Seattle V New York

[Steve]

Thoughts on last night:

Crowd: Looked great, hope them all the best so they can push us and the rest of the league forward.

Montero: Looks damned good. What's more, he is apparently only being paid $155,000 for the loan. How the hell? I wonder if there are any backdoor dealings going on here. Either way, he looks good, and if he can keep it up he will be a game breaker.

Team: Looks good so far, I don't want to keep up the old arguement, but it is only one game. I mean, from that game, they look like they could be challenging for a playoff spot, but you know how much can change from our seasons (how many times have we been playing well then just collapsed?). So far so good ,but I'm not willing to give them the cup yet.

Compared to us: I don't think we can judge it yet. In fact, even if Seattle get into the playoffs, we can't judge it yet. Mo has stated he is working on a 5 year plan. Sure, I think that may be too long for such a young league, but I understand his strategy. So, after 5 years, we need to look at where the team is. Right now, I'm excited about the team because not only do we look solid, but we seem to have a good number of young players that will push us further forward by being trained in a single system. If we keep getting better every year, and not only make the playoffs, but make a run for the cup (and take home the cup a few times) for 5 years in a row (after the 5 year plan comes to fruition) can you really say Mo was wrong? Does making the playoffs and flaming out in your first year make up for constant mediocre performance?

Again, I'm not saying this IS how it will turn out, I'm saying it's possible, and we can't fully judge for a few years yet. That being said, I think a 5 year plan is way too long for this league given how fast rules can change (for example, if the salary cap goes up by 50% next year, every team will have to revise their strategy and bring in better players, which may make the 5 year plan less relevant).

[trane]

^ 5 year plan. Alright, he has a 5 year plan, but does that mean we shuold just let him put together a shite team for 4 years, and then just assess his performance in year 5, or worse should be let him filed a shite team for 5 years, and then assess his performance in year 6 when he has the 5 years he needs?

[Beach_Red]

This isn't a knock against TFC but if your gonna win in this league…you've got to play the "league" style. I watched the whole game, throughly enjoyed it and thought this is a team built for the MLS…quick, nippy and very hard working.

That's right. It's worrying to bring in a coach like Carver with no history in this league at all. This year we'll see how much he learned the league from last year.

And also, is Seattle an expansion team? Didn't we learn last year that the USL is not much different than MLS?

[Pachuco]

That's right. It's worrying to bring in a coach like Carver with no history in this league at all. This year we'll see how much he learned the league from last year.

And also, is Seattle an expansion team? Didn't we learn last year that the USL is not much different than MLS?

The players on the field are much different then their USL team. Oh, and so is their coach. It's a brand new team all trying to learn how to play with one another. So that argument doens't fly here.

[ExiledRed]

The players on the field are much different then their USL team. Oh, and so is their coach. It's a brand new team all trying to learn how to play with one another. So that argument doens't fly here.

Correct, or why bother with the expansion draft? Why not just keep all their players?

[Beach_Red]

The players on the field are much different then their USL team. Oh, and so is their coach. It's a brand new team all trying to learn how to play with one another. So that argument doens't fly here.

I'm not trying to make an argument, just point out that we shouldn't be surprised if Seattle does well. The difference between USL and MLS teams isn't that great, plus they improved that roster.

I still think we will more games than Seattle this year and that this year's TFC is much, much better than year one and better than year two. If improvement doesn't continue steadily that's a huge problem, but so far that isn't the case.

[TorCanSoc]

One game folks. Monterro out with a leg injury, Keller takes one in the gooolies, Ljundberg falls of a runway stage.... different team. Its a long season.

No doubt a success so far.

[Shakes McQueen]

I'm not trying to make an argument, just point out that we shouldn't be surprised if Seattle does well. The difference between USL and MLS teams isn't that great, plus they improved that roster.

I still think we will more games than Seattle this year and that this year's TFC is much, much better than year one and better than year two. If improvement doesn't continue steadily that's a huge problem, but so far that isn't the case.

I insist that you cut out this "being reasonable" shit, and join in with the rabble already calling for Mo and Carver's asses, despite us having not played a game yet.

Two of Seattle's goals were very fortunate, and due almost entirely to defensive lapses by the backline, and keeper. New York was missing four players from it's preferred XI.

They played great, absolutely deserved the win, and I was happy for them. But this is one game. We had sparks in our first season (ie Chicago, Dallas), where we looked like world-beaters too, but our final record told a different story.

I'm not making excuses for why New York lost - I'm tying to provide some perspective. Manchester United got demolished by Liverpool last weekend - do you think that one isolated game represents a broader statement on how good or bad either team is?

If they can play that well consistently, then they will be successful this season. But a single match is not long enough to make that determination yet.

For now, I'm savouring the fact that New York got it's ass handed to it.

