Reza Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 What do you think about having DeGuzman in place of Tony Menezes in the back? If Menezes doesn't get back into shape which is probably likely considering his club fortunes, would DeGuzman be a good replacement considering that he sometimes seems to be playing defence for his team? The Gold Cup showed that Canada's worst position was defence. There was a general lack of speed and vision coming from the backline which resulted in giving away about 4-5 glorious chances to Costa Rica and 2 cheap goals to Cuba. Would a combination of a rock like Devos combined with two speedy defenders like DeGuzman and McKenna, one with real foot skills and field vision solve that problem? Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Reza What do you think about having DeGuzman in place of Tony Menezes in the back? I don't really know if that's good. De Guzman is quite skilled and is better as an offensive midfielder. I know his team Hannover 96 has him in the last game as left back, but he was also used as striker and midfielder previously . He was also quoted in ISM that he admires his Albanian teammate LATA (sp?) who also played an attacking role with Bobic (last year). I think the problem with the GC 2003 was the reliance on Fenwick and Hastings, both who got burned several times. Pozniak will eventually develop, but in the GC he was out of place several times. I know you think Menezes' absence was very significant and I somewhat agree, but from what I saw the problem essentially was cohesion with the whole team and lack of finishing. Menezes has good anticipation and control, but I think if the team had more time to "gel" together the results may have been different. Don't forget Cuba, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and even Martinique had more games and weeks to train for the GC. We had, what, a week ... and the Germany game, where several did not participate in the GC. Did we really expect to win? De Vos, McKenna, and someone else. I would rather use him in midfield. I think the challenge is up front, where if Radzinski and Dwayne are not available, do we use McKenna again? Hmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Reza What do you think about having DeGuzman in place of Tony Menezes in the back? If Menezes doesn't get back into shape which is probably likely considering his club fortunes, would DeGuzman be a good replacement considering that he sometimes seems to be playing defence for his team? The Gold Cup showed that Canada's worst position was defence. There was a general lack of speed and vision coming from the backline which resulted in giving away about 4-5 glorious chances to Costa Rica and 2 cheap goals to Cuba. Would a combination of a rock like Devos combined with two speedy defenders like DeGuzman and McKenna, one with real foot skills and field vision solve that problem? Reza My view. A naturally gifted and creative offensive threat in MF has been somthing of an achilles heal for Canada for a long time. The problem that I see with your suggestion is that it is solving one problem by creating another and the attacking central MF is perhaps one of the most important players on a team. JDG in the back line might solve the teams penchant for hoofing long balls and might bring some much needed help by having someone who is confident on ball. But is it worth it? there are others who could step in at the back and not feel out of place given that they play these roles at their clubs ( eg>; Imhof, Brennan, stalteri, Klukowski, McKenna etc). T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 Speed and skill at the back are defintiely problems for us. I like to think that Menezes will come back, as he is still reasonably young. In hindsight, he would probably have been beter off taking the alleged MLS offer than going to China. We need DeGuzman in the midfield however, and I think that left back is likely the one spot where we have the horses, at least potentially. I'd like to get a look see at Jazic - and a commitment from the man - back there. Klukowski as well, although I do see him having a brighter future as a centre back. I can live with Pozniak as the second choice at left back. He has laways looked better than Hastings to me. And he is at least starting for his club. The thing of it is that we need to create some depth for the back line as well. This is gong to require Holger to decide who his top 8 choices are and give them some playing time. I do not think he can aford to move them around game to game. The opinions expressed above are just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Observer Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 DeGuzman is simply too small to play at the back in a 3-5-1. He can only play left back in a 4-4-2 or somewhere in the midfield so there really is no debate on the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reza Posted August 5, 2003 Author Share Posted August 5, 2003 But you need someone with skills in the backline. This is strictly based on their club activities. DeGuzman started out as a defender and if he continues in that position, maybe use him there. As his replacement, I was thinking more of Nsaliwa who according to Ed is playing midfield for his club. Just throwing an idea around, but there is no question that we need someone nifty back there. Devos is too slow and Fenwick and Hasting are just not up there. