Official Richmond Vs Sydney Swines gameday thread

[gustiger12]

One thing that did disappoint me yesterday was that we had a number of players who were prepared to sit off a contest and wait for the easy ball rather than going to assist a team mate. Saw this on a number of occassion and it often resulted in the Swans having numbers at the contest while we had too many outrides. This was a worrying sign for me. It ok if we have the ball or numbers at the ball but we had neither.

 

[gustiger12]

According to AFL.com not one of our players had 20 possessions or more. It would be a while since that has happened.

 

[mb64]

According to AFL.com not one of our players had 20 possessions or more. It would be a while since that has happened.

Particularly with the way the game is now played.

 

[Crystal]

Petts took a great mark though..sad that you chose to overlook that particular effort.

Wow.

1 flashy thing against 0 1%ers.
Thats why he is what he is, a downhill skier.

Yes its all Pettifer's fault. We all know he can't tackle, but great oportunity to kick the boots in. Good stuff.

Cheers

Spare me your bleeding heart FFS!

The bloke has no defensive game at all,tackling,second efforts,physical pressure nothing.
Are you are a subscriber to the every player is not worthy of criticism mantra are you?
Geez,I thought you had more to offer than that Good one.
Cheers indeed.

Touchy there. I just dont subscribe to Pettifer bag posts every single week. I agree he has a very poor defensive game. Many forward players do. And no I cant see him ever being a leader of the club. However from an attacking pont of view he has presented very well this year.

And cut out the swearing, not needed.

Cheers

Pettifer can't tackle. We all know that. But geez he took some fantastic gutsy marks yesterday, busted his gut the entire game and kicked a couple of goals. As I've said countless times now, he struggles with mental fitness and you can read his face like a book (although he is improving which is great to see). That's his weakness and until he can overcome it and stop mentally torturing himself he will continue to play a poor defensive game. Plus he's desperately missing Browny (as we all are). So back off Petts!! ALL OF YOU!!!

 

[AcKeR]

With such an inexperienced back-line yesterday, what was wrong with putting Stafford floating across our half back, placing Richo onto Hall, Bowden in the forward line with Cleeve and Pets. We just seemed to have plan A and not a plan B

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Does anyone think that when the Swans opened up a lead the boys backed off a little from the attacking game style and went back to playing defensive football?

 

[Anduril]

Only in the first quarter.
After that they busted their little buns.

 

[Tubytiger]

With such an inexperienced back-line yesterday, what was wrong with putting Stafford floating across our half back, placing Richo onto Hall, Bowden in the forward line with Cleeve and Pets. We just seemed to have plan A and  not a plan B

Stafford turns like the titanic now and would be of no use drifting accross the HB line - Hall would of been too good for Richo (he isnt a backman) and Bowden would of had little input up forward. One thing i did notice yesterday was when we were coming into the forward line from a run we held the ball too long and didnt use the first option of a leading forward. By the time the running player kicked the ball it was usually to the advantage of Sydney because our guys were by then out of position.

We were up against it yesterday full on, too many senior players out and the kids were found out agains a totally professional unit that had no mercy. Usually when teams get that far ahead they liarise a bit but not Sydney. I just hope the younger guys keep this in the memory bank for when our time comes - it was a lesson in football.

 

[AcKeR]

With such an inexperienced back-line yesterday, what was wrong with putting Stafford floating across our half back, placing Richo onto Hall, Bowden in the forward line with Cleeve and Pets. We just seemed to have plan A and not a plan B

Stafford turns like the titanic now and would be of no use drifting accross the HB line - Hall would of been too good for Richo (he isnt a backman) and Bowden would of had little input up forward. One thing i did notice yesterday was when we were coming into the forward line from a run we held the ball too long and didnt use the first option of a leading forward. By the time the running player kicked the ball it was usually to the advantage of Sydney because our guys were by then out of position.

Agreed with your comment about Richo, but Stafford is a big body and could fill holes, would'nt have to manouver that much as long as he made a contest. Bowden has played forward before

 

[Tubytiger]

With such an inexperienced back-line yesterday, what was wrong with putting Stafford floating across our half back, placing Richo onto Hall, Bowden in the forward line with Cleeve and Pets. We just seemed to have plan A and  not a plan B

Stafford turns like the titanic now and would be of no use drifting accross the HB line - Hall would of been too good for Richo (he isnt a backman) and Bowden would of had little input up forward. One thing i did notice yesterday was when we were coming into the forward line from a run we held the ball too long and didnt use the first option of a leading forward. By the time the running player kicked the ball it was usually to the advantage of Sydney because our guys were by then out of position.

Agreed with your comment about Richo, but Stafford is a big body and could fill holes, would'nt have to manouver that much as long as he made a contest. Bowden has played forward before

Yer AdKer but the way the ball was coming down to their forward line would of made Stafford a witches hat mate. Agree Bowden has played forward before but we needed to keep some structure once we lost Kelloway and Hall. Whichever way we went mate i dont think it would of made much difference in the end.

 

[AcKeR]

Yep, with my plan B we probably would have lost by 117pts

 

[Tubytiger]

Yep, with my plan B we probably would have lost by 117pts

Na mate - dont get me wrong im not bagging you at all. All im saying is that we were on a hiding to nothing yesterday. Keep up the alternatives - it is great to think of alternatives but unfortunately yesterday we were too up against it mate.

 

[happytige]

Only just got home from Melbourne and have skimmed through this thread.

