|
Post by sheajane80 on Oct 9, 2011 12:34:46 GMT 8
^ so you're saying england's style is cross strike and pray lang?
ganito lang yan, macca had to use something that would fit the current players that he had.
if macca was given the current team now he won't park the bus much often anymore.
if weiss was given the previous team that macca had, he'd still use the system he's using now. using an attacking system when having a weak roster, siguradong tambak tayo sa mga nakalaban nila dati instead of winning or drawing.
i'm not saying who's better, i can only see which one adapted to the team's ability.
|
|
|
Post by sheajane80 on Oct 9, 2011 12:43:30 GMT 8
www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=65dde139f57c22070285622390a415c8&t=327376&page=130may punto siya, one coach was clear and concise with his plan of adjusting as shown with his answer. the other one is just giving excuses. pelefan's post:Post conference quotes by Raddy, Singapore's coach: "It is always difficult when you try to make some changes. In the first half, our attacks were cut from midfield and we couldn't keep possession in the opponent's half. And when you can't do that, you cannot create chances, we then changed the positions of a few players during the break, and the team looked a lot better." He replied when asked what he said to his players who were different in the second half. This is an example of how a coach with a few adjustments can change the complexion of the game. A coach with a plan. This is Coach Weiss'es quotes: "They were tired and jet-lagged but they played well despite that fact. We were compact in the first half and played quite ok." Speaking on the first goal his team conceded, "I warned my players of Singapore's set pieces as they have a few variations and we were punished by Singapore's No.3 Shaiful Esah. But we had a couple of chances in the second half but it was not enough." This is an example of a coach making excuses. A coach without a plan. As for fatigue being a factor, I thought our players played their hearts out, going all out to get an equalizer or consolation goal all the way to the end. I don't think it played a part in the game as I thought prematch. A more valid excuse is the lack of cohesion within the team, as a few passes were found wanting. Gaboo's post:My match experience: Finally got in 20 minutes after kick-off (the queue was incredibly long and organisation quite poor). As expected at least 70% Filipinos (most of them must have missed big parts of the first half as well for the same reason as myself). Philippines played better and at least from my feel (haven't seen the match statistics yet) Philippines had more possession. The reasons why they lost the game nonetheless in my opinion are: - lack of efficiency compared to Singapore (some shots at the goal were really bad). - play/routes not really memorized yet (which is not surprising since the players only came together just before the game) - Schroeck missing (he's simply a notch better than most players in SEA) - Chieffy injured out - Phil Younghusband playing: sorry, but in my opinion this guy just can't make it! He can't receive the ball properly, he stumbles, even worse fumbles, he is not efficient and the worst thing...unwilling to make an effort. You hardly ever see him running and if the ball doesn't go directly at him, he refuses to chase after it. One good thing about him...at least he's not selfish Eventually it comes down to the lack of efficiency. Anyway, the support was good throughout the game and the players received standing ovations after the game.
|
|
|
Post by azkalrules on Oct 9, 2011 14:09:49 GMT 8
^ so you're saying england's style is cross strike and pray lang? ganito lang yan, macca had to use something that would fit the current players that he had. if macca was given the current team now he won't park the bus much often anymore. if weiss was given the previous team that macca had, he'd still use the system he's using now. using an attacking system when having a weak roster, siguradong tambak tayo sa mga nakalaban nila dati instead of winning or drawing. i'm not saying who's better, i can only see which one adapted to the team's ability. Hi sheajane ... Im not saying that Weiss is good and Macca is bad. Actually Im a member of a FB page that is against replacing Macca. Its not Weiss or Macca's fault actually. Our coaches did not have the luxury of changing strategy as per opponent because of our setup of having a training team but then when our professionals come ... most of those regular practicing players sits on the bench. hehehehe .... Let us not expect to many wins with this set up. PH is years behind But I BELIEVE because I love football. This is for the future generation. We are on infancy stage of trying to solidify our national team. We dont even have a style of play yet. The German Federation is paying for it. As for the English game, indeed that's their brand of play ... playing from the wings and have crosses. See the azkals BEFORE are deadly from corners and deadball situations. I think if Macca had the chance to have better players his game plan will start from the wings. You seldom see english teams doing overlap. Here in Brazil they call it "cross and PRAY" technique .... maybe you did not get me .... its a joke around here kung baga kuentong barberia. Hope you understand that its the football culture, the kind of play that I think Dan and Weiss is molding now. Its not about winning ... its how are they going to play the game. Now you can see our midfield is getting better. Not only on these all star team we see on tv but on the team that practices together. I watched their practice game against Negros selection during my vacation and the Azkals have their patterns nowadays. They have good instincts where the ball should move .... not like before when its a race to the finishline kind ..... Midfield was the Azkals weakness in Suzuki Cup last year. The strong 11 we have are strong individually thus have great promise. But they have not played together yet as a crew so cohesion is a big problem. Give this crew some more Game Time against quality teams like Singapore and Kuwait and we will have our brand of play .... more friendlies next year with this strong 11 and I think we have a chance for Suzuki Cup 2012. My dream is seeing a JamesY, Schrock, Lucena, Mulders at midfield ... with El Toro and Chieffy or Phil upfront. I think Phil's a little off lately .... Jonsson, Ott, Borromeo, Cagara at back with Niel on keep is hard to pierce through. Gier a bit slow now but still an inspiration ...