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 Perhaps if he played a type of libero role that Beckenbauer made famous. That way Canada could enjoy the offensive strengths he brings to the field. But is he good enough to play such a role (at least right now)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Observer Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 I agree you need someone with skills in the backline but the guy is 5'7" and would be killed in the air by any team with an average sized striker (ie. 5'9"). I am certainly one for playing players where they play for their club team as much as possible but he doesn't play central defense for his club whether as a sweeper or stopper. He plays full back and he certainly could play wing back for us in a 3-5-2 but I think Brennan is better in that position. Alternativley, he could play on the left in a 4-4-2 with Brennan as the full back (or vice versa). An come on, the guy is no Beckenbauer. Moreover, how many sides play with a libero any more? Not many. I agree that we need speed at the back and personally think this is by far the weakest area of our side now and at least in the short term. My personal hope is that Menezes starts playing regularly again, Brad Parker finds a side and some form, and that Kevin Harmse or Winston Marshal develop quickly in the next year or so to challenge for places. Otherwise, we will be in some trouble at the back against the fast paced Central American/Carribbean sides in Qualifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 Our problem at the Gold Cup was not simply an issue of slow and unskilled defenders, but also one of a very weak, gap-riddled midfield. Stalteri should not have been a striker; he should have been in the center mid. Corazzin should have played behind McKenna, or even better, Corrazin and Xausa should have played up front so that McKenna could play at back. Anyhow, I am leaning more and more towards this line-up: Hirsch or Pat Nsaliwa DeVos Jazic Imhoff Hume Stalteri Bent Brennan (or DeGuzman) Radz DD --- I'd even consider putting Stalteri on right Defense and let DeGuzman take the central midfield role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reza Posted August 5, 2003 Author Share Posted August 5, 2003 Well Central D would be for Devos I guess to cover all the aerial attacks. Somene like McKenna can help out too. DeGuzman will be the guy who can get the ball out of trouble zone without booting it 60 meters every time. Or I guess Nsaliwa can do that too.. Irregardless, that hole must be filled with someone skillful and speedy and someone who can start out attacks and defend as well. As for Menezes, well, I am not convinved he will be back. One would hope so, but to what degree and capacity and length (i.e. he may not be fit at the beginning or end or middle of a campaign), even that is in question. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Oranje Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 de Guzman and Stalteri, as of this week, are Bundesliga starters and it would seem unusual for a full-strength Canadian team not to start both. Both started in the Bundesliga this week as fullbacks in a 4-4-2. In my opinion, they along with Radzinski must be considered automatic starters for Canada when they are available. They are the only Canadians playing regularly in Europe's top four leagues Fullbacks can easily move into midfield roles. It is not as easy for them to move into a central defender role (although I noticed Reiziger playing there for Barcelona against Manchester U). As for size, de Guzman would be fine as a left fullback (checked that he is about the same size as Roberto Carlos). The fact that Hannover feels comfortable with him there should mean that Canada would not be weakened defensively with him in that position. The real question is whether de Guzman would be more valuable to the Canadian team in another position (ie more offensive). Also, Nsaliwa is now starting in a defensive right midfield role in a 3-5-2 with Regensburg. Bundesliga-2 is a strong league and he could play anywhere on the right side or central midfield roles for Canada. Brennan and Jazic are also good options on the left side but not at the expense of a starting role for de Guzman. When healthy and available, these three should also be starters (Jazic may make the most sense as the left back). DeVos also will play at a high level this year. However, the key is having the right defensive partner for him. I see the rest of the side filling in around these players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reza Posted August 5, 2003 Author Share Posted August 5, 2003 Agreed. Devos, DeGuzman,Stalteri, Nsaliwa, Jazic, Radzinski and Brennan play the highest level of football on a consistent level (well we hope that Nsaliwa would) which counts for 7/10 field positions. Then you have other players like McKenna