stacks Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Daniel Imhof has played good in both games, he's playing in a defensive role. He is tough and gritty and thats what Canada needs in the midfield. He reminds me of Nicky Dasovic or Geoff Aunger. Give the Imhof bashing a break. p.s He looks like Dasovic too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Is it just me, or does anyone else think that either of Serioux or Bircham would be better than Imhof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stacks Posted September 6, 2004 Author Share Posted September 6, 2004 quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan Is it just me, or does anyone else think that either of Serioux or Bircham would be better than Imhof. bircham would be good because he plays a offensive and defensive role, brennan is mainly offensive, but imhof is tough man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VI Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Daniel is stong on the ball and good in the tackle. Many of his passes to Rad were just too far off. It seemed to me Rad was getting frustrated. All he wanted was something even close to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nolando Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 You have to remember Radz is used to top flight players (and ball control) and top flight officiating. You can see how upset he gets when he doesn't get those kinds of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Imhoff looked good, to be honest. If he and Radz were not connecting then from what I saw at game level I'd say that they simply have not played together enough. To be honest, ball movement and support through the centre of the pitch (in the second half especially) was actually very good because of the DeGuzmann/Imhoff link. I still think our mid could be tweaked. Wouldn't mind seeing Brennan come into the squad, or see DeGuzman out wide left with Diesel in the middle with Imhoff, and Hume on the right. Or even better, stick Serioux and Diesel in the middle, DeGuzmann on the left and Imhof on the right. (He's played there before and has been very good.) This way we can link Hume and Radz together, and bring Ocean on later (or vice versa). Simpson isn't quite ready, nor is Peters. DeRo is a swell guy, but I'm pretty positive he does not have the defensive skills (or mind) to be on the wing in mid. Pesch is getting past his time, I'm afraid. No, Daniel Imhoff is too important to this team. He's got too much to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 quote:Originally posted by stacks He is tough and gritty and thats what Canada needs in the midfield. He reminds me of Nicky Dasovic or Geoff Aunger. Give the Imhof bashing a break. p.s He looks like Dasovic too. I think Imhoff is a better player than Dasovic or Aunger ever were; he has more quickness, whereas the other two guys (along with the veteran Colin Miller in midfield) were as mobile statues in the internationals I watched them play in! Imhoff has to play a disciplined positional game and for the most part he has done well (though he looked caught out in the first half Honduran counter attack that resulted in our woodwork being smacked). He needs to be a more consistent passer, maybe trying to eliminate a few of those 50 yard specials to Radz, and keep concentrating upon quickly switching the point of attack, especially to the fullbacks. Several on the board want him to be replaced by Serioux, but I would like to see them both featured, perhaps in a formation like this: Hutchison Watson Menezes Jazic Imhoff Serioux DeGuzman Hume Radzinski DeRosario We get Imhoff's disciplined role in front of the back four (particularly shielding the central defence) , with DeGuzman still coming deep to show and receive passes from either the defenders or Imhoff, Serioux's great engine and ball winning capabilities, Hume drifting wide left as a winger or cutting inside, hoping to provide space for Jazic, and DeRosario providing much more of an aerial presence than Pesch (especially on Serioux's throws). (4-1-3-2: yikes! It's looks like Erickson's diamond formation! Oh well, just brainstorming some ideas, folks.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 quote:Originally posted by BearcatSA [... were as mobile statues in the internationals I watched them play in! I meant "as mobile as statues" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgs Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I still wasn't impressed with Imhoff. Mostly because of his distribution. I agree it improved in the second half, but only because Yallop started to play more of a 4-5-1 when he pulled Pesch out for Peters. This gave them more options in the midfield. Still i think he is the best option we have in this squad, as possible replacements like Serioux, Bircham, and Stalteri are now all unavalaible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcaout Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Imoff was fine out there, it's a tough role to stand out in, but he played his part on the night and was a good influence. I would like Serioux or Bircham better myself. Bircham adds a lot of character and some good sold skill. Serioux is going to be a really good player and his throw ins are a real weapon. That said, I like the job Imhoff is doing, and I have no problems with him in the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Loome Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I'd like to see Atiba moved up to the midfield, where he'd be a major threat with his ball distribution and could still make a serious defensive contribution. I don't think Imhoff's consistent enough to do the job given how few games the national team actually gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theglove0 Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I'm not a fan of Imhof because of his lack of on the ball skills. Granted his defensive work is solid, but he turns over the ball more than any other player on Canada. He takes too long to control the ball, and when he eventually does, he goes for long bombs to the forwards that consistently go out of bounds. I'd like to see him at right back rather than in the midfield. Move Stalteri or Serioux into Imhof's role. We need a guy that can move the ball quickly and accurately to complement DeGuzman's strong play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canso Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Imhof is a good little player...as a right back! I remember seeing him play there when he first broke into the team and he looked really strong in that role, getting forward to great effect, linking up well with Stalteri (back when Stalteri was a midfielder). I think Holger threw him into the center as cover and he still does that job well enough, but it's time for him to move back! He lacks the confidence to take command of the midfield, he cannot switch feet to make a play and he's not tall enough to cut out balls in the air. Attiba Hutchinson is the new Dasovic, only much, much, much better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massimo Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 What about having Grande in place of Imof? I think Grande and DeGuzman would make some great ball distribution, as well as ball control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I thought Canada played as well or better on Saturday than I've seen them play in the past five years. Why is everyone so eager to make changes? Imhof has never impressed me, but in a game that is this crucial I'd tend to trust his experience rather than replace him with a guy who has played all of 45 minutes for the national team. I'd prefer Bircham over Imhof if we played in any other conference. But in CONCACAF, I worry that he's just a red card waiting to happen. Speaking of red cards, what are the implications of Stalteri's red card from Saturday night? Will he have to miss any games because of it? I tend to favour the if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it philisophy. Too much tinkering is what cost us the Guatemala game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massimo Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Chet I tend to favour the if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it philisophy. Too much tinkering is what cost us the Guatemala game. Chet, Uuuu...we are mathematically one game away from kissing our World Cup Qualifying hopes good-bye, if it ain't broke we are on the brink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.