I'm not ready to panic just yet. Team has looked very organized and efficient. Outside of the last 2 matches, we have not been a poor scoring team. Also, while pepino is right that we should beat teams like Venezuela and Chile, those 2 teams have been given us problems for the past decade, longer for Venezuela. We have struggled to score against them since 2000. Also, we created a ton of chances against Venezuela and just missed sitters. So in reality, only match where we lacked offense was vs Chile. And we cod have still very easily won that game and should have had a pk. Though we need Arias and James. Hope CQ is not arrogant enough to choose scheme over taleng because talent wins 90%of the time.
1.chile 2019: 3 victories, 4 draws and 5 loses. Absolutely a weak team in this year....no excuse 2. Rueda was coach of colombia more than years ago....from this team he only coached davinson....i watch a lot of national teams defeating coaches of their country...pekerman with us never won to argentina for example....... If you dont care my opinion, so why you give arguments in a public forum? If you dont want to be argued so dont say anything.......and then treat me as hypocryte? Why? Because i dont say: "i agree chile is a good team and have been beastly this year" 3. I hope that agisnt argelia we create comfortable options of goals
In South America there are no teams we should beat or should not beat. Especially when some match up better with us than others. IT is a war and any team can beat anyone.
1) Stats against other teams has nothing to do with how they match up against Colombia. 2) It does not matter when he was coach. He knows our players and knows our style in general and also has scouts in Colombia . Heck, he and his family may watch all our matches for all I know. 3) I said you are a hypocrite for repeating the same things like a parrot and calling other people a parrot. I do not care about your opinion about Chile and Rueda because you keep on repeating the same things.
In last 7 matches we only have scores 6 goals thar is very poor rate and is a reggresion of our scoring rate in last years....just for reference in wc 2018 that it supossed we didnt attack well, we scored 6 goals in 4 matches. as i said before queiroz didnt take a chaos he is here to improved what we had....and i dislike that we are regressing in aspect...and not only of quantity of goals morelos and duvan didnt received the ball in confortable places where they are dangerous. Yeah james will returned eventually and we will depend more than ever of his talent Ps: even reyes defeated venezuela....
We can disagree, and u dont have to be aggresive Is silly to ignore how have been the overall performance of a team during a season. Is like "dont expect that a team that is in top of a table in a league defeat one that is in the bottom" Yeah and chile form this year is reflected in his poor performances. So they arent excuse im sorry. Your point that we have to value that we were a good team as chile.....isnt very real in 2019. Someone that follow chile can know that. Im sorry i didnt say " i agree homie"
I understand your concern and try to understand your observations in the way you view them. Within proper context though CQ has slowly strayed away from two of our captains (two of our best offensive players in history in James and Falcao) and experimented with tactics and personnel. What matters is if he is learning about our players and if he can fix our problems once official matches start up again. The results in these friendlies are not indicative of regression or progression.
It is silly to ignore when a team matches up well with us within their style and tactics. Your top of the table metaphor does not apply to this game because these are friendly matches not matches for points. Experiments are expected. Chile still is a talented team that has given us problems. I do not care what they have done against other opponents in different situations. I never made the point that you are trying to say when pertaining to people following chile so that is irrelevant.
Very good points. Again tbough, that Venezuela draw is on the players not the tactics. We should have scored 3 that game but the players didn't finish.
Agree venezuela was a better game, i brought because homie mentioned. But to say that because venezuela and chile have been dificult recently isnt that we have to ignored the moment of them....and to use the level of those team as excuse. The true is that are teams that dindt qualify to last world cup and havent had a god 2019.
I never said to ignore the moment. Just that it seems more important to me how a team matches up in various ways on that day. The past schedule and other games are not as important.
The regularity of a team in last matches always would be a reliable standard of measure of the level of the team. Im not inventing that is well known. If you want to deny it to win a discussion in a forum. Do it no problem. But im going to be proud of colombia national team because "dominanted" a team that isnt having a good moment and year, like chile.....without creating real options of goal.
The regularity or consistency of a team in the last matches are a factor. Just as there are many factors on how games and results go. But to me the most important factors have to do with the clash and certain ways the teams match up against each other within the various categories I have parroted in this thread. Especially if the manager of a team knows the other team well. There is no winning or losing in this discussion. Just expressing what I think applies to the matches as best fit.
Has anyone here told you to be proud of Colombia's performance or proud of their attacks on goal? You bring up the strangest arguments sometimes.
Argentina won 6 - 1 to ecuador. Without messi, di maria, aguero. Each time they are improving and getting better results.....sadly we cant say the same about us Next month we play against ecuador ...why not winning them for a similar result?
I don't put too much stock in friendly results because they can be deceiving. Pinto had tremendous friendly results before the 04 Copa America, which didn't translate to tremendous results in the tournament. These friendlies are more about the process than the results in general.
So many things to factor in here. There is no answer that is A+B=C. Ecuador beat Peru in a friendly. Peru Eliminated Uruguay and Chile in the Copa America . Chile and Uruguay are better than Ecuador. There is no answer to your question. What there is an answer to is what is the Colombian manager doing? Well more than likely the manager has certain criteria he is looking for and philosophies he is trying to convey to his players in friendlies. He is experimenting in so many ways and learning about our team, our culture and heck even the continent. What I think we have to do is hope that he uses all of his tools and information and lessons he has gathered during these friendlies and we progress when Qualifying and the Copa America take place.
yes i agree with you. But my concerning is about the play not the result.....i dont like how we are attacking, with very few people and giving service to our forwards in places hey arent dangerous. there are teams that you can see progressiion in friendlies, beyoond the results....and another regresion. i think we are regressing. pinto was 2007. and this team reminds me the one of pinto....a rigid order tactic in friendlies but very limited to attack.....and the bolillo of copa america 201, a team that had posession...but create options in extremis..
I clarify, I saw the game of Argentina. Ecuador is very bad, you can see a lot of progress in Argentina from Scaloni of his first games. If Colombia is really so good with Queiroz, it should have no problem to dominate and win Ecuador comfortably.....we cannot not take advantage of the bad moment of our rivals, just because it is a priority to maintain a strict defensive order.
I personally think we could dominate Ecuador as we usually do (outside of Quito) but there's many factors that go into it as I said. If we start a lineup that has never played together before with new guys like we did against Venezuela in Tampa it may be a problem to generate goals. But who knows? As long as we do well when the real games start up then why does it matter what we do against Ecuador?
I don’t agree when we call up 24 players and play his favorite 11 every game!!! Again his 11!! Roger, Tesillo, and Medina wouldn’t start in my 11. The Korea game is his only lost other then the Chile game at cops America where they steam rolled us and Var saved us. The Korea game was basically a sub team and we lost because our 5th string goalie who isn’t even called any more fkd up epically but I agree with Pep and a reason I get into argument with most of you. We need to fking go out there to win squad wise other then Brazil I don’t see a South American team better then us Chile are shorter, older and weaker then we are. We need to stop shitting our pants against them
I've read some solid arguments/opinions on both sides of the fence on this thread. The reality is probably somewhere in between. However, we stepped into WC '18 clearly dependent on what James would do and fortunately for us Quintero was able to step up in some critical times. That was a clear audible considering JFQ had not been part of our qualification process. Our backline was improvised last minute when we lost the likes of Fabra and with a Zapata not in top form. I give tons of credit to Mojica for also stepping up but that was also another clear audible. That WC team looked quite disjointed in both offense and defense. While the results and play to date from CQ haven't shown clear superiority (tough to do in Conmebol), I do see a sense of team organization and not as much desperation when we lose the ball. I would ask, what are the expectations? CQ has been shifting all the responsibility from 1-2 players and brought in a collective mentality. At the very least, the team's workrate has surely improved. It takes 11 men to win a game but you need a great team effort and a deep bench to truly have success in a WCQ cycle. I don't sense panic or stagnation but it's still too early to tell. By this time next year, we will have a clearer picture as to what this team is made of collectively, how James and Quintero fit in this team and how CQ develops his strategy. We will have plenty of 'real points' on the table and draw some solid opinions.