and Imhof and Klukowski that play relatively competitve football too regularly. After this, you have players like Xausa with limited playing, Rogers, Ian Hume, Dwayne DeRosario, Bent, Martin Nash, Hasting, Fenwick and other A-leauge and Scandanivian league players. You also have players like MC^2 that could play as well. The offensive line doesn't seem too shabby if we have the services TR. Even without him and with a healthy DD and Hume things shouldn't be too bad. There are many midfielders as well. Granted, no major playmakers, but still decent enough to maintain some possession and create chances. Stalteri, Brennan, Nash, Jazic, Bent, Nsaliwa and Imhof and even DeGuzman are all some of the available players. It's back in defence that things are shakier than ever. With Fletcher pretty much finished and Menezes in limbo, that solid trio that helped Canada in the early Holger days is gone. And that trio really needs a building again. So, we probably have to sacrifice a speedy midfielder with some vision to cover up for the losses in that line, unless Menezes returns. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 If Menezes can't "comeback", then we have a deep hole in the middle of the back line. None of the ususal suspects i.e. Fenwick, can fill that gap, nor can the guys in the wing i.e. Pizzolitto or Reda. Mckenna is closest to competent, but also happens to be noworse than our Number 3 striker, barring the return of Pesch. AS it stands for Canada, there are 3 or 4 guys on the cusp of moving into the National team permanently. These are Klukowski, Hutchinson, Hume and MC2 (the latter being the "iffyist" of the bunch). There are also two guys on the outside whom could undoubtedly help the national team in Jazic and Aguiar. If 4 or 5 of these guys can figure in a year, and Holger shows enough sense to drop the guys who no longer cut it, we are in pretty good shape to take a good run at qualifying. Hume and Hutchinson are important additions - as would Aguiar - because they resolve the right back situation: Nsaliwa, Bent and Imhoff are free to move out of the midfield. Frankly, after the German game, I hope to see Nsaliwa as our starting right back for the next decade. Jazic and Klukowski would solidify the Left back position and Pozniak could fill in as third choice. If I were coach of the Men's National team, I would be looking to develop a first choice lineup that looked a little like this: Hirschfeld Nsaliwa Menezes (or McKenna) De Vos Jazic Hume DeGuzman Stalteri Brennan DD and Radzinski Key Subs Bent (RB, RH) Klukowski (LB, LH) Hutchinson (AM DM) Aguiar (DM) Imhoff (DM, RH, RB) Pesch (S) A return to form by Menezes eliminates one glaring hole: The lack of a competent third centre back. The other hole is depth at Striker. Its a long drop after Pesch, and we don't even know if he is still willing to play. And our Strikers are injury prone. Now, this does, admittedly, require Hutchinson and Hume to upgrade their game, but both, on appearances, seem to be doing just that nicely. Hume has far more ball skills that the much hyped DeMarcus Beasley, although Beasley has better jets and a stronger commitment to the defensive side of the equation. I think Hume will add an exciting element to the Canadian attack - along with some speed. He certainly did against Cuba. The nicest thing about this lineup is the speed. Excellent speed up front, excellent to good throughout the midfield and on the flanks of the back line. Slow centre backs however. No worries ladies and gents. These are just the idle speculations of a guy on vacation avoiding yard work. Holger won't go for a fast exciting lineup when he can dress slow plodding but loyal and very experienced pros. The opinions expressed above are just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David C. Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 I think that Julian is playing left-back at Hanover because they have a glaring hole there and want to find a way to get Julian on the field. With a more-than-capable midfield, Julian's only opening is on defense. This is not a case of a club thinking that this is his best position. For our nat's, I would keep him in the midfield hole for a few reasons: 1. We need skill up front, more that on the backline. A midfield creator has been a glaring weakness for a while - Julian is the perfect solution. 2. It's his best/ most natural position. He will eventually play there for a club. 3. We need speed, more than offensive skill, on defense. Other players can fill this void: Nsaliwa, Pozniak, Fletcher on the right; Jazic, Hastings, Kuklowski, maybe Brennan on the left. 4. Now that we are using a 4-4-2 formation, we don't need a true sweeper anymore (Menezes) and we have a glut of centre-def's. If we want a true sweeper, getting Menezes back to form is our best hope. Otherwise Pizzolitto, McKenna and maybe DeVos could fill this need. I wonder if Hutchinson would fit in here - he would add some skill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 I agree with the concensus that we need DeGuzman in the midfield. I would rather push Brennan to left back and have DeGuzman in the left mid slot rather than