Peters!?!?

[Natesta]

You've got a few pros who can almost definately contribute more than this 17 year old unattached talent... why wouldn't you put them on?

Rather than sticking peters on for 15 minutes?

[bettermirror]

he needs to get better. he won't if he doesn't play.

[The Ref]

There was nothing wrong with Peters, he actually was above average.

[Natesta]

As was said, he needs to get better.

Giving him 20 minutes on the field when we are in need of a goal is not the way to go.

You know, I probobly woulnd't be as annoyed if he would have played the rest of the game.

But putting him on for 20 minutes is a waste of a frickin sub.

[Cheeta]

Going to try to read Yallop's mind on this one.

Peters is the only greyhound on the bench. Throw him in and hoof away. Simpsons pretty fast too, but not like Peters as far as I can tell. So if you think you can expose the Hondurian flanks with a little throttle you've got to go to Peters.

Looked like it could work to me. Radz. and de Guzman were drawing players like flys. There was space developing towards those touchlines. Just didn't pan out. Would have been way happier with a more experienced sprinter going out at the half but there just isn't one to be had that I can think of out of hand.

Of course all Frankie's wishings aren't going to turn Peters into something he isn't yet. Gotta work with what you got and unforturnatelty Peters was it in that instance.

[Cheeta]

Going to try to read Yallop's mind on this one.

Peters is the only greyhound on the bench. Throw him in and hoof away. Simpsons pretty fast too, but not like Peters as far as I can tell. So if you think you can expose the Hondurian flanks with a little throttle you've got to go to Peters.

Looked like it could work to me. Radz. and de Guzman were drawing players like flys. There was space developing towards those touchlines. Just didn't pan out. Would have been way happier with a more experienced sprinter going out at the half but there just isn't one to be had that I can think of out of hand.

Of course all Frankie's wishings aren't going to turn Peters into something he isn't yet. Gotta work with what you got and unforturnatelty Peters was it in that instance.

[nolando]

I am surprised that nobody else is reading as much into the Peters sub as I am. Yallop has confidence in Peters, without question. I don't think he was still experimenting with the kid at all. In fact I think Frank is probably the brightest football mind I've seen working for Canada in my lifetime (almost 30 years). He saw what he could do in the friendlies and against Guatemala, and he made a sub that I initially really was happy with (It was bloody creative and turned the Hondurans back into their half with hesitation in their play). What I truly think happened was that Frank was so upset with his positioning that he felt he HAD to teach the kid a lesson and take him out. I don't think he'll have another chance in that key of a moment for a while. One thing that I think many people on this board are guilty of is not being willing to give up something to get something much bigger. Of course an average, hardworking player like Bircham or Bent, or a host of A-Leaguers could fill in there, but what Yallop sees in potential is so much greater. And I don't think Yallop is loking towards 2010 or something ridiculous-he sees the potential payoff for this round, for this moment as he looks towrds Germany. Last night it failed, but not because Peters was that out of place physically (Christ he beat a few grown men like rented mules) but because he was not ready mentally for that kind of pressure. He will be soon, but I don't think that Yallop will give him the chance to show it in this round.

[bettermirror]

peters will play against costa rica. i GUARANTEE it.

i think it was a good sub and it was peters positioning that caused the subsitution. what angered me was that they took de ro off who was just starting to turn the jets on and him and radz had found out honduras' right back for what he is - an amateur at best.

i would rather we be giving peters subs NOW to learn than in 3 or 4 years when we have a new crop of players with no experience.

i truly hope we can convince jonathan de guzman to come and play for us now. if he sees this video tape it just might be enough to convince we are more than worthy of his skills. hell, send one to dylan hughes as well. i mean, a midfield of both de guzman's, peters and simpson is pretty frightening. throw in a holding midfielder and we have got horses.

KEEP PLAYING PETERS, FRANK!

[bmac]

Interesting observations Cheeta & Nolando.

Must confess that I did not know much about the kid before last nite...yes, I know I should pay more attention to this board <grin>...and was puzzled by the substitution.

The comment about positioning makes sense to me. It seemed he found himself "drifting" into the middle rather than remaining on the flanks where I expect his pace was intended to be utilized.

That might explain his re-substitution.

[Cooks]

I agree.

If he had stayed wide, like he was supposed to, he would have been much more dangerous.

It's hard to keep your head when you're a 17-year-old in an important international.

Hopefully, his short stint taught him a lesson and he'll stay wide next time.

[Cheeta]

As poor as his possitioning was, and hands up everyone who thinks it devolved into crap, it partly that drifting into the play that I was happy to see.

He's 17. He was gravitating to the action because he wanted to be more involved. It was counterproductive to his purpose, but it shows ambition and confidense.

Sort of lonely out there on the touchline sometimes.

Got to be a little more patient. Radz., The Guz and the lads knew you were out there. They'll get you the ball and you can do what you need to from there.

[RJB]

In the last two games, when Peters came on, I question Yallops tactics.

Against Guatamala, when we are desperate for a goal, he picks a 17 year old for his first cap?

The same against Honduras. And then he subs him off, which is a complete waste of a sub.

Does Yallop have a clue? Honestly? I'm prepared to stand by him for now, but with wastes like that, I don't know.

As for him needing to get better, coming on as a sub won't help. He needs to play at a good club level. That's where players do their learning, not with the National team.

[Canuck Oranje]

First, let me say that Peters looks like an incredible talent. However, I think he needs time developing with a club. He needs to learn his role better and WCQ is not the place to be doing that.

Most of the time a player spends on the field is without the ball and what he does when he doesn't have the ball is just as important as what he can do with the ball. There is no question about what Peters can do with the ball.

