Autopsy Swans vs Roos Rd 7 2018

[connolly]

Yes I watched yesterdays NEAFL game live thanks to youtube
Yes I've played and still play football, highest level being vfl although not currently
I'm currently employed as a PT and sport scientist and have had work experience at a Melbourne based AFL club
I see the development of players on a weekly basis and it's more than just skill and fitness. There's work ethic, mental space and clarity all involved. You'd be surprised at how many players struggle with certain issues you'd never know about. All of this has to be managed as a collective and the team that gets put out on the park is picked accordingly. It's not as simple as putting whoevers name on the board at selection.
And no a persons age doesn't make their opinion more entitled, nor does it devalue the opinion of someone who is younger

You completely misunderstood your own insult. I was replying to your sledge of "sooking" not claiming my opinion had greater weight due to longevity. Your CV had this old noggin slowly shaking at the "sports scientist" bit. As in Galileo mate? If you are going to construct a straw man at least try and make it consistent with your own insult. Thanks for the inside information that teams are not just picked by putting the names of the players on a board. I never knew that. And thanks champion for the condescension - it helps so much to get by on that awful entitlement called the pension.

 

[HeeneyGT]

Genuine question - what would you do if you were in Horse's shoes right now?

There is not much the coach at this point. If he goes hard at them he might looe the group and we havent got a coach who does that.

He just needs to keep doing what we have, as proved last week against Geelong we can play to the game plan.

Footy in 2018 is about pressuring the ball carrier and not much you can do about it when players keep shanking and stuffing up simple skills.

Dropping players will zap the confidence of the team.

We are lucky to have the kind of coach we have. Seriously after watching them a few times live this year our skills would be a lot more terrible under some of the crappier coaches.

 

[Jack2Jack]

Convert a handful of those misses we win, we most certainly do........we win an ugly, putrid game of football and mask over cracks. It should never have been at the point where 2 or 3 misses was the difference between a win and a loss....we happily played into an ugly, defensive dogfight that always is going to leave the door open for lessor teams.
The skills (or lack thereof)were/are a result of a game we like to play into. Players tighten up around the sticks because every-shot is just so god damn crucial because we have to grind so hard and work overtime just to bloody create one. Whereas the opposition often only has to do half the work to get the shot right back, because we play into their hands with sideways garbage that would hardly concern even the most mediocre coaches like B. Scott.
Our often superior inside 50 stats reflect that (yet in nearly every game we have less scoring shots), the way we bring the ball into the forward line is far less threatening than a lot of other teams, who only need half the inside 50's for the same result. That is partly on player execution but largely on game-style, we do not have the kicking skills to play a slow pinpointing retention game....a lot of our players would have far superior skills playing a different system (as most have shown in previous seasons, like early 16 when we tried to attack and move the ball quicker).

We have the talent on the list to play a more proactive game-style that generates enthusiasm/momentum among the group and the home crowd (we sometimes show this when we fall 5 goals down and start taking a few risks). Other teams should worry about US and how to stop US, yet we choose to stifle ourselves and we're playing a completely reactive setup to a team(s) with half the talent.

 

[zyzzbruh]

You completely misunderstood your own insult. I was replying to your sledge of "sooking" not claiming my opinion had greater weight due to longevity. Your CV had this old noggin slowly shaking at the "sports scientist" bit. As in Galileo mate? If you are going to construct a straw man at least try and make it consistent with your own insult. Thanks for the inside information that teams are not just picked by putting the names of the players on a board. I never knew that. And thanks champion for the condescension - it helps so much to get by on that awful entitlement called the pension.

I tell people which and at what time to have their protein shakes, and study their strengths and weaknesses using fancy equipment, hardly rocket science but thanks ill proudly take the nobel prize. you are the one with the notion of skills being the fault of the coach and giving me all this jolly swagman fancy old sayings trying to make your insults sound all gentleman like. All im saying is everyone is jumping to unnecessary and unjust conclusions

 

[RUNVS]

You see, I don’t think we have a strong list overall. It may get that way at some point but we are not there.

Our best 22 is as good as any, but once we start to lose a few, our depth is very shallow.

At the moment we have too many bottom 6 types which includes those talented younger players that aren’t quite mature enough to have consistent performances.

Look at the team last night: Jack, Marsh, Ronke, Rohan, Florent, Towers, Cunningham, Fox probably McVeigh and even Hayward (who played well but at his stage of development should be bottom 6 in a premiership contending side).

They are imo all bottom 6 types and currently we have around 9-10 of them with only bottom 6 types (at best) in a similar position to replace them.

We did have a strong list though, we had a strong list in 2014, 2015 and 2016 and Longmire did **** all with it. He gave us a gameplan that failed, and he has not changed that gameplan in the slightest.

