CSA: Miller Announces Finland Roster

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by DJT

Yes, but if you want to talk stats, that's 9 goals in 45 caps. McKenna, who is "supposed" to be a defender, has 6 in 18, which is 67% more proficient.

Also, The last goal he scored for us was in a friendly versus Honduras in 2000. Before that you have to go back to October 1997. Thats seven years ago and two WCQ's later. Except for Honduras, none of his 8 other goals in 45 caps have come against anything resembling a quality side. he also hasn't scored many big goals for us. Three of his goals came in the early rounds of WCQ against Cuba ( who very weak at that time) and panama. In two WCQ semis and one hex, plus the conferderations cup and other Gold Cup, he has no goals.

[david]

there goes the scottish mafia again.when you are 13 years you must be 190lb and 6ft-2 to have national team potential.that's why owen hargreaves,mike klukowski and julian deguzman were cut from the u17 teams by that great coach taylor.so if you want to play for canada you have to play for a third division english or scottish team.

any dummy who has followed those guys careers could see greatness.

when will these guys klukowski and deguzman be identifed as part of canada's future.see u.s.a donovan and debeasley(?).

[redhat]

The good news is the group of players available for this friendly.

I couldn't believe Radzinski was actually playing. Rad and Dwayne

upfront with Pesch coming in as super-sub! Yikes.

I know that everyone is disappointed that De Guzman and Aguiar are not

called, but at least Stalteri, Bent, Bircham, and Nsaliwa are going to

be there. It'll be a decent midfield in any event. I think De Guzman,

who doesn't want to lose his place at Hannover96, may defer to later

friendlies or to games that may have more meaning (WCQ).

Comparing this to the Gold Cup roster, it's a vast improvement;

and this friendly may also serve as a nice send off for certain

vets like Fenwick & Watson.

Am I correct in assuming that Sportsnet will show this match

on tape-delay this SATURDAY??? Bring it on!

[Andrew W]

Yes it is on Sportsnet tape delay according to my schedule[:0]. My question is with the English Prem on hold for a week, why not show the game live? Maybe the start time in Finland conflicts with the women's game, although a semi prime-time slot isn't bad. [8D]

[Canuck Oranje]

Re: de Guzman

First, if there was ever a time for him to play in a friendly, he has been red carded and faces a suspension in the Bundesliga. That means he will not be able to play Hannover's next game anyway and maybe two. I am still hoping there is some understanding between the Bundesliga and the CSA about not calling him because of the red card but I don't know that.

I will say again. This would be considered a scandal in England, Germany, or Brazil if one of the top players was not named. At very least, we need to know the reasons. I don't think there is any question that de Guzman should be an automatic call up for Canada.

quote:Originally posted by redhat

The good news is the group of players available for this friendly.

I couldn't believe Radzinski was actually playing. Rad and Dwayne

upfront with Pesch coming in as super-sub! Yikes.

I know that everyone is disappointed that De Guzman and Aguiar are not

called, but at least Stalteri, Bent, Bircham, and Nsaliwa are going to

be there. It'll be a decent midfield in any event. I think De Guzman,

who doesn't want to lose his place at Hannover96, may defer to later

friendlies or to games that may have more meaning (WCQ).

Comparing this to the Gold Cup roster, it's a vast improvement;

and this friendly may also serve as a nice send off for certain

vets like Fenwick & Watson.

Am I correct in assuming that Sportsnet will show this match

on tape-delay this SATURDAY??? Bring it on!

[ray]

My take:

I'm more concerned about the fact Aguiar is missing rather than deGuzman. It seems odd that after going out of their way to bring back some players, like Pesch, Bircham and Watson (to the CSA's credit) and welcoming Jazic, that Fernando is not included on this squad. There is obviously something else going on between the CSA and Aguiar. Too bad, I feel he could help Canada in qualifying if only because he adds badly needed depth and experience to the player pool. Julian's abscence can be explained by the red card or because we are saving him for WC and Olympic qualifying. As Ed said on the other forum, we should be concerned if he is not called for something bigger that a friendly.