shift him into the backline. I think his quickness on the ball and his runs off the ball are invaluable to our midfield. This whole center back discussion is one of the reasons Holger drives me so crazy. We're sitting here, less than a year away from WCQ and we have no idea who should partner DeVos in the back. It was obviously a problem area since Watson retired and yet after using Fenwick over and over and over, we've yet to try McKenna and DeVos together (probably too slow), we haven't looked at Oppong, we haven't tried Reda, we haven't used Rogers in more than a year, we've tried Pizzolitto, but only with Fenwick. Pozniak and Clarke have both swept before, maybe they can add the pace we need in the middle (I have my doubts, but until we actually find the right combination I'm open to anything). Does anyone remember how Clarke looked with DeVos in his 30 mins against Switzerland? Obviously part of the problem has been DeVos' injury woes last year, but even when healthy I believe he's been paired with Fenwick dating back to the 2002 Gold Cup. Here's a scary, yet possibly workable idea — Nick Dasovic. He's playing in the back in Vancouver, while he looks a step behind in the midfield, I'm not sure how his pace would hold up in the back. He reads the game well and could maybe slot in next to DeVos? In any event I wish we'd try to find some sort of combination that works since it is obviously the weakest part of the team right now. Why oh why can't someone give Menezes a job. cheers, matthew The car is on fire and there is no driver at the wheel and the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides. A dark wind blows. The government is corrupt and we are all so many drunks with the radio on and the curtains drawn. We’re trapped in the belly of this horrible machine and the machine is bleeding to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reza Posted August 5, 2003 Author Share Posted August 5, 2003 The fact that we are aware of these problems in 2003 is actually not too bad. At least they can be looked at. Missing Menezes right now actually has shown a huge gap that needs to be filled. If we had him there in the Gold CUp and he was injured or out of job in 2004 , it would have been a bigger problem. I think we should plan the team without him. If he makes it, well great. That would be the optimal case. Otherwise, we should have one or two players who can replace him. Same thing with Rad. I think we should plan the team without him. If he makes it, then we are in better shape. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Oranje Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 The thought of deVos and McKenna together in the back doesn't give me any comfort. Oppong is not playing at a high level. Actually an interesting concept may emerge with Nsaliwa. He is currently playing defensive right midfield in a 3-5-2 with Regensburg and from all accounts seems to be successful.. Moving from that position to a central defender role may be easier than taking someone like Pozniak or Klukowski and putting them there (Klukowski would be interesting if he is playing central defence now). Also, I believe that the level of play in the Bundesliga 2 would be consistently higher than Sweden or Belgium. The other option would be to go back to a 3-5-2 with Pozniak and Jazic or Klukowski flanking deVos with Nsaliwa and (Imhof or ???) in defensive midfield.. Then Stalteri wide right and Brennan wide left with de Guzman in the middle behind the Strikers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 I think Tam would be a better choice for sweeper than De Guzman (based on height alone) but in the end I don't think either should play there if they've no experience at it at the club level. I think Pizzolitto will be the next person tried there instead of Fenwick. His distribution & ball control aren't great, but on a par with Fenwick & he's a lot quicker. I would like to see Reda given a chance in central defense & even Rogers (given that the latter has never played in central defense for Canada). And if we have enough healthy strikers, McKenna should also be looked at. Even without Radzinski & Pesch, its gotten to the point that I'd like us to go with De Rosario & Hume (two players who will always show up when called) up front. Also we need to look at which strikers will get called for the Olympic team besides Hume & Friend - I'm thinking of Ngon & Belotte (especially once the latter hooks up with another club). Also we have to keep Xausa in the mix, we simply don't have enough strikers playing at a high enough level otherwise. Another player who might fit the sweeper bill is Pozniak, as one of his strengths is reading the play. His ball control skills are better than Fenwicks, but his passing is erratic. But he has some experience in that position & we have other options at right back (especially if Harmse & Ledgerwood continue to develop rapidly over the next year from being in Europe - both are 18, but I wouldn't be surprised to see either given a look with the national team sometime following the U20 finals). The other problem spot is at left back, as Hastings shouldn't start for Canada if he