CHILE vs Colombia, 11 de septiembre en Santiago (Clasificatorias) [R]

very well said. I would add two things.

The first is that when Bielsa's Chile suffered an early red card the exact same thing happened. Think of the Valdivia red against Brazil, Estrada against Spain -- we got routed and there was absolutely NO adecuate response from the bench. Think about the Isla red card against Uruguay, where we held onto a point thanks to Baldassi, or the Jara red in Quito.......we got demolished in the game play in all these games..... point being, its absurd to think the Medel red card wouldn't have affected Bielsa's team, or any team at this level for that matter.

secondly, about the comment regarding how Borghi wasn't the ideal replacement.....the truth is that every other name they looked at (Scolari, Del Bosque, Riikjard,Bianchi, Pekerman) were too scared to take the job.

=====

there's been a few people that have gone on about this 'Vidal isn't a defender' thing... my question is what they would have done then? who would they have put in? Moving Vidal to the middle would mean taking out Medel or Diaz to bring in.......Labrin? Hans Martinez? this would've been the right call, really?

with Ponce, Contreras, Pepe, and Osvaldo out (and none of the young guys really stepping up when they've had their chance) what options were there really?

The same goes for the Jara never again crowd. Dude is a horror movie with the ball at his feet, but who else is there, especially with that lack of depth.

how different would your starting 11 been from Borghi's? one player? two?

===

what i want to see is something we really haven't had a chance to see in about a year. And that is Borghi's starting 11. I want the problems with the teams, with the players, and all that to go away and see what can be accomplished when everyone is available (allowing for injuries and the probability that Valdivia won't return).

this is especially true of the midfield, which is our strength. I want to finally see the Isla-Medel-Vidal-Jean-Mati midfield that Borghi see's as his top midfield (with Diaz as the sub).

once that happens, and if the team doesn't show dramatic improvement, then the serious questions that are being tossed around will seem more legitimate. But until then, I think people need to remember that this entire WCQ process has had to be piece-meal pretty much the whole way. ANd we're 2 points out of top spot, with all the f'ing problems we've had to deal with, and with the three most difficult away games already played.

At the end, this team's best soccer is ahead of it.

 

One of the things that has become blatantly apparent now is that when Chile goes down a player or makes consistent, awful mistakes, the team has no damage-control button. It simply doesn't exist. Other direct rivals do have this; they can change it up and weather the storm.

This is something to look at and address before the next matches.

 

Dentro de todo lo malo, Chile quedo quinto y estariamos en el repechaje. Para mi Paraguay y Bolivia estan fuera y Peru todavia no ha muerto, aunque creo que si les ganamos en Lima, practicamente los eliminamos.

 

Primero concentrémosnos en salir vivos en Quito contra Ecuador, y en Santiago contra Argentina, o de lo contrario solo será un duelo de 2 equipos colistas y nada más.

 

Hace algunos días lo dije, una vez que se publicó la nómina para este partido. Con los nominados esta vez por Borghi, y usando la defensa de 3 que es la única defensa que Borghi sabe usar, no había más opción que poner a Martínez de líbero, y a Medel y M.González de stoppers.
Vidal NO puede jugar de defensa (ya está recontrademostrado en muchos partidos de la era Bielsa y de la era Borghi: contra Venezuela en Macul fue un fiasco, contra Brasil en Brasil fue un fiasco, contra Argentina en B.Aires fue un fiasco, y hoy nuevamente).
Jara no tiene nivel para estar en una selección, lo mismo Labrín. Con suerte para la banca, ante las ausencias de Ponce, O.González, Contreras, Rojas, etc.
Martínez ES líbero (el otro líbero, Ponce, sigue recuperándose de una lesión y no fue nominado por lo mismo).
Vidal no es líbero ni stopper, es mediocampista.
Medel ok, no es defensa, es mediocampista. Pero Bielsa lo usó durante 4 años como stopper y siempre jugó bien o muy bien, siendo el mejor futbolista de la Roja en esos años. Siendo chico cabecea más y mejor que Vidal, es un "perro de presa".

En lo demás no había mucho para elegir con los que nominó Borghi (ya que no estaban Valdivia, Carmona, Aránguiz, Beausejour, etc.). En delantera Seba Pinto era una opción interesante a Suazo, quien hace años viene en bajada.

