The SCG lends itself to teams who zone the corridor and force the opposition wide. The Swans are the perfect team for it. Strong bodies and experienced leaders.

We have 2 options. Run the ball in space where we can utilise our strengths (speed and youth) or kick to contests through the corridor which suits the Swans. (On average nearly 2 years older and stronger than our players).
Which would you prefer?
I have no doubt that if we bombed it up the corridor and played to Sydneys strengths, the supporters would be going feral.

Ratts had a plan to break up their zone which was reasonably successful. It's more the footskills of the players that let it down. Waites first 3 kicks were to leading forwards were poor whilst under no pressure. All 3 should have given us set shots at goal. Lets also remember Sydneys first 2 goals were also direct results of Carlton clangers including a THornton kick across goal to a contest 40 metres out.

Meanwhile Carlton dominated play and should have iced the game half way through the second quarter. All the stats were in our favour except for scoring efficiency.
Lets not forget, we had more scoring shots in the first and second quarters which resulted in 3 goals 12. You can argue had we kicked 4.3 in the second quarter instead of 7 points, the game would have been ours!
Ratts cant get out there and kick them for the players. He can only supply the game plan and structures to give us every opportunity to win.
I'd suggest he did that.

Lastly, dont underestimate the importance of scoring accuracy to winning games. I had a quick look on Saturday night and around 80% of games this season had been won by the team with the superior accuracy. The value of scoreboard pressure on opposition teams is enormous and our structures have given us every opportunity to capitalise over the past 2 weeks.
Its our poor conversion that cost us the games.

Lets also remember Sydneys first 2 goals were also direct results of Carlton clangers including a THornton kick across goal to a contest 40 metres out.

Fair call by BV.

Although I always say "where once you don't succeed try again", and I'd argue the Swans got on top as the game wore on and we didn't really dominate any part of the game other than the first quarter.

have to play more than one good quarter.

I think there's a bit of truth either way really.

You have to take your chances when you get them. We dominated the first quarter and a half but didn't put Sydney away. What made it worse was that at the same time as our own wastefulness, the first three goals we conceded were gifts as a result of poor, undisciplined or inexplicable play on our part (50m penalty, kicking to a contest across goal and not letting the ball go out of bounds).

So we had complete control of the general flow of the game for long enough to be able to just about put the game away. Sydney then have to come from behind which means Sydney needs to take risks to get back into the game, which means no lock-down footy at which they are so adept, which means more time and space for our players to hurt them when they inevitably turn the ball over. There are of course no guarantees that we would have won given this situation but the odds would have been heavily stacked in our favour.

Unfortunately, while this should have happened, it didn't and as we began to lose spirit Sydney's confidence began to rise because although they had been dominated and by right should have been a fair way behind, they were level or even in front. Eventually, they did get on top and were able to get the game on their terms, getting several goals in front and basically just defending this lead.

So I think this game really did come down to missed opportunities early on, more so than the Essendon* one. If we put those away like we should have I am convinced that we would have won the game. Having said that, I do agree that it was disappointing that we never really threatened to win during the second half. I would have liked to have seen more run, quicker ball movement and some more risks taken. But I think this was one of those games in which we shot ourselves in the foot early on and from there one could realistically only foresee one outcome.

Essendon* cheated, simple as that

We are so overrated.

Slight improvement from last year. The forward line hasn't changed from 08. 'WE'RE ON THE ROAD TO KNOW WHERE'

http://bhandler.spaces.live.com/blog/



Do you mean nowhere?