doesn't play regularly at the club level. We have other options (Jazic, Klukowski to name but two) lets start using them. De Guzman must play in midfield, I think he'd tear most Concacaf defenses apart by beating his man & moving laterally across the field, allowing other players to get open & into scoring opportunities. If Tam starts doing this regularly in the Bundesliga 2 we should also expect him to be very effective for Canada against Concacaf opposition. Costa Rica did not take too kindly to Canizalez having the ability to run at them with the ball in the Gold Cup - we should be able to surprise a lot of Concacaf teams with our ability to do this, as traditionally Canada hasn't had too many players with this ability. We have so many possibilities on the field & they keep growing as the player pool does. We need to continue to look at them all. I really hope that the single friendly announced for the rest of 2003 is an indication that we are going to have our best players for Olympic qualifying in November when we play El Salvador (assuming of course we beat the US Virgin Islands). Even the wolf can learn. Even the sheep can turn. Even the frog can become at last the prince. - Peter Hammill, Over (1977) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Reza The fact that we are aware of these problems in 2003 is actually not too bad. At least they can be looked at. My fear is that we've had the same problems since 2002 and they aren't being looked at. I think Pizzolitto or Reda are the safest options. They're both unflashy, but should be able to do the job. Clarke, Pozniak, Nsaliwa are riskier ideas, but they haev more upside if they work out. I actually don't mind the idea of Tam in the middle. But I do remember him trying to dribble his way out of trouble too often out of the back at the U20 level. I think he's matured and think he'd be more composed, but who knows. Hopefully we'll at least get to look at some of these options. Even our other problem areas have lots of possible solutions. With Menezes clubless we're really looking a group of guys who almost zero senior international experience as a centre back in a 4-4-2. Clarke has 30 mins and Pizzolitto has one game, McKenna has two starts I think. Fenwick is the only one with experience. That's what worries me about the last year. I fully expect Holger plans on using Fenwick all the way into qualifying. cheers, matthew The car is on fire and there is no driver at the wheel and the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides. A dark wind blows. The government is corrupt and we are all so many drunks with the radio on and the curtains drawn. We’re trapped in the belly of this horrible machine and the machine is bleeding to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Oranje Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 Actually, I think Nsaliwa's greatest strength defensively is man marking. That would suggest he is probably better suited as a defensive midfielder. I would say also that in the absence of National team experience, we need to look at players that play regularly at a high level with their club. I agree that you don't want to be switching people into central defence if they haven't played there regularly. De Vos is definitely one of two central defenders in a back four and he needs to be paired with someone capable of covering him with some speed and quickness as well as have some ball handling ability. I would think Klukowski would be the best option if he plays there at club level. If not, I would rather go with Nsaliwa after a year in the intense Bundisliga 2 atmosphere as a defensive midfielder switching to central defence than going with an A-league central defender. It's not their capability as much as it is the adjustment to the increased pace and experience under pressure of the zero tolerance for error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 The question is.....how long will Holger continue to go with Hastings, Fenwick & Dasovic? Somebody has to take the fall for the Cuba debacle, we certainly can't rest on our laurels when our laurels consist of elimination by an all-domestic Cuban team. I don't think we'll see Dasovic again, he'll be 35 soon & will be 35 & a half years old by the next A-league season. Considering that we have a plethora of other options in midfield that need to get playing time asap, plus the fact that Nick will be doing some coaching in the off-seson rather than playing indoor to keep in shape etc., I don't think we will see him until the next A-league season starts at the earliest - if ever (and that's if he returns to the A-league next season). With Hastings, it was clear that Holger blamed him for the 2nd goal by Cuba ("that individual mistake cost us" was the quote) and I don't think too many people can argue about fault - except maybe it being Holger's fault for starting a guy who has not played much at all in the previous year at the club level. We've seen Holger choose other options when players appeared to be at fault in matches that really cost Canada (the disappearance of Jeff Clarke as a regular from the National team can likely be traced back directly to his