Collingwood v Adelaide - Semi Final

[Footy Smart]

All this plan A,B,C,D rubbish is what people who have no idea about football go on about.

"WAH WAH NEIL CRAIG DOESN'T HAVE PLAN C, I CAN'T ACCEPT THAT THE CROWS WERE BEATEN BY A BETTER SIDE"

Clap Clap Farmy..... well said

[catchit]

didnt malcom blight make a decision to put ellen in the forward line which helped win a flag.. Would that be considered a plan c? And yes farmy you are right crows were not beaten by a better side.. They were beaten by poor coaching.. They did it against west coast a few times and now they are doing it against collingwood.. When a team threatens them craig panics.. Yes he is a good coach but not when he is challenged in finals.. And fair to say the proof is in the pudding.. There has to be a reason for losing so many finals when it counts and players come and go where the coach has been there for a while.. So he must be accountable..

[Footy Smart]

didnt malcom blight make a decision to put ellen in the forward line which helped win a flag.. Would that be considered a plan c? And yes farmy you are right crows were not beaten by a better side.. They were beaten by poor coaching.. They did it against west coast a few times and now they are doing it against collingwood.. When a team threatens them craig panics.. Yes he is a good coach but not when he is challenged in finals.. And fair to say the proof is in the pudding.. There has to be a reason for losing so many finals when it counts and players come and go where the coach has been there for a while.. So he must be accountable..

placing a player in a postion once off isnt a plan C its a tactic used in a game to fill a gap.... it was a very different game in 1197/8 than now and i would suggest that if he made a decision to put Rutten forward would have lead to you bagging him still...... He moved Hentchsel into defense??? isnt that plan C..... NO it was a tactic which maybe did/maybe didnt pay off. Just like Ellens move forward could have prooved fruitless...... If the players dont do what they have to it doesnt matter how good the coach is the result will not favour them

[catchit]

didnt malcom blight make a decision to put ellen in the forward line which helped win a flag.. Would that be considered a plan c? And yes farmy you are right crows were not beaten by a better side.. They were beaten by poor coaching.. They did it against west coast a few times and now they are doing it against collingwood.. When a team threatens them craig panics.. Yes he is a good coach but not when he is challenged in finals.. And fair to say the proof is in the pudding.. There has to be a reason for losing so many finals when it counts and players come and go where the coach has been there for a while.. So he must be accountable..

placing a player in a postion once off isnt a plan C its a tactic used in a game to fill a gap.... it was a very different game in 1197/8 than now and i would suggest that if he made a decision to put Rutten forward would have lead to you bagging him still...... He moved Hentchsel into defense??? isnt that plan C..... NO it was a tactic which maybe did/maybe didnt pay off. Just like Ellens move forward could have prooved fruitless...... If the players dont do what they have to it doesnt matter how good the coach is the result will not favour them

plan c or d or a tactic is all the same shit with just a diff word... yes hentchsel went back but the prob was porpy and tippet were next to him, finals are about winning not protecting a 3 goal lead in the 2nd quarter.. the funny thing is that i really think NC is a good coach just not a great coach [yet].. so its not that i get off on bagging him, its more i am saying what i thought cost the game..and the fact is his finals record is not that flash yet.. i am not saying he should be sacked but if you dont learn from your mistakes you are leaving the door open to be bagged..
i guess we agrre to disagree which is what this is all about..

[Felch]

didnt malcom blight make a decision to put ellen in the forward line which helped win a flag.. Would that be considered a plan c? And yes farmy you are right crows were not beaten by a better side.. They were beaten by poor coaching.. They did it against west coast a few times and now they are doing it against collingwood.. When a team threatens them craig panics.. Yes he is a good coach but not when he is challenged in finals.. And fair to say the proof is in the pudding.. There has to be a reason for losing so many finals when it counts and players come and go where the coach has been there for a while.. So he must be accountable..

Absolute rot !!!

Why isnt Worsfold accountable for allowing certain players to run riot off the field and turn the Eagles into a disgrace then ?

You are just anti-Crows Catchit, and anti-Craig.

Coaches get way too much credit fullstop, whether it be for winning or losing. Sweet FA can be done on gameday usually, other than change a matchup here and there.

Anyone listen to Ken Hinkley the other night on 5AA ? He summed it up by saying Geelong dont play any different in finals as they do in the minor round. If thats the case, then if a game plan that works well during the season will hold up during finals - unless you come up against a better side on the day. Too much credence is given to 'game plans', everyone has basically the same one nowadays.

