In year one with Nelsen he was arguably our best player and easily playing at the level required from a starter. That being said, outside of that central role (which he won't play with this team) I agree he hasn't done much lately to warrant the starting spot.Originally Posted by shwade
Last edited by ag futbol; 04-08-2015 at 02:20 PM.
I think we need to try this. Put Osorio and Giovinco as an AMC/Shadow Striker. This is our best formation with the players we have.
That's one slow ass back line. Can't say I agree with you
Which is why we need to two defensive midfielders, or reduce the number of strikers to pack more players into the midfield.
The reds would get annihilated with only 3 in the back.
4-2-3-1 should work good.
3 in the back doesn't work unless they are really good.
We'd get destroyed.
1. Our coach essentially said today that the double pivot is too sophisticated for this league;
2. When you have a weakness like Crevalle you protect it. Neither oso norbfindlay did, I would suggest because they can't, they are offensive minded, so what choice is there amongst defence first players? On our club, it's Jackson and had to be. It's what " balance" means
Vanney's part two interview is really worth watching, an unvarnished and clear account of what went wrong. Impressed.
I would say Vanney's knowledge and approach are solid. He knows what he's talking about. The question to be answered is how he executes it, or puts that into action to get the results needed.
Where are you seeing this interpretation? I read Vanney's comments from yesterday's presser and there was nothign about the double pivot. Whenever I see someone say "essentially said" in the middle of a discussion, it usually means "this is what I heard."
"A weakness like Creavalle"... If a player were that big a weakness, he wouldn't be starting in defence. Anywhere. He's got issues and I don't think he's ready to start, but you don't fix a problem by compounding it.
Okay, I just listened to his entire THREE part interview (not two), and at no point does he ever state ANYTHING like "the double pivot is too sophisticated." He doesn't hint it, he doesn't suggest it, he doesn't say it on any level. He makes not ONE SINGLE suggestion that the tactics are the issue.
This is the power of bias. You've been stating for weeks now that he's not good enough, and now you're hearing things. And, once you dump on a speech that never took place, you come back and say it was "impressive" for him to be so frank, as if we're supposed to buy that you're being even handed.
Come on dude. Give it a rest.
In fact, this entire presser was focussed on the fact that compounded individual mistakes have caused their losses. In part three he points out that Giovinco and Cheyrou are having to adjust to the lower standard; that's as close as he gets to discussing tactics.
LOL
they adjust by just passing to each other, and it resultd in a goal.
Cheyrou more than anything is probably in awe at how the D can fall apart so fast, and how is has to look back and babysit more than hes use to.
It's fine by me if those 2 only pass to each other the whole game.
Vanney talked about the fact that they're so used to positionally responsible play, i.e. players not charging the ball constantly, that the difference in style is a learning curve. Also not used to adjusting quickly to simple things going wrong, because they're used to those things being done with technical competence. He said it more tactfully than that, but it amounts to a different style of football.
Jloome further to your comment. I have spoken to many players in the league that have come from overseas and they state that the hardest thing to adjust to is the lack of positional responsiblity and the lack of time on the ball due to the athleticism of the players. They close down players here at a break neck speed and not think about the shape of team or their responsibility.
I was told that it takes almost half a season for most players to adjust to the North American style of game, which always trumps athleticism or skill.
1. Listen to part 3 of Vanney, and he is asked about the adjustment to the league of Cheyrou. In it he says something like " he is used to players being in the right position and in this league they aren't always" which to me is an admission that you have to keep systems simple ie the double pivot is too complicated to work in this league. It possible it is in part one, definitely not part two as I hadn't seen it when I posted this.
2. I don't understand how you can disagree with my point about Creavalle - he is defensively weak at RB and the coach should have played a system or with personnel to protect him. The best defensive midfielder we have is Jackson, so he should have been ahead of Creavalle - look how well he and morrow protected things in the early going last year. A really attacking system exposed Creavalle on the counter and Findlay and Osorio weren't there every time to protect him. This kind of balance is the coaches job.