Honestly you're just repeating the speech of Queiroz, I don't know how real it is in the application. The truth is that the fact of not having called players of the characteristics of James or Quintero, does not convince me that they are looking to win games without them and shift responsability to the others. I only see that is changing to a more defensive style, which is more concerned about not losing than winning (we have had this before). I also don't know how to discard, players like arias who really know how to attack, it is necessary not to depend on 1 or 2 players. I only see a change of conservative style, which in fact will make our "cracks" have more work at the time of creating chances of goal. Colombia already won matches and obtained results before without james or quintero. We must not romanticize the idea of queiroz as the first time that we are going to have a team not dependent and collective. he did not invent that idea and and it's not the first time a coach in Colombia tries. When it was not quintero, it was cardona. All teams have better players and depend on some more than others. the logical thing is to have replacements of their own position. not by having 11 people organized who know how to run and do not have the characteristics of a offensive midfelder, is going to replace the contribution of James. We can not forget that part of the bad participation were individual participations as sanchez, izquierdo, james or Cuadrado. The football is of players and for 2018 pekerman was wrong not carrying cardona and we were unlucky that our best players were not at a good level. if had been injured griezmann, mbappe or pogba, france was also not going to win the WC by having 11 players who run in tactical order. With this little offensive work, what I see is that when James returns he will have to work twice as hard as before to be dangerous, since he will have fewer partners to attack. Something that happen with pinto, only 3 players attacked and i remember how uncodortable where the forwards and he offensive player..... In truth, the background of queiroz are those of a little winning coach, did not do it with madrid, nor with portugal (very discreet world cup, worse than colombia last two). I do not know why think that everything he does is super accurate........All those speeches and philosophies are also used by Pinto, and apart from giving the impression that they are very rigorous coaches with tactics, do not guarantee better results to those of before.
@crzdcolombian there's some truth and i do agree with many of your sentiments but i think some of your suggestions (or lack thereof) are just not realistic/reasonable. you often criticize how CQ and even pekerman for that matter calls up 23/24 players and doesn't call up 30+ players. i'm not trying to be a jerk here - but can you name other teams that consistently call up 30 players for their friendlies? Does France/Brazil/Croatia/Portugal/Germany/Spain etc. do that all the time? if you can send us a link of teams who consistently do so, i would be really curious to see. there must be economic/financial considerations that probably make a 30+ player roster unproductive - for a two game friendly, there would be players who do not see a minute of playing time. does that financially make sense to call up 34 players for 2 friendlies? the only way that would work is if you play 11+6 subs in one game and play a totally different 11+6 subs in the 2nd game. is that what you are trying to get at? that would make on field chemistry difficult - right? i agree with you about the going out there to try and win - i feel that mentality dissipated big time in the 14-18 campaign and the NT was in a worst case scenario by the time WC18 came around the corner with all the injuries and black cloud over several of our key players. the early game nervousness has been another issue and i don't know if winning friendlies 5-0 will solve that. i honestly feel the results of friendlies will not dictate how the next game will go for us. winning 2-0 in a WCQ is a better way to find out what works than winning 5-0 in a friendly. I honestly feel i learn more about our NT in a 0-0 friendly or a loss than during a 4-0 victory - when we beat China 4-0 last cycle - did that really change things up for us? friendly results are so skewed and do not indicate anything b/c other team's priorities and strategies may be experimental from one game to the next. on the whole, i get what you're trying to say, but i think your expectations are not realistic. people here argue/counter you often b/c what you suggest is not as easy as it sounds. i pointed out in another post not too long ago, but Mexico is a team that does some of the things that you suggest - more friendlies and more players, but their end result is not much better than us - they just have the benefit of being in a weak continent where they can win their version of the Copa America / UEFA Euro with a B team; an accomplishment that Colombia will never have that benefit to achieve in South America. end rant =)