other options.

Maybe Buddy wasn't quite match fit, but he did have an excellent, in-form opponent to contend with. May didn't contribute much other than keeping Buddy under wraps, which isn't to take away from May's performance, but rather to point out that even when not in top form, Buddy is still a handful, and May often does much more than just shut down an opponent. Plus the forward line was crowded, it was a little wet in the second half, and Buddy's pressuring and tackling was still very good, even if he couldn't find the ball.

Reid will improve us if he can get fit. Put him and Heeney back in and we are pretty much at full strength. I don't think you can improve that team by adding Naismith or Hewett, but they are decent players to have ready to come in if Hickey (Naismith), or various players (Hewett) get injured.

[bloodspirit]

I don’t visit opposing teams fan sites. Is every fan site littered with people who all believe that the umpires are unfair to their clubs?

Yes.

[Rod_]

I'd give us a bit more credit than that. We came closer to knocking off the Dees than anyone else has this year, and their midfield guns were up and about (Oliver, Petracca and Gawn in particular). That's different to our wins against the Lions and Tigers, where both teams played well below their ability, irrespective of how well we played. Their forward line was in good marking form and they converted pretty accurately. So the fact we got reasonably close says we did a lot right. Our midfield was great in the second half, when they might have been "excused" after the second quarter of thinking that maybe they weren't just good enough.

Wicks and Gulden are both young and inexperienced, and Gulden, in particular, a long way from having an AFL mature body. But you could ask whether the Dees can play, say Fritsch and Pickett in the same team, given they contributed as little as Wicks and Gulden on Saturday. (The answer, for the Dees, is clearly "yes" based on output from other games.) Just as relevantly, is there anyone in our reserves side who can be relied upon to do better? Bell is probably the closest match to Wicks, but I think Wicks shades him on most aspects. Taylor could come in for Gulden but he's got different attributes and none of them as valuable, IMO. He'd drive most of us mad, I suspect.

Sinclair isn't the best 2nd forward. I think Longmire acknowledged that in his press conference, but also gave sound reasons why they selected the team as they did. I don't think we'll see Sinclair and McLean together again in the same forward line unless we are bereft of all other options.

Maybe Buddy wasn't quite match fit, but he did have an excellent, in-form opponent to contend with. May didn't contribute much other than keeping Buddy under wraps, which isn't to take away from May's performance, but rather to point out that even when not in top form, Buddy is still a handful, and May often does much more than just shut down an opponent. Plus the forward line was crowded, it was a little wet in the second half, and Buddy's pressuring and tackling was still very good, even if he couldn't find the ball.

Reid will improve us if he can get fit. Put him and Heeney back in and we are pretty much at full strength. I don't think you can improve that team by adding Naismith or Hewett, but they are decent players to have ready to come in if Hickey (Naismith), or various players (Hewett) get injured.

Just a few questions and well answered, thanks Liz.


Huge respect for the team and made mention that the Swans could keep their heads held high after the game. We lost no supporters after the game and that is for sure!!


I was concerned about Wicks and Gulden as they were well held or had less impact than previous weeks. This may be because Heeney and Reid were out. After the Tigers game I was 100% both in. After the Cats I was 70 - 30.. After the Demons game 50 - 50 with my Monday morning wrap up thinking.. Note that this was a different game and result so my bias is askew... And as a sensitive supporter I recognise players have good and not so good games. Agree they are young and have a quality stamp next to their names. No argument or discussion in that regard. Just looking for improvements from a spectator perspective...

McClean was stiff not to be paid 2 marks, and a couple of goals went begging. Wonder why McClean is not pinch hitting in the ruck? Agree that some players will bring a different frustration if they replace a tall..

Buddy needs to play games and I possibly agree that he has say only 30 games left in him. (say 3-7 games in a row then a rest) He deserves 1000 goals. However I note that he does not have as big an impact after a layoff. Therefore how he is used and particularly if we make finals will be interesting..

I feel Naismith and Hickey will become an Ace in the hole later in the year! Prediction!!

Clubs need 30 players to win a season. We have that many with senior exposure. Just limited on experience with a few..

[Meg]

I don’t visit opposing teams fan sites. Is every fan site littered with people who all believe that the umpires are unfair to their clubs?.

Exhibit A: Melbourne v Sydney match day thread on Big Footy’s Melbourne Demons site. Just as many complaints about umpiring disadvantaging the Dees as we have complaining they were biased against Sydney.

I think we fans see what we want to see ...

[crackedactor 01]

Appreciate your feedback. My view of umpiring differs from many. I believe over time that you win some decisions and you lose some decisions with umpiring. I teach my son these principles. I believe to get caught up in the umpiring decisions that don’t go your way is not leading your fullest life.

