The Ref Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca The problem is going to be, that even if we get rid of Pellerud, he has to be replaced by someone that is willing to change the style we play at all levels, or we will be no better off. Will Ian Bridge, for example, be capable of doing that? I believe that Ian Bridge is a good coach and may be a good choice if he was knew to the program. The sad thing as I see it is that he is toasted because of his long association with Pellerud. However I don't put anything past the CSA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca He's been the coach of the women's team for how many years now....6? He's been around for two World Cups. I could maybe see that argument when he first started but 6 years (and two World Cups) later nothing has changed. If he doesn't want to play the long ball style he's had plenty of time to develop a different style with the players at his disposal and/or scout players in the country that could better fit a different style Problem is the U19 team plays largely the same style. I haven't followed the team as closely in recent years, but I am curious as to what happened to the likes of Aysha Jamani & Amanda Cicchini (other than the latter posting sexy photos of herself on Facebook, that is). Those two players seemed to have the sort of skills that we need to play a possession game. What happend to them? Yeah, I also once assumed that Pellerud was employing these tactics because he felt we did not have the personnel to do otherwise. But there are a number of things that suggest his decision to have our women play 6 years of long ball was foolish: 1) A good many of our player have been learning the game in US colleges, where possession is the name of the game for the most part. And, turns out, most of our players are fully capable of playing that sort of game, and have in fact thrived playing a possession-styled game. I once remember Latham commenting that to play on the National team [under Pellerud] meant having to adjust to direct play when she was learning a possession style game in the US. 2) As cited above, Pellerud knows one style only, and he is resting on the rather crumpled laurels of what he achieved with Norway back when hoofing the ball up the field and trampling your opponents with size was effective. Too many teams are employing more complex, possession-based tactics for direct play alone to succeed. 3) We trounced Australia four years ago in a pre-World Cup warm-up at Swanguard. We weren't technically amazing, but our direct play trumped the Aussie's inexperience, size and passion. We got to a good lead early, but as the game wore on, the Aussies looked better and better. They were clearly trying to play a possession game. They were clearly trying to LEARN a possession game, and as the second half played out, I couldn't help but feel that the Aussies--like the Brazilians and a host of other countries--would quickly pass us because they were learning how to play a much more effective, complete game of soccer. Now look where the Aussies are. Our results at the WC this year are an indictment of Pellerud's coaching and of the CSA's inability to effectively develop players and coaches. End of story. [For now] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Ed Too much Brazil in them I am afraid G-L. They didn't fit EP's game. Yeah, that's what I was afraid of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NS Rooney Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca Yeah, that's what I was afraid of. You can add Moscato as well. Did she even get a sniff at the Senior team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted September 21, 2007 Author Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by NS Rooney It's probably a given that Pellerud will resign sooner rather than later. Getting someone to change the style of play will be easy. Finding 18 players to execute that style will be the challange. Did it ever occur to anyone that Coach Pellerud only used that style because of the personnel he had to work with. Certainly there are a number of world class players but there are not enough. Our players were slow to the ball, looked unfit were not quick enough with their play on the ball and when they tried to pass on the ground they looked woefully inadequite. I hate to admit it but player for player, the Australians were better. Our midfield was dreadful. I agree with just about everyone that lofting the ball aimlessly forward is worse than useless but your midfielders must be able to do something positive when they get the ball. And the midfielders must be much quicker to the ball. Canada's number one priority - with or without Pellurud - has to be scouting. That means replacing most of the CSA - men's and women's - youth coaches and scouts with non-politicians who believe in excellence and not just holding onto their jobs or getting Pellerus's. That organization has to be dispanded and we must start over. Lots of talented players exist in the country, you have to remember Even Pelerud ...when he arrived in Canada, believed we had no club system..in fact we did and do ...its just Even never tapped into it in any real way. Those who like Dick Howard say he saved womens soccer in this country are frankly nuts.... if anyone influenced more funding and a higher public profile ...and indeed a higher profile in FIFA it has to be Charmaine Hooper. I personally have no idea if she is ready or interested in being a coach, but we could do worse then have her involved in a selection committtee for the new Womens national team coach. Tons of players in this country can play a better possession game, right now there is lots of praise for Sinclair, yes she scores goals..but she is not skilled on the ball ... she will become less and less effective, we need the speed that Australia shows along with the joy of playing and dominating the ball, which under Pelerud players were never allowed to learn or display. Do we need a coach drawn from elsewhere then Canada... no we have coaches here ...some may be at