Player Watch Nick (AFL MVP) Daicos

[Pistol Night]

Langdon probably thinks he’s got a pelt hanging on the wall but he gave up 20+ possessions and a goal to his direct opponent that he was glued to all afternoon with the sole intention of stifling him. He got 4? possessions of his own?
That’s ****ing embarrassing for a league footballer. Celebrate away duck dinner if your 1 one is a poor Micky Gayfer clone.

If anything it shows how much of a superstar Nick really is if the entire footy world is drowning a community biscuit lauding Langdon keeping Nick to 20 and 1. Hope he gets a hard tag in the GF, gets 19 touches and while the mouth breathers everywhere are salivating over “Nicky” getting well held we’ve snuck off with the flag as the other 22 have outplayed the oppo 21

 

[rand corp]

I may get howled down as being a sook, biased etc here.

However, in half a century of watching football, I just thought what Langdon was doing all day was just a poor indictment on the game. There was no intent to play football at all. Most of the time, Langdon was not even facing the contest, purely looking to prevent one player from getting near the contest at all.

That a player can stand at a stoppage with his back to the play and just shepherd, scrag, hold, grab and pull a player so that he cannot play or be involved is just not good for the game as a spectacle or a sport. There is tagging and then there is what Langdon was doing, which -in my opinion- was crossing the line all day.

You want to go to the football and take your kids to the footy and be able to watch the best players have a fair crack at playing their best football. Sending players out to not play football at all, but to ignore the game and do whatever is necessary and whatever they can get away with (and the umpires miss), regardless of if it is within the rules; this is not football in my opinion.

I feel possibly a rule change is in order: where, at a stoppage, a player must be made to face the contest, or stand a meter off another player to have his back turned, is in order.

It was ugly, it was hard to watch and it was a dampener on what was an otherwise great day for football.

And it was a credit to Nick Daicos that he was able to lift so impressively in the last quarter.

end of rant

 

[TW Sherrin]

I may get howled down as being a sook, biased etc here.

However, in half a century of watching football, I just thought what Langdon was doing all day was just a poor indictment on the game. There was no intent to play football at all. Most of the time, Langdon was not even facing the contest, purely looking to prevent one player from getting near the contest at all.

That a player can stand at a stoppage with his back to the play and just shepherd, scrag, hold, grab and pull a player so that he cannot play or be involved is just not good for the game as a spectacle or a sport. There is tagging and then there is what Langdon was doing, which -in my opinion- was crossing the line all day.

You want to go to the football and take your kids to the footy and be able to watch the best players have a fair crack at playing their best football. Sending players out to not play football at all, but to ignore the game and do whatever is necessary and whatever they can get away with (and the umpires miss), regardless of if it is within the rules; this is not football in my opinion.

I feel possibly a rule change is in order: where, at a stoppage, a player must be made to face the contest, or stand a meter off another player to have his back turned, is in order.

It was ugly, it was hard to watch and it was a dampener on what was an otherwise great day for football.

end of rant

It's rare to see these days but thats what Bucks and co lived with every week.

If the umpires do their job the rules are fine. Maybe they were caught off guard because they definitely changed after half time.

 

[Vankri]

I take a slightly different view. He had 4 touches and his only involvement after half time were two tackles against a guy that had 19, 8 clearances and a goal. That’s a hard L on the basis of what you can normally expect from Langdon and was ultimately the difference in the contest. If they win it’s a different story. I’d also suggest that Fly’s comments in his presser aren’t necessarily indicative of his actual thoughts on it in the context of the contest. It was the shortest presser I’ve seen from him and behind closed doors I’d be surprised if he wasn’t taking a different view on how it played out. I would have liked to know more about whether he wanted the likes of Long, Crisp and Pendles to do more to buffer Langdon, but it wasn’t drilled down on.

I respect your opinion but I’m always loathed to make a black and white call like W or L for the tagger based on a one point game. Melbourne were good in general play and better than us in the first half and they essentially butchered their come back with untidy disposals and probably ‘should’ have won the game considering it wasn’t just one blunder (Trac’s dumb handball, Oliver’s horrible kick OOF i50, Fritsch inexplicably playing on from his mark 20m out). Story of the week if they had won would have been the formula to beat Collingwood is a hard tag on Nick.

