Canada vs Iceland - Jan 15th (Camp Poutine Match #3)

[SpecialK]

But there is a big difference between 19-21 pro to an 17 year old kid who hasn’t even been called up to 1st team and he plays in the 3rd division of USL. 
 

Brym and Bassong are pros in Europe, just because Nelson played well at U17 tourney and won a youth award. I’m sorry it’s apples to oranges here. Davies was 16 played with the main club before he came to the Sr team he played against England u20 team and other youth teams before getting called up to the Sr team. Nelson has not done that. The kids got talent but let’s get real here. He’s 17 year old kid and Herdman and the CSA are trying to catch lighting in a bottle again like Davies and David. Why because they can say the system is working and we are the heros bla bla bla. I’m sorry we needed the points and it was a must win and he threw out a CPL player and a 17 year old kid. It just shows how inexperience Herdman is and it gonna cost us the qualifying for the World Cup ! This is not the woman’s game. 

Edited January 16, 2020 by SpecialK

[Bison44]

I dont understand the complaining about Nelsen??  Do you think he played bad? To me it was Tesho and Rickets that didnt produce much, Nelsen looked lively when he came on.  If not Nelsen, it would have been Borges or Shafflebourg.  And I think you need to trust the coaching staff a little, they have been watching them train together for an entire camp.  And they thought Nelsen was the guy to get some offense going.    

Bair could have come on earlier for Rickets, maybe the fresh legs would have sparked something.  But poaching a goal against even a Iceland B team was always going to be tough. Not a good result, not what we hoped for, but its not surprising.  

[JamboAl]

36 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

But there is a big difference between 19-21 pro to an 17 year old kid who hasn’t even been called up to 1st team and he plays in the 3rd division of USL. 
 

Brym and Bassong are pros in Europe, just because Nelson played well at U17 tourney and won a youth award. I’m sorry it’s apples to oranges here. Davies was 16 played with the main club before he came to the Sr team he played against England u20 team and other youth teams before getting called up to the Sr team. Nelson has not done that. The kids got talent but let’s get real here. He’s 17 year old kid and Herdman and the CSA are trying to catch lighting in a bottle again like Davies and David. Why because they can say the system is working and we are the heros bla bla bla. I’m sorry we needed the points and it was a must win and he threw out a CPL player and a 17 year old kid. It just shows how inexperience Herdman is and it gonna cost us the qualifying for the World Cup ! This is not the woman’s game. 

This was one game with a B side that was going to be experimental.  Nelson was on for how long?  Everyone on that bench was pretty green.   If we don't qualify (which is at best 20% anyways), that will because mistakes will have been made before this game and during qualifying and not in this one friendly which was meant to show what depth we had.  Herdman is not going anywhere.

[SpecialK]

No I don’t have trust. They messed up the Mexico, Haiti , 2nd USA game and with Iceland the subs came in super late. It’s not Nelson that’s the issue main issue, the issue is that there was mls/pros left off the team issue one , issue 2 is that we are down a goal and we need a goal and he throws out a kid who has never played against real pro/men before in hope he’s as talented as Davies was at 17. We’ll I’m sorry I don’t see it. If he was he would be with TFC already. It was a gamble on herdman part, too me that shows how inexperience he is

[SpecialK]

5 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Everyone on that bench was pretty green.

You had Chapman, Borges and  Tiebert there , those players are not green. 

[JamboAl]

22 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

You had Chapman, Borges and  Tiebert there , those players are not green. 

And how do you know any of them would have done any better?  Nelson is unpredictable, the others are decent players but not as quick either.  I would have been bothered if Herdman hadn't rolled the dice in that situation.   

[soccer.shocker]

43 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

You had Chapman, Borges and  Tiebert there , those players are not green. 

Fact check:

Actually, It turns out that Chapman left the squad after the second Barbados match and that Teibert was not even on the bench last night for whatever reason (injury, illness etc.) so how about we all understand which players were even dressed before the collective “we” calls for someone to start or come off the bench in a particular setting. General comment just saying. 
 

[SpecialK]

3 minutes ago, soccer.shocker said:

Fact check:

Actually, It turns out that Chapman left the squad after the second Barbados match and that Teibert was not even on the bench last night for whatever reason (injury, illness etc.) so how about we all understand which players were even dressed before the collective “we” calls for someone to start or come off the bench in a particular setting. General comment just saying. 
 

Well that changes things. I wonder why though they were listed available. 
 

do we know if other players like Hamilton, Edwards etc were available ? Because I know some weren’t released or injured. 

