Thread for the T&T vs Guatemala Game (2-Sept-2016)

[palos]

Ozone beating Rangers (or vice versa) is irrelevant.

I agree.  Just like Cornell Glen being in the national team is moot.  Neither of us pick the team, nor have any influence over who is or isn't selected.   

Well...I shouldn't speak for you bro...I just know bout me 

[asylumseeker]

Ozone beating Rangers (or vice versa) is irrelevant.

I agree.  Just like Cornell Glen being in the national team is moot.  Neither of us pick the team, nor have any influence over who is or isn't selected.   

Well...I shouldn't speak for you bro...I just know bout me 

Whappen, Palos? Yuh geh unfriended? 

We dealing with an open secret. The recognizable, underlying, undeniable reality is that we lack two items.

1. A purist finisher consistently in advanced areas of the pitch.

2. A purist finisher consistently on the field for the bulk of 90'.

Well ...

3. Perhaps, a purist finisher. Period. Granted, some nuances have been manifest.And that's NO disrespect to anyone because ALL GOALS count equally.

HOWEVER, what do you think the solution is?

Agree? Disagree?

Obviously from this comment you should tell I mention Glen to stir discussion ("moot"), not as the solution per se or as an all-encompassing option.

Guatemala has an entirely different tactical posture than T&T ... that on good days capitalized on Ruiz being opportunistic and a deft, intelligent reader of tight and potentially available/available space (separate things). If he were (1) less dynamic and (2) less prolific, he would be watching Dallas on TV rather than signing with them.

I ask: Locate a pure finisher or "make" or reinvent something close to one combining through the central channel?

Agree? Disagree?

[palos]

Whappen, Palos? Yuh geh unfriended? 

Nice 

Our friendship has never, is not, and will never be contingent on matters pertaining to any football team.  I've never had or have zero desire to have any influence on anything pertaining to the football bro.

We dealing with an open secret. The recognizable, underlying, undeniable reality is that we lack two items.

1. A purist finisher consistently in advanced areas of the pitch.

2. A purist finisher consistently on the field for the bulk of 90'.

Well ...

3. Perhaps, a purist finisher. Period. Granted, some nuances have been manifest.And that's NO disrespect to anyone because ALL GOALS count equally.

HOWEVER, what do you think the solution is?

Agree? Disagree?

Obviously from this comment you should tell I mention Glen to stir discussion ("moot"), not as the solution per se or as an all-encompassing option.

Guatemala has an entirely different tactical posture than T&T ... that on good days capitalized on Ruiz being opportunistic and a deft, intelligent reader of tight and potentially available/available space (separate things). If he were (1) less dynamic and (2) less prolific, he would be watching Dallas on TV rather than signing with them.

I ask: Locate a pure finisher or "make" or reinvent something close to one combining through the central channel?

Agree? Disagree?

If you put it that way, I would have to disagree

I don't think we have a problem in the goal scoring department.  Had we demonstrated an inability to score goals, then the argument for a "pure finisher" would have more weight IMO

We have a problem defending. 

In 18 matches from the last Gold Cup to now....we've scored 33 goals and conceded 33 goals.

1.8 goals scored per game.  Goalscoring not the issue bruh

[Deeks]

We have a problem defending.

While that may be true, our attacking has left much to be desired lately. From mid-field to forward, our play has become unimaginative since that Haiti game. This has  resulted in constant pressure on our defence. I still feel that Hart is not totally satisfied with our defensive play. But our mid-fielders are below par. They out of sync, injured, etc, etc. We have to fixed that fast.

[palos]

We have a problem defending.

While that may be true, our attacking has left much to be desired lately. From mid-field to forward, our play has become unimaginative since that Haiti game. This has  resulted in constant pressure on our defence. I still feel that Hart is not totally satisfied with our defensive play. But our mid-fielders are below par. They out of sync, injured, etc, etc. We have to fixed that fast.

We've played 3 WCQ matches & 4 friendlies since that Haiti match.  We scored 6 goals in the 4 friendly matches.  We scored 8 goals in the 3 WCQ matches.

14 goals in 7 games.  Against a wide variety of opposition....from Grenada to China.  If our mid field to forward play that bad and we still scoring 2 goals per game....we could potentially rival Barcelona.

[asylumseeker]

Well, Palos, yuh know what they say about stats: they are subject to selective interpretation. (Aside from that famous line regarding lies, damn lies and statistics).

Having submitted that, let me ask a seemingly contradictory stats-based question to bolster my position:

What is our ratio of total chances on goal (goal scoring opportunities) to chances converted into goals? I would be cautious about dismissing goalscoring as a concern. One has to distinguish between the quantum of goals scored and when/if they are scored.

While all goals count equally (as emphasized above), not all goals matter equally. For instance, Trevin Caesar's goals versus SVG at the HCS can't be said to "matter equally" vis-a-vis Levi Garcia's first or second goal versus SVG in SVG.

Football is a cumulation of critical moments each constituting favorable or unfavorable outcomes based on decisive or indecisive actions that yield advantage or disadvantage. Goals matter most whether scored or conceded?

Even if 1.8 gpg, that stat sweeps several pertinent factors/variables under the carpet.

[palos]

What is our ratio of total chances on goal (goal scoring opportunities) to chances converted into goals? I would be cautious about dismissing goalscoring as a concern. One has to distinguish between the quantum of goals scored and when/if they are scored.

Well......if we missing more chances than we score...that would tend to debunk Deeks' statement that our attacking play leaves a lot to be desired and our midfield to forward play lacks imagination.  Unless midfield supplying the forwards with endless route 1 balls and the forwards contrive to miss the vast majority.

