Jump to content

Canada vs. USA - May 25, 2009 [R]


Vic

Recommended Posts

^ Lang's feeble attempts at step overs to fool the defender marking here looked as though they were being done in slow motion....it was laughable. I think she's done....I expect to see her drop on the depth charts quite significantly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Sorry but I've heard that word too many times now.

Isn't development Stephen Hart's job? And even at that we farm out our elite development to professional clubs and the NCAA, and at the youth level to, Provincial programs, L1 clubs, etc. You also don't change that stuff overnight (i.e. CSA Wellness to World Cup), and it takes a decade to see the results of changes at young levels. It is far outside the purview of how our women's team performs next year in World Cup qualifying.

The job of a national team coach in terms of development is limited technically in terms of what can be accomplished in at best a few camps a year, and indirectly through dictating style of play and counseling players (i.e. training plans).

National senior coaches are hired to:

a) ensure the right players are on the field

B) create the best possible game plan

B) perform tactical adjustments in competition

c) motivate, inspire and lead

It will take Morace and Bavagnoli a while to get a feel for both the skill level of the countries players, what they actually accomplish in competition, and what they bring (or take away from) the team as a unit.

That's the pathway.

The development card is a warm fuzzy security blanket like Pellerud's not enough money and subsequently not enough games. National coaches are hired to deliver results, not change the way kids kick a ball. Morace's success or failure has nothing to do with our youth development programs and everything to do with her ability to identify and gauge talent, understand the game and tactics, and motivate.

The USA games are a Godsend and a perfect lab for her to see different players pushed hard and what she is up against. Quite impressive of the CSA for the coup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ You are missing the point. See option a) in your list. Pellerud spent 9 years filling the barn with Clydesdales; we need a few Arabians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Ed

Defending was poor in our end, leading to all 4 goals. The defenders were too slow to react and clear on too many occasions. particular I thought that Wilkinson in particular was out of her league in terms of skill AS A DEFENDER. The team looked a bit better offensively (Parker impressed) but there is a sharp contrast in skill level between the Americans and us, which didn't seem to exist 10 years ago. Thanks a lot Evan!!!

Also, I could a hear a distinctive groan from those in the audience with testes at minute 61.

Right on the money. Poor defending has little to do with playing the ball on the ground and a lot to do with moving your ass. Wilkinson and Lang have to go, what a useless pair! Timko has never been a defender, why would Morace put her there when she had Zurrer. Sinclair has totally lost her touch, I think she is the next one to go. I am anxious to see if Morace has the cojones to make changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Sinclair is going nowhere....

She has not lost her touch. She got zero service. She is a quality player and I know that Morace feels that she is a top player in the world. Step 1 was improving her fitness, which was evident last night. She's never looked that lean before.

In my opinion, she does pretty much everything well. There is no single player in the Canadian roster who can do what she does. She is not only the most talented but the hardest worker in training as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps Ed. Your point about defending is well taken too. And Ref I agree it's tough to have someone like Timko play striker all year in Sweden and then all of a sudden play the back line against the #1 team in the world. Although I think if you look at the other end of the field, we had no one who could deliver like the Americans either. They took their opportunities and potted them, often with considerable skill. I didn't see anyone demonstrating anything like Boxx's run out of the middle, Rapinoe's ball bent into the far corner or Cheney's near-post glancing header.

Because she's been on the team through three Prime Ministers, people treat Kara Lang like she's 30, but she is one of the youngest players on the roster. She's been in the limelight half her life and is managing being a full-time student and a national team player. There were four other university students on Canada's roster last night, and none of them played a minute. And I don't hear anyone going after them. I've said it before, when she gets out and commits to the sport full-time like the other players on the field, she will be one of if not our best player in the sense of the total package of what they bring to the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So she's going to develop vision, the ability to beat defenders on the dribble and tactical awareness after she leaves UCLA?

When she was 16 she was likely one of the best teenage players in the world. She's stagnated to the point where she's a borderline starter on a middling national team now. I do think there is talent there, but she needs to prove it. Maybe some time in a pro environment will help her do that (but do you honestly think she's WPS quality? As an international?).

We're not throwing her under the bus for sport. Critiquing her game is fair. And there has been a lot in her game to critique.

