AFLW Round 8: Sydney Swans v Essendon 3.10pm AEDT Sat 15 Oct 2022 Ikon Park

[Meg]

Three Swans’ players in the coaches’ votes.

VOTES PLAYER (CLUB)

10 Sophie Alexander (ESS)
6 Sofia Hurley (SYD)
6 Madison Prespakis (ESS)
3 Stephanie Cain (ESS)
3 Bonnie Toogood (ESS)
1 Paige Sheppard (SYD)
1 Lexi Hamilton (SYD)

[bloodspirit]

We have also used other factors to draw players here e.g. offering or finding them employment.

Brooke Lochland cited her desire to be near the beach as one reason she came to Sydney.

Totally agree Ham and Hurley are excellent selections who we are lucky to have recruited. I would say that Cynthia Hamilton, our home-grown talent (from Queanbeyan), is just as good.

[aardvark]

Apparently the AFL have admitted Molly Eastman's shot for goal in the third quarter was a goal not a point. Swans probably should have won the game.

[Meg]

Apparently the AFL have admitted Molly Eastman's shot for goal in the third quarter was a goal not a point. Swans probably should have won the game.

[emoji2368]

[bloodspirit]

Apparently the AFL have admitted Molly Eastman's shot for goal in the third quarter was a goal not a point. Swans probably should have won the game.

!!!!

That sucks! Should have been our first ever win. Would have been Molly's first ever goal. All the players thought it was a goal at the time.

[mcs]

https://twitter.com/DanielCherny/status/1582242279091503110?t=16s3QFdVtMSnw9WazcNOlA&s=19

Thought it looked clearly a goal watching telecast, but this reverse angle shows it truly was a howler of a call.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Mel_C]

Apparently the AFL have admitted Molly Eastman's shot for goal in the third quarter was a goal not a point. Swans probably should have won the game.

I just saw behind the goal footage of the kick on the news and it clearly went through the goals without hitting the post. It was the same angle the goal umpire would have been standing, so I don't know how she couldn't see it was a goal. The players were certain it was a goal. I was listening to the game on the radio and they called it a goal and were surprised when it was awarded a point.

Thanks for the apology AFL ????. It most probably cost us our first win.

[ootf]

The goal umpire involved saw the post wobble (poorly positioned looking along the line, wasn't the first time) and called a behind - unfortunately it was from a defender bumping into it. :-( If you watch the footage, the field umpire initially signals 'goal' then changes on the goal umpire call.
Disappointing for the team given their performance, perhaps last chance for a win this season on Saturday against the Dockers.

As others have mentioned, Triple H (Ham Hurley and Hamilton) looking good - and Paige Sheppard at 160cms doesn't shirk the midfield contests (15 possessions/4 tackles v Bombers).

It will be interesting to see what happens post season. Will the Swans retain a large part of the current squad to build on this year or will there be a major refresh?

[mcs]

The goal umpire involved saw the post wobble (poorly positioned looking along the line, wasn't the first time) and called a behind - unfortunately it was from a defender bumping into it. :-( If you watch the footage, the field umpire initially signals 'goal' then changes on the goal umpire call.
Disappointing for the team given their performance, perhaps last chance for a win this season on Saturday against the Dockers.

As others have mentioned, Triple H (Ham Hurley and Hamilton) looking good - and Paige Sheppard at 160cms doesn't shirk the midfield contests (15 possessions/4 tackles v Bombers).

It will be interesting to see what happens post season. Will the Swans retain a large part of the current squad to build on this year or will there be a major refresh?

Will be interesting to see what we do. I suspect it will be a case of doing all we can to maintain the main key core (The Triple H + a few others), then refresh some parts from there - but without drastic surgery if we can avoid it.

We seemed to take a strategy of trying to give a lot of players on the fringe 'a chance' in the first season. I suspect the intent there is to find a few diamonds in the rough, recognising not all will pay off or be good enough long term - but noting we can go to the draft to continue to build the core going forward, and we can gradually shape the list around that, while still giving some of those other players a couple of seasons to show whether they can make it or not at the top level.

[bloodspirit]

Apparently the AFL have admitted Molly Eastman's shot for goal in the third quarter was a goal not a point. Swans probably should have won the game.

Goal-umpiring error cost Swans in loss to Dons: AFL (womens.afl)

[Meg]

Interesting analysis of the improvements shown by the Swans in Saturday’s game.

“IT HAS been a tough induction to the AFLW for Sydney. ……………. but energy is up in the Swans camp …………… they seem to have turned a corner.’

https://www.womens.afl/news/110426

[707]

What a dreadfully amateurish incorrect score call. May well have robbed us of our first victory which was deserved, grrrr

[aardvark]

Will be interesting to see what we do. I suspect it will be a case of doing all we can to maintain the main key core (The Triple H + a few others), then refresh some parts from there - but without drastic surgery if we can avoid it.

I'm willing to bet we are already talking to the next top Victorian draft picks to see who's interested in Sydney Uni and a unit at the beach, similar to what we did with Hurley and Hams. I also reckon we're in line for a priority pick or two. Our pick one will be of interest to all Vic clubs so a trade might be happening for an A Grader as well. If we manage the next 6 months well I can see us being very competitive next year. Only guessing but we'd be due a few decent players out of the Academy sometime soon I'd reckon.

[The Big Cat]

Goal-umpiring error cost Swans in loss to Dons: AFL (womens.afl)

Absolute and utter rubbish speculation. It was in the third quarter for goodness sake! The ball would have gone back to the centre and not kicked out. Swans could have lost by ten goals after that. Who knows.

I get frustrated with commentators (and barrackers) that they can't see that one event impacts on the next. Had the kick in question been taken on, or after, the final siren then a result can be safely assumed.

BTW, cricket commentators are the worst. A catch is dropped and the batsmen run a quick single and the new batsman then gets bowled. "He should have two wickets," some idiot commentator yells.

[liz]

The article doesn’t claim that the mistake cost the Swans victory, merely that it cost them in the game. Which clearly it did. It cost them five points.

As always, however, it is easy to fixate on particularly bad mistakes. (And clearly this was a particularly bad mistake from the goal umpire.) There was another blatant error when Ham wasn’t penalised for a clear cut HTB decision when she was trying to run the ball out of defence. That would have given the Bombers a shot at goal about 30m out. Though I don’t recall how play unfolded after that - ie whether they got a shot in the immediate passage of play anyway.