fza Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Loud Mouth Soup Negativity from beast in 3, 2, 1... HAHAHA...YEAH THAT`S RIGHT!!...3,2,1 AND????...WHERE ARE YA BEAST???..HE MUST BE SO HAPPY TO SEE RADZ BACK!!... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loud Mouth Soup Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Paddy I may be wrong, but I don’t think that lack of first team action affects a keeper the same way it affects other players. You're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 menezes is back! i've always loved him in our defence. he is perfect for the region. calm. well-positioned. great distribution. a quintessential latin type player. my lineup gk-hirschfeld rwb-stalteri cd-de vos cd-menezes lwb-simpson rm/w-hume cm-serioux cm-de guzman lm/w-de rosario cf-occean st-radzinski subs: obvious how can yallop possibly believe watson to be superior to klukowski who plays at a very high level and wins cups!???? i'd even say pozniak and hell...david edgar are superior choices. i mean, why not edgar, if we are picking jaime peters - who just may be our answer to freddy adu (if jon de guzman doesn't work out for us - CALL HIM UP FRANKY!). i had been calling for hutchinson at centre back but with menezes back in the fold we can rely on hutch as a wide right or central midfield player. even wing back if stalteri has to move forward. when mckenna comes back you'll see my preferred 3-4-3/3-5-2 lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver Fan Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by nolando Any reason to think that Yallop reads this page?? I am sure that many of the media do their homework here but I ma not so sure about the direct coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Loud Mouth Soup You're wrong. I am wrong because...you say so? Please...fill me in. My reasoning is that Lars is still getting training in practices and reserve games and in his case it has to be better than what he was getting before his amazing performance in the Gold Cup. I doubt that the experience in the A-league comes close to what he has experienced in the UK. I also feel that as long as a keeper is getting game time, even reserve matches, that it is better than being a field player in reserve matches. He still gets to train at what he does most, which is basically to stop shots. This is far easier to replicate in a practice than that of an outfield player, especially when he would have a goal coach specifically working with him. I guess game confidence could suffer, but I still feel that it is a little different to what a field player goes through. No, I haven't played goal often, but I did play at a very high level in Canada as a midfielder and forward, so my comments are not just pure speculation. Anyway, Lars is a far more natural goalie than Onstad, so I will take him any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timotas Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 We won't see Lars start, almost positive. I wish he would start, but we all know what Yallop will do; he'll start Onstand and give him the captains armband. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loud Mouth Soup Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:I am wrong because...you say so? Please...fill me in. My reasoning is that Lars is still getting training in practices and reserve games and in his case it has to be better than what he was getting before his amazing performance in the Gold Cup. I doubt that the experience in the A-league comes close to what he has experienced in the UK. I also feel that as long as a keeper is getting game time, even reserve matches, that it is better than being a field player in reserve matches. He still gets to train at what he does most, which is basically to stop shots. This is far easier to replicate in a practice than that of an outfield player, especially when he would have a goal coach specifically working with him. I guess game confidence could suffer, but I still feel that it is a little different to what a field player goes through. No, I haven't played goal often, but I did play at a very high level in Canada as a midfielder and forward, so my comments are not just pure speculation. Anyway, Lars is a far more natural goalie than Onstad, so I will take him any day. I've been a keeper, though not a pro. I've always been off my game when I've not played or not seen action-and it comes with game action. 