Match thread. THE GRAND FINAL!!! Swans v Cats.

[Faunac8]

Hmm James Isaac and Luke appear to be our best centre clearance combination?
Who could have seen that as an option ? Of course we could then revert to smaller bodies like Chad and ???
actually we don’t have the big bodies required to dominate centre clearances which was the reason the Cats won

We had plenty of contributors but no winners on the day

[i'm-uninformed2]

Some really interesting analysis of the centre bounces on Saturday and our mix of players on bigfooty.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2022-grand-final.1332743/post-76814135

Extract from it:

Our five most used centre bounce combinations in order of success rate at winning centre clearance on Grand Final day:
1. Isaac Heeney, Luke Parker & James Rowbottom (four times with a strike rate of 75%)
2. Tom Papley, Luke Parker & James Rowbottom (four times with a strike rate of 50%)
3. Tom Papley, Luke Parker & Chad Warner (eight times with a strike rate of 37.5%*)
4. Errol Gulden, Luke Parker & Chad Warner (three times with a strike rate of 33.3%)
5. Callum Mills, Luke Parker & Chad Warner (four times with a strike rate of 25%)

*This figure is extremely flattered by two late centre clearances won in the last two minutes of the game.

Our mids by number of centre bounces attended in the run of six straight clearance losses in the 3rd term:
Luke Parker/Chad Warner - 5/6
Callum Mills - 3/6
Tom Papley - 2/6
Errol Gulden/Isaac Heeney/James Rowbottom - 1/6

Our mids in order of success rate at centre bounces with a winning centre clearance:
1. Isaac Heeney (62.5%)
2. James Rowbottom (58.3%)
3. Tom Papley (46.7%)
4. Callum Mills (42.9%)
5. Chad Warner (40.9%)
6. Luke Parker (40.7%)
7. Errol Gulden (25%)

What's surprising in that list is how we never paired Warner and Rowbottom at a centre bounce, when they're a natural pairing for each other. Rowbottom is better as a ball winner at round-the-ground stoppages and contested balls than centre bounce clearances (though he's improved on that in the second half of the year) but what he does very well at centre bounces is a lot of the defensive cover and body work to clear space for others and give them the confidence to be offensive. The midfielder we have that most naturally benefits from that sort of work because of his explosive capacity is Warner. Maybe the coaches have seen something over the season to suggest they don't work as well together as instinct tells me, or maybe it was just dumb luck, but I'm still surprised.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

3. Too sociable. How many times do we have to see interstate teams go meekly to the MCG and get slaughtered by a Vic team. I'm thinking WC, Adelaide, Port Adelaide, GWS and now Sydney again! Blind freddy can see a different approach is need. Hawthorns premierships were built on unsociable footy. The swans players needed to be thumping the geelong players. The geelong players never once had to look over their shoulders giving them plenty of confidence. I was at the game and was expecting a melee at the end of the first quarter but the swans were too meek and it never came.

Hawthorns premierships were built on a win at all costs attitude, just one of the side effects of that attitude has featured quite prominently in the papers over the last week.
So while I'd love another Swans flag, but I'd hate to win one and have it tainted.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Fair enough! Not the first to call me paranoid but . . . . .

Actually I didn't call you paranoid, I didn't call anyone paranoid, but the idea of a faceless cabal of media tycoons gathering in their secret death star to plot our demise sounds like the plot to another crap Marvel movie, rather than a plausible scenario.

I don't think anyone here is in any doubt that the deck is stacked against the Swans. The Sydney Cost of Living, the difficulty of attracting players and coaches to a non AFL state, the negative free kick differential that the Swans face every season, having to play the granny on someone else's home ground, the additional travel interstate teams face - I've probably mised some but all of these objectively exist, they are demonstrable, and together they form an extremely effective barrier to a Swans premiership.

[barry]

My 2 cents on why we lost:

1. The Reid/Logan/Mclean disaster. We started with only 21 players in the first quarter and gave up 6 goals. Mclean should have been a straight swap for Reid. Logan stays.
2. Outcoached in the mids. Geelong players were blocking for Dangerfield because they knew where there ruckman would tap it to. Hickey should have been spiking the ball 10-20m out of the square at every chance.
3. We should have appealed the Ladhams suspension. There was nothing to lose, and he would have been a better reid replacement than McLean, and may have solved point 2.
4. Deviation from the normal game prep. Whats the point of putting Paddy McCartin up forward when we havent done it all year, and the ball isnt getting there.