Also notably abscent is Kenny Stamatopolous. Onstad is getting ready for playoffs and is a known quantity. Why call him up? It would be more important to see if Kenny has what it takes to be the #2 or even replace Pat as our top 'keeper. Its a mistake not to try Kenny.

On the positive side, its nice to see Jazic and Radz are playing (crossed fingers). Seeing what Hume, Birch and Pesch can do is also good. Look forward to seeing the match. Thanks Sportsnet!

[Canuck Oranje]

My point remains... Where is the explanation?

This would not be a topic of discussion if a legitimate explanation is given.

As for significance, DeGuzman is a Top 3 Canadian and only 22. He represents our present and future. The least the CSA can do is give us and the press an explanation.

quote:Originally posted by ray

My take:

I'm more concerned about the fact Aguiar is missing rather than deGuzman. It seems odd that after going out of their way to bring back some players, like Pesch, Bircham and Watson (to the CSA's credit) and welcoming Jazic, that Fernando is not included on this squad. There is obviously something else going on between the CSA and Aguiar. Too bad, I feel he could help Canada in qualifying if only because he adds badly needed depth and experience to the player pool. Julian's abscence can be explained by the red card or because we are saving him for WC and Olympic qualifying. As Ed said on the other forum, we should be concerned if he is not called for something bigger that a friendly.

Also notably abscent is Kenny Stamatopolous. Onstad is getting ready for playoffs and is a known quantity. Why call him up? It would be more important to see if Kenny has what it takes to be the #2 or even replace Pat as our top 'keeper. Its a mistake not to try Kenny.

On the positive side, its nice to see Jazic and Radz are playing (crossed fingers). Seeing what Hume, Birch and Pesch can do is also good. Look forward to seeing the match. Thanks Sportsnet!

[Rupert]

QPR had no option but to release Bircham, whether they liked it or not. Same with Bent and Plymouth, even though Canada's game is a friendly. It's an official FIFA international date, hence players called up by their countries have to be released.

In England clubs can call off games if they have three players called up for international duty. Plymouth have a selection crisis this weekend with Bent away, another midfielder away with Northern Ireland Under-21 and two other midfielders injured. The Plymouth manager even thought about signing Luxembourg's No 2 goalie (who is a free agent) to get this weekend's game called off! But that didn't work out.

Bent has been mostly good this season (I have seen every Plymouth game) although last weekend his passing was often inaccurate. His defensive play has been excellent though.

[Peschfan]

Hey Free Kick...

Whats your beef with Pesch?

All you do is put him down? What's our problem? Who else are we gonna have in attack options? We need more than 2 strikers to be called up and I do not count MCkenna as a striker. we need him in defence more desperately. We should welcome all the players we can and Pesch is a very useful player. He is starting and scoring again with one of the best teams in the first division on the fringe of the premiership. You say his goal rate is 1 in 5. So I guess since Radz only scores about 1 in 6 and De Rosario 1 in 8 for canada they shouldnt play either. Common. you cant judge a player entirely on that. Not everyone is gonna like every player, thats football but lets at least be supportive and give him a chance. Its not his fault Holger wouldnt call him for Canada. He got 2 years of scoring oppourtunites taken away from him. Lets just move on with it already. You've made your point, its weak but thats what the forum is for. We can voice our opinions but lets get some decent facts to back it up. Hes a goalscorer Simple as that. He's sixth all time for Canada has scored over 100 goals in England and is still scoring. So I guess I just dont see the negative of having a in form striker play for Canada.

[BearcatSA]

Miller played with Aguiar in the last days of the Lenarduzzi regime and I wonder if the two didn't hit it off then. Hope it isn't something as petty as that.[?]

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Peschfan

Hey Free Kick...

Whats your beef with Pesch?

