I didn't think Cumming did much wrong. She shot 2/11, which is obviously bad, but she took good shots. They didn't drop for her yesterday, but most days those same shots would.
I agree that Dandy's defensive intensity seemed to ease off in the second half. Credit where it's due to SEQ too though, for making the most of the many mismatches out there.
Rangers tried Scherf a couple of times, but it didn't really come off in their favour. I doubt Bunton would have either, but it's definitely strange they wouldn't at least try if she was healthy. I thought they should have got more than 50 combined minutes out of their bench.
Rangers faced a bit of a dilemma I thought. With 12 players at their disposal compared to just 8 for SEQ, a track meet would have favoured them physically. But that's not their game style, and it is SEQ's. So they needed to find a way to play disciplined offence, use up the clock to make SEQ's defenders expend energy at that end, and crank up their own energy level at the other end.
For the most part they did it pretty well, but once SEQ loosened up and the shots started dropping, suddenly the mismatches worked mostly in their favour.
Perth will make for an interesting contest, assuming we lose today. Our guards are still small (actually even smaller than Dandenong's) so still prone to getting exploited down on the block, but we certainly won't be afraid to crank the pace up to maximum. I'd like to think our ball pressure will be a lot better than Dandenong's too.
I still think the Rangers should have won yesterday though. Credit to SEQ for having the heart and skill to steal it, but it was the Rangers' lapses that allowed it to happen.