Ed Langdon says "I told you so"

[Demon17 5,188]

So a year ago it was 'All duck or no dinner' and Ed gets crunched for it.

He was on the money then, and MFC showed yesterday that if the corridor is denied to the Pies they are just another good team with problems when their first choice strategy is addressed by the opposition. 

The talk now primarily will be how the Dees unlocked the Pies game plan.  Good coaches elsewhere will be taking notice. The trick will be having the talent to execute.

Well done Ed.

[John Demonic 5,797]

Shhhh

[layzie 33,814]

The blueprint has been there for a while but executing it is another thing. The wingers did a brilliant job of holding the width and our mids towelled them up in contested ball all day which didn't allow the Pies to get their 'inside to outside' game going.

They're a hard side to play against and they're gonna win a lot more than they lose. 

[Deestar9 1,624]

To sit at the game & watch our team dismantle the Pies game plan was literally a thing of beauty. You start to understand the tinkering of the players..game plan etc. Goodwin is coaching a team to be accountable against many different game plans. Also  just like other sides did to us when they saw our game plan dismantled ..other teams will take note. Pies will be an interesting watch after the bye. 

[chookrat 4,250]

9 minutes ago, Deestar9 said:

To sit at the game & watch our team dismantle the Pies game plan was literally a thing of beauty. You start to understand the tinkering of the players..game plan etc. Goodwin is coaching a team to be accountable against many different game plans. Also  just like other sides did to us when they saw our game plan dismantled ..other teams will take note. Pies will be an interesting watch after the bye. 

I reckon while our approach serves as a template for beating the Pies most teams will struggle to execute this for an entire game. Aside from a couple of costly turnovers early and inaccuracy in front of goal our pressure and ball movement was outstanding across 4 quarters. Most teams might be able to do this for 2 quarters.

[Demon Disciple 12,141]

22 minutes ago, Deestar9 said:

To sit at the game & watch our team dismantle the Pies game plan was literally a thing of beauty.

Our whole ground defence after the first 10 minutes in the 1st quarter was sublime. Yesterday our defending was indeed a thing of beauty, and we rightly got our just rewards.

[Little Goffy 14,568]

Langdon had very low stats... I suspect he was doing an important job keeping Collingwood away from his wing.

Running up and down like a man with one fence post trying to keep the dog in the yard.

[deegirl 1,578]

31 minutes ago, chookrat said:

I reckon while our approach serves as a template for beating the Pies most teams will struggle to execute this for an entire game. Aside from a couple of costly turnovers early and inaccuracy in front of goal our pressure and ball movement was outstanding across 4 quarters. Most teams might be able to do this for 2 quarters.

Thought similar at HT yesterday.  We'd done a great job of shutting them down but would it be possible to do it for a whole game.  We got our answer 😁

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

4 hours ago, layzie said:

The blueprint has been there for a while but executing it is another thing. The wingers did a brilliant job of holding the width and our mids towelled them up in contested ball all day which didn't allow the Pies to get their 'inside to outside' game going.

They're a hard side to play against and they're gonna win a lot more than they lose. 

This is spot on.

Without any insight myself I'm confident all coaches know how to win vs a particular opposition, to reinforce your pointe it's about execution.

Just look at the Hawks v lions game. Fagan was interviewed pre game addressing how the lions wanted to play, turns out the players couldn't execute.

I think the corridor style and attacking game plan still the best strategy for winning games. Finals though is a wait and see 

[Rednblueriseing 824]

4 hours ago, chookrat said:

I reckon while our approach serves as a template for beating the Pies most teams will struggle to execute this for an entire game. Aside from a couple of costly turnovers early and inaccuracy in front of goal our pressure and ball movement was outstanding across 4 quarters. Most teams might be able to do this for 2 quarters.

The first 15mins our pressure was non existent, the pies were finding free players everywhere and walking out of defence, while we struggled to get out of d50. Luckily this was turned on its head for the rest of the game

[Roost it far 8,277]

The fact remains that we have the strongest list in the comp. If we're fit and fielding our best 23 come September we will simply be unstoppable. No one can stop us now. 

Who goes out to fit Oliver, Bowey and Petty?

Do we play an extra tall and give Gawn as much rest during games as possible. For me he's the wildcard. If he's fit and rested in September then look out. How we missed a fit Gawn last September. He's looking much better atm. I was super worried he was cooked a few weeks back.

Edited June 13, 2023 by Roost it far

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Demon17 said:

So a year ago it was 'All duck or no dinner' and Ed gets crunched for it.

He was on the money then, and MFC showed yesterday that if the corridor is denied to the Pies they are just another good team with problems when their first choice strategy is addressed by the opposition. 

The talk now primarily will be how the Dees unlocked the Pies game plan.  Good coaches elsewhere will be taking notice. The trick will be having the talent to execute.

Well done Ed.

Last year Langers copped it from our fans for poking the bear. Firstly, no single comment from anyone can determine the outcome of a match. Secondly, good luck trying to stop Ed from saying this type of thing since he’s quite different. He’s very chill and unconventional. He is what some might call out of left field. That’s just him. Why would anyone want him to change?

[Demon17 5,188]

4 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

Last year Langers copped it from our fans for poking the bear. Firstly, no single comment from anyone can determine the outcome of a match. Secondly, good luck trying to stop Ed from saying this type of thing since he’s quite different. He’s very chill and unconventional. He is what some might call out of left field. That’s just him. Why would anyone want him to change?

Not me either.  Just one of a number of quirky dees players and staff (looking at you  chocco)

Led by the afl's most intetesting skipper.

But gee they can play as well 

[Adam The God 30,261]

6 hours ago, Cheap Seats said:

This is spot on.

