What a night! What a result! (Game recap.)
I should no longer refer to Bobby Boswell as BoBo. My wife suggests B-Swell has a more positive ring to it. And B-Swell's game winner comes a day or so after he says "For me, the goal is definitely to beat Pachuca, a team that [the Dynamo] played a lot last year. And if I can be a catalyst to help the team get past them and get into the finals, then that's a big step for me and the team." Congrats on your big step, Catalyst!
And I wonder how many more games I'll have to watch before I see Corey Ashe get another goal off a header. He's the smallest guy on the pitch, isn't he?
I thought there was a lot of energy in the crowd tonight. The two supporters' groups did well stirring up noise and fervor. We also were introduced to our newest player: Kei Kamara. He looked good, though he did not seem to have gelled with the team yet. No surprise there at this point.
My family tried a new seating position this time: Section 124. From that section we were looking over DeRo's shoulder when he made the two dangerous shots on goal from the left flank in the first half. The first shot looked like he was trying to bend it as a cross, only the ball didn't bend and it became a shot that was easily snuffed by Calero. The second shot looked like he swiveled to fake a cross, then attempted a clever flick that Calero deflected. Had a middie timed his run right, the deflection would have led to an easy follow-up shot on goal. (When I rewatched the play on Telemundo, it looked like Jaqua and Mullan actually were trailing the play, but the ball didn't get near them unfortunately.) DeRo's best shot was around the 8th minute. It was a spinning left-footed volley from about 25 yards out that Calero had to stretch to deflect over the ball. That shot, had it been a goal, would have been on the highlight reel.
From our seats, we were also in line with the play in the second half when Pachuca had a goal called back due to offside. We didn't see the infraction at the time, and watching the replay on Telemundo, it appears there wasn't one.
Before this divine/referee intervention, we also saw some excellent saves by Onstad in the first 5 minutes of the second half. The veteran saved our skin tonight.
I'd give Dynamo-H the edge in the first half. They had the better possesion and the better threats on goal. Pachuca completely dominated the first 5 minutes of the second half, and after that the game evened out (except for that fast break non-offside non-goal that we were gifted).
As the game wore on, I worried that we would head into extra time. If the Tuzos were able to sneak past the Dynamo yet again, who would I root for in the final, I wondered? Well, regardless of who wins the New England-Atlante match, I'd have to root for Pachuca. They're a quality team, and I won't root for the Revs as long as Steve Nicol is killing the game for them.
Then a bit of magic in the 77th minute when a DeRo corner is headed on by Waibel for a timely tap-in with B-Swell's side foot. After that, the game opened up as Pachuca sought the equalizer and the Dynamo had more opportunities to counter. Ashe's header 10 minutes later ensured that the non-offside gift wouldn't taint the Dynamo's victory.
Pachuca played a solid game, until their emotions got the best of them as time wore down. Then there was a fracas after the game. It seems Pachuca is only a class act when they're on top; they don't have the emotional maturity to face disappointment like men. Hats off to Calero (surprisingly, particularly after his antics with Dom at halftime) and Torres to show class and sportsmanship in their respective post-game interviews. They need to do some remedial training for some of their teammates.
Wednesday night, I guess I'll root for Atlante so we get the final at home. Either opponent would be difficult. We beat Atlante 4-0 in the group stage, so they'll be gunning for us -- plus they appear to have their edge back. Also, it's difficult to beat the same team twice in one tournament. New England would be difficult because they know how to frustrate the Dynamo, beating us for a combined 5-0 tally in our two matches this year. We've beaten them the past two MLS Cup championships, but that only makes the odds for a third consecutive championship victory seem that much more difficult to attain over the same opponent. Plus, we'd be on their home field with their fake turf. So, it's go Atlante.
But, Go Dynamo! even more.
Showing posts with label offside. Show all posts
Showing posts with label offside. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Friday, October 12, 2007
Offside enforcement for the betterment of the game
I enjoyed this editorial from usssoccerplayers.com. The subject is on how MLS referees should understand the spirit of the Offside law and use it as a tool not only to prevent the game from degrading into skill-less kickball (the original intent of the law), but also to encourage creative, attacking play.
The editorialist uses an incident during the recent Chivas USA - FCD goalless draw as an example. I have to agree that, as in baseball, ties should go to the offense in order to err on the side of attacking (which is by nature creative, since the opposition will not create the opportunities for you), rather than to err on the side of stodgy defense (which, though a necessary and admirable skill, is still destructive since it seeks to undo what the opposition is creating). This could also have the side effect of slightly increasing the goals in a game due to increasing the number of goal-scoring opportunities in a game -- and that would help the game in the US.
(As an aside, we Dynamo fans should relish this draw as it keeps the Dynamo safely in the top four of the league, thus ensuring our berth in SuperLiga next year, while still keeping Chivas USA within reach of us...for now. This is a short term benefit, but a long-term benefit would arise from enforcing the spirit rather than the strictest letter of the offside law. Such a policy could help improve the style of play league-wide by creating more attacking opportunities and forcing defenders to improve their marking, tackling, and decision-making skills. The risk is that defenders will be put in more desperate situations and resort to Ty Harden-style fouling tactics -- brutality over skill.)
