Guest Ed Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 ^ How in hell can you justify bringing in Imhof? He, like McKenna, starts every week in the Bundesliga. No way will Dale start them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Ed ^ How in hell can you justify bringing in Imhof? He, like McKenna, starts every week in the Bundesliga. No way will Dale start them. Lol. You're right. Instead, Mitchell will probably find some more USL2 guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Is Mckenna an obvious starter over guys like Serioux and Hastings? From what I've from his performances with Canada over the years as a CB, I would say "No". Of course, I have no problem with people who have a different opinion but it's not like Mitchell started some inexperienced CB over Mckenna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Hastings isn't starting for ICT, not sure why! I would like to see McKenna start at CB, Serioux could partner him or play the defensive midfield role if Imhof isn't called!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by loyola Is Mckenna an obvious starter over guys like Serioux and Hastings? From what I've from his performances with Canada over the years as a CB, I would say "No". Of course, I have no problem with people who have a different opinion but it's not like Mitchell started some inexperienced CB over Mckenna. The answer is YES. He is an obvious starter over those two guys. But not to Dale Mitchell and, apparently, not to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Ed The answer is YES. He is an obvious starter over those two guys. But not to Dale Mitchell and, apparently, not to you. First, our defense wasn't really the problem during those first 2 critical games. Our midfield was the guiltier party IMO. Second, not really sure Mckenna was so much of an obvious starter in the V's mind when you look at those threads about possible starting 11 prior to the Jamaica game. He surely didn't impress during the SA friendly. I think his lack of pace is the main problem with Kevin and with the kind of opponents we're facing it might become a problem. He could've probably helped for the first goal (would've done a better job than Hastings) in Chiapas but in the other end we would've given them someone to exploit with speed for the whole game. I just don't think it was a big mistake not to start him (I probably would've started him but he wasn't a lock), can't see how he would've change our faith in those first two games. I still think he should've brought in for the last few minutes against Honduras as a forward, he could've helped there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 I don't see why it is so hard to argue that if a player does not do well with the nats and is strong with his club, that we are not getting the best out of him. That is how I see it, and that is how I feel it is with players like Friend or McKenna. Or even Julian. You have to play the player right, the way he has proven to be successful, unless you have a very good reason to do otherwise (an injury and suspensions in a tournament with no replacements). And especially you have to look at your four or five key players and build your team around them. The keeper, the senior central defender, a holding mid and a creative mid, your goal scorer or the striker who sets up goals and opens up the defense. Mostly down the middle. Meaning you don't have to worry too much about Kluka or Stalteri, or even if Issey is in there, and you can stick in DeRo as he will adapt, more or less. The key is to have a confident keeper, someone running the defense, a supporting figure in the middle to break down the opposition's attack 25 metres from goal and to the centre circle, a creative mid who can help give you possession, find options going forwards, and someone who can score with half a chance (like Sebrango just did and hopefully will do tonight). If you are not getting the best out of those guys then you are coaching them wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Jeffrey, you can't be implying that Dale Mitchell coached them wrong? It truly is amazing how good players such as Friend look in a proper situation with their clubs and then struggle with our set up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Jeffrey S., I'm not sure if your post is an answer to mine but let's just say that Mckenna's record with his club is nothing impressive. Started 9 out of 22 games, Koln never got a clean sheet during those starts, and the team is 2-5-2 with him as a starter. I'm not sure this was much better than Serioux and Hastings considering that both were starters for their club at the start of the season while Kevin was a sub for Koln. You also have to take into account the players who are playing alongside our guys with their clubs. With Koln, if Kevin is paired with an exceptionnal CB that covers Kevin lack of speed it might make a lot mot more sense to start him with that kind of player. But if we don't have such a CB, we might be looking at another pairing at CB. We have 11 guys on the field who are coming from 10 or 11 different clubs. So, while saying our coaching staff should coach them like they are coached with their clubs, it pretty much means coaching them with 11 different style??? I'm not defending Mitchell on this, I think he didn't got the best out of the guys, but I'm not sure it's fair to imply we can accomodate our 11 players with a playing style similar to the one they're playing with their clubs. At some point, some of our players we'll have to adjust and still perform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by loyola Jeffrey S., I'm not sure if your post is an answer to mine but let's just say that Mckenna's record with his club is nothing impressive. Started 9 out of 22 games, Koln never got a clean sheet during those starts, and the team is 2-5-2 with him as a starter. I'm not sure this was much better than Serioux and Hastings considering that both were starters for their club at the start of the season while Kevin was a sub for Koln. You also have to take into account the players who are playing alongside our guys with their clubs. With Koln, if Kevin is paired with an exceptionnal CB that covers Kevin lack of speed it might make a lot mot more sense to start him with that kind of player. But if we don't have such a CB, we might be looking at another pairing at CB. We have 11 guys on the field who are coming from 10 or 11 different clubs. So, while saying our coaching staff should coach them