- Scott

[trane]

^ I do not think that anyone is calling for anyones ass, just hope that as a group we are ready to take a stand if , come June we are in the same position we have been in the past two years. My only point, about Seattle, is the better they do clearer that Mo has been long on excuses and not short of resutls, this is the year that that must end.


I am expecting better things this year.

[Shakes McQueen]

^ I do not think that anyone is calling for anyones ass, just hope that as a group we are ready to take a stand if , come June we are in the same position we have been in the past two years. My only point, about Seattle, the clearer that Mo has been long on excuses and not short of resutls, this is the year that that must end.

But suppose Seattle ends up ultimately finishing with the same record as us in our first year?

I think giving Mo a couple of seasons to put together a good team was fine, but looking at our roster this season, there are no excuses - short of some really catastrophic injuries.

Our pre-season was as successful as Seattle's, in terms of results. I'm confident we will have a good season. And if we aren't, I will address it then. I'm not going to get weary about the season before ours even starts, though.

- Scott

[JonO]

^^^ Well you're just a debbie-downer. Why ruin the joy of the messageboards...

[trane]

^ I was feeling the same, untill I saw them play on Saturday , and the problems at the back seem to persist. I will give them ten games, but that should be plenty for them to show that a new course has been set.

[Oldtimer]

Seattle has a USL-quality backline, just like Montreal. Also, just like Montreal, they've managed to get those boys to play very well together.

Seattle includes 5 players from their USL side, so the core of the team was there, so they've had a huge advantage over other expansion teams -- and even though the majority of the team and the coach are new, they are still much better off than the last few expansion teams. Plus they have the US player pool, which TFC does not have the same access.

The proof of whether Mo did a good job is not how Seattle does. It's how well Ottawa does (another CDN team from scratch), if Ottawa gets in.

I'm a bit jealous, they won their first MLS game, their first game was at home, they have a roof, their team looks better than our first year team. I'm not jealous of: heavy handed management that tells the supporters what to sing, the marching band (after 10 minutes would drive me nuts), the cheerleaders (reminds me of the NASL). However, they are obviously a success, and that can only be good for the league.

[GeorgeB]

one guy that impressed me other than Montero is Sebastian Le Toux.he is from france but also played in the usl last year in seattle.

[flatpicker]

regarding the first goal in that game...
should it not have been offside?
one of the Seattle players was in an offside position when the shot was taken.
He didn't touch the ball, but he was very close to the keeper...
Does that not count as being part of the play when there is a player in an offside position that can affect the decisions of a keeper?

[Shakes McQueen]

regarding the first goal in that game...
should it not have been offside?
one of the Seattle players was in an offside position when the shot was taken.
He didn't touch the ball, but he was very close to the keeper...
Does that not count as being part of the play when there is a player in an offside position that can affect the decisions of a keeper?

Yes, and it should have been offside. But I guess shit happens. Especially when the "shit" is being controlled by MLS referees.

- Scott

[dannyd]

regarding the first goal in that game...
should it not have been offside?
one of the Seattle players was in an offside position when the shot was taken.
He didn't touch the ball, but he was very close to the keeper...
Does that not count as being part of the play when there is a player in an offside position that can affect the decisions of a keeper?

Yeah, that was the rule about 15 years ago... where have you been living, in a cave since then??

[ExiledRed]

regarding the first goal in that game...
should it not have been offside?
one of the Seattle players was in an offside position when the shot was taken.
He didn't touch the ball, but he was very close to the keeper...
Does that not count as being part of the play when there is a player in an offside position that can affect the decisions of a keeper?

If the player is offside (but unaffecting play) the keeper should be worrying about the players that are onside. Because the moment the offside player involves himself in the play, the flag goes up (ideally)

The goal was fair.

[flatpicker]

^ ok... I just needed it cleared up... I just thought that perhaps the offside player was affecting play.

and thanks to dannyd for being an jerk...

[Shakes McQueen]

If the player is offside (but unaffecting play) the keeper should be worrying about the players that are onside. Because the moment the offside player involves himself in the play, the flag goes up (ideally)

The goal was fair.

So, keepers are now supposed to be sitting there judging for themselves whether a player is offside?

Suppose it's a close call?

If this is seriously the rule now - what a stupid rule. It's up to the referees and the attacking players to make sure they are onside - it shouldn't be up to the GK to decide whether he has to pay attention to a player who could be involved in the play.

- Scott

[Pachuco]

So, keepers are now supposed to be sitting there judging for themselves whether a player is offside?

Suppose it's a close call?

If this is seriously the rule now - what a stupid rule. It's up to the referees and the attacking players to make sure they are onside - it shouldn't be up to the GK to decide whether he has to pay attention to a player who could be involved in the play.