Some decisions do go the Swans way.

In the round one game against Brisbane, what appeared to be an intercept mark was taken by the Brisbane defender (I think it was Harris Andrews). The ball was held longer than the Hayden McLean one. A Swans player knocked the ball out from the Brisbane defenders hand and a goal was scored quickly after.

That decision and that goal gave the Swans all momentum and they kicked some quick goals after that point.

That was an example of a decision going the Swans way. The Jeremy Cameron decision and Dane Rampe Spider-Man also went the Swans way.

I get frustrated by all the angst and focus on umpiring decisions that don’t go the Swans way.

I don’t visit opposing teams fan sites. Is every fan site littered with people who all believe that the umpires are unfair to their clubs?

I love Leigh Montagna’s idea of an AFL DRS. At least a team would have an opportunity to correct at least one incorrect decision.

How the f## can you say the Cameron decision went our way? The umpire shouted out not 15 meters well before anyone marked it. What if a Swans player marked it? It would have been ignored.

[NeonBible]

How the f## can you say the Cameron decision went our way? The umpire shouted out not 15 meters well before anyone marked it. What if a Swans player marked it? It would have been ignored.

Wow! That is a great point crackedactor! Amidst all the conversation about whether the umpires had robbed Geelong of a match-winning shot at goal, it could just as easily have been us getting robbed of a match-SAVING mark!

[SwanSand]

Valid questions. I reckon Buddy will get better the more he plays. He cannot get better at a lower level. I thought Gulden has the offensive side to his game (classy inside fifty kicks) and class that Wicks doesn’t, but having too many marking targets is also not a good balance - Heeney Hayward, Reid, Buddy McLean. We need the tacklers too. But most teams who are in the top tier have intercept markers that we need to negate.
I know we want Braeden to play back but is he better suited to our game style in the front half with his speed and good kick for goal.

[bloodspirit]

having too many marking targets is also not a good balance - Heeney Hayward, Reid, Buddy McLean. We need the tacklers too.

I think only 3, maximum 4, play in the same team.

Agree there could be a role for Braeden in the front half - but would we make that switch mid-season when we are not compelled to do so and we clearly decided in the pre-season that we would try him out down back? Maybe. I'm not sure. It's a pity the reserves missed a practice match this round.

[Ralph Dawg]

I understand the rationale behind playing Sinclair on Saturday night and as has been pointed out, was successful to a degree. However, he didn't add much in the ruck whilst giving the chop out to Hick, nor did he add much in attack. His hands are not sticky, both on the marking and at ground level.

Moving forward, I feel he can't be picked ahead of Logan. I understand the arguments to wrap Logan up in cotton wool but I feel he stands to develop more playing in the ones with Buddy and Papley by his side. He is more mobile than Sinclair and his ground work is much better. We lose out on having a second ruck but Reid,McLean or even Blakey can do this. It would've been great for his development to give him the job of nullifying Lever and I actually think his attributes would suggest he could've done it as well as Cal. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Naismith is not the answer. He only plays if Hick is out.

Re Hayward, he plays when Heeney is out. When fit, Isaac is a vastly superior medium forward, who can push into the midfield. Hayward is proving to be too inconsistent. There really is only room for one medium forward, especially if we persist with 3 talls.

[Blood Fever]

I understand the rationale behind playing Sinclair on Saturday night and as has been pointed out, was successful to a degree. However, he didn't add much in the ruck whilst giving the chop out to Hick, nor did he add much in attack. His hands are not sticky, both on the marking and at ground level.

Moving forward, I feel he can't be picked ahead of Logan. I understand the arguments to wrap Logan up in cotton wool but I feel he stands to develop more playing in the ones with Buddy and Papley by his side. He is more mobile than Sinclair and his ground work is much better. We lose out on having a second ruck but Reid,McLean or even Blakey can do this. It would've been great for his development to give him the job of nullifying Lever and I actually think his attributes would suggest he could've done it as well as Cal. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Naismith is not the answer. He only plays if Hick is out.



Re Hayward, he plays when Heeney is out. When fit, Isaac is a vastly superior medium forward, who can push into the midfield. Hayward is proving to be too inconsistent. There really is only room for one medium forward, especially if we persist with 3 talls.

Agree about Heeney and Hayward. Although he is a Longmire favourite, there isn't room for both of them. He also has shown too many times that he lacks composure. His kick to two Melbourne players in the 3rd quarter was a shocker. Cost us an almost certain goal. After a Melbourne turnover, he was under zero pressure and still buggered it up. This sort of thing happens too much.