[BearcatSA]

20 minutes ago, soccer.shocker said:

Fact check:

Actually, It turns out that Chapman left the squad after the second Barbados match and that Teibert was not even on the bench last night for whatever reason (injury, illness etc.) so how about we all understand which players were even dressed before the collective “we” calls for someone to start or come off the bench in a particular setting. General comment just saying. 
 

You never know the back story regarding potential injury problems which inevitably arise in an off season camp.  

 

[Bison44]

Ahh Mr K....Now you are complaining just for the sake of it.  Tiebert would have magically broken down Iceland??  Did you really think if we had Hamilton in camp instead of...oh i dont know... Nelsen,  we would have beaten Iceland?  Now I like Teibert and hamilton, but Nelsen has pace and some trickiness and I have no problem with him coming on. 

Not using the other subs is something harder to explain.  

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, SpecialK said:

You had Chapman, Borges and  Tiebert there , those players are not green. 

Borges is not green? His grand total of professional experience is 25 CPL games and a handful of Cup games.

1 hour ago, SpecialK said:

It’s not Nelson that’s the issue main issue, the issue is that there was mls/pros left off the team issue one , issue 2 is that we are down a goal and we need a goal and he throws out a kid who has never played against real pro/men before in hope he’s as talented as Davies was at 17. We’ll I’m sorry I don’t see it. If he was he would be with TFC already. 

You literally made this up.

[Obinna]

34 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

do we know if other players like Hamilton, Edwards etc were available ? Because I know some weren’t released or injured. 

Perhaps Hamilton and Edwards were available and just didn't make the cut....

I am not very convinced of your wild theories that Herdman thinks Nelsen is the next coming of Alphonso Davies. I think he was just looking for talented players that could help the senior team and if they are available for the U-23 team, all the better. Borges also falls into that category, btw. 

It would be kind of short sighted not to use this camp to bring in U23 players. If Herdman selected Edwards people would be criticizing him for wasting a spot on an overager.

There is always something to complain about with some people...

[gator]

I don't completely disagree with @SpecialK on a lot of this, Nelson was ok, he's not why we lost and I look forward to seeing him progress, I would have rather seen Borges come into the match, the Nelson love by Herdman reminds me of Frank Yallop's love for a 16 year old Jamie Peters!

[RS]

3 hours ago, gator said:

the Nelson love by Herdman reminds me of Frank Yallop's love for a 16 year old Jamie Peters!

Hardly the same thing. Peters was playing regularly in World Cup qualifiers whereas Nelson was a late sub in a few B camp friendlies that are only deemed important because of the ridiculous qualifying format.

Peters' first-ever full MNT game was a crucial World Cup qualifier against Guatemala. In fact, his first five MNT matches were all in that WCQ cycle.

[Blackdude]

 

15 minutes ago, RS said:

Hardly the same thing. Peters was playing regularly in World Cup qualifiers whereas Nelson was a late sub in a few B camp friendlies that are only deemed important because of the ridiculous qualifying format.

Peters' first-ever full MNT game was a crucial World Cup qualifier against Guatemala. In fact, his first five MNT matches were all in that WCQ cycle.

Peters first impressed in the B-friendlies against Hearts and Milwall (I can't remember the English team, I think it's them, but recall Simpson and Serioux signing with them shortly after). It's not that crazy of a comparison.

[RS]

4 minutes ago, Blackdude said:

 

Peters first impressed in the B-friendlies against Hearts and Milwall (I can't remember the English team, I think it's them, but recall Simpson and Serioux signing with them shortly after). It's not that crazy of a comparison.

It was Millwall.

Regardless, I don't think @gator was referring to those matches when he mentioned Yallop's love for Peters.

[TFC2017]

I can't help but think we could've got the win if Kaye and Cav were available (Healthy) to play 😓. All things considered when you factor in only Osorio, Miller, and Laryea can be considered our true #1 starters for us we actually did really well and we weren't dominated. 

I understand Iceland didn't have their full team either but i'd like to think if they get their best 11 and we get ours we can actually compete. 

 

I know we likely won't make the Hex. at this point or at least, it'll be very difficult, but I feel really optimistic about our chances going through the B Tournament as well if that's what we're forced to do. 

[gator]

9 hours ago, RS said:

Hardly the same thing. Peters was playing regularly in World Cup qualifiers whereas Nelson was a late sub in a few B camp friendlies that are only deemed important because of the ridiculous qualifying format.

Peters' first-ever full MNT game was a crucial World Cup qualifier against Guatemala. In fact, his first five MNT matches were all in that WCQ cycle.

Time will tell on this one Rudi!

