Jump to content

Show 53: Suffering from "British Tabloid Disease"


JamesW

Recommended Posts

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

To be fair to Josh, he was playing a 4-3-3 (or 4-5-1) as though he was in a 4-4-2, because that is what he is used to (and it's been a while since he had played that style with Canada, over a year). It takes some time to adjust when you aren't used to the system, which is one of the reasons we looked more out of sync than usual against South Africa (though under the circumstances I don't see how it could be avoided for this friendly, unless we change Canada's system that works so well in Concacaf for the sake of a friendly against an African team, which doesn't make sense).

Frankly, I thought his shortcomings in the SA match were primarily on the technical side of the game as opposed to lack of familiarity with the playing system, but I guess will agree to disagree.

However, I'm glad you brought up that point which I've highlighted above: that's why I've been harping about playing guys in positions with which they play on a regular basis at club level, though I believe you have applied it more specifically to a team's tactics/formation/system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

But when he does that it's up to the midfielders to make the runs up front in his stead to give him options. They weren't doing that, with Atiba & Simpson the biggest culprits in that regard.

The situations I'm alluding to are when our midfielders are working to get the ball back and Hume comes to help them. With a 3 men central midfield, this situation shouldn't happen that often. When you're working defensively, you aren't thinking about making runs forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.

He in fact does play quite well with his back to a defender if the ball is not played in the air

In the first half vs SA Hume played two really nice first time passes to Radzinski on the right. However, I thought that in a couple of situations where he needed to hold the ball a bit longer until support was available he seemed to get out-muscled. As you've described, he brings a number of dimensions to our game (long range shooting, for instance) and an ability to go 1 v 1 better than Friend/Occean/Gerba. However, when we face really close marking in midfield, our defenders (especially the central defenders) as a group are not the best distributors of forward passes on the deck, and when under pressure their passes more often than not are of the airborne variety. Friend and Occean seem better at taking down those kind of passes and holding the play up until support arrives (our a foul against them occurs)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by loyola

The situations I'm alluding to are when our midfielders are working to get the ball back and Hume comes to help them. With a 3 men central midfield, this situation shouldn't happen that often. When you're working defensively, you aren't thinking about making runs forward.

I thought so to.

Hume seemed to work his way back too deep into the midfield third. He's the lone striker and he's not holding the shape. He's out and out removing himself as the target/release player and confusing everybody on a night when they trotted onto the pitch confused enough already. Yeah, great effort, rah-rah-rah, and coming back was probably at least partially provoked by a need to get more chances at the ball but as a practice the wrong play out of your lone striker.

P.S. Friend is very good in the air and the irony of his current goal scoring proficiency from the deck is wonderful. If he or Big Kev can't score from headers then at least in CONCACAF they may win a penalty or two in their vertical efforts. I'd happily take a penalty any day.

P.S.S. Re Ben's comments on giving Mitch some breathing room. Forget it. Mitch cannot be afforded the luxury of time. Whatever advantage he may have in being "in" with the players or deeply knowledgeable of their talents and abilities (real or imagined) he has to show he can apply it now. He has no other qualification which might have justified his hiring otherwise. So if he can't bring that quality to the squad right now, only months before WCQ starts, I see no reason in using the World Cup Qualifying tournament as a training exercise for his becoming a better international coach. It took a failed WCQ for Frank Yallop to start to find his feet but by then it was too late. For us and a good many MNT players who'd missed their last opportunity to play in a WC and that's just not good enough. Wasn't then, isn't now.

Mitch is carrying the legacy of a wretched U20s into his new job with him and everything that happens with the MNT will be viewed through the history of the 2007 tourny and I can think of no reason that it shouldn't be. It's part of his record, just like the '86 WC and all those caps he has for Canada. 'Cept of course, the U20s are a much more current part of his dossier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

Mitch is carrying the legacy of a wretched U20s into his new job with him and everything that happens with the MNT will be viewed through the history of the 2007 tourny and I can think of no reason that it shouldn't be. It's part of his record, just like the '86 WC and all those caps he has for Canada. 'Cept of course, the U20s are a much more current part of his dossier.

