In Defense of Bobby Convey

[PVancouver]

I’m not about to say Convey was one of the best players on the field, but he had a decent game and doesn’t deserve all the derision he has received for his performance against Mexico. While he did not do anything outstanding, he didn’t do anything particularly bad either, and the reason he did not have a larger impact on the game is that either the play was away from him, his teammates were unable to get him the ball, or his teammates simply chose not to deliver him the ball. There were several times he called for the ball in a good position and did not receive it. In my mind (and I realize I am in an extremely tiny minority, so there is really any need to say so) there is nothing that he did or didn’t do in this game for him to indicate that he doesn’t deserve another start against Mexico.

06:24 Short pass to Corrales
07:22 - Stuffed by Castro on dribble
07:56 - Had cross attempt blocked, fouled by Castro
11:03 + Intercepted Mexican pass
11:05 + Short pass to Altidore
13:28 + Short pass to Corrales
13:31 + Long pass to Dempsey
13:35 + Short pass to Altidore
16:29 Under great pressure, cleared a ball upfield too strong for Altidore
22:28 Blocked Mexican pass attempt over touch
24:37 Stayed reasonably close to Arce running down right center of field, although one could argue the point
27:22 Trailed fast break counter attack by Donovan, was too late to reach Donovan’s center pass over Altidore’s head
29:55 + Short pass to Altidore
31:01 + His only play was to boot a ball upfield before it bounced over touch, a lesser player would not have reached the ball
31:47 - Quick turn and pass to Altidore was a great idea that didn’t work
32:12 Short pass to Corrales
32:19 + Short pass to Corrales
35:03 - Another attempt at clever one touch pass to Altidore nearly nutmegs Castro but fails
36:06 - Allowed Arce to get a bit of a jump on him but managed to stay close, Arce nearly scores
39:00 Nearly able to cross ball to Altidore, but cross blocked
39:03 + Short pass to Dempsey
44:58 + Quick turn long pass to Dempsey had to be more luck than skill
48:23 + Short pass to Clark
51:47 + Completed dicey long pass to Moor
53:24 + Short pass to Altidore, fouled & hurt on play
57:34 - Unable to block cross from Castro deep in left corner
61:24 + Sent what looked like a good long ball to Altidore, only Altidore fell or was knocked to the ground
64:05 Short pass to Altidore
64:58 Short pass to Feilhaber
69:38 Lewis replaces Convey

[Mr. Warmth]

I’m not about to say Convey was one of the best players on the field, but he had a decent game and doesn’t deserve all the derision he has received for his performance against Mexico.

Yes he does

[Martin Fischer]

Bottom line is that Convey's job in that game was to unbalance the Mexican defense. It is not his job to play the ball square or backwards.

He got the ball in strong positions two times early on (#s 2 and 3 on your chart) and utterly failed to achieve this job. The rest of the match he didn't even try to do his job. Lewis at least got forward.

[JohnR]

Square passes are easy, being a proper winger is hard. Bobby can only do easy right now.

[deron]

I rarely have anything bad to say about Convey. The problem is I rarely have anything good to say about him.

When he was just starting I thought Convey would really be a force. Then with DC he seemed to want to try to do too much, often times not being very generous with the ball and more often with space. Reading has solved all that, but the trade off seems to be having a player who really seems reluctant to put his stamp on the game - in the moments he's given.

He may have a more cultured touch than Beasley and a prettier cross, but I doubt there's ever been a game when I didn't know Beasley was on the field. Can't say that for Bobby.

[PVancouver]

Lewis at least got forward.Lewis did not complete a single pass and never even got complete possession of the ball. I'm not saying he had a bad game, but if you judge him by the standards Convey is being judged by he was no better and probably slightly worse.

deron, how much of an impact did you think Donovan made on the game?

I did not label the direction of the passes, obviously many of them were lateral or backward, but there were also a lot of complaints about long balls and lack of US possession. Why is Convey is getting hammered for maintaining possession with short passes?

[Red Card]

Convey as an International is off the wall. The guy can be a decent club player, but he doesn't take charge of an International game. He is not a difference maker. The question should be who is propping him up so that he gets starting time. Is it someone at USSF? Is it Bradley? The guy is weak on the International level and it doesn't say good things about Bradley if he continues to go to him. That's my 2 cents.

[SamsArmySam]

Convey's career (and Beasley's, too, for that matter) seems to run in these long phases of good and bad form. He's in the bad form phase at the moment, but he'll be back.

[Nutmeg]

My problem with this analysis, yours of Moor, and also your defining "good" passing from the defense all pretty much comes down to this:

You seem to want to analyze on a touch-by-touch basis whether the player accomplished what they intended to do. If they did, you define it as "good."

What you seem to be missing in this analysis is determining whether what they intended to do was the right decision in the first place?

