Jozy and the Footycats: Altidore at Sunderland

Doesn't matter; still has to be a penalty and I've seen it called before (Messi stepped on Nesta's leg in the box and was awarded a penalty). Not calling it encourages defenders to go to ground early and try to get stepped on--reduces the riskiness of committing to a sliding tackle/block.

 

Ref whistled for a foul in the box.

 

Already expecting a post like that ( ), but seriously, that was not a legitimate penalty, Altidore basically stepped on Azpilicueta who was sliding. Bad referee call.

 

We just prefer to use tangible stats which show a player's worth to the team, instead of using daft stuff like touches of the ball and % goals scored whilst a certain player is on the pitch

 

Ah, the old British empiricist vs. continental rationalist debate....

 

Well, the post I was responding to mentioned that "Altidore would be remembered by Liverpool & Everton fans" (paraphrasing) and thus my post wasn't about who "should" get credit but rather who "Liverpool fans in fact are giving credit too."

That said, if you're a Liverpool fan winning the penalty didn't get the job done. It was the scoring of the penalty that put them on the brink.

As for shooting more. I just made me think about that wickham goal. I don't know what to make of it but when he basically got that tap in the first thing i thought was that's a goal that comes from a guy just going and getting in front of the goal. Occasionally i'd like to see Jozy get in that area to just poach a goal that way.

fair enough. i'm not sure that qualifies as "worst to first" or if drawing an iffy penalty is gonna make him stand out to Liverpool fans. especially when what helped liverpool was the scoring not the drawing of the penalty, NOT that they are unrelated because one doesn't come without the other.

 

I think it's a little of both. I think there is a dislike for statistics (and that analytical side) but I also think people far to often take a statistic and try to use it to prove way more that it can prove. For example scoring goals why a player is on a pitch doesn't mean that player is a material reason for the goal. The keeper's on the pitch. The centerback is on the pitch. There's nothing wrong with a possession stat. I'm a possession guy, but the pure statistic doesn't tell you if the possession is effective. There are games when Barcelona had 70% possession in the other teams half assaulting the other teams goal and never being under pressure and winning by 5 goals. I've also seen them have 70% possession at the like the halfway line and create barely a decent scoring opportunity. Headers won doesn't tell you where on the pitch they are. And maybe if you're West Ham with Carroll it's great to have headers but if you've got short strikers maybe headers lots of headers shows you that the team is simply not following the manager's plan of playing to is strikers strength. Hell even a shots or shots on goal doesn't tell you if they are dangerous shots of a team taking lots of speculative shots. I like stats. I think you can look at Jozy last season and go, most of his goals aren't from headers off crosses or route one high ball play and think, "maybe we need to get the best out of him by using different plan of attack that's not reliant on crosses and long outlet balls." I think stats are wonderfully useful, but only if you put them in context of tons of other variables, like style of play, game tactics, score, whether you intend to play on the break or press and pin a team back, etc, etc. Anyway my two cents. Off to In-N-Out Burger. Cheat day. Ok Cheat week.

 

I will say that, for a PK called at that angle, it is for sure a foul that is not always called. But as far as I know (it's been a while) from the USSF ref perspective anyway, it can be considered a foul and is most certainly not a foul on Jozy in any case. From a pragmatic standpoint, once a player who has given the ball away cheaply leaves their feet in an effort to regain the ball in the box, they are always risking a call. It is not a wise play, especially fueled by chagrin. Human nature tends to judge those actions a bit more carefully.

S'land and Jozy, as Poyet said, had a bit of luck - but I think they were due.

 

Because a player was tripped by a careless tackle? I will say if Jozy gamed that one, he did a really good job. I think he was going to zico and try to lay back to whoever that was at the top of the box (Johnson?) in the wider angle.

 

Pfft, get on my level, bro. More like Cheat Life for me...

 

As far as I can tell (and one video does not tell the whole story) Azpilicueta is not trying to recover the ball. He is trying to block the ground pass/score. I think the difficulty for those taking Jozy's side is that Azpilicueta is moving parallel to the trajectory of the ball while Jozy steps away from the trajectory of the ball and into Azpilicueta's path. The difficulty for Azpilicueta's defenders is that his dragging back foot takes out Jozy's planted foot which jozy would say was planted there for the purpose of moving towards the ball, something he would say he was entitled to, especially since Azpilicueta's lead foot, nearest Jozy, had passed and was not interfered with while the dragging foot, not visible to Jozy was portruding outside to the side of Azpilicueta's body and was used to take him out after Jozyhad planted his foot in a legitimate place. Was Jozy entitled to plant his foot where he did before it was taken out? Dunno. Jozy would reasonably ask why Azpilicueta found it necessary to drag his hind leg if his purpose was simply to block a pass. No doubt the ref will point to exactly that question.

 

Not a single Sunderland player tried to get in front of his man so Altidore could drive a cross across the box. Its a good job Azpilicueta lunged in, Altidore had no options.

I'm back and forth on whether its a penalty. Essentially Altidore stands on Azpilicueta (thats not to infer that Altidore does anything wrong btw), but you could argue its reckless play by the defender. Can see why the ref gives it, looked a stonewaller in real time

 

Your "looked a stonewaller in real time" quote is the significant part, since in real time Jozy was -trying to put his foot down - and got wiped out by the defender in the box.

If life could be lived at slo-mo replay speed, sure Jozy had options other than the one he attempted to take.

But life is not the Matrix movie, so it was indeed a 'stone-waller' penalty in my post hoc as well as in the linesman and the ref's real-time view

How much or how little credit Jozy gets from Liverpool, Sunderland or Chelsea fans for Azpilicueta's blunder does not much matter really.

The positive I see for USMNT in Brazil is there may be just a fraction of a second's hesitation on the part of defenders dealing with Jozy, seeing as how bad Azpilicueta looked on the play in question. One might hope that Jozy does something useful with that fraction, at least a couple times.

And then, hopefully, Jozy's potential post-Sunderland options open up just a bit wider. Personally, I am guessing Jozy could do well in France if given a chance.

 

The USSF advice specifically deals with the dragging foot, noting that even if the lead foot get ball (since "I got ball" is the usual defence for a careless or reckless slide tackle that both gets ball and trips the player.) that if the trailing foot then trips the player it can still be a foul. In this case, the slide was to block where he thought the ball would be, but if, for instance, Jozy had cut left with the ball and been contacted like this there is not question it would be a foul.

Would this be any different if Jozy had, say, done a step over, his right foot "going away from ball" as he came across right to left, and say, planted in the same spot?

Again, I would say this is a pk that always can be called, but often is not, especially in that spot, but that Azipilecueta was always risking a call once he left his feet - it is much less easy to avoid contacting - and tripping - the attacker when you are off your feet. And if Jozy was just playing the ball how he intended, then that is clear evenidence that is where meant to put his foot. And if he put it there to job the call - well, double good on him. That would make him a sneaky cheat, but very well executed and very hard to do. And clearly he did not "dive" in the sense of faking the trip. He was tripped for sure.

 

Okay, now I am confused. In what way are stats you do not prefer not tangible? If it is worthwhile to accurately note the guy has one goal in 28 league appearances, it is also worthwhile to accurately note that he usually gets half the normal touches of a striker scoring at a higher rate gets or less. It is also certainly worth noting when the team scores 2.25 times as often when he is leading the attack line, that falls squarely under player worth to the team.

Yeah, I think it is just the resistance thing. It makes it too bloody American or sumfin.

Ummm. So is the steward, but he is not the lone striker. I think it is safe to say there are varying degrees of how relevant such a stat is, with #9 forward being just about the most relevant of all.