En Quito espero que Borghi se atreva a poner a S.Pinto de 9, ante la ausencia obligada de Suazo por acumulación de amarillas.

 

absolutely. a lot of people don't like the idea, but i'm of the opinion that if you're down a man against a good team you need to bunker up. Bielsa and Borghi are not like this at all and that's why neither of them has been able to respond properly to red cards. Not that there was another good defender or contencion on the bench today, but i wouldn't have minded a 4-4-1 after the red

i get the feeling sometimes that because of out strength going forward, the best coach for us would be a defensive tactician a la Pellegrini or Markarian

 

I don`t think so.
Chile always is regarded as an attacking team. And this is because we have a very poor defense Since the days of great Elias Figueroa and Alberto Quintano, we`ve never been able to stand a fairly decent defense, and pretending that from one moment to the other we will change this issue, is simply dellusional.

We have very few players able to keep fully concentrated during a whole game, and more often than ever, once a gap in the concentration of players is produced during the game, we give away some of the most innocent naive goals on our opponents behalf, which mean to us losing a game that otherwise could have meant a victory or at least a draw.

Chile playing defensively, would mean another 2002 WC qualifier, or even worse than that.
Our best defence, is attack. Bielsa knew it, and Borghi knows it too. (deep inside, I believe Pellegrini knows it as well, reasons why he did not want to coach the team when they offered it to him)

 

http://www.cooperativa.cl/chile-cay...l-mundial/prontus_nots/2012-09-11/184341.html

Chile (1): Claudio Bravo, Arturo Vidal, Marcos González, Gonzalo Jara, Mauricio Isla (58' Junior Fernandes), Marcelo Díaz, Gary Medel, Eugenio Mena, Matías Fernández, Alexis Sánchez (83' Mauricio Pinilla), Humberto Suazo (71' Sebastián Pinto). DT: Claudio Borghi.

Colombia (3): David Ospina, Camilo Zúñiga, Luis Amaranto Perea, Mario Yepes (46' Juan Cuadrado), Pablo Armero, Edwin Valencia, Abel Aguilar, Macnelly Torres (68' Aldo Rodríguez), James Rodríguez (81' Carlos Sánchez), Radamel Falcao, Teófilo Gutiérrez. DT: José Pekerman.

Goles: 1-0: 42' Matías Fernández (CHI), 1-1: 59' James Rodríguez, 1-2: 74' Radamel Falcao, 1-3: 77' Téofilo Gutiérrez (COL)

Amarillas: Arturo Vidal, Humberto Suazo, Marcelo Díaz, Eugenio Mena, Mauricio Pinilla (CHI), Mario Yepes, Abel Aguilar (COL).

Rojas: Gary Medel (CHI), Abel Aguilar (COL).

Estadio: Monumental de Santiago.

Arbitro: Víctor Carrillo (PER)

 

you might be right, but its been like 30 years in which we've kept saying that we have to shore up the defense. And we have good guys going forward, but they're not exactly Messis and Ronaldos either. and even teams like portugal, argentina, and england end up getting smacked around because of their defense.

like they say, offense wins games but defense wins championships

 

To ever form a good defensive team, who can bunker succesfully, first we have to have very disciplined players, who don`t lose their temper on insignificant plays during a game. And discipline is not our best issue, and actually it has never been. If we are top specialists in anything related to this particular issue, it is precisely the contrary to this, proved by how many times our players get carded in each game, being most of them due to very poor character of our players, who fall with absolute ease to all provocations or start argumentative discussions with referees. Another issue is the coach. Unfortunately with Borghi we will never go anywhere in this aspect (in this particular issue, Bielsa put a very tall bar to emulate)

Medel`s latest example, who unwillingly fell innocently into the Colombians play by answering stupidly to the provocation, which lead to his red carding afterwards, is just a clear example of what I`m telling you now. Unfortunately, among chilean players, there are lots more Medels than what we would really want to have, which makes bunkering impossible to achieve, unless a great player appears, with the right leadership among the team mates to get the rest of the team play disciplined. Elias Figueroa in the past, was that player, that made us one of the best defensive teams of the world. Since his retirement, we`ve never had any other player able to achieve anything like it. The actual generation could be very talented as players, but in relation to Figueroa`s disciplinary overall attitude, they are a very big bad joke.

 

but there are coaches that are known for defensive discipline, you'd figure they'd have better luck getting things organized in that way.


in any event, Colombia is a good team that is reaching its peak -- you can't give them an extra man like that

 

I Agree with Rickdog. This is quite simple, we lost a player... we lost the match. Since I have memory Chile has never won an official match with one player less than the opposition. We have the Copa America match against Venezuela as one example, happened with Bielsa (Spain and Ecuador come to mind), I only remember us getting a draw against Uruguay in Santiago with a fenomenal show by Claudio Bravo to keep the draw by some miracle.

More than a coaching aspect, this has to do with the fact that Chile does not have the defensive qualities to play bunker style. We have to improvise with a defensive midfielder in a line of three for crying out loud. This will not change no matter who we have as a coach. You can put Mourinho in charge and we'll still have the same problem.

Also we need Jean bad. Mena will not do against Ecuador and Argentina.

 

i think this is the way it is. ur absolutely right. against a good team that is in great form its always going to be difficult.

no need to flip out, everything will be fine. We have one of the best midfields in the world (maybe) when they're healthy, but we need 3 defenders that can play at a decent (not great level)...

Contreras-Ponce-Jara-Marcos-Osvaldo-Pepe-Labrin etc.... just three of these idiots have to be at a decent level and we can contorl 90% of the matches we have left

 

Actually we have the defenders that can play at a decent level.
Our greatest problem now, is in our coach's stupid pride, who keeps on hurting us by not calling up those players that can make the diference in favour of our team. Now it`s time to put aside all that stubborn attitude and call every player that can make the diference, or we will get prematurely eliminated from this WC.

This time, we could have won easy against Colombia, if we would`ve used some of the players from the "u" (Pepe Rojas, for instance), and maybe by calling our best midfielder as well, whom I`m convinced that could make Suazo be the weapon he used to be in the past, which is Valdivia. Mati is talented, but he doesn`t have the same quality and "eye", in order to make other players play, the same way as Valdivia can. By playing Suazo and Sánchez coming from the back, as we`ve been doing lately, we lose their abbility to position themselves in a better position to afterwards score. But Borghi doesn`t seem to get it and insists in improvising players in positions where they hardly ever play.

 

Good post; and I agree with almost every point raised by you guys so far, but...

Chile does not have to adopt a bunker-style to improve results. Chile has to learn to defend to improve results; there's a clear difference here, if we think about it. To argue the case that bunker-style is synonymous with defending is invalid. To say that Chile needs to adopt a bunker-style to defend is not true.

I think that there is a misconception at play here; it is a global view.

Football, whether we can accept it or not, has changed. Teams need to be able to defend as a team at various stages of a ninety-minute match; this is not bunkering. Defend as a team and attack as a team; every good team worldwide, international or club, does this. It goes without saying. If you can't do this, or if you choose not to, then you lose. Simple. It is not just about winning, but about survival.

You can't adopt the same approach every single game. Football is a tactical sport. Even Spain '08 and '10 needed to adjust to the circumstances in front of them; they would press when they could, hold when they had to.

Italy did not bunker at Euro 2012. Neither did Germany. Neither did France. Neither did the hosts. They would attack and defend, attack and defend. So, who bunkered then, right? England. From start to finish. There's a big difference.

The good teams do both. A bunker-style won't work, as disciplined as it is; ask Switzerland about 2010. A primal, 'all-out' approach won't work either, as we know.

The thing that holds us back is a mindset in our football culture; "We attack. Matar o morir. That is who we are." This is a proud but incredibly archaic notion. Borghi, and Bielsa before him even, are both symbolic of this. We go for someone who can adjust to us, but not the other way around.

I will back the team and I will back Borghi, because he is in charge. He should have the freedom to pick his best team and ignore the pressure from outside.

But, I do hope that one day, we can have something in Chile that attracts the interest of a manager who can revolutionise things a bit and bring us up-to-date.

And, fingers crossed that Beausejour and a couple of decent defenders can come back soon.

 

at the very least Rojas (and Osvaldo) would have permitted Vidal to start the game in the midfield or to be moved there after the red card. This could have made a huge difference.

I also can't believe that some people insist that Valdivia would have made a difference. with a man down he would have been absolutely useless in any defensive capacity and would have been the first guy taken out.................not to mention that Matias is the best player we have so far in the qualifiers

i do agree though, it would be nice to have him there on the bench for the second halves

 

Borghi has had plenty of freedom and the support of Jadue. Unfortunately the players he has picked and how he plays them do not make the best team.

