Is this argument gonna re-emerge everytime Latapy has a good game in the SPL ? I think we should get over it.
I honestly think Latapy was supposed to be our super-sub. I think that is what Beenie orignially had in mind. This is what I speculate, trying to use logic and concrete results over emotion in hindsight:
Against Sweden we went down to ten men, we were being dominated and were holding on for dear life, so a last minute change in tactics had to be employed....and it worked. We held on for the draw against the odds, without Latas, and I believe that must have caused Beenie to reconsider using similar tactics going into the second game against England
Against England, we couldn't really see our way, and got sucked into a defensive shell. With 5 minutes left to go, and the score still 0-0, I think that Beenie was getting flashbacks of the Sweden game, and decided to try and weather the storm in similar fashion. He musta thought why go and upset the pattern when it worked before, and it seemed to be working again....by the time Crouchy took a hair sample from Sancho, it was too late.
Against, Paraguay remember we had a slim chance of qualification, and this is where I think , Latas was most likely going to get the chance to play the quintessential, super sub role. Beenie probably thought that if we could hold Sweden for 90, England for 85, without Latas.....by using similar proven tactics, we should be able to contain Paraguay for at least 60-65, at which point Latas would come in and add some final punch to the attack and hopefully push into the second round.............
Sadly, in the last game we conceded one in the early minutes of the game before he came in....and we conceded one while he was in. We didn't score when he was off the field and we didn't score when he was one the field.....The truth is, the pattern of the game had switched in our favour
before Latapy come on. We were chasing the game. That is the natural pattern of a team that is chasing a game. Latapy did add some excitement with his style of football, but in terms of output, there was no
real difference. The shots we managed when he was on the field were still off target, and the majority of our plays were still being broken down before we could get a clear shot off, and there were no clear cut chances created by incisive passing. In fact the closest we came to scoring in that game was a header off a free kick in the first half. I think that was the only testing save that the Paraguay keeper had to make in the entire game. We even conceded a goal while Latapy was on the field. What Latapy did bring was a style that excited the crowd and "looked" more dangerous because of his neat football and natural flair......
To add everything up, try to put your self in Beenie's shoes - not in hindsight, but consider T&T's game situations in the heat of the moment and be honest about Latapy's real concrete contribution to the last game.......
In the end, considering
EVERYTHING the only thing that Beenie probably deprived us of was a little extra excitement....and given the battles that we were up against, I think it was fully understandable. There will never be any denying that Latapy is great, and I too would have liked to see him get more of a run but in all honesty, one man was not enough to change our WC successes this Summer.....so in my opinion, we could give the armchair coaching and speculation a rest. (for the entire SPL season
)
Poll