[Booney]

Correct, most sides have a similar game plan. So what is more of an emphasis for you, the players executing the plan or the coach developing the right plan?

Many would say Collingwood's boundary hugging style is the "wrong" way to go about it, but the players execute it well.

Many would say Adelaide's style ( of late 2009 ) of gung-ho attack down the corridor is the "right" style, but the players couldn't execute it well enough.

I think the buck has always stopped at the coach for very good reason.

[Footy Smart]

Many would say Adelaide's style ( of late 2009 ) of gung-ho attack down the corridor is the "right" style, but the players couldn't execute it well enough.

Booney the game plan didnt loose us the game, when rallied with hard tough one on one footy we didnt match it and we lost

[Booney]

Many would say Adelaide's style ( of late 2009 ) of gung-ho attack down the corridor is the "right" style, but the players couldn't execute it well enough.

Booney the game plan didnt loose us the game, when rallied with hard tough one on one footy we didnt match it and we lost

So the game plan didnt hold up to the one on one, or the players?

[Felch]

Correct, most sides have a similar game plan. So what is more of an emphasis for you, the players executing the plan or the coach developing the right plan?

Many would say Collingwood's boundary hugging style is the "wrong" way to go about it, but the players execute it well.

Many would say Adelaide's style ( of late 2009 ) of gung-ho attack down the corridor is the "right" style, but the players couldn't execute it well enough.

I think the buck has always stopped at the coach for very good reason.

What im saying is that too much emphasis is put on game plans full stop. Im sure many people dont even know what a game plan is, but its a common theme with Crows supporters that Neil Craig doesnt have a game plan to win finals. It all comes down to the ability of players to withstand the opposition pressure and play the game on their own terms, ie their game style/plan. I dont think the type of game plan really matters, its how it can be adhered to under pressure.

For some reason, people think there is some secret, magic formula to winning finals that Craigy doesnt possess, but guys like Malthouse, Bomber and Leigh Matthews do. Absolute hogwash!

I agree the buck should always stop with the coach, but im talking about true, realistic indicators, like on/off field discipline and performance, player development, stuff like that - not finals game plan myths.

[catchit]

didnt malcom blight make a decision to put ellen in the forward line which helped win a flag.. Would that be considered a plan c? And yes farmy you are right crows were not beaten by a better side.. They were beaten by poor coaching.. They did it against west coast a few times and now they are doing it against collingwood.. When a team threatens them craig panics.. Yes he is a good coach but not when he is challenged in finals.. And fair to say the proof is in the pudding.. There has to be a reason for losing so many finals when it counts and players come and go where the coach has been there for a while.. So he must be accountable..

Absolute rot !!!

Why isnt Worsfold accountable for allowing certain players to run riot off the field and turn the Eagles into a disgrace then ?

You are just anti-Crows Catchit, and anti-Craig.

Coaches get way too much credit fullstop, whether it be for winning or losing. Sweet FA can be done on gameday usually, other than change a matchup here and there.

Anyone listen to Ken Hinkley the other night on 5AA ? He summed it up by saying Geelong dont play any different in finals as they do in the minor round. If thats the case, then if a game plan that works well during the season will hold up during finals - unless you come up against a better side on the day. Too much credence is given to 'game plans', everyone has basically the same one nowadays.

what the?? is cousins still at west coast?? turn it up mate...
i am not anti any team or coach for starters.. and have won some good money on the crows this year so i like them a bit more now... ... yes everyones gameplan is much the same its just that the better coaches no when to put loose men back and when not to.. yes it sounds like i have it in for NC but i dont.. what he has done in his time has been outstanding, BUT unfortunatly you get remembered for winning premierships, and i think worsfold is one up in that catergory

[Gingernuts]

Many would say Adelaide's style ( of late 2009 ) of gung-ho attack down the corridor is the "right" style, but the players couldn't execute it well enough.

Booney the game plan didnt loose us the game, when rallied with hard tough one on one footy we didnt match it and we lost

So the game plan didnt hold up to the one on one, or the players?

I would say a bit of both Booney. Adelaide was beaten by a better team on the night, simple as that. You can analyse it and say it was individual players, game plans, coaches moves, but the sum of all that is that Collingwood were better by a kick.