I don’t think much of their good game can be attributed to Langdon but at least some of our crap transition game can be attributed to lower output from Nick. If really Goodwin told him he does not care at all about his contribution but reduce Nick’s output as much as you can I think Langdon will say he did his job. Now whether the coach should be sacrificing an entire (decent) player’s contribution is another story and I tend to think it would backfire and outside of the muddy crap conditions it would have costed more because space would have opened up for Nick and for our other kids.

Both pressers were short and weird. Not sure if there was a logistical thing going on so I’m just taking Fly’s reaction at face value. It’s a tricky game to play when you decide how much attention should go to the tagger, at some point you also want Ned Sidey Pendles etc to focus on their game.

 

[Scodog10]

I respect your opinion but I’m always loathed to make a black and white call like W or L for the tagger based on a one point game. Melbourne were good in general play and better than us in the first half and they essentially butchered their come back with untidy disposals and probably ‘should’ have won the game considering it wasn’t just one blunder (Trac’s dumb handball, Oliver’s horrible kick OOF i50, Fritsch inexplicably playing on from his mark 20m out). Story of the week if they had won would have been the formula to beat Collingwood is a hard tag on Nick.

I don’t think much of their good game can be attributed to Langdon but at least some of our crap transition game can be attributed to lower output from Nick. If really Goodwin told him he does not care at all about his contribution but reduce Nick’s output as much as you can I think Langdon will say he did his job. Now whether the coach should be sacrificing an entire (decent) player’s contribution is another story and I tend to think it would backfire and outside of the muddy crap conditions it would have costed more because space would have opened up for Nick and for our other kids.

Both pressers were short and weird. Not sure if there was a logistical thing going on so I’m just taking Fly’s reaction at face value. It’s a tricky game to play when you decide how much attention should go to the tagger, at some point you also want Ned Sidey Pendles etc to focus on their game.

I’m mostly comfortable going that far with it because of how severely it curtailed Langdon’s output. We’re talking a locked and loaded 20-25 possession, 5 mark, 5 score involvement player reduced to a -5 metre gained and 4 free kick against game.

What more do we get from a looser checking role on Naicos? Another 10 possessions? Less clearances because at least 2 came from free kicks he wouldn’t have otherwise received. If they keep Nick to 30 possessions and 1 goal with Langdon having his normal output they win by 3-4 goals, IMO. You can still curtail what Nick has done with the ball by playing a looser checking role and not have one of your prime overs reduced to a negative impact in the process.

I’m with you though on that tipping point of when support starts to impact the game of others which is why I was keen to get more from Fly, but it’s not hard to be more combative. Every time Langdon is running past or in the area just bump him exactly like they did to Nick. I just didn’t like leaving him one out all day on that front.

FWIW season on the line effectively you role the dice like the Dees did I totally get that and I know there’s a place for negating roles in 2025. I personally like my footy more pure and think yesterday went to far towards the bad old scragger days.

 

[Dtennent94]

It’s been mentioned more than once, so I’m going to comment on it.

There is no way you could implement a rule about which way players are facing. They can barely get front on contact right in marking contests… imagine trying to watch all players at a stoppage. What happens if a player grabs another player and turns him to face another direction as the ump is looking?

How about we just pay holding the man?

 

[localfootylegend23]

I think Mccreery should have put Landon in a different time zone.

De goey and maynard would have, missed our two bash em brothers out there. Also two of the best team mates.

Flying V here we go

 

[Harry O]

Hopefully Fly has 2 weeks to have a plan to expose Windhager

 

[Gabbo64]

Simple answer to the W or L question.

If all of their players tagged all of ours and each of their's had 4 posessions and each of ours had 19 and 1 goal, we would be well and trully on the W side. Here endth the lesson Demon floggers.

 

[Pistol Night]

Hopefully Fly has 2 weeks to have a plan to expose Windhager

Wind him and then coat hanger him. The answer is spelt out for us

 

[localfootylegend23]

I may get howled down as being a sook, biased etc here.

However, in half a century of watching football, I just thought what Langdon was doing all day was just a poor indictment on the game. There was no intent to play football at all. Most of the time, Langdon was not even facing the contest, purely looking to prevent one player from getting near the contest at all.