While all goals count equally (as emphasized above), not all goals matter equally. For instance, Trevin Caesar's goals versus SVG at the HCS can't be said to "matter equally" vis-a-vis Levi Garcia's first or second goal versus SVG in SVG.

No argument from me.  Joevin Jones' goals against Guatemala virtually worth GOLD then

Football is a cumulation of critical moments each constituting favorable or unfavorable outcomes based on decisive or indecisive actions that yield advantage or disadvantage. Goals matter most whether scored or conceded?

Even if 1.8 gpg, that stat sweeps several pertinent factors/variables under the carpet.

I don't agree that it sweeps anything under the carpet.  Our deficiencies are clear.  Improvements can be made in EVERY area.  I just don't agree that goalscoring is a priority for this team.  It's probably the last thing to "fix" IMO

[asylumseeker]

What is our ratio of total chances on goal (goal scoring opportunities) to chances converted into goals? I would be cautious about dismissing goalscoring as a concern. One has to distinguish between the quantum of goals scored and when/if they are scored.

Well......if we missing more chances than we score...that would tend to debunk Deeks' statement that our attacking play leaves a lot to be desired and our midfield to forward play lacks imagination. Unless midfield supplying the forwards with endless route 1 balls and the forwards contrive to miss the vast majority.

While all goals count equally (as emphasized above), not all goals matter equally. For instance, Trevin Caesar's goals versus SVG at the HCS can't be said to "matter equally" vis-a-vis Levi Garcia's first or second goal versus SVG in SVG.

No argument from me.  Joevin Jones' goals against Guatemala virtually worth GOLD then

Football is a cumulation of critical moments each constituting favorable or unfavorable outcomes based on decisive or indecisive actions that yield advantage or disadvantage. Goals matter most whether scored or conceded?

Even if 1.8 gpg, that stat sweeps several pertinent factors/variables under the carpet.

I don't agree that it sweeps anything under the carpet.  Our deficiencies are clear.  Improvements can be made in EVERY area.  I just don't agree that goalscoring is a priority for this team.  It's probably the last thing to "fix" IMO

Leh me be clear, our defensive frailties are a priority. BUT, recall, my comments did not start being based on priority. It's impossible to be blind to the issues on transition etc.

The comment stemmed from the discussion on finishing ... as such, it is hand-in-glove regarding chances on goal v. conversion. At this level one can't mask technical deficiencies.

(And as I post this, someone calls into 95 echoing this).

Also to be considered is how chances on goals are generated. Deeks is dealing with ball circulation. Would not dismiss that.

But, bottom line ... attacking ... defending ... behavior on transition ... can't and should NOT be de-linked. Joint, interrelated priorities with joint, interrelated consequences.

[palos]

But, bottom line ... attacking ... defending ... behavior on transition ... can't and should NOT be de-linked. Joint, interrelated priorities with joint, interrelated consequences.

I never suggested they should.

However, this whole debate started because of the suggestion to include Cornell Glen.  In the light of all the positions on the field......another striker FOR ME is the least of our needs.

I absolutely concur that we should work on all the areas from back to front WITH WHAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE given the time frame involved. 

If others come on board....great.  I don't necessarily see Cornell Glen as one of those and on that, we can agree to disagree.

Respeck 

[asylumseeker]

But, bottom line ... attacking ... defending ... behavior on transition ... can't and should NOT be de-linked. Joint, interrelated priorities with joint, interrelated consequences.

I never suggested they should.

However, this whole debate started because of the suggestion to include Cornell Glen.  In the light of all the positions on the field......another striker FOR ME is the least of our needs.

I absolutely concur that we should work on all the areas from back to front WITH WHAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE given the time frame involved. 

If others come on board....great.  I don't necessarily see Cornell Glen as one of those and on that, we can agree to disagree.

Respeck 

Our average squad age dropped with a few swift selection changes. When I said "because iz Bleeder", that wasn't disrespect to Bleeder ... it was a nod to the reality that we have a younger player with the range and dimension that rendered Bleeder replaceable.

However, the challenge is on for young players "up top" looking for NT work. Ah doh see a clear-cut replacement from the previous cycle.

Not so much abstractly an issue of whether "another striker". We could call several names of players picked in the past three years for a look as options/supplementals in that position.

The issue is have we nailed it yet? My view: We can't have. I would say we have it 60% nailed.  Clinical finisher needed. We have players in the mix in the position (or who [say they] could play there) who possess other solid qualities. Two players come to mind. One would need a monumental temperament adjustment. The other would reportedly would need a lobotomy.

However, somebody needs to show up. It likely won't be Cornell especially with a view to the medium and long-term, but somebody needs to show up. From somewhere. clinical finisher needed.

We need someone to complement/supplement what we have. Not replace what we have. Dahis not my contention.

Looking at where our 4th round goals (and service on those goals) came from ... there is an opportunity for someone to rise to the challenge. Dahis all ah saying.

 

[palos]

Clinical finisher needed. We have players in the mix in the position (or who [say they] could play there) who possess other solid qualities. Two players come to mind. One would need a monumental temperament adjustment. The other would reportedly would need a lobotomy.

Call names nah man 

[Deeks]

I like the discussion. my worries was in the Guatemala game. Ruiz will take the ball right outside the Guat. area(it don't matter which side) and he would work triangle passes with other Guat. players right up to our area. They look more Barsa-esque when they were playing that way. Yes we had some counter and did indeed scored, but Guatemala was always more in command of the game. If was not for that "shithong" in goal we would gotten about 4. Somehow I see that game differently from some in the forum. I was worried, and I am still worried about the future. Our mids and forwards are not in command and control. I did not see the US game, but the clips that I saw were frightening.