CNL: Canada vs Jamaica - Tuesday, November 21st - 7:30pm EST / 4:30pm Pacific - Toronto

[Bigandy]

10 hours ago, costarg said:

Well if we're being honest, there are still lots of people here that also think bringing in Osorio is still a good idea, so Brennan is definitely not alone there.

Some were also fully onboard with Kaye, as well as Vitoria and Borjan starting matches.  We'll never all agree on everything including formations and players, and throw in some club bias.

Theoretically theres some sense. We dominated the midfield in the first half. Jamaica made adjustments and lowe caused all sorts of issues. Dropping a striker for a CM makes sense to regain the advantage. We also dont want to give up too much attacking so you take off larin for an attacking cm... oso. on paper thats a logical call as the other option would be ali whos unknown. (although personally and in hindsight ali wouldve been the right call.

Kaye for kone was for legs and more defensive solidity.... its too bad kaye isnt a great player but again the profile makes theoretical sense. 

Hoilett for buchanan was poor... We need speed on the counter at 2-2. tajon defends better than hoilett. 

No other options but to put millar and JRR on the field to gamble a goal.  Johnston makes sense as we go with an additional attacker. 

JRR for staq is a weak call because hes the only option to sub once you say youre not subbing a sub, your attacking players like davies david, laryea(ish) and you still need your CB's (including cornelius for height in the box). Personally I would have subbed off MAK but thats a tough tough call to make. 

Like i said, on paper/in theory it makes sense. In hindsight, it was horrible execution. 

My solution at 2-2. switch to a 3-5-2.  laryea comes off for ali. (if choiniere was there, hed get the call). If this doesnt win the midfield back, you move davies to lb, johnston to rb, take off larin for millar and go 4-3-3. Id consider bringing on vitoria for cornelius at the same time and defend a bit deeper. 

 

[VinceA]

I don't mind Oso on the team but he needs to be in form and in a good environment. It's obvious the TFC terribleness has seeped into his play.

When he's at his best we get Azteca Osorio.

[costarg]

2 minutes ago, VinceA said:

When he's at his best we get Azteca Osorio.

This was 26 months ago.  Not the same person or player.  Unfortunate, but it's more than just time and age in his case.  I'm no Dr, but like many others, I feel it was the concussion and not a matter of his legs/lungs.  His decision making as well as giving up on plays is terrible.  He's just going the wrong way half the time chasing ghosts.

Holding on to that 11 is the reason we're failing and falling below expectations.  The kids are better than the experience we're soo desperately trying to hold on to.

[costarg]

51 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Theoretically theres some sense. We dominated the midfield in the first half. Jamaica made adjustments and lowe caused all sorts of issues. Dropping a striker for a CM makes sense to regain the advantage. We also dont want to give up too much attacking so you take off larin for an attacking cm... oso. on paper thats a logical call as the other option would be ali whos unknown. (although personally and in hindsight ali wouldve been the right call.

Kaye for kone was for legs and more defensive solidity.... its too bad kaye isnt a great player but again the profile makes theoretical sense. 

Hoilett for buchanan was poor... We need speed on the counter at 2-2. tajon defends better than hoilett. 

No other options but to put millar and JRR on the field to gamble a goal.  Johnston makes sense as we go with an additional attacker. 

JRR for staq is a weak call because hes the only option to sub once you say youre not subbing a sub, your attacking players like davies david, laryea(ish) and you still need your CB's (including cornelius for height in the box). Personally I would have subbed off MAK but thats a tough tough call to make. 

Like i said, on paper/in theory it makes sense. In hindsight, it was horrible execution. 

My solution at 2-2. switch to a 3-5-2.  laryea comes off for ali. (if choiniere was there, hed get the call). If this doesnt win the midfield back, you move davies to lb, johnston to rb, take off larin for millar and go 4-3-3. Id consider bringing on vitoria for cornelius at the same time and defend a bit deeper. 

 

Absolutely, it can be explained and quasi justified theoretically, but like most of us knew and commented on immediately, chances leaned heavily towards it failing.  There were better options.

My post was specifically defending the different views and opinions.  Not everyone will see it the same way in the moment, and that is OK!  This place would be boring and we wouldn't learn anything if we all had the same views and opinions.

[Bigandy]

39 minutes ago, costarg said:

Absolutely, it can be explained and quasi justified theoretically, but like most of us knew and commented on immediately, chances leaned heavily towards it failing.  There were better options.

My post was specifically defending the different views and opinions.  Not everyone will see it the same way in the moment, and that is OK!  This place would be boring and we wouldn't learn anything if we all had the same views and opinions.

