Re: Beasley/Russel PSV vs Rosenborg 11/2 (R) no he's not - should DMB should start curling deft chips with his right foot now? he shaved the woodwork with his try, while this chip he speaks of might have landed in the stands besides, he's sitting around hours later, thinking over and organizing is thoughts... bease had a split second and for crying out loud there is no standard shot attempt for any such situation, you take what the goalie gives above all else - folks, there is a big difference between scoring on 9 year olds and scoring on espen johnsen
I don't really understand why people are so defensive and hurt by any criticism. He did well but even the best players in the world can still improve. It was a nice goal, but it did look like the ball got a bit too far away from him on the first touch. His speed got him there before the keeper and it was a very nice goal. I'd expect even Beasley would say that he could have done better. I sure hope he believes that he can always improve on things, even if they are just little things. It does sound like some are over thinking each little move too much. The play is going so fast it's hard to pinpoint certain moves and shots are based on where the keeper is. No player in the world is going to pick out the upper 90 on each and every shot.
I really don't understand why people are insistant on offering unfounded criticism and then accusing others of being defensive if they show how wrong the criticism is. On this play, Beasley had the space and took it. If he had not played the ball in front it would have been harder to get around the keeper. So Beasley did the exact right thing and it was a very good goal from a beautiful pass.
Hahaha. A fire fan, I'm not surprissed at all. Come running to the defense of your boy. It was a beautiful pass and a beautiful goal but he could have done better. If you've watched soccer at all you've seen better. Just because you do something well, doesn't mean it can't be done better. Jesus this is silly.
I don't think my "boy" that just scored the game winning goal that put his team on top of his CL group needs any defending. My post was more of an attack on your asinine assertion than a defense of Beasley. But I will give you this, if the defense was better placed and a softer touch was required I am not sure Beasley could have pulled it off.
The crying in your posts certainly don't indicate that. It's "asinine" to understand that no matter how well something is done that that something can be done better? Way to strive for excellence. You obviously don't understand how to better yourself. That doesn't have anything to do with my point or my posts.
Wow, I can understand saying that BMD's touch could have been better but is there any point in arguing all of this since he put it in the back of the net? Yeah it could have been better, but it was sure as heck more than good enough! I doubt that after that play Hiddink came over and said. "Beasely, that was a great goal, but your first touch could have been a lot better." I'm not saying that DMB's skills don't need improvement, and for sure, he could improve his touch overall, but on that one play, it's hard to argue when the ball goes into the goal.
Crying in my posts? Did anyone ever tell you that if you must resort to childish insults on a forum, it is a sign that you may have lost your argument? As far as bettering oneself, celebrating ones successes is important as well. As my original point stated, Beasley achieved excellence in this goal, he did everything absolutely correct and put the ball in the back of the net. Sure one should never stop striving to improve, and nothing is ever perfect but to point that out on this forum at this time, gives me a hint to your bias. I am glad that you figured out the last comment was not a direct response to your post, but another related issue. That gives me some hope for you, however I see nothing wrong with expanding/altering arguments in a forum such as this.
Certain people were drooling over that first touch on tv here in Holland yesterday, certain people who played on a very high level, a level most of us here (probably no one) will never achieve. I'll trust on their opinion in this case if you don't mind... Seriously, if his first touch would've kept the ball closer to his body then he would've gotten big difficulties on his second touch at that speed. (90% of players in that position would've stumbled it out of the penalty area without doubt)
Well, I would prefer that he be named the starter, but Eurosport have DMB coming off the bench for Ronaldinho in the UEFA CL Team of the Week. Check out this line-up and two things should stick out for us YA folks. First, DMB is in great company. Second, Howard isn't gonna be starting anytime soon except for cup matches.
Hey, you are the one that thinks any criticism is "unfounded criticism". Calling a perfectly valid point "asinine" is crying to me. I don't know why you feel the need to "win" an argument here? That's not even possible, we are talking about our opinions on criticism. There is going to be a lot of criticism on everything imaginable here on BS. If it hurts your feelings so much then you might not want to stick around. Beasley is one of my top 3 to 5 favorite nats. There's no "bias" at all just your paranoia. I stated pretty clearly in my other posts that it was a great goal and very well done, just that his first touch could have been better. Great game, great goal, but he still could have been better. That's a fact, that's not even disputable. Why is that hard to admit? Are you telling me it's physically impossible for a first touch to be better than what Beasley displayed on his goal?
I like how I can actually understand the person being interviewed in this PSVTV post-game video. Okay, well at least one of them.
Nope, I'm not. Just never expected people to be so defensive over something that is a given. I don't see the radical nature in saying something can be improved upon. Does that show my "Bias", whatever that was supposed to mean?
If you would note, I do not call all criticisms unfounded, just the unfounded ones like this. It is entirely possible to win an argument. Otherwise what is the point of arguing? Interesting you keep talking about crying and hurt feelings, are we doing a little bit of projecting, maybe? Remember "de-Nial is not just a river in Egypt." OK back on point. To follow your logic every kick in every game could have been a little better. While that may be true, it really is a mundane thing to discuss and would lead to over analyzing everything. To go back your original post that stated Beasley played the ball too far away from himself, which I think is incorrect. As I said earlier, Beasley used the space he had available, and if he had not played the ball that far ahead, he would have found it difficult to round the keeper. So if you would like to explain why Beasley would have been better off having the ball closer to himself after his first touch, go ahead. Otherwise I will continue with my perception that you are not happy to see Beasley doing well and are simply looking for something to complain about.