|
|
|
Post by cypher210 on Oct 9, 2011 15:27:04 GMT 8
i dont understand why people are bagging on weiss. people are so impatient. they expect drastic change of quality after weiss took over. this team was formed not too long ago with more euro-based players. but these players never had time to train together due to club commitments or whatever gigs they have. chemistry really matters, and it was obvious thats something we are lacking. each player has the skills but without chemistry we're gonna have a hard time winning against tougher opponents. it takes time to develop chemistry within the team, so we cant use weiss as a scapegoat cuz he didnt have a plan, without this cohesiveness he talks about, his plans wont work.
its annoying how people expect the azkals to become contenders overnight. it will take awhile but we'll get there.
|
|
|
Post by slayermoonlight on Oct 9, 2011 16:26:14 GMT 8
I'm also equally annoyed on people who cannot appreciate it when people "agree to disagree". We are all not so immature and dumb to expect everything will change overnight. That's the path to any aspiration in life, not just in sports. Yet some get easily damn pissed of when people points out and scrutinize what is legitimately needs to be pointed out and scrutinized. Again, we are all stakeholders of the future of Filipino Football future. It's not only the sole responsibility of Mr. Palami and PFF. It should be all of us.
Soem may find it absurd and pointless for this thread (which is about Azkal vs Singapore match) because it is already done. Some may even treat the continuining discussion here as "crying over spilled milk". View it as "spilled milk" as you like. But if possible if you all you have to say are general statements such as "it will take time for our boys to develop" or such as "we are at least improving and gaining respect" are something like those then I think you might as well save your word and just post on the Azkal vs. Nepal thread because what keep this very thread much alive is about analysing what flaws there are in our part and needs to be address in order to improve and strengthen our NT team. In short, LESSONS LEARNED, that's it. No bleeding heart sentiment, no accusation of someone being a racist. No complaining that people X are point fingers at this or that while people Y prefers that we should just shut the up. Well at least it supposed to be that way but unfortunately..... (*sighing, shrugging my shoulders and shaking my head kasi malamang mamasamain na naman ng mga iba dito ang mga sinasabi ko. mamemersonal na naman ang iba jan at mang-ii SMite na naman ang iba jan*)
I tried to be as diplomatic and as friendly here pero kung ganyan nalang din edi sige.... Kung wala kang ma-i cocontribute na worth it pag-usapan na related sa thread na ito edi wag kayong magpost. Dun nlng kayo mag post sa ibang thread tutal di nyo kaya sikmurain kamo ang mga criticism at debates dito kasi nga naman ang impression agad sa inyo eh "nagsisisishan" or "sinisisi ang Coach" or "sinisisi ang player". Kung ayaw nyo makarinig ng mga criticism on Weiss' ability to coach (which is by the way are legitimate naman and with basis) edi wag na kayong magpost dito pwede nyo naman i ignore. same goes with those na nagfefeeling football manager expert kamo kung mang-aasar lang kayo ng mga tao dito eh wag na rin sana kayo mag post kasi na na-tetempt ang ibang posters na magpost din immaturely kasi nga immature din ang post nyo. Nadadamay tuloy yung mga matitino't mature na post ng iba posters dito na pilit na nagpapa diplomatic at pilit na nag-aadhere sa forum rules and regulation and last but not the least eh nagpopost ng ayon sa title ng thread which is supposed to be:
- elaborate discussion on where we excelled during the Singapore match (i.e. as just shared by one poster here which he read from a SG football site, they observed we are actual getting more possession and shots comapred to them. We were controlling the ball and the field most of the time according to SG forums)
- elaborate discussion on where we sucked during the Singapore match (again from the same SG forum shared by a poster awhile ago: very poor player rotation, lack of total gameplan, mistakes in play bcecause of lack of cohesion which is understandable because di nga naman sila nakapag practice, inefficient strikers, etc.)
