Oh -- I also noticed (noticed this during the game, too) that Bachmann really needs to time her runs better. She would just run early and then hang out in an offside position. That gives other players no option but to ignore her. So, again, the understanding among these players needs to improve.
Totally agree and Thanks for your Game Reports. They are insightful and honest.I look forward to your reports after each game as,even though I was at the game, you bring up things that,in the heat of the game,I missed.
I said MAKE goals (for others) not score goals. And Aluko - how many of the 6 has she scored for the Beat ?
Answer = 2 so far. If you read some of the replies you would see that. For a Person who loves Skyblue,even attended[ actually paid to see ONE WPS game] you seem to enjoy being a fly on the Beat Board. Are we the only people who actually reply to your ? posts. Reference Thread :-Grove of Cerebral Delights Dated 24th July 2010
Here's another interesting and insightful article by Jonathan Wilson, again on the 4-2-3-1 formation. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/aug/04/the-question-is-4-2-1-3-the-future Personally, as I keep saying, I love this formation (and variations of it), because it is stronger than 4-4-2 in both attack and defense. In my opinion, despite the results we've been getting with 3-4-3 (or some variation of that), the problem with this formation is that the two wide midfielders have to stay deep to help defend (and then they can't get forward to help with the attack) because if they get caught up-field they leave gaping holes down the channels for the other team to exploit. This point, which I've made before, was pointed out by the female commentator for Fox Soccer Channel during our recent game against FCGP (sorry I didn't catch her name!). The only nagging thought I have about 4-2-3-1 or 4-2-1-3 (which, by the way, creates a place for Mami to play in behind the front 3 -- although it does create other problems regarding placement, I'll grant) is that probably there is something significantly different about women's football than men's that affects the effectiveness of formations? For example, you hardly ever see men's sides playing 3-4-3, yet this is a very popular option among women's sides. Is that because the relative lack of pace that most women have makes it harder for them to exploit the open channels? I realize lack of pace would affect both attacking and defending players, but what I mean is twofold: first, the whole pace of the game is noticeably slower, which means players have more time to react and reposition; second, the difference between fast paced players and slower players is less pronounced than in the men's game. Or perhaps there is some other reason why playing with a back 3 is workable in the women's game?
Come on out to the game tonight and you might find out the situation on Larkin.... Hope to see you there.
Not specifically about formation, but I see that Atlanta has signed Kaley Fountain to replace Larkin. She can play multiple positions, but I'm wondering how much impact she will have this late in the season.
Is this to a full or developmental contract? Because signing someone who's played a whopping sixty-two minutes of professional ball to a full contract at this point seems a little odd.
I would assume developmental, but to be honest, I've lost track of whom Atlanta's developmental players are. I know Sesselmann and Lofton-Malachi. Is that the only two?
I don't know much about Larkin, but I'm glad to see she's a left-back with pace who can play elsewhere along the left flank, too. I'm still familiarizing myself with our roster, but it strikes me that our team is very heavy in the midfield, and this is related to our formation. We only have 3 players listed as defenders on our roster (McNeill, Ellertson, and Robinson) who happen to be our regular starting defenders when we play 3-4-3. Do we have natural fullbacks (apart from Larkin, now) if we want to play with a back four? Are we playing with 3 in the back simply out of necessity? Who would be our preferred right back? It also strikes me that we have only 2 players who are real out-and-out forwards: Aluko and Bachmann. Of these two, Bachmann may have a boat-load of talent and future potential, no question -- but Aluko is the seasoned professional with the record to prove it. The other players classified as forwards, and who sometimes play up top on the wings (Rasmussen and Ocampo) are excellent players and good along the flanks, but don't strike me as out-and-out forwards. Our lack of forward players, it seems, is limiting our flexibility in terms of formation and organization. The result is that we play Mami up top, where she looks out of place and rarely if ever looks like scoring (as I've said umpteen times), because we don't have enough options there. And we play with a back 3, using wide midfielders as backup support, which seems far from ideal. What would happen if we lost Aluko or one of our back 3 to an injury? We'd be up a creek. I wonder if anyone else considers our side slightly unbalanced, or are all the WPS teams like this? I'm wondering if we should give this some thought as this season winds gradually to a close and we think about next season and how we can balance the team out more, which would give us more options during the season. No one can question the talent of the players we have, but our record isn't testifying to the strength of our squad.
