3 quick (hopefully) points: if the guy drafted, acquired , wanted these players on the bench, use them.... they are not just there to warm the bench. Don't tell me they are so useless they are unable to face a 10 men team up two goals...or that they would have made our team worse off.... There is nothing to defend his sub patterns,,, .. NOT when your team is up two goals and up a player....NOT (in previous games) the countless times i've seen Youri subbed late, LATE in games.... And the three times so far since April that i hear a "Youri is out due to hamstring problem" in a press release..Similar case with Agoos.... NOT when someone like Lisi must have been showing sign of fatigue, one figures.......OR when your team (according to comments from MOtta in Wado, and Real's feed relayed here in this thread) is being overrun by a team that had 10 players for a half plus.... and fielding "hard working MVP" Clint Mathis no less.... NOT when (like you said) neither Razov nor Agoos are 100%... So why sub one player?... and/or almost always (in other games) SO LATE in games? It's not been a complaint that just arose yesterday..... It's a pattern of idiocy i just find too hard to understand.... I mean, unless the guy is really inept and has done a horrible job trying to build chemistry between starters/reserve team members.... And that if he dares introduce subs, they are going to do such a horrible job compared to the ones on the field that they are best left on the bench...I don't buy that.... These are all pros... surely there are starters and subs, but when you've done your job as coach, one should feel fairly confident that your subs can do at least an appropriate job when coming into the game..for 15, 20, 25 minutes..... heck at least a "I'm not going to fvck up, seriously!" serviceable kind of job.... I t would just seem that either BOb is scared sh!tless about subbing people, or he just forgets the rules of the game... or he is accomplishing little trying to have starters and reserves be on the same page ..Does he not have confidence that reserves/subs can at least to do a so-so job filling in 15-30 minutes a game each (all 3 of them)?
You're absolutely right, and that's the problem with Bob's tactical decision last night. It's OK to take risks with substitutions, but to completely flout common sense and conventional wisdom is quite different. Think of the mirror image scenario - Bob makes all of his substitutions early in the match. What are the risks there? Perhaps someone gets injured and we have to play with 10, perhaps one of the substitutes commits a grievous error. But you couldn't blame Bob for that. The heat, the crowd, the travel, the altitude, the nagging injuries - because of these factors no one could possibly blame him for making all three subs early, even if we lose. On the other hand, if you still have all your starters in at the 87 minute mark in a match like this, you are taking a great risk as a coach. If you win, you win despite that decision, and if you lose, you are directly responsible. It is hard to see how a rational thinking coach could make that decision unless he was absolutely convinced that the choice he was making would turn out correct. Personally, I don't think a coach could ever be that certain about anything. A rational thinking coach would have "played the percentages" and made the subs - for the good of the team and, at the very least, to immunize himself from criticism.
If there was no TV broadcasting anywheres, will they still have clips from the game for the MSR on thursday?
Thank you very much. I was concerned about Bradley at the beginning of the year, but he has proven that he belongs in the starting lineup. Bradley is going to be one of the pillars of Metro's future.
Geez. Let's see what the BS response would've been if BB put in daSilva and Suarez in the waning minutes of the Real game and Real came back and scored. "I know that Mendes would be tired, but how on earth do you sub in a guy like daSilva or Suarez who has not played 1 minute with the Metros." "You know, the back is much different that the front. You need to communicate back there. How could BB expect these guys to mesh together in the last 10 minutes of a match. Doesn't he know anything?" "Stammler has been pushed forward in his last couple of outings, there is no way that BB should've put him in for defensive purposes at that stage of the game." By the way, if Bradley goes about his business in order to immunize himself from criticism, he should be dismissed right away. Thankfully, he relies on his own experience and does things his way. As NONE of you saw the foul that led to the PK, as NONE of you saw the game, it is impossible to RATIONALLY make an argument one way or another. If you can't see the improvement in the team, then you can't see the improvement in the team.
Yes--the main point of comparison is that they are both young. Gio17, I'm not blaming Lil' Bradley for all the team failures. I was just trying to use it as an example of some of the ways in which Big Bradley has at times made questionable player decisions.
Fair enough--but how about if Regan came in for Razov, and putting him in to man mark anyone advancing the ball through midfield and to clog up the center. A young defender for an injured, older attacker. In a situation where we're 2 goals up, it would be pretty hard to criticize that move, wouldn't it? Wouldn't that subsitution make a lot of sense? And if RSL did in fact manage to put in 3 goals, we could still have shifted Magee up front with SGR to go back to a 4-4-2 from the 4-5-1. Bottom line, Metros need to study the film from the DC - Crew match last saturday in order to see how to close a game down and protect the lead. It wasn't pretty, but DC looked like they knew how to protect a lead. We've shown twice in a row that we're inept at it.