Other ways changes in enforcement could have a positive effect on the game: allowing cards to be issued for gamesmanship (e.g. diving, intentional handballs, pushing/pulling) based on video review after a match. While post-facto review wouldn't reverse an injustice committed in a previous match, it should serve as a deterrent and would ensure that those who bring disrepute to the game are punished. Belated punishment is better than none. Violators would sit out future matches for severe fouls (as with any red card) or if there has been an accumulation of such incidents (like any Yellow accumulation would do). The details of such a policy would need to be worked out, preventing fickle punishments and perhaps dictating that such punishments would have to be announced within a certain period (perhaps 5 days or so) after the match, but that is minutiae that could be easily determined.
BTW, ussoccerplayers.com is a great website that I've just stumbled across within the past month or so. Under the "Exclusives" tab you can find some great editorials on various facets of the game.
The editorialist uses an incident during the recent Chivas USA - FCD goalless draw as an example. I have to agree that, as in baseball, ties should go to the offense in order to err on the side of attacking (which is by nature creative, since the opposition will not create the opportunities for you), rather than to err on the side of stodgy defense (which, though a necessary and admirable skill, is still destructive since it seeks to undo what the opposition is creating). This could also have the side effect of slightly increasing the goals in a game due to increasing the number of goal-scoring opportunities in a game -- and that would help the game in the US.
(As an aside, we Dynamo fans should relish this draw as it keeps the Dynamo safely in the top four of the league, thus ensuring our berth in SuperLiga next year, while still keeping Chivas USA within reach of us...for now. This is a short term benefit, but a long-term benefit would arise from enforcing the spirit rather than the strictest letter of the offside law. Such a policy could help improve the style of play league-wide by creating more attacking opportunities and forcing defenders to improve their marking, tackling, and decision-making skills. The risk is that defenders will be put in more desperate situations and resort to Ty Harden-style fouling tactics -- brutality over skill.)
Other ways changes in enforcement could have a positive effect on the game: allowing cards to be issued for gamesmanship (e.g. diving, intentional handballs, pushing/pulling) based on video review after a match. While post-facto review wouldn't reverse an injustice committed in a previous match, it should serve as a deterrent and would ensure that those who bring disrepute to the game are punished. Belated punishment is better than none. Violators would sit out future matches for severe fouls (as with any red card) or if there has been an accumulation of such incidents (like any Yellow accumulation would do). The details of such a policy would need to be worked out, preventing fickle punishments and perhaps dictating that such punishments would have to be announced within a certain period (perhaps 5 days or so) after the match, but that is minutiae that could be easily determined.
BTW, ussoccerplayers.com is a great website that I've just stumbled across within the past month or so. Under the "Exclusives" tab you can find some great editorials on various facets of the game.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Once again: we're even with the mediocre
I was tired Sat night/Sun morning so I executed my right to rewrite this...
Tonight the draw with C-Bus seemed more like 2 points lost than 1 point gained. We cling to our lead in the Western Conference (but one Dallas win or two Chivas wins can erase that since they have games in hand on us), but we trail behind New England and DCU for the Supporters' Shield. Our fate is no longer solely in our hands. We have to win the majority of our remaining games in order to earn the Shield, and New England and DCU (and the teams that have games in hand on us) must also lose a few. Given the nature of this league, however, I think we're practically guaranteed the Shield if we go on another long winning streak.
The key is that we need to win in order to have the winning streak.
Tonight, we tie (barely), at home, to a mediocre C-Bus Crew team, which played most of the game with only 10 men.
That sentence (run-on though it is) is chock full of reasons to be depressed about the result. In the opening 15 minutes, I was surprised how wide open the game was. We were looking dangerous and moving the ball around, but C-Bus looked equally dangerous with their direct play and their ability to move the ball around our box once they got there. I thought we might see a 3-3 match after seeing the back and forth play and the shaky defense at both ends.
We were lucky that the Crew’s first golden opportunity hit the crossbar, but Cochrane's role in that play was a harbinger of what was to come. Sure enough, in the 17th minute, Schelotto fakes Cochrane out so smoothly that Cochrane is lucky that he wasn't given a wedgie and had a "kick me" sign placed on his back in the same play. Schelotto then lays the ball off for Alejandro Moreno, who had long ago proven that he doesn't score often in Robertson Stadium, but he decides to step out of character tonight. For the second time in as many meetings, Moreno scores on his former team.
Dynamo starts to press harder for the remainder of the match. D-Ro has a great shot from distance turned aside, Jaqua has a 1-on-1 with the goalie that gets sent into low earth orbit (forwards have no excuse for doing that, particularly early in the game), and Ngwenya sees his loads of opportunities wasted. The beginning of the second half portended an orange-dominated play. Yet, it was not until late (80th minute) that we could make hay of our possession. At that point Ngwenya, freed by a give and go with Clark just outside the box, worked his way into the box at the north end and got off a shot, the shot was saved, and Jaqua picked up the trash and evened the score. Because the goal came so late, it was blessed relief. We didn't stop there, though: we continued to pressed and a win seemed possible. Ngwenya and D-Ro both found themselves with great opportunities taken away by timely tackles, while another fast break by Ngwenya was nullified by a (ref-unseen) shirt pull by Ezra.
