Perspective.

[degruch]

Fair enough, and I tend to agree...but it was the way we lost today that gets my goat. We weren't even outplayed for the majority of the game...Sydney just ran with the flow until we cocked up, then bombed it forward. It was like watching early 2000's Richmond *shudders*

[bigcarl]

The Swans form line and ladder position is pretty deceiving. I reckon they were the best team in it last season and probably should have won the GF if you take away some dubious umpiring. Dogs had double the number of frees. That's significant in a close game.

I think they will play finals again this year now they have hit their straps after a stinker of a start.

I wasn't surprised we got rolled yesterday but was a little concerned that we didn't put up more of a fight.

All's not lost though. It's just an indication of how much work still needs to be done.

[Zed]

I disagree with Richo's presser comments to a degree. It wasn't a case of Sydney winning the game because they were too good, it was our horrible turnovers time and time again that actually cost us goals. At least 10 Sydney goals were a direct result of turnovers. That is a massive concern and just screams that we don't have the necessary quality of talent. We are a bunch of average footballers making the most of their average talent. If we are lucky enough to make finals this year and the next few years, turnovers will ultimately stop us from going all the way unless we can bring another 3-4 very classy ball users.

[shrodes]

I disagree with Richo's presser comments to a degree. It wasn't a case of Sydney winning the game because they were too good, it was our horrible turnovers time and time again that actually cost us goals. At least 10 Sydney goals were a direct result of turnovers. That is a massive concern and just screams that we don't have the necessary quality of talent. We are a bunch of average footballers making the most of their average talent. If we are lucky enough to make finals this year and the next few years, turnovers will ultimately stop us from going all the way unless we can bring another 3-4 very classy ball users.

Yeah, I was listening around 3 qtr time on SEN and they said something like 9/12 of Sydney's goals were from turnovers (not sure the number exactly, but it was high).

[WellardSaint]

The creampuff sledging fiasco ruined the preparation for this game, a bad distraction.
Not an excuse, but a reason.
Need to be at your best against a violent, talented team that are drilled with military precision.
How many times did we get caught and pressured, and how many times did they
evade our tackles and find a way out? I'm looking at u, Weller.

And was anybody taking on their #4 who was 10m outside every contest and
who they dished off to with boring predictability?
No?

Not good enough.

[degruch]

I disagree with Richo's presser comments to a degree. It wasn't a case of Sydney winning the game because they were too good, it was our horrible turnovers time and time again that actually cost us goals. At least 10 Sydney goals were a direct result of turnovers. That is a massive concern and just screams that we don't have the necessary quality of talent. We are a bunch of average footballers making the most of their average talent. If we are lucky enough to make finals this year and the next few years, turnovers will ultimately stop us from going all the way unless we can bring another 3-4 very classy ball users.

Yeah, I was listening around 3 qtr time on SEN and they said something like 9/12 of Sydney's goals were from turnovers (not sure the number exactly, but it was high).

I reckon just about all of them would have started with a shank from the wing into our forward line, or being chopped off on the half back flank...we were completely stagnant there with no movement upfield, our principle link man playing deep in the FWD line. I wonder if we couldn't have left Bruce in this week and tried him further upfield...we effectively tinkered with our usual structure anyway, but ran with a far more predictable FWD line.

[The Peanut]

You could almost predict this would happen. We'd been up for 3 big games and we get a bit ahead of ourselves and bang we hit a bit of wall against an oppo prepared to do the hard work (grand finalists too). We are not that ultra-consistent club yet that can win despite not playing its best. But that is the nature of young teams.

Disappointing to lose by so much but we were off today and Sydney were on. STill a lot of development/sifting through our list to go - but that isn't a surprise to me. We had some of our limitations shown to us again today. We are like a shark - if teams stop us moving we tend to die. We need to keep developing backup plans. We don't have a huge load of great ball users who can keep possession under tough presses.

Teams studied us closely as we went up the ladder. Now we need to evolve further. Probably got our structure wrong at the selection table that didn't help. Without Bruce's tank and workrate, Roo and Paddy both struggling, we lacked a strong forward target for our "bomb and lock" strategy. Without Webster it fell back on Joey to try and kick our way out of the back half and that was too heavy a load. Someone like Rice with his good kicking might have been better than Mckenzie.

Swans did a great job shutting down Steven's run which hurt. You can judge if we are likely to win by how much Steven's is allowed to break the lines. Acres got going for a while with some bullocking runs but then went MIA a bit. So we need to keep developing other options and get more consistency across the board. Today felt like a typical blip in effort for a young team that had been up for a while.

This

[The Peanut]

You could almost predict this would happen. We'd been up for 3 big games and we get a bit ahead of ourselves and bang we hit a bit of wall against an oppo prepared to do the hard work (grand finalists too). We are not that ultra-consistent club yet that can win despite not playing its best. But that is the nature of young teams.

Disappointing to lose by so much but we were off today and Sydney were on. STill a lot of development/sifting through our list to go - but that isn't a surprise to me. We had some of our limitations shown to us again today. We are like a shark - if teams stop us moving we tend to die. We need to keep developing backup plans. We don't have a huge load of great ball users who can keep possession under tough presses.

Teams studied us closely as we went up the ladder. Now we need to evolve further. Probably got our structure wrong at the selection table that didn't help. Without Bruce's tank and workrate, Roo and Paddy both struggling, we lacked a strong forward target for our "bomb and lock" strategy. Without Webster it fell back on Joey to try and kick our way out of the back half and that was too heavy a load. Someone like Rice with his good kicking might have been better than Mckenzie.

Swans did a great job shutting down Steven's run which hurt. You can judge if we are likely to win by how much Steven's is allowed to break the lines. Acres got going for a while with some bullocking runs but then went MIA a bit. So we need to keep developing other options and get more consistency across the board. Today felt like a typical blip in effort for a young team that had been up for a while.

This