So be it, the club moves on to 2010 and does what it has to do in the off season to ensure that next year no one is better than them, and that it will prevail if confronted by a similar situation come finals.

[catchit]

Many would say Adelaide's style ( of late 2009 ) of gung-ho attack down the corridor is the "right" style, but the players couldn't execute it well enough.

Booney the game plan didnt loose us the game, when rallied with hard tough one on one footy we didnt match it and we lost

So the game plan didnt hold up to the one on one, or the players?

I would say a bit of both Booney. Adelaide was beaten by a better team on the night, simple as that. You can analyse it and say it was individual players, game plans, coaches moves, but the sum of all that is that Collingwood were better by a kick.

So be it, the club moves on to 2010 and does what it has to do in the off season to ensure that next year no one is better than them, and that it will prevail if confronted by a similar situation come finals.

no way collingwood was a better team.. that is just a easy out.. i honestly think if the 2 coaches swaped for the day that the crows would of won...

[Felch]

didnt malcom blight make a decision to put ellen in the forward line which helped win a flag.. Would that be considered a plan c? And yes farmy you are right crows were not beaten by a better side.. They were beaten by poor coaching.. They did it against west coast a few times and now they are doing it against collingwood.. When a team threatens them craig panics.. Yes he is a good coach but not when he is challenged in finals.. And fair to say the proof is in the pudding.. There has to be a reason for losing so many finals when it counts and players come and go where the coach has been there for a while.. So he must be accountable..

Absolute rot !!!

Why isnt Worsfold accountable for allowing certain players to run riot off the field and turn the Eagles into a disgrace then ?

You are just anti-Crows Catchit, and anti-Craig.

Coaches get way too much credit fullstop, whether it be for winning or losing. Sweet FA can be done on gameday usually, other than change a matchup here and there.

Anyone listen to Ken Hinkley the other night on 5AA ? He summed it up by saying Geelong dont play any different in finals as they do in the minor round. If thats the case, then if a game plan that works well during the season will hold up during finals - unless you come up against a better side on the day. Too much credence is given to 'game plans', everyone has basically the same one nowadays.

what the?? is cousins still at west coast?? turn it up mate...
i am not anti any team or coach for starters.. and have won some good money on the crows this year so i like them a bit more now... ... yes everyones gameplan is much the same its just that the better coaches no when to put loose men back and when not to.. yes it sounds like i have it in for NC but i dont.. what he has done in his time has been outstanding, BUT unfortunatly you get remembered for winning premierships, and i think worsfold is one up in that catergory

No, but Kerr is...anyway, that wasnt my point. I was trying to say that if Craigy is accountable for the lack of a mythical plan a,b,c or z, then Woosha has to be too for things going pear-shape at WC.

Catchit, heres a hypothetical - If Bomber Thompson had to leave Geelong tomorrow for unavoidable reasons, and the Cats had the choice between Worsfold and Craig as the new coach, who do you think they would go for ?

Im saying Craigy.

And its not as easy as just putting 'loose men back', trust me...

[catchit]

you say craigy i say worsfold.. big deal.. thats a question that should be asked to a third party...
my arguement isnt who the better coach is... it is that IMO NC went defencive to early.. thats all..

[Gingernuts]

By saying better team I was including coaching staff, game plans etc. not just purely the ability of the playing squad.

catchit, are you bored and looking for something to do?

We went over all of this already on this forum topic, hence the 11 pages.

[catchit]

yeah bored of this now... GO YOU EAGLES..
off to the power board now hey booney

[Psyber]

Two things went wrong:
1. The Crows were too confident of the forwards taking the marks and bombed from too far out in the second quarter.
2. They didn't cope when Collingwood went man on man.

Credit to Collingwood:
Collingwood's defence was better than the Crows had met in the two previous matches.
Collingwood know how to play man on man, and the Crows don't...

[the big bang]

cant believe this thread is still going.

crows lost. get over it.

collingwood won. and where did that get them?



can someone please lock this thread.

[Jimmy_041]

cant believe this thread is still going.

crows lost. get over it.

collingwood won. and where did that get them?

can someone please lock this thread.

fire up big fella

[the big bang]

cant believe this thread is still going.

crows lost. get over it.

collingwood won. and where did that get them?

can someone please lock this thread.

fire up big fella

something had to be said!

been nearly a week now since someone posted something stupid on here!!

i have made the world a better place.

i may now die a happy man.