Not long after the match ended, the blessed relief of the late goal faded back into disgust at what we lost (2 points) and to whom (a mediocre team down to 10 men). This is really getting old: we beat quality teams, we tie mediocre teams, and we lose to cellar-dwellers. Where is the logic in that? Is there a certain quality horrible teams share (perhaps a compacted defense?) that we can’t overcome while others can? If so, is this the quality that fuels our inability to score on short-handed teams? Just this season, we weren’t able to score on a 10-man RBNY in NY, Colorado in Commerce City, and Toronto in Houston. We were able to score on Chivas when the Goats were down to 10, but we were already up 2-0 at that point.
What’s the connection? What does that say about our weaknesses?
Abby Okulaja proves to be his usual inconsistent self. He had help: in the second half the east-side AR called Wondo offside after an excellent through pass to Wondo in the box. Offside? There was a Crew defender (in addition to the keeper, naturally) sitting (literally) inside the box at least five yards between Wondo and the goal. Dynamo players enthusiastically pointed this out, and the AR seemed to recognize that he made an error -- I was only about 10 yards away from the linesman, so I'm basing this assumption on his body language and snippets of conversation I could hear after he made the call, but I could be wrong. Nevertheless, Abby gives the Crew a free kick after our opportunity was already snuffed. Um, oops.
(Is there a loophole in the rules so that a player can be called offside if one of the two opponents (between the player and goal) is kneeling and taking himself out of the play? I didn’t think so.)
Thankfully, not too long after this, Jaqua scores.
Another complaint, while I’m at it: Can’t the stadium run the clock past 90 minutes? Just keep it going, guys! We'll tell you when to stop! Another facility related gripe: go back to an announcer who doesn’t mumble; tonight the mumbler made it difficult to hear most of the names of the subs coming in or the players going out of the game. This isn't a big problem for me with the Dynamo subs, but I had trouble keeping up with the Colorado players.
Before I go to bed, I have to focus on the positives, just so I go to sleep with a warm glow inside me:
Tonight the draw with C-Bus seemed more like 2 points lost than 1 point gained. We cling to our lead in the Western Conference (but one Dallas win or two Chivas wins can erase that since they have games in hand on us), but we trail behind New England and DCU for the Supporters' Shield. Our fate is no longer solely in our hands. We have to win the majority of our remaining games in order to earn the Shield, and New England and DCU (and the teams that have games in hand on us) must also lose a few. Given the nature of this league, however, I think we're practically guaranteed the Shield if we go on another long winning streak.
The key is that we need to win in order to have the winning streak.
Tonight, we tie (barely), at home, to a mediocre C-Bus Crew team, which played most of the game with only 10 men.
That sentence (run-on though it is) is chock full of reasons to be depressed about the result. In the opening 15 minutes, I was surprised how wide open the game was. We were looking dangerous and moving the ball around, but C-Bus looked equally dangerous with their direct play and their ability to move the ball around our box once they got there. I thought we might see a 3-3 match after seeing the back and forth play and the shaky defense at both ends.
We were lucky that the Crew’s first golden opportunity hit the crossbar, but Cochrane's role in that play was a harbinger of what was to come. Sure enough, in the 17th minute, Schelotto fakes Cochrane out so smoothly that Cochrane is lucky that he wasn't given a wedgie and had a "kick me" sign placed on his back in the same play. Schelotto then lays the ball off for Alejandro Moreno, who had long ago proven that he doesn't score often in Robertson Stadium, but he decides to step out of character tonight. For the second time in as many meetings, Moreno scores on his former team.
Dynamo starts to press harder for the remainder of the match. D-Ro has a great shot from distance turned aside, Jaqua has a 1-on-1 with the goalie that gets sent into low earth orbit (forwards have no excuse for doing that, particularly early in the game), and Ngwenya sees his loads of opportunities wasted. The beginning of the second half portended an orange-dominated play. Yet, it was not until late (80th minute) that we could make hay of our possession. At that point Ngwenya, freed by a give and go with Clark just outside the box, worked his way into the box at the north end and got off a shot, the shot was saved, and Jaqua picked up the trash and evened the score. Because the goal came so late, it was blessed relief. We didn't stop there, though: we continued to pressed and a win seemed possible. Ngwenya and D-Ro both found themselves with great opportunities taken away by timely tackles, while another fast break by Ngwenya was nullified by a (ref-unseen) shirt pull by Ezra.
Not long after the match ended, the blessed relief of the late goal faded back into disgust at what we lost (2 points) and to whom (a mediocre team down to 10 men). This is really getting old: we beat quality teams, we tie mediocre teams, and we lose to cellar-dwellers. Where is the logic in that? Is there a certain quality horrible teams share (perhaps a compacted defense?) that we can’t overcome while others can? If so, is this the quality that fuels our inability to score on short-handed teams? Just this season, we weren’t able to score on a 10-man RBNY in NY, Colorado in Commerce City, and Toronto in Houston. We were able to score on Chivas when the Goats were down to 10, but we were already up 2-0 at that point.
What’s the connection? What does that say about our weaknesses?
