Jump to content

Stamatopolous or Sutton ?


Winnipeg Fury

Recommended Posts

quote:Originally posted by Ivan

Despite the two gaffs in the season finale, I would have to say Stama.

I'm not sure the 60 yarder is Stama's fault, loosing the ball in midfield was the real mistake. Kenny S. was at the top of his box when TFC lost the ball (where he should be), the guy just launched a great shot and I can't blame Kenny for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, ANY time you're scored on from 60 yards it's the keepers fault.

That being said completely agree there is a healthy share of blame upfield. That turnover was horrendous, sudden and timely for the Revs.

Hell of a goal though. Given the wind and all and the way he drove it towards Kennys goal. Wasn't some weak ass floater punted down field trying to catch the keep sleeping. Hell of a goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

Dude, ANY time you're scored on from 60 yards it's the keepers fault.

Euh No!

You want your keeper to be where Kenny was at the start of the play. Why? Because there's a lot more chances on a turnover like that, the ball will be played behind your defense and you want your keeper to be able to make the intervention if possible. So you can't have it both ways and ask your keeper to be closer to his line. It's a question of percentage and I just can't see how can someone claim that Kenny was badly positioned at the start of the play.

Great goal but the chance it works are pretty slim.

Just look at DeRo similar goal a few years ago, that was bad goalkeeping because it wasn't on a turnover and the back peddling by big Zach Thornton was atrocious. Kenny tried to get back but like you said this was no flotter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

Dude, ANY time you're scored on from 60 yards it's the keepers fault.

Disagree. It would be second guessing to the highest degree to blame Kenny for not sprinting back to his goal line the moment he released the ball at the edge of the area (where he had to come out to bail his team out again) because that was the only way he would have been able to save that. I don't think he was expecting Wynne to almost immediately give the ball away at midfield and it was a hell of a shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Incidentally, I am undecided. Leaning towards Stama with how well he played the last few weeks (he made some excellent saves) but they are both about the same level. TFC need to keep both.

Incidently, I agree with this statement, I was just answering WF's question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually think it's incumbent upon the team to keep them both. I don't expect at this late hour MLS to change the Canadian content rule for TFC (and I hope they don't), thus two spots are claimed in the position where domestic players should be slotted. As well, there must be some concern that Sutton has a soft melon now, so the insurance policy in signing Stama Kennytopoulos would be a wise piece of business.

It would also allow them to sign Monsalve or another young Canadian keeper, or possibly draft one and make a project of them. If TFC does nothing else, I hope the spot between the sticks will be strictly Canadian territory.

As for their play. Both now know what the quality of the league is and I think they'll raise their respective levels of play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Dude, ANY time you're scored on from 60 yards it's the keepers fault.

There is no way that the goal was Kenny's fault. The team had control of the ball and were advancing in numbers. Any keeper would be at the top of the box during that time.

The fact that the ball was so atrociously given away and Parkhurst got the shot away almost instantly, gave Kenny no chance at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if it possible to score from 50 yards out and not be the keepers fault, you would think that we'd see this play tried on many occasions in every game. If a keeper should be absolved of blame on those plays, then there would be less reason to move the ball forward in soccer, would there? Bottom line, players try that play when they notice that the keeper is napping.

If its true that sports teams listen, too a certain extent, to the ticket buying public and fans when it comes to player transaction decisions ( I have always that this is the case), then I think that the best way we, as fans, can serve soccer in Canada is by being a little more fair in our evaluation of Canadian players versus non Canadian players. We don't need to protect the Canadians, the MLS rules are there already there as they should be ( and must remain) to ensure that the benefit of having TFC accrues to to whole soccer system in Canada. Some non Canadians have sucked and we all know who they are. But, other than perhaps Brennan, there have been other Canucks who have had bad spells this year on certain plays or who have not put their stamp on the game.