Aside from Ellertson, McNeill, and Robinson, Bishop has played back most of the season, although I think she had played mostly midfield before this season. Sesselmann (developmental) has played outside back most of this year when she's been in there. Blank can play back, but I think she's better at defensive mid. I think Nolin has played on the back line this year as well, but I'm not as familiar with her. Of course, Chalupny plays outside back for the national team, but except for a few isolated instances when Barcellos was experimenting, she has played midfield in WPS. I think it is natural for teams to have more midfielders. Generally, defenders play a full 90 minutes, so there is less need for subs for the back line. Teams usually have three or four forwards they use, leaving the rest as midfielders. For many teams, the attacking mid and third forward have become almost the same position, which kind of blurs the definition. I think that one thing that Atlanta really lacks is a big power/target forward, someone who is good in the air and won't get moved off the ball in traffic. But there are only so many Wambachs, or even Cheneys out there. Bachmann and Aluko are too similar in many ways. The main differences are Aluko generally stays on her feet better, she's slightly more accurate with her shots (most of the time), she gets called offsides a lot more (sometimes unfairly), she will occasionally pass the ball, and she is a bit more polished. I think at this point in their careers and remembering that Bachmann is just a teenager, Aluko is much more aware on the field, both on her position on the field and in her decision making.
Why are you taking this so personally ? This is directed at Beat management. And as for your bizarre notion that I "love SkyBlue" - no I dont or otherwise I would attend more games - I am a Beat fan. If ever my theory that the beat FWs have no chemistry needed proof, then just look at the WPS video highlights of Monday's game. Apart from the thin passing up front, you can see when Aluko scores, and Bachmann tries to congratulate here, that gets rudely rejected. I know in soccer that the FWs have the big egoes, but these are some prima donnas operating here. And one more statistic can be seen here - after some 20 games, the FW line has tallied a miserable total of ONE assist.
First of all, let's be a little fair here. How many games have Ocampo, Aluko, and Bachmann actually been all active together for? Not too many. Aluko has now scored 3 goals in 10 games for Atlanta. She's scored 13 goals in 35 career games which is pretty good in this league. And last year, she did lead Athletica in assists. I saw the first game she played for Atlanta in Chicago and I think she was a bit frustrated. She was used to getting the ball in a position that she could do something with it. It didn't happen at all early on for Atlanta. Especially for a young player such as Bachmann, she really hasn't spent enough time on the field with her teammates to start to gel with them. I do get the feeling that Bachmann is not likely to set up other players, but maybe I'm wrong. She really hasn't played anywhere before where she wasn't the main go-to player. I don't think Ocampo was completely healthy much of the early part of the season. We know she can pass the ball if history is any guide, because she had 11 assists for FC Indiana last year in just 9 matches. I think that quite frankly, this team just hasn't played together long enough and has had way too many injuries. The lineup is constantly changing because of call ups, injuries, new players, and suspensions. I think that Atlanta has the players to become a good team, but they just need more time, which they don't really have this year. They dug too deep of a hole the first two months of the season, complicated by starting with four straight road games. Considering that they were 10 points out of a playoff spot at the end of May and managed to get back to within two points (as of a couple of weeks ago) of 4th place is pretty amazing. They are two own goals away from being from being ahead Sky Blue in the standings. Personally, I'm kind of thinking a 3-5-2 formation might be the best for this team, with the personnel they have. The problem with a 3-5-2 is that the outside defenders really can't get forward much and that is really Robinson's strongest point. It would help them if they had a really great holding mid (Shannon Boxx). Blank has potential, but I don't think she's there yet.
But really to be fair, the Beat has played at least 2 out of these 3 players on the field together for the last dozen games around 95% of the time. I don't doubt that each wants to score goals, but I am questioning whether they want each other to score goals - you cannot deny the visual evidence - and questioning if they want to play real football as a team priority. Yes the revival has been very interesting, and I think it is primarily due to players like Miyama, Solo, Rasmussen and Yamaguchi's endless running. However the assists have come from MF and the real football seems to stop there.
Sorry for my Wrong supposition,MUMF. Sorry I did make it personal and I was wrong ,was a bit too rabid a Beat fan.
Sure no problem. Better a rabid fan than a distant fan like me - Atlanta is just so far away. I hope somehow they can make the playoffs, but the deficit from April-May seems perhaps too large.
Thanks. I live in hope that we can make the playoffs,doesn't look good but stranger things have happened .Having our first 4 games away from Home didn't help,the Team never got to see and feel their home support until the 5th game.Own goals didn't help either.The infusion of Athletica players was a good move but it takes time for cohesion to occur.I think we are now coming together as a Team and, if not this season,next season we will be a force to reckon with.
... it would also help if Bachmann started being worth the hype. poor girl. She's like last season's A-Rod
Yeah, I also think the team just needs time to gel. We have some great players, I don't think anyone ever argues with that. But we do also seem a bit unbalanced (which has also been noted many times here) -- particularly in lacking a strong defensive mid. And yes, the forward line does not link up well -- yet. But that also can develop in time. What kind of 3-5-2 were you thinking of? Specifically, how would you organize the 5 midfielders (and who would you put where)? I can't quite visualize a 3-5-2 that would give us defensive cover on the flanks and still allow attacks. In fact, only having 2 up top would make it seem even harder for us going forward than 3-4-3, as we wouldn't have any width at all. This formation, it seems to me, has the same problem as the 3-4-3 we are currently employing, in that it asks a lot from the two wide midfielders, who have to do dual duty of covering the flanks and getting involved in attacks. In a 3-5-2 they might have to do triple duty if they're also expected to provide all the width on the pitch. But I am quite possibly missing what you actually have in mind.