As others have said, Convey intended to make a lot of safe, conservative plays. Good for him on a touch-by-touch list. Bad for the team because that isn't what the team needed.

He sucked.

[onefineesq]

I can't see how anyone could look at that game and think that Bobby was decent. As Martin said, Convey was played in a nearly purely attacking role, and came right out of the gate getting stuffed. I didn't see him make any incisive passes. I didn't see him beat anyone off the dribble. I didn't see him make any penetrating runs without the ball which would either draw defenders or lead to him being on the receiving end of a dangerous pass. He was a total flop in the game. That's not to say that he is a useless player, but he was certainly useless in that game. Honestly, until something changes he needs to stop being called up.

[Marko72]

First, I agree with Nutmeg above. Second, the fact that he couldn't beat a man if his man laid down on the pitch that night had two major effects: it took away a passing option from Bradley, who had an extremely difficult time finding a rhythm, eventually losing his midfield battle with Pardo and Torrado, and secondly, it allowed the defense to shift to the man Mexico feared the most, Landon Donovan. Convey made his teammates worse. He sucked.

I'm noticing a trend here. Believe it or not, this touch-for-touch tracking really is not as accurate an assessment as it might seem to you.

[DoctorD]

Your analysis of Drew Moor was though provoking. But Bobby did little commendable in that game.

EDIT: by the way, now I'll be expecting a "Tim Howard: Overrated" thread. ;)

[onefineesq]

Convey's career (and Beasley's, too, for that matter) seems to run in these long phases of good and bad form. He's in the bad form phase at the moment, but he'll be back. I'm going to respond to this because of my beliefs about Beasley, but it's going to come off as me Bobby-hating. The difference between the two is simple. As a professional of 7 years or so, Convey has had exactly 1 really good season. As a professional of 7 years or so, Beasley has had 5 really good seasons. I think it's unfair to Beasley for people to continually lump him in with Convey when Bobby comes up for discussion. Beasley has done enough over the course of his career to merit cutting him some slack when things aren't going well. Bobby has not.

[Nutmeg]

I'm noticing a trend here. Believe it or not, this touch-for-touch tracking really is not as accurate an assessment as it might seem to you.

It isn't useful, in my experience, when you try to draw definitive conclusions about a player based on that alone. It's exceptionally useful when it is partnered with something like software that can zoom to a particular play and you can analyze a player's decisions based on the choices he had available to him at the time, including:


Was the player in the right place when he received the ball? Could he have made a better run?
What passing options were available to him, and did he pass to the best option?
Was he in a position where beating a player 1v1 would be the best alternative?
Was the pass delivered appropriately? Did it lead to a 50/50 scenario? Was it played too hard or inaccurately?Every single decision on a soccer pitch can be analyzed in much more depth, and there are some key decisions in any game that make the difference between winning and losing, if they are executed appropriately.

I wouldn't, for example, count Convey's decision to take on Castro as a bad decision. He tried to do the right thing, but he got embarrassed. It was downhill for Bobby from there. After that, he became incredibly risk adverse in a position where we needed a player who would try things.

As JohnR said, Convey opted for the easy, probably because he found it quickly that he couldn't do the hard stuff.

[appoo]

He sucked against Mexico. IMO that's painfully obvious.

In his defense...it's not really hbis fault. He's lost about 50% of his pace, and for a 24 year old who's never had to deal with that, that's HUGE.

Before the world cup, he was basically torching everyone he faced including Arne Freidrich. He did some of that in the World Cup, and he was doign that in the first few Prem matches he played in, even out-dueling Gary Neville in a match. Shortly after that his knee problems began and this is where he is now with that.

Unless he can get back to his 06 health, he's in trouble. If this is the healthiest he can get, his international and possibly club career are done. He was THAT bad.

And as a Convey fan, that hurts to say. I'll go out on a limb and say that a completly healthy Convey is our best winger. But that may never happen again.

[JohnR]

As JohnR said, Convey opted for the easy, probably because he found it quickly that he couldn't do the hard stuff.

Tried a move or two, he had nothing, so he shut it down and played square. Good thinking. I don't blame Bobby, the man could only do what his body permitted. This one is on BB.

[CommonSense]

Convey as an International is off the wall. The guy can be a decent club player, but he doesn't take charge of an International game. He is not a difference maker. The question should be who is propping him up so that he gets starting time. Is it someone at USSF? Is it Bradley? The guy is weak on the International level and it doesn't say good things about Bradley if he continues to go to him. That's my 2 cents.