All you do is put him down? What's our problem? Who else are we gonna have in attack options? We need more than 2 strikers to be called up and I do not count MCkenna as a striker. we need him in defence more desperately. We should welcome all the players we can and Pesch is a very useful player. He is starting and scoring again with one of the best teams in the first division on the fringe of the premiership. You say his goal rate is 1 in 5. So I guess since Radz only scores about 1 in 6 and De Rosario 1 in 8 for canada they shouldnt play either. Common. you cant judge a player entirely on that. Not everyone is gonna like every player, thats football but lets at least be supportive and give him a chance. Its not his fault Holger wouldnt call him for Canada. He got 2 years of scoring oppourtunites taken away from him. Lets just move on with it already. You've made your point, its weak but thats what the forum is for. We can voice our opinions but lets get some decent facts to back it up. Hes a goalscorer Simple as that. He's sixth all time for Canada has scored over 100 goals in England and is still scoring. So I guess I just dont see the negative of having a in form striker play for Canada.

I have nothing against Pesch and if you think that I have a beef with pesch, you might be interested to know that I believe that I have been much harder on Corrazin. I could turn it around and ask whats your beef with Radzinski, Derosario or Mckenna because, anytime someone suggests that Pesch should start it means that two these three would have to sit. Also I am looking at the fact and just stating what I believe, nothing else. I don't believe our last two WCQ efforts were a success and I do believe lack of scoring was the main reason. Pesch is striker and was part of the last two WCQ's. At that time we seemed like team whereby scoring was a real ordeal, whereas it doesn't seem to be the same when Rad, Mckenna, or derosario play. They have scored goals and and at times made it look easy and against ( at times) good opposition). Pesch used to be my favourite Canadian player. But times change and I am able to look at the fact too; a striker's principle role is to score. I would say nothing on him if people weren't insisting that he should be preferred over Radzinski and deRosario.

[Gian-Luca]

I haven't seen too many people "insist" that Pesch should be preferred over Radzinski or De Rosario. I'd bet the vast majority, if not quite all, of the people who would like to see Pesch back in the squad wouldn't start him ahead of those two. What the majority of people have said they want to see is Pesch used as a "super-sub" the way he is for his club. To be fair to Peschfan, your posts (& the volume of them) about Pesch on both boards would certainly give the impression to someone who (unlike me) doesn't know you better, that you don't even want to see Pesch play for Canada at all, not even as the "super-sub" that many of us envision him as.

I'll repeat my basic points - we don't have that much depth yet at the striker position to continue to ignore someone playing at such a high level. As well, I am curious to see what Pesch would do when paired with a striker of high quality for Canada for the first time since 1997 (the good old days, when he did actually score fairly regularly) - even if its only for 45 minutes as a 2nd half sub.

[Canuck Oranje]

Regarding our strikers, I think it is safe to say that Radzinski should be one of our automatics when he is healthy and available (like Stalteri and de Guzman). What we need to know is who partners best with him.

Central defence on the team named is weak. It will be interesting to see if Miller experaments a little here or goes to a past solution and hopes for a different result.

Finally, this is a friendly so let's use a lot of players and make some decisions about the usefulness of some (particularly the older players).

[Peschfan]

I have nothing against Radzinski De Rosario or Mckenna. I never say Pesch should start over Radzinski but rather be paired with him for the friendly to see how they would work as a partnership, otherwise ya he would be most effective as a super sub, and have Dero and Radz start. As for mckenna, well I think we need him more desperately in the back as someone with prescence to dominate all the headers. He is frozen out of the first team right now with his club and is mainly used as a defender when he does play, so I just think he would be of more use to us in the back where we need it most if we have the likes of Radz Dero and Pesch available, not to mention Hume if needed also to choose from in attack.

[James]

I'm on the same page as Peschfan. I don't get or like all the Pesch bashing. It's been harder too be critical of Pesch since he's been scoring but I can't believe how many people have knocked him. Peschisolido has always brought a strong game to the National team. Starting with radz or coming on as a sub, Pesch is going to be a big part of our offence against Finland. Personally, I'd like to see him start. Have DD come on in the second or even start all three.

I'm more concerned(as usual) with our back line. deVos leaves a big whole to fill in an already weak defence. It would have been nice to see Reda get a call. In midfield, deGuzman isn't a worry. I'm sure it's a club thing. Somebody should get to the bottom of the Aguiar snub. I don't get that one. He should be a cinch in our midfield.