Actually, probably more of a 3-2-3-2. ----------------Solo---------------- Robinson/McNeill---Ellertson-----Robinson/Bishop ------Blank------------Chalupny---------- Miyama------Yamaguchi/Ocampo-------Rasmussen --------Aluko---------Bachmann/Ocampo---- On the back line, it would depend on whether you wanted to start Robinson or Bishop. I personally think Robinson is better outside right in a four player back line, but if you go three in the back, then there is probably a preference to have McNeill over there. Ocampo could either be positioned either very high in the midfield (just behind the forwards) or if you would rather play Yamaguchi (which I think I would at this point), put Ocampo up front with Aluko instead of Bachmann. In this formation, the focal point would be the center attacking mid (either Yamaguchi or Ocampo). Get the ball to them, let them either distribute to the wings (Rasmussen or Miyama) or through to Aluko or the other forward). I would probably have Blank more as a stay-at-home defensive mid, but give Chalupny more leeway to go forward if she sees an opening. The problem with the three player back line is that if the two outside backs are drawn wide, the two defensive mids must drop back in the middle in a hurry or else Ellertson is left alone in the middle. The other problem is that the center attacking mid might have to drop back defensively a little more than one would like. It's just a thought. Probably not a whole lot different from what they've already tried. I just think that, for the most part, it plays to each players strengths. It would give them two layers of midfielders and if their spacing is done properly, should make it quite hard for the other team to get through the midfield without being challenged. I like Rasmussen and Miyama wide. I like Yamaguchi and Ocampo more in the middle. But that's just me. Unfortunately, I haven't seen Atlanta play as much as I would have liked. I just wish that Atlanta had someone up front with some size to them. They really have no size at all at forward or midfield, except possibly Cinalli who doesn't get in much and really isn't a physical player for the most part.
I think this is why Mami keeps getting played up top -- because she's physically a bit bigger and stronger and can hold the ball up well. Unfortunately, despite being a really great player, she's just not a forward in my book. She has never looked like scoring in any of the 5 or so games I've watched her play up top. Thanks for your explanation of the formation suggestion, too. It's an interesting suggestion, but I do think it would leave the flanks open, which is the big problem I have with virtually any formation that only plays 3 at the back. If you play with 3 at the back, they have to play rather narrowly together. You can't have those two defenders on the side actually get out wide to defend often -- that would leave a gaping hole down the middle of defense. So, effectively, you have 3 defenders in the center of defense, which leaves your defensive flanks open, which in turn requires the wide midfielders to help out much more in defense, which in turn means they can't attack as effectively. At least, this is my logic, but I'm open to corrections. Several games in which we've played 3-4-3 have born this out, in my opinion. I agree with your midfield suggestions, so I would simply take out the other forward (you had Ocampo and Bachmann) and put in another defender. This doesn't make the overall formation more defensive -- strange as it may sound. By now having cover on both flanks, midfielders can be more daring, press higher, and get involved in the attack more without having to worry about leaving a gaping hole behind them. So, I'd suggest something along the lines of: ----------------Solo---------------- Robinson-----McNeill---Ellertson-----Robinson/Bishop ------Blank------------Chalupny---------- Miyama------Yamaguchi/Ocampo-------Rasmussen -------------------Aluko--------- I agree with you that Mami's best position is probably in an attacking midfielder role just behind the main striker. Also agree with Blank playing more defensively, providing cover for the back 4, while Chalupny can move forward more. This formation just seems suited to our strengths. It also gives us an extra woman in midfield, which will be to our advantage, since it seems almost all the WPS teams play with only 4 in midfield. Its only possible disadvantage is that, while creating a position for Mami, it removes a position for Bachmann. Considering Bachmann is hardly in a run of form and needs more time to develop, I don't think that's a bad exchange. Later, if (when) Bachmann comes good, we can think about how to find a way to integrate both her and Aluko into a system.
Although I found some of Johnson's comments miffling, I was at least pleased that he saw that we obviously need a more organized side. On that note, another interesting case of 4-2-3-1 (sorry if I'm boring you all): Spurs' champions league qualifier game against Bern: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/18/tom-huddlestone-tottenham-hotspur Spurs started 4-4-2, went down 3-0, switched formation, got organized, and fought back to a 3-2 loss, keeping them favorites with the return leg at White Hart Lane.