To me, that's the big albatross hovering over him and rightly so. Yallop walked into the MNT job with an MLS title the most recent part of the chronology of his CV, and in the eyes of some people that may have given him some wiggle room, but in my mind Mitchell doesn't have that luxury. I'm not one to wax nostagically about a coach's or player's past achievements: the moment is now. He's inherited a team that proved to be very successful at tournament level, with some important players in their prime right now. Barring long term serious injuries to these key performers (i.e. DeGuzman getting bocanegra-ed) he should at least get us to the Hex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soju --Now that you know who little bird is "Uccello" and Bigbird is me BigDaddy. Players call me Mister Uccello, and friends of mine call me Frank. Others that remain are enemies and they tend to call me stupid or a bird brain, that’s because the truth hurts them more then it does me or they are simply jealous and have a thing in it for me!

Which is perfectly fine with me, as good coaches tend to take from both sides of the fence. I believe in speaking my mind as I see it and maybe sometimes I may have to say your right and I was wrong.

So I am not always right SOJU. But I try to do my best. Regardless of my son position in this its my opinion not his….

Now that we got these introductions out the way and my character list of me, lets get to the point of your reply SOJU and we hopefully remain with mutual respect for one another.

You’re Question: These stats what games are those stats from?

These are just simple stats I have on my computer for so many years copies of game sheets etc. Some are from games that Canada has played MNT, some under 20's, some games in the some qualifying rounds of both, exhibitions games and so on. Its just a big mixture of games that indicate that they have used a 4- 2-3-1 or 4- 5-1 and so on. Plus I have added Uccello, Hume’s, Friends records of games with there clubs this year. Applied the math to the question. Gives me results.

What you do not like the math, or you do not like the question?

In either case, I also have said in the same statement if anyone wants to disagree with me they may as these are very simple observations and stats by me, conclusions that you can, use, disagree, or add your own figures pertaining to the Lone striker role, vs 4-4-2.

You ask I think you'll find Canada has scored more goals per game?

Na not even close when you talk about the complete picture of things now going back several years. One thing is for sure never enough goals from the striker role and too few from a team prospective, is surely nothing to be boosting about in my books.

Do their clubs have midfielders who score in the 4-5-1 like we do?

Most Its close to 90 to 100% of the teams in Italy play 4-4-2 system in all of serie D , C, and B and even A.

Further proof in the pudding Italy are champions of the world, and now euro soon! Only because they are masters of the 4-4-2.

Sorry when it comes to Canada choices of the one striker role, its obviously not the right call, and surley shows by not getting enough goals to win games, further for a National team to depend on two key players in their center roles like Dero and Deguzman, to win and score goal for you all the time is even more wrong 2 x’s. Why have a striker in this case all by himself doing nothing to contribute

I think you find some a common language here, that you cannot win many games from having just your one or two midfielder scoring goals....We know that we can score from the midfield but most likely when some defenders have more goals then our striker on the field I do not think its right.

Winning, ties and losses are all different stats to look at the end of a game, but when you playing the game you can only play soccer one way in my eyes there are three styles, A defending mode, A Holding mode, and finally an attacking mode. All the easiest using the formation of a 4-4-2 in all three catorgory the work load is well split and less dependent on one or two individuals, and also mentality between the players on the pitch..

Nothing is better then Dero and Deguzman behind and Hume and Friend in the front with if Uccello if needed on the bench, are i think the the two best center midfielder and two expereinced strikers

a very good sub as well.

This will give a positive look on things to come for Canada and a new look of youth combined with experience and quality talent straight up the middle. get the right person on the flanks and your defenders and CANADA WILL WIN THEIR NEXT GAME IN THIS Situation. Massive Lunch.....lololol again........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SOJU HERE, THIS JUST IN: If you're going to post stats and not explain them I'm going to ask you to explain them. I didn't say I agreed or disagreed I was saying I didn't understand. I still don't see how mixed stats from several teams of several years can show us what this 2007 team Canada team can accomplish. I guess you mean overall in your opinion 4-4-2 seems to work well and strikers score more (which I agree with), but surely that depends on who's in the team. My whole point in this thread is that I don't think we have time to change the shape of Canada this late on, and I don't think we have time to develop a good strike partnership. I think it's gambling as there's no guaranteed improvement, and I'm worried if we go back to the drawing board now we'll go into the qualifiers like we did in 2004, in a complete shambles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok fair enough i see you point and yes i am comparing to a 4-4-2 Sorry if the numbers for you do not make sense, for me it does. But regardless, I totally disagree to be afraid of change "you have nothing", as we speak. The bottom line of what i am trying to say is this

When Canada is not even close having right person for that job why force it! Strikers hate these roles it's too demanding. If you do not have the right players behind you, its a total waste of time.

