A_Gagne Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 15 minutes ago, Vince193 said: a 4-4-2 diamond robs us of wingers which is what we have a crap ton of. Hoilett, Edwards, Aird wouldn't work in a 4-4-2 diamond. And now we can add Alphonso to that list as well! johnyb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 Hoilett can play centrally at top of the diamond. Aird and Edwards can play wing back. As I said the formation can change to 433 as needed. Also, considering what we've been doing hasn't worked.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 1 hour ago, A_Gagne said: And now we can add Alphonso to that list as well! Alphonso won't start. You guys don't read so well do ya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 9 minutes ago, ThiKu said: Alphonso won't start. You guys don't read so well do ya? He didn't say Alphonso would start, he said you can add him to the long list of wingers we have. I myself don't care too much for wingers, i prefer my attacking players closer to the front of the net. So i'd like to see 2 strikers and whether we go three or four at the back we have either 1 or 2 CAM's supporting the strikers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_Gagne Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 (edited) 47 minutes ago, jpg75 said: He didn't say Alphonso would start, he said you can add him to the long list of wingers we have. ^this... 1 hour ago, ThiKu said: Alphonso won't start. You guys don't read so well do ya? ... read just fine thanks. And for the record, this season Fonzie's seen the pitch in 11 of 13 MLS matches (5 starts), playing in 6 cup matches, and has 3 goals in all competitions. I think that puts him in the mix to start. Edited June 8, 2017 by A_Gagne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince193 Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 3 minutes ago, A_Gagne said: ^this... ... read just fine thanks. And for the record, this season Fonzie's seen the pitch in 11 of 13 MLS matches (5 starts), playing in 6 cup matches, and has 3 goals in all competitions. I think that puts him in the mix to start. I think he'll sub in for Hoilett. deschamp86 and ThiKu 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Club Linesman Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 His place at the Gold Cup is a tough one. When with Vancouver I like the number of minutes and different expectations of him. Development is slow and steady. With the GC - we have three games to attempt to win and if he is one of the better players he should be in the mix to start. However he is not in league with Arfield or Hoilett but could potentially bump an Aird or Osorio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffian Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 Is this the Cavallini or Davies thread? Ivanovski94 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, Club Linesman said: His place at the Gold Cup is a tough one. When with Vancouver I like the number of minutes and different expectations of him. Development is slow and steady. With the GC - we have three games to attempt to win and if he is one of the better players he should be in the mix to start. However he is not in league with Arfield or Hoilett but could potentially bump an Aird or Osorio. Cavallini? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Club Linesman Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 Apologies - just following the posts above. Should have been in the Davies thread. Now I will need to make a comment about Cavallini in the Alphonso thread to balance. Obinna 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 (edited) Re. Cavallini, I don't see him starting. I don't think we will throw caution to the wind and play with 2 forwards. Only way Cycle and Lucas play together is if we go 5 at the back, and I'm just not mentally ready for that kind of change. If Cycle doesn't produce in this friendly and the first game, his ass sees pine and Cavallini gets his chance. About time Cycle had competition and pressure to produce. Edited June 8, 2017 by BrennanFan Kusch to the Corner, Obinna and ThiKu 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 23 hours ago, A_Gagne said: ^this... ... read just fine thanks. And for the record, this season Fonzie's seen the pitch in 11 of 13 MLS matches (5 starts), playing in 6 cup matches, and has 3 goals in all competitions. I think that puts him in the mix to start. He didn't say he'd start - and I said we can switch to a 433 (or similar) formation with 1 sub.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 23 hours ago, Vince193 said: I think he'll sub in for Hoilett. Agreed, no chance he starts unless we've qualified for knockouts by our 3rd game, or we're eliminated already in our 3rd game. He's an impact sub for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 6 hours ago, BrennanFan said: Re. Cavallini, I don't see him starting. I don't think we will throw caution to the wind and play with 2 forwards. Only way Cycle and Lucas play together is if we go 5 at the back, and I'm just not mentally ready for that kind of change. If Cycle doesn't produce in this friendly and the first game, his ass sees pine and Cavallini gets his chance. About time Cycle had competition and pressure to produce. I hope we play 442 diamond, but if we play 1 striker then no, Cava doesn't start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi44 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) I'd love to play some sort of 4-2-2 with two strikers. It has been far too long for Canada. Goaltending and defense used to be our strong suit, sure, play one up front. Then it was the midfield. Yes, one up front. But it's been like this for years and honestly Canada has not accomplished much. Now, a lot of our great young players are attack minded/forwards, why not try a 4-2-2? I would definitely love to see Larin partner Cavallini. Get them both on the pitch. A Striker like Cavallini would probably be a starter for several CONCACAF teams better than Canada! Peñarol is a top team in Uruguay, and 5 goals in 14 appearances is pretty good! Edited June 9, 2017 by Bertuzzi44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrycoyster Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bertuzzi44 said: I would definitely love to see Larin partner Cavallini. Get them both on the pitch. That really isn't a great idea on paper. Larin needs wingplay and a 4-2-2-2 doesn't offer that; nor do we have the fullbacks needed to occupy the gigantic amounts of space that formation leaves on the wings. Maybe a 4-4-2 diamond or an empty bucket, but both are very hard on the central defenders and defensive midfield. A flat 4-4-2 doesn't really have the midfield presence needed to compete with better teams. Our personnel fits a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 better. Cavallini will probably have to play on the wings to get on the field against good competition. Edited June 9, 2017 by harrycoyster Complete Homer and Olympique_de_Marseille 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpion26 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 13 hours ago, BrennanFan said: Re. Cavallini, I don't see him starting. I don't think we will throw caution to the wind and play with 2 forwards. Only way Cycle and Lucas play together is if we go 5 at the back, and I'm just not mentally ready for that kind of change. If Cycle doesn't produce in this friendly and the