Commentary

USA-Jamaica Concacaf W Championship Player Ratings

USA-JAMAICA EXPRESS:
July 7 in Monterrey, Mexico
USA 5 Jamaica 0. Goals: Smith 3, 8, Lavelle 59, K.Mewis (pen.) 83, Rodman 86.
Att.: n/a.

In a more polished performance than its 3-0 opening win over Haiti, the USA played more cohesively, passed more adeptly and shot more accurately in its 5-0 win over Jamaica that clinched a berth in the 2023 World Cup in Australia and New Zealand. (The USA's second win combined with Haiti's 3-0 win over Mexico assured the Americans of a top two spot in Group A.)

Only five of 17 U.S. shots were on target against Haiti compared to 11 of 20 against Jamaica, forcing six saves). But the USA had set the bar low with its play against the Haitians and the number of poor passes remained disturbingly high from some of the Americans.

On the backline, 22-year-old Naomi Girma, who replaced 37-year-old veteran Becky Sauerbrunn, in her third U.S. appearance made a strong case for regular starts.

USA Player Ratings
(1=low; 5=middle; 10=high.)

GOALKEEPER

Required only to make two easy saves, neither was Alyssa Naeher tested with back passes. The 34-year-old, 5-foot-9 veteran will have to prove at practice whether she can fend off the 26-year-old, 6-1 Casey Murphy's challenge for the starting keeper spot.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)

5
Alyssa Naeher (Chicago Red Stars) 82/0 (34)

DEFENDERS

Naomi Girma, central defender, assisted on the first goal with a cross-field pass into the stride of Sophia Smith. A couple minutes earlier, she won the ball in the U.S. penalty area after a Lindsey Horan giveaway. Girma, who defended with composure and tackled cleanly, with central partner Alana Cook shut down forwards Bunny Shaw and Atlanta Primus. Sofia Huerta, mostly secure with the ball under pressure and able to evade challenges with clever touches, assisted on Smith's second goal with a well-weighted through ball. Huerta also helped set up the  fifth goal with defense-splitting pass. It was an uneventful  evening for left back Emily Fox, not tested defensively and replaced at halftime.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)

7

Sofia Huerta
(OL Reign) 16/0 (29))

6
Alana Cook (OL Reign) 12/0 (25)

7
Naomi Girma (San Diego Wave) 3/0 (22)

5
Emily Fox (Racing Louisville) 16/0 (24)

MIDFIELDERS

For the second straight game, Lindsey Horan's performance failed to resemble her authoritative performances we're used to seeing. A weak Jamaican midfield freed her of defensive toil but she failed to exploit that with attacking prowess. The veteran was among the U.S. players who too often gave up the ball while not under pressure. For sure, this midfield trio (Ashley Sanchez in for Andi Sullivan) had a more commanding grip on the game than against Haiti. But if not for her impressive finish to make it 3-0, Rose Lavelle would have been disappointed with a performance that included hasty decision-making and an amateurish first-touch that ruined her close-range chance in the 22nd minute. Sanchez, too, rushed play instead of helping establish a rhythm, but often unsettled the Jamaican defense and assisted superbly on Lavelle's goal

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)

6

Rose Lavelle
(OL Reign) 75/21 (27)

4
Lindsey Horan (Lyon/FRA) 113/25 (28)

6
Ashley Sanchez (Washington Spirit) 11/2 (23)

FORWARDS

If this game hadn't been in the bag for the USA by the 10th minute, one can't imagine that Coach Vlatko Andonovski leaving Mallory Pugh on the field while subbing at halftime Sophia Smith after her brilliant performance. Near sublime was how Smith hit the net with an instep strike after beating Den-Den Blackwood with a half-volley tap of the ball after receiving Grima's pass. Smith's timing and awareness of the goalkeeper's challenge on her second finish was also remarkably skillful and composed. For Andonovski to keep Pugh on the field past halftime after a series of misplays, starting within a minute of kickoff, and weak shots must have been to provide her the chance to regain confidence. She started the second half by crossing out of bounds, did manage to help set up the third goal, but kept mis-hitting balls. Finally, in the 86th minute she assisted on Trinity Rodman's close-range finish with a sharp low cross. (Keeping service from the flank low like that and as Sanchez did for Lavelle's finish should become even more of a habit for the USA.)  Ashley Hatch nearly scored on a couple half-chances, hitting the crossbar on a difficult to reach ball, and in the second half she hit the post with a 20-yard volley. 