RE: development – I’m not talking development in the traditional make-the-players-better way, but rather developing a new style of game. They probably could have soldiered on playing route one and made another quarterfinals run, but they were never going to advance past that playing the way they were. The goal of this program should be to win the World Cup not just take part. We likely need to take a step back before we start to build towards that possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All fair on Lang, to each their own opinion. And thanks for the clarification on the context of your use of development. Don't disagree and you left out because no one in Canada could stand watching them play bangball without damaging their televisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by VPjr

^ Lang's feeble attempts at step overs to fool the defender marking here looked as though they were being done in slow motion....it was laughable. I think she's done....I expect to see her drop on the depth charts quite significantly

Lang impressed when she was a teenager, bigger and stronger than almost every other kid on the field and with a kick like a mule, but she lacks ball skills and agility, always has. She has not kept up with the others in terms of development and no longer belongs on the MNT in my opinion unless something remarkable happens to her game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Watched the first half. Not surprised that we were being beaten by the americans, but pretty optimistic and pleased with the way they played despite the loss. Baby steps folks, baby steps. Missed the lineups, but I believe Candace Chapman was playing centre back?? If that is the case, not a bad move by Morace (maybe she plays this regularly now, but recall her as a right back with U-20s and first appearances with Seniors) as she brings some pace and some skill to the position. Also, while Timko is now a striker, she did play right back with the U-20s when they won silver. Lang, probably out of place on the wing, might have a better future as a back as I do not think she will be replacing either Robinson or Sinclair up front. On the other hand, if crossing will still be part of the game - and it needs to be IMO - there are few who do it better. Wilkinson also, looked a fish out of water. Very impressed with Matheson, think Parker also has a great deal of potential, although she will have to deal with the quicker pace of top flight international soccer better than she did last night (first half at least).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Sorry but I've heard that word too many times now.

Isn't development Stephen Hart's job? And even at that we farm out our elite development to professional clubs and the NCAA, and at the youth level to, Provincial programs, L1 clubs, etc. You also don't change that stuff overnight (i.e. CSA Wellness to World Cup), and it takes a decade to see the results of changes at young levels. It is far outside the purview of how our women's team performs next year in World Cup qualifying.

The job of a national team coach in terms of development is limited technically in terms of what can be accomplished in at best a few camps a year, and indirectly through dictating style of play and counseling players (i.e. training plans).

National senior coaches are hired to:

a) ensure the right players are on the field

B) create the best possible game plan

B) perform tactical adjustments in competition

c) motivate, inspire and lead

It will take Morace and Bavagnoli a while to get a feel for both the skill level of the countries players, what they actually accomplish in competition, and what they bring (or take away from) the team as a unit.

That's the pathway.

The development card is a warm fuzzy security blanket like Pellerud's not enough money and subsequently not enough games. National coaches are hired to deliver results, not change the way kids kick a ball. Morace's success or failure has nothing to do with our youth development programs and everything to do with her ability to identify and gauge talent, understand the game and tactics, and motivate.

The USA games are a Godsend and a perfect lab for her to see different players pushed hard and what she is up against. Quite impressive of the CSA for the coup.

Not sure if I got you right but IMO what development is done below the National Teams has a direct impact on what the National Teams get. If Canada below the NT's had a Euro or USA situation we would see things very different at the top.

Problem is, in Canada we don't have a package like the Euro's or even the USA to offer players in the NT development pathway let alone below that. It's why I've stated many times before to give the players below the NT's the best chance is for Clubs not to wait on the NSO or PSO. Join together for the sake of the kids otherwise we will continue in this endless cycle of going forward in slow motion.

Bottomline is development at all levels affects what you move upwards or retain or loose. We are moving forward in slow motion but we have a new era. As a country we need to pick it up at all levels to avoid parking our NT programs at a level or rotating coaches in & out every 2-3 years.

Btw the W2W is a sham as no one uses it as it's incomplete. It was done as part of a nation wide program cookie cutter template & will perform in the same light as the CSA brain farts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is so frustrating to watch these girls play soccer and for some crazy reason throw the fundamental stuff out of the window. Even the American girls seem to have that desease,which is.

Poor passing and poor judgements.

Remedy.

Control the ball before you pass it.

Time and time again they fell into that trap and I suggest they also learn to find the open player and for that matter be the open player. Running of the ball is also very important.How to pass the ball is another one. Make sure that the ball is easely controlable and so ensure that the least amount of spin is on that ball as well.

It all adds up to a more simplistic game and even more fun game to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by squizz

I've put up a new post about the match, which mostly focuses on the crowd. It's titled "Why screaming children are the future of Canadian soccer", so that gives you a pretty good idea of the angle.

http://canadiansoccerblog.ca/2009/05/26/why-screaming-children-are-the-future-of-canadian-soccer/

Personally, I'm waiting for why Bohemian Rhapsody is the future of Voyageurs sections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not surprised with the results as the US team was much better than the Canadian. There were a lot of positive things coming out of the game. First of all, Morace insisted of playing the ball on the ground, i.e. the way soccer should be played most of the time. Secondly, the players listened to her coaching. Regardless, there were still signs of the old Pellerud's method. It will take a while to abandon it.