In this case, Yes, Stamatopoulos is Canadian, but without that blunder, we might have won that game. We could have earned another result a while back had we not allowed four goals in the second half. Would we have been equally forgiving of a foreign keeper? And, if the national selectors think like we do here, in assessing Stama for National teams duties, then ask yourselves if you would comfortable if that goal ( of these four goals in second half) occurred in a crucial World cup qualifier next year?

In the business world, consumers don't help the Canadian economy and Canadian companies in the long run by buying Canadian. Yes, we all want Canadian companies to thrive because it keeps us employed, but the best way to do so is by buying the product and service that provides you with the best value for the money regardless of where the company is headquartered. Thats the best way to help Canada, because it forces Canadian business to be competitive rather than complacent. Canadian soccer is no different, so lets not give anyone a easy ride just because they are Canadian. The right attitude to help soccer in Canada can be summarized from a recent comment from Danny Dichio when asked about how he feels about the arrival to Savo Milocevic. He was greatly looking forward to the challenge for his job because it will bring out the best of him. That's the kind of attitude that we need more of in Canada to succeed in Soccer. Its even been missing at the National teams in past and present when you look at the fact that some of the players have been such a lock for a spot on the team.

Another example. I noted on an other thread that a knowledgeable follower listed a certain Cnd, who has mostly been used as a sub or depth player this year, as an untouchable on the team. I've seen all the games this year live or on TV and I am very puzzled with this assessment. Yet Mitch Peacock and most observers would concur, that when the injuries hit this year, our play went south. Peacock IMO correctly noted that you need depth and quality subs to be competitive in this league. If we are going to be competitive in the future, Canadian talent is going to be crucial to the formulae. IMO, there has to be an upgrade in the Canadian contingent to move fwd and that means somehow getting the next level of talent that is in MNT pool. problem is, Can TFC afford them? Otherwise we will have to wait for youth players to develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

Well if it possible to score from 50 yards out and not be the keepers fault, you would think that we'd see this play tried on many occasions in every game. If a keeper should be absolved of blame on those plays, then there would be less reason to move the ball forward in soccer, would there? Bottom line, players try that play when they notice that the keeper is napping.

If its true that sports teams listen, too a certain extent, to the ticket buying public and fans when it comes to player transaction decisions ( I have always that this is the case), then I think that the best way we, as fans, can serve soccer in Canada is by being a little more fair in our evaluation of Canadian players versus non Canadian players. We don't need to protect the Canadians, the MLS rules are there already there as they should be ( and must remain) to ensure that the benefit of having TFC accrues to to whole soccer system in Canada. Some non Canadians have sucked and we all know who they are. But, other than perhaps Brennan, there have been other Canucks who have had bad spells this year on certain plays or who have not put their stamp on the game.

In this case, Yes, Stamatopoulos is Canadian, but without that blunder, we might have won that game. We could have earned another result a while back had we not allowed four goals in the second half. Would we have been equally forgiving of a foreign keeper? And, if the national selectors think like we do here, in assessing Stama for National teams duties, then ask yourselves if you would comfortable if that goal ( of these four goals in second half) occurred in a crucial World cup qualifier next year?

In the business world, consumers don't help the Canadian economy and Canadian companies in the long run by buying Canadian. Yes, we all want Canadian companies to thrive because it keeps us employed, but the best way to do so is by buying the product and service that provides you with the best value for the money regardless of where the company is headquartered. Thats the best way to help Canada, because it forces Canadian business to be competitive rather than complacent. Canadian soccer is no different, so lets not give anyone a easy ride just because they are Canadian. The right attitude to help soccer in Canada can be summarized from a recent comment from Danny Dichio when asked about how he feels about the arrival to Savo Milocevic. He was greatly looking forward to the challenge for his job because it will bring out the best of him. That's the kind of attitude that we need more of in Canada to succeed in Soccer. Its even been missing at the National teams in past and present when you look at the fact that some of the players have been such a lock for a spot on the team.

