Video I captured after the 2-1 loss to Toronto FC featuring Jermain Defoe, Michael Bradley and their head coach Ryan Nelsen.
Not sure how you guys feel about me posting this here, but those of you who are old-timers will recall I used to a player ratings thread on games in the early years. The folks over at Sounder at Heart allowed me to do the same this week on their site. It's possible we will do it all season. We'll see how it goes. It's here: http://www.sounderatheart.com/2014/3/16/5513322/sounders-players-ratings-march-15-2014 I know some of you aren't big S@H fans so if you want to argue with my ratings here instead that's fine too. Just thought I would share.
You win. Not the first time I was wrong on Big Soccer. Certainly won't be the last. Bradley was great, particularly in the first half, and Defoe took his limited chances marvelously.
One game does not a great season make. I'm sure this one game will help him adjust, but Pappa definitely gifted him one, and the other chance I would hope a striker with his pedigree would put away. We'll see how he does with all the traveling after all those years spent in England. It's a big shift from the very limited travel Tottenham had done during Europa League games.
In my mind Neagle was saved by the move to the right when Cooper came on. Remick was saved by that sub too. Neagle did have the through ball that led to the goal. But i agree he was pretty poor on the first half.
Agree He was better in the 2nd. Remick was making those runs in the first but Neagle just was not seeing him.
It was the tale of two games, just like to many last year. We looked so much better in the second half. Watched the replay again today, and I cannot be certain but on the Pappa assist to Defoe, it looked like Pappa may have been bumped just as he was making the pass. Not sure if he was try to go all the way back to Frei or just misplayed it to one of the center backs or what, but if he was bumped in the process that may have taken something off it. Not making excuses just something I saw while watching again this afternoon.
What happened to Mario Martinez? I saw his picture for the 3rd kit at the stadium but I thought his loan was terminated? To me you guys are seriously lacking wide/attacking midfielders, Neagle didn't look comfortable in one of the 3 man CAM roles.
Yeah, to me Neagle seems more like a backup forward. I want to see how Bowen plays, always thought he had a lot of potential.
anyone here read this crap? http://www.sounderatheart.com/2014/3/15/5513018/sounders-lose-toronto-2-1 it's so delusional. to say seattle lost on turnovers, how else does a team get the ball? The first goal was good play and the 2nd was a defensive error. But to say that it was against the run of play I disagree with. Toronto absolutely dominated 1st half and Seattle absolutely dominated the 2nd half. Being delusional about how your team plays doesn't make them play any better. Speaking to a friend, we both can't understand why you have so many forwards at this point either... I guess Sigi trying to play them all is why
I'd say that what you said about top flight players adjusting to MLS is true when they come midseason. The fact TFC was able to get Bradley and Defoe at the beginning of MLS season was MASSIVE. Their first match showed why
I think one of the main problems with the attack was that they were trying to put crosses into Martins like he was EJ. The thing that benefited Defoe was that his teammates and Pappa both gave him the ball the way that played to his strengths rather than Martins having his weaknesses played to. If this keeps up like this I think we're going to see a lot of discontent from Martins by midseason.
I'm not even sure you can call the 2nd half dominating. Toronto, wisely, took a more defensive posture and conceded possession. Really, all that time on the ball in the 2nd half didn't lead to much.
While I agree with Ed that it was the tale of two halves and that the Sounders were completely ineffective in the 1st half, I don't think Toronto "absolutely dominated" the first half. I think both midfields essentially negated each other up until Toronto's second goal and then Toronto packed it in for the rest of the game. I could also see how S@H could say the goals were against the run of play (and be wrong). If you are solely looking at time of possession, Toronto only won the possession game in the first 5 minutes and 70-75 minute with the Sounders pretty much owning the rest of the 5 minute breakdown starting in the 2oth minute (immediately after Defoe's first goal). I think a lot of the Sounders possession was meaningless and that Toronto's was more effective in that first 25 minutes before they packed it in, but to call that dominance? Meh.
What did everyone think of Pineida's performance? While his substititution corresponded with Toronto packing it in, I'm not sure it was a coincidence that our offense became more effective when he subbed in.
I liked him, especially in the first half. He made some passes through the middle that you just don't see made in MLS very often. Sigi said he's not 90-minutes fit though, and I think you could tell in the second half when he had as many turned-over passes as he did ones that opened up anything. Most important he was calm on the ball and seemingly always in contact when he needed to be, providing his teammates an outlet. I like that level of maturity. I doubt he is going to score many goals or anything like that, but I wouldn't mind seeing him next to Alonso a lot more and Evans pushed out to the wing as a replacement for Neagle or Pappa.
It's curious, but during the game, the lady sitting next to me said that Martins was too short. Riiight. She said it several times, most likely prompted by the countless balls in the air Martins could not get on to. Eventually I just had to make an ass of myself and tell her that his height was not the problem. Not playing to his strength ( que the Balboa qoute) was the problem. Floating a ball from the back or from the wings and expecting Martins to have much of an impact on the game, will lead to frustration all around. Alternatively, I could watch Pappa-Martins give and goes all match long.
I like him in the middle more than Evans. Evans to me isn't that creative or looks to find the ball that can get behind or unlock the defense.
Gonzalo Pineda: ‘It’s a great team with a great crowd, and I’m happy to be part of that.’ http://blogs.seattletimes.com/sound...-great-crowd-and-im-happy-to-be-part-of-that/
My post in PBP thread in N&A forum *** I think Nelsen played the game well tactically. He knew TFC was likely going to concede possession percentage, so he tried to go for high press in midfield leading to counter attack, or force Seattle to attack through flanks and cross. 'Defend to attack' is one of Nelsen's mantras tactically. With Bradley, you have one of best DMs who has high anticipation, and Seattle simply couldn't adjust enough to high pressure in midfield. Both TFC goals came from counters (Henry to Osorio to Defoe) and Bradley pressuring Pappa leading to bad back pass which Defoe pounced on. Osorio did his part too, trying to be more responsible defensively if Bradley pushes up. And for most part, Osorio/Bradley tandem worked well, except one time when both were caught too far up the pitch with Osorio causing a turnover which lead to Dempsey goal. And Seattle played 4-2-3-1, which is suppose to overload the midfield with numbers advantage. So, Seattle was forced to try to attack through the flanks, and the stats were not good. Opta says Seattle attempted 36 crosses with 13.6% success (and we all remember lulz worthy Cooper cross near the end of the game...) while TFC only attempted 13 crosses, but had 30.8% success. One of the reasons for poor Seattle crossing was that it was Martins as lone striker. Fast, but short guy. Vs athletic Henry and wily veteran CB in Caldwell. You're not going to win many aerial duels that way. I also didn't understand why Marco Pappa played RW most of the game when he's best at LW, and vice versa for Neagle. I think Sigi wanted his wingers to cut in, leaving room for the fullbacks to attack the space created when TFC defenders pinch in to cover the wingers. But Yedlin didn't overlap as much as he usually does I thought, which was due to high work rate defensively by Jackson (who had a shit game offensively). Remick was abused by Rey defensively, but he was more involved offensively. I think that was the reason why Rey was subbed earlier than Jackson, partly to protect the lead, a yellow card, and Rey didn't put in as much effort defensively. By late game, Sigi tried to overload TFC defenders with more strikers with virtually going 4-2-4 ish, (Cooper and Barrett subs, plus Martins, Dempsey), it was too late, and none of Seattle strikers can play the hold up role with all the crosses coming in. Like Vancouver-NY game in Week 1, it's not how much possession you have; it's what you can do with it. It could have easily been a bad day for TFC if Defoe didn't put away his chances (but you leave a finisher like Defoe with a sec or 2 to place his shots, he's going to score 9 out of 10 times), or if Jackson got sent off for kicking Dempsey (then again, Dempsey should have been sent off for sacking Bloom and being an overall douche) or Bloom got called for a PK for hauling down Neagle (contact was initiated outside the box, so I think a freekick outside the box would have been a fair call)... anyways, I thought the ref didn't have a good game. What I'm saying is, TFC was able to impose more of their game plan than Seattle. I never felt other than 2 shots on goal, Seattle was particularly threatening, and Nelsen outcoached Sigi. (and TFC had very thin bench)