Jump to content

Gold Cup - June 19th 2019 - Canada vs Mexico


apbsmith

Recommended Posts

I just find it hard to believe that people would think Herdman would say that.  I he that he seems to be fairly confident (whether genuine or projected) but I will absolutely give him the benefit of the doubt on this one - especially since I can’t see any public figure (barring maybe Trump) being that self congratulatory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, apbsmith said:

OZ, I was pleased with but I wasn't overly impressed like tons of other people on here. Wow we beat FG 4-2 aftter almost blowing a 3-0 lead in Davies coming out party, followed by ties vs 2 solid teams that did not prioritize the 2017 Gold Cup....only to get take the L in the first KO game vs Jamaica because of OZ's decisions.

You gonna remember he also had draws  Against Scotland and Costa Rica. That’s not a easy task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

You gonna remember he also had draws  Against Scotland and Costa Rica. That’s not a easy task.

Valid points, I'm not saying OZ was bad, he def helped steer the program in the right direction ( many reasons). 

I was more referencing perhaps he jumped a bit pre mature with his cheeky comments. For me personally , I'm saving my judgement towards Herdman post tourny. 

The way I see it, if we want to be "results oriented", which often times is the reality. 

2017 under OZ - QF loss vs Jamaica a team that didn't make the hex. 

Vs 

2019 under Herdman TBD.

Edited by apbsmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dyslexic nam said:

“The culture’s a bit stronger” 

Not

”The coach is a bit stronger”

 

You're right, misheard it the first time.

I actually don't have issue with this. The culture is different, some of that is probably what OZ put in place, some of it is the swagger some of the new guys brings and some of it is from Herdman. It's not a detraction from anyone as the basis for the culture was the change in talent level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually surprised how quiet OZ was when Herdman took his job. He's having a little jab now and I don't have a problem with it.

Plus, A little criticism is a good thing, especially since the Canadian "soccer media" sit on their hands 90% of the time or ask pandering questions! I haven't really heard any hard questions to Herdman about the apathetic lack of games for the National team or any hard questions about the Gold Cup roster and his tactics/approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

“The culture’s a bit stronger” 

Not

”The coach is a bit stronger”

 

But the coach is responsible for the culture of the team and the results have been better, so perhaps a man-motivator is more important than a tactician for this group?

Edit: Just realized you were just correcting the record on what Herdman said.

Either way my point stands.

Edited by Obinna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Obinna said:

But the coach is responsible for the culture of the team and the results have been better, so perhaps a man-motivator is more important than a tactician for this group?

Edit: Just realized you were just correcting the record on what Herdman said.

Either way my point stands.

Results have not been better. Yet.  Let's see how the quarterfinal goes and also how the USA games in the fall go before we judge Herdman one way or the other.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Herdman said "culture" not "coach", and the context was in respect to the Canada - Mexico game from the last WCQ they faced off. I'm sorry, but Zambrano comes off as petty here as this had nothing whatsoever to do with him (if indeed it is true he took offense to something that was never about him to begin with).

I have my own criticisms of Herdman, but the vitrol he seems to get from some people on this site just for the sake of it is illogical and hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SpecialK said:

Why Herdman took a shot at him. Any normal person with be pissed about that. Also Oz coach against tougher   Opponents And did really well. Herdman shouldn’t have said anything about former coaches. He should have showed some class ! 

he NEVER took at shot at him. Period. Zambrano comes off as bitter (understandably), and petty (unnecessary).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BrennanFan said:

Results have not been better. Yet.  Let's see how the quarterfinal goes and also how the USA games in the fall go before we judge Herdman one way or the other.  

 

2-0 W vs T&T > 1-0 W vs Curacao 

4-0 W vs Martinique > 4-2 W vs FG

1-3 L vs Mexico < 1-1 D vs Costa Rica

The last one could probably go either way, but hard to argue a loss is better than a draw, even if that loss came against a Mexican side much stronger than CR, so I'll give that one to you.

The results speak for themselves thus far, but let's see how the rest of the tournament goes. If we get past the quarters, which we all hope for, they'll be no argument about which coach has delivered the better gold cup results.

Edited by Obinna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this team can really burn an opponent off the counter when a turnover occurs.  Not just the Cavalini goal that punished the questionable decision of the last outfield player back trying to make a cute move, but also when Davies pounced on a loose ball and beat two guys only to narrowly miss on a sharp angle, Cavalini manhandling the defending on the break and getting off a heavy shot,  as well as the play where David misread the pace of Kaye's pass when we were on the first break (I thought for sure he was going to pot one there the moment Kaye released the pass).  Good team's need that special ingredient of gamechange to take it to the next level, and that's a big intangible we really haven't had in our program.

On the other hand, watching Henry dive in on Jimenez and getting skinned on the edge of the box and other questionable defending by others is the sort of stuff that makes you fear that we could be surrendering a penalty sometime later in this tournament.  I'm hoping our overall defending sorts itself out here and we don't stub our dicks with brain cramps in the QF.  That, or Borjan continues to be "the man" with big time shot stopping   Oddly enough, it's quite possible a team like the Ticos could repeat their own counterattacking game from the their own successful WC 2014 against us and try to sucker punch us off the counter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Addona said:

I think resting the A squad was the right call, even if it was hard to watch our B squad and wonder what the full A squad could have done. What's not mentioned is that even a draw vs. Mexico last night would have almost surely led to a 2nd place finish in the group. Given that we would have needed an outright win convinces me that resting was the correct call.

What I'd like to see vs. Cuba is:

Borjan

Godinho - Henry - Cornelius - Morgan

Arfield - Piette - Osorio

Hoilett - David - Davies

Subs:  Millar for Davies around the 60th (if game is comfortable), Cav for David, and 3rd sub depends on game situation.

* Godinho because he's fresh, and showed a little better, albeit against weaker competition

* Morgan because Kaye is on a yellow and I don't want to risk losing him for the QF

* Cornelius desperately needs a rest, but hopefully can go, and may not have as much work to do. Also, we don't really have another great option at CB ... not sure if Miller can be trusted in a match of this magnitude.  Unfortunately, Hutch is the only other field player who has gone all 180, otherwise, I'd swap out Cornelius for Hutch. But for now, I'd rather rest Hutch for the QF, and we should still be able to beat Cuba without him. Not having one more quality CB (like James) is the pretty clearly our biggest weakness right now.

I dunno, i don't see the advantage of playing Morgan.  We know what his ceiling is, we know what he can and can't give.  He won't be able to claim LB from Kaye, Tiebert, Davies or even Johnson if we play him there.  He's not our future, he wasn't even our past.  There are other rested players that can slot in and do just as well, even though it is his natural position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, costarg said:

I dunno, i don't see the advantage of playing Morgan.  We know what his ceiling is, we know what he can and can't give.  He won't be able to claim LB from Kaye, Tiebert, Davies or even Johnson if we play him there.  He's not our future, he wasn't even our past.  There are other rested players that can slot in and do just as well, even though it is his natural position.

Keeping everyone engaged is a good reason. You just never know if or when we'll need Morgan to step in later on in the tournament. This is a good chance to get him going.

I agree he is not the past, present or future of left back, but he allows us to give better players the break they need (which is another good reason to start him).

I think we'll see him or Teibert at left back. I would be somewhat surprised if Kaye or Davies even play, let alone start the match at the left back spot.

Edited by Obinna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...