Is the strategy too physically (and mentally) taxing?

Sainternist · Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:29am

This ultra-defensive brand of football could be starting to take its toll on the players. We just can't seem to put the opposition away. The game plan is too negative. They seem to have forgotten how to attack with efficiency. The players also look very uninspired by it all.

I for one am farking bored with watching it. I just can't see it working for another year.

Please Ross, can we move on... please!

Thoughts?

Marchin' In · Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:32am

Fair post, this defensive gameplan is something Rossy has inherited from Roos and it worked in 08/09 and parts of 10, but it doesn't anymore. Paul Roos had the guts to move away from his own gameplan, which the Swans followed for 5 years, so Ross needs to change too.

degruch · Post: # 1055182Post **degruch** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:34am

We didn't look overly defensive tonight IMO. I think we're struggling with the transition to be honest, but 1st and 4th quarters we ran hard into the F50, just didn't convert.

bobmurray · Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:35am

The game plan is not the only thing that needs to evolve...so does the list ..so does the team...the only thing the draw did was stop us being 0-3 at the bye.

BigMart · Post: # 1055187Post **BigMart** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:37am

Just a tad.....

Fwds play as mids and fwds

Mids play as defenders and mids

Defenders......they have it a bit easier....all 12 of them

Sainternist · Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:43am

bobmurray wrote:the only thing the draw did was stop us being 0-3 at the bye.

hey, my post may have had a dash of pessimism, but not the extent of throwing in the towel next week.

Sam23 · Post: # 1055214Post **Sam23** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:52am

Didn't we kick 13.17 tonight.

30 scoring shots.

Certainly weren't that defensive tonight.

SainterK · Post: # 1055216Post **SainterK** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 12:53am

Sam23 wrote:Didn't we kick 13.17 tonight.

30 scoring shots.

Certainly weren't that defensive tonight.

Thank you!

Sainternist · Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:07am

SainterK wrote:
Sam23 wrote:Didn't we kick 13.17 tonight.

30 scoring shots.

Certainly weren't that defensive tonight.
Thank you!

13 goals 17 behinds is a product from a defensive mindset. The delivery into the forward line, for the most part, was attrocious. The players seem weighed down and have forgotten how to go into a game with a fully pronged attack.

SainterK · Post: # 1055257Post **SainterK** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:07am

Sainternist wrote:
SainterK wrote:
Sam23 wrote:Didn't we kick 13.17 tonight.

30 scoring shots.

Certainly weren't that defensive tonight.
Thank you!
13 goals 17 behinds is a product from a defensive mindset. The delivery into the forward line, for the most part, was attrocious. The players seem weighed down and have forgotten how to go into a game with a fully pronged attack.

It was better than last week, and you just hope it's better again next week.

degruch · Post: # 1055259Post **degruch** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:08am

Sainternist wrote:
SainterK wrote:
Sam23 wrote:Didn't we kick 13.17 tonight.

30 scoring shots.

Certainly weren't that defensive tonight.
Thank you!
13 goals 17 behinds is a product from a defensive mindset. The delivery into the forward line, for the most part, was attrocious. The players seem weighed down and have forgotten how to go into a game with a fully pronged attack.

I think you'll find a stack of them were set shots...not hacked out of the pocket, but clean shots at goal that went everywhere. We didn't look very defensive tonight to me.

hungry for a premiership · Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:11am

We ARE moving on. The game style HAS changed. Its more multi-pronged in attack. It's just that it doesn't happen overnight. You'll see, we'll get the balance right soon.

Sainternist · Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:15am

hungry for a premiership wrote:It's just that it doesn't happen overnight. You'll see, we'll get the balance right soon.

hahaha... heard that one before.

but you're right in most respects. we're moving on because we'll have to. looks like patience will be required again. another 45 years...

dcstkfc · Post: # 1055270Post **dcstkfc** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:17am

SainterK wrote:
Sam23 wrote:Didn't we kick 13.17 tonight.

30 scoring shots.

Certainly weren't that defensive tonight.
Thank you!

We drew tonight because we didn't take our chances, and their run and spread made us pay for our turnovers. First will happen sometimes, second is going to get more common as teams figure us out and copy Collingwood.

vacuous space · Sat 02 Apr 2011 1:26am

I don't understand why Ross is so resistant to playing more runners. You watch the teams that had the most success in week one and it was the teams that played runners everywhere and rested mids in their forward lines (as well as the shortened bench) that had the most success. Ross seems determined to use the bench his way and lean hard on his best players in the centre. Accept the interchange rule has made it even more of a runners game and bring in more of them.