That a player can stand at a stoppage with his back to the play and just shepherd, scrag, hold, grab and pull a player so that he cannot play or be involved is just not good for the game as a spectacle or a sport. There is tagging and then there is what Langdon was doing, which -in my opinion- was crossing the line all day.

You want to go to the football and take your kids to the footy and be able to watch the best players have a fair crack at playing their best football. Sending players out to not play football at all, but to ignore the game and do whatever is necessary and whatever they can get away with (and the umpires miss), regardless of if it is within the rules; this is not football in my opinion.

I feel possibly a rule change is in order: where, at a stoppage, a player must be made to face the contest, or stand a meter off another player to have his back turned, is in order.

It was ugly, it was hard to watch and it was a dampener on what was an otherwise great day for football.

And it was a credit to Nick Daicos that he was able to lift so impressively in the last quarter.

end of rant

Could not agree more. It was anti football, could not believe it took so long to get the first free, First stoppage and until then it was a bear hug not facing the ball, no intent to win it and only intent to hold on for dear life to Nick.


Thought the games moved past that. Anyone who watched the essendon carlton game, Cincotta on Merrett was almost or just as bad. Cincotta was actively avoiding winning the ball, only interested in hanging off Merrett or tackling him.

AFL need to step in and clarify some things because they let a lot go and paid some shockers like the fingertip push I feel as a square up.

 

[Gabbo64]

It’s been mentioned more than once, so I’m going to comment on it.

There is no way you could implement a rule about which way players are facing. They can barely get front on contact right in marking contests… imagine trying to watch all players at a stoppage. What happens if a player grabs another player and turns him to face another direction as the ump is looking?

How about we just pay holding the man?

Sorry but that wouldn't work. Nick would have had 45 free kicks for if that was the rule..

 

[Harry O]

St Kilda’s midfield is their big weakness
Defenders like Sinclair Wanganeen-Millera and Wilkie are A graders

They will look to make the midfield battle Wrestlemania 10 and win it 60-50

In this context Titch should be seriously considered for selection if his body is ok

 

[localfootylegend23]

Wind him and then coat hanger him. The answer is spelt out for us

Which of the vfl fellas want a game to Cop a 3 week suspension for taking him out.

Seriously if same tactics happen again just go to full foward, and one of our key forwards put their knee thru windhagers back first long ball in.

 

[Gabbo64]

Sorry but that wouldn't work. Nick would have had 45 free kicks for if that was the rule..

Hang on, that is the rule??

 

[Pistol Night]

Hang on, that is the rule??

Yeah, subjective to when the **** they want to enforce it like 99% of them. Any wonder people get frustrated

 

[peter9789]

I may get howled down as being a sook, biased etc here.

However, in half a century of watching football, I just thought what Langdon was doing all day was just a poor indictment on the game. There was no intent to play football at all. Most of the time, Langdon was not even facing the contest, purely looking to prevent one player from getting near the contest at all.

That a player can stand at a stoppage with his back to the play and just shepherd, scrag, hold, grab and pull a player so that he cannot play or be involved is just not good for the game as a spectacle or a sport. There is tagging and then there is what Langdon was doing, which -in my opinion- was crossing the line all day.

You want to go to the football and take your kids to the footy and be able to watch the best players have a fair crack at playing their best football. Sending players out to not play football at all, but to ignore the game and do whatever is necessary and whatever they can get away with (and the umpires miss), regardless of if it is within the rules; this is not football in my opinion.

I feel possibly a rule change is in order: where, at a stoppage, a player must be made to face the contest, or stand a meter off another player to have his back turned, is in order.

It was ugly, it was hard to watch and it was a dampener on what was an otherwise great day for football.

And it was a credit to Nick Daicos that he was able to lift so impressively in the last quarter.

end of rant

100% agree with this.

Was at the game and it felt the tactics went way beyond what should be acceptable. Langdon standing with his back to the play with his arms wrapped around Nick. Blocking him at every opportunity. It was a terrible look for football. Notwithstanding the time Nick was on the ground tying his laces and Langdon was still pushing him on the back.

I watched Oliver and Pendles at stoppages who at stages were on each other. They were niggling each other attempting to stifle each others influence - but both were legitimately trying to compete. Thats the distinction in my view. Langdon had absolutely zero interest in competing - had 4 possessions for the game (FOUR!!) and was -5 metres in gain.