Another example. I noted on an other thread that a knowledgeable follower listed a certain Cnd, who has mostly been used as a sub or depth player this year, as an untouchable on the team. I've seen all the games this year live or on TV and I am very puzzled with this assessment. Yet Mitch Peacock and most observers would concur, that when the injuries hit this year, our play went south. Peacock IMO correctly noted that you need depth and quality subs to be competitive in this league. If we are going to be competitive in the future, Canadian talent is going to be crucial to the formulae. IMO, there has to be an upgrade in the Canadian contingent to move fwd and that means somehow getting the next level of talent that is in MNT pool. problem is, Can TFC afford them? Otherwise we will have to wait for youth players to develop.

Free Kick, your the coach and I'm Kenny. Tell me where should've I been positionned to avoid that goal.

The fact that it isn't try to often is a question of confidence by the player because that kind of shot must go in if you don't want have the coach and your teamamtes angry at you. It's very audacious shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:...you would think that we'd see this play tried on many occasions in every game

The planets don't align often for that kind of shot. Parkhurst had a huge wind at his back, was gifted a horrendous pass, had a clear shooting lane, and the ball sat perfectly after his first intercepting touch. It was a one-in-a-million shot and I applaud him for actually hitting it perfectly. I'm just sorry that it had to be against TFC. Pick a keeper, any keeper, and that particular goal would have been scored nearly 100% of the time. Don't blame Kenny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Cooks

The planets don't align often for that kind of shot. Parkhurst had a huge wind at his back, was gifted a horrendous pass, had a clear shooting lane, and the ball sat perfectly after his first intercepting touch. It was a one-in-a-million shot and I applaud him for actually hitting it perfectly. I'm just sorry that it had to be against TFC. Pick a keeper, any keeper, and that particular goal would have been scored nearly 100% of the time. Don't blame Kenny.

Add to that the only reason Kenny had been so far off his line in the first place (which you can't see from the crappy CBC camerawork but those of us at the game could see clearly) is that Kenny had to come to the right edge of the penalty area to intercept a free kick because the rest of his defence was standing around ill-prepared for it. If you re-watch the game (it's availabe on the CBC website) you will see that Kenny's momentum took him outside the 18 yard box on the right side of the field just after he released the ball to Wynne. Seconds later Wynne gives up the ball and Stama is still getting back into position and couldn't possibly have been in position to make that save to the opposite end of the goal that he had been coming from, unless he sprinted back immediately because he knew both that Wynne was going to give up the ball and that the player he would give it up to would unleash a perfect shot to the upper right corner. Of course, to argue that would be, as I said, second guessing to the highest degree.

Not even Gian-Luigi Buffon would have been able to save that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

In this case, Yes, Stamatopoulos is Canadian, but without that blunder, we might have won that game.

The blunder was by Wynne with his horrible giveway after Stama had actually bailed out his defense, it was not by Stamatopolous. And Dunivant (who needlessly gave away a corner kick) and Boyens (poor marking on Twellman) did the blunders on the second goal. Stama also made a superb save in the first half that not all keeper in the league would have made. While I agree with what you are saying in principle about upgrading Canadians, you picked a poor example. I think if you had been at the game (or at least sitting in 223 ;)) then you would not be blaming Stama for that.

Also I am assuming you are referring to Pozniak, while nobody is pretending he is a star, his versatility in playing any position between goal & striker half-decently is what makes him a player they should keep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the question: Stamatopolous. He positions and

reacts well, better than Sutton.