 

[bedford]

I tell people which and at what time to have their protein shakes, and study their strengths and weaknesses using fancy equipment, hardly rocket science but thanks ill proudly take the nobel prize. you are the one with the notion of skills being the fault of the coach and giving me all this jolly swagman fancy old sayings trying to make your insults sound all gentleman like. All im saying is everyone is jumping to unnecessary and unjust conclusions

You wouldn't know, sports scientists are one of the problems , we need footballers

 

[connolly]

I tell people which and at what time to have their protein shakes, and study their strengths and weaknesses using fancy equipment, hardly rocket science but thanks ill proudly take the nobel prize. you are the one with the notion of skills being the fault of the coach and giving me all this jolly swagman fancy old sayings trying to make your insults sound all gentleman like. All im saying is everyone is jumping to unnecessary and unjust conclusions

Its good to have a lab technician on board mate.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Horse really is a bit of a mule.

 

[RW]

Reminder to those people on the board who have strong opinions: Robust debate is always encouraged, but keep the focus on the issues instead of the poster.

 

[zyzzbruh]

We did have a strong list though, we had a strong list in 2014, 2015 and 2016 and Longmire did **** all with it. He gave us a gameplan that failed, and he has not changed that gameplan in the slightest.

As much as it burns that we didn't win 2016, only 1 team can win the premiership. So you must admit he's ok to get us to the grand final, but cause we lost he's cooked? If anything our success has come out of the blue and technically wasn't even a strong squad. Half of it was made out of rookies yet he got them this far

 

[zyzzbruh]

Its good to have a lab technician on board mate.

Cheers Connolly, I'm glad we've settled our indifferences

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

As much as it burns that we didn't win 2016, only 1 team can win the premiership. So you must admit he's ok to get us to the grand final, but cause we lost he's cooked? If anything our success has come out of the blue and technically wasn't even a strong squad. Half of it was made out of rookies yet he got them this far

Grundy, Rampe, Kennedy, Hanners, Tippett(first half of the year) all had career best seasons then you add Heeney and Mills who had just about the best first year season of a player i have seen.

Papley with a breakout year kicked 30 something goals you can see why we made a GF.

 

[zyzzbruh]

Grundy, Rampe, Kennedy, Hanners, Tippett(first half of the year) all had career best seasons then you add Heeney and Mills who had just about the best first year season of a player i have seen.

Papley with a breakout year kicked 30 something goals you can see why we made a GF.

and half of them came off the rookie list. the coaches must be doing something right if we can develop players the way we have

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

and half of them came off the rookie list. the coaches must be doing something right if we can develop players the way we have

Absolutely our development is sensational to get the most out of them.

 

[SilentHunter_]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-05-06/afl-gives-the-ok-to-controversial-goals

Hahahaha expected.

 

[DavyRed]

Apparently nothing wrong with the McVeigh touch 'non-review' decision. From the AFL website:

Hartung's opening-term goal looked to be touched off the boot by Swans veteran Jarrad McVeigh, but neither the field nor the goal umpire called for a review. ​

As is the process with every goal, the score review official looked at the vision before play was restarted.

However, despite the ball appearing to be touched, the goal was not overturned.

A league spokesman told AFL.com.au the vision was inconclusive.

"There was not enough definitive evidence to overrule and change the decision in time before the restart of play, so the original decision stood."

Nothing to see, move along!!!

 

[TheMase]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-05-06/afl-gives-the-ok-to-controversial-goals

Hahahaha expected.

What a load of shit

 

[SilentHunter_]

What a load of shit

Incorruptible AFL at it again!

 

[grimlock]

I reckon what happened was that they were still looking at it when the ball was bounced. The explanation here is classic post-hoc backing up of their officials.

The real failure was that the field umpires refusing to refer to the video based on the belief that all goals are reviewed anyway.

 

[bedford]

What a load of shit

Like the frees to Ben Brown , not his fault , comes across as a good bloke.

 

[SilentHunter_]

Like the frees to Ben Brown , not his fault , comes across as a good bloke.

First time I have seen a FF get frees for being clumsy.

 

[Mick Oxlong]

Genuine question - what would you do if you were in Horse's shoes right now?

Probably play with my giant ****!

 

[Kimbo]

Here's where we lost it: our forwards who are usually good for the odd single goal every so often.
Heeney, Jack, Paps, Ronke, Rohan, Florent.
0 goals 9 behinds. Lose by 2 points.
That's it right there folks. 58 inside 50s to 48.

Just convert.

Equally, Brown (1.2), Dumont (0.1), Anderson (0.1), Clarke (0.1), Ziebell (0.4), Atley (0.1), Turner (0.1), Zurhaar (0.1) 1 goal, 12 behinds.

Neither side took their chances last night.

That said it was a game of pressure and perceived pressure, so perhaps understandable.

 

[MarkP]

Genuine question - what would you do if you were in Horse's shoes right now?

Unfair question.

Horse will not do anything different.

To be honest this whole discussion is po

Equally, Brown (1.2), Dumont (0.1), Anderson (0.1), Clarke (0.1), Ziebell (0.4), Atley (0.1), Turner (0.1), Zurhaar (0.1) 1 goal, 12 behinds.

Neither side took their chances last night.

That said it was a game of pressure and perceived pressure, so perhaps understandable.

Yep.

Lots of weird stuff projected on hete.

Norf were useless. We were worse.

If norf were basically competanc in that game they win by 60.

There are bigger structural issues at the heart of our problems.

 

[RUNVS]

Probably play with my giant ****!

I think that is all he does during the week.