Jump to content

CMNT Head Coach Approval Rating - June 2010


rdroze

Recommended Posts

My disapproval is mainly because I'm not convinced he will qualify us for 2014. That's his job and can't support him fully unless I believe he's going to bring us this result. Having said this, he's done a good job in many areas, though it's sometimes hard to tell what is him and what is the association getting better.

I'd have to think that the discovery, or rather, the bringing into the fould of all the new faces to create some depth is 100% pure Hart at work. He had already started on it as the TD, but now as the head coach he can both bring these guys in and set them up for action on the pitch.

The question that still lingers for me is whether it would have been better to have kept him as the TD and recruited a coach with more international coaching experience. We didn't really debate this one to the death like we should have, as it just sorta happened like we were all expecting it to. Does he not deserve a shot at being the head coach? I don't think there's a solid argument against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have to think that the discovery, or rather, the bringing into the fould of all the new faces to create some depth is 100% pure Hart at work. He had already started on it as the TD, but now as the head coach he can both bring these guys in and set them up for action on the pitch.

To me, this is his biggest mandate for now: bringing in and evaluating new faces, seeing if they have the skillset for international level, seeing if they fit into his scheme. I hightlighted the last word because you can question his tactical plan on the pitch: he (and Mitchell before him) seem committed to a system which features a lone attacker, two flank midfield types, and three midfielders who play more centrally. Is this the best way to go? Or is this the best way to go with the personnel he has available?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are a tough bunch! Wouldn't that be a different poll though? This poll asked whether you approve of how he is handling the job. You seem to have indicated your disapproval based on the fact you think he was the wrong choice for the job, which is a different thing altogether.

Or maybe I have seen nothing so far that changes my mind? He was the play it safe appointment who can be expected to select players who emerged on the scene by playing for the CSA youth national teams in preference to players who did not and who can be expected to select all the usual suspects based on reputation built up over the years rather than performance and commitment in the here and now. I don't approve of that kind of approach. What's needed is to bring someone completely new in who rather than playing the game politically will make his own judgments on players and slowly put a team together that can actually win key qualifier games. Using TFC as a frame of reference most people will be familiar with I see Stephen Hart as being a Chris Cummins sort of appointment but would greatly prefer somebody like Preki, who is not afraid to raise eyebrows a bit by discarding underachieving prima donnas and bringing in a couple of Tony Menezes type players (to use an example from the Holger Osieck era) that normally wouldn't be selected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^so, who are these players who Stephen Hart is not selecting due to their position as 'CSA Outsiders'? If you're going to throw out an accusation, why not back it up with some examples to bolster your position? How many youth caps did Pedro Pacheco win again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If games are going to be played on non-FIFA dates (I suspect primarily for the CSA to pick up appearance fees rather than for Stephen Hart to build the team for the future) there is always likely to be a need to make up the numbers with some unusual selections. Tony Menezes became a regular selection under Osieck. That hasn't happened yet with Pedro Pacheco so there is no valid comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If games are going to be played on non-FIFA dates (I suspect primarily for the CSA to pick up appearance fees rather than for Stephen Hart to build the team for the future) there is always likely to be a need to make up the numbers with some unusual selections. Tony Menezes became a regular selection under Osieck. That hasn't happened yet with Pedro Pacheco so there is no valid comparison.

If the CSA was only interested in appearance fees, they would've been playing these games all the time. Last World Cup though, I don't think we played a single warmup game.

Also, no one's been a "regular selection" under Hart as far as I can see. In the 11 games he's managed, he's called in 51 different players and no single player has been there for every game. True, there have been a couple players that are there an awful lot of the time like Stalteri and Hastings however outside of this year, Stalteri was still playing at a pretty high level and Hastings is usually brought in as cover as he can play both center-half and full back.

Personally, I think evaluating as many guys as possible is a good thing however I hope he soon starts to pare down his pool of players with less experimental guys (ie. 2 or 3) brought in for each game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm "satisfied" with Hart so far and would prefer to see him experiment with friendlies since they really don't mean a whole lot.

Although Canada needs to be in the top 4 of CONCACAF come the next WCQ.

Anyways, the real test will be at next years Gold Cup. That's really the final tune up before the WCQ. Although I would hope the CSA will line up at least 2 friendlies.

I'm also not a fan of the solo striker, and would prefer to see 2 up front. Maybe someone can ask him in an interview why he's still using the solo striker?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...