The glaring difference between the two teams is that Geelong prepared for the grand final all season. We seemed to be surprised to make it, and so werent prepared (list wise, or fitness wise). Lets assume we make it every year from now on.

[Roadrunner]

My 2 cents on why we lost:

1. The Reid/Logan/Mclean disaster. We started with only 21 players in the first quarter and gave up 6 goals. Mclean should have been a straight swap for Reid. Logan stays.
2. Outcoached in the mids. Geelong players were blocking for Dangerfield because they knew where there ruckman would tap it to. Hickey should have been spiking the ball 10-20m out of the square at every chance.
3. We should have appealed the Ladhams suspension. There was nothing to lose, and he would have been a better reid replacement than McLean, and may have solved point 2.
4. Deviation from the normal game prep. Whats the point of putting Paddy McCartin up forward when we havent done it all year, and the ball isnt getting there.

The glaring difference between the two teams is that Geelong prepared for the grand final all season. We seemed to be surprised to make it, and so werent prepared (list wise, or fitness wise). Lets assume we make it every year from now on.

Not sure what you mean Barry by your last paragraph-could you please elaborate? I think even a wooden spooner thinks they can make it the following year and prepare accordingly. The Pies finished 17th last year and missed the GF by a cat’s whisker, if you forgive the pun.????

[barry]

Not sure what you mean Barry by your last paragraph-could you please elaborate? I think even a wooden spooner thinks they can make it the following year and prepare accordingly. The Pies finished 17th last year and missed the GF by a cat’s whisker, if you forgive the pun.????

I think Dangerfield is the perfect case-study. He is old, and physically fragile, but they managed his game time and training so that he hit his peak capabilities at the end of September. Because they believed that had the talent and game plan to make finals, and top 4 without him being a major contributor, he was able to build up what was best for him, not necessarily the team. Ditto for many of the older guard like Sellwood, Stewart.
I just dont think the swans played like that. We went out to put our best 22 on the park week in week out. Was buddy cooked by finals time?

I would guess, that in general, with players over 32 their output starts to diminish after they have strung together a dozen games or so.
Chris Scott may have said. "We play a stop start, slow game, because our team is old and cannot keep up with younger frantic teams". Then he realised that frantic ball movement is what wins games. So he thought, how to I get these old farts to play frantic football at there age. The answer was to only make them play frantic football for a dozen of so games of the year, and rotate them so they only play 60-70% game time.

[Blood Fever]

My 2 cents on why we lost:

1. The Reid/Logan/Mclean disaster. We started with only 21 players in the first quarter and gave up 6 goals. Logan and Armartey should have played. Reid and McLean should have not. It destroyed our forward line
2. Outcoached in the mids. Including super weird player positions. For example why was Mills playing in the forward line in the first half with Gulden playing back flank? Weird deviation from the game plan that got them to the final.
3. Too sociable. How many times do we have to see interstate teams go meekly to the MCG and get slaughtered by a Vic team. I'm thinking WC, Adelaide, Port Adelaide, GWS and now Sydney again! Blind freddy can see a different approach is need. Hawthorns premierships were built on unsociable footy. The swans players needed to be thumping the geelong players. The geelong players never once had to look over their shoulders giving them plenty of confidence. I was at the game and was expecting a melee at the end of the first quarter but the swans were too meek and it never came.
4. Deviation from the normal game prep. After the full squad had been involved in every match pre-meeting etc for the entire year, for some weird reason it was decided that the non playing players stay in a different hotel and be completely excluded from the entire prep. Suddenly instead of the team being surrounded by their fellow team mates geeing them up they were put in a bubble with guys like Brett Kirk talking his special brand of crap.

In my view something happened at the coaching/administration level that resulted in the team not preparing properly. They should have maintained their normal approach and positions except with a focus on playing hard, winning the contests and making the opposition hurt.

Take exception to your criticism of Kirk who has been crucial in his development role. Also, easy to sink the boots in after a loss.