Goodwin is a terrible coach and this focus just reinforces why.

 

[BillyElliott]

Who will RTB have tag Nick in our game against the Saints?

Because we know he will.

 

[Scodog10]

Hopefully Fly has 2 weeks to have a plan to expose Windhager

Agreed. Windhager is like the legitimately good version of the old school tagger. He’ll do a lot of the Ling lean on Nick then work off him at contest. It’ll be a completely different looking role and much more effective because he won’t need to wrap arms around at stoppage to nullify Nick. The Saints also go to it regularly so they know how to get Windhager involved on offence. It’s one where it can quickly get away from us with Nick having 6 to Windhager’s 16 at HT or something. That’s when it’s dangerous for us.

 

[Pistol Night]

Agreed. Windhager is like the legitimately good version of the old school tagger. He’ll do a lot of the Ling lean on Nick then work off him at contest. It’ll be a completely different looking role and much more effective because he won’t need to wrap arms around at stoppage to nullify Nick. The Saints also go to it regularly so they know how to get Windhager involved on offence. It’s one where it can quickly get away from us with Nick having 6 to Windhager’s 16 at HT or something. That’s when it’s dangerous for us.

The funny thing is now the only thing we'll hear about in the lead up is 'Who's tagging Daicos" when our other mids are perfectly capable of winning the game for us with Nick not dominating

 

[Scodog10]

The funny thing is now the only thing well hear about in the lead up is 'Who's tagging Daicos" when our other mids are perfectly capable of winning the game for us with Nick not dominating

I’d feel a lot more comfortable about it myself if it were legal hah. I unfortunately don’t think it plays out like that v St Kilda. There won’t be a will they won’t they Lyon will just send Windhager to him who’s a completely different kettle of fish to Langdon.

 

[Harry O]

I’d feel a lot more comfortable about it myself if it were legal hah. I unfortunately don’t think it plays out like that v St Kilda. There won’t be a will they won’t they Lyon will just send Windhager to him who’s a completely different kettle of fish to Langdon.

Ross will flood the midfield like he did against Freo. Reduce the game to a mess and hope we end up rolling over 60-50

 

[Scodog10]

Ross will flood the midfield like he did against Freo. Reduce the game to a mess and hope we end up rolling over 60-50

I don’t doubt that Lyon will have plans on plans for us because he’s the number one win out of nowhere coach in the league currently, but that’s not a plan that’s likely to work, IMO.

Fremantle’s ball movement has improved out of sight since that night and we’re in a different league again to the way they’re moving it now. If they can stop our run and intercept mark like the Dees did it could work, but I don’t think Wilke, Caminiti, Howard and Marshall are as capable of doing what May, Turner, Lever and Gawn did yesterday. It’ll be a coaches box battle though because they always are against Lyon coached teams which usually means a dogfight…

 

[jimmy35]

I may get howled down as being a sook, biased etc here.

However, in half a century of watching football, I just thought what Langdon was doing all day was just a poor indictment on the game. There was no intent to play football at all. Most of the time, Langdon was not even facing the contest, purely looking to prevent one player from getting near the contest at all.

That a player can stand at a stoppage with his back to the play and just shepherd, scrag, hold, grab and pull a player so that he cannot play or be involved is just not good for the game as a spectacle or a sport. There is tagging and then there is what Langdon was doing, which -in my opinion- was crossing the line all day.

You want to go to the football and take your kids to the footy and be able to watch the best players have a fair crack at playing their best football. Sending players out to not play football at all, but to ignore the game and do whatever is necessary and whatever they can get away with (and the umpires miss), regardless of if it is within the rules; this is not football in my opinion.

I feel possibly a rule change is in order: where, at a stoppage, a player must be made to face the contest, or stand a meter off another player to have his back turned, is in order.

It was ugly, it was hard to watch and it was a dampener on what was an otherwise great day for football.

And it was a credit to Nick Daicos that he was able to lift so impressively in the last quarter.

end of rant

Anywhere on the ground those are free kicks every day. To most players not called Nick Daicos the same applies. The club really needs to go to task with the AFL on this. They have enough media push to bring this to the top.
**** scraggers like Langdon and scragger clubs getting free rein with this shit.

 

[nahnah]

Wind him and then coat hanger him. The answer is spelt out for us

A Brayden Maynard leaping smother attempt