Abby Okulaja proves to be his usual inconsistent self. He had help: in the second half the east-side AR called Wondo offside after an excellent through pass to Wondo in the box. Offside? There was a Crew defender (in addition to the keeper, naturally) sitting (literally) inside the box at least five yards between Wondo and the goal. Dynamo players enthusiastically pointed this out, and the AR seemed to recognize that he made an error -- I was only about 10 yards away from the linesman, so I'm basing this assumption on his body language and snippets of conversation I could hear after he made the call, but I could be wrong. Nevertheless, Abby gives the Crew a free kick after our opportunity was already snuffed. Um, oops.
(Is there a loophole in the rules so that a player can be called offside if one of the two opponents (between the player and goal) is kneeling and taking himself out of the play? I didn’t think so.)
Thankfully, not too long after this, Jaqua scores.
Another complaint, while I’m at it: Can’t the stadium run the clock past 90 minutes? Just keep it going, guys! We'll tell you when to stop! Another facility related gripe: go back to an announcer who doesn’t mumble; tonight the mumbler made it difficult to hear most of the names of the subs coming in or the players going out of the game. This isn't a big problem for me with the Dynamo subs, but I had trouble keeping up with the Colorado players.
Before I go to bed, I have to focus on the positives, just so I go to sleep with a warm glow inside me:
- We got a point
- We finally managed to score on a 10 man team
- We played well and had sufficient opportunity to put this game away (dang finishing)
- Mulrooney and Ianni played excellent games
- Ngwenya is taking responsibility for his missed chances in saying "I had three clear chances I wish I could have put away. I think I need to get back to training and start being serious again. I need to start putting away chances again. I think I was a bit too relaxed. " Nice to hear the commitment, but why weren’t you already serious after the penalty kick fiasco vs Pachuca?
- My daughter caught a T-shirt
Saturday, June 23, 2007
More on the USMNT
Copa America
Bob Bradley announced his roster for the Copa America. He is definitely using the opportunity to give his younger players a crash course in international play, versus high caliber players, in hostile environments. The roster includes three (Moor, Wynne, and Gomez) who don't even have a cap. Here's the roster:
Goalkeepers: Brad Guzan (Chivas USA), Kasey Keller (Borussia Moenchengladbach, Germany)
Defenders: Jonathan Bornstein (Chivas USA), Bobby Boswell (D.C. United), Danny Califf (Aalborg BK, Denmark), Jimmy Conrad (Kansas City), Jay DeMerit (Watford, England), Drew Moor (FC Dallas), Heath Pearce (Nordsjaelland, Denmark), Marvell Wynne (Toronto FC)
Midfielders: Kyle Beckerman (Colorado), Ricardo Clark (Houston), Benny Feilhaber (Hamburg SV, Germany), Eddie Gaven (Columbus), Sacha Kljestan (Chivas USA), Justin Mapp (Chicago), Lee Nguyen (PSV Eindhoven, Netherlands), Ben Olsen (D.C. United)
Forwards: Charlie Davies (Hammarby, Sweden), Herculez Gomez (Colorado), Eddie Johnson (Kansas City), Taylor Twellman (New England)
I'm not that opposed to the young lineup, but I do find some of the choices curious, particularly at forward. Gomez must be an experiment, but based on what? He hasn't really delivered in the MLS, though he does have potential. Twellman is virtually an old man on this roster, but I guess he's here to get some experience since his international play is as refined as the play of the newbies. Johnson I understand: he shows potential; Bradley just hopes he can tap into it.
Beckerman is a good risk, and I hope we see Nguyen and Clark on the field. Drew Moor is one that I question in the back. He doesn't seem very reliable at the club (FCD) level, so how can he compete against some of the world's best?
Bottom line: this is a lineup that's doomed to not get out of the group stage, but it should be good experience for the players.
Tobias' take on the Copa Oro
The Ft Worth Star-Telegram has a brief commentary on the USMNT's performance (and Fox Soccer Channel's broadcasting performance) for the Gold Cup. I can't say that I disagree with much that he writes. I like FSC, but I'm not a fan of Max Bretos' banter nor his bias towards certain teams, and I absolutely hate his scream when a goal is scored. It's something like "Yeeaahhaaaarrggggh!" What is WITH that?
The Offside Discussion
It's interesting that something so concrete as a rule or law can appear so different to people of a different perspective. The offside call at the end of the US v Canada game is still generating chatter, with people clamoring for both sides. I guess the only definite thing to come out of it is that the call was close enough that -- as infuriating as it is to the Canadians -- it can only be chalked up to a ref's on-the-spot opinion and not to international conspiracy.
Here's the BigSoccer discussion (full of locker room lawyers, be warned)
Bobby McMahon with the more common view that Canada was robbed
Robert Burns has a more unusual take, saying the call was correct because DeRo was offside, and he was part of the play (even though Onyewu deflected the ball before it got to him)
It's no surprise that people have differing opinions. It is a surprise that people can't believe others have a different point of view.
T. Henry
ESPN reports that the deal is done. Thierry Henry is on his way to Barcelona. That's good for him and good for Barca, but poor, poor Arsenal...