role in allowing Angus Eve to get off that shot which started our elimination from the 2002 World Cup), will it happen here, especially when Hastings doesn't play regularly for his club team & thus will continue to remain rusty? If we stay at a 4-4-2, and with Holger likely to keep De Guzman, Stalteri & Imhof in the midfield with one of Hume, Nsaliwa & Bent on the right side of midfield, that would suggest Brennan (or Jazic) could be moved to left-back when we are close to full-strength. You never know what will happen with Jazic, but Brennan overlapping at left-back with De Guzman might be a more likely possibility. And Holger seems prepared to play Hutchison anywhere in midfield, which might lead to further Brennan at left back possibilities. And then there is Canizalez emerging on the left as well. And Klukowski.... the list of possiblities there seems to go on & we should be able to solve it quite easily As for Fenwick, that's the big question. Are all of his previous mistakes finally going to catch up with him? Are we finally going to see someone else (with speed) paired with De Vos? A reliable sweeper is the tougher question, as its the one area where easy & obvious solutions don't present themselves. Its the #1 problem area to address (along with increasing our striker depth, though I think that will happen to some extent over the next couple of years). And if we can still believe in tomorrow, yesterday will disappear soon enough - IQ, The Wake (1985) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Oranje Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 Again, if Nsaliwa gains a year of seasoning in Bundesliga 2, he should start ahead of Imhof or somewhere in defence.. We can't afford to leave someone out playing at that level and so young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 I actually like Tam as a right back. I like Bent in the midfield, though he could play at right back as well. I agree Tam need to find somewhere on the field, but I wouldn't mind freeing him up to get forward more. Is Klukowski definitely moving into the middle for La Louriviere? If so I'm all for him getting a shot with us. I still think Reda or Nevio could be the answer. I'm not too worried about our attacking depth. Well if we keep ignoring Pesch I'll worry a bit, but Radz and DeRo are top notch. Add in a Pesch who can still do the business, Hume and MC2 almost there and hopefully any one of a number of youngsters ready to emerge by 06 as Pesch's career winds down I think we're in good shape. Plus McKenna has proven he be effective if we need a target man. With Onstad's decent play and Stamatopolous starting to come on, I'm not even really worried about our keeping depth right now. Asside from the actual squad selection, the only concern for me is central defence. We have a lot of options and depth at all other positions. cheers, matthew It's alright, it's okay, there's something to live for... Jesus told me so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachesl Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 All great discussion, coming out like welcome fruit. I don't think anyone would argue that we have some valuable assets with many alternative ways of using them. The problem is that we have to have access to these assets, treat them with respect, and then use them intelligently. This requires, in practice, shrewd planning, training, scheduling, bargaining with club teams, and comunication, communication, communication. We have to be able to calculate which players we can do without, and save them for when we really need them. If we waste our possibilities by trying to pull in a full A-squad from Europe for the first round of WCQ and the Olympics between now and next summer, we may find they won't be there when we need them for the all important second round next summer, and in 2005 if we make it to the hex. I would suggest that one or two friendlies in Europe are what we should concentrate on trying to get a A-squad together for before next summer. Call this brinkmanship, fine, I call it reality. But, for the CSA and team management, planning is the first base we may never even get to, and without this we are lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reza Posted August 6, 2003 Author Share Posted August 6, 2003 Yeah, looking at the players list, there is really no reason we shouldn't be in the final hex. Once you take Mexico and USA out, there are not many teams in CONCACAF who have 6 or 7 players playing top flight Euro soccer in CONCACAF. Off course the gelling problem is an issue and the distance and club commitments and grumpy coach factors are also relevant. But nonetheless, we should have enough to make it t final 6 at least. But we must also address the big issues that are open for everyone to see. The backline problem was all too glaring. Despite the midfield's weakness, it was obvious that an injection of Bent, Brennan, DeGuzman, Nsaliwa, and maybe Jazic would have turned that midfield upside down. But it's hard to say the same about the defence. And that's why it should be addressed starting with the Finland match. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.