- discussion on what are the immediate factors that made us suck (i.e. jetlag, no time for them to practice, LTC campaign wear-and-tear, etc.)
- perrenial problem that still needs to be addressed (i.e. coach's ability to utilize his player in optimal position, coach's ability to trust his substitute, coach's ability to assess which player should be replaced in the lineup and which player should be added instead. etc.)
Sana wag tayong magpaka pusong mamon sa mga criticism dito. These are discussed here not to let hte team down but to actual to make them a better, matured team. How we react here inthe forum is alos a reflection of who we are in real life. Kung di natin kayang mabasa ang mga negative comments dito, then what more in real life? Fiven if your were politely scrutinize for you deficiency which you know is nagkamali ka nga, dadamdamin mo ba? Do you really perefer to hear the things you WANT to hear? Or you value to hear things you NEED to hear?
At any rate, this thread should be discussing more on the lesson learned, the positive things that were realized, and mistakes and deficiencies that were revealed during the Singapore match. And this is about the Azkals and the Coach. Whether you want to leave the thread or post in this forum, fight with someone when you see him personally, getting fired in your job because of your tactless tongue, lambast the so-called "pundit" or "nega's", name call others (you can include me if you want to i dont care) me as "Nag-mamagaling" etc. etc. , me getting -999999999999 karma, or you hating me till Kingdom Come cause i stepped on your frakking rotting ego pride chicken, then wala naman akong mawa kayo bahala na kayo. As long makakarating sa Azkals at sa PFF ang mga legitimate yet constructive criticism na in-address ng mga taong nag observe ng laban between Azkals and SG at maukolan kahit konti attention and solution na ayusin ang mga gusot (at hindi puro palusot). Then I'll be one happy panda este puppy.
|
|
|
Post by narko on Oct 9, 2011 19:37:19 GMT 8
Okay then, let's keep the discussion going. As we all know, you let 5 guys watch a football match and they will view the game in 5 different ways. These are just my views and opinions, not meant to refute or challenge other opinions (we're all entitled to them) but I'd like to throw these out there for people to chew on.
Coach Weiss didn't adjust effectively. Here's my take on that. The SG coach has the advantage of working with his team for a long time, he has all the pieces of his puzzle together. He knows the combinations that will work and he's had the time to develop patterns that the team could readily resort to should there be a need for adjustment during the game. Coach Weiss doesn't have the same luxury as the SG coach, he is still figuring out his optimum formation and is still in the process of putting the pieces of his puzzle together. How many different line-ups has the coach had to deal with? Coach Weiss has to keep improvising depending on player availability.
SG is the better team, yet we did pretty well to contain them and came close to scoring as well. So who needed to adjust by the half time break? Definitely not us, I thought we were doing quite well and matching SG. It was SG that needed to adjust there was no need for our coach to do so, we just needed to keep it up and look for that goal. Note also that midway through the 1st half Angel got injured and Ian was sent in. That already affected our offensive capability yet we were doing quite well until the first goal by SG.
First goal by SG via set piece (we have a particular weakness in this area) c/o a fluke deflection. A goal behind, how does the coach adjust? Depends, are we looking to win, draw and keep the scoreline at 1-0? If we were looking to get a goal to draw and go on for the win, what should our coach have done? Change players? Our best line-up was on the pitch already and doing fairly well, even pressuring the SG defense and getting shots off. If the coach wanted to win or draw, what changes could he have made that would have changed the match?
Do you just sub for the sake of subbing and making a change and hope for the best? Or you make a sub that creates an impact in the game? Sub in so you have fresh legs? What if those fresh legs don't click with the team because he's not in the position he's used to playing? You will have fresh legs running around the pitch but not doing anything effective, what good will those fresh legs do? If you're looking to shore up your defense, then yes having fresh legs will help, but we needed to score goals not defend and protect the scoreline. Any sub that needed to be made needed to make a significant impact on our offensive capability.
I think a number here have conveniently overlooked how Coach made subs against Hong Kong and Macau that made a positive impact in the game. Gener out and Carli to RB and Angel dropping to holding mid, we almost won that match against HK if not for a set piece debacle again. Against Macau, coach put in Chieffy who took the game by the scruff of its neck and won it for us. You make a sub because it will change the game. Against SG, who could Coach have put in there at 1-0 that would have changed the match like Chieffy did against Macau? Those currently on the pitch seemed to be doing a pretty good job trying to get a goal.
As it happens when you're chasing the match, gaps are left at the back and the formation gets stretched a bit as players commit forward. No surprise that the experienced SG team took advantage of this and got a second goal. You are 2 goals down, with the subs at your disposal, how do you change the match? You want to get a goal back, who's your sub, who's the offensive player who can come in and create chances and ignite a spark in the team? Coach did take out a defender and sent Misagh in late on.