I will only say that Yallop's subbing in of Peters and the subsequent subbing out of Peters for a similar player took away the option of making a defensive substitution after the DeVos goal. It may not have made a difference but with being one goal up at 82 minutes, it would have been nice to have that option.

Having said all that, we are locked in for CR as far as players. The challenge now is to use who we have in the best way possible.

[Guest Georgio]

Go back and watch the Honduras tape. For 90% of the 15-20 minutes that Peters was on we were in the oppositions end. He has that kind of impact on the game. He plays with so much confidence that it rubs off on the team. He did against guatemala too. The kid comes on the pitch and positve football ensues. It's like the action is always within his grasp. He didn't play wide enough this game when the switch should have been an option. That is my only complaint.

He was taken out, Simpson brought in and for about 10-15 minutes the ball was in our end untill we got the freekick and the goal.

[loyola]

Was the free kick a result of a foul commited on Simpson? I don't remember.

[Cheeta]

quote:Originally posted by Georgio

Go back and watch the Honduras tape. For 90% of the 15-20 minutes that Peters was on we were in the oppositions end. He has that kind of impact on the game. He plays with so much confidence that it rubs off on the team. He did against guatemala too. The kid comes on the pitch and positve football ensues. It's like the action is always within his grasp. He didn't play wide enough this game when the switch should have been an option. That is my only complaint.

He was taken out, Simpson brought in and for about 10-15 minutes the ball was in our end untill we got the freekick and the goal.

That may be just put down to the normal ebb & flow of some matchs. Saw a lot of that last night.

[Guest Georgio]

It happened in the Guatemala match too. I don't think it's just a coincidence.

While watching the game live at Commonwealth it was something I noticed - his team mates were really mindfull of getting him into the game. The team mates can see the threat he poses to the opposition with his pace and by running at them. He also manages to keep the ball glued to his feet. When the substituion occured, there has a prominant "boo" within the crowd as if to say "we're sorry to see you leave the pitch". There is a noticeable change when he is on the pitch and a lot of good things started to build up on the side he was on. Thats not to say he is the best player to have at all given times on the right side, just that he has a role that is important and I find he brings some extra energy and optimism to the game that has an effect on the rest of the players too.

[Natesta]

Were you watching the same game I was?

Peters looked lost out there, a few times balls were played to where he should have been and instead ended up in touch.

The Peters choice was suspect at best.

Come on, put in someone who actually has the experience to handle this gravity of the situation.

As for the flow of the play when he was on, you are giving him far too much credit, he is not currently a game changing player, strategies don't change when he steps onto the field, he is not an elite player yet.

I like Peters, I really do.. I think he'll be a great addition to future sides, but the key word is future, enough experimenting in World Cup qualifying!

That's what friendlies are for.... well if we ever played them.

[Guest Georgio]

Well your opinion doesn't seem to fit with his performance against Guatemala where pretty much everyone was impressed with him.

Ya I was there at the Honduras game and then watched it after on tape. The kid pinched in too much and was not spreading the field. Other then that he took on players down the flanks, linked up well with Deguzman and helped create Imhoff's sitter which was the best chance of the game for Canada outside of our goals.

I am not giving him too much credit. I know he is young, and can use work on his positioning to spread out the field which is frankly quite easy to be taught and I'm sure he was given a talkin to. But he does have an impact on the game like all players do. Your looking a little too deep into my appreciation of the quality he brings to the game. I highlighted what he accomplished in the short time he was on and noted where he faultered.

Get used to it Natesta, cause you'll be seeing Peters more for pretty much the reasons I gave, the energy and confidence he brings in a game when Yallop feels he needs a guy to start running at them, that is obvious. Every player is game changing, either negatively or positively. And yes he is a part of Yallop's strategy just like every other player is when a coach decides to put a player in.

Did I say he is as important and as integral as Radzinski. No! But he has an effective role to play.

[strobe_z]

I think he's got some talent and can run at defenders. He and Hume seemed to be the only ones who could go on a run with the ball and not lose it. I was actually a little disappointed deGuzman didn't do that better. I thought Peters did a better job of that than Pesch did, but then I don't really see that as Pesch's job either.

I'm quite sure if Peters had stuck to the game plan Frank would've looked like a genius, but the inexperience got the better of him. He was pulled outta position by the re-action, instead of setting himself up for the action. I think we've gotta give Frank some credit here for a) trying something a little different that looked like it had some potential.. and b)having the guts to basically admit he was wrong and pull off Peters when it just wasn't working. I can see a lot of coaches being too stubborn to back off on their earlier decision and riding it for good or ill.

[ditty]

I'm not sure Peters age alone makes Yallop's decision a catastrophe. Should Wales have not selected Giggs at 17? Portugal Cristiano Ronaldo? England Michael Owen or Wayne Rooney? Ultimately Peters lost his composure but I wouldn't reject all players under 18 for the national team as a result. I didn't think it was a terrible sub, I just thought Occean needed to be on the pitch from the start and a straight Pesch-Occean swap would have been more productive.

Let's see what we're made of on Wednesday.

[ditty]

I'm not sure Peters age alone makes Yallop's decision a catastrophe. Should Wales have not selected Giggs at 17? Portugal Cristiano Ronaldo? England Michael Owen or Wayne Rooney? Ultimately Peters lost his composure but I wouldn't reject all players under 18 for the national team as a result. I didn't think it was a terrible sub, I just thought Occean needed to be on the pitch from the start and a straight Pesch-Occean swap would have been more productive.

Let's see what we're made of on Wednesday.