like they are coached with their clubs, it pretty much means coaching them with 11 different style??? I'm not defending Mitchell on this, I think he didn't got the best out of the guys, but I'm not sure it's fair to imply we can accomodate our 11 players with a playing style similar to the one they're playing with their clubs. At some point, some of our players we'll have to adjust and still perform. If you are going to back up your opinion with stats, then surely you can show that Hastings clearly does belong in the back line based on his stats with Inverness. Or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Ed If you are going to back up your opinion with stats, then surely you can show that Hastings clearly does belong in the back line based on his stats with Inverness. Or not. That wasn't really my intention. Just to show that Kevin isn't having the same impact on his club that Julian or Rob are having with their club. I think my second paragraph is more reflective of my point. Out of a possible 3 starters at CB, one was a sub with his newly promoted squad and the other 2 were starters with their clubs (decent clubs as well). So choosing Adrian and Richard wasn't unreasonnable, specialy when considering recent MNT performances on top of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 The day you can convince me that Inverness or FC Dallas are 'decent' clubs, compared to a mid-table Bundesliga club, is the day you win your argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 So have we established that Hastings is a regular CB with Inverness and not simply a guy who stood in at the position with Canada for the Gold Cup and a couple of friendlies then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Ed The day you can convince me that Inverness or FC Dallas are 'decent' clubs, compared to a mid-table Bundesliga club, is the day you win your argument. Well, Koln was third last year in B2 and the B1 had just started in early September. I think you have to look at the timing of the selection to make a fair comparaison. I would agree that Koln is the best club, but I'm not sure Mckenna is automaticaly a better player because he's playing there. His performances with Canada as a CB have never really shown he was a dominant force at the back (he's shown he can be dominant in the air IMO). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by loyola Well, Koln was third last year in B2 and the B1 had just started in early September. I think you have to look at the timing of the selection to make a fair comparaison. I would agree that Koln is the best club, but I'm not sure Mckenna is automaticaly a better player because he's playing there. His performances with Canada as a CB have never really shown he was a dominant force at the back (he's shown he can be dominant in the air IMO). Then why are you using Koeln's mid-season stats in regards to the club record with McKenna starting to back up your argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Gordon, Hastings has not been in the starting lineup of ICT lately, also when he has played it has been at his more familiar fullback role! I think he has played decently at CB for Canada, usually because he has been one of the only options but there should be others to choose from, such as Edgar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by gator Gordon, Hastings has not been in the starting lineup of ICT lately, also when he has played it has been at his more familiar fullback role! I think he has played decently at CB for Canada, usually because he has been one of the only options but there should be others to choose from, such as Edgar! Well, talk about dropping a clanger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by loyola Well, Koln was third last year in B2 and the B1 had just started in early September. I think you have to look at the timing of the selection to make a fair comparaison. I would agree that Koln is the best club, but I'm not sure Mckenna is automaticaly a better player because he's playing there. His performances with Canada as a CB have never really shown he was a dominant force at the back (he's shown he can be dominant in the air IMO). If you want to make this argument you'd have to say that we do not have a single player for Canada who is amongst the best three or even four at his club. Sure, maybe Friend last year, and even though Julian was voted fan favourite at Depor last year he was not the most talented player, maybe just the hardest working in a bad year, they voted him because fans of teams underperforming appreciate effort, as a kind of minimum. Now maybe Radz was amongst the top at Xanthi and now at Lierse, that could be, but he went down a level to play for both, his natural level should be higher. But in general we do not have major players at their clubs. That means that when I say we should play them for their talents as shown at their clubs I mean we should at least not force the journeymen who grace our shirt to do anything unusual or require them to be special playing out of position or in a way that they are normally not used to. You have distorted one major thing I said though: I say take our best player in each line of play and build the team around those four or five, not around all eleven. I even argued we could ignore the outside backs as long as they did their job, there is little coaching there to do, the coaching has to be done down the spine with the better club players. And McKenna is probably best bet we have at centre back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by loyola I think my second paragraph is more reflective of my point. Out of a possible 3 starters at CB, one was a sub with his newly promoted squad and the other 2 were starters with their clubs (decent clubs as well). So choosing Adrian and Richard wasn't unreasonnable, specialy when considering recent MNT performances on top of that. I don't know if this point is relevant to the discussion, but I don't think either of these guys are regular CBs at club level. But it is important to my belief that if you want to get the most out of a player, regardless of the tactical system or style his team uses, play him where he consistently plays at club level. Now, we certainly can discuss the exceptions to the rule, and it wasn't like we were playing Friend as a flank midfield man instead of a centre forward, for instance. However, after watching this campaign and previous friendlies, I have to conclude that Hutchinson isn't the guy I want playing in the deep-lying