Jump to content

CONCACAF U-20 Championship (November 2018)


Lou
 Share

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Why do we want to play less games though? I know there are complaints about having to play minnows, but they are competitive games, which is better than playing friendlies against better teams, one could argue.

Playing against minnows in a competitive tourney is not better than playing a middle ranked European or South American B team. Come on now! The League of Nations and this new  format is based on getting more games for   Caribbean teams.  Carribean nations = votes ! Remember that. Oh and who wants to FIFA  President one day Sir.Victor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

With our current squad, Panama is the better team. We will likely lose.

However, if we can beat Panama, then are chances become really really good.

For the final games we can bring in David, Davies, Tabla & Millar and possibly 2 other players.

With those guys were have the firepower to beat Guatemala or El Salvador in the "D vs F" game. Then either El Salvador or Guatemala lose to Mexico on the next match day and we would be through to the U 20 World Cup and we would only have had to risk those guys for one game!

Good luck getting the clubs to release any of those players during non fifa dates...

Edited by LeoH037
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

It is how it works @admin! You can change up to 6 players after the group stage, as long as those players were on the (secret) 35-man roster.

https://res.cloudinary.com/concacaf-production/image/upload/v1537388899/concacaf-prod/assets/Concacaf_Under-20_Championship_-_ENG.pdf

Ah, so they do have to be submitted before hand.  That make sense.  I was thinking wrt to just bringing people in willy  nilly. 

I didn't know it was that large. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

Playing against minnows in a competitive tourney is not better than playing a middle ranked European or South American B team. Come on now! The League of Nations and this new  format is based on getting more games for   Caribbean teams.  Carribean nations = votes ! Remember that. Oh and who wants to FIFA  President one day Sir.Victor. 

Keep in mind what we're in right now is qualifying for League of Nations. Once the actual league of nations begins we'll be playing against the likes of USA, Mexico, Honduras, Panama, etc.

Those teams are EXACTLY the types of teams we should be playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Why do we want to play less games though? I know there are complaints about having to play minnows, but they are competitive games, which is better than playing friendlies against better teams, one could argue.

I'm advocating for less minnows not less games. I think a pre-qualification tournament  could still lead to a format where we have a minimum of 4 games. Let's say the final tournament is played with 20 teams (4 groups of 5) instead of 34.

I don't mind the 3-0 scores, but the 12-0 we've seen in some groups are a bit of a joke. I would hate to see those scores becoming a factor in a tiebreaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

Playing against minnows in a competitive tourney is not better than playing a middle ranked European or South American B team. Come on now! The League of Nations and this new  format is based on getting more games for   Caribbean teams.  Carribean nations = votes ! Remember that. Oh and who wants to FIFA  President one day Sir.Victor. 

I would say it's about getting everyone more games, but you're right that teams who play the least are the biggest beneficiaries. That's largely the small Caribbean islands.

But Canada also doesn't play many games so we are amongst the beneficiaries I would suggest.

And I'm sure competitive tournament games against weak teams has it's benefits, such as dealing with the pressure of needing results. Playing friendlies against good teams is nice and has also it's benefits though, no doubt.

I don't think it's clear cut either way though. I tend to lean towards learning to get results in official competition, I think. 

That's if I had to choose. Having both would be optimal!

Edited by Obinna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, aloyol said:

Olivieri played pro with the Impact, was a member of our U23 national team, was technical director at Lac St-Louis for 7 years (arguably one of the strongest region in Quebec in term of producing talent), was the women's U20's head coach, WNT assistant and head coach for a PLSQ team.

IMHO, this is good enough to coach an U20 NT that has very few camps and friendlies. I don't know every candidates in the country but Olivieri has some decent enough experience to qualify for this job. Not sure we have many candidates for this kind of job. 

Maybe I'm mistaken but I have the impression that historically, the U20's coach has often been a MNT assistant at the same time.

 

Olivieri, is a CSA Lacky and a Herdman ass kisser simple as that. Dwight Lodeweges should have been hired and the best squad should have been brought. Or at least have Mauro Biello manage the team. 