Should coach have tweaked the line up? Changed the formation? The team was playing both long ball and building up the offense from the back. They were also using the wings and taking advantage of late runners to take shots from just outside the box when the penalty area was congested. There was a bit variation in the offensive game and the Azkals did trouble the SG defense, so how else could they have improved on that other making their shots count (which has nothing to do with the coach but with individual players already)?
So let's take a step back and go through it again. We lost so we think the coach should have done something to change the game. Question, what should he have done? What I saw was an Azkals team giving a much superior side plenty of trouble and coming close on a few occasions. Up to the end the Azkals were gunning for the SG goal hoping to score one. Sometimes, you need to change things during the match, other times, you don't mess with what's working. We had 12 shots, none went in but it was one of the best performances I've seen the Azkals play despite the loss. We controlled the midfield despite having 2 players not playing their regular position (Jonsson, Lucena) and a debutant (Cagara). The midfield used to be our weakness, particularly our defensive and offensive transitions. I saw that aspect was much improved in the SG match, considering the quality of the opposition.
So I will just have to disagree regarding what the coach could have done in that game. The SG coach came into that game with the advantage of having a settled team and system in place, experienced players and a deep bench. Our coach had no such luxury but I think he and our team gave a good account of themselves.
However, as with every loss, there are always lessons to be learned and I am sure the coaching staff and the players have taken note of those. No need to spell them out here as other posters have pointed them out, need to work more on set plays, corners, shooting, etc.
I'm willing to give Coach time to work with the Azkals.
Okay, my last post and this one have been quite lengthy ones, I hope it hasn't gotten to be annoying to you guys out there. Sige, I'll head on to the Nepal thread already, hehe.
|
|
|
Post by tombucho on Oct 9, 2011 19:46:06 GMT 8
Haayyyyyyyy...finally someone got it right..1 million percent agree with this post..how i wish fans here would have some knowledge before pointing the finger to the coach...just so many dumb people this forum... yeah we pinoys can be biased in defense for weiss kasi he's the coach of our national football team. so much so that we neglect the fact that the reasons they or we give in defending weiss like lack of cohesion was also present during macca's days. yet despite that plus having a weaker than what weiss has now, macca managed to win against strong opponents while weiss cannot. in the past i have been defending weiss not because i have seen what he can do but because one poster just had to resort to pulling one in order to raise another. napagod na siguro siya sa paulit-ulit niyang sinasabi na ganun nga. and to label posters here as dumb just shows who dumb person is. just because some people don't agree with many doesn't mean he's dumb. now, i just can't defend the guy anymore. he's had better players at his disposal, lack of cohesion couldn't be used as an excuse cos that was also present in macca's day, side by side comparisons shows the results speaks for itself. i'd take a singaporean's non-biased view with regards to his comments regarding our need to have a better top quality coach over any pinoy's biased view. his mind is clear from emotions as he is free from attachments because he isn't pinoy, thus he can think clearly. mind you, pack that singaporean for his racist views.on that one, i clearly don't agree with him. sheajeane, i think you are one classic example of a dumb fan...singapore is ranked 130+ ...azkals is 160+..just because cagara and those other fil-euros played in singapore..one of the few if not the first time..doesnt mean they are just going to blow by singapore who happens to have been playing for a long time already...Singapore is ranked higher simply because they are much better than the azkals..you keep on pointing to the coach much like the other dumb people here when the fact is the azkals still has a loooooooooooooooong way to go...who are we kidding here? ganun na ba talaga kagaling ang tingin nyo sa azkals? Give them time to develop for crying out loud...
|
|
|
Post by orwat on Oct 9, 2011 21:18:15 GMT 8
People could not be blamed if ever they expected so much from the team in their friendly with Singapore. They ( just can't remember if its Palami or Weiss ) have been saying that the least that they're expecting is a draw and now Weiss is saying lack of cohesion, lack of rest, etc.. Weiss could have known about this before the game and not have hyped our chances.. The inability to adjust has always been our problem and I guess its mostly due to the limitations of Weiss.. Very evident in our Long Teng Cup games wherein the team should have jelled well already with the longer preparation..
|
|
|
Post by feindouno on Oct 9, 2011 21:47:30 GMT 8
Observation: Ever since Aly Borromeo has featured for the team at CB, he has gone forward for our set pieces. This isn't something that just came up during Weiss's term, this has been a team strategy since the Caslib days. It does allow us a powerful target to score, but it does leave us vulnerable to counter-attacks. So, guys, is it time to ditch this strategy? With Guirado at our disposal, we don't need Aly's foray as much, and our other backs (except Cagara) aren't fast enough to provide sufficient cover.