As for his long-range gaff(unfortunately will be in highlight

reels), it's his fault eventually, but any goalkeeper will

have a game or two like that. Sheesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by loyola

Where should the keeper be? I don't know. I am not the GK coach nor have I ever played the position. What I do know is that from my vantage point in 113 this year, I noted that the keepers are often at or near the top of the box when the play is at the other end. But that was the first time that I ever saw a keeper let in a shot from that distance and it also the first time that I ever saw anyone attempt a shot from that distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Stama wasn't out near the edge of his box (or past it) because he was out picking daisies or wandering absent-mindedly out there for the sake of it (as George Gross suggests). New England took a quick free kick (so quick that CBC's deficient camera work missed it) which caught the entire TFC defence napping except for Stamatopolous who rushed out to intercept the cross that otherwise would sent a New England player all alone on him. He kept moving and threw the ball to Wynne who was un-marked for a quick counter-attack in injury time (he could have also given it to Hemming), there was no need for him to hang on to the ball in that situation. Wynne gives it up right away to the guy who shoots it in from centre field to the opposite end that Stama had come out to and there's no way he could have gotten back into position in time. He was still in the process of getting back into position when the shot was taken.

The fault lies with 1. the TFC defense for being asleep on the NE free kick that caused Stama to come way out of his net & 2. the TFC midfield for giving the ball up so quickly before Stama could possibly have got back into the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You forgot #3, blaming Stama for not having the athleticism to compensate and keep the ball out of his net. If all you're looking for is someone to be "positionally sound" and not make mistakes or great plays then sure, Stama is not to blame because he's a mediocre player. Or, if you believe Stama should be held to a higher standard and earn his likely 6-figure salary then he should have made a great play and kept the ball out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by jpg75

You forgot #3, blaming Stama for not having the athleticism to compensate and keep the ball out of his net. If all you're looking for is someone to be "positionally sound" and not make mistakes or great plays then sure, Stama is not to blame because he's a mediocre player. Or, if you believe Stama should be held to a higher standard and earn his likely 6-figure salary then he should have made a great play and kept the ball out.

Are you kidding? He'd have to be a combination of an Olympic sprinter & high jumper as well as a 7 foot 5 freak to boot in order to have the athleticism to keep that one out.

The wonder's of digital technology - just for fun, here's a second by second breakdown of the play based on CBC's webcast:

45:46 - After Marshall gives away possession needlessly yet again Robinson commits a foul. NE prepares to take it, Stama can be seen pointing to a wide-open NE player to his right

45:49 - (off-screen) Stama has raced out of his area to intercept the quickly-taken free kick while his teammates stood to argue with the ref.

45:51 - Stama has just thrown the ball to Wynne. Stama is currently out of his penalty box, the momentum of his run to intercept the pass has taken him there. The NE player who the cross was intended for can be seen all alone behind him. Kenny has basically just saved a sure goal.

45:53 - The ball reaches Wynne. Stama starts to jog backwards (naturally facing the play at all times to the goal) but he is still outside his 18 yard box.

45:57 - A mere four seconds later the ball is already given away by Wynne to Parkhurst.

45:58 - Literally a second later Parkhurst shoots. Stama can't be seen on screen but he is still jogging backwards towards his goal, diagonally from the right to the centre area.

46:01 - Stama is nearly to the edge of the six yard box on the other side of the net that he was originally running from, leaping backwards in the air behind him but the ball is over his head and outstretched hand and just about to enter the net.

46:02 - the ball is in the net.

By my calculations, Stama had a grand total of 8 seconds to run backwards to the left edge of the goal from outside right of his own penalty area. That's what, a good 25, 30 yards when you take the width into account?

And given how fast the ball travelled from mid-field into the goal (three seconds) in the air, that should give you a sense of the advantage the wind gave Parkhurst.

After reading that, anyone still want to pin the goathorns on him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with you on this, G-L. There is no reason for a keeper to sprint back into his net when his team is advancing on the counter and has open options nearby. He's better off at the top of the box supporting if there is a need for a backpass. Wynne got caught in possession when he had Hemming open wide.

It was a perfect storm of factors, with the quickness of the turnover, the wind at Parkhurst's back, and a perfectly struck ball that caused the goal (Parkhurst's first shot on goal in 95 MLS games), not any deficiency on Stama's part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...