10 reserve games and 5 on loan last year, plus almost nothing in the last 5 months or so won't see Lars at a high or prepared for a high level of play. As for Lars being a more natural goalie, is that your opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote: As for Lars being a more natural goalie, is that your opinion? Yes, my opinion. Though I do not feel alone in that sentiment. Lars' positioning and reaction time seem far more natural to me. Onstad seems to move into bizarre positions sometimes and is beaten, in my estimation, by very savable balls. He seems to especially have trouble with high shots (his reaction to them is often brutally slow -first goal for T&T last qualification for example). Overall I just don't get his style. On a slightly different topic: A friend of mine pointed out that Lars would have at least tried to save the first Guatemalan goal, where Onstad merely stood there and raised his hand for offside (as if that would validate his case). I just have no faith in Onstad and do not think he is capable of rising to the levels witnessed by Forest and Lars. We need a far more dynamic keeper to take us through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natesta Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 For some reason the people on this board seem to see something in Lars that almost -nobody- else whom have an unbiased view see. Guys, seriously.... if he is such a strong keeper he'd have caught on with at least a division 1 team. He's had some good performances for the National team but the main complaint on him is his consistancy and his kick (though it can't be much worse than Onstads.) Lars in not this phenom that some people like to blindly believe. That being said, this is an improved line-up over last game, but we expected it to be. I seriously hope we get a better explanation from Yallop on why Brennan isn't getting called. And don't give me that first team football crap, Yallop has called an unattached 17 year old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Natesta For some reason the people on this board seem to see something in Lars that almost -nobody- else whom have an unbiased view see. Guys, seriously.... if he is such a strong keeper he'd have caught on with at least a division 1 team. He's had some good performances for the National team but the main complaint on him is his consistancy and his kick (though it can't be much worse than Onstads.) Lars in not this phenom that some people like to blindly believe. That being said, this is an improved line-up over last game, but we expected it to be. I seriously hope we get a better explanation from Yallop on why Brennan isn't getting called. And don't give me that first team football crap, Yallop has called an unattached 17 year old. Phenom ,no. Good, yes. Better than Onstad, without doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Loud Mouth Soup I've been a keeper, though not a pro. I've always been off my game when I've not played or not seen action-and it comes with game action. 10 reserve games and 5 on loan last year, plus almost nothing in the last 5 months or so won't see Lars at a high or prepared for a high level of play. As for Lars being a more natural goalie, is that your opinion? The question though, is more relative than specific. The question really is: A rusty Lars better than an non-rusty Pat? I will concur that Lars will almost assuredly not be as good as he could be given some relative inactivity. That, nevertheless, might still be better than Pat however. But really, the decision should be based on who the team has the most confidence in. I might think Lars, you Pat, but what matters is what Jason, Paul, Ante and Mark/Tony think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natesta Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Natesta Anyone can look good over the span of a few games. Unlike Pat, who looks bad consistently over many games. Pat was lucky in the MLS to have a good team, for that league, in front of him. For Canada he has always been sub par. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Natesta For some reason the people on this board seem to see something in Lars that almost -nobody- else whom have an unbiased view see. I see. So perhaps you could inform me then what the source of my bias is, as well as everybody else (and it nearly is everybody else that I know) who thinks Lars is a better keeper than Pat. Are we all related to Lars then? Good buddies with him? Come from the same home town? All have the same middle name? It's very simple - those of us, who quite astonishingly, are relying on the evidence of our eyes (I know, what a controversial thing to do), believe that Lars is a better keeper than Pat, and that he has consistently out-performed Pat for the national team since 2002. And the last match against Guatemala, with Pat not making even an effort to stop either goal, didn't do anything to persuade me otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natesta Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 The Goalkeeping wasn't the problem last game, do you really think we would have won with Lars in net? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Georgio Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:The Goalkeeping wasn't the problem last game, do you really think we would have won with Lars in net? Sure it's possible! Just as possible as us having won with Klukowski or Hutch playing center back instead of Watson. One player in such a crucial role as keeper can easily change a game. We had no right being in that game against the US in the Gold Cup, but guess who kept us in it? Ya you got, Lars did! Of course one player can change a game. Would Guatemala have score two goals against us without Ruiz. Probably not. They may have still won though the way we were playing. One player can get on everyones case and wake them up like how Devos does as a leader or how Forest did as a keeper. Lars is superior so he should start, ya that's my opinion but I have accepted it as a fact or common knowledge because it's so blatently obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Natesta The Goalkeeping wasn't the problem last game, do you really think we would have won with Lars in net? Probably not, but since that game is over, we are concerned about the games coming up. Pat Onstad is a well known quantity. Yallop has confidence in him, and he has 17 shutouts for Canada, but unless our centreback situation resolves itself - and Devos back is only half the answer, I think we need a shot stopper in goal. Lars is that shot stopper IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 quote:Originally posted by fza HAHAHA...YEAH THAT`S RIGHT!!...3,2,1 AND????...WHERE ARE YA BEAST???..HE MUST BE SO HAPPY TO SEE RADZ BACK!!... Radzinski was also announced as a player for the Vancouver game as well. Just because he's listed as a player doesn't mean he'll be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natesta Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree... I'd rather see Sutton start than Lars right now. The one thing we hopefully can agree upon is... Why the hell isn't Brennan in this line-up!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hottoddy7 Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Hirschfeld should definately start but won't. And derosario cannot play in midfield. Though i don't know who takes his place. It's unthinkable that Jim Brennan isn't in our side but what can you do. DeVos and menezes are a big improvement in the middle but i'm not sure if it matters with onstad in goal. This should be the lineup Hirschfeld stalteri devos menezes jazic hume deguzman serioux imhof radzinski occean but i suspect it will look more like this Onstad stalteri devos watson jazic hume imhof deguzman derosario radzinski pesch I also think mckenna should be in the squad as he was almost ready to play today according to what i read and has another week to prepare for the first game. But there's nothing to be done about it now. It's do or die lets hope this team can do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Natesta I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree... I'd rather see Sutton start than Lars right now. The one thing we hopefully can agree upon is... Why the hell isn't Brennan in this line-up!? Sutton may be the answer. I just haven't seen him play enough to form an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Natesta The Goalkeeping wasn't the problem last game, do you really think we would have won with Lars in net? Maybe, maybe not. But surely we are not going to win with Onstad in net. I've never liked the man. He is good just for one thing, that is blaming others for his lethargy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Okay now I'm firmly in the pro-Hirschfeld camp (if he were playing any first team ball he has to start and even if he isn't I think I'd give him a shot), but I have NEVER seen Onstad blame anyone else for his play or point fingers after a loss. He is a stand up guy and puts his hand up for blame when he deserves it for club and country. You may not like him as a keeper, but to my recollection he's been a stand-up guy on and off the pitch for us for more than a decade. And really Onstad is not a bad keeper. Reading some of these comparisons it's like people think Onstad is to Lars what Cobi Jones is to Ronaldinho or something. They're not that dissimilar in quality. Frankly I think if we play well both can win us games and if we play like we did against Guatemala neither one will save our hide. Sure Lars kept us in the US game single-handedly, but Pat kept us in against Iran single-handedly. I don't think either one can go it alone very often and pull out a result. cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastcoaster Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 I am not picking sides in the Lars - Onstad Debate. However, people seem to get down on Lars because he is a backup. Well wasnt Forrest a backup for most of his West Ham Days, in fact towards the end wasn't he third string behind James and Hislop. This would be similar to Lars when he was at spurs. I am not bitching on Forrest as he was my god when he played for Canada. I just think perhaps we are being hard on lars. As long as Yallop is coach, I feel that Ontstad will be the man. Finally, did anyone else think that Forrest is a little hard on Jazic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 I haven't seen many matches on TV or in person (I lived in a no-sportsnet household) so apart from the results themselves, I haven't had much to choose between Onstad and Lars. But when it comes to results, what significant matches has Onstad won with the Nats? Are there any? Same question with Lars. I'm concerned that Yallop is ignoring talent level out of a sense of personal loyalty to Pat. The captain's armband is a sign of that. If Onstad and Devos both start on the 4th, and Jason isn't captain, I'll be a little worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.