Jump to content

villus

CSN
  • Content Count

    1,314
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About villus

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. David is perfectly designed to play as a false 9 because he's shown he can drop in and play as a 10 really well, and one of his biggest strengths is late runs into the box. Davies is a perfect compliment to play with a false 9 because of his ability to run behind so well and attract a ton of attention for a roaming 9 like David to exploit. I think we should be building towards using those two in that role, I think for now the best match would be Hoilett/David/Davies with David pulling CB's out of place and having a couple wide forwards with pace to exploit that space.
  2. Bolivia would be a great team if we could host them in Canada. All of the other teams would not be a good idea imo, even the teams between Bolivia and the best teams are very good and would give us a lot of problems. I'd rather we find a European team, the Conmenbol teams regularly beat up on Mexico and Paraguay, Venezuela and Ecuador would be the worst of the bunch and their ranking is probably weaker then their actual strength because they have to play official games against other Conmebol nations all the time, whereas in Europe its inflated because they get official games against minnows to beat up on.
  3. I've played in games against people who did that and had no idea you couldn't. I've never seen it come up but apparently the ref got it right, I don't think its a big issue, clearly neither Davies or Borjan had any idea and I can't really blame them either, its pretty damn obscure law.
  4. Unfortunately FIFA is a shady and corrupt system, so you almost have to do this to avoid getting gamed by all parties involved. We absolutely should be looking to find a good team that would be willing to play an experimental side.
  5. The group is Naive because we are still fairly young no doubt, but the organization and ability to teach and get methods right is always on the coach. We very well may have failed if we approached the game correctly but its hard to judge when the manager doesn't do the minimum to organize us correctly. The players for sure are not immune to criticism here but the manager took a very talented and extremely young player in Davies and gave him a complex role that doesn't play to his biggest strengths, a smart manager would have realized not to put Davies in that position and given him freedom to attack rather then put him in a position to make complex decisions of when to push forward and attack and when to stay home and defend, which is exasperated by a rather weak CB pairing. We have the most talented team we've ever had but they are young and still learning, which makes it that much more important that we hired someone who very clearly knows what he's doing and can get the message across to the players and knows when to gamble and when to stick to very common strategy. There were a bunch of reasons screaming out for Herdman to make different decisions and he bypassed them all, which is really bad. He chose a strategy to try and take away the ball from the Americans at home? The Americans have struggled mightily and made mistakes in possession and build up while transitioning to Berhlaters style, why on earth would you decide that allowing them possession and pressing them is a bad idea and set up trying to go toe to toe and gain possession? We're not a great team in possession either, we're better being solid and countering. Ugh its so frustrating to keep thinking about.
  6. This. Its not even close, the Hex is much easier, the other route is a mindfield with no real room for error and any route that has to go through South America is a death sentence. A home and away against someone like Chile or Peru would have Canada as big, big underdogs. Chile, Peru, Colombia, Uruguay are all most likely favorites against Mexico the best team in the region except maybe Peru who is possibly a slight underdog.
  7. Eh Stalteri is no Davies. Stalteri never had the type of game or ability to beat players like Davies has. I'd actually argue for the best of Davies career that if he's going to be locked into LB at Bayern he should strongly think about leaving. He's got way too bright a future playing as an attacker, sure he could be a very good LB but I think his ceiling is so high that it'd be a waste to not target his career there, the way he takes on players and his ability to finish and create is wasted with defensive responsibilities. Davies is head and shoulders above any attacker we've ever had in terms of dynamism and ceiling, Hoilett is good but maximizing Davies should be the priority for Canada and for his career I'd argue as well. Its by far what's best for Canada.
  8. There were a few options 1) attack mode 2) park the bus 3) in between where we come out and close down and press pick our spots to press and hunt in packs 2 and 3 have very solid arguments, 1 doesn't, we don't need to win and we are on the road against a team that is fired up and a tie is a huge boost for us and allows us to keep getting points if I'm not mistaken, but on top of that 2 and 3 for me still give us a great chance at getting a win because the USA have showed they try to play out and make a lot of mistakes and struggle to pass out and break down teams. Even if we went with attack mode I don't think we have the team to dominate possession and get two attacking fullbacks forward and pin the US back in their half, they played a very attacking lineup and still have talent. I think clearly 3 is the way to go, you also set yourself up to adjust in game no matter what happens, starting the same way we did in Canada made a lot of sense and we back off when we don't have a chance to win the ball and when we do we come out and press as a unit and work our socks off with David and Davies pressing at the back and the 4 mids being solid with one attacking fullback and one fullback that is going to stay home and cover for the side Davies is mainly patrolling giving him freedom to attack and roam.