Actually, you can look at last season and see that five of his goals came off headers. He also had a few off long balls and another few off low crosses. This season, he plays on team that is far more likely to have a defensive midfielder or wingback shoot from Mars than he is to see a well-hit long ball or cross. Yesterday, there were several crosses and long balls that dropped nowhere near Altidore, giving him zero chance to grab them.

But, yes, he is not a striker that wants to exclusively do these things. He likes most to run close combos and face the top of the area, with those other bits sprinkled in along the way. I have yet to see Sunderland attempt to utilize all he offers.

Okay, well now you are just being mean.

 

But he didn't.

 

Among themselves I am sure the refs are reminding each other that such penalties are not awarded when the attacking side is not in any position that would suggest the ball could be scored - not that I have any idea what the bird's eye view of the pitch was at that time. After all, a certain kind of justice is served when the ref can say "gosh I did not see the foul but he would not have scored anyway".

 

Where is the foul? Which law of the game was violated? Please be specific. If you step on the opponent's leg and fall down, that's your fault, not the opponent's. Anyone can run into the penalty area, step on a defender's leg, and fall down. Should that be an attacking strategy now?

I see no evidence that Jozy dove. I give him the benefit of the doubt. He was looking to his right at the ball. His long, exaggerated step to the left was a bit bizarre. Perhaps he was trying to shield or obstruct. I don't know. But the defender did nothing wrong. So from that video alone, it's fairly clear to me that there was no foul, and therefore no penalty. However, if there is a different camera angle, I would love to see it, as that one wasn't the best.

 

No question Jozy could do well in France.

B.t.w- suppose Jozy's fall that earned a penalty saves Sunderland from relegation (a very strong possibility at this stage), who can say his multi million € price tag was not worth it.....

Maybe they will give him a goose down cushion for his seat on the bench embroidered by the Owner's wife with the names of thankful mates

 

The defender fouled the attacking player in the penalty area. The linesman altered the head official of the infraction and a penalty was awarded.

(To be less of a jerk, I'd say follow Azpulicueta's LEFT leg - not the right leg).

 

So, how about a 442 with Wickham and Altidore?

It could maybe be the start of something great..

 

To me, using the arrangement that schooled Newcastle (and was in effect for most of their better performances) would be the plan. And right now, in that arrangement, Altidore is the sub. He just has to earn it back, like anyone else. It will be good for him.

Besides, I really do not think that dropping them to two midfielders in the middle of the park is any kind of answer, considering the choices for that two. For my money, Colback is the only central midfielder who has even approached his top form level this season. The rest have only had moments or stray top games, at best. For the large part, they have all been bafflingly crap. Or in the case of Cattermole, unsurprisingly crap. How a club like Stoke can activel attempt to pay millions of GBP for him is beyond me.

Had they managed a proper bid for Bradley last summer, things might be a bit different. Lots of had theys to go around on this team, unfortunately.

 

Our entire culture is infused with Americanisms and American influence. I couldnt give a shit if something has an American tinge to it, I'm an adult and as such am able to view life without the weight of petty tribalism.

Stats are meaningless without context. Touches of the ball means nothing. Jon Walters takes 3 touches more than Messi to control a ball, doesnt mean hes a better player. Rooney had loads of touches today, but he was meant to be the lone forward, and the majority of his touches came in deeper positions, pulling the whole attack too deep.

Scoring goals when a certain player is in the team again needs context. Did the player influence these goals at all, or was he just on the pitch? Stoke scored more goals with Ricardo Fuller, a talented, but inconsistent player, in the team than Mama Sidibe, whose only asset was his height and strength, because Fuller would get the starts against the smaller, beatable sides, and Mama would play against the teams we needed to bully like Arsenal. Different players are worth more to the team for different games/styles, you can't just say "we score more with Player A in the stadium, he must be the better option"

 

No. Wickham's first game was worse than Jozy but he subsequently played 2 more in which he showed clear superiority to anything Jozy had done in his previous 30. Wickham gets the start untill further. Jozy may come on to show his stuff as a sub for the forseeable future. It is up to Jozy to earn his keep.