For sure there were better options. I just wanted to explain my solutions over biellos. I see what his thought process was but it was poor. It shows hes not CMNT quality. 

With 20/20 hindsight, we really should have called up ugbo over cav which led to JRR. Choiniere over MAK/piette. If we are trying to hold a lead and put on a defensive mid then you would expect piette to get the call. Since we went with MAK, theres no sense in having them both there. I think choiniere would have really helped our midfield when we lost it. 

The more I think about it, the more I think we should have thrown on vitoria for cornelius at 2-2. 
47' cornelius doesnt close down gray and they hit the crossbar. 
61' staq tackled and cornleius raises his arms and doesnt react to nicholsons movement. - harsh criticism but cornelius didnt provide an option for staq and he didnt tell him he had pressure coming fast... I believe vitoria makes the team better in moments like this even though its not directly cornelius fault.
65' cornelius burned by gray on the counter. Again, harsh criticism. 

[jonovision]

1 hour ago, costarg said:

Holding on to that 11 is the reason we're failing and falling below expectations.  The kids are better than the experience we're soo desperately trying to hold on to.

Correction: the kids may be better than the experience (good chance also that they are not), but they do need to play so we can find out.

[costarg]

34 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

The more I think about it, the more I think we should have thrown on vitoria for cornelius at 2-2. 
47' cornelius doesnt close down gray and they hit the crossbar. 
61' staq tackled and cornleius raises his arms and doesnt react to nicholsons movement. - harsh criticism but cornelius didnt provide an option for staq and he didnt tell him he had pressure coming fast... I believe vitoria makes the team better in moments like this even though its not directly cornelius fault.
65' cornelius burned by gray on the counter. Again, harsh criticism. 

Based on the past 12 months and specifically the first Jamaica game, I feel your list would would infinitely longer if Vitoria was on the field.  Even his superior positioning and experience don't make up for the cement in his boots.  Two of your comments are Cornelius not closing someone down and getting burned, how do you expect Vitoria to do better?  Sitting back at the top of the box wouldn't even help, anyone could easily run around him at this point.  He doesn't even bother running in to meet the passes to him anymore.  He's constantly flat-footed, sad, but he has nothing left to give.  

[Bigandy]

39 minutes ago, costarg said:

Based on the past 12 months and specifically the first Jamaica game, I feel your list would would infinitely longer if Vitoria was on the field.  Even his superior positioning and experience don't make up for the cement in his boots.  Two of your comments are Cornelius not closing someone down and getting burned, how do you expect Vitoria to do better?  Sitting back at the top of the box wouldn't even help, anyone could easily run around him at this point.  He doesn't even bother running in to meet the passes to him anymore.  He's constantly flat-footed, sad, but he has nothing left to give.  

I disagree. 

In the first jamaica game bailey got in behind vitoria in the 35th minute. It wasnt his lack of speed, it was being outfoxed by bailey with how he dragged him out. I think none of our CB's would have recovered if they got sucked out like vitoria did. I thought given vitorias obv weakness, he had a great game in jamaica. I think he made us better as a squad. 

When else did he get caught out in the first game? 

My point is that theres a good chance the staq turnover doesnt happen if vitoria is on the field. 

-Cornelius didnt get burned for pace on the crossbar play. He just chose to step off bailey because he was scared to get beat. I think vitoria gets tighter and cuts off the passing lane better than cornelius. 

-Bad turnovers and counter attacks happen in game. The main counter attack against was the kone giveaway and cornelius wasnt the answer. Neither is vitoria. 

I too would have started vitoria on the bench in toronto, but I would have subbed him on to provide calmness when we were at 2-2. Its not like jamaica had any counterattacks that cornelius stopped because of his speed. 

Its such a shame you turn on players so harshly. The man just contributed 90 in our first win in jamaica in 30ish years. That is something, whether big or small, that hes contributed. How offensive to claim he has nothing left to offer after he clearly offered us something that no other CB (aside from miller) has done in 30 years. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by Bigandy

[costarg]

16 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Its such a shame you turn on players so harshly. The man just contributed 90 in our first win in jamaica in 30ish years. That is something, whether big or small, that hes contributed. How offensive to claim he has nothing left to offer after he clearly offered us something that no other CB (aside from miller) has done in 30 years. 

It's not harsh and definitely not personal.  It's just the natural evolution of teams and athletes.  I turned 50 this year, I'm not sad about it.  I've loved and maximized every decade of my life, but I realize and accept I'm not at my physical peak anymore and totally ok with that.  My kids tease me about it and I never take it personally or as an insult.