- Scott

It has absolutely nothing to do with that. The goal keeper plays until the whistle blows. Simple as that. They dont give a shit if someone runs on the field with a gun, they keep playing until the whistle blows. The Refs make the decision, and the rule is that the ref judges whether the player was influencing the play. In this case, he was not influencing the play, so it was the right call.

[Shakes McQueen]

It has absolutely nothing to do with that. The goal keeper plays until the whistle blows. Simple as that. They dont give a shit if someone runs on the field with a gun, they keep playing until the whistle blows. The Refs make the decision, and the rule is that the ref judges whether the player was influencing the play. In this case, he was not influencing the play, so it was the right call.

But as flatpicker said, the offside player was very close to the keeper, which ostensibly makes him "involved" in the play.

If some guy was at the other end of the field with a gun, and not standing near the GK, then I agree - play on.

But if the guy standing near Cepero caused Cepero to stand in a bad position, rather than squaring himself to Montero, then it should have been called.

Or at least, that's how I see it. At the end of the day, I guess I just consider it a failure of judgment on the part of the MLS ref - which is common.

- Scott

[JonO]

It has absolutely nothing to do with that. The goal keeper plays until the whistle blows. Simple as that. They dont give a shit if someone runs on the field with a gun, they keep playing until the whistle blows. The Refs make the decision, and the rule is that the ref judges whether the player was influencing the play. In this case, he was not influencing the play, so it was the right call.

No - the question is "how is it determined if a player in an offside position affects the play". Although I haven't seen the play in question, this is the reason I miss the old offside rule.

At the speed the game moves today, it's hard enough for an official to get the actual offside position call right, let alone determine whether or not it affected play.

Personally I think that unless the guy is jogging back up the sideline opposite the field of play then an argument can be made that he affects play. (eg: the defender/keeper has to make a quick decision and a player close to the play can easily affect that decision with regard to positioning, etc..)

Anyway, sorry for the tangent, but it's really my pet peeve.

[Dirk Diggler]

But as flatpicker said, the offside player was very close to the keeper, which ostensibly makes him "involved" in the play.

If some guy was at the other end of the field with a gun, and not standing near the GK, then I agree - play on.

But if the guy standing near Cepero caused Cepero to stand in a bad position, rather than squaring himself to Montero, then it should have been called.

Or at least, that's how I see it. At the end of the day, I guess I just consider it a failure of judgment on the part of the MLS ref - which is common.

- Scott

What does the revised rule have to do with MLS refs? They didn't make it up themselves.

[Dirk Diggler]

I don't think you have ever once had a complaint about anything ever.
You defended fieldturf, and our poor performance and practically everything else that anybody piped up about.

I stopped takling your viewpoint seriously a while back, because it's so one sided. Reading your comments is like reading a biased newspaper.

Anyway, put your money where your fingers are. the bet is $20 that Seattle make 6th or higher this season. You want to take it?

I think I've read more complaints from mlsintoronto than him. I guess some people find having an anti-contrarian viewpoint more rewarding.

[mighty_torontofc_2008]

^ 5 year plan. Alright, he has a 5 year plan, but does that mean we shuold just let him put together a shite team for 4 years, and then just assess his performance in year 5, or worse should be let him filed a shite team for 5 years, and then assess his performance in year 6 when he has the 5 years he needs?

first off the team has not been shite for the first two seasons, the have been competitive for the most part, and last year if they caught a few breaks, like not having to play shorthanded might have made the playoffs.
Its seems like you want a Cup winner from day 1..guess what it doesn't happen that way!! It takes time to build a contebder and ever 5 years might not be enough...there is too much talk of TFC winning a lot this year, for me a .500 record would almost be certain of a playoff spot,
and the Canadian Championship would be nice too,but not at the expence
of having a stronger club in years to come...Carver and Johnston need
more time..a certain hockey team has waited 42 years for a championship team...we Reds fans can have a bit more patience!!

[noochie]

Montero = New. Defenses will figure out quickly how to shut him down.

[Shakes McQueen]

What does the revised rule have to do with MLS refs? They didn't make it up themselves.

Yes, but MLS refs are the ones who have to exercise their judgment in deciding when a player is part of the play, and when they aren't, which is what I was talking about.

- Scott

[James Oliphant]

Montero = New. Defenses will figure out quickly how to shut him down.

There's just one problem with that theory: very few MLS teams have defences.

[onemanbarmyarmy]

So, keepers are now supposed to be sitting there judging for themselves whether a player is offside?

Suppose it's a close call?

If this is seriously the rule now - what a stupid rule. It's up to the referees and the attacking players to make sure they are onside - it shouldn't be up to the GK to decide whether he has to pay attention to a player who could be involved in the play.

- Scott

If I'm not mistaken one of, if not the , "goalden" (sp. but it stays) rules is to play till the whistle blows. Do your job and save balls like Donovan does for Becky.