I found some articles about Beasley in the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf. I don't speak Dutch. Still, I put it in Babblefish and could make out that Beasley thought Bush would win the election, but he supported Kerry because "Bush has done a lot of stupid things, especially that unnecessary war in Iraq." Another article after the game quoted Beasley saying that this was his best game since joining PSV. There was some extensive quote from the coach Hiddink. All I could make out was that he said this game showed "how dangerous Beasley could be."
You do realize that you are the one getting wound up? Keep up the standard internet arguement techniques, I find them quite boring. Good luck trying to prove an opinion is right or wrong, take all the time you need. You are never going to win an argument on opinion alone. You can win an arguement on facts but not an opinion. I'll take you up on that for fun. Watch the play again, the keeper jumps back right as the ball lands to Beasley. If the keeper comes out on that, instead of falling back, he has a good chance of getting to the ball or blocking Beasleys shot. That hop backwards killed all chances for keeper. If the keeper doesn't hesitate and Beasley keeps the ball closer to himself he has a better chance to beat the keeper. Why are you so paranoid? One day at a time little buddy.
So Fire now that I've answered your question I expect you to answer mine. (For the 2nd time)Are you telling me it's physically impossible for a first touch to be better than what Beasley displayed on his goal?
Fun is this is all about. OK, so I have reviewed the tape per your request and I do not see what you see. If the keeper could have known where DMB was going with the ball in the instant before he received it and gone straight to that spot, he may have had a chance to get there close to the same time as DMB. However, yours is a fanciful supposition. If he had come out on the ball he would have come towards where Beasley was, not where Beasley was going. There is no way the keeper could have gotten to that ball before DMB and it is far more plausible to say that Beasley would have struggled to maintain control had he attempted to keep the ball closer to himself. Therefore I will keep my opinion that Beasley's touch was a beautiful one and certainly not worthy of criticism. For future reference you cannot "prove" an argument on opinion alone, but you certainly can "win" an argument on opinion. Winning an argument is about attaining ones goals. Since you have engaged in such practices as mirroring, projecting and name-calling I would say that I have achieved my goal of winding you up. On that basis I consider myself the winner (fully aware of how meaningless that is) even though I know that I have not nor cannot "prove" your opinion false.
I'm not surprised by your response and it really shows me that you lack the necessary knowledge of the sport to understand my explanation. The keeper doesn't need to "go(ne) straight to that spot" while Beasley was receiving the ball, he just needed to put himself in a better position to deal with the situation. The keeper jumps back about 3 feet and is on his heels. He can't recover after that. He comes out but it's too late. If he stands his ground or steps up a foot and to his left (where the play was going) he has a much better chance of getting to the ball. He gave up about 4 or 5 feet of space and only missed getting a hand on the ball by a foot or 2. Still a great goal by Beasley. We can disagree, that's fine I don't value your opinion, but I still don't understand why people, especially you, are so overly sensitive. For the record it would take a lot more than this to wind me up so unfortunately you did not achieve your objective. Why the paranoia over Beasley's reputation? Did you prove my "Bias"? I just said he could do better. If you think I'm over analysing things then oh well. No need to get so freaked out. Believe it or not he is one of my favorite players on the nats.
I'll let the goal be... but on the shot DMB hit high over the crossbar, he opened up too much and hit it with the inside of his left foot. Instead he should have tried turning his body inward and driving the ball with his instep toward the ground. This way, he forces the goalee into making a save. If DMB gets lucky, he gets a bouncing ball which is next to impossible to stop from the GK point of view. On the cross that just missed everyone, a "two-footed" player would have tried to curve it in with the inside of his right foot. Since the player is on the left, the ball would tend to go around the goalee. As an example, see Andi Brehme's goal against Holland in 1990 or Nuno Maniche's goal against Holland in the last Euros. This is not to pick on DMB but to indicate where he can improve to become a better finisher.
A. Jumping back 3 feet and being on his heels is factually incorrect. He jumped back about half a step in order to get on the balls of his feet. This is how a keeper gets in a good position to react to the play. B. The play did not go to his left until after Beasley touched the ball. If he had not reset himself, there is no reason to believe that the he would know to go to his left until after Beasley touches the ball there. With these two things in mind, your 4 to 5 feet estimate is greatly exaggerated and I do not feel there was enough time for the keeper to go from where he was to where the ball went. Of course because none of this happened it is speculation on both of our parts. So a question for you, if I have not wound you up some, why all the character assassinations? Are you always incapable of arguing a point without insulting the other party?
IMVHO, no way does the keeper have the advantage one v. one in this situation, even if he does everything perfectly. The attacking player [Beaseley] is facing goal, has no other defenders to concern him and has too much open space to maneuver. If the attacker can't convert the goal, it's on him every single time.