Rd 2 vs Geelong Cats @ SCG - Match Thread

[i'm-uninformed2]

We demurred- we were in the concourse and probably only about 10 rows back, it took about 5 minutes for the flood of people to clear out of the steps so we could consider and I think we both went "pitch invasion or super spreader event?" and happily harumphed and just enjoyed watching the madness.

There'd been so much tension building up in the area since he'd kicked his 3rd that I think we were just a tad relieved for the pressure release if nothing else!

That’s lovely. And lovely to have you back on the board for the special occasion.

Would you ever consider analysing the modern day Swans through the context of your Davo ratings matrix?

FWIW, I largely feel about JMac these days the way you did about Davo, though I’m not sure JMac will ever match Davo on the guns score.

[Nico]

That was a bizarre part of the game! If I had been a Cats' supporter I would have turned the TV off - sometimes that works! So many gettable shots sprayed here there and everywhere except through the goal sticks. It was a bit reminiscent of our last quarter v GWS is the finals last year - how are they missing shot after shot. We would have been in trouble if they had kicked half of them.

But there was something special about the game as it unfolded. You couldn't have bettered it if you had written a script. In hindsight perhaps protection for Buddy could have been better planned but I am not sure how. Have four burley security guards who were elite sprinters to get to Buddy before the mob, planted behind the goals? Announce over the PA before the game certain protocols, such as no one being allowed on the ground until Buddy was protected or a signal given? Or fans going onto the ground allowed to jog only? Probably wouldn't have worked!! It was in fact the spontaneity of what happened that made it so special. Fortunately none of the worst fears of the wet blanket, 'what if'ers'...., as far as we know, were realised. A great game, so worthy of the occasion.

My observation was that a lot of their errant shots were from a fair way out.

[AB Swannie]

He does ! Only 2 swans had more tackles than Chad last night and i know everyone loves pressure acts so much , he had the most on ground !

He gives 100% both ways and knows no other ways , weird to nit pick after such a tremendous performance by him .

Chad is a star. His attack on the ball and strength through the hips is extraordinary for such a young player. I can't quite work out if he, Gulden, or Juzzy is my favourite. These three plus Rowbottom all bring a different element that makes the sum of the parts very special.

The pressure acts stuff is enormous as it means he is working both ways. Side note: Warner was actually equal first in this stat with Rowbottom (26 pressure acts).

I tend to agree with Liz's assessment about the evenness of our group. Sure, we have our stars but overall, we are not reliant on a few to win us games. Parker, Florent, & Rowbottom were not as strong last night as they were the previous game.

I thought Campbell's game was really promising. His numbers aren't quite there yet but there are glimpses.

JPK had some really nice moments having a much improved game last night. I'm still not convinced with him playing behind the ball as he got burnt for speed a few times (watch the Isaac Smith passage of play where he soccered off the ground and ending up with a shot at goal).

For me, Wicks is still the one who is not taking his chances. I cannot for one minute question his effort but his polish is not there. In response to Bangalore, 2022 is a different year to 2021. Wicks can't afford to go backwards in output when so many others are jumping forward.

[Nico]

I thought Campbell was terrific. Hard at it, beautiful kick, knows where to kick it, fearless, and has great closing speed. Can't wait for him to go into the midfield.

Also, he only had 59% ground time.

[AB Swannie]

BTW, take a bow Callum Mills - kept Dangerfield to 13 possessions while accumulating 29 himself!

[TheBloods]

Chad is a star. His attack on the ball and strength through the hips is extraordinary for such a young player. I can't quite work out if he, Gulden, or Juzzy is my favourite. These three plus Rowbottom all bring a different element that makes the sum of the parts very special.

The pressure acts stuff is enormous as it means he is working both ways. Side note: Warner was actually equal first in this stat with Rowbottom (26 pressure acts).

I tend to agree with Liz's assessment about the evenness of our group. Sure, we have our stars but overall, we are not reliant on a few to win us games. Parker, Florent, & Rowbottom were not as strong last night as they were the previous game.

I thought Campbell's game was really promising. His numbers aren't quite there yet but there are glimpses.

