I stand by my "outcoached" comment.joffaboy wrote:Apparently you have outcoached the opposition if you score 7-11 in a PF, with four of those goals after qtr time, and no goals in the last 25 minutes of play.reincarnated wrote: How did Eade out-coach Lyon if we won?
Surely a by-product of the proclaimed 'out-coaching' is a win for the team that possess the coach that performs the 'out-coaching'?
So infact Eade has been shown up as having the ability to do a few good things to put an opposition off their usual tempo however does not have the ability to keep the fresh moves/changes/ideas flowing as the games gets deeper and deeper
He outcoached Lyon so badly on Friday night that he got himself an extra weeks holiday.
Outcoached. Pfft.
Have yet to see any evidence for this "outcoaching".
Eade found a way to render our usual gameplan ineffective for enough of the match to give the Bulldogs a big chance of winning the game. If their forwards and running midfielders had taken their chances better (remember, they had 17 more inside 50s than us and ended up kicking 7-9 to our 9-6), they'd have won for sure.
He neutralised some of our key attacking weapons: our small forwards delivered little and were not generally able to tie up the Dogs when they were bringing the ball out of defence. Whereas the Dogs were great at tackling us and getting turnovers or stopping our run out of defence.
When we were able to make it extremely hard for us to get the ball into our 50: and, when we did manage it, Lake and Morris and the rest did extremely well at keeping our forward line quiet: they only kicked 6 goals between them (and one of those was the controversial Riewoldt free kick which didn't involve any actual forward play).
It was a fantastic effort from a team with, on paper, considerably less talent across the board than us (eg, they had only one player - Boyd - in the top 20 Brownlow vote winners this year, as opposed to our 5).
It was a coordinated effort from their entire 22 players: in this sort of situation I tend to give credit to the coach. I reckon it was an above-average tactical and match-day coaching performance by Eade.
Lyon, on the other hand, did what any coach would have done in his situation: prepare the team to play exactly the way it has been playing all season, and rely upon our experience in playing that way for 4 quarters and our superior overall talent to get us over the line, which it did just.
It seemed to me that Lyon started to experiment with matchups a bit during the second quarter (eg, Goddard on Hahn, Dawson up forward) in a way that didn't work too well. I wondered at the time if he was starting to panic, although I'm not too sure. After half-time, he seemed to go back to basics, and that - along with a dollop of good fortune - got us home.
I accept that it isn't particularly easy to judge one coach's performance against that of his opponent other than by looking at whose team won the game. So I can understand why some of you are puzzled/scornful of the idea that a losing coach could ever outcoach his opponent: although why the idea has to generate such vitriol from among some of the more unbalanced posters on here, I simply don't understand.
Anyway, I take the view that - if a coach can, through his tactical nous, get his team to perform significantly better against their opponents than would appear to be possible on paper - he might be said to have "outcoached" his opponent on the day. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. I don't mind that others have different opinions, and I don't feel the need to attack them for having them.
P.S. Any poster who reads through the last 4 or so pages of this thread and can't come up with a highly likely hypothesis as to the true identity of Reincarnated isn't paying enough attention. And it certainly isn't SP2008.