My thoughts:

There were bad vibes about this match form the word go.

Hall and Kellaway being out was a huge problem, not only because they are both have effective defensive skills, but also because in their absence, there was little leadership in the backline.

I watched Will Thursfield play his early games last year and it was obvious that he was being guided by Mark Graham, Gas. Chaff and Andy Kellaway. These players might be all past their prime but they were able to support and encourage the new boy and protect him from the sort of savaging that the young boys suffered against the Swans army.yesterday. All our backline was drowning, so poor old Luke McGuane was really thrown to the wolves, with only Joel to encourage him......I felt sick when O'Loughlin got his first goal. I think it was most unwise of Terry Wallace to leave Luke on the backline for the game. He did his best, but i fear for what it might have done to his confidence. Talk about a sacrificial lamb!

The Dome is so unforgiving....our boys never stopped trying, but Sydney were so much stronger that the inevitable turnovers lead to instant Swans goals.

I'm worried about Coggs...something's wrong with his kicking and I suspect his confidence.

Richo was amazing. He is an outstanding leader and i am stunned by the increased maturity he is showing this year. He is our heart and soul and thank God he was playing for us yesterday.

I don't feel depressed, because we were beaten by a classy, experienced, highy disciplined team. It sets a standard for us to aim for.

Let's hope the Crows are feeling a bit too cocky after their big win today!

 

[Silent Bob]

My rant is simple - inexperienced or not, there is no excuse for being beaten by over 100 points.

 

[FightingFury]

Petts took a great mark though..sad that you chose to overlook that particular effort.

Wow.

1 flashy thing against 0 1%ers.
Thats why he is what he is, a downhill skier.

Yes its all Pettifer's fault.  We all know he can't tackle, but great oportunity to kick the boots in.  Good stuff.

Cheers

Spare me your bleeding heart FFS!

The bloke has no defensive game at all,tackling,second efforts,physical pressure nothing.
Are you are a subscriber to the every player is not worthy of criticism mantra are you?
Geez,I thought you had more to offer than that Good one.
Cheers indeed.

Touchy there.  I just dont subscribe to Pettifer bag posts every single week.  I agree he has a very poor defensive game.  Many forward players do. And no I cant see him ever being a leader of the club.  However from an attacking pont of view he has presented very well this year.

And cut out the swearing, not needed.

Cheers

Now a moderator wannabe as well?

I'll rightly or wrongly be critical of any insipid effort.Being a forward is not a 'get out of jail free' card for zero team based work off the ball.
This is one the first times i've aired criticism at Pettifer this season,and i've seen him pull out of 3 contests in the last 4 games where he risked being crunched hard.This is a trait I cannot tolerate in a league footballer,you can't help being tall,short,fast or slow sometimes.....but the decisionnot to take a hit for your side and break the fabric of team ethos is unforgivable.

My two cents,feel free to disagree,but don't be telling me what to post.

 

[jb03]

I thought Petts was terrific. Did you see that mark!

 

[Scoop]

I thought Petts was terrific.  Did you see that mark!

Really people we got thumped and I am all for this being happy and positive but Kayne Pettifer has some glaring problems that he needs to work on. The game is not all one mark. People are defending him for one mark in four quarters. One grab!! Good lord. Kayne has taken massive steps forward but his defensive work in our forward half has not improved one bit. Work rate when he doesn't have the ball is unacceptable. Attack on the man with the ball not good enough. Tackling is terrible, couldn't catch a cold.

 

[Mr Brightside]

Found out from TW on Saturday that when the roof is closed at the dome you cant use the tracking system.Probally obvious to some but because the roof blocks the system to the satelite,I didnt know :

 

[GoodOne]

Now a moderator wannabe as well?

I'll rightly or wrongly be critical of any insipid effort.Being a forward is not a 'get out of jail free' card for zero team based work off the ball.
This is one the first times i've aired criticism at Pettifer this season,and i've seen him pull out of 3 contests in the last 4 games where he risked being crunched hard.This is a trait I cannot tolerate in a league footballer,you can't help being tall,short,fast or slow sometimes.....but the decisionnot to take a hit for your side and break the fabric of team ethos is unforgivable.

My two cents,feel free to disagree,but don't be telling me what to post.

Not a moderator at all, but why the need to post FFS????? As far as Im concerned it's as good as spelling it out. Not telling you what to post otherwise, go for it.

Like you I love the tough footballer, the one who goes in and puts his body on the line and does it for the team. reality is, not all players are like that. You could go through every team and pick them out. Obviously its something he has to work on, but I don't think you can make a player tough, its either in you or its not. So the question is, should Pettifer, who is getting good ball and bringing it into the forward 50 ALOT this year, who can kick a long goal outside 50, who does have the ability to hurt the opposition, should he be in the Richmond side because he has a bad defensive side to his game? My opinion is yes he should, and what bores me, is that EVERY week someone brings up the fact that Pettifer is soft and can't tackle and doesnt chase. We ALL know that, virtually no-one disagrees. I agree one mark does not make a game, but Pettifer did a bit more than just that and was far from the worst on the ground. Downhill skier? Personally think that is harsh, seemed to be alot of downhill skiers on the weekend.

I've said before I never thought Pettifer would make it in the AFL, I was wrong, and admit it, and am able to change my opinion, as it does change according to changing circumstances. Seems to be some who never do (and not referring to you personally by the way).

Cheers