FWIW, I wouldn't drop Gram. I'd put him in the centre and tell him to win his own ball. If he doesn't do that, he's out. A quick kick out of the centre is more damaging than a high floater off the wings. Let Joey, Dal, BJ and Schneider do more of the outside work - they're much better at it.

bobmurray · Post: # 1055372Post **bobmurray** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 7:46am

Sainternist wrote:
hungry for a premiership wrote:It's just that it doesn't happen overnight. You'll see, we'll get the balance right soon.
hahaha... heard that one before.

but you're right in most respects. we're moving on because we'll have to. looks like patience will be required again. another 45 years...

I dont have that long left

Toy Saint · Post: # 1055378Post **Toy Saint** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 8:20am

Yes, the game plan is too physically and mentally taxing. It's also aweful to watch.

We have a lot of players with fantastic skills, let them go out and have fun, and take the game on.

If we go man vs man against most teams, we should win.

Our team appears to lack pace because they are forced to run all over the ground, the Lyon game plan requires marathon runners.

If Ross the boss was a racehorse trainer, he'd probably train Black Caviar for the Melbourne Cup or the Grand National.

We need to loose our slow defensive minded "role" players, and replace them with younger risk takers.

bergholt · Post: # 1055385Post **bergholt** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 8:36am

Toy Saint wrote:We need to loose our slow defensive minded "role" players, and replace them with younger risk takers.

...and guarantee a whole pile of losses. if changes are necessary then it's about incremental - we don't just jump into a completely different gameplan next week.

roosy also has something to contribute here:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/h ... 6032213004

cwrcyn · Post: # 1055387Post **cwrcyn** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 8:47am

No doubt in my mind that players are tired, sore and drained from the hard yards put in for the past three seasons. The problem is that it's almost the exactly same bunch of guys. If we had some young, fresh legs in the mix it might freshen up the team and give them a new focus. It would add some much needed unpredicability to the team

You can't keep expecting the same group to run themselves into the ground all the time, particularly with a punishing game style they play.

.

SainterK · Post: # 1055627Post **SainterK** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 2:04pm

Our gameplan this year has been nothing like last years.

Con Gorozidis · Sun 03 Apr 2011 12:15am

Marchin' In wrote:Fair post, this defensive gameplan is something Rossy has inherited from Roos and it worked in 08/09 and parts of 10, but it doesn't anymore. Paul Roos had the guts to move away from his own gameplan, which the Swans followed for 5 years, so Ross needs to change too.

agree. we need to refresh the playing group. re-invigorate. or we will just decay and then crumble. decay and crumble tends to happen quickly and with punctuation as well. its not a steady decline. so u need to change direction because there tends to be a cliff rather than a steady decline to the valley of the footy world.

Teflon · Post: # 1056406Post **Teflon** » Sun 03 Apr 2011 10:09pm

vacuous space wrote:I don't understand why Ross is so resistant to playing more runners. You watch the teams that had the most success in week one and it was the teams that played runners everywhere and rested mids in their forward lines (as well as the shortened bench) that had the most success. Ross seems determined to use the bench his way and lean hard on his best players in the centre. Accept the interchange rule has made it even more of a runners game and bring in more of them.

FWIW, I wouldn't drop Gram. I'd put him in the centre and tell him to win his own ball. If he doesn't do that, he's out. A quick kick out of the centre is more damaging than a high floater off the wings. Let Joey, Dal, BJ and Schneider do more of the outside work - they're much better at it.

Great post total agreement.

I too think the sub rule has meant more runners are needed. Some suggestion that as the game opens up later when players are tired,we will struggle to keepour closed game style in shape.

Con Gorozidis · Sun 03 Apr 2011 10:55pm

bergholt wrote:
Toy Saint wrote:We need to loose our slow defensive minded "role" players, and replace them with younger risk takers.
...and guarantee a whole pile of losses. if changes are necessary then it's about incremental - we don't just jump into a completely different gameplan next week.

roosy also has something to contribute here:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/h ... 6032213004

everything roosy said there was true but it is dangerous territory if ross is telling himself hes done everything right and only luck cost him therefore he should stick to his guns. thats poor logic. For the record i think he DID do everything right and luck DID cost him.

But thats done now. He now has to focus on the right game plan for 2011/12. Would be fools logic to think that that poor luck is still relevant to this year.