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)

8

Sophia Smith (Portland Thorns) 18/8 (21)

5
Ashley Hatch (Washington Spirit) 11/4 (27)

4
 
Mallory Pugh
(Chicago Red Stars) 76/23 (23)

SUBSTITUTES

Midge Purce, who replaced Smith at halftime, had a similar outing to Pugh's in that she finished on a high note after much flawed play, by contributing to a late goal (fouled for the penalty kick that Kristie Mewis converted). As in her performance against Haiti, Purce failed to deliver well after advancing from the flank when awareness of her teammates and good passes would have created scoring chances. Emily Sonnett passed to Jamaicans twice within a minute after entering. Taylor Kornieck skied a shot over the crossbar. Trinity Rodman's close-range finish required a well-timed run and solid strike.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)

4
Emily Sonnett (Washington Spirit) 67/0 (28)

4

Midge Purce (Gotham FC) 17/4 (26)

6 
Kristie Mewis (Gotham FC) 42/6 (31)

6
Trinity Rodman (Washington Spirit) 5/2 (20)

4 
Taylor Kornieck
(San Diego Wave) 3/1 (23)

TRIVIA: Jamaica coach Lorne Donaldson's day job is director of Real Colorado, where U.S. attackers Mallory Pugh and Sophie Smith played their youth soccer. 

July 7 in Monterrey, Mexico
USA 5 Jamaica 0. Goal: Smith 3, 8, Lavelle 59, K.Mewis (pen.) 83, Rodman 86.
USA — Naeher; Huerta, Cook, Girma, Fox (Sonnett, 46); Lavelle (Kornieck, 65), Horan (K.Mewis, 61), Sanchez; Smith (Purce, 46), Hatch (Rodman, 61), Pugh.
Jamaica — Spencer; Wiltshire, A.Swaby, C.Swaby, Blackwood; Carter (McCoy, 75), Brown (Bailey-Gayle, 46), Asher,  Solaun (Sampson 46); Primus (Spence, 63), Shaw (Van Zanten, 63).
Yellow cards: USA — Sanchez 45+4; Jamaica — Blackwood 43, A.Swaby 90+4.
Red cards: none.
Referee: Melissa Borjas (Honduras)
Att.: n/a.

Stats:
USA/Jamaica
Shots: 20/4
Shots on target: 11/2
Saves: 2/6
Corner Kicks: 6/0
Fouls: 11/9
Offside: 6/0
Possession: 68%/32%

22 comments about "USA-Jamaica Concacaf W Championship Player Ratings".
  1. James Madison, July 8, 2022 at 1:01 a.m.

    Pugh is being given every possible chance and not delivering.  Horan was better than Mike gives her credit for..
    Crisper play, but still too many poor decisions and unforced passing errors.

  2. Bob Ashpole replied, July 8, 2022 at 5:25 a.m.

    You are missing something. Which flank was Pugh on when you didn't like her play? Which flank was she on when she hit a perfect cross? She is a right winger but the best of the younger right wingers playing at left wing. So the coach puts her at left wing and you and the reporter blame Pugh. 

    I usually don't comment on the ratings. This time I disagree with most of what Mike said. The starting fullbacks did poorly. They make Emily Sonnett look like a star (and she played better than the starters). I think Cook was ineffective in both games. Smith was substituted because the the game was in hand. A smart move to protect her and rest her. Did you see how Hatch was sandwiched seconds after she hit the frame with a nice shot?

    Horan did great for someone coming back from injury. Expecting her to play box to box is unrealistic. I do agree about Girma. She was a pleasant surprise. But part of that was Cook making her look good in comparison. Becky is 37. No one should read anything into her not playing today. 

  3. Santiago 1314 replied, July 8, 2022 at 5:23 p.m.

    In the Immortal words of Monty Python; 
    "Better, Better Get Me a BUCKET.!!!"
    Ho Humm... Rinse, Lather, Repeat...

    Santiago 1314, July 4, 2022 at 11:51 p.m.

    Ho Humm... A Warm-Up for the Next Warm-Up Game.!!!
    Don't Forget Gals.!?!?!?
    JUST WIN BABY, WIN.!!!

    Anybody been watching the Women's Euros.???
    See just a Little bit of Difference in the Speed of Play, TWITCH, Athleticism, PASSION.!!!
    We in a World (Cup) of Hurt if our Play Continues like this.!!!


