Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: July 3 - Friendly - USA vs. Canada [R]

  1. #1
    Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Toronto, , Canada.
    Posts
    5,712

    Default July 3 - Friendly - USA vs. Canada [R]

    Final:

    USA 1 Canada 0

    Heather Mitts with the goal in the second half.

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA, .
    Posts
    14

    Default

    I thought Canada played decently for having only one practice in the past 3-1/2 months, but I have to wonder why Canada continues to avoid controlling the ball more than they do. I understand the idea of quick counters with long balls, but there are so many times that Canada aimlessly plays the ball forward to no one, which means just giving the ball back to the other team. The U-19 team played some long-ball tactics, but controlled the ball more and had a reason for every ball they sent. I almost wonder if the U-19 team would have fared better today. That's an exaggeration, of course, but U19 team seems far better coached (and possibly better skilled... for their age).

    Best three players for Canada today: Sinclair, Timko, and Swiatek.

    If Sinclair got in a bit better shape, she might be the best player in the world. Timko was surprisingly dangerous, and surprisingly fast, playing so far up front (as she did in the first half). If she gets used to playing that far up front, she might move up to another level. And all I can say about Canada's goaltending - if Swiatek had played in the CONCACAF Olympic qualifying, Canada would be going to the Olympics. And the second best goalie is the U-19 goalie. LeBlanc is no better than the fourth best goalie I've seen for Canada in the past few years.

    Can anyone tell me if Pelerud does not allow the players to hold the ball? Does he pressure them severely to just get rid of it immediately? Why is the U-19 team so much more confident with the ball at their feet?

  3. #3

    Default

    Just finished watching it, and I'm sorry to play devil's advocate, but we are truly regressing with the women's team. Absolutely nothing from this match to show me that Evan is adapting this team's play or wanting to improve.

    1-A ridiculous dependence on the slide tackle. This killed us time and again because the girls missed a majority of them, and by choosing to slide instead of standing the attacker up or cutting in to their path and fighting for the ball or simply creating an obstacle for them to work around, it took our girl out of the play and they took too much time getting back in.

    2-Midfield. Do we even have one? I think we have attackers, wings and two more attackers in behind the primary strikers. We were destroyed in midfield play. And our lack of midfield (a proper midfield, not two bodies taking up space) means a lack of playmaking, a lack of ball possession and a lack of control. We still refuse to hold the ball for more than 2 seconds before hoofing it upfield, usually to no one in particular (or a US defender). We are scared to hold the ball and do something with it, especially put pressure on opposing defenders. Anyone notice how the US mids tended to play deeper in our zone than our own mids?

    3-The longball. Need I say more? How many more times can we simply watch this team get the ball and proceed to, as mentioned above, hoof it to no one in particular? You don't score by kicking the longest. Which we also seemed to be doing when taking shots on goal from the 18 or further. Kara Lang seems obsessed with this shot. She also seems incredibly frustrated and at loss for ideas out there.


    Sorry, but I really don't see this team moving forward any time soon.


    Feel free to rip me, but I call it as I see it. And I see something that ain't that good.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA, .
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Loud Mouth Soup:

    I'm not sure what you are talking about with Canada's mids. Quite the opposite. They were playing way too far back. They were retreating back into the box half of the time (at least the entire second half). In fact, that is a large part of Canada's problems... with almost everyone back, it is hard to find a midfielder for the defense to pass to. If you are talking about Timko, she was actually playing a forward according to the starting line-up.

    And as far as Lang goes, I agree that she doesn't always concentrate, but she is either out of shape or over-trained. She looked far too tired for mid-season form. And when she had the ball, with no forwards making runs and no gas left in the tank, the only option left was a shot from where she was. She did not play great, but she was not given much support.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The only road..., , Canada.
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    It doesn't matter what strategy you employ if you allow yourself to be outplayed as badly as Canada did in the second half.

    They looked really good in the first half, but they have gotten in a habit of playing well, until it matters(like against Mexico in Oly qualifying, Extra time vs U.S. at U-19, second half vs Sweden at WC)

    I feel Canada are much better than the recent string of results. Missing the Olympics was a disgrace. DO they not believe that they can reach the next level, or is it something else.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Welland, , Canada.
    Posts
    2,043

    Default

    Yeah, I have to agree that it is getting tiresome watching the US ladies push the ball all over the field, while we play kiity-bar-the-door. I would almost rather we lose 4-1, but play real soccer, the way our U19s did. Lo and behold, they won!

    I agree that Swiatek, Timko and Sinclair were our best players. Sinclair looks in much better shape than she was for the WC. I was also impressed with Zurrer who, for a 16 year old, did not hesitate to get stuck in with the likes of Mia Hamm and Abby Wambach. She is great in the air. Thought Randi Hermas played a good game as well.

    Andrea Neil has served the NT well for a long time and I do not want to be disrespectful, but I really question whether she has the speed and skill to play at this level any longer. Latham is the proverbial bull in the China Shop and deserves a place on the team because she makes things happen, but her first touches are about as good as mine, like hitting a brick wall.

  7. #7
    Member Ed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    6,993

    Default

    How Pellerud could start anybody but Swiatek in net is mind boggling. She was sensational once again in the 2nd half last night. I would bet my house that we would be in Athens if she had started in qualifying.

  8. #8

    Default

    They need kristina kiss back in the mid badly, but wont happen for a long time

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA, .
    Posts
    14

    Default

    I think that though Canada would have been outplayed a bit, they would not have been outplayed so badly had they not gone into such a shell in the second half. I agree that it would serve Canada far better to risk losing 4 -1 and in doing so, play a style that will eventually make them better. Besides, I would have predicted 2 - 1.

    I agree with Ivan that Andrea Neil, though having done a lot for Canada in the past, is probably hurting the team on the pitch. She's very slow, and Canada needs to develop the highly skilled U-19s because their Senior Team goals should be 2007 and 2008. Maybe Neil should stay on as a reserve if she is a great leader, but definitely not starting.

    Can someone up there in Canada tell me what happened to some of the players?: Breanna Boyd, Kristina Kiss, Tanya Dennis, Candace Chapman.

    Also, can anyone up there tell me why, when Pellerud claimed that the U-19 team was the focus this year, that Cicchini, Iachelli, Boxmeer, and Thorlakson were not on the roster. In fact, why isn't Thorlakson normally on the roster anyway? I think that Thorlakson and Sinclair up front are probably the only way Canada can play their 4 - 4 - 2 (or should I say their 8 - 0 - 2) and be successful. Thorlakson can control the ball, and she's mentally stronger than any of the other forwards, I think.

  10. #10

    Default

    quote:Originally posted by 3DMan

    Can someone up there in Canada tell me what happened to some of the players?: Breanna Boyd, Kristina Kiss, Tanya Dennis, Candace Chapman.
    ooo ... me me me! I can answer that ...

    Boyd: last i heard she was still not back on the field and her timeframe of recovery and such is still unknown ... her injury is very "iffy" in the sense that it's not really an injury that has a "standard" timeframe etc. (injury being concussions/neck ...)

    Chapman: saw her in ottawa during the u19s and she looked good. she was walking fine and all that, but i don't think she's back on the field fully. (she tore her ACL last august, to refresh her injury)

    Dennis: when she's back on the field is still TBD ... suffering from concussion(s?)

    Kiss: no longer plays for Canada, so she's "retired" ... had differences with the Canadian system/coaching and is currently playing in Norway for a club side there. (Floya)

    elaine

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •