Swans v Giants Elimination Final 2021

[neilfws]

It's so easy to get caught up in the Toby hysteria. Slowmo camera shows he didn't even touch Stevic. Stevic pulled his shoulder back to get out of the way of Toby.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BrentonSp...EqQ7TPvfa9AmfM

Interesting! Yes, that does seem to be the case on rewatching the original footage too. Seems C7 commentary may have been describing an alternative reality, again.

OK, that has changed my mind. Could be a fine at most or even no penalty.

[Faunac8]

Thanks for that Agent 86. After clicking on their name you have to go to view profile and select ignore and then confirm that you really want to ignore them. I have now very happily ignored two recent posters that have been hijacking and bullying all. A pair of pitiful and childish trolls.

Ah thanks for the details on how to do this I wish I had been aware of this at the start of the season.
I wonder if the two that I chose to ignore were the same two as you.

[lwjoyner]

although disappointed, it was a great ride. Should have on with 3 mins to go and the behind by Bell. Also the red time goals against us happens too often. Delist Gray,Clarke,brand,ling,ronke and taylor all if contracts allow. Surely with our expence with Johnston we should also pay out naismith cant possibly be right after so many knee ops. This all should give us the money to fix up Dawson and Parker. Also send Bell, Melican and COR back to supplementary list. We need a marking backman beside McCartin. Maybe reidy would have helped today with his marking even if his kiccking for goal leaves a lot to be desired.

[Agent 86]

Interesting! Yes, that does seem to be the case on rewatching the original footage too. Seems C7 commentary may have been describing an alternative reality, again.

OK, that has changed my mind. Could be a fine at most or even no penalty.

Yes. Move on. Melbourne press will be all over it, but they have to talk about something.

[dejavoodoo44]

This would be great sarcasm if you didn’t actually believe it.
Seriously stop telling people how to think and act and make like the Shepard and his sheep and flock off.

Yes, there's probably very few things that are more tedious, than some z-grade intellect, claiming that their antisocial trolling is somehow a noble expression of freedom. It's an argument that's easily demolished, but often, people just don't bother doing so. But hey, while I'm here.

(Although, since this is a football forum, I'll keep it as brief as possible).

Essentially, I think there's two main ways that you can class online forums. Either they're largely social clubs, or they're largely a publishing business.

If a site is generally like a social club, then it's a good idea to consider what free speech rights other social clubs offer. Do RSL clubs, bowls clubs, book groups, etc, etc, offer unlimited free speech to everyone? Obviously not. An RSL club would not tolerate someone who constantly droned over the top of the oath. A bowls club would rapidly ban an obnoxious drunk, who for some reason, obsessively paid out on particular people trying to play a quiet game of bowls. And most of a book group would soon decide to meet elsewhere, in order to avoid the arrogant twat who relentlessly belittled their opinions. But online, the claim is, that because of 'free speech', similar antisocial behaviour must be endlessly tolerated.

If the site is more like a publisher, then you have to look at how publishing usually has proceeded. There's generally a few reasons why a publisher would publish. They think that the book or article will make money, by attracting readers. Maybe they think that the merit of the writing deserves a wider audience. Or they think that publishing will create some common good. Contrast that with what a troll comes up with. Their largely merit-less antisocial whining and baiting, is likely to drive others away from a site, and decrease the common good. But because of the 'free speech' argument, online publishers apparently have no right, not to publish troll posts that will damage their publishing business.

And one final point. Because of modern technology, trolls have almost infinitely more freedom, than ever before, to have their tiresome opinions communicated to a mass audience. And yet, they spend much of their time abusing that privilege and falsely claiming that they're being oppressed.

[O'Reilly Boy]

Gee that was tough.

They smashed us in that second quarter, and were quite brilliant at it. The commentators were right on it, identifying the slowing of the pace of the game, the careful kicking, the deep entries, and the amazing work at those stoppages. On the other side, we just didn't get our hands on it, and it felt like we got a bit rushed and Buddy-focussed with our entries, partly as a function of our not controlling the football, and feeling pressured when we did get hold of it to make something happen, rather than to trust the system—controlling the ball in the back half for a while to start moving the opposition around in order to open up the corridor.

In that second quarter, I thought that Parker was magnificent, but playing a bit of a lone hand. The big lift from Hewitt in the third quarter was key to wrestling the game back. I thought that he was Kennedy-esque. There was one sequence where he ended up at the bottom of four or five packs in quick succession, and gradually worked himself into dominance. But by then we were always chasing the game: we've had an alarming tendency to leak goals in the final minutes of quarters, and I think that that hurt us yesterday: had we gone into 3/4 time a goal closer, and without the momentum check, who knows?

I felt for Warner, who struggled to find the game. He looked a lot like he did in his debut last season, when he was played forward. His amazing work earlier this season came when he started at a centre bounce and was able to use his explosive energy. Papley has taken on that role (successfully) this past few weeks. I thought it was one of Rowbottom's better games all round this season, and that goes to improved fitness.

Florent has been getting a bit of a caning here, but he is playing a particular role, something like a sweeper half a kick behind the play, and he does a great deal that I like from there.

I also think that Bell was having a pretty good game. Nico complains about him standing off packs, but surely that is his role? One of the great improvements in our play has been the maintaining of width, and that's what I see him doing. That said, his was a terrible, terrible miss. Poor guy.

The issue of team balance has been raised, and it's a good question. We felt less threatening up forward for the middle part of the game, but perhaps that was more a function of being beaten in the mids rather than not having a potent front half. As we got on top in centre clearances in the final quarter we looked amazing.

And shout-out again to Hickey. An amazing effort. We laughed as he rag-dolled Mummy (although that seemed to stiffen Mumford's resolve, and he was really strong in that last 10 minutes).