  4. Bob Ashpole, July 8, 2022 at 5:42 a.m.

    Once again the US team underperformed. They played uninspired and like it was preseason. They had flashes of good play and were rewarded for it. 

    The reality is that this is not good experience for the back line and the fullbacks especially. These national leagues prevent us from playing quality opponents. Basically UEFA is denying the USWNT meaningful opponents in order to retard our development (by making the best UEFA teams unavailable during FIFA windows). Except for Canada, our most challenging "competition" is going to be playing intersquad scrimmages.

    I really worry about what is going to happen when we actually face a quality opponent. I suspect we will have to include some older players to have a chance. Hopefully they will be healthy. 

  5. frank schoon, July 8, 2022 at 9:30 a.m.

    I could take about only 22min of this game in the first half. Jamaica has no defense.Their program needs some serious infusion. I saw the Jamaican player Shaw make Fox look silly in a one on one situation. It shows how slow Fox in the first 3steps. The problem we have is that we are so dominant that it hides our weaknesses very easily, and worse we dominate so many of our competitors that makes it difficult to find our weakspots.

    Bob ,and James, the discussion about Pugh is that she reminds of Morris playing on the leftwing who should be on the right ,for Pugh ,being right footed, means she can't cross the ball which was so obvious in the last game where she was near the endline. She couldn't cross with her left and she lacks good one on one skills in tight to beat a defender and also she's not a creative player....

    The coaching is bad on the US side, specifically, when it comes to the backfield when we have ball control. If I were the coach and I see such a wasted pass from one centerback to the other, a square pass when the nearest opponent(s) 10-15 meters away, posted about the midline, I would jump off the bench. Ten year old would do that but not at the national level. 

    That square pass doesn't beat anyone, doesn't surprise anyone and it allows the opponents to adjust defensive according where they see the ball move, which usually goes to the stationary left or right back with the ball going to the feet....I never seen such STUPID soccer in my life. And it's brought to you LICENSED coaches, UNBELIEVABLE!!!!! Why do we bother LICENSING COACHES, when they are too stupid to even see this development. This is constantly carried out in the game...
                                                                 NEXT POST

  6. frank schoon, July 8, 2022 at 9:51 a.m.

    In this situation with our Centerbacks having the ball ,having so much space and time, we get a square pass to the other back. That pass has no solution, it doesn't beat anyone, there is no idea behind it for there is NO PRESSURE and therefore it DOESN'T SOLVE ANY PROBLEM... The statement this pass makes, says, "Oh, i'll pass to you and you do something with it !!!". I mean, seriously, guys, it shows how BAD we develop our players, here. 

    The centerback with the ball should take the ball up towards midfield and allow one of the attackers to commit. This committal means there will be one less opponent in the defensive bloc, or it could also means the opponent is beaten if the ball by-passes the opponent, WHICH IS THE REAL GOAL WHEN BUILDING UP.!!!! The less opponents you face the better....But what happens in our build ,we give our CARDS away before we actually should and thus given our opponents more time to set up, along with no opponents beaten...

    The way soccer is played today is so lacking in intelligence. As Cruyff states most of all the good principles of soccer is simply  not followed or are watered down. And the coaches are clueless to these facts what makes for good soccer, and therefore follow their laptop programs..

    Our whole left side as far as ball movement goes is a joke. We got Pugh who lacks penetrating power, because she can't cross or play 1v1 in tight area, and there is no one else overlapping who has a left foot. So we see Fox coming up which is fine for the opponent for a player like Shaw will make mince meat of her after Fox having made a few runs down the flank....


  7. Bob Ashpole replied, July 8, 2022 at 1:03 p.m.

    Frank, the square passes between CB is USSF doctrine as to how to play out of the back. (They also call for the CB to pass to the FB standing on the touch line, and then after receiving a return pass to square pass to the CB again.)

    I wouldn't believe it myself if I hadn't seen it myself. A self-appointed on-line expert used a graphics program to illustrate a series of pattern passing drills to teach players how to build out of the back. One of the exercises called for three players, keeper and two CBs, to pass the ball back forth in front of the goal inside the 6 yard box endlessly! Insanity.

    The WNT program lost a lot when the USSF men took control of the women's program too. The same leadership that failed to qualify the men for 2018. They choose head coaches who obey USSF instructions on how to coach the team and where to live. Under those conditions, I don't see USSF as ever being able to hire a good coach. USSF wants control, not success. I also don't think any of the former NT coaches would have taken the job under those conditions.