JPK had some really nice moments having a much improved game last night. I'm still not convinced with him playing behind the ball as he got burnt for speed a few times (watch the Isaac Smith passage of play where he soccered off the ground and ending up with a shot at goal).

For me, Wicks is still the one who is not taking his chances. I cannot for one minute question his effort but his polish is not there. In response to Bangalore, 2022 is a different year to 2021. Wicks can't afford to go backwards in output when so many others are jumping forward.

Those 3 are my favourites too , cant pick one over the other . Blakey might be in there soon too ,needs a haircut , but i love a player who can prove me wrong .

[Bangalore Swans]

Because it wasn't relevant in 2021.....and maybe it is now because Wicks is not in great form......and because Parker has always had good forward craft and Paps has always been a small forward, maybe those suggestions aren't actually the revelations you believe them to be?

It was exactly the same idea as 2021. Parker’s forward craft and one one ability would have any small backman on edge.

I think in late 2021 when I proposed the idea the midfield resources were not as deep as they are now. Chad was out in the 2nd half of 2021, Rowbottom was slowed down by injury, Stephen’s was not playing like he is now and Heeney after coming back from his ankle was not playing many midfield minutes. In 2021 Parker was needed more at the midfield coalface.

Now in 2021 we can go in with a forward line of Buddy and McLean as key forwards, Heeney and Hayward as medium forwards and Papley and Parker as small forwards. The only average non mercurial player in that grouping is McLean. Buddy, Hayward, Heeney, Parker, and Papley can all dominate in one on one situations.

You then have a midfield grouping of Florent, J-Mac, Stephens, Mills, Gulden and Chad charging through the middle to deliver the ball to the forwards.

Added to that drive and precision kicking is Blakey and Campbell charging off half back.

What a team!

[SwanSand]

I looked at the stats for this game. We were again better at contested possessions and broke even. Our disposals were better - which have been better than other teams anyways.
Looking at our VFL match stats it seems we have better depth than what I thought we had. But would have liked Angus sheldrick in the VFL match rather than not get any playing time.

We are better at tall defence and we are covering well the loss of Aliir and Dawson with Paddy doing well in intercept marking. I am sure His game is going to go another level in a few weeks

Where can we improve?

Why do we have less f50 entries? For 2 consecutive weeks we had less than 50 f50 entries. With our line breakers and good kickers I would have thought we would have more entries. We were saved by our straight kicking. This strategy is probably not going to work in close games.

Contested possessions - we are certainly better at contested game this year.

Centre bounce work - we need to get better at this. There is changing of the guard this year and I think we will get better at this at the season goes on. However we need some big bulls at times especially against quality opposition

[Ralph Dawg]

I looked at the stats for this game. We were again better at contested possessions and broke even. Our disposals were better - which have been better than other teams anyways.
Looking at our VFL match stats it seems we have better depth than what I thought we had. But would have liked Angus sheldrick in the VFL match rather than not get any playing time.

We are better at tall defence and we are covering well the loss of Aliir and Dawson with Paddy doing well in intercept marking. I am sure His game is going to go another level in a few weeks

Where can we improve?

Why do we have less f50 entries? For 2 consecutive weeks we had less than 50 f50 entries. With our line breakers and good kickers I would have thought we would have more entries. We were saved by our straight kicking. This strategy is probably not going to work in close games.

Contested possessions - we are certainly better at contested game this year.

Centre bounce work - we need to get better at this. There is changing of the guard this year and I think we will get better at this at the season goes on. However we need some big bulls at times especially against quality opposition

I think Lloyd and Rampe looked less composed than usual and along with T McCartain, gifted the Cats some easy goals. Once they become their usual miserly selves, our defence will be impenetrable.

[MattW]

I thought Campbell was terrific. Hard at it, beautiful kick, knows where to kick it, fearless, and has great closing speed. Can't wait for him to go into the midfield.

Also, he only had 59% ground time.

Great description.

[liz]

Why do we have less f50 entries? For 2 consecutive weeks we had less than 50 f50 entries. With our line breakers and good kickers I would have thought we would have more entries. We were saved by our straight kicking. This strategy is probably not going to work in close games.