Yes. He says that players in this league aren't in the right place and that Cheyrou is having to adjust to that. By stating that, he is conceding that tactics have to be simple, which I took as an admission that a subtle tactic, like the double pivot, won't work. That's what I meant by essentially and its a fair comment. Perhaps I should have added my rationale but I stand by the comment. If Cheyrou can't move or pass where he wants to because the players are not up to it, you can't run the double pivot.
you also have my position wrong. I am concerned about Vanney's coaching because his teams are consistently defensively weak and give up easy goals. It's a fair concern given that in every game he has coached we have been defensively weak and in nearly every one we have given up easy goals. However, the second half versus Vancouver was excellent and he deserves credit for that. He also deserves credit for his comments in part two of the video which were surprisingly frank for a coach, and therefore impressive.
i hope he has the same ability to correct the mistakes as he does in analyzing them, he just has not yet shown that he does. And I am worried because I had a coach once like that - spoke well and insightfully but couldn't get us as a team to play well, when his predecessor, a meat and potatoes guy, could, using more basic concepts and hard work.
Last edited by MightyDM; 04-09-2015 at 06:24 PM.
To me this quote makes me question Vanney as a coach. The players don't play for a league...they play on a team of 11 men on the pitch. He is the coach - they are professionals - if they don't know where to be...that is a problem that can be fixed. Either through practice or by the coach getting the right players. The coach that accepts that this league is of a lower standard is a loser. It's a shitty rationalization of an excuse. We as a support can't accept this any more. It's why we a re the poorest MLS team in Canada. It has to change.
Last edited by Hamilton_Red; 04-10-2015 at 08:32 PM. Reason: Grammar
I've actually gone back and rewatched the game. It's pretty clear of a few things.
1)
Fouls & cards were not given out equally for fouls committed. Stomping and slashing fouls were called against us and we received yellows for them. However when chicago players committed the same fouls they were either not called or a card was not given.
2)
Two players for chicago probably should have been sent off this game. #2 In the first half for a slash on bradley and a stomp on gio. Also #6 for a studs up body check against morrow and a slide from behind against bradley.
#2 for chicago committed the exact same fouls as crevalle. In the 11:43 minute mark he slashes down bradley in the same fashion as crevalle's second yellow but dosent recieve a booking. At minute 15:11 again #2 stomps Giovincos foot after missing the ball. The ref didn't even call a foul.
#6 at 57:40 of the second half Gherig goes for the challenge studs up and body checks morrow. This was a brutal foul that even had bendik in a rage at the ref. No foul was even called. Then in the 72:26 min of the game he receives a yellow for a dangerous tackle from behind, should have been a second though.
Also #20 could have been sent off at minute 18:24 for a two footed slide tackle that gio dived out of the way.
3)
Giovinco was persistently fouled all game, with arms around his neck, mid section not getting any calls. Also a few times our players got cleated on the back of the leg with no call being made. These came in the 74:51 mark with jozy and the 88:29 min with gio.
4) As much as we want to rag on Crevalle I believe that he was fouled multiple times including a stomp on him 47:21 Exactly like what he received a yellow for but only a foul was called. Also a penalty 49:09 where crevalle was elbowed in the head then bowled over in the box.
I'm going to be including the above and a lot more in a Highlight package and putting them on youtube. Just wanted to post some of my thoughts on here after re watching the game.
it' a TFC tradition.......and how we always misuse players
ALL HELL'S BROKEN LOOSEhttp://gfycat.com/SharpKindArrowana
I'm late on this but essentially doesn't 3 in the back , turn to 5 at the back when under attack , and when we attack they shift up the flank........of course needing speed and complete two way players.
ALL HELL'S BROKEN LOOSEhttp://gfycat.com/SharpKindArrowana
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote