Topics

1

Football / Robert Primus Thread

« on: September 28, 2009, 03:33:20 PM »

First of all I would like to thank our Young Socawarriors for their valiant attempt in today's game; good showing fellas!!
 
After watching the last two games, there is one player that really stands out to me. Not taking anything away from the rest of our young warriors, but I think Robert Primus has done exceptionally well in his role for the team. He is a big physical centre back that has alot going for him. This guy reads the game well, covers alot of ground (in a short time), is dominant in the air, tackles the ball well and is a decent passer of the ball from the back. I think given the right environment, this guy could truly become a fixture in our senior team and even go on to play in one of the world's top leagues.

WHAT IS YOUR ASSESSMENT OF THIS PLAYER?

2

Football / U 20 Evaluation

« on: September 24, 2009, 10:01:54 PM »

1. Samuel - 5- Great reflexes but his decision making seems to be very poor. On many occasions he was caught in no man's land and hand to rely on his athletism to pull him out of the situation.

2. Thompson -8- Excellent game. Clearly he showed that he was a cut above the rest. His tactical awareness, dedication to defensive duties, ability to get forward in attack, dribbling ability and crossing ability makes him a real asset to the team.

3. Primus -7- He covered alot of ground, marshaled our back four and often put in the last ditch tackle and when needed. Our rock in defence. (definitely one for the future).

4. Cyrus -5- A bit shaky in the early going, but he came into his own as the game progressed. Needs to be a bit more dominant in that centre half position.

5. Bentick -5- Decent tackler but was often found out of position, forcing him to scramble across. Needs to improve on his service to the front runners.

Overall analysis of the defensive shell -5- improved organization and better communication between the back four and the goalkeeper is warranteed.

Paul -5- Showed good fight off the ball, but was ineffective on the ball.. needs to stamp his authority on the game as the captain, and lead his team.

Rochford-6- played his role as the holding mid to good effect. Was intrumental in breaking up some of the Egyptian attacks, and seldom gave the ball away when in possession.

Da Sivla -4- Showed fight off the ball, but was poor in possession. Guilty of tunring the ball over to the Egyptians in dangerous parts of the field.

Adams -4- ineffective down the left flank. produced nothing offensively and little cover defensively. Seems out of sort in his new role on the team.

Hyland -5- Ineffective with his back to goal. He needs to play in his more familiar central midfield role. (settled the team down when he went there in the 2nd period) (N.B. -: Still needs Rochford to cover him in the midfield.)

Gay -4- Toally out of the game. In fairness to him, the quality of service into him wass poor but he still needs to be more of a threat when on the ball.

Clarence -5- Despite being guilty of blundering a great scoring opportunity he had a decent game. Showed good touches and made powerful runs in the heart of the Egyptian defence.

Molino -5- Illustrated confidence and good touches on the ball. (Would like to see more of him)

Joseph - - (limited time)

Coaching Staff -5- Decent use of bench.

All in All, our young Socawarriors gave good account of themselves leaving us fans to be opptimistic about the future.

Team I would like to see line up for our next match.
--------------Samuel---------------
Thompsosn----Primus----Cyrus/ Bateau----Bentick/Adams
------Paul---Rochford---Adams/Molino------
-------------Hyland------------
-----Clarence -------Gay-----
 

Good luck Socwarriors!!

3

Football / CHANGES THAT MUST BE MADE

« on: September 14, 2008, 07:46:20 PM »

Since JW refuses to fire PACHO, here are some changes I think must be rectified for us to advance to the Hex

(1.) Promote a winning mentality
Them fellas looked like they didnt believe they could get a result against the US. Imagine 2 years ago we played against two powerhouses in the WC; England and Sweeden and we went in there with no fear in the world. We approached the game with the right mentality. (big up to Leo for instilling that belief to the players). How can we come up against the US, our biggest rival I would say, and give them all that respect? We sat back and gave them the world of room to play; allowing them to make a mockery of our Warriors. That is totally unacceptable.

(2.) Tactical changes
I dont know bout allyuh eh but everytime I look at that game it was evident that we gave them too much space to ping the ball around. Our defensive mids sat right infront of our back four allowing the Americans time and space to pick and choose their passes. At this level the middle of the field is the most crowded part of the field; time and space supposed to be hard to come by. Why the hell were the Americans allowed this leisure? Our defensive mids need to be more intelligent and assertive in the middle of the park... Dont get me wrong, Telesford and Leon did work hard to cover ground but they didnt do it with any intention. It was evident with their last ditch tackles that the Americans skipped around. They need to be aware of the passing lanes so as to deny entry passes to the US forwards and also they need to try to force/ drect play into an area where we have a higher possiblilty to win the ball.
Another tactical fault I have noticed is that our wing backs are ushering attackers inside rather than to the line. I dont know if this is what the coach requires of them but if so God help us. We all know that wing backs or any defender thereof should send the attacker to the line because the line is deemed as another defender on the field; it limits the space on the field. I mean this is learnt at the early stages of ball. I cannot understand the logic of allowing an attacker to cut inside where there is more space to play; space that can lead to a decisice pass or a cracking shot. Rectify this fast Pacho

(3.) Use of Subsitutes
For God's sake we were down 3-0 in the 57th minute and we only utilised one sub. What was the logic behind this? How can you as a coach/tactician not make changes to a game that wasnt by any means going our way? I mean we had attacking threats in the form of Jason Scotland and Andre Touisant on the bench. Was Maturana intimidated by his US counterpart Bob Bradley? It seemed so to me. His inability to try something to change the swing of the game was the most depressing factor for me. As the leader of the team it seemed that he gave up before the game was started.

All this being being said, I hope Pacho, his coaching staff and our beloved Socawarriors get it right in the next few weeks because the faith of a country lies behind their performances. GO WARRIORS.

4

Football / PLAYER/ COACH EVALUATION

« on: September 11, 2008, 09:44:25 AM »

This is my analysis of the poor showing by our Nash Team.
I didnt have the luxury to go up to Chicago to view the game in person but thank God for ESPN2. After the national anthems of both countries were sounded, the game started with our warriors lining up in their familiar 4-5-1 formation---

                             Marvin

Cyd          Makan         Thomas        A. Edwards
     
                 Leon         Tesleford

C. Edwards                                     Daniel
                          Theobald

                           Glenn

Ironically it could be argued that the US lined up in a similar formation with Donovan playing a withdrawn forward role behind Ching, and being covered by Bradley and Krjiestan or what ever the man name is in midfiled. One would think that we would have been able to match them in every position on the field because of the similarity in the line up but as the game wore on it was evident that this wasnt the case. Our warriors desperately lacked ORGANIZATION, LEADERSHIP and that overall BITE on the night. For the most part of the game we ran around like headless chickens. We were totally outclased by a US team that I definitely dont think is more talented than us by any means.

Marvin --- Did aight for what was infront of him. He was constantly called into action...Needs to more vocal to direct his backline.. Him and our defense have to learn to deal with FACKING free kicks.. For God's sake 4 in 3 games that is unacceptable at this level...6

CYD---- POOR, POOR, POOR.. As a captain and leader on the field he was one of the weak links on the night. He had like 3 good recoveries in the game but was mute on the field when our team was sinking.. Need to learn to control and pass.. Recommend St Clair Coaching School....4

MAKAN----Still green and it showed he lost the ball in our box and we almost got bore.. One to  keep UNDER THE WINGS of DENNIS 'TALLEST' LAWRENCE...5

THOMAS--- Hmmmm.. Look lethargic in that back line.. Too too slow.. His awareness was poor.. He kept getting screened out the play when we faced those incoming freekicks. This shouldnt be because he's supposed to be one of our aerial rocks in the back.. Plus ah frigging through pass from 20 yds passed between his legs for the Demsey goal.. jah man...5

A. EDWARDS--- As Makan, made amateur mistakes.. He got beaten for pace a few times but recovered well on a few.. One to keep for sure..Understudy to AVERY.. 5

C. EDWARDS--- Shadow of his ole self.. The man just aint the same Carlos we know.. He not running at players like he used to.. Showed fight but wasnt effective going forward.. 5

LEON--- Did alright in the holding mid position but I think they sat in too much giving the US mids too much time on the ball.. Played well on the ball but seldom turned opting to go back all the time...6

TELESFORD--- HMMMMM... This man is not a MIDFIELDER ppl.. He just doesnt have the awareness nor touch to play there.. The man would run whole day and do the dirty work eh but on the ball he was useless.. BACK PASS after BACK PASS when he had roomm to turn and face the field.. Turnover the ball on a couple of occasions.. And he have to cut out that last ditch sliding tackle bc most times he aint touching man or ball..lol.. 5
 
K. DANIEL--- Best player for us by far on the day.. His confidence was high.. He ran at the US players, held the ball well and even put in a few crunching tackles.. Ask Demsey...lol.. The man looked the part of a true baller... Keep up the good work...7

THEOBALD--- LAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWD... I dont kno where to start..Thought he would have been a leader on the field but as usual he faded.. The man proving to us game in and game out that he not ready for this thing..As our ATTACKING MID, is bad pass after bad pass, he not turning and facing defenders and he crumbling under pressure.. Come nah man bleeder we know yuh better than that.. Get it together fast brudda...4

GLENN--- Hmmm..Touched the ball once in the first half. (Not his fault; just cant play a lone striker role). Caused problems for the US defense everytime he picked up the ball and began running at them... 6

WOLFE--- (On for Bleeder).. Did aight; brought some intensity to the game.. He actually found the back on the net but it was ruled offside. 6

PACHO--- TUTUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU.. I cant understand how your team could be loosing 3-0 and you just sitting on the bench picking yuh nose..steupps.. The man aint even get up and try to motivate his players; then again he cyah really speak ENGLISH..  Imagine No communication from the bench at all.. No adjustments made to conjure the US style of play.. and 1 sub...steuppps..This man is ah joke.. he would get a 2 rating for tutu

OVERALL

NO ORGANIZATION, NO LEADERSHIP, POOR MENTALITY

Pacho and Cornmeal have some explaining to do.
 --The Omission of Tallest in the backline
 -- The use of 1 FACKING sub when we were down 3-0.. Great Tacticians..steups
 -- The lack of Leadership from the sideline.. Pacho just sat there like a puppy with his tail between his leg
     STEUPPPPPPS
 -- It body language and mentaliy of the players and staff alike showed that we didnt come here to win.

WHERE ARE WE GOING FROM HERE?

COME ON WARRIORS.. we have 3 games to make this thing right.