defensive role of our midfield. Every time I've read a game sheet for his club side he seemed to be playing as a flank midfielder or sometimes pushed up as second striker. Or maybe he simply just sh*t the bed with the others and choked under the pressure, who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Ed Then why are you using Koeln's mid-season stats in regards to the club record with McKenna starting to back up your argument? I didn't do it initialy. This was an answer toi Jeffrey S. comparing Mckenna contribution to his club to the one of Julian and Rob. Both are definite starters in top leagues, I think the case is different with Mckenna. I also have pointed out other factors that might help explain why a quicker defender might be a better option than a slower one even if he's playing in a better league. Partnership is really important at CB. Look, I'm not saying Hastings is a tremendous defender and that Mckenna sucks. I'm just saying that I don't see much difference between those two and I can understand why one started and the other was benched. It's not like Mitchell started a 16 yrs old instead of him or a mighty USL player like Yallop did in 2004...He started a 31 yrs old with some SPL experienced who had played well recently for Canada. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. If you want to make this argument you'd have to say that we do not have a single player for Canada who is amongst the best three or even four at his club. Sure, maybe Friend last year, and even though Julian was voted fan favourite at Depor last year he was not the most talented player, maybe just the hardest working in a bad year, they voted him because fans of teams underperforming appreciate effort, as a kind of minimum. Now maybe Radz was amongst the top at Xanthi and now at Lierse, that could be, but he went down a level to play for both, his natural level should be higher. But in general we do not have major players at their clubs. That means that when I say we should play them for their talents as shown at their clubs I mean we should at least not force the journeymen who grace our shirt to do anything unusual or require them to be special playing out of position or in a way that they are normally not used to. You have distorted one major thing I said though: I say take our best player in each line of play and build the team around those four or five, not around all eleven. I even argued we could ignore the outside backs as long as they did their job, there is little coaching there to do, the coaching has to be done down the spine with the better club players. And McKenna is probably best bet we have at centre back. I agree that Mckenna could be the best of the 3, but considering the opposition and our players pool, who do we have to cover is clear lack of speed? From what I've seen of Mckenna with Canada over the years, I don't see this as a complete surprise that Hastings and Serioux were selected over him. This is my point. It's not as crazy as some of the decisions we've seen with Yallop. Hastings and Serioux are both capable CB just like Mckenna...nothing much between thewm and they all have strenght and weakness that can help or hurt us in some ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Hastings is/was a sub par Left Back on a mediocre-at-best team in a league that is no better than the MLS aside from the top 2.5 teams. Hastings is slow. I'd put money on McKenna winning that foot race. Hastings had a decent Gold Cup but really he didn't have much to do aside from the USA game. Was not called up to the MNT for years. He had been paired up with Serioux, once? before the Jamaica game. In Summary: A slow, converted LB with little to no understanding/ game experience with the other CB, who's had one good game for Canada in the past 3 or 4 years, starts over a Bundesliga Level CB, a guy who has Captained his club teams and is a former Captain of the National team, who is in his PRIME, and who has been a constant figure in the program since 2002, and who also happens to have an excellent goal scoring record for Canada. Conclusion: Starting Hastings at CB over McKenna was a complete and total fcuk up on Dales's part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 ^A big difference between the two, if you or others feel it's a trade off defensively, is that you do get a set piece goal scoring pedigree with McKenna. Hastings was never able to replicate his latter stage GC 07 performances in subsequent MNT appearences. I never felt particularly comfortable with him in those matches and I thought he looked especially vulnerable against Vela in Chiapas but he redeemed himself somewhat with his efforts in the return leg in Edmonton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklefan Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by loyola I agree that Mckenna could be the best of the 3, but considering the opposition and our players pool, who do we have to cover is clear lack of speed? I understand that you think that Mckenna isn't our best choice because of his lack of speed. But IMHO, I believe that you don't need speed to play at CB, you need a guy who is good in marking the oponent and who has good positioning (someone who plays well without the ball) and if possible big and tall guy. I'm not saying Mckenna is one the best players in the world marking the oponent and with good positioning, but sure he's big and tall and I can say too that I wasn't convinced by Serioux play in the WCQ. Of course it would great if Mckenna had Serioux's speed but that's not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 quote:Originally posted by BearcatSA ^A big difference between the two, if you or others feel it's a trade off defensively, is that you do get a set piece goal scoring pedigree with McKenna. Hastings was never able to replicate his latter stage GC 07 performances in subsequent MNT appearences. I never felt particularly comfortable with him in those matches and I thought he looked especially vulnerable against Vela in Chiapas but he redeemed himself somewhat with his efforts in the return leg in Edmonton. TBH, I never felt comfortable with any of our centers back. It was always going to be our main issue but it's not what killed us in the first 2 games....so talking about a major fcuk up, I don't think so. Pat and Lars weren't tested that much during those two games and the central defense looked OK IMO. Getting caught on the counter against Honduras can't be blame on the back 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.