Without any insight myself I'm confident all coaches know how to win vs a particular opposition, to reinforce your pointe it's about execution.

Just look at the Hawks v lions game. Fagan was interviewed pre game addressing how the lions wanted to play, turns out the players couldn't execute.

I think the corridor style and attacking game plan still the best strategy for winning games. Finals though is a wait and see 

I don't think this gives enough credit to Goodwin and co.

Our press was highly sophisticated. It wasn't merely a frenzied press (ala 2018), it was denying corridor and pressuring into wide areas. When they did get it into the corridor, we sweated on them for the turnover.

As for corridor style and attacking game plan being the best strategy for winning games, the best strategy for winning games is the strategy that is able to be replicated under intense pressure in finals.

And good defence always beats good offence in finals, because the games are often arm wrestles that have less open space and more pressure. Relying on handball chaining like the Bulldogs do will only get you so far.

Collingwood have at least four elite ball users (Daicos, Daicos, Sidebottom and Pendlebury) who can also do damage, but it's the forward handball that enables quick ball movement. Because they run and gun, it's a hard thing to replicate in finals without costly turnovers back the other way.

I guess we'll see in due course though.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,221]

20 hours ago, Cheap Seats said:

This is spot on.

Without any insight myself I'm confident all coaches know how to win vs a particular opposition, to reinforce your pointe it's about execution.

Just look at the Hawks v lions game. Fagan was interviewed pre game addressing how the lions wanted to play, turns out the players couldn't execute.

I think the corridor style and attacking game plan still the best strategy for winning games. Finals though is a wait and see 

Hardwick said after the Anzac Eve game they know what to do to beat Melbourne.

As I said at the time the difference between knowing and doing is the difference between flags and spoons.

[layzie 33,814]

They don't call him Positive Lingers for nothing. 

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

On 6/14/2023 at 9:56 AM, Dr. Gonzo said:

Hardwick said after the Anzac Eve game they know what to do to beat Melbourne.

As I said at the time the difference between knowing and doing is the difference between flags and spoons.

Yep spot on.

Its what makes the difference between an average coach and a good coach and coaching team. 

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

On 6/13/2023 at 8:08 PM, A F said:

I don't think this gives enough credit to Goodwin and co.

Our press was highly sophisticated. It wasn't merely a frenzied press (ala 2018), it was denying corridor and pressuring into wide areas. When they did get it into the corridor, we sweated on them for the turnover.

As for corridor style and attacking game plan being the best strategy for winning games, the best strategy for winning games is the strategy that is able to be replicated under intense pressure in finals.

And good defence always beats good offence in finals, because the games are often arm wrestles that have less open space and more pressure. Relying on handball chaining like the Bulldogs do will only get you so far.

Collingwood have at least four elite ball users (Daicos, Daicos, Sidebottom and Pendlebury) who can also do damage, but it's the forward handball that enables quick ball movement. Because they run and gun, it's a hard thing to replicate in finals without costly turnovers back the other way.

I guess we'll see in due course though.

There are some good points there.

 

Let me summarise it this way, we've had a good win vs a good oppnent. But can we get it done when it matter? 

Like U said, time will tell, but we have some form and faith. 

 

Bugger me though, kick straight 

Edited June 15, 2023 by Cheap Seats

[Adam The God 30,261]

Just now, Cheap Seats said:

There are some good points there.

 

Let me summarise it this way, we've had a good win vs a good oppnent. But can we get it done when it matter? 

A question that could be posed far more heavily to Collingwood, our own main competitor. Or Port, one of our other competitors.

This group of players got the job done less than 24 months ago.

And in 2023, it's clear we've made substantial tweaks to our system, but retained the emphasis on CP and defence, playing to our strengths.

But our system tweaks are going to take a little longer to perfect. We still don't move the ball quickly totally instinctively like Collingwood do. However, if we bring our pressure game, we have multiple ways of winning the game. It's not just force them down the line to our interceptors via upfield pressure anymore. It's more sophisticated. And we score not just from stoppage, but from turnover and against the likes of Collingwood, this is a very tried and true formula for success against their high risk game style.

[Fanatique Demon 2,647]

Ed langdon says "I told you so"
 

Please… we beat them by four points! And might even have lost it but for the last clearance. 

[deejammin' 2,370]

If it hadn’t got so close late I wanted to start a mighty ducks style “quack quack quack” chant in Ed’s honour, sadly Max and Maysie dropped those marks and they kicked goals so I was too nervous to try it.

[640MD 3,377]

Three things I have taken from watching the replay 

1/. the first few minutes we played well but not full throttle pressure. We actually passed it to their centre line players a couple of times. Obvious result.
 

2/ After Viney goal we were by far the better side.  Hardly allowed them any space and forced them wide.

3/ again in the last two minutes similar against Port, we had some terrible decisions go against us and we sort of stopped and expected the decision to be reversed. Which it did not and we were too comfortable in the 17 point lead. 
that did change in the last ball up. !!

BOG.  Viney. He is harder than his old man.
 

[Jaded No More 68,922]

41 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

Ed langdon says "I told you so"
 

Please… we beat them by four points! And might even have lost it but for the last clearance. 

Or won by 6 goals if we kicked straight 🤷‍♀️

[loges 6,767]

42 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

Ed langdon says "I told you so"
 

Please… we beat them by four points! And might even have lost it but for the last clearance. 

And we may have won by plenty if we'd kicked straight 

[dee-tox 4,835]

Just trying to be objective but it is the depth of Collingwood's midfield that makes them so dangerous. As much as we dislike him, Degoey is a dynamic player that can break lines and Sidebum is an elite user of the ball. They complement the other Pie midfielders. The more the ball was in the hands of Taylor Adams, Noble, etc. the better it was for us.