[matthew]

I agree with the people backing Pesch. He creates a lot and he creates a lot of space for other people with his ability off of the dribble. I think DeRosario is a similar type of player, but Pesch has experience and is perfectly suited to coming off the bench. I’m happy with the three of them. We can push Stalteri or McKenna (or DeGuzman and Hume I suppose) up there in an emergency, but those three should be the only three natural strikers we call in my opinion.

If we decide the aerial game is going to important, than by all means McKenna is a good option and a proven goal-scorer, but if you have a front six of Radzinski, DeRosario, Bent, Brennan, Stalteri and DeGuzman - you have guys who are adept at playing a certain style with a lot of pace and a lot of skill. I think throwing McKenna into that mix, might kind of skew the way we play. If we’re unable to play the ball to feet and are having trouble creating, we can surely let Brennan and Bircham cross and Radzinski prefers playing with a big target man, but I would prefer to try to work a nice short-passing game.

About the middle of our defence - I don't see this as being any worse than it has been for the last year. In fact it’s probably better. We have Watson back (old, but proven, back when it was he, DeVos and Menezes no one was saying it was the obvious weakness of the team). I think McKenna and Watson is an adequate pairing. Not exactly what I’m dreaming of for WCQ, but Especially given that DeVos is out. I think we could use a younger guy to pair with DeVos, but I've been complaining about us not trying younger central defenders for months. We had to know this was coming? When you use DeVos and Fenwick primarily and Menezes, McKenna and Pizolitto sparingly — I don’t see why it’s a big controversy that we haven’t called up Reda, Gervais, etc.

Hopefully we’ll have some sort of camp in Europe after the coach is named and before qualifying starts where we can look at some of these young guys and assess if they deserve a shot. I can’t say I expect any of them to start, but if we go down to the Carribean and start DeVos and McKenna and have Gervais and Reda training, then you can slowly work them in, esp if one of the early games gets out of hand, of for the fourth opening round qualifier after we’ve won the first three and booked our place.

cheers,

matthew

[Canuck Oranje]

Sounds like how Leaf fans use to justify Larry Murphy in Defence or Hakeem the Dream for the Raptors. Relying on how good someone was 2/3 years ago is dangerous.

Quite frankly, our defence a few years back may not have been our biggest weakness; but we were getting scored on back then too and that was with Forrest in net.

I am prepared to wait and see but if they aren't good enough, I think we need to move on. That goes for Hastings and Fenwick too.

[Gian-Luca]

Leaf fans that I know (including myself) didn't ever justify the use of Larry Murphy - but this is a touchy subject with Matthew so I'll stop there.

Nice video interview with Pesch himself today on SoccerCentral - but when Gerry & Craig ran down the line-up for the Finland match, again there was absolutly no mentionn of Julian De Guzman's absence, as though it is a CSA/media conspiracy to keep his non-inclusion a mystery. My fear is that De Guzman wasn't even called because of some fight over not showing up for the Olympic team, & Julian's "club first" position in the club vs. country conflict. I hope that this is not the case, as if so it could affect how many times we'll see Julian for the matches that actually count. Hopefully the new coach will also see Julian's importance & wipe the slate clean if there are any difficulties.

As far as I am concerned Julian is, with Stalteri & Radzinski, the three most important players for our team, and the three we most need in the line-up. Our midfield against Finland will be competent without him, but by Concacaf standards it could be well above average if he was there.

[Gian-Luca]

One thing about our defense back in then - we didn't get scored upon as much, but that was also due to playing a very defensive style against the better Concacaf teams, with as many as 5 defenders at times. We stopped playing that style under Holger as our younger players began to mature (though it still crept up more often than I would have liked when we fielded Dasovic in the midfield, who was really only good for defending), and that's one reason why I think we have been scored upon more often recently.

Having said all that, I can't really see a back-line of Hastings, Fenwick & Watson as being sufficient for international standards or to get us to the World Cup. That will have to be re-vamped, no question in my mind.

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by Canuck Oranje

I am prepared to wait and see but if they aren't good enough, I think we need to move on. That goes for Hastings and Fenwick too.

My concern: how will we know whether or not they (or any of the other players, or a certain combination of players) are good enough? One game against Finland won't tell us much, especially if there are a lot of subs. The first round of WCQ will not be a test. If we go into the second round in August with question marks then we're screwed, because the second round is going to be very tricky, probably moreso than the final round. Are we going to play against any good teams, with our best players, before next summer? There is hardly any time to do this.