    I am afraid that the nonsense will continue as long as USSF management wants to make the coaching decisions.  

  8. frank schoon replied, July 8, 2022 at 4:01 p.m.

    Bob, The USSF follow the European training programs, theory and practice principles...It has nothing to do with the man side or women side training procedures for the women follow whatever is established by the men. Women coaches take the same course as the men. Soccer philosophy has no gender. The problem lies in the coaching and it is deplorable to say the least

    All these coaches act like robots and follow whatever is established by the coaching school as what should be the norm....for example the square centerbacks. I would never have my team play with 2centerbacks, never, I prefer a ballhandling sweeper. The centerback system has totally ruined upcoming attack through the middle, remember 'Beckenbauer.  Attacks through the middle is the best , for you have more and better options. The centerbacks ,today, have become useless, not only are they lousy at individual defense but also at ball handling attacks. You don't see good attacking ventures through the middle from the backfield as well good give and go's in the middle.

    Defensively, why would you have 2square centerbacks, you don't play 2 square centerforwards or on a 2v1 defensively you don't post square to the player with the ball....I just don't understand the 2 square centerback thing...it is inefficient

    The outside back receives the ball to their feet and standing still, not even moving, because of that the opponents are given time on defense as a bloc to set up. The only time a back should receive a pass is when he's running full speed with plenty of space ahead, which hardly happens.

    Too many long ball from the centerbacks who are terrible at accurate passes and outside backs trying to cross like wingers is a joke...So often passes are made from the backs to the wings which is likewise bad for it leaves the wing with his back facing downfield. So few passes are made with the receiver facing downfield...
    So from the backfield the attacks are not good. It is all due to bad coaching and development and not following the principles of what makes soccer good..

    If I ran youth soccer association, the first thing I want is creative coaches with no coaching license ...the less indoctrinated the better...






  9. Santiago 1314 replied, July 8, 2022 at 5:18 p.m.

    Right On Frank... I want a "Ballsey" Coach to Bring back the Sweeper.!!!

  10. Bob Ashpole replied, July 9, 2022 at 2:16 a.m.

    I was coaching the bottom of the bottom adult, but I almost always had 2 awesome CBs. So they would alternate who swept and who stopped and they also alternated who went forward. (Flat back line instead of diamond.) It made them actually quicker to adjust to switches in fields, the most common tactic used to break down a sweeper back line. Rarely did I have only one awesome CB. Then I did use a designated sweeper. Sometimes I would designate someone to lead the back line and ask him which of the avaiable players he wanted to start in his line. 

    With really good players I found the best way to manage them was assign them a line and let them work out the details. Less instructions was more. 

    I can understand how that wouldn't work as well generally at high levels, but I think that is sort of how Rinus Michels ran Ajax when Cryuff played there. He picked players that already played the way he wanted and put them on the field together and let them make magic happen. IMO having the right players works better than telling the wrong players how they should play. 

  11. frank schoon replied, July 9, 2022 at 9:08 a.m.

    Bob, either centerback should have the capability of going on attack. This is what Ajax did when they played the 3-4-3 back in mid-90's when van Gaal won the European cup. Remember the libero #4 played in front of #3 the centerfullback. The opponents got smart and started to guard the #4 so van Gaal made sure the #3 also had the ability to go on attack, to counter the opponents move. So in essence what you did is correct with your men's team.

    The only aspect I question is the positioning of the centerbacks today, defensively.  For example , if you outnumber your opponent who has the ball in 2v1, why would both defenders position square to the attacker, for all he has to do is pass the ball for a 'split pass' and both are 'done'. Take a throw-in, as the defending team you don't position two defender square to defend against a throw in. Or for example, when a wing coming from the sideline towards the penalty area, you don't position two defenders square but one behind the other.  So why would a team position 2 centerbacks square to each other, which is what you see everywhere, and realize this is last resort, the last defensive position being closest to the goal,  guarded by two centerbacks who are positioned square to each other.

    I mean, nowhere else will you find two defenders positioned square to an attacker with the ball, except , BUT IRONICALLY,  in front in the most vulnerable area near the goal. GO FIGURE!!!