Another observation: The reason players were opting for the long ball during the Singapore match was because our short passing wasn't that sharp. Unlike Singapore, we weren't capable to string more than four passes in the midfield. Lack of cohesion, communication, you could name reasons... Also, the defense is more vulnerable if a short pass is missed than if a long pass is missed.
|
|
|
Post by narko on Oct 9, 2011 22:14:31 GMT 8
If Aly goes up for the corner kick, the holding midfielder should be ready to cover for him in case he doesn't get back in time. Many teams and clubs do this as their CBs are usually tall and large. The fullbacks and the holding mids usually cover for them when they go forward for the corners. What they need to do is to work on those corners some more and get the most out of those opportunities.
As for long ball, my impression from the match was that they resorted to long ball and they also resorted to short passing from the back through the midfield to build up play. I'd say they strung more than 4 on several occasions. Like I said in my previous post, they had variation, they would go long and sometimes they would play their way up from the back. I agree that their passing still needs some more precision, more sharpness but this was one of the better midfield performances from the Azkals in my opinion.
One way of watching the match is not only looking at the end result of a particular offensive move, check how the defense reacted to it. There were several occasions were the SG defense just hacked the ball away as they were clearly under pressure from the Azkals offense.
I will disagree about the vulnerability of the defense to a missed short pass compared to a long pass. Best example is Barcelona. They love the short passing game, players in triangles close to each other. The advantage of this short passing game is that when the short pass is to a nearby team mate is missed/intercepted, both players are close enough to swarm the opposing player to get the ball back. Watch Barcelona and see how they recover the ball quickly by swarming the opposing player because their spacing is near to each other. Whereas miss a long pass and an opposing player could find himself in possession of the ball with no opponent near him giving him acres of space and/or ample time to initiate their offensive transition without pressure.
|
|
|
Post by Caz on Oct 9, 2011 23:28:13 GMT 8
Okay then, let's keep the discussion going. As we all know, you let 5 guys watch a football match and they will view the game in 5 different ways. These are just my views and opinions, not meant to refute or challenge other opinions (we're all entitled to them) but I'd like to throw these out there for people to chew on. Coach Weiss didn't adjust effectively. Here's my take on that. The SG coach has the advantage of working with his team for a long time, he has all the pieces of his puzzle together. He knows the combinations that will work and he's had the time to develop patterns that the team could readily resort to should there be a need for adjustment during the game. Coach Weiss doesn't have the same luxury as the SG coach, he is still figuring out his optimum formation and is still in the process of putting the pieces of his puzzle together. How many different line-ups has the coach had to deal with? Coach Weiss has to keep improvising depending on player availability. SG is the better team, yet we did pretty well to contain them and came close to scoring as well. So who needed to adjust by the half time break? Definitely not us, I thought we were doing quite well and matching SG. It was SG that needed to adjust there was no need for our coach to do so, we just needed to keep it up and look for that goal. Note also that midway through the 1st half Angel got injured and Ian was sent in. That already affected our offensive capability yet we were doing quite well until the first goal by SG. First goal by SG via set piece (we have a particular weakness in this area) c/o a fluke deflection. A goal behind, how does the coach adjust? Depends, are we looking to win, draw and keep the scoreline at 1-0? If we were looking to get a goal to draw and go on for the win, what should our coach have done? Change players? Our best line-up was on the pitch already and doing fairly well, even pressuring the SG defense and getting shots off. If the coach wanted to win or draw, what changes could he have made that would have changed the match? Do you just sub for the sake of subbing and making a change and hope for the best? Or you make a sub that creates an impact in the game? Sub in so you have fresh legs? What if those fresh legs don't click with the team because he's not in the position he's used to playing? You will have fresh legs running around the pitch but not doing anything effective, what good will those fresh legs do? If you're looking to shore up your defense, then yes having fresh legs will help, but we needed to score goals not defend and protect the scoreline. Any sub that needed to be made needed to make a significant impact on our offensive capability. I think a number here have conveniently overlooked how Coach made subs against Hong Kong and Macau that made a positive impact in the game. Gener out and Carli to RB and Angel dropping to holding mid, we almost won that match against HK if not for a set piece debacle again. Against Macau, coach put in Chieffy who took the game by the scruff of its neck and won it for us. You make a sub because it will change the game. Against SG, who could Coach have put in there at 1-0 that would have changed the match like Chieffy did against Macau? Those currently on the pitch seemed to be doing a pretty good job trying to get a goal. As it