I think we already screwed up by not playing more friendlies after the Gold Cup. From August to November (let's call this autumn) there are five international dates and we've got just one match. [xx(] And these are the months leading up to WCQ, no less.

(But I shouldn't be surprised because the CSA is particularly bad at arranging autumn friendlies: in the three years since our last WCQ ended we've played only one match each autumn even though there are about five international dates available. I know it's tough for us to get friendlies but I can't believe that three matches out of fifteen dates is the best we can do.)

[matthew]

I agree that Fenwick and Watson are both not going to cut it at World Cup time. Hastings is maybe. I'm not arguing for us to ride Watson and Fenwick, I'm just saying since Holger saw fit to keep playing Fenwick and not inject any youth except Pizzolitto, I can excuse Miller for going with the status quo for one game.

I want to see Reda for sure, but there's no guarantee he's going to step in and be better than McKenna, Pizzollito or even Watson right now.

Man what's with all of this senseless Larry Murphy bashing? He was the only plus on a bad team. He didn't make the Leafs a whole lot better and yeah since they were crap they probably should have gone with some youth. Murphy then went to a very good Detroit team, play huge minutes and won a cup. He wasn't going to turn a team around and he was definitely in decline, but he had experience and savvy and he didn't hurt a good team while playing a role.

I see no reason why Watson or McKenna can't do the same thing. If we have a crap back four and d-mids who are past it trying to cover in front and yeah they're going to be exposed, but if you have a decent back four with DeVos-Brennan and Bircham or Nsaliwa playing beside them then I think they can fit in and not hurt the team. We know what we're going to get with them as it were.

cheers,

matthew

[Canuck Oranje]

On De Guzman (yeah, like we needed him in the recent Olympic qualifying) and to some extent Aguiar too, I just would like to know the reasons. Somebody in the press has got to ask the obvious questions.

As for the defence, we know that what we had was not good enough; so why not try something new rather than something old.

As for Murphy, he was still a better player in Washington and Pittsburgh than in Toronto and Detroit.

[matthew]

quote:Originally posted by Canuck Oranje

As for the defence, we know that what we had was not good enough; so why not try something new rather than something old.

We've barely used McKenna in the back and we haven't used Watson in over a year. I definitely would have chosen Reda over Fenwick and if DeVos was healthy I wouldn't recall Watson, but I think McKenna and Watson won't hurt us, whereas a lot of the younger guys people are pining for are unproven and I don't know if they will or won't hurt us.

quote:As for Murphy, he was still a better player in Washington and Pittsburgh than in Toronto and Detroit.

Sure, but fulfilled a role with a good team in Detroit the same year he was scapegoated and booed on a bad team in Toronto. Would Mark Watson make any difference to the Calgary Storm? Not really, I don't think they'd win any more games with him than without him. Stick him with the Battery and he was A-League defender of the year.

Sure he's not as good as he was, but he's better than what we've been using and is proven. So I don't think his inclusion is a disaster. That's all I'm saying.

cheers,

matthew

[Gordon]

quote:Originally posted by matthew

Sure, but fulfilled a role with a good team in Detroit the same year he was scapegoated and booed on a bad team in Toronto.

cheers,

matthew

Your Member of Parliment is a big Larry Murphy fan, stemming back to the days when he was a cub reporter in Toronto and covered a Canadian youth team traveling the Soviet Union. Murphy was a member of that team, and the only one to go on to the NHL.

[matthew]

quote:Originally posted by Gordon

Your Member of Parliment is a big Larry Murphy fan, stemming back to the days when he was a cub reporter in Toronto and covered a Canadian youth team traveling the Soviet Union. Murphy was a member of that team, and the only one to go on to the NHL.

Well I'll be damned! In case it wasn't obvious, Murphy was my boyhood hero and has been a class guy the two times I've met him. He also played in the first hockey game I ever went to. I'll be sure to bring that up with my MP the next time I see him, we talk sports from time to time, but obviously that never came up.

cheers,

matthew