    What playing with two centerbacks has done is to focus more on flank attacks by outside backs, which makes it easier for opponents to defend against, along decreasing your own attacking space.
    So if you look at your backline, the centerbacks are worthless when on attack with the ball, and your backs most of the time don't contribute to efficient attacking forays. As a result the midfield loses it attacking potential, since the #6 usually has to come back to collect or receive it with his back facing downfield, which is bad, there is not 3rd man off the ball movement from one of the centerback to create numerical superiority. As a result we do see many long balls made by the centerback that take too long to travel and lack accuracy, without help for secondary balls...

    Look we outnumber the attackers in the backfield with 2centerbacks and a #6, a PERFECT triangle. But rarely do you see a centerback pass to a #6 with the other centerback receiving the ball on the run facing downfield...

     Soccer, today, is being played so bad, so inefficient, so lacking in intelligence and REALIZE, this in an era where ALL coaches have to be or are licensed...GO FIGURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. Bob Ashpole replied, July 9, 2022 at 1:29 p.m.

    Frank, I will explain what I mean by flat back. I am not talking about a representation of positioning on the field. Under no system should a back line be positioned in a direct line across the field, or any other line for that matter. I am talking symbolically about the assigned roles. Meaning that in a zone defense all roles are a shared responsibility.

    When I taught youth, I taught zonal marking which is a hybred of zone and man to man. The phrase is borrowed from pointy football and means defending man to man within an assigned zone. I used to conceptualize the "flat back" line as 3 marking zones with the 2 CBs in one central zone. I used to conceptualize the "diamond" line as 3 marking backs (either man to man or zonal marking) backed by a sweeper. At one time the USYSA referred to a flat back zone defense as a "swoosh" defense. Most of the time I kept this in my head because no one except coaches would understand what I was saying. 

    Generally I asked who I talked to what team sport that they had played competitively and then used that sport to explain what I wanted to say. 

    My firm belief is that whatever "system" a team uses, that the defensive shape of the team should look the same in the same circumstances during a match. A lot of the differences were subtle, like when to hand off marks, which areas of the field to deny, and who recovers where when beat.

    I am saying this just so you understand what I meant by "flat". I had a lot of experience playing with people from other countries. I think that helped me understand that how we verbally describe the game is unimportant to experienced players and that playing the game is the best way to communicate.

  13. frank schoon replied, July 9, 2022 at 2:48 p.m.

    Bob, I understand about the flatback, which at one time was played lack the flat midline. I remember coaches discussing a diamond formation as compared to a flatback midline...
    Although teams don't play a flatback 4, they so often do fall into that shape  when running back on defense due to the opponent making a counteratack. Or so often I noticed after a goal is scored how flatlined the defense is situated...

    My problem with the zone system as compared to man to man is the former does not make you think or anticipate as well as man to man.  Playing man to man, makes the defender more involved thinking wise. One, because you need more to be aware of your direct defender because he's so close to you and two, it makes you more aware in how you can contribute to the offense ,if possible. Everything you do is in relation to how the opponent presents himself to you. But when you play zone those aspects of thinking is not immediate and perhaps won't come into play.

    Man to man if I move up I have to make sure to tell my teammate to take over my defensive duties,but in a zonal system that's different, for your responsible to hold that zone.

    Zonal is more sophisticated so the speak but I look at defense as always thinking a step ahead. In other words, when we go on offense ,I as a sweeper, will make sure that my immediate teammate will have an eye on someone to watch, in case of ball loss. Ofcourse the defender furthest away from where the ball in the backfield is able to move further away from his man,which to me would be zonal, in a sense. The German mentality is not fluid playing zonal for their mentality is more oriented for precision , more, black and white sort of thing.. 

    I'm not a fan of playing zonal, if it means, that you don't play defense until a man comes in your immediate area. To me zonal is reflected in how dangerous your nearest opponent is to the play at the moment at hand. If he isn't dangerous the defender can move away up to a point...

  14. Bob Ashpole replied, July 9, 2022 at 6:47 p.m.

    Frank, of course you are correct. The challange I had as a youth coach was in teaching the young players to use their judgment as to when to "break" the system rules. Some of the most exciting moments of soccer result from the tactical surprise of a player "breaking" the system guidelines. (I don't know any other area where kids are encouraged to break guidelines (not LOTG) when they think it best. Team sports are so good for social and mental development.)

    What I loved best about soccer was the tension between being creative and being disciplined. The most success results from having a balance of both. As a player I simply thought about how to be as effective as possible.