Onwards to 2022. My daughter was devastated, but got a text that she'd won a $100 Swanshop voucher just after the final siren. We're tossing up getting the doggy vest, or waiting for the Franklin 1000 goal memorabilia that will surely be just around the corner.

[Bangalore Swans]

Yes, there's probably very few things that are more tedious, than some z-grade intellect, claiming that their antisocial trolling is somehow a noble expression of freedom. It's an argument that's easily demolished, but often, people just don't bother doing so. But hey, while I'm here.

(Although, since this is a football forum, I'll keep it as brief as possible).

Essentially, I think there's two main ways that you can class online forums. Either they're largely social clubs, or they're largely a publishing business.

If a site is generally like a social club, then it's a good idea to consider what free speech rights other social clubs offer. Do RSL clubs, bowls clubs, book groups, etc, etc, offer unlimited free speech to everyone? Obviously not. An RSL club would not tolerate someone who constantly droned over the top of the oath. A bowls club would rapidly ban an obnoxious drunk, who for some reason, obsessively paid out on particular people trying to play a quiet game of bowls. And most of a book group would soon decide to meet elsewhere, in order to avoid the arrogant twat who relentlessly belittled their opinions. But online, the claim is, that because of 'free speech', similar antisocial behaviour must be endlessly tolerated.

If the site is more like a publisher, then you have to look at how publishing usually has proceeded. There's generally a few reasons why a publisher would publish. They think that the book or article will make money, by attracting readers. Maybe they think that the merit of the writing deserves a wider audience. Or they think that publishing will create some common good. Contrast that with what a troll comes up with. Their largely merit-less antisocial whining and baiting, is likely to drive others away from a site, and decrease the common good. But because of the 'free speech' argument, online publishers apparently have no right, not to publish troll posts that will damage their publishing business.

And one final point. Because of modern technology, trolls have almost infinitely more freedom, than ever before, to have their tiresome opinions communicated to a mass audience. And yet, they spend much of their time abusing that privilege and falsely claiming that they're being oppressed.

Thanks I’m out.

Have a good offseason everyone.

I can see that most people want me out of the community.

I’ll take a hike.

[Markwebbos]

Hey Mark where is the ignore button, ive been trying to findit for a while. I hope you see this and havent used it already on me !

You have to use the full, non-mobile versión of RWO. Click on the name of the offending poster and it will take you to their page. up the top there’s a button “add to ignore list”

It will make reading RWO a whole lot sweeter

[Markwebbos]

One thought about the non selection of Reid. If he had played Horse would have sent him back in the last 5 minutes of each quarter. And we might have conceded 3 less goals.

[Blood Fever]

Thanks I’m out.

Have a good offseason everyone.

I can see that most people want me out of the community.

I’ll take a hike.

Bon Voyage

[Ralph Dawg]

This would be great sarcasm if you didn’t actually believe it.
Seriously stop telling people how to think and act and make like the Shepard and his sheep and flock off.

I’m standing up for the right of posters to have the individual freedom to express an opinion. This outrageous attempt to sensor and cancel TB is a prime example of cancel culture which Piers Morgan is leading a rearguard action against.

Let TB and all posters have the right to express their opinions. Don’t get too comfortable with government controls.[/QUOTE]
BS, I've tried very hard not to buy into TB v the rest. However, the way he just constantly goes on about Rowbotton is incessant hectoring. We all know how he feels and he knows how most others feel. It would be nice to draw a line in the sand and everyone just moves on.

[O'Reilly Boy]

One thought about the non selection of Reid. If he had played Horse would have sent him back in the last 5 minutes of each quarter. And we might have conceded 3 less goals.

Good call. Those late in the quarter goals are killers. Heeney used to go back too, but I didn't notice that yesterday. McLean was pretty much unsighted yesterday, but it's hard to know watching on TV what patterns he was running.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Heartbreaking stuff. Should’ve won that. My feelings of bitterness about the end did rapidly shift to feeling proud of how the club has performed this year though. What a ride. Next year we would have to be a serious threat for the flag. And we might actually get to be at the game when Buddy kicks 1000, so that’s another bonus! Up the Bloods!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Agent 86]

Gee that was tough…

Very nice summary, O’RB. I’ve been so cranky that I haven’t been able to put perspective on what was a pretty good year in the circumstances.

On Bell, I mostly agree & was saying the same earlier in the year when he was copping it here. He did have a shocker yesterday tho. That miss gave me a headache that hasn’t shifted. He seems to be waiting for permission to get involved - just take it kid, don’t wait! Case in point was when he won a free kick (q3 I think) and was in the perfect spot to take the advantage - but he stopped and waited for ump to call advantage. You ‘take’ the advantage, James - it doesn’t get given to you. Oh, and when you get a kick inside 50 - give it off, you can’t kick straight.

On Ollie, the main area of improvement is making the right decision after doing the hard work. Does some great work, then disappoints on the final kick. I’m not sure he’ll improve much more than what we’ve seen unless he can sort this out - has played enough games to make me think he won’t.

Parker, Hewitt & Hickey were all magnificent. Isaac nearly won us the game. Paps is still a bit selfish at times.

As for the voucher, wait for the Buddy 1,000!

[Industrial Fan]

Interesting! Yes, that does seem to be the case on rewatching the original footage too. Seems C7 commentary may have been describing an alternative reality, again.

OK, that has changed my mind. Could be a fine at most or even no penalty.

different angle changes that quite a bit doesn’t it. Greene is still a complete @@@@, but I wouldn’t want to adjudicate the penalty there.

Not a good look trying to physically intimidate umpires but doesn’t seem the incident it first appeared to be.