Before his injury, during his run with Reading, he was playing pretty well at all levels. I don't think there's any grand conspiracy theory, he's one of the few Yanks that was in season, getting playing time for a top flight club in England. It's kind of a no brainer as to why he started, Beasley is injured, and we need speed on the wings against Mexico, something Davis and Eddie Lewis both lack. It seems to be like Bobby lost a fair bit of pace due to that long, horrible injury, ala Ben Olsen. Moving forward I think Bob learned a lesson about Bobby, unless he regains his top flight form for Reading (as in not just playing, but playing well) we need to embrace youth (Rogers, Zizzo, Mapp) or focus on providing good service, but no ability to beat the defender 1vs1, from the position (Davis and Lewis).

Bobby had a horrible game, his 1st half was just unbelievable. It seemed like he forgot out to play the game. We had the 3-2 break that he just absoultely butchered and everytime he tried to take on a defender he was stripped. Clearly, having Corrales behind him didn't help, no words can describe that abomination of defending, but Bobby didn't do a DAMN THING moving forward. If we're playing an empty bucket we need production from the wings, period.

Bobby Convey failed, NEXT. I really think that by 2010 the position will be up for grabs between Mapp, Rogers, and obviously Beasley. I REALLY like Rogers, the kid is very quick, good dribbling skills, crosses pretty well, solid finisher, and seems to have a good grasp of the game. He was playing fantastic football at the end of Columbus' season, although IIRC he was mostly playing on the right, he did quite well at the U20 WC, and played on the left. I'm convinced he's our best option for the future, but not really ready yet.

I'm concerned Beasley will take a long time to regain form, like his last injury spell. He's one of my favorite nats, his crosses are seldom world class, and he has an elephant's touch at times, but you can see how important he is when we play a side like Mexico. His ability to cover the entire left flank, defend well, and hit on the counter is unparalleled in the US pool.

[PVancouver]

It isn't useful, in my experience, when you try to draw definitive conclusions about a player based on that alone. It's exceptionally useful when it is partnered with something like software that can zoom to a particular play and you can analyze a player's decisions based on the choices he had available to him at the time, including:

....

I wouldn't, for example, count Convey's decision to take on Castro as a bad decision. He tried to do the right thing, but he got embarrassed. It was downhill for Bobby from there. After that, he became incredibly risk adverse in a position where we needed a player who would try things.

As JohnR said, Convey opted for the easy, probably because he found it quickly that he couldn't do the hard stuff.
Well, if you have evidence that Convey became "incredibly risk averse" I'd love to see it. I thought he definitely took some chances with his one touch passing that failed miserably, so he looked worse than he might have otherwise.

I don't really know that you need software to analyze a player's decisions, but one huge drawback with TV is there isn't enough of a view of the entire playing field.

There was only one play that I questioned his decision making, but I ended up concluding that he made a reasonably good decision. That was the play at 39:00 when instead of trying to hit Dempsey on a break or hitting Altidore earlier, he dribbled in close enough for Mexico to close him down. He then pushed the ball to the left and tried to get a cross in front of the two Mexicans trying to cut off his cross to Altidore, but failed. Had the timing of the footwork been different he might have done it differently.

Many of you are claiming that Convey sucked because of his positioning or his decisions. I don't see why this poor positioning and decision making can't be identified. If it can, and I agree with you that his positioning and decision making sucked, I will be happy to agree with you that Convey sucked.

I don't agree that Convey's role was purely offensive. Both Convey and Donovan had defensive responsibilities.

[uniteo]

Bobby's the Adu beta version. Lots of folks just don't like him or his game. I don't remember that game that well, but lots of folks praised Convey for his defensive work, and as badly as Corrales got skinned by the Mexican attacking players, I can't really remember any dangerous scoring chances created on that side other than from free kicks off fouls by Ramiro.

[Marko72]

I wouldn't, for example, count Convey's decision to take on Castro as a bad decision. He tried to do the right thing, but he got embarrassed. It was downhill for Bobby from there. After that, he became incredibly risk adverse in a position where we needed a player who would try things.

As JohnR said, Convey opted for the easy, probably because he found it quickly that he couldn't do the hard stuff.

I'll concede the first point you made as I'd never disagreed. My disagreement is in the notion that you simply track a players touches, count them up, and go "one good, one bad, one good..... pretty good game. And I can prove it objectively!"

As to the part that I'd quoted, well, an emphatic yes. And this points to the difference between his role and that of Rico Clark. If all Rico does is win balls and dump it off to the safe man, and he does so a lot, then he hasn't hurt our team. In fact, he's probably helped it. (Just how much is debatable... if we'd needed him to get the ball forward into danger more often, I'd say "not enough" but if that's not the case, then he gets a favorable rating.) But Convey was playing a left winger role, and his primary job was to help get the ball into danger. How many times was danger created that Bobby was involved in? There you have it. That's my assessment.

(I remember early in the game when he got stuffed on the dribble on the left, and thinking "there goes Convey's whole night," and it all pretty much went downhill from there. He was increasingly backing off the challenge.)