On the contrary. I believe that he thought that nothing like what afterwards happened (sacking of the mule head) was really coming, so he just let his "unleashed mutt" go lose and did whatever he wanted to do ( just another "ego-maniac" that can do whatever he wants, because it is "him"), as he knew that despite whatever would come due to it, he would be forgiven for, and afterwards called to the team once more as if nothing had happened. In all this time in the NT, he got away from lots of things, including the "baptize" chapter, so why wouldn`t he get away with something that he could do, in an unsignificant friendly game, as the one against Serbia ?. In his European teams, he never acts the same way, because he knows that back there no one will excuse him and more so, he could get punished with his paycheck afterwards, as well. But when he comes to Chile, he thinks that he is "untouchable", and acts likewise. And least of all, if the "mule head" was still at charge.
Bueno en vistas de las circunstancias, al parecer ahora ya no va a ser necesario de que Valdivia se sienten a conversar con el "cabeza de mula".
Medel in the back line is actually good imo, we will finally have a good defender on the right side, plus with Iturra/Carmona we don´t lose much quality. Under Bielsa he played there and did it extremely well. As for Vidal, Sampaoli has already said that Vidal is in, no problem there.
To be fair, I think that Sampaoli is the real deal. He proved that with Universidad de Chile already, with local and continental success. However, I don't think that he is right for Chile. On the positive side, the current national team players will -- or should -- be able to adjust to his tactical demands without too many difficulties. Many of them, of course, have experienced it to some degree before. The problem that I have with advocates of this kind of approach is that they generally do not like to strategise too much. I find them to be stubborn; they do not like to change the system to implement a 'Plan B' or 'C', for example, against any adversary. In short, they tend to live and die by the same sword. I like the way that Sampaoli's teams play football. The style is elegant and the football is dynamic. But I find it too open at times and, as a result, not ideally suited for the knock-out stages of a world cup, especially with our defensive limitations. I really wanted a manager who could teach the players how to adapt to a more balanced, measured and stoic style. I think that we have, once again, played the safe card and chosen the 'familiar' over the 'unknown'.
Good point though to be fair I think the situation right now is more "critical" than actually open for experimentation. Granted every coach is a risk (there is no coach that will be a guarantee of WC qualification), Sampaoli is currently the least risky option, as you also pointed out. I am cautiously optimistic, personally.
I never undrestood the need to look for someone who knows or understands el famoso 'medio local'. really, why? why do we need someone who knows ow to succeed in a mediocre league or deal with mediocre players? I'm not talking about Sampoli, i'm talking about the premise generally. 90% of the team, and really 100% of it at times, plays and triumphs outside of Chile. There is no benefit to having someone who understands 'el medio local'. As for Sampaoli being the 'safe choice' i think you're right. he's been so successful in chile that its hard for anyone to disagree with his candidacy. But that doesn't make him the right choice. There are things to worry about. - he's demonstrated that it takes players quite some time, even when he has them on a daily basis, to understand and work well into his scheme. This is tie that we don't have with over 50% of qualifiers done. - his passion for the game has led him to take significant risks in important games to disastrous results....Chile needs to be able to lock down defensively, as we should have against Colombia and Ecuador....Sampaoli's teams don't defend well when they can't retain possession. at the end of the day though, we'll be alright. the players are good enough to make the WC regardless (almost) of who the dt is
I am sorry but I don't buy this point: Colombians said the same thing over the last 3-4 cycles. Their player/talent pool was 3rd or 4th best but the results and the teams overall during the last 3 WCQ cycles were not. I may be alone in this but if qualification ever depended on Chile having to lock down defensively or applying a predominantly defensive mentality system for a specific system, I think we would be closer to being eliminated than going through.
I think it is just a requirement invented by the powers to be to justify their choosing Sampaoli over other possible deserving candidates.
- I'm not saying its a birthright, what i'm saying is that our rivals are Uruguay and Venezuela and i see us as having better players than both, and despite having hit rock bottom i think we r better and will beat them out --- have them both at home - anyone else worried about how the guy that's taking over the NT made tremendous tactical errors that have resulted in huge defeats against Union, and others? this game was largely lost at the bench. and it goes to what i was saying before. you're up 1-0 going into the second half you have to make sure they don't score 2 goals in one half...a quality team should be able to do this EASILY..... the inability to hold the lead speaks volumes of the coach's philosophy and the risks he takes. not liking this at all not to mention the fact that la u has lost EVERYTHING this year
Si asume Sampaoli, el DT de los sparrings será el argentino Arán (así escribe?? actual DT de la Sub19 de O'Higgins) y el técnico de la Sub20 sería Mario Salas, según el CdF.
Después de algunas goleadas que han sufrido los equipos de Sampaoli últimamente, espero que la ANFP reconsidere bien si en realidad lo quiere. No veo a Chile mejorando en el aspecto defensivo.
You do bring up a good point but to be fair, la U had Magalhaes sent off in the second halff though that does not excuse then allowing 3 goals. La U and its coaching staff should have enough "resources" to seal the game and qualification. Sampaoli is indeed tactically naive.
there was that red card, but there was also a legitimate goal that was called back and two clear penalties not called. they're lucky it wasn't a 7-1 game, seriously. Sampaoli is not a bad coach, but he has shown that he isn't a top guy either.
