Soccer Message Board
|
-- Sponsor Message  |
| Subject: No hiding it...I'm not a Bradley fan at all |
| Posted by: HoosInLondon? on Tue Jun 30 2009 4:20:57 PM |
|
Message:
My problem with Bradley is that we're not improving under his
stewardship. Yes, we beat Spain. That's a great, great win. Beating Egypt, however, doesn't impress me. They're no better than Honduras or Costa Rica, and we absolutely SHOULD beat teams at that level. And a heartbreaking loss to Brazil is still a loss. Donovan said it best: at this point, moral victories don't matter for you-know-what. You suggest that our player's cracked under the Brazilian attacks pressure. That's the problem, though: they were under relentless pressure starting from the 30th minute. We basically retreated into a shell, and gave Brazil all the space in the world. Check out the stats from our games versus South Africa's against Spain and Brazil. Note the shots disparity. South Africa managed to get loads more chances at goal than we did and maintained possession better. Are they better than us? Are they that much better on the ball that they can keep possession better than us and pose a more consistent threat to team's like Spain and Brazil? I don't think so. I think it's Bradley's general approach to the game. South Africa was not under siege like we were for long stretches, which I chalk up to tactical decisions by the coach, not the players abilities. Yes, we did win one, whereas South Africa won both. But, in the long run, I think it behooves us to keep more possession (if South Africa can, we can) and threaten the goal more (again, if South Africa can, we can). Then there were the substitutions. Why, why, why make two defense- minded changes in a tie game. That spoke volumes to me. Bradley made it clear that he was playing for penalties at that point. I also don't think he's doing enough to develop depth, which will doom us next year. Yes, the Confederations Cup is great. But qualifying and the World Cup are bigger. In the long run, I believe we would have been better off if he spread some minutes around. (I also believe we would have been better off in the short run, too, but spelling tired legs sooner. The fact that we played only 15 field players through 5 games in 13 days is the reason, in my mind, that we fatigued so badly against Brazil. Brazil had fresher legs as Dunga used more of the roster.) Honestly, ask yourself...are we better now than in 2002? I don't think so. And I personally believe Bradley has a lot to do with that. Yes, we have some very, very nice stretches, but we can't sustain our best form for long enough to take the next step. |
| Current Thread: |
|
The attitude of some of the posters on here really confuses me. -- the_slammer Tue Jun 30 2009 10:38:59 AM |
Did you or did you not see a change in the style of play over both halves? -- Nova Hokie 95 Tue Jun 30 2009 12:56:41 PM |
|
I'm sure Bradley told them to come out more defensively. -- the_slammer Tue Jun 30 2009 2:38:55 PM |
|
No hiding it...I'm not a Bradley fan at all -- HoosInLondon? Tue Jun 30 2009 4:20:57 PM |
|
Meant to say that South Africa lost both, of course... ** -- HoosInLondon? Tue Jun 30 2009 4:38:53 PM |
|
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree -- the_slammer Tue Jun 30 2009 5:27:40 PM |
|
Re: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree -- tightenuppeople Wed Jul 1 2009 6:56:48 PM |
|
I guess it's how you look at it. to me, the tournament went like this -- CAVern Tue Jun 30 2009 11:27:24 AM |
You must log in before you can reply to a message.
Please login or
create an account
if you wish to reply.