Brazil moved on from Pele, just like Argentina walked away from Maradona, soon we'll see Portugal drop Ronaldo.  There is nothing harsh or mean about it.

Our immaturity as a soccer nation really stands out when we think our best 11 is the same 11 from "winning" WCQ 2 years ago.  Better and worse teams have moved on from their 11 of two years ago.  We're underperforming and sliding down in the rankings, argument can be made that we're 5th in CONCACAF at the moment, when we claimed to be the new kings only a short while ago. 

Vitoria was also the weakest link on the field vs Jamaica.  Attributing the win to his effort is a stretch at best.  We won in spite of him, not thanks to him.  We can just go back a few pages to see the overwhelming evidence to that.  

[Watchmen]

8 hours ago, SoccMan said:

They have three former pros on their podcast and two of them Brennan and Forest constantly lament especially Forest I find , that no teams here in Canada have hired them. After listening to that podcast a few times it doesn’t surprise me why no one has . I found both of these guys clueless and Brennan showed how clueless he was when he coached York in the CPL. Moreover , what is Footy prime you listen to it and it seems the last thing they really want to talk about is soccer . If it’s a soccer podcast you want to listen too Footy prime is not it .

Forrest was in the media for so long at Sportsnet I just assumed he had no interest in the coaching side. Did he ever go for any of his licenses?

Yeah, I eventually dropped Footy Prime from my listening rotation.  I enjoyed it early on when they were telling stories from their playing days and commenting on what was going on in soccer, but eventually it seemed to just become them hanging out and mocking each other with much, much less soccer talk. I guess it still gets an audience and that's fine, it just wasn't for me.

[Watchmen]

16 hours ago, Stryker911 said:

Listened to the Footy prime podcast after the Jamaica loss, makes me realize how bad of a coach Jimmy Brennan must have been at York. He is the only person i have heard that thought Biellos subs make sense. 

In a mild defense of the substitutions: they were brought on to see the game out, and weren't responsible for the go ahead goal. Once they did trail, they were the wrong guys to have on the field and there wasn't much to be done.

[Bigandy]

1 hour ago, costarg said:

It's not harsh and definitely not personal.  It's just the natural evolution of teams and athletes.  I turned 50 this year, I'm not sad about it.  I've loved and maximized every decade of my life, but I realize and accept I'm not at my physical peak anymore and totally ok with that.  My kids tease me about it and I never take it personally or as an insult.

Brazil moved on from Pele, just like Argentina walked away from Maradona, soon we'll see Portugal drop Ronaldo.  There is nothing harsh or mean about it.

Our immaturity as a soccer nation really stands out when we think our best 11 is the same 11 from "winning" WCQ 2 years ago.  Better and worse teams have moved on from their 11 of two years ago.  We're underperforming and sliding down in the rankings, argument can be made that we're 5th in CONCACAF at the moment, when we claimed to be the new kings only a short while ago. 

Vitoria was also the weakest link on the field vs Jamaica.  Attributing the win to his effort is a stretch at best.  We won in spite of him, not thanks to him.  We can just go back a few pages to see the overwhelming evidence to that.  

Every player contributes in a win. Even if its small. To say he provides nothing when would have contributed to a clean sheet (if the ref didnt make a mistake) against 3/4 top 5 league attackers is plain wrong. Are you saying that modric is finished because hes old? Are you saying the weakest link of a champions league winning side provides nothing? 
Of course not. It's a team sport and everyone is collectively responsible for the win.  

You're clearly being blinded by bias and your using terrible arguments. Saying every team at some point moves on from aging players does not prove vitoria provided nothing. If pele or maradona came out of retirement and played the very next game, they would still have contributed. Just because vitoria is old, doesnt mean he provides 0 value on the pitch. 

If you watch the game youll see vitoria heavily contributed aerially, organizationally, positionally, and his possession play was pretty much what we ask of a CB. Did he get pulled out on a play in the 36th minute? Yes. So does every player. However, where else did he fail? The fact that you say he contributes nothing even though he is the best on the team in the air, speaks volumes of your bias. Is it time to move on?

I dont understand why you hate our older players so blindly. If your argument was "its time to move on from vitoria, as his cons now outweigh his negatives, AND we have better options available" then I'm with you (thats how I feel). But youre argument is "Vitoria contributed absolutely nothing, 0, to our first win in jamaica in 30ish years, despite nearly keeping a clean sheet against arguably the best attack in the region".  Nonsense, harsh, bias, and simply untrue. 
 

