Ecuador vs CHILE, 12 de octubre en Quito (Clasificatorias) [R]

Bingo.

Though I tend to agree with all the points zasal brought up, the only thing I'd change at this point (ideally right after the Argentina game) would be the coaching staff.

 

quote="SIN DIOS NI LEY, post: 26606133, member: 212496"]Chile terminó en noveno lugar el Mundial de Brasil, así que el gran "logro" de Bielsa simplemente fue la cuarta participación histórica.[/quote]
Ganó un partido contra el casi inexistente EEUU de esos momentos, y nos sacaron la cresta tanto Ingleses como Españoles (quienes solo terminaron últimos en el cuadrangular final). 9º entre 13 países, sobrepasando a Paraguay, Bolivia, México y EEUU (estos 2 últimos en esa época eran de lo más malo que había en el fútbol mundial y eran pan comido para todos aquellos que los enfrentaban).

Un mundial al que Chile llegó, solo porque Argentina, Perú y Ecuador renunciaron a participar, clasificando tanto a Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile y Bolivia en forma automática sin disputar ningún partido.
Bolivia solo jugó un partido y lo perdió por masacre contra Uruguay, en un grupo de solo esos 2 equipos. Paraguay a su vez, empató contra Italia y perdió contra Suecia (ambas potencias Europeas de ese entonces, e Italia bicampeón del mundo), en un grupo de 3; y a México, todos (Brasil, Yugoslavia y Suiza) lo masacraron.

Ese resultado tiene muy poco mérito, ya que estaba altamente condicionado por las renuncias de varios equipos, incluso desde las eliminatorias mismas inclusive.

 

It depends on what you wanted the outcome to be, as a fan, for the team at the finalisation of the group stage.

If you wanted the team to simply make the last sixteen -- in other words, if that was your overriding priority, which is very understandable and normal -- then you can say that the group was considerable accessible.

On the other hand, if you wanted the team to realistically fight for first place in the group -- not necessarily win, but be in there with a good chance of winning that group -- then you can argue that the group was challenging, because Chile had a very slim chance of actually doing this. Spain was in good form after the European championship and the qualifiers.

For me, the pancake groups, in relation to the representatives of South America, were always going to be the groups with Italy and France. Always; and I called it months before the tournament, saying that those two would go home early. Those groups were not only accessible, but "up for grabs" in that any of the teams could realistically win them, excluding the gutsy New Zealand side.

I pretty much agree with the rest of your argument before that, though. The Bielsa-era is over; we can reminisce, but he's gone.

 

All you care for, are numbers. Against that it is hard to discuss anything.
Being consequent, numbers can`t tell you anything about it being a good or bad match. So stick to it and be consequent. Against Paraguay we lost 0-3, just leave it like that, as anything else you say respect to it can`t be measured with numbers.
We played great that day, despite losing. For most neutral observers, they all believe that in that day, Chile was very unlucky, as Paraguay had only 3 (lets say 4) plays that ended in Chile`s goal zone, and all ended in goals for them, while Chile had many chances lost.

A home 0-3 lost game isn`t good at all, statistically speaking, but it doesn`t tell you anything about it not being a good or bad game. Plain numbers, don`t always reflect what has happened within the pitch. I thought you knew more about Football, but as it seems, all you know, is restricted only to numbers.

Actually 2 draws in Quito (1985 and 1997), but its not important.
In general, most teams in Conmebol usually wins more games playing at home than losing them. No surprise in that.

Sure. No one denies that.
The problem here is that you are the one who insists in calling out the actual performance as it being great, mostly based on numbers, when for truth whomever has watched any of the games, know exactly that our team has performed horrible
This is not about our actual position, but in what the team is showing, which is NOTHING OF NOTHING. Not playing attack. Not playing dominance. Not playing defensive. Nothing
You get it now ?

 

I actually watched that game not too long ago. Chile had a very good opening 20 minutes, with a header that could have gone in, a free kick by Ponce that was almost a goal etc...

After the second Paraguay goal Chile had lots of possession but created almost no chances. it was a disaster, it wasn't a good game at all except for the first 20. there was so much confusion that the players were running into each other, and the press even asked Bielsa what the hell Jimenez was playing as because there was nothing but confusion.

Also, i have never said that this team is playing well and much less, as you claim that "i insist in calling the actual performance as it being great"....which i don't.

take the time to read and you'll see that what i'm saying is that there is a need to improve on the individual and collective sense, but that its not the end of the world. there have been mitigating factors, a bit of bad luck, injuries, and other problems that have affected the ability of the team to reach good form.....

and i've said that its the responsibility of the coach to solve those problems, and he will be judged based on his ability to do that or not........i'm just not as fatalistic about it as others are.

i'd rather hit rock bottom now and still be well in the hunt than later. things will get better

 

First half of your post, I disagree.
second half of your post, we agree.

In what we disagree completely now, is in giving the "fatso (guataca, ) mule head" another opportunity. He should be gone after the game against Argentina, no matter how we play that game, as his stubborness will not go away and for games to come, next year he will end up doing the same things that he has been doing till now. Playing bad players, playing players in recovery from injuries, not playing those who really deserve to be in the team, and the most stupid changes of players during the games, which definitively will lead us to not make it to the WC.

We need a coach with a very ample point of view, versed in diferent tactics, someone who doesn`t get involved personally with the evolution of our team. "Fatso mule head" isn't that man.


Since now, I propose Labruna or Berizzo, from our own media (I don`t like Sampaoli, but if oposed to "mule head", I`ll accept him anyway).

 

So now you believe that the level of football back in last centuries 50's, was the same as actuals 21st century football. If you do, it only proves that your knowledge in football is very limited.

Back then, the diference between the best teams and those who came from behind was huge, but in reference to those who were among the worst, it was like two completely diferent dimensions.

Nowdays, despite having diferences between the top teams and the rest, those diferences aren`t so evident, so nowdays any top team gan get defeated, in a bad day, by almost the most insignificant adversary.
In the old days, huge scores were something of an everyday issue. Now days, it is very faint, and very scarce. (specially losing 0-3, I get more mad as I remember it).

So in actual 32 team WC's, the 16 second round teams are comparable in level to those 8 quarter finalists in those 16 team WC's of the past.

 

What's wrong with a coach that gets involved with the evolution of our team??? We want someone who's looking at new up and coming players. Am I misunderstanding you?

 

What I meant was that we can`t have a coach who lets his personal feelings towards anything or anyone get priorized, over what is really the best for the team.

For instance, the case of Herrera, despite not liking him as a person, he should equally be given the opportunity to prove his worth for the NT, by nominating him and training him with the rest of the players. If he doesn`t really fit in, well good bye, keep on trying for next time, but if he does prove being the best, he should be given the place. At last the one that will get the most benefit from this, it will be our NT.

In fact, as you said it and I didn`t expressed it right, it's better when the coach gets involved with minor aged levels as they are the future, and whatever you can achieve with them now in present times, will reflect themselves later, on the adult team.

 

ugh.... i think some people might be underestimating how difficult it is for teams to come together a new coaching staff. this is especially true of guys that play unique and difficult styles (a la Sampoli etc...).

after the Argentina game the schedule lightens up considerably, and we play teams that we have already beaten (Peru, Paraguay, Venezuela, Bolivia)...now's not the time to change it up.

 

LOL. One can only hope.

 

That's because the was no downward slope. That friendly game against Uruguay was arguably one of the best games under Bielsa, the team kept playing and better and better after the world cup and had matured the style Bielsa had imposed.

 

I really have no words to describe what I saw yesterday. Borghi has only one right desicion for the game against Argentina and thats to riesign, even if Chile win with 10 goals! Enough is enough.

Im a big Bielsa fan and I dont shame to say that, because there are big reasons behing that. As a fan of Colo Colo I have always been very positive to Borghi, but.. like I said enough is enough. I dont like to live in the past and always to compare with the past, but for me yesterday was the worst performance of the chilean team, I have ever seen. I could not watch the game live, because was at work, but have donwloaded it when I was home, and without knowing the result have experienced the most awful moment since Im fan of this team(maybe it was 1996 when everything started).

What Borghi has done int he last 2-3 weeks is really not so easy to do. He has not a single right decision in the last 20 days, friends. Look at the nomina. I dont want to comment every single player he has called, but I really thought Im sleeping, when I saw he has called up Mark. Sorry, but he has not played more than 15 minutes in a professional game in the last 16 months!!!!.. Sorry its my mistake.. Thats not true, because he played 25 minutes yesterday!

On the wings in such a game, you need fast players, who are 100% fit , able to attack and defend 90 minutes. in the second HT on the wings were Mark and Isla.. we all know how many mintes have both played in the last 9-16 months and how long were both injured. Are in CSKA Moscow and in Juventus so studpid, that they still dont use these players? As far as I remember Isla has started twice in the starting line up in the last 7-8 months and thats.. against Colombia and yesterday. Thats a fact, that doesnt need to be even commented.

