We have GOT to figure our how to bury squads with lesser talent and counter attack styles. It's really the only bugaboo with our team. Feel pretty confident about this one. At home on 9/11 against a team we had a poor performance and result against last tim.
Yes, we should beat them. But, it is after a long layoff, again. This team just doesn't play as well after such breaks. One can always hope for the best out of this team.
In theory, you would like to think RBNY can get this one figured out. I think the layoff recharges the club and they come out and lay wood to a not very good Chicago side. My tip: 3-1 RBNY
1. @kokoplus10 The game is on UniMas, not Univision like the topic title says. 2. I'm going to watch the game tomorrow. For now I'll post the lineup from Twitter: B. Wright-Phillips, Grella, Kljestan, Sam, Felipe, McCary, Lawrence, Lade, Perrinelle, Miazga, and Robles Bench: Reynish, Zizzo, Zubar, Davis, S. Wright-Phillips, Abang, and Veron
All I can say is whew! Coming back from being down two goals is a huge result. But, there is a template here to beat the Red Bulls in the playoffs. Chicago employed two very active, speedy and hard-working forwards, they laid back and forced NY into a possession game and they pressed for turnovers all over the field. Of course, NY complied far too often (it almost looked deliberate). Those turnovers led on many occasions to some kind of chance for Chicago as they quickly got the ball forward on the counter. OTOH, Chicago can't defend the entire field for 90 minutes and despite the mistakes, NY was the superior team at moving the ball. But better opponents will defend better (most probably by maintaining discipline). If you stay back and choke off opportunities, then hit Ny on the counter when they get bogged down, you will have a better than even chance at beating NY. Finally, I don't think NY can count on getting bailed out by the ref every time they need it (even if it was the correct call).
The good news is that nobody else in the Eastern conference has speed like Chicago does, so its not as much of a concern in the playoffs. The only other playoff team that really does is Vancouver and we wouldn't meet them until the final. The bad news is that we have to play Chicago one more time on the last day of the season, potentially to determine the Supporter's Shield.
We got burnt on the counter off corner kicks multiple times but that's something that can be fixed. Deserved win. Both PK's given were soft but the Chicago one early changed the momentum early on whereas we started to chase and that benefited Chicago. I thought we looked great offensively and it's amazing to see the offense at the start of the season to where it's now. They are clicking.. They play fast, they are direct and they have that killer instinct to finish goals. Sasha was great yesterday.. I thought they were all good except for the back-line(particularly DP) but that was a weak PK regardless. Fluke 2 goals by Chicago and I'm glad the dominant team won yesterday.
Maybe not speed, but certainly many teams have the ability to pressure high. Dax and Felipe were turnover machine's last night. At one point I had to wonder what exactly it is about Chicago's two forwards that the defense would just pass them the ball, but I watched on repeated occasions that Dax, Felipe, Perinelle or Miazga would hit some short pass while one of Mace or Igboananike would be just standing right there. They wouldn't even be hiding, just getting in the way. It was totally mystifying. Of course, those guys are no more successful at capitalizing off of turnovers than anyone else in MLS. Igbo sent at least two decent scoring chances high into the stands and Mace flubbed one wide of goal after doing everything else right. What would worry me about Vancouver is they have horrible tactics and still beat NY. But I'd also worry about LA just because they have the experience and the talent to exploit any team's weaknesses. Not to mention that a team like NE always seems to step it up in the playoffs and can be more than just a bump in the road for NY.
If I counted right from MLS Soccer's chalkboard graphic, McCarty had 67 out of 77 passes be successful (87.0%) and Felipe had 80 out of 87 passes be successful (92.0%). The Red Bulls had an 85% success rate.
I thought Dax passed the ball incredibly well this game. His ability to play balls between and behind defenders has hugely improved this season. I didn't pick up on any egregious giveaways from either him or Felipe. Next time check out WhoScored, it'll save you a lot of time trying to count those chalkboard graphics!
It can be. However, I feel like the counter-attack strategy is a weakness that has been apparent all season long. Yeah, we're not likely to face the kind of speed up top that Chicago offers in the playoffs (god willing), but as pointed out a team with a good attack (LA, KC, NE, Sea) should look at this game, sit back in a smart organized fashion, and wait wait wait for us to lose our shape then punch us in the mouth. We're very lucky as fans to have enjoyed the season so far, but it's frustrating to me how this ONE weakness keeps coming up. I guess I'm selfish.
And of the passes those guys didn't complete several were in the defensive third and put the defense under pressure.
Again, I would emphasize that Chicago is on their season a very poor team. Yet, in two games, NY has managed to make them look pretty good, spotting them leads in both games. What worries me is what happens when they face a team capable of really punishing the sloppiness of this NY team and then shutting them down to defend the lead. Percentages alone do not tell the entire story. A big problem for Dax and Felipe are meaningful passes when the pressure is on. At least in the attack it can be excused somewhat, it is rare that a turnover on a searching pass up high leads directly to an attack, but in the defensive end, where pressure is being applied too often to they miss on completions or make poor passes that put other people under defensive pressure, hospital balls. Chicago had 4 interceptions and 10 recoveries in the New York end of the field. By contrast NY had 13 and 38. That's a huge margin, so why wasn't the game 3-4 to 1? The Bulls took 16 shots with 8 on target, while the Fire had 8 and 3. Corners were 12 to 2. Possession was 67.8 to 32.2. In most categories, NY was far superior, yet the win was in doubt until the 71st minute. This is an opponent that NY should have dominated on the final scoreline. With the statistical edge in so many categories, one would assume that it wouldn't just be 2-1 or 4-2 but 3-1 or 4-0. But you know what they say about assumptions.
You got me interested so I looked back, and I just don't see where this criticism is coming from at all. The chalkboard below is the unsuccessful passes from both Dax and Felipe - only 5 were given away in our half and none were anywhere near our box. Of those, 3 were the result of aerial duels. The 2 actual passes didn't put us in a bad position or set up a counter. Bad giveaways hurt us in the away game against Chicago but the entire team was sloppy as hell that game, it was one of the two worst we played all season (Houston being the first imo). This time around they only really threatened us with route 1 counter attacks. Its an inevitable vulnerability when you have a slow back line and a high press system, Marsch needs to address it but its not an easy fix.
The problem with dry statistics is they don't tell the whole story. For the NY it's simply an inability to make simple passes consistently that break pressure. For what it's worth, NY had the edge possession and passing accuracy in the previous match against Chicago. Having watched this game in person, with the Red Bulls defending on my end in the second half, it was pretty obvious that even one of the Chicago players was able to cause incredible problems for the Red Bulls just in getting the ball out of their own end. If this had been against a team better able to defend in depth, not just with one or two frisky, young forwards annoying the backline, then those possession problems could put the team under undue pressure. The team would get bogged down with Dax or Felipe and the center backs banging the ball back and forth without creating any space. And quite often it was unnecessary, it would have been possible to switch or turn and move the ball out of danger. This was a very uncomfortable win. In all seriousness, would you count on the Red Bulls scoring three unanswered goals (the final one a penalty) in order to win a game?