Canada is not a germany, or some other countries for that matter that have many choices to choose from to maybe make it work on a short haul or long the bottom line is they do and we dont.

In this system I believe Canada does not have 9 players required to make this work behind this single person we call striker. and it has shown to be the fact that most of the time our striker becomes a stinker in every game. We blame him, and others on the team not doing there job.

Oh wait but Deguzman and Dero they are ok because they scored ya right,,,,this is a 11 man team here and it has to be sprend right over the entire group evenly or it will effect even dero and deguzman. Make it easier make the right choice 4-4-2 it will work.,. u will see and lots of time to get them prepared.

what a line up sorry it look so good

? ? ? ?

atiba dero deguzman dejong

hume friend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NOW

LOYOLA

You ASK

No way a 5th division guy in Italy is what we need right now?.

I never said that littlebird is what Canada needs,...and or vice versa i meant the canada should use a 4-4-2

Let me be clear about what I did say about littlebird. He is and would be the best suited player in a 4-4-2 behind the primary and more experienced strikers of the likes of Hume and Friend. He would be a lousy single man up front as they all would be. And In my opinion based on past performances and some light stats I have. It appears that a 4-4-2 is Canada logical choice and best solutions of scoring output for Canada.

YOU said “I'm amazed that some are still talking about Uccello as a potential member of our MNT at the moment....First, let him prove what he can do with the U-23's and we'll work from there. No way a 5th division guy in Italy is what we need right now”.

Littlebird really has nothing to prove to anyone to you or to me for that matter. He knows that since he is out of my nest now going on 5 years to be exact, and he will continue his dream forward and movement up the latter slowly and at a comfortably pace. His main focus is to play every day and have a game a week, getting results that requires of him. With a long term focus of a full time job in Serie A.

He is a fifth tier player you right and one of the best prospects in all of serie D right now. Which by the way includes a pool over over 3500 players of his age and above, and over 180 teams. Not in my opinion but the general press about Uccello proformances in Italy comment that he is a true striker, has a powerful output which comes from the heart, like that of Gattuzo. His driving force and scoring goal touch is “an opportunist” of Insaghi and Trez.

But let me make no mistake about it there are only 4 players that are there in Italy compared to how many in England or Germany. If it was that easy as you say a fifth level soccer you call it or 4th level it's maybe time that Canada should look at having some games against Italian teams in C1 or C2 or what the hell even a good Serie D, to realize what needs to be done, a wake up call for them im sure after pkaying them just relize how far back they are in this sport.

Your are right he is young always things to learn. But the most important thing to advance in this sport is a PLAYER NEEDS TO PLAY every game to get stronger and better, you may not feel the same way about some of your young guns and may consider this comment of little weight of importance but to me it’s the primary goal of success.

Take from me Loyola, littlebird is busy on his Potential of being your first Canadian player to play in League play for a Serie A team. SO you can be proud of him now with me, or later when you see him play for sure on an Italian Serie A team on your TV, and for Canada when they are ready to accept him and his talents and thats only if they want him. His career does not depend on a Canada call up, yes it would always be nice if they did, but till then, what better world to be in and to understand the game of Champions and of the world and now even maybe Euro.

If Littlebird is needed he will be there and kick ass and is the type of player that NO ONE WILL BE IN HIS WAY! If you know him that’s the way Uccello is. His vision to succeed and determination of getting that job done is far none when called upon for duty to play a game, and I mean any game.

What better time to get experience he searches for with talented strikers of both Hume and Friend, and a strong experienced centers of Dero and Deguzman. Those are the things that make players like Uccello want to do more because they learn from each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

JOEY TORCHIA!!!!!!!

Hum could it be possible YA, If littlebird gets to a Level B in Italy it may be the same, but if his dream comes true, then it would take the top which would be tuff to Swollow. Do you not think?

Maybe he littlebird will become a legend as did JOEY the first Canadian to play in Serie A and never to play for Canada mens team.

call it "The Bird Droppings"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by BigBird

Hum could it be possible YA, If littlebird gets to a Level B in Italy it may be the same, but if his dream comes true, then it would take the top which would be tuff to Swollow. Do you not think?

Maybe he littlebird will become a legend as did JOEY the first Canadian to play in Serie A and never to play for Canada mens team.

call it "The Bird Droppings"

Uccello has played for Canada already in the 2005 U-20 WCQ tournament in Honduras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...