I think most stats are misleading and/or irrelevant when looked at in isolation, or without further probing. Including the I50 stat.

Not all I50s are equal.

I don't know how much this applies to our last two games, but most teams nowadays are reasonably good at creating repeat entries. That is, when they get the ball into their forward line and it comes out, they are often able to put up a wall and send the ball back in. However, if you create a high quality, deep inside 50 entry the need (and opportunity) to create a repeat entry is lessened. You score instead.

I think we've seen relatively few instances in the last two games of the Swans aimlessly banging the ball into the forward line. Entries have typically been more targeted - and deeper - than we are used to seeing from our team. And certainly more targeted and deeper than our opposition's.

I think we've been comfortably better than our opposition over the last two weeks, using the eye test. I don't think the lower discrepancy between the Swans and their opponents' scoring shots and I50s than in the final scoreboard indicates that the scoreboard flattered us unduly.

[AB Swannie]

Why do we have less f50 entries? For 2 consecutive weeks we had less than 50 f50 entries. With our line breakers and good kickers I would have thought we would have more entries. We were saved by our straight kicking. This strategy is probably not going to work in close games.

I think the inside 50 entry stat is a clunky one and often needs more analysis to check its relevance. Sometimes it does indicate dominance but other times it shows that a team has had a lot of shallow repeat entries. Therefore, I think it is a stat that must be read in conjunction with other possession stats. For yesterday's game, the fact that we had significantly more effective disposals (281 vs 234) and total metres gained (5867 vs 5480) tells me that we have not much to worry about in terms of the forward 50 entry discrepancy.

[SwanSand]

I think most stats are misleading and/or irrelevant when looked at in isolation, or without further probing. Including the I50 stat.

Not all I50s are equal.

I don't know how much this applies to our last two games, but most teams nowadays are reasonably good at creating repeat entries. That is, when they get the ball into their forward line and it comes out, they are often able to put up a wall and send the ball back in. However, if you create a high quality, deep inside 50 entry the need (and opportunity) to create a repeat entry is lessened. You score instead.

I think we've seen relatively few instances in the last two games of the Swans aimlessly banging the ball into the forward line. Entries have typically been more targeted - and deeper - than we are used to seeing from our team. And certainly more targeted and deeper than our opposition's.

I think we've been comfortably better than our opposition over the last two weeks, using the eye test. I don't think the lower discrepancy between the Swans and their opponents' scoring shots and I50s than in the final scoreboard indicates that the scoreboard flattered us unduly.

Completely agree with what you say.
We are lowering our eyes a lot more this year and less Buddy centric than before and we have very good marking targets and players who can negate opposition intercept markers. Then it is our ground ball work in forward 50 and locking it in and scores from that. I am not sure what the stat is for that but we generally do well when Heeney or Papley play well. We need another small forward to step up with pressure and efficiency, and wicks is struggling with the efficiency part of it. And it would be interesting to see how we go when opposition starts intercepting the ball.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Completely agree with what you say.
We are lowering our eyes a lot more this year and less Buddy centric than before and we have very good marking targets and players who can negate opposition intercept markers. Then it is our ground ball work in forward 50 and locking it in and scores from that. I am not sure what the stat is for that but we generally do well when Heeney or Papley play well. We need another small forward to step up with pressure and efficiency, and wicks is struggling with the efficiency part of it. And it would be interesting to see how we go when opposition starts intercepting the ball.

All true. Re your last point, It’s one of the reasons we’re playing three talls, and McLean in particular is getting a game. His ability to be selfless, cover ground, create space for fellow forwards, be a big body under high balls, and keep a defender busy, knowing he can be a good mark and kick for goal, is very good.

I’ve said before, though he will never be a star, I reckon the coaches would love him.

[MattW]

All true. Re your last point, It’s one of the reasons we’re playing three talls, and McLean in particular is getting a game. His ability to be selfless, cover ground, create space for fellow forwards, be a big body under high balls, and keep a defender busy, knowing he can be a good mark and kick for goal, is very good.

I’ve said before, though he will never be a star, I reckon the coaches would love him.

Well said!