The 4-0 loss was mainly due to the line up on the field. This will be a good learning process for Morace. Mcleod, after regaining her confident in the WPS, should be the first choice goalie. Canada still has not found its best left and right full back. Putting Timko into the right back position was not ideal, even though her starting line up was long overdue. Since she has speed, tackling and shooting ability, either a midfield on either side will work for her. She might have to compete in a starting place if Morrace put her in the forward line. After all, she is not a natural full back even though she can play well in that position. Where was Emily Zurrer? She caught my eyes since last year and she would fit in well in both central defender and left back position. Remember her headers that scored goals during corners! Booth was a bit green and was outsmart left, right and center, but that's all part of the learning process. Wilkinson is a natural right winger. Putting her into left/right midfield and also right back have not produced any good results in the last couple of years. She has speed on the wing but should never play as a full back. These girls are still learning and they are not the Total Footballers who can play in any position, yet. Parker was one of the bright spot in that game. Combative and willing to try new things. However I found her and Matheson in bit light weight in the center where Shannon Boxx outmuscle them with her physical built. Robinson was skilful but tended to hold on the ball too long. She sometimes failed to exploit the time and space of her team. Just look at the Americans as their team, even without some of their best players, fully exploited the space and width of the pitch. Our usual best players Lang, Sinclair and Matheson, did not have their best game, which explained why Canada found it tough going forward. Sinclair simply missed Tancredi's physical presence upfront in the first half. Lang, after her injury and probably got tied up with her school work, looked sluggish on the wing. I am a big fan of her and I hope that she can recover her form soon. She has wonderful talent that will help out the team. Overall, the team is on the right track. Never be afraid of not getting the result when you do things right. This is for the long run team building. You girls just have to ignore the media and any negative comments coming from the CSA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed out one more player int eh holding midfield line up - either Rustaud or Schmidt will provide defensive shielding in the penalty box area. It was scary to see the Americans carrying out a shooting training program around our penalty box and we failed to shut them them. I'd prefer to see only one of them play as they have similar style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Growing pains. It was a delight to see the Canadian women try to play

more possession style, despite the scoreline. These are the Americans we're

talking about right? They're number one and played like it. It was even alarming

to me to note that their subs even poured it on when they had their chances.

Poor defensive cover, players playing out of their natural positions, and lack of

quality offensive chances, in addition to facing a formidable opponent like the

Americans will not bring a result. (Americans have a stronger program, a larger

budget, and optimal quality of match experiences that they possess.)

From what I saw, the women are on the right path, with the right coach, this time.

F**k the score, it's a friendly, back to the drawing board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of criticisms about Pellerud. Me myself is not a big fan of his coaching method. I was brought up in the Total Football era when the Dutch and W. Germany team excelled in the early 70's where intelligent passing and interchanging of position highlighted a golden era of soccer after the 1970's Brazilians. You have to give Mr. P the credit though. Before his time, Canada was the whipping girl in the world cup, failing to win a game. It was embarrassing if you looked at the record. When Mr. P came on board, he stressed on the youth program. With the help of Ian Bridge, they brought in the young under 20 team of Sinclair, Lang, Timko and McLod. They almost beat the Amercians in the U20 World Cup final in Edmonton. A year later, their physical and high ball approach upset another favorites, China with Sun Wen in the lineup. It was an emotional night when Canada finally surface out and joined the elite of world soccer. Leading Sweden for 75 minutes and lossing in the semi final was no disgace as Sweden was the third best team in the world at that world cup. The third place consoldation saw Canada carried on a fight with the Amercians with Lang running rings around the Amercians and Sincalir scored a clinical goal. Three wins and three losses was the best achievement the Canadian women soccer team ever had. Instead of building the team aound the basic skills and passing after the early success, Mr. P decided to focus on his Norwegian's style which brought him the glory in early days when women soccer was not that well developed. Since the 2003 WC, a lot of teams have grown such as N. Korean, Australia, England, France, Japan and notably Brazil. Their players are more skilful and organized. Canada could no longer rely on the primitive play to disrupt the oppositions. This led to an early exit from the Olympics qualifier in 2004 and another exit for the U20 WC and again against Australia in the last senior WC. Hats off to Mr. P for bringing the early glory to the team. Now it is time to change for the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...