Bob Bradley announced his roster for the Copa America. He is definitely using the opportunity to give his younger players a crash course in international play, versus high caliber players, in hostile environments. The roster includes three (Moor, Wynne, and Gomez) who don't even have a cap. Here's the roster:
Goalkeepers: Brad Guzan (Chivas USA), Kasey Keller (Borussia Moenchengladbach, Germany)
Defenders: Jonathan Bornstein (Chivas USA), Bobby Boswell (D.C. United), Danny Califf (Aalborg BK, Denmark), Jimmy Conrad (Kansas City), Jay DeMerit (Watford, England), Drew Moor (FC Dallas), Heath Pearce (Nordsjaelland, Denmark), Marvell Wynne (Toronto FC)
Midfielders: Kyle Beckerman (Colorado), Ricardo Clark (Houston), Benny Feilhaber (Hamburg SV, Germany), Eddie Gaven (Columbus), Sacha Kljestan (Chivas USA), Justin Mapp (Chicago), Lee Nguyen (PSV Eindhoven, Netherlands), Ben Olsen (D.C. United)
Forwards: Charlie Davies (Hammarby, Sweden), Herculez Gomez (Colorado), Eddie Johnson (Kansas City), Taylor Twellman (New England)
I'm not that opposed to the young lineup, but I do find some of the choices curious, particularly at forward. Gomez must be an experiment, but based on what? He hasn't really delivered in the MLS, though he does have potential. Twellman is virtually an old man on this roster, but I guess he's here to get some experience since his international play is as refined as the play of the newbies. Johnson I understand: he shows potential; Bradley just hopes he can tap into it.
Beckerman is a good risk, and I hope we see Nguyen and Clark on the field. Drew Moor is one that I question in the back. He doesn't seem very reliable at the club (FCD) level, so how can he compete against some of the world's best?
Bottom line: this is a lineup that's doomed to not get out of the group stage, but it should be good experience for the players.
Tobias' take on the Copa Oro
The Ft Worth Star-Telegram has a brief commentary on the USMNT's performance (and Fox Soccer Channel's broadcasting performance) for the Gold Cup. I can't say that I disagree with much that he writes. I like FSC, but I'm not a fan of Max Bretos' banter nor his bias towards certain teams, and I absolutely hate his scream when a goal is scored. It's something like "Yeeaahhaaaarrggggh!" What is WITH that?
The Offside Discussion
It's interesting that something so concrete as a rule or law can appear so different to people of a different perspective. The offside call at the end of the US v Canada game is still generating chatter, with people clamoring for both sides. I guess the only definite thing to come out of it is that the call was close enough that -- as infuriating as it is to the Canadians -- it can only be chalked up to a ref's on-the-spot opinion and not to international conspiracy.
Here's the BigSoccer discussion (full of locker room lawyers, be warned)
Bobby McMahon with the more common view that Canada was robbed
Robert Burns has a more unusual take, saying the call was correct because DeRo was offside, and he was part of the play (even though Onyewu deflected the ball before it got to him)
It's no surprise that people have differing opinions. It is a surprise that people can't believe others have a different point of view.
T. Henry
ESPN reports that the deal is done. Thierry Henry is on his way to Barcelona. That's good for him and good for Barca, but poor, poor Arsenal...
Thursday, June 21, 2007
DeRo and Onstad are coming home
The US eked by Canada today. Overall, the US seemed to have the better cohesion and tactical acumen in terms of passing, as well as better physical conditioning (which is usually the case), and all this helped us control the vital midfield. Canada seemed to have the better touch and technique and better individual creativity, and all this kept them in the game until the second half when our cohesion fell apart.
Hejduk has got to be proud of his one-touch strike of the Donovan layoff. It had just enough spin and bend to deflect the right way off the post. Not much Onstad could do about that one.
Onstad could've stopped the second goal though, had he listened to me as I talked to the TV. I told my wife that Donovan goes down the middle with his kicks, and the kicks are usually soft. I said that Onstad should just stand there and let the ball come to him. Didn't I, wife?
Wife: "Yes."
See?
Had Onstad stood there, he'd have stopped the kick and embarrassed his former Earthquake teammate.
I thought it cool that the two were talking right before the PK. You don't see adversaries talking much before one is going to shoot at the other. (BTW, I don't know that the PK should've been awarded. It looked to me that Beasley had lost the ball and dragged his foot to catch Onstad...like a Tomcat dropping its landing hook as it lands on the flight deck.)
I'm disappointed that Clark only got garbage time and Ching got no time. Was Ching even on the bench? If not, it's a travesty. If so, then he should've been put in. Johnson did not contribute anything on the field today. It seems he either has a hat trick or is a no-show when he plays. Either way, he doesn't make his teammates better. Today, he was a no-show. Ching is the better choice over him and Twellman. Travesty.
As for Clark, he is one of the best D-Mids for the US, but he doesn't start over Coach Bob's son, Michael. Unlike the forward situation, though, I can't argue that Clark is that much better than his replacement. Boy Bradley has good touch and passing; that he doesn't offer much in terms of shooting is immaterial with his position. I think both Clark and Bradley do well with Mastroeni…although Bradley's inability to play a physical game might mean he is a better complement to the physical Mastroeni, whereas Clark might be somewhat duplicative with Pablo.
All that was moot when Boy Bradley got the red card. Clark goes in then. I thought Dad Bradley should've left Mastroeni in with Clark to protect the lead.
As for Boy Bradley, I guess you should leave the physical play to the experts.
And how about that lead that we were protecting? Only through an iffy offside call at the end was the 10-man US able to get through to the next round. A recap: Canada plays the ball forward (no one is offside at this point), the ball goes to Onyewu and off his head (Hutchinson is offside at this point) and lands at Hutchinson's feet, who shoots the ball into the net. The Canadian coach says "Their player headed the ball down into the box and our player kicked it in. If one of their players played the ball back, it's a back pass and it cannot be offsides. That's how I saw it." Others agree.
I guess this is where my armchair refereeing fails me. I don't see anywhere in the Laws of the Game that benefiting from being offside is ever okay, back pass or no. However, the Laws do say that a player in an offside position is only penalized if he is gaining an advantage by being offside at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team. Well, if that's the case, then Hutchinson was onside when the ball was played by one of his team and the Canadian goal should stand. However, the Laws also say that "Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position." In which case, the goal was rightfully waived off.
Comments?
Onstad shows himself a wise veteran with his take: "We did things to put ourselves in that position, whether it was a bad call or not. We dug ourselves a hole."
At any rate, the US dodged a bullet, and their play in the second half was sub-par for the most part. We controlled the midfield in the first half, but not the second. The second half also saw the embarrassing whiff by Donovan in front of the goal (one of the few chances we had in the second half), and Dad Bradley followed his poor decision on attacking starters (Johnson and the creative Dempsey, who I think is better as a midfielder that pushes forward) with a poor decision on an attacking sub (Twellman), and it nearly cost us the game. We couldn't even protect the ball in the corner after a free kick with 30 seconds remaining. Sigh.
Now for the OTHER soccer game and happier times... Dynamo shellacks Chivas USA 4-0 tonight. Brad Davis gets a hat trick. Once more: Brad Davis gets a hat trick. I think that's our first hat trick since Ching's in the first Dynamo game ever -- versus Colorado last season. All 3 of tonight's goals from the run of play (1 from Mullan and 2 from Davis) were beauts.
I love it when we blow out the competition. (We had 17 shots to their 8? Really?) It was good to see the reserves get some more time, and Holden get the start. Stewart also had a good shot on goal in the opening minutes and created the third goal in the second half by working the ball down and feeding it to Ngwenya who fed it to Davis. Were there faces on the bench that you didn't recognize? There were for me. Wouldn't it have been cool for a John Michael Hayden to get his first minutes?
Okay, it's confession time: At the beginning of the game I lamented, "Oh no, Dom has Mullan as a forward."
Wife: "So?"
Armchair Coach: "He started his career as a forward, but he's a better midfielder. He can't even stay onside as a forward."
Wife: "Oh."
(Six minutes later) Armchair Coach: "Great strategy Dom! Awesome insight! Dale Dale Dale Dynamo..."
Wife: "But, you said..."
The best part about being an armchair coach is that there's no accountability when you're wrong.
[Addendum on the offside: Dynamo benefitted from a similar call when a Herculez Gomez goal was called offside at Colorado.]
Hejduk has got to be proud of his one-touch strike of the Donovan layoff. It had just enough spin and bend to deflect the right way off the post. Not much Onstad could do about that one.
Onstad could've stopped the second goal though, had he listened to me as I talked to the TV. I told my wife that Donovan goes down the middle with his kicks, and the kicks are usually soft. I said that Onstad should just stand there and let the ball come to him. Didn't I, wife?
Wife: "Yes."
See?
Had Onstad stood there, he'd have stopped the kick and embarrassed his former Earthquake teammate.
I thought it cool that the two were talking right before the PK. You don't see adversaries talking much before one is going to shoot at the other. (BTW, I don't know that the PK should've been awarded. It looked to me that Beasley had lost the ball and dragged his foot to catch Onstad...like a Tomcat dropping its landing hook as it lands on the flight deck.)
I'm disappointed that Clark only got garbage time and Ching got no time. Was Ching even on the bench? If not, it's a travesty. If so, then he should've been put in. Johnson did not contribute anything on the field today. It seems he either has a hat trick or is a no-show when he plays. Either way, he doesn't make his teammates better. Today, he was a no-show. Ching is the better choice over him and Twellman. Travesty.
As for Clark, he is one of the best D-Mids for the US, but he doesn't start over Coach Bob's son, Michael. Unlike the forward situation, though, I can't argue that Clark is that much better than his replacement. Boy Bradley has good touch and passing; that he doesn't offer much in terms of shooting is immaterial with his position. I think both Clark and Bradley do well with Mastroeni…although Bradley's inability to play a physical game might mean he is a better complement to the physical Mastroeni, whereas Clark might be somewhat duplicative with Pablo.
All that was moot when Boy Bradley got the red card. Clark goes in then. I thought Dad Bradley should've left Mastroeni in with Clark to protect the lead.
As for Boy Bradley, I guess you should leave the physical play to the experts.
And how about that lead that we were protecting? Only through an iffy offside call at the end was the 10-man US able to get through to the next round. A recap: Canada plays the ball forward (no one is offside at this point), the ball goes to Onyewu and off his head (Hutchinson is offside at this point) and lands at Hutchinson's feet, who shoots the ball into the net. The Canadian coach says "Their player headed the ball down into the box and our player kicked it in. If one of their players played the ball back, it's a back pass and it cannot be offsides. That's how I saw it." Others agree.
I guess this is where my armchair refereeing fails me. I don't see anywhere in the Laws of the Game that benefiting from being offside is ever okay, back pass or no. However, the Laws do say that a player in an offside position is only penalized if he is gaining an advantage by being offside at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team. Well, if that's the case, then Hutchinson was onside when the ball was played by one of his team and the Canadian goal should stand. However, the Laws also say that "Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position." In which case, the goal was rightfully waived off.
Comments?
Onstad shows himself a wise veteran with his take: "We did things to put ourselves in that position, whether it was a bad call or not. We dug ourselves a hole."
At any rate, the US dodged a bullet, and their play in the second half was sub-par for the most part. We controlled the midfield in the first half, but not the second. The second half also saw the embarrassing whiff by Donovan in front of the goal (one of the few chances we had in the second half), and Dad Bradley followed his poor decision on attacking starters (Johnson and the creative Dempsey, who I think is better as a midfielder that pushes forward) with a poor decision on an attacking sub (Twellman), and it nearly cost us the game. We couldn't even protect the ball in the corner after a free kick with 30 seconds remaining. Sigh.
Now for the OTHER soccer game and happier times... Dynamo shellacks Chivas USA 4-0 tonight. Brad Davis gets a hat trick. Once more: Brad Davis gets a hat trick. I think that's our first hat trick since Ching's in the first Dynamo game ever -- versus Colorado last season. All 3 of tonight's goals from the run of play (1 from Mullan and 2 from Davis) were beauts.
I love it when we blow out the competition. (We had 17 shots to their 8? Really?) It was good to see the reserves get some more time, and Holden get the start. Stewart also had a good shot on goal in the opening minutes and created the third goal in the second half by working the ball down and feeding it to Ngwenya who fed it to Davis. Were there faces on the bench that you didn't recognize? There were for me. Wouldn't it have been cool for a John Michael Hayden to get his first minutes?
Okay, it's confession time: At the beginning of the game I lamented, "Oh no, Dom has Mullan as a forward."
Wife: "So?"
Armchair Coach: "He started his career as a forward, but he's a better midfielder. He can't even stay onside as a forward."
Wife: "Oh."
(Six minutes later) Armchair Coach: "Great strategy Dom! Awesome insight! Dale Dale Dale Dynamo..."
Wife: "But, you said..."
The best part about being an armchair coach is that there's no accountability when you're wrong.
[Addendum on the offside: Dynamo benefitted from a similar call when a Herculez Gomez goal was called offside at Colorado.]
Friday, May 11, 2007
Musings on this week's media
The RSL-Rapids game on Thursday was pretty uninspiring. I fell asleep in my recliner early in the second half and was pleased that I didn’t miss any more own goals.
Attendance looked pretty good at The Dick for a Thursday evening. It was better than during the freezing deluge last weekend when Dynamo Houston was in town. The stadium looks nice in the sunshine, although I'm not a big fan of the one goal line that has what looks to be a few rows of temporary bleachers rather than the wrap-around permanent seating seen behind the other goal line. That's still better than the barren concrete stage on one end of the Frisco Deep Dish, which is an abomination. The Frisco club should at least put up temporary bleachers there, or maybe put a party patio out there, kind of like at Crew Stadium. Empty sidelines and endlines are something the Dynamo Stadium should avoid.
My gripe with The Dick is pretty minor in comparison. That Colorado pitch looks pristine, even when torrents of rain are falling. A pitch of that quality can make up for a lot. We need a field like that in Dynamo Stadium. Someday; someday.
The ESPN crew had more of the same: endless prattling by Wynalda, pointless People-magazine trivia by DOB about the players, and more of the same from the sidelines by Allen Hopkins. Tommy Smyth was talked over most of the time because he would, you know, take a breath occasionally.
Frothing rant: DOB, for the love of all that is beautiful, please just call the game! Try it just one time, and if you don’t like it, you can go back to Soccer Brought To You By Entertainment Tonight. And do we really need three in the booth? Seems awfully crowded and encourages more idle talk.
How about Herculez Gomez (the diving El Pescadito-lite) having the goal called back around the 13th minute? Here's how it plays out: Colorado's Nicholas Hernandez shoots the ball at the goal while Gomez is onside. Gomez then runs past the final defender as the GK makes the save, knocking the ball back into the field of play. Gomez, past the last defender, is now in an offside position after the ball whizzes past him going the other way. The ball then deflects off a defender and goes to Gomez, who finishes the shot. The refs call the goal back due to offside. Wynalda says the goal should count because Gomez wasn't offside at the time of Hernandez's initial shot, and as the LOTG state, a player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by: (1) interfering with play or (2) interfering with an opponent or (3) gaining an advantage by being in that position. Well, when the ball was played by his teammate, he was onside; and when he was offside and collected the rebound off the defender, the ball wasn't played by "one of his team." Quod Erat Demonstrandum. Score one for Wynalda.
Ah, but Tommy Smyth was correct. FIFA's Decision 2 of Law 11 clarifies item #3, above: ... "gaining an advantage by being in that position" means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.
When the ball bounced off the defender, Gomez was offside, so the call was correct. Whew! Another game not blown by the officials! (Don't worry, it'll happen. And probably to us.)
Must agree with Wynalda's opinion about De Rosario during one of the many conversations in the ESPN booth. Tommy Smyth brought up a discussion he had with Jeff Cunningham, where Cunningham mentioned he's the most underrated (or overlooked, don't remember which) player in the league, but Wynalda respectfully disagreed saying that DDR holds that claim. True.