I wonder if Davies , Millar , Ballou and David are even on the 35 man list ? Maybe that’s why the CSA is keeping it secret because they are not on it . 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, aloyol said:

I'm advocating for less minnows not less games. I think a pre-qualification tournament  could still lead to a format where we have a minimum of 4 games. Let's say the final tournament is played with 20 teams (4 groups of 5) instead of 34.

I don't mind the 3-0 scores, but the 12-0 we've seen in some groups are a bit of a joke. I would hate to see those scores becoming a factor in a tiebreaker.

Ah gotcha. Yeah I am all for playing better teams if the number of games stays the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Ah gotcha. Yeah I am all for playing better teams if the number of games stays the same.

There should have been more games for the U17 and U20 levels. It’s kinda of Joke. We have a lot of talented players out there and they get lost and  eventually signed on with other nations. Ya we have Davies, Millar, Ballou and David but what about Palmer , Paton , Romeo, Reka and now Hood. The CSA is not making it exciting to play for Canada. These players want games to showcase their talent. Fuck Herdman on his Bullshit with this you need feel it and all that. Players are going to nations that they feel they can play at the highest level , play against the best , get  exposer and play in huge tourneys/world cups. 

If we had more camps and more games against good teams. We can really see where our players are and really build a core of 40-60 players for Canada at all levels

Edited by SpecialK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SpecialK said:

There should have been more games for the U17 and U20 levels. It’s kinda of Joke. We have a lot of talented players out there and they get lost and  eventually signed on with other nations. Ya we have Davies, Millar, Ballou and David but what about Palmer , Paton , Romeo, Reka and now Hood. The CSA is not making it exciting to play for Canada. These players want games to showcase their talent. Fuck Herdman on his Bullshit with this you need feel it and all that. Players are going to nations that they feel they can play at the highest level , play against the best , get  exposer and play in huge tourneys/world cups. 

If we had more camps and more games against good teams. We can really see where our players are and really build a core of 40-60 players for Canada at all levels

I wanted 2 friendlies for evey window we were inactive, but that was like wishing upon a star.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

With our current squad, Panama is the better team. We will likely lose.

However, if we can beat Panama, then are chances become really really good.

For the final games we can bring in David, Davies, Tabla & Millar and possibly 2 other players.

With those guys were have the firepower to beat Guatemala or El Salvador in the "D vs F" game. Then either El Salvador or Guatemala lose to Mexico on the next match day and we would be through to the U 20 World Cup and we would only have had to risk those guys for one game!

Really?? You know this for sure? I think most of us would be hard pressed to know anything about any of their players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Stryker911 said:

Really?? You know this for sure? I think most of us would be hard pressed to know anything about any of their players. 

Just compare their stats vs Guadeloupe:

https://www.concacaf.com/en/under-20s-men/game-detail/456397#tab_match=match-details

vs ours against Guadeloupe.

https://www.concacaf.com/en/under-20s-men/game-detail/456412#tab_match=match-details

 

What does it tell you? :huh:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aloyol said:

I'm advocating for less minnows not less games. I think a pre-qualification tournament  could still lead to a format where we have a minimum of 4 games. Let's say the final tournament is played with 20 teams (4 groups of 5) instead of 34.

I don't mind the 3-0 scores, but the 12-0 we've seen in some groups are a bit of a joke. I would hate to see those scores becoming a factor in a tiebreaker.

As annoying as I am finding the qualification system, it's arguable that the other teams currently in 2nd place have it worse than we do (where the team that I thought would be the out and out minnow of the group has already won a game). Of the four groups which have 6 teams, ours is by far the most even. 1st place team is "only" plus 8 goal differential after 2 games and the worst team is -5 goal differential after 2 games.

In comparison, in Group A, the US is plus 19 and the last place team is -24. In Group B, Mexico is plus 11 while last place team is minus 10. In Group C, Honduras is +18 and Sint Maarten in last place at -19.