happens when you're chasing the match, gaps are left at the back and the formation gets stretched a bit as players commit forward. No surprise that the experienced SG team took advantage of this and got a second goal. You are 2 goals down, with the subs at your disposal, how do you change the match? You want to get a goal back, who's your sub, who's the offensive player who can come in and create chances and ignite a spark in the team? Coach did take out a defender and sent Misagh in late on. Should coach have tweaked the line up? Changed the formation? The team was playing both long ball and building up the offense from the back. They were also using the wings and taking advantage of late runners to take shots from just outside the box when the penalty area was congested. There was a bit variation in the offensive game and the Azkals did trouble the SG defense, so how else could they have improved on that other making their shots count (which has nothing to do with the coach but with individual players already)? So let's take a step back and go through it again. We lost so we think the coach should have done something to change the game. Question, what should he have done? What I saw was an Azkals team giving a much superior side plenty of trouble and coming close on a few occasions. Up to the end the Azkals were gunning for the SG goal hoping to score one. Sometimes, you need to change things during the match, other times, you don't mess with what's working. We had 12 shots, none went in but it was one of the best performances I've seen the Azkals play despite the loss. We controlled the midfield despite having 2 players not playing their regular position (Jonsson, Lucena) and a debutant (Cagara). The midfield used to be our weakness, particularly our defensive and offensive transitions. I saw that aspect was much improved in the SG match, considering the quality of the opposition. So I will just have to disagree regarding what the coach could have done in that game. The SG coach came into that game with the advantage of having a settled team and system in place, experienced players and a deep bench. Our coach had no such luxury but I think he and our team gave a good account of themselves. However, as with every loss, there are always lessons to be learned and I am sure the coaching staff and the players have taken note of those. No need to spell them out here as other posters have pointed them out, need to work more on set plays, corners, shooting, etc. I'm willing to give Coach time to work with the Azkals. Okay, my last post and this one have been quite lengthy ones, I hope it hasn't gotten to be annoying to you guys out there. Sige, I'll head on to the Nepal thread already, hehe. Hey I share your observations on the match. Spot on, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by xclentoy on Oct 10, 2011 2:47:29 GMT 8
Okay then, let's keep the discussion going. As we all know, you let 5 guys watch a football match and they will view the game in 5 different ways. These are just my views and opinions, not meant to refute or challenge other opinions (we're all entitled to them) but I'd like to throw these out there for people to chew on. Coach Weiss didn't adjust effectively. Here's my take on that. The SG coach has the advantage of working with his team for a long time, he has all the pieces of his puzzle together. He knows the combinations that will work and he's had the time to develop patterns that the team could readily resort to should there be a need for adjustment during the game. Coach Weiss doesn't have the same luxury as the SG coach, he is still figuring out his optimum formation and is still in the process of putting the pieces of his puzzle together. How many different line-ups has the coach had to deal with? Coach Weiss has to keep improvising depending on player availability. SG is the better team, yet we did pretty well to contain them and came close to scoring as well. So who needed to adjust by the half time break? Definitely not us, I thought we were doing quite well and matching SG. It was SG that needed to adjust there was no need for our coach to do so, we just needed to keep it up and look for that goal. Note also that midway through the 1st half Angel got injured and Ian was sent in. That already affected our offensive capability yet we were doing quite well until the first goal by SG. First goal by SG via set piece (we have a particular weakness in this area) c/o a fluke deflection. A goal behind, how does the coach adjust? Depends, are we looking to win, draw and keep the scoreline at 1-0? If we were looking to get a goal to draw and go on for the win, [glow=red,2,300]what should our coach have done?[/glow] Change players? Our best line-up was on the pitch already and doing fairly well, even pressuring the SG defense and getting shots off. If the coach wanted to win or draw, what changes could he have made that would have changed the match?Do you just sub for the sake of subbing and making a change and hope for the best? Or you make a sub that creates an impact in the game? Sub in so you have fresh legs? What if those fresh legs don't click with the team because he's not in the position he's used to playing? You will have fresh legs running around the pitch but not doing anything effective, what good will those fresh legs do? If you're looking to shore up your defense, then yes having fresh legs will help, but we needed to score goals not defend and protect the scoreline. Any sub that needed to be made needed to make a significant impact on our offensive capability. I think a number here have conveniently overlooked how Coach made subs against Hong Kong and Macau that made a positive impact in the game. Gener out and Carli to RB and