Later, during halftime, Wynalda mentioned DDR's explosive game versus Colorado and commended DeRo on kicking it into gear and how DDR is now getting that contract bump he wanted. Huh? Does Wynalda know something we don't? I haven't heard anything about the contract negotiations being settled. Maybe Wynalda just meant that DDR's play had made the case for a good contract a no-brainer. Can't argue with that.
I think DeRo should be among the top paid domestic players in the league, but I don't know that he warrants DP money. His play is equivalent to a DP, but it's an unfortunate truth that there is more to being a DP than on-field performance -- for starters, a DP needs to have drawing power. Dynamo Houston aren't much of a team without DDR, and DDR is one of the most dynamic players in the MLS, but Dynamo can't afford to use DP-dough on him unfortunately. Luckily for him, the cost of living is cheap down here, eh? (The Census has the Houston area with a COLI of 88.9 and San Jose at 158.1. The national average is 100.)
Finally, cheers to Glenn Davis for his Dynamo Soccer Report, which has come so far in so short a time. How do you like him stirring things up by being in the parking lot across US59 from Minute Maid Park? Someday, hopefully. Someday.
Attendance looked pretty good at The Dick for a Thursday evening. It was better than during the freezing deluge last weekend when Dynamo Houston was in town. The stadium looks nice in the sunshine, although I'm not a big fan of the one goal line that has what looks to be a few rows of temporary bleachers rather than the wrap-around permanent seating seen behind the other goal line. That's still better than the barren concrete stage on one end of the Frisco Deep Dish, which is an abomination. The Frisco club should at least put up temporary bleachers there, or maybe put a party patio out there, kind of like at Crew Stadium. Empty sidelines and endlines are something the Dynamo Stadium should avoid.
My gripe with The Dick is pretty minor in comparison. That Colorado pitch looks pristine, even when torrents of rain are falling. A pitch of that quality can make up for a lot. We need a field like that in Dynamo Stadium. Someday; someday.
The ESPN crew had more of the same: endless prattling by Wynalda, pointless People-magazine trivia by DOB about the players, and more of the same from the sidelines by Allen Hopkins. Tommy Smyth was talked over most of the time because he would, you know, take a breath occasionally.
Frothing rant: DOB, for the love of all that is beautiful, please just call the game! Try it just one time, and if you don’t like it, you can go back to Soccer Brought To You By Entertainment Tonight. And do we really need three in the booth? Seems awfully crowded and encourages more idle talk.
How about Herculez Gomez (the diving El Pescadito-lite) having the goal called back around the 13th minute? Here's how it plays out: Colorado's Nicholas Hernandez shoots the ball at the goal while Gomez is onside. Gomez then runs past the final defender as the GK makes the save, knocking the ball back into the field of play. Gomez, past the last defender, is now in an offside position after the ball whizzes past him going the other way. The ball then deflects off a defender and goes to Gomez, who finishes the shot. The refs call the goal back due to offside. Wynalda says the goal should count because Gomez wasn't offside at the time of Hernandez's initial shot, and as the LOTG state, a player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by: (1) interfering with play or (2) interfering with an opponent or (3) gaining an advantage by being in that position. Well, when the ball was played by his teammate, he was onside; and when he was offside and collected the rebound off the defender, the ball wasn't played by "one of his team." Quod Erat Demonstrandum. Score one for Wynalda.
Ah, but Tommy Smyth was correct. FIFA's Decision 2 of Law 11 clarifies item #3, above: ... "gaining an advantage by being in that position" means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.
When the ball bounced off the defender, Gomez was offside, so the call was correct. Whew! Another game not blown by the officials! (Don't worry, it'll happen. And probably to us.)
Must agree with Wynalda's opinion about De Rosario during one of the many conversations in the ESPN booth. Tommy Smyth brought up a discussion he had with Jeff Cunningham, where Cunningham mentioned he's the most underrated (or overlooked, don't remember which) player in the league, but Wynalda respectfully disagreed saying that DDR holds that claim. True.
Later, during halftime, Wynalda mentioned DDR's explosive game versus Colorado and commended DeRo on kicking it into gear and how DDR is now getting that contract bump he wanted. Huh? Does Wynalda know something we don't? I haven't heard anything about the contract negotiations being settled. Maybe Wynalda just meant that DDR's play had made the case for a good contract a no-brainer. Can't argue with that.
I think DeRo should be among the top paid domestic players in the league, but I don't know that he warrants DP money. His play is equivalent to a DP, but it's an unfortunate truth that there is more to being a DP than on-field performance -- for starters, a DP needs to have drawing power. Dynamo Houston aren't much of a team without DDR, and DDR is one of the most dynamic players in the MLS, but Dynamo can't afford to use DP-dough on him unfortunately. Luckily for him, the cost of living is cheap down here, eh? (The Census has the Houston area with a COLI of 88.9 and San Jose at 158.1. The national average is 100.)
Finally, cheers to Glenn Davis for his Dynamo Soccer Report, which has come so far in so short a time. How do you like him stirring things up by being in the parking lot across US59 from Minute Maid Park? Someday, hopefully. Someday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)