[Blood Fever]

Some really interesting analysis of the centre bounces on Saturday and our mix of players on bigfooty.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2022-grand-final.1332743/post-76814135

Extract from it:

Our five most used centre bounce combinations in order of success rate at winning centre clearance on Grand Final day:
1. Isaac Heeney, Luke Parker & James Rowbottom (four times with a strike rate of 75%)
2. Tom Papley, Luke Parker & James Rowbottom (four times with a strike rate of 50%)
3. Tom Papley, Luke Parker & Chad Warner (eight times with a strike rate of 37.5%*)
4. Errol Gulden, Luke Parker & Chad Warner (three times with a strike rate of 33.3%)
5. Callum Mills, Luke Parker & Chad Warner (four times with a strike rate of 25%)

*This figure is extremely flattered by two late centre clearances won in the last two minutes of the game.

Our mids by number of centre bounces attended in the run of six straight clearance losses in the 3rd term:
Luke Parker/Chad Warner - 5/6
Callum Mills - 3/6
Tom Papley - 2/6
Errol Gulden/Isaac Heeney/James Rowbottom - 1/6

Our mids in order of success rate at centre bounces with a winning centre clearance:
1. Isaac Heeney (62.5%)
2. James Rowbottom (58.3%)
3. Tom Papley (46.7%)
4. Callum Mills (42.9%)
5. Chad Warner (40.9%)
6. Luke Parker (40.7%)
7. Errol Gulden (25%)

Interesting. Parker and Warner slipped over a couple of times when about to take possession as well. Might be wrong but I reckon we got caned at centre bounce clearances in 2016 GF as well. Perennial achilles heel.

[Agent 86]

Not sure what you mean Barry by your last paragraph-could you please elaborate? I think even a wooden spooner thinks they can make it the following year and prepare accordingly. The Pies finished 17th last year and missed the GF by a cat’s whisker, if you forgive the pun.[emoji4]

I think Barry is on the mark with his last paragraph. We were clearly not mentally in this ball game from the start. They were simply better prepared and set up perfectly. We were a rabble and never close.

We have some young gun midfielders playing in the 2s that didn’t get much game time & could’ve been useful (just ask TB). We didn’t have a replacement for JPK ready to slot in when needed (for example). We flogged Reid like a dead horse when he (possibly) could’ve been managed? Consistency of the playing group can be a strength - but can also be helpful to blood for some depth when you have a young team.

[Roadrunner]

I think Dangerfield is the perfect case-study. He is old, and physically fragile, but they managed his game time and training so that he hit his peak capabilities at the end of September. Because they believed that had the talent and game plan to make finals, and top 4 without him being a major contributor, he was able to build up what was best for him, not necessarily the team. Ditto for many of the older guard like Sellwood, Stewart.
I just dont think the swans played like that. We went out to put our best 22 on the park week in week out. Was buddy cooked by finals time?

I would guess, that in general, with players over 32 their output starts to diminish after they have strung together a dozen games or so.
Chris Scott may have said. "We play a stop start, slow game, because our team is old and cannot keep up with younger frantic teams". Then he realised that frantic ball movement is what wins games. So he thought, how to I get these old farts to play frantic football at there age. The answer was to only make them play frantic football for a dozen of so games of the year, and rotate them so they only play 60-70% game time.

Fair point, but they won their last 15 games and finished on top in the H&A. Obviously they have enough depth in the squad to enable some rotation without a big drop in quality. Not much point preparing for the GF if you don’t make top 4! We on the other hand don’t have much depth as yet and have a very young team, so we played our best 22 nearly every game- we had to, if we were going to make the 8, let alone top 4.

It was obvious by the time we played the Pies in the prelim we were mentally and physically exhausted. But we didn’t have the luxury of rotation like Geelong did. So yes, you are correct and hopefully next year we will have a lot more depth.

[Blood Fever]

I think Dangerfield is the perfect case-study. He is old, and physically fragile, but they managed his game time and training so that he hit his peak capabilities at the end of September. Because they believed that had the talent and game plan to make finals, and top 4 without him being a major contributor, he was able to build up what was best for him, not necessarily the team. Ditto for many of the older guard like Sellwood, Stewart.
I just dont think the swans played like that. We went out to put our best 22 on the park week in week out. Was buddy cooked by finals time?

I would guess, that in general, with players over 32 their output starts to diminish after they have strung together a dozen games or so.
Chris Scott may have said. "We play a stop start, slow game, because our team is old and cannot keep up with younger frantic teams". Then he realised that frantic ball movement is what wins games. So he thought, how to I get these old farts to play frantic football at there age. The answer was to only make them play frantic football for a dozen of so games of the year, and rotate them so they only play 60-70% game time.