American Universsity programs coaching ..others at Canadian schools...still others coaching professional teams in Canada. I certainly hope the CSA sends a message and dismisses the coach within the week .... in any other country he would have been gone by now...imagine the Brasilian ...CBF keeping a coach who failed to get out of the group stage. Ask yoursleves where was Brasil eight years ago ..and where and what do we feel about the womens game from Brasil now... less funding..no national league ...no university programs and they field competitive teams..time and time again. Compare the growth in the game in England....from horrible four years ago to doing better then Canada in China....we can change and we can compete but its time for new values...mature values and approaches to be taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted September 21, 2007 Author Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Bill Ault It's simple - keep the ball, control the tempo, set the pace and usually the results will come. We could not do any of the above after Sinclair gave us the lead and ultimately that cost us the game. It wasn't because we not fit it was we couldn't do what needed to be done. But could you have pulled a Sinclair back to the midfield with the task of marking ...could you have played five in the middle with a single liberio working in front of the back four ? Do the players have an understanding of dropping into such a mode...for seven minutes....? Could Pelerud have dropped Lang back ... and brought in a defensive specialist after we went up.... letting Lang stay on and bring Sinclair off.....so many options and yet nothing done by the coach. Frankly you have to wonder what was going on in Peleruds head in those last minutes cause he did not seem to have team ready to drop into another mode... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 And yet, what would we be writing if Swiatak saved that last shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Same stuff. And repeating it all a couple of days later after being destroyed (a-gin) by Brazil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest speedmonk42 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by terpfan68 And yet, what would we be writing if Swiatak saved that last shot? We would be writing all the same things, just as we have for years win or lose. The potential to be something much better is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 You sound like some of the parents of student I teach. Johnny is so smart. It's just that he has never had any good teachers, but he has so much potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NS Rooney Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Compare the growth in the game in England....from horrible four years ago to doing better then Canada in China....we can change and we can compete but its time for new values...mature values and approaches to be taken. The England team has come so far because they have the resourses - coaches, amateur and professional club systems - and despite some serious blunders, the England FA is run by and large by people who know and understand the game, not soccer moms and dads who have never played the game but have their own agendas. You all know them. And Charmaine Hooper is the best roll model any young soccer player (male or female)could look up to. After years of starring up front, when asked to, she moved to the back and gave everything for team and country. Don't forget that the last time things were bad for women's soccer in this country it was Charmaine who spoke up and was punished. And she effected change at the CSA for her efforts. The woman has always desplayed heart, integrety and honesty and of course tremendous skill and understanding of the game. Sounds like a great formula for a coach! If you look around the CSA alas, you would have to conclude that she is too good for that crowd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted September 21, 2007 Author Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by terpfan68 You sound like some of the parents of student I teach. Johnny is so smart. It's just that he has never had any good teachers, but he has so much potential. Terpfan68.... just imagine the class you could have if you could choose your students... that is reject those you see as unfocused or not developing to be replaced by a new student you choose and teach and develop over eight years.... what kind of class would you have ? You may well love defending the status quo and the style of futbol that Pelerud has imposed on the national team, most others have seen Pelerud as being long past his prime time... Most of those who have come to that thought process at first thought Pelerud would move us forward...ultimately he never really did, the womens club programs have seen little of him in eight years and he has not influenced coaching development ... a sad legacy, his best potential now as individual is to leave the National Program and catch on somewhere as head coach of a big club ...or a provincial Technical Director, I am not sure any emerging national programs will take him in Europe, Africa tends to hire its own.. the Carribean ..not sure he would fit in ... its time he is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by terpfan68 You sound like some of the parents of student I teach. Johnny is so smart. It's just that he has never had any good teachers, but he has so much potential. Except in this case our women have had other teachers (coaches) who have taught them things their current teacher has not. Some of our little Janie's can paint masterpiece's, but Pellerud insists they fingerpaint instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Anyone who defends THAT style of football isn't a fan of the game IMO and probably didn't watch this world cup at all. The back four pounding balls upfield was all we were capable of huh? So we're no better than NZ? Then how about in the last minutes after the match was tied 2-2 and our women BUILT UP AN ATTACK (shock!!! horror!!!) got