  9. It may have been a relic but he played that style and his successful runs relied on it. I'm not saying he was a dumpster fire by any means or that he could be a good coach, but I don't think he was tested or there was enough evidence to evaluate him on to make the decision to coach the mens team. For the women's game that he competed in you didn't need to be at a high level or tactically have to play the same kind of chess that you may have to play at the senior mens international level. And just to be clear I'm not saying women are inferior tactically or that its poor soccer but that unfortunately the game is neglected outside of a few countries and Canada was blessed with a very good base of talent.
  10. We needed a point, the onus was on the US to break us down and based on the players we have and the team the USA has and how they played it was actually the best case scenario for us. We have lots of good defensive midfielders and we have Davies and Hoilett who are very good on the counter. The USA has been plagued with mistakes trying to build play and break teams down and that is another check mark for setting up solid with an eye to counter attacking when the chance arrives. This is simple tactics 101 and lots of us see it, yet Herdman complicated things because he's trying to prove he belongs at the level I'd imagine.
  11. This is the worst USA team in some while, they've been really bad for a few years and have regressed under Berhalter and this is arguably one of the best Canadian teams we've had. We shouldn't simply accept losing here, we had a very good blue print from the previous game that worked and we deviated from that with not logical reasons why. Our back 4 controlled the USA fairly well, Davies and David were fantastic giving the USA tons of problems and we deviated from that and then after we went a goal down we panicked and got punished for it. That's all on the coach. Lots of games we'd lose to USA in the States and it would simply be us being at a much lower level, but that's not necessarily the case here we showed very poorly and were not set up properly and didn't adjust.
  12. Especially when we played a more defensive lineup with Miller playing as a defensive LB that didn't really venture forward a lot last game which worked well. This game was going to be more defensive since they're going to attack a lot more and that's the game to play Davies as a LB?? It's braindead, there's no execusing it from a logic/tactics point of view and Herdman either knew it or is too arrogant to realize his mistake he's made a few times of neutering our best player and actually hurting our fairly week defensive even more playing him in a back 4. We played 4 essentially central midfielders in the first game in Toronto with one attacking RB and a LB who stayed home, we set up to counter and the key was Davies on the loose when we got the USA to turn it over with our fairly defensive midfield, it worked well and in the reverse he decided to give us less ability to break out of midfield and attack on the counter and played essentially also less defensive with two attacking fullbacks which would maybe make sense if we expected to have a ton of possession and allow them to park forward and play as wingers, which was never the case. It just makes absolutely no sense on multiple points, we may not have the most talent in the world which actually makes it important we get the game flow and our counter attacking posture more important, if we were gonna line up like that play Hoilett instead of Cavallini at least to give us more ability to take on defenders 1v1 which you'd expect a lot of when countering a team trying to attack at home.
  13. I'm sorry but Herdman is untested, unfortunately the Women's game is really neglected for world soccer. His teams played a ton of long ball and the Canadian women phyisically battered teams, but the tactics weren't exactly next level, the Canadian team had more talent then most teams and relied on that and its physicality. The US coach who won two world cups is terrible tactically and setting up her team, but they have so much talent so they can cover it up. Herdman talks a good game and sounds good but how do you see how Davies tore up the USA and in the next game were they are going to attack more you don't play a single attacking player who can stretch on the counter attack other then maybe David, but that's not really his strongest point. The USA was going to try and play a high line against which is perfect for a guy like Davies but he had to change what worked and he had no plan B, the same thing that happened against Haiti and the same thing that happened against Mexico, he has elaborate plans to look like a genius but when things aren't going well he has no ability to adjust or change the team. He's a fraud.
  14. He's a moron, its not even a difficult calculation to make. Davies is the best LB, RW, LW, RB etc and at LB he barely has a chance to influence the game. At Bayern he's playing LB because they have Gnabry, Coman, Perisic, Mueller ahead of him, Herdman has absolutely no idea what he's doing if he thinks its a no brainer, just absolutely no idea how to utilize his best players. The best LB for Bayern plays CM for Austria because of the gulf in talent from Bayern to Austria and because he influences the game massively, Herdman is just copying people's work because he's not at the level to sort these problems out for himself.
  15. It's not even like Davies is a career lb, he's played a few games there but for the most part has been an attacker in his career. We finally get a guy who is dynamic on the ball and who can attract a ton of attention and beat players and Herdman in our biggest games has put him at lb. Herdman is just out of his league, the team was ill prepared and he ran out a 4-4-2 with basically no attackers who can break lines and trouble teams on the break aside from David and that's not even his major strong point. This game was easy to set up tactically, you play a compact 4-3-3 and you try to frustrate the opposition and look to counter, but he played Davies as an attacking lb in a game we should be defending a decent amount because ???? This is our most exciting team in for ever and this guy has no clue what he's doing or how to prepare a team. Was the same thing in the gold cup, poor job setting the team up and not utilizing his best player at all. It's like when Spurs played Gareth Bale at lb, just a huge waste of talent of someone who's not a great defender anyways.
×
×
  • Create New...