  15. frank schoon replied, July 9, 2022 at 9:36 p.m.

    Bob,      check this wing out for Ajax


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAXBsCKmYpk 



  16. Bob Ashpole replied, July 10, 2022 at 12:06 a.m.

    What a handful he is to mark.

  17. frank schoon replied, July 10, 2022 at 10:51 a.m.

    That's my idea of a winger, someone that is good 1v1 player that drives opponents nuts.

    And check this guy out
    Helges Finter - Fotboll 2000 - YouTube

    This the type of coach/trainer youth would love to have. These types of guys are not licensed but they can show the youth a thing or too and most imporant get them excited about the game. I don't expect every coach to do what he does,but this is the flavor of coach I would hire to run a youth team....He reminds me so much of how the youth in my days were influenced and taught

  18. Santiago 1314 replied, July 10, 2022 at 3:37 p.m.

    Bob,Frank...
    The "Funny" thing about the "Flat Back" is; It was NEVER supposed to be "Flat".
    The Modern Re-Emergence of the "Flat Back"(because Brazil has always played a Flat Back 4, and Remember how everyone used to Criticize Brazlian Defenders and Still DO.!!! They suck at Defense, but i digress)
    Was under Arrigo Sacchi(only Played Amatuer Soccer) with the AC Milan Euro Cup Champions of 1989 & 1990 {Thanks to a "Slight" Dutch Influence.. :)}
    He actually played a 2 Sweeper Concept, In order to Thwart Bob's Good Point about how to beat the Sweeper(Longer Diagonal Passes)
    Sacchi used "Shadow Play Trainging" to get the Timing Correct on Who was Sweeping and Who was "Stopper"... Looked something like my Diagram below.
    The Famous "Hockey Stick Defense" or "L"
    With the Weakside CB dropping Off like a Sweeper, while the Weakside FB: "Pinched-IN" like a 2nd #6 {o being the Ball}
    I have NO Idea why this GOOD idea was "Bastardized" into the Abysmal "Flat Back 4" of Current World Footbal...
    2 side-by-Side "Luggs/Thuggs" who DON'T want the Ball: when they get it, they want to PASS if Off, Square or Back as Fast as they Can, KICK EVERYTHING that is NOT NAILED DOWN, and are SO Un-Athletic, it's like Turning a Battleship, when they are Beat.  
                                     *  GK  *


                                              LCB

                           RCB       
                                                         LD
      RD
    o

  19. Santiago 1314 replied, July 10, 2022 at 3:53 p.m.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTbUKo7fJsk&t=149s
    It's in Italian, but you get the idea.

  20. Santiago 1314 replied, July 10, 2022 at 4:02 p.m.

    Loved the Utube on Anthony... I wonder if ManU will be able to sign him AND if he will be able to Repeat that kind of Style in EPL.???

  21. frank schoon replied, July 10, 2022 at 8:26 p.m.

    Santi, Sachi at AC Milan, went to Holland to study Ajax ,to study under Cruyff there as part of his coaching intern. He learned and followed the dutch style of play at Ajax ,this is why he bought van Basten and Rykaard two Ajax stars along with Ruud Gullit to play for AC Milan.

    Baresi was the sweeper , he forced the backline to go forward on defense instead of backwards.
    Maldini the leftback went on offense on the flank. Baresi in practice would tie the team together with ropes, in order to learn where to move as a team ad player moves. It was very controlled.

    The difference between AC Milan and other Italian teams although they were just as good was that Milan played offensively, and used their defenders as attackers ,that was the difference. And ofcourse van Basten , Rykaard, Gullit, those three made AC Milan even better.....

    Sacci didn't play at the highest level, but what he did was to follow the principles of playing good attacking soccer which he learned from Cruyff at Ajax, and ofcourse he had 3 great dutch players...

    Besides this stupid flatback, look how stupid it is for the back to be attacking down the flanks. They can't cross the ball , they're not good at 1v1, and it is very inefficient for back to constantly make up and down the flank runs. That's  why we have wingesr to do this job without having to run as much. It should be the outside midfielder who should make overlaps or unsuspecting runs past the wing not the back.....

  22. Ted Morehouse, July 8, 2022 at 7:46 p.m.

    I disagree about your assessment of Midge Purce.  She creates chaos among the defense and opportunities for the offense.  She is tough on the ball.  

Next story loading loading..

Discover Our Publications