The other two groups are a bit more reasonable but they only have 5 teams, and thus one less minnow to beat the living crap out of.

Chances are some teams will get eliminated from the first round because they didn't win the "Who can beat the living daylights out of their group's minnows the most?" competition, which is not how it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

That they had a better game that day. 

Is Aruba better than Jamaica because they beat Grenada 3-0 and Jamaica only won 1-0? Or is Saint Lucia almost as good as Costa Rica because Costa Rica only beat Barbados by 1 more goal than Saint Lucia did?

I am not saying we will win tomorrow, but to use one game against a mutual opponent as the measuring stick is pretty lame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Stryker911 said:

That they had a better game that day. 

Is Aruba better than Jamaica because they beat Grenada 3-0 and Jamaica only won 1-0? Or is Saint Lucia almost as good as Costa Rica because Costa Rica only beat Barbados by 1 more goal than Saint Lucia did?

I am not saying we will win tomorrow, but to use one game against a mutual opponent as the measuring stick is pretty lame.

IMHO, Panama and Canada are exactly at the same level, and I'll show you why:

Both Martinique and Dominica won by one goal against St Kitts & Nevis, so they are exactly at the same level. So Martinique = Dominica. This is a fact.

Canada won by a 4 goals margin against Dominica.

Panama won by a 4 goals margin against Martinique.

Then, based on those results, we have to conclude that Panama and Canada are exactly at the same level.

Using one game against a mutual opponent as a measuring stick is indeed lame but using many results like I just did, this is science. ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aloyol said:

IMHO, Panama and Canada are exactly at the same level, and I'll show you why:

Both Martinique and Dominica won by one goal against St Kitts & Nevis, so they are exactly at the same level. So Martinique = Dominica. This is a fact.

Canada won by a 4 goals margin against Dominica.

Panama won by a 4 goals margin against Martinique.

Then, based on those results, we have to conclude that Panama and Canada are exactly at the same level.

Using one game against a mutual opponent as a measuring stick is indeed lame but using many results like I just did, this is science. ;)

 

 

Image result for spock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both teams have played twice since Friday so that will be another factor.  Of the players who have played in both matches who is 100%?  We obviously had a bit of rotation last match, did Panama? I don’t care to look because I have no clue about their players anyhow, but just some food for thought. 

Lets hope Panama has a sense of false confidence coming off two big wins and we can throw them their first taste of adversity.  In that way, it’s sort of nice our group is coming off a tough win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Keegan said:

Both teams have played twice since Friday so that will be another factor.  Of the players who have played in both matches who is 100%?  We obviously had a bit of rotation last match, did Panama? I don’t care to look because I have no clue about their players anyhow, but just some food for thought. 

Lets hope Panama has a sense of false confidence coming off two big wins and we can throw them their first taste of adversity.  In that way, it’s sort of nice our group is coming off a tough win.

Panama had 5 starters in common between the two games. Based on the fancy stat, player jersey #, Guadeloupe got Panama's A team. Martinique faced a squad riddled with high jersey #s such as 14, 15, 17 and 18. The possession stats and number of passes also seem to support this as well.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Soro17 said:

Panama had 5 starters in common between the two games. Based on the fancy stat, player jersey #, Guadeloupe got Panama's A team. Martinique faced a squad riddled with high jersey #s such as 14, 15, 17 and 18. The possession stats and number of passes also seem to support this as well.  

 

 

I believe this ultimately supports my argument; they are a better, deeper squad. As a neutral, I'd bet on them. I'd bet on us if we had Tabla, Millar, David and Davies for this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

I believe this ultimately supports my argument; they are a better, deeper squad. As a neutral, I'd bet on them. I'd bet on us if we had Tabla, Millar, David and Davies for this game.

Did Panama call up their best team? From their last games against Japan and South Korea in October none of their players were u20. Even looking at their call ups over the last year, only 4 were u20 (3 of them playing in Panama and 1 in Israel)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...