[costarg]

4 hours ago, Bigandy said:

Every player contributes in a win. Even if its small. To say he provides nothing when would have contributed to a clean sheet (if the ref didnt make a mistake) against 3/4 top 5 league attackers is plain wrong. Are you saying that modric is finished because hes old? Are you saying the weakest link of a champions league winning side provides nothing? 
Of course not. It's a team sport and everyone is collectively responsible for the win.  

You're clearly being blinded by bias and your using terrible arguments. Saying every team at some point moves on from aging players does not prove vitoria provided nothing. If pele or maradona came out of retirement and played the very next game, they would still have contributed. Just because vitoria is old, doesnt mean he provides 0 value on the pitch. 

If you watch the game youll see vitoria heavily contributed aerially, organizationally, positionally, and his possession play was pretty much what we ask of a CB. Did he get pulled out on a play in the 36th minute? Yes. So does every player. However, where else did he fail? The fact that you say he contributes nothing even though he is the best on the team in the air, speaks volumes of your bias. Is it time to move on?

I dont understand why you hate our older players so blindly. If your argument was "its time to move on from vitoria, as his cons now outweigh his negatives, AND we have better options available" then I'm with you (thats how I feel). But youre argument is "Vitoria contributed absolutely nothing, 0, to our first win in jamaica in 30ish years, despite nearly keeping a clean sheet against arguably the best attack in the region".  Nonsense, harsh, bias, and simply untrue. 
 

Once again, "hate" has nothing to do with this and has no place in my passion for soccer.  As most that read my comments on here can attest, I don't even hate our biggest opponents.  There are no clubs or nations that I hate.  I can be a tough critic of our own performances and players, but it isn't blind negative trashing, it's with a positive goal and outcome in mind.  I don't bash players or systems without proposing ideas or solutions.  There is a huge difference there.   

Feeling Vitoria, Borjan and Osorio are not at the level required to bring us forward is not insulting or negating their positive history.  It's calling it what it is today.  As previously said, I do feel we have guys that can step in and do just as well and probably better if given a chance.  

It's kinda funny, cause I think - and you owned - being very harsh towards Cornelius.  I understand you don't agree and prefer to stick with Vitoria, and that's ok.  I just think it's silly to hold on to Vitoria et al to play every game and then claim the other guys haven't proven themselves yet.  We've been free falling in the FIFA rankings sticking with the experienced guys while they've been among the worst on the field.  We can no longer say we are winning the games we should win.  Time for change, change is good.

[Bigandy]

11 hours ago, costarg said:

Once again, "hate" has nothing to do with this and has no place in my passion for soccer.  As most that read my comments on here can attest, I don't even hate our biggest opponents.  There are no clubs or nations that I hate.  I can be a tough critic of our own performances and players, but it isn't blind negative trashing, it's with a positive goal and outcome in mind.  I don't bash players or systems without proposing ideas or solutions.  There is a huge difference there.   

Feeling Vitoria, Borjan and Osorio are not at the level required to bring us forward is not insulting or negating their positive history.  It's calling it what it is today.  As previously said, I do feel we have guys that can step in and do just as well and probably better if given a chance.  

It's kinda funny, cause I think - and you owned - being very harsh towards Cornelius.  I understand you don't agree and prefer to stick with Vitoria, and that's ok.  I just think it's silly to hold on to Vitoria et al to play every game and then claim the other guys haven't proven themselves yet.  We've been free falling in the FIFA rankings sticking with the experienced guys while they've been among the worst on the field.  We can no longer say we are winning the games we should win.  Time for change, change is good.

You're attempting to re-word my stance. I'm 100% on board for change. I want ali over oso, crepeau over borjan.  

However, my main point is how can you say vitoria contributed 0 when he played 90 minutes. Obviously he contributed something. - a header, organization, a pass, a block. He contributed. He showed he can be on the field against a top end opponent and we can win for the first time in 30 years. 

To take away every single ounce of credit towards him is just incorrect. It shows bias. If ZMG put in the exact same performance as vitoria did (which is plausible due to lack of pace), you wouldnt say he contributed 0. 

At no point did I say I want to stick with vitoria. -youre manipulating my argument again which is nonsense. I will restate my point. It is astronomically incorrect to say vitoria contibuted nothing against jamaica. Give credit where credit is due, give criticism where criticism is due. (sure you can be reasonably harsh or positive but youre assesment is not just harsh, its blinded by bias). Again, if you said vitorias very beneficial for his heading and organization, but hes so slow that its time to replace him, then I would stand with you..... but be reasonable towards a guy whos given everything to our team.