the mids and back four forward, pressed the OZ box, and were a bit unlucky not to produce a chance on goal. OHHHH so we CAN pass it on the deck, beat players to take space 1v1, then make cutting passes to our big forwards. So why didn't we take it to the Aussies like this through the whole game instead of sitting back and hoofing balls STRAIGHT TO THEM??! Yeah you're right terpfan, it's the lack of skill nothing to do with tactics at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 That 'too much Brazil' comment is a literal quote from Cdn coaches (either EP or IB) when some Calgary girls were being evaluated. Source has to remain nameless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I am not defending any type of play. Especially Route 1 football. I am just saying that I don't think the current players would be more successful with any other style. Sure it might look good, but I don't think it would translate into a higher world ranking. This is the highest level of soccer for these women. It is beyond developmental. Winning is what counts. Lets see if a new coach and time (three or four years) produces a higher ranking. Trillium has a good point. I can't pick my students but I do know that when the class succeeds the implication is that they are very bright and when the don't succeed it must be the teacher fault. Perhaps more on this later. I have a class to teach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by NS Rooney Compare the growth in the game in England....from horrible four years ago to doing better then Canada in China....we can change and we can compete but its time for new values...mature values and approaches to be taken. The England team has come so far because they have the resourses - coaches, amateur and professional club systems - and despite some serious blunders, the England FA is run by and large by people who know and understand the game, not soccer moms and dads who have never played the game but have their own agendas. You all know them. And Charmaine Hooper is the best roll model any young soccer player (male or female)could look up to. After years of starring up front, when asked to, she moved to the back and gave everything for team and country. Don't forget that the last time things were bad for women's soccer in this country it was Charmaine who spoke up and was punished. And she effected change at the CSA for her efforts. The woman has always desplayed heart, integrety and honesty and of course tremendous skill and understanding of the game. Sounds like a great formula for a coach! If you look around the CSA alas, you would have to conclude that she is too good for that crowd. Thank you NS Rooney for recognizing Charmaine Hooper. I wonder if she would be interested in taking over the team after Pellerud is gone. She knows the players and knows what needs to be done. It would just be fitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-A Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Theres an idea put Charmine Hooper as coach. I am not sure if that would happen but it would depend on what the CSA would think. Would they seriously consider her as a replacement. I would like to think so. She does know the players but do the current bunch still consider her a friend ?. After what happened in the past would all parties involved be interested in forgetting the past. Shes at the right age to coach. Look at the England coach Hope Powell she is 40 now and was 30/31 when she took over as coach in the 1990's and learnt alot from her 'mistakes' to taking England to the quarters in 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 As to Charmine Hooper taking over the team don't you need an A license to coach a National Team? Aren't the qualifications fairly difficult to achieve? I don't think just being a former player (very good former player) is enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NS Rooney Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by terpfan68 As to Charmine Hooper taking over the team don't you need an A license to coach a National Team? Aren't the qualifications fairly difficult to achieve? I don't think just being a former player (very good former player) is enough. An A License doesn't make a great coach. Look at the bunch at the CSA now. If she doesn't have one, she'll just have to get it. It is my understanding that any player with senior caps automatically has a National B License. So she can start there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Of course an A license doesn't make a good coach. It is just the starting point. If you don't have one, you can't apply. As to the automatic B license, is that really the case? Can someone direct me to a website where it is stated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Of course an A license doesn't make a good coach. It is just the starting point. If you don't have one, you can't apply. As to the automatic B license, is that really the case? Can someone direct me to a website where it is stated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Que Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by terpfan68 As to Charmine Hooper taking over the team don't you need an A license to coach a National Team? Aren't the qualifications fairly difficult to achieve? I don't think just being a former player (very good former player) is enough. Never mind the license wouldn't it be nice if the new coach a tiny bit of coaching experience? Usually comes in handy. 10 years for her to come up to speed is not acceptable. Also I believe EP manages the whole Women's program from top to bottom. You need someone who can do the business side of things as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Ed That 'too much Brazil' comment is a literal quote from Cdn coaches (either EP or IB) when some Calgary girls were being evaluated. Source has to remain nameless. Unbelievable. It would have been very satisfying to have seen the reaction of the speaker after the 7-0 ass-whooping this summer at the Pan Ams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.