first game, his ass sees pine and Cavallini gets his chance. About time Cycle had competition and pressure to produce. Well service to the strikers will have to better for either one to score. Cyle will score and so will Cavallini if they receive better at goal chances overall. Will see how OZ will have them set up formation wise and style of play the CMNT will play from that game to the future. Seems the players he called believe in him already that were on the fence or did not want to play for Canada. Hopefully Cavallini is finally ready to just play as well and not flip flop with his decision to rep Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyslexic nam Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 My only thought is that OZ wouldn't go to Uruguay, mend fences with Cav, convince him to come back into the fold, and then make him ride the pine. Maybe his role will be limited to a sub, but I wouldn't be surprised if OZ gives him at least one start - either through rotation with Larin or by tweaking the formation. The former may be unlikely given Larin's threat in front of goal, but I think Cav gets some pretty meaningful minutes at this tournament. Club Linesman, Complete Homer, gator and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 6 hours ago, harrycoyster said: That really isn't a great idea on paper. Larin needs wingplay and a 4-2-2-2 doesn't offer that; nor do we have the fullbacks needed to occupy the gigantic amounts of space that formation leaves on the wings. Maybe a 4-4-2 diamond or an empty bucket, but both are very hard on the central defenders and defensive midfield. A flat 4-4-2 doesn't really have the midfield presence needed to compete with better teams. Our personnel fits a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 better. Cavallini will probably have to play on the wings to get on the field against good competition. Leicester City would argue that 442 is just fine, as would Atletico Madrid and many others. A 442 diamond is probably best for Canada though as I agree the CM's would likely need help in our team so a flat 442 likely wouldn't work for us. We would leave the CDM deep, and always ensure one of the FB's is deep to keep essentially a back 5, or switch to a back 3 with the FB's flying forward and the CDM dropping between the CB's similar to Michael Carrick (lol if only we had a Carrick-type!) BCM 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obinna Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 I am fine with playing a 442 diamond. We'd want our wingers to pinch in and our full backs to overlap and judging by all the wingbacks called I won't be surprised if this is what we go with. Hoilett and Davies playing as inverted wingers might lend itself to narrow play (i.e. helping the CM's) and players like Edwards and Cordova can attack the space out wide. This is how the US has been playing lately under Bruce Arena. I only saw part of the game last night, but Nagbe and Fabian Johnson I believe were playing as inverted wingers and Yedlin and Villafana were wingbacks. Bradley was the CDM and Pulisic (who is unreal) was the CAM. Question is, who would play that role for us? If you listen to the Osorio interview, he hints at possibly playing a more "free" role, but doesn't want to give anything away. You could also play Arfield there, but I don't think he'll give us enough creativity and his reliability on the ball is needed to build the play up from the back. CDM would also be a mystery. I don't trust Johnson on the ball enough as a lone CDM. I'd trust Arfield but I think it would also be a waste to play him so far back. I think we could use two box-to-box types who alternate and Arfield-Johnson would be great, even Arfield-Piette looked good against Scotland. They were not overwhelmed by any means. BCM 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrycoyster Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 1 hour ago, ThiKu said: Leicester City would argue that 442 is just fine, as would Atletico Madrid and many others. A 442 diamond is probably best for Canada though as I agree the CM's would likely need help in our team so a flat 442 likely wouldn't work for us. We would leave the CDM deep, and always ensure one of the FB's is deep to keep essentially a back 5, or switch to a back 3 with the FB's flying forward and the CDM dropping between the CB's similar to Michael Carrick (lol if only we had a Carrick-type!) Are we really going to say we can do it because Leicester City and Atletico Madrid can? It's a very different situation with very different players. We don't have CMs with enough range to pull it off. When you leave the CDM deep in the diamond, you risk isolating the attack from defense and vacating the middle of the field. The 442 diamond also requires dangerously complex rotations for a national team. I don't see what's wrong with a defensive 433. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyslexic nam Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 27 minutes ago, harrycoyster said: Are we really going to say we can do it because Leicester City and Atletico Madrid can? It's a very different situation with very different players. We don't have CMs with enough range to pull it off. When you leave the CDM deep in the diamond, you risk isolating the attack from defense and vacating the middle of the field. The 442 diamond also requires dangerously complex rotations for a national team. I don't see what's wrong with a defensive 433. You argue against the formation because of our player pool ("don't have CMs with enough range to pull it off") but that kind of argument goes both ways. With two strong (ie starting-11 quality) strikers in our our player pool, doesn't it make sense to find a formation that accommodates both rather than playing one of them out of position? ThiKu 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrycoyster Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 2 hours ago, dyslexic nam said: You argue against the formation because of our player pool ("don't have CMs with enough range to pull it off") but that kind of argument goes both ways. With two strong (ie starting-11 quality) strikers in our our player pool, doesn't it make sense to find a formation that accommodates both rather than playing one of them out of position? Saying "we have two quality strikers, let's start both" completely disregards what Larin is good at. To properly utilize our best striker we need wingers, and our defense isn't good enough to play the USMNT-style diamond that allows the wide midfielders to get forward. They have Bradley, Brooks, and Cameron and still only use the formation against weaker opponents because of how defensively unstable it is. 90% of Larin's goals are off of crosses; that has to be the game plan. Let Cavallini play on the wing or be a 60' sub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi44 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 I dunno, maybe Larin and Cavallini being on the pitch together doesn't really work "on paper", but in friendlies and for the love of god just to change it up, can't we try it at least once? Who knows, they might have amazing chemistry and go on to wreak CONCACAF defenses everywhere!!! >:) toontownman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 Shearer and Ferdinand didn't work on paper. Depends on the chemistry, players around them and tactics. ThiKu 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now