Angel dropping to holding mid, we almost won that match against HK if not for a set piece debacle again. Against Macau, coach put in Chieffy who took the game by the scruff of its neck and won it for us. You make a sub because it will change the game. Against SG, who could Coach have put in there at 1-0 that would have changed the match like Chieffy did against Macau? Those currently on the pitch seemed to be doing a pretty good job trying to get a goal. As it happens when you're chasing the match, gaps are left at the back and the formation gets stretched a bit as players commit forward. No surprise that the experienced SG team took advantage of this and got a second goal. You are 2 goals down, with the subs at your disposal, how do you change the match? You want to get a goal back, who's your sub, who's the offensive player who can come in and create chances and ignite a spark in the team? Coach did take out a defender and sent Misagh in late on. Should coach have tweaked the line up? Changed the formation? The team was playing both long ball and building up the offense from the back. They were also using the wings and taking advantage of late runners to take shots from just outside the box when the penalty area was congested. There was a bit variation in the offensive game and the Azkals did trouble the SG defense, so how else could they have improved on that other making their shots count (which has nothing to do with the coach but with individual players already)? So let's take a step back and go through it again. We lost so we think the coach should have done something to change the game. Question, what should he have done? What I saw was an Azkals team giving a much superior side plenty of trouble and coming close on a few occasions. Up to the end the Azkals were gunning for the SG goal hoping to score one. Sometimes, you need to change things during the match, other times, you don't mess with what's working. We had 12 shots, none went in but it was one of the best performances I've seen the Azkals play despite the loss. We controlled the midfield despite having 2 players not playing their regular position (Jonsson, Lucena) and a debutant (Cagara). The midfield used to be our weakness, particularly our defensive and offensive transitions. I saw that aspect was much improved in the SG match, considering the quality of the opposition. So I will just have to disagree regarding what the coach could have done in that game. The SG coach came into that game with the advantage of having a settled team and system in place, experienced players and a deep bench. Our coach had no such luxury but I think he and our team gave a good account of themselves. However, as with every loss, there are always lessons to be learned and I am sure the coaching staff and the players have taken note of those. No need to spell them out here as other posters have pointed them out, need to work more on set plays, corners, shooting, etc. I'm willing to give Coach time to work with the Azkals. Okay, my last post and this one have been quite lengthy ones, I hope it hasn't gotten to be annoying to you guys out there. Sige, I'll head on to the Nepal thread already, hehe. agree to all the post, could not wrote anything better than this. i wish sheajane or vimjmonk answer the highlighted questions
|
|
|
Post by tombucho on Oct 10, 2011 8:23:26 GMT 8
sheajeane, i think you are one classic example of a dumb fan...singapore is ranked 130+ ...azkals is 160+..just because cagara and those other fil-euros played in singapore..one of the few if not the first time..doesnt mean they are just going to blow by singapore who happens to have been playing for a long time already...Singapore is ranked higher simply because they are much better than the azkals..you keep on pointing to the coach much like the other dumb people here when the fact is the azkals still has a loooooooooooooooong way to go...who are we kidding here? ganun na ba talaga kagaling ang tingin nyo sa azkals? Give them time to develop for crying out loud... you are the dumb fan. nowhere in my post did i say they're gonna blow out singapore. and with your dumb post regarding rankings, rankings don't mean much when teams adds player but haven't played yet. i think you may have forgotten to include into that dumb emo brain of yours that the singapore the macca azkals faced was also way ahead of us in rankings add to that fact the talents he had at his disposal then wasn't much compared to what weiss has now. despite the odds against them, they were able draw against singapore. fast forward to your azkals under macca, the difference in ranking remained the same.they are way higher in rank than us. the similiraties between macca's azkals and weiss azkal's ends there. because weiss has at his disposal many much more talented players. now to make the story short, use logic: macca azkals vs singapore way ahead in rankings. macca doesn't have many talented players as compared to weiss has BUT HE WAS ABLE TO DRAW WITH SINGAPORE. weiss azkals vs singapore still way ahead in rankings. weiss has many talented players he can use BUT HE LOST. now matanong kita, sino mas magaling na kots? obvious na obvious naman kung sino eh. now di mo pwedeng sabihin na the weiss players were at fault cos they obviously are much more talented than the macca players. di mo rin pwedeng sabihin na lack of cohesion, kasi that problem also existed during macca's time. and btw, a singaporean who isn't biased and isn't emotionally attached as a fantard like you is someone i'd listen to. his head is clear, his judgment is based on what he has seen not only from the singapore match but all the matches under weiss' helm. and not like you based on what you only want to see or hear.