They certainly timed their run perfectly and had their older players peaking at the right time. It's a fine line however- they were lucky to beat Magpies who dominated the game early but kicked poorly for goal. Should have been miles in front and out of reach 0f Cats who only got up right at the end.

[liz]

They certainly timed their run perfectly and had their older players peaking at the right time. It's a fine line however- they were lucky to beat Magpies who dominated the game early but kicked poorly for goal. Should have been miles in front and out of reach 0f Cats who only got up right at the end.

Possibly, though they would likely have made their way to the GF via the long route.

You have to give credit to Scott and his team (through gnarled teeth if needs be). At the end of last season - which itself came after years of having a mature squad and being regular contenders but consistently falling short - they sat down and decided to "work smarter, not harder". We can moan all we like about how Geelong came to have the squad they do, but regardless, the Cats coaching team assessed the benefits and risks of having such a squad and found a way to maximise the benefits and minimise the risks.

They still enjoyed a degree of good fortune in not getting long-term injuries to players pivotal to their game-style. But every premier enjoys a degree of luck, particularly when it comes to injuries.

Given the Cats' PF loss last year was as bad as our GF loss this year (but arguably without any of the mitigating factors), there's a blueprint for Longmire and his team to reflect on once they have had a few days to licks their wounds. What are the benefits and risks associated with the squad he has at hand, and can any of those risks be offset in the upcoming trade period? If not, how can they work over the pre-season to improve next year's chances.

The solution will be different to the one the Cats employed this year because the make-up of the squad is different. And there are no guarantees it will bring us success next year, or even within the next few days. But the blueprint is there to reflect and change, rather than just assume natural development of the younger players will bring all the necessary change.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Fair point, but they won their last 15 games and finished on top in the H&A. Obviously they have enough depth in the squad to enable some rotation without a big drop in quality. Not much point preparing for the GF if you don’t make top 4! We on the other hand don’t have much depth as yet and have a very young team, so we played our best 22 nearly every game- we had to, if we were going to make the 8, let alone top 4.

It was obvious by the time we played the Pies in the prelim we were mentally and physically exhausted. But we didn’t have the luxury of rotation like Geelong did. So yes, you are correct and hopefully next year we will have a lot more depth.

This is all very true, and then there are additional layers.

I saw one article somewhere over the weekend that when Dangerfield was injured in rd9 or 10, he was technically ready to resume in rd 12, but they held him out to rd15 to give him a serious training block.

I also remember seeing David King speak about this in the lead up - which was how much rest Geelong's mids got via rotations vs ours. Our main four of Mills, Parker, Chad and Warner played far more game time than their Cats compatriots, because Geelong had more midefield depth but also has flexibility in its squad. For example, he points out their rucks can interchange from on the ball to behind the ball and take a bit of down time rather than a rotation, which can then be used on a midfielder. In short, it meant our blokes averaged one rotation a quarter vs their two.

These two articles expand on it, but it provides some additional explanation on why our blokes looked cooked by comparison.


“That is a huge advantage”: The surprising way Geelong achieves “ridiculous” final quarter dominance

AFL Grand Final 2022 preview: Geelong Cats vs Sydney Swans, MCG, match-ups, analysis, strengths, weakness, statistics

[Roadrunner]

I think Barry is on the mark with his last paragraph. We were clearly not mentally in this ball game from the start. They were simply better prepared and set up perfectly. We were a rabble and never close.

We have some young gun midfielders playing in the 2s that didn’t get much game time & could’ve been useful (just ask TB). We didn’t have a replacement for JPK ready to slot in when needed (for example). We flogged Reid like a dead horse when he (possibly) could’ve been managed? Consistency of the playing group can be a strength - but can also be helpful to blood for some depth when you have a young team.

Hard to make changes to a winning team when there are no injuries. Managing an in-form Reid by bringing in McLean or Amartey is a huge drop in quality which we couldn’t realistically afford- shame his injury came at the worst time. Bringing in Gus or any other raw player also a risk, despite TB’s calls. We have no obvious replacement for Joey at this stage as far as I’m aware. We could have rested Ramps and brought in Gould for a few games but that’s about it.

We don’t have true depth yet- will be better next year and beyond. That’s why realistically we weren’t supposed to challenge for the flag this year. Credit to the boys as we made it to the granny.