Sampaoli no me da garantías de seguridad defensiva. Pero de todas formas, creo que nos llevará al Mundial con la calidad de jugadores que tenemos.
this is true....though i'd say the same thing about pretty much all of the other candidates...and even of borghi
Para que eso sea posible, en Chile tendrían que nacer nuevos "Elías Figueroa" y "Alberto Quintano", juntos a la vez, como lo fué en el pasado. O sea weones grandes de buena contextura física, capaces de lidiar con todos los aspectos del quehacer defensivo. En esto hay que ser prácticos y realistas, en Chile, individuos con estas características son muy escasos y más todavía que sean buenos para jugar a la pelota (tuvimos mucha suerte de en algún momento contar con los jugadores previamente mencionados, lo que es muy poco común para Chile, pero eso ya es pasado). Por esto es que hoy, se le extraña encarecidamente a Waldo Ponce, quien a pesar de aproximarse a las características necesarias para este tipo de labores, aún está "al debe" y como no tiene a nadie que le sirva de socio para estas labores, por ello su presencia igual es insuficiente para garantizar solidez defensiva. Chile es, y siempre será un país de enanos. A lo mucho podrán jugar más ordenados en lo defensivo, pero a la primera pelota aerea y/o "trancazo" legal de juego, igual nos vamos a ir a la cresta. Chile no tiene los elementos para jugar en forma defensiva, por ello se hace necesario aplicar la política de "un buen ataque, supera la falencia defensiva". Lamentablemente, estamos cagados y siempre nos meterán goles, lo importante es que nosotros seamos capaces de hacer más goles que los rivales.
As I've said in the past on this forum, there's a difference between (a) knowing how and when to lock down defensively and (b) adopting a predominantly defensive system. Chile needs 'a'. Every good team today -- every contender for a title, whether club, international, league or tournament-based -- needs to know how and when to lock down. All the best teams do it. Chile, if managed correctly, can win the majority of its games by pressing. The talent is there. But there will be games where something different needs to be attempted; a plan 'B'. Every side is different; not every team will be beaten by the same methods.
You've mentioned some good points. However, I don't think that having an Elías Figueroa and Alberto Quintano is necessary. We need defenders like the Jorge Vargas who captained Reginna in Italy ('99-03) and Pablo Contreras during his Monaco ('99-01) and Celta Vigo years ('01-07). These two guys were competitive in their best years without being great. They were also not tall (about 5'11 or 180cm) but good in the air (Contreras, in particular, was a monster in the air). The decent defenders that we produce need to go abroad when they have peaked in Chile; that is, when Chilean football can no longer facilitate their development. At 23 years of age, a defender should already be tactically and technically ready to move to at least a mid-tier European league. I think that Chile has had at least a handful of decent defenders in the past 10 years -- with considerable potential -- who were probably managed poorly by their agents and/or clubs. I remember Waldo Ponce at one stage had offers from a couple of teams in France, one or two in Spain and one in Turkey (if I'm not mistaken, it was Galatasaray). He ended up going to Cruz Azul in Mexico; a competitive league, but also a dead-end. Rafael Olarra, in his best years, was also a defender who possessed the physical characteristics to play in Europe, but nothing ever eventuated. I consider both examples to have been significant set-backs for the Chilean national team, albeit in different periods. We need to learn from this.
Point well-taken but even when when you make the distinction, I still do not think that Chile would be able to win games by "knowing when to lock down defensively", even if the coach Mourinho or Di Matteo. That is not to say the team's defending--individually and as a unit--cannot improve.
Hace un par de años leí un artículo en un diario (la tercera me parece) sobre la estatura media del chileno y como ha ido aumentando en el último tiempo. La cosa es que es la altura media del chileno según ese reportaje era de 1,74 mts y fracción, muy cerca del 1,75 mts, en mujeres si que estaba bajo, no lo recuerdo muy bien ahora. O sea, hablamos de una estatura más que decente y eso de que el chileno es en general enano, es un mito. No somos Senegal, está claro, pero tampoco un país enano. Lo que sucede es que en Chile se hace poco deporte y no se nutre de gente alta, que existe y bastante. En otro punto, yo crecí a finales de los 80 y mucho de los 90 viendo a Chile con esquemas ratones que se basaban en seguridad defensiva y sin tener grandes defensores precisamente, te doy que eran mejores que los de hoy, pero te digo que por mí pasa sólo por un tema de aplicación. Si te fijas en el futbol mundial, no se marcan grandes diferencias y eso se debe a que las selecciones son aplicadas en defensa. Chile comparado con países de similar nivel, es de los pocos que SIEMPRE sale goleado ante Brasil, por nombrar un ejemplo. Lo que nos ha pasado es que en nuestro país la afición futbolera ha cambiado de mentalidad y piensa que la única forma válida de jugar es siempre al frente, se he formado un culto a jugar de esa manera, no cabe la posibilidad de ser defensivo. De hecho, a los técnicos los critican por "ratones" y no tanto por los resultados.
Muy interesante tu información y haces un buen argumento. Me atrevo a agregar que el estilo del fútbol chileno siempre tiende a ser igual de muchos pases y lento, como si estuviera adaptado a ganar el quien vive con jugadores de baja estatura. Hago notar sin embargo que Bielsa le dio mucho más velocidad a nuestro estilo lo que sí dió grandes resultados. Lamentablemente la era Bielsa parece que se terminó al menos para la selección. Respecto a la estatura de las mujeres, puede ser tal cual, pero ayer nuestro Colo-Colo femenino ganó la Copa Libertadores, lo que es un gran triunfo en sudamérica. Cabe notar que también tenemos 5 chilenas jugando en Estados Unidos. Cristiane Endler, María José Rojas, Valentina Lefort, Marion Bravo y María Francisca Mardones. Todas haciéndolo con gran éxito en sus respectivas universidades.
Si, concuerdo bastante con Sin Dios ni Ley, eso de la estatura es un mito. Hay una gran diferencia entre los jovenes y las personas sobre los 40 años. Tiene que ver más con la cultura deportiva del chileno promedio, pocas canchas (y pagadas más encima) y mala alimentacion (no por escasez, sino por exceso)