wag masyadong emo, gamitin ang utak wag ang puso! you started it first, so please don't be such a dumbo, dumbo!hahaha...you are really dumb sheajane...have you ever played football?? or any team sport?? You keep thinking that football is about individual players/individual talent...mas gugustuhin ko pa yung azkals team na naglaro sa suzuki cup who has played 3 years or more as a team kaysa dun sa azkals team sa sinapore who has only played one game as a team...it takes time, a lot of time dumb ass...im not for weiss or any coach for that matter...but i just dont agree with anybody here that it is the coach's fault considering that he has been here for less than a year and that he is forced to play with a different line-up every time because his players arent complete...Heck, the USA basketball team composed of the greatest basketball players (Kobe et al) and the greatest college coach took three years before they regained Olympic gold.
|
|
|
Post by Katipunero on Oct 10, 2011 9:58:56 GMT 8
Wow, this thread is still going the morning before matchday. Here's my take, maybe we should all rewatch the game tape comparing the two matches and see for ourselves.
Football is beyond the final scoreline. Could we say with a straight face that we were a better football team than Vietnam after the win? Not exactly, we have understand that results aren't always caused by progress.
If we replayed that Singapore team with our 2010 edition we'd probably win 1 out of 10. They were all over us in that game and luckily for us the bus held. We were really really really fortunate to not be blown out in that agme considering the pressure we took. Chris Greatwich who barely practiced with the team(Manny Ott's replacement) had a terrible game in midfield made us forget all that by scoring at the death with lapse defending.. That Suzuki Cup campaign really proved we had heart despite limited talent.
Now if we played the game again with the 2011 edition, we would probably win may 4 out of 10. There was a drastic improvement and we had quality possessions with no training together. And it was breaks of the game that caused us to breakdown. I can't put much on Weiss this game since he barely had time to work with the team, maybe Nepal will be a better gauge.
Btw, this is a different Lions squad from what we saw in the Suzuki Cup. They took that tournament lightly and played cards late into the night and that came back to haunt them to the disgust of their coach. Good job by him by turning it around and rejuvenating their squad.
|
|
|
Post by stellarboy on Oct 10, 2011 10:38:03 GMT 8
Reactions from Lions All The Way in Singapore:
Braving the rain, holding OUR ground...www.lionsatw.com/2011/10/braving-rain-holding-our-ground.htmlFilipinos proved a point, but we hold bragging rightsFrom one of those comments made prior to the game, to their credit, they did keep to their promises. They did "embarass us at our home ground" on some levels. What they did brilliantly was to teach us Singaporean "fans" to not take things for granted such as the purchasing of tickets. They taught us that when we are at home, we better make sure we make it our home. The sight of the grandstand at 7.20pm was appalling. It was as though the grandstand reserved for home fans had some kind of a wild animal running loose. A friend told me that Singaporeans can blame all they want. Blame the "government's open door immigration policy for P.R and new citizens" and also the "FAS's practice to allow Filipinos to buy tickets at their own leisure". Well, blame them all you want when in actual fact, the only people we can blame are ourselves. Another can be quoted as saying "Local football doesn't need better players, they need their countrymen's belief!" While the most eye catching came from a source who stated "Singapore football doesn't need better players now- standard on the rise now- but Singapore need much better citizens!" All very valid after last night's game! You have done it before queuing up overnight for tickets against Malaysia. So why can't you do it for this sort of games? Is it because it is JUST a friendly? Is it because we have lost two games in a row? Or is it because realistically, it is just not practical and worth your time because this victory is meaningless to you as a fan. But then strangely, we slam the FAS when we can't get the tickets and then the media for their uncertainties in their live telecast. But then we didn't stop there. We blame the media and FAS again for screening it on a Starhub channel and demand it to be screened on Channel 5 instead. What's next? Asking FAS to offer courier service to your homes? Build bigger stadiums that will not be filled up 80% of the time? What have we become? An embarassment that is. But that is not to say that all of us are in it. There were still a sizeable number, although not that many, that bothered and truly bothered. Braving the rain, we put up our brave banners, we held on to our pride and cheered and sang our hearts out, leaving our voices in the stadium. Sometimes, these people can be forgiven for thinking that they are themselves embarrassed by their own countrymen. Deep down, they knew but they choose to keep their spirits high for the team. At the end of the day, before we choose to compare, complain and condemn our football, lets take a look at ourselves and compare our fans to fans from other nations. And to the Lions, if you are let down by the turn up today, then really, we apologise. Obviously, from your goals celebrations, this friendly meant a whole lot to you guys. It just did not mean enough to Singaporeans. And to those fans that got wet and sang and stood for 90 minutes, on top of getting your tickets early, you are truly the pride of Singapore football. Wind, rain or shine, WE'LL BE BLOODY HELL COMING BACK FOR MORE!
|
|