I will agree with you that DC looked terrific in finishing off the game vs the Crew. At the same time, the Crew looked like crap. It's probably also true that Real looked alot better than the Crew.
Good luck with that. They will both be out the end of this season if this ******** keeps up. Like father like son.
If your point is that BS posters will always find something to gripe about, no matter how petty or unfair, you will get no argument here. I can make a rational argument based on the facts I know (as I said, the altitude, the heat, the travel, the various injuries) that all three substitutions ought to have be made. I need not have watched the game on TV to make that judgment. I am not suggesting that Bradley act like a robot and disregard his instincts all of the time. Nor am I saying that any coach should have as his primary motivation the avoidance of criticism. I am only saying that in a situation like this, where all of the factors point to a certain decision (i.e. making all three subs) and you make the opposite decision (i.e. starters all still on at 87 minutes) you must have an additional level of certainty about your decision. If you do not have that level certainty - if you just have a feeling or a hunch - then you better not flout common sense. It just does not make sense to take that kind of risk.
Before you get your thesaurus out to write some comments on a freakin board, let me ask you: Who has said any of this stuff? People have said that Lil Bradley sucks, or is over-rated, or shouldn't be starting. Nobody has said anything about who gains what from it. As far as I care his name could be Guevara, Maldini, or Ronaldo. Call him what you want...have him related whomever you want...he is not at the professional calibur on this team. (Or at least starting calibur) I was excited when I first heard of him and rumors of playing in princeton with Gaven or whatever...but after the first game I saw him play I was very dissapointed and haven't been turned since. I don't see what his father or coach coincidentally sees in having him such an integral part of this starting lineup. Some apparently see good things out of him, but I don't. To each his own I guess. But, my argument was never the fact that I was bitter over the father playing his son simply because he can. I just don't think he is any good. Switch Gaven and Bradley's names and then I would be fine with Bradley and hate gaven...has nothing to do with who his father. Stop trying to defend Bradley ...I gave up this year.
I just wandered by to make sure you all know that nobody hit Lisi, he collapsed due to altitude and heat fatigue. I see that somebody posted that already. I was at the game, and I'd like to make a few observations: First off, our color guy is Scholes, not Stoltz. You may have heard of his cousin, who plays with Man U. He probably knows something about the game (never actually heard his call, just guessing) I thought the PK was a bad call too, I didn't see the replay so I didn't see if there was an elbow. HOWEVAH - That ref was letting your guys rape Watson all night long, and he missed a bunch of blatant handballs. He sucked all over the field. The ref had to be escorted off at halftime by the security people, showing how bad he was, and also showing that: Whoever it was who said that most of the fans were only there for the fireworks was dead wrong. It was one of the more rowdy games this season from the fans. How can a Metros fan criticize RSL crowds? The entire crowd was on its feet for the last 15 minutes or so. carry on..
I disagree..I thought both DC vs. C-bus, and Fire vs. Chivas were horrible at knowing how to keep the lead.. Even though they accomplished finishing the game on top, they let two 10-man clubs get way too close.... Of course, Metro accomplished to do even worse..... While i would have been ok with Metro playing like crap and still holding on for the win, instead of playing like crap and letting the opponent tie... I think MLS as a whole has a great deal of trouble turning a man advantage into a more sizable lead.... a safer lead...Or at the very least, enough of an advantage as to neutralize the opposition better.... which is why all these three clubs had trouble, while Metro was the only one that lost points.... But to me , the problem is clearly there, league-wide..... Just ask KC, in their game vs. Colorado for another example...
I only saw the DC game. IIRC, DC made 25 or more consecutive passes and kept possession of the ball from the 84 min. mark thru the 87th min. mark. It was a combination of DC hustle and absolutely no desire from the Creww team. I think that the Crew have totally quit on Andrulis and were trying to send a message to their mgmt. that they will not play hard for him. Having said that, DC did allow the Crew 1 or 2 chances on long crosses near the end of the match. In a sense, I do agree with you to a degree. DC won the game with a mediocre performance, but were almost ominant as Columbus was dreadful. It was not a good game. I remarked to a friend of mine that I wanted those 2 hours of my life back.