 

Me da pena no analizar el partido en detalle porque es como decir que me rendí, pero así me siento sinceramente.

Sólo un par de puntos a acotar:

1. con un jugador menos, la responsabilidad pasa al cuerpo técnico (o a Jaime Vera, los que quieren desligar a Claudio Borghi de la responsabilidad por no estar físicamente en la banca) de hacer algún ajuste que le permita a Chile por lo menos competir en el partido. No me considero un experto pero la lógica en este caso dictaría que uno de Suazo o Sánchez salga para hacer ingresar a un defensa (digamos Martínez, por dar un ejemplo).

Con eso, Sánchez se queda sólo arriba; atrás se puede defender con 4 (Isla, González, Martínez, Mena); Vidal y Díaz en la contención y habría que quizás hacer ingresar a alguien para acompañar a Fernández en la creación. Por último, aún existiría la posibilidad de luchar por el empate y mantener algo de orden.

Lo que quedó demostrado con la falta de acción de Vera (claro, porque Borghi no estaba en la banca) es que o le tiene demasiada fé al 352 o simplemente carece de un plan "B": y eso es inaceptable a este nivel. Un buen técnico tiene que tener la capacidad de adaptarse y ajustar al equipo en base a las circunstancias.

2. Los 3 goles los analizaré en detalle más tarde pero los pasaron por el hecho de que Díaz sólo en el medio no se la podía y esto no habla de que sea mal jugador, si no que simplemente esta era tarea de dos jugadores y no de él sólo. Aparte que la defensa con 3 ya hacía agua. Como dije, esto lo voy a ver más en detalle más tarde.

3. Los únicos individualmente rescatable de la tarde fueron Bravo y Fernández y quizás la voluntad de Sánchez. El resto estuvo de mal a pésimo (en algunos casos por una evidente inactividad--Isla y Jara--y en otros porque jugaron fuera de posición--Vidal y en su caso, si le sumamos su general desorden táctico, era una receta para el desastre aunque reconozco que pensé que el experimento podía funcionar en un principio).

 

En el gol de Falcao, Aldo Leao Ramírez se lo llevó con chancho al hombro a Díaz, lo cual es más atribuible a su lentitud que al hecho de estar sólo en el mediocampo .
Por mucho que no me gusta Diaz, le doy a su favor que no es la marca lo que más siente y que ese sector luego de la explusión de Medel fue un pasadizo.

 

Se lo llevó, sí pero con un hombre más en el medio apoyándolo por lo menos este segundo hombre pudo haber entrado ya sea a robar la pelota o a forzar a un pase con mucho menos angulo para encontrar sólo a Falcao.

La habilidad de Díaz no se puede cuestionar en este partido si estaba luchando "sólo contra el mundo" (contra 3 o 4 jugadores). Lo siento pero estás equivocado.

 

Está bien lo que dices, de acuerdo. Yo apunto hacia otro lado, que con hombre más en el medio o no, que no sea su especialidad el equite,etc. no le puede sacar tanto metros de ventaja un rival. Si fueron muchos y Diaz apenas le vio el número de camiseta.

En fin , el partido ya fue, era uno de los que se podía perder por el poderio de Colombia, a dar vuelta la página que ante Ecuador ganamos y en la segunda rueda a Colombia tb. allá .

 

Díaz lo fue a achicar y si bien perdió ese mano-a-mano, se supone que con ayuda ahí en el medio (como dije anteriormente), Ramírez no habría tenido tanta libertad para poner un pase tan milimétrico. Tampoco digo que habría sido imposible pero era mucho menos probable.

 

Diaz nunca ha jugado solo de contencion, el necesita alguien que quite la pelota. En la U tenia Aranguiz que no solo protegia a el, sino a Matias tambien. Por eso Marcelo Diaz no tenia ninguna culpa.

 

Hmm, en realidad ninguno era contención neto (ni él ni Aránguiz) pero incluso Díaz era el más defensivo o ni tanto el más defensivo pero el volante central que estaba un poquito más retrasado.

De todas maneras, con equipos de Bielsa y Sampaoli que buscan atacar hasta el cansancio este tipo de falencias y hoyos defensivos se esconden un poco.

Y for the record, yo no digo que Díaz sea responsable: al contrario, yo pienso que trató de hacer lo que pudo con las circunstancias.