How stupid you have to be, that you dont change anything in the defensive tactics of the team, when you have already received 13 goals in 5 games (already 16 in 6 games). For the fans of the comparissons with the chilean team under Bielsa.. Chile had received 22 goals in the last eliminatorias, 7 of them against Brazil, so I wont be very far from the reality if I saw, that if Brazil were not hosts of the next WC and have played in the qualifications, after 9 games Borghi would have reached these 22 after 50% of the games.

The biggest problem is not receiving goals and loosing games. The biggest problem ist that even having so much talent, so many good players, this team has not played a single good game in the last 1,5 years. And thats a conclusion I have allowed me finally yesterday to do. " years ago this team was smashing every oponent, this team was playing a wonderful football, whole the world has talked about. This team has dominated against each opponent since the first minute, till the last one. Yesterday Chile played well in the first 3 minutes. Against Colombia no more than 5 minutes, against Venezuela 5 minutes, against Bolivia 0 minutes etc. Maybe we will be able at the end of the eliminatorias to reach 90 minutes, if Borghi remains, but if that would be enough, to have played well in 90 minutes, when you have to do that in 16x90minutes? What actually means to play well? For me thats to know what has to be done and to do it. Which is the most beautiful goal Chile has scored in these 8 games? A difficult question, right? I dont remember any goal., but the goal of Orellana is stil in my head, the whole attack is in my head; the goal of Mati against Peru in the last eleiminatorias is in my head...

Unfortunatelly Borghi has done it, Chile is again the mid-level south american team, like most of them. Taking points in the away games against 7-8 of the teams is already mission impossible. Vera is already talking about wins only in the home games. "I hope we will take our 5 home games".. and the other 3 games? But has he talked with Argentina and Uruguay, what they think about his plans? Soon we will know the first answer.

Everything in the post is very chaotic, I really have no idea where to start from. Easily can write 10x the same amount of text about all the subjects I want to comment, but what will change that?..

In the period september 2007 - december 2010 I was watching the games of La Roja with high quality single malt whisky, enjoying the game, enjoying the whisky, enjoying the life. Yesterday I had 15!!! cigaretes during the game and at 8AM, having not slept the whole night because of the work and to watch the "beautiful" game, had to drunk 100ml vodka- that was the only way to be able to get a sleep, after the nightmare Ive seen.

 

Bueno en verdad no he leido los posts anteriores, algunos ya seguramente dicen que Piñera y su mafia son culpables con el mafioso de Jadue bla bla bla.

Hay que ser objetivos nomas, si perdemos ante Argentina (o si ganamos jugando mal) Borghi debe irse

 

Falta que le echen la culpa a Pinochet.

 

hahaha no me extrañaria de algunos.

A proposito, Borghi se abre a la posibilidad de dejar la banca aunque ganemos ante Arg.

http://diario.latercera.com/2012/10...-cargo-aunque-chile-derrote-a-argentina.shtml

 

Hay que dejar claro que estas son especulaciones de gente que supuestamente es cercana a él.

 

http://www.cooperativa.cl/noticias/...en-las-clasificatorias/2012-10-12/200740.html

Ecuador (3): Alexander Domínguez, Juan Carlos Paredes, Gabriel Achilier, Frickson Erazo, Walter Ayoví, Segundo Castillo, Luis Saritama, Renato Ibarra (75'Jefferson Montero), Joao Rojas (73' Christian Noboa), Felipe Caicedo (67' Jaime Ayoví), Christian Benítez. DT: Reinaldo Rueda.

Chile (1): Miguel Pinto, Pablo Contreras, Osvaldo González, Gonzalo Jara, Mauricio Isla, Marcelo Díaz, Felipe Seymour (67' Mark González), Jean Beausejour (77' Eduardo Vargas), Arturo Vidal, Matías Fernández (59' Junior Fernandes), Alexis Sánchez. DT: Claudio Borghi.

Goles: 0-1: 24' Juan Carlos Paredes (Autogol), 1-1: 33' Felipe Caicedo, 2-1: 54' Felipe Caicedo, 3-1: 92' Segundo Castillo (ECU).

Amarillas: Felipe Caicedo, Luis Saritama (ECU), Pablo Contreras (CHI).

Rojas: Pablo Contreras, Arturo Vidal (CHI).

Estadio: Atahualpa, Quito.

Arbitro: Heber Lopes (BRA).

 

What's the point?

 

only bright spots: Pinto (respondio) and Seymour (not great, but good)... I thought Alexis did well when he had someone up top with him, but i know others disagree.......pretty much it. Contreras the worst