[costarg]

1 hour ago, TFC2017 said:

I can't help but think we could've got the win if Kaye and Cav were available (Healthy) to play 😓. All things considered when you factor in only Osorio, Miller, and Laryea can be considered our true #1 starters for us we actually did really well and we weren't dominated. 

I understand Iceland didn't have their full team either but i'd like to think if they get their best 11 and we get ours we can actually compete. 

 

I know we likely won't make the Hex. at this point or at least, it'll be very difficult, but I feel really optimistic about our chances going through the B Tournament as well if that's what we're forced to do. 

Technically, Piette is considered a starter as well.  

 

[El Diego]

Speaking of all this Jamie Peters talk, you know what made me feel really dumb/old? During the game the commentator said that Nelson became the second youngest scorer for Canada and I thought to myself "Ah yes, 16 year old Jamie Peters is the youngest ever scorer" and then the commentator said "Of course, Alphonso Davies is the youngest scorer..."

[SthMelbRed]

9 minutes ago, Lofty said:

I still think the B tournament is the easier path.

I'd prefer to play in the Hexagonal because of the experience but do we have a higher chance of being beaten by Mexico & USA & Costa Reeka (which puts us at best 4th or at worst eliminated outright) or by one team from a bigger group of teams who are mostly much worse than us although a couple are comparable?

Always underdogs in the former, never underdogs in the latter. Then, for both paths, the two play off hurdles loom.

I can make my peace with the low road route to qualification. The gradual rise in difficulty in opposition gives it a bit of a Grand Slam tennis tourney feel, assuming that CONCACAF doesn't compound their massive fuck up in designing this qualification process in the first place by failing to seed teams through each subsequent round of the B route. If the CSA can break form by scheduling tough friendlies at every available opportunity interspersed through the qualification campaign, we could actually arrive at the climax (the playoffs) better prepared, as a young, developing team, than we would through the hex.

[CanadaFan123]

We will also be going to some exotic places and our young players will probably continue to get a ton of hype as they pad their stats at the international level.  So it's a good thing I think and ultimately at the end, when we finish 1st, we're going to be playing a Hex team.

[Obinna]

I agree with you guys. The lower route ain't so bad. I have said it many times before, the Hex is a potential trap. 

As a fan I want the prestige of playing in the Hex, but pragmatically speaking I think our chances are relatively the same either route. Perhaps they are even greater in the lower route. I like the way @Lofty put it!

As of today, I think Mexico will cream everyone, USA will finish (a distant) second, and Costa Rica, Honduras, and Jamaica will all battle it out for 3rd. No way we are NOT in that 3rd place conversation (should we make the Hex), but no way we are favourites for 3rd when you consider the way we make mistakes and give away points. We saw it against Haiti, we saw it against the USA, we saw it against Iceland...

The lower route feels safer, oddly enough. If we can't at least win it and get to the concacaf playoff, we don't deserve to play in the WC. 

We will be seeded for the Round Robin and should destroy everyone, a la nations league qualifying. Then we have to get through three 180 minute match ups against teams we are better than on paper.

I would be more nervous if it was single elimanation, but having two legs is forgiving enough. Our quality should see us through even when the mistakes rear their ugly heads.

Should we get to the concacaf playoff, as expected, we are playing a team who will likely not be on a winning streak (like us), not be full of confidence (like us), and most importantly would not have the feeling of what it takes to win a two-legged tie.

If we have to go through a Chile, or Peru, or Ecuador, or Paraguay in the intercontinental, then it is what it is. 

Those teams are very, very difficult, but they are not unbeatable. Mexico is better than all those teams if you ask me.

The only way I think we are honestly screwed is if someone like Argentina or Brazil manages to slip all the way down to 5th. I am not going to worry about that though....

[archer21]

The Hex still gives us a way better chance of making it to the World Cup IMO. The fact that there’s a chance to get direct qualification trumps any other argument for me. Not that I think we’ll definitely finish top 3, but there is a chance. And even if we finish 4th, we’d play a weaker team than if we won the loser’s bracket. Then to just lose in the intercontinental playoff.

i don’t get the argument that the lower route is better because we won’t finish 3rd anyway, but then say that we have a chance to beat someone like Chile over 2 legs, who would be 2nd best in CONCACAF. I guess if we knew we’d be playing Oceania then I would maybe buy it.

[SoccMan]

The lower route is it still going to be difficult. Countries like Curaçao, Haiti , Trinidad and Tobago and especially Panama and even Guatemala are no slouches. Good luck going into any of these countries and playing them away and trying to get even a tie . Factor in the weather, the ref and the crowd and the fact that these countries are no slouches and it’s going to be very tough even going the lower route .