Agree that Ale Moreno was good on the call -- prefer him to Twellman for sure. I was thinking in the first half that it was a very Burns-y line-up, but then I rememberd Buksa was out there. The Ralston Line should be updated to the Rowe Line. As with the former, I like Kelen's play and he adds value...in MLS. But honestly he was the only one showing he had any ideas in Gil's absence. I am not a big Penilla fan. We already knew Diego cannot dictate an offense, so I was not that disappointed in how he played. Rennicks needs more USL games. Seems we actually have fullback depth, even on the left: astonishing! Alons-y Impact ! !
I continue to be impressed with Kessler. I am seeing flashes of Parky in the way he reads the game. I wonder if Bruce is planning to keep those two centerback pairs together and play them as a pair. It would make sense from the standpoint of learning your partner. They continue to get chances and they eventually have to start going in. Could have easily had 3-4 goals. Bucannon looked like a college kid playing with pros, trying things that may have worked in college but not here, but he seemed to adapt well in the second half and was somewhat dangerous.
Yeah, me too. That was pretty nasty - and the commentators didn't even think that was worthy of discussion. Bradley must've been exhausted, he had some real bad plays down the stretch. I think our defending has been very, very good - even if a little too desperate at times. The only goal against in three games was a flukey give-away. That means we're limiting good looks - and this team (TOR) was a handful with lots of weapons. I think Farrell/Kessler have emerged as the #1 pair, as I thought they would. Farrell seems miles ahead of his days under Jay Heaps. No kidding - in each game they've had at least 2 chances that have been inches off. I still can't believe Bunbury's blocked shot didn't spin in. I'll differ on Diego - I thought he actually played *much* better, though he still had some bad giveaways. At least this game he got involved and provided a fulcrum for the attack. I think this is a game he can build on - after last game I thought he was hopeless. We know he's got talent - I can only assume that it's confidence that is dragging him down. I think going the full-90 can pump him up, along with Arena's faith in him. We have to hope, I suspect, because we're probably going to be without Gil for a long time and I think he probably has the best potential to be a Gil-lite. Overall, this was a great showcase for our young players: good performances from Taj, Jones, Bye (looking every bit the seasoned pro now), Kessler and Rennicks. Bunbury had a chance to get us a lead against the run of play in the first half and showed an atrocious first-touch to give it away.
Agreed. I don't think I feel the need to see Mancienne or Delamea again. The Revs got jobbed on the Bou non-PK call. Am I the only one who thinks that should be a binary situation -- either the PK is given, or the attacking player is booked for diving?
I think Bou looked like he was faking it, but then there was contact in the 2nd moment. FWIW, I hate that plays like that end up in PKs, but calls like that certainly go against us. Moreno's attitude seems to exemplify the current interpretation "Bou was under no obligation to avoid the extended leg".
In my opinion, the contact was minimal, Bou could have stayed on his feet if he wanted to, and he had no chance to catch up to the ball. Good non-call. Yet I have seen the PK called in similar scenarios, so what do I know?
The standard isn't contact, it's still a PK if it's obstruction (correctly pointed out by Moreno). If that had been called against us, I wouldn't have been upset. Certainly one of those that is usually called. I didn't re-watch the play, but I thought the ball would have been playable for Bou had he not changed path and fallen. We shouldn't have needed a PK with as well as we played in the second half -- we should have scored from the run of play. The last pass and/or first touch seemed to elude us -- memories of last year's start. The way ball-to-hand has been called so much this year, I'm also sort of surprised that they didn't look at the ?Penilla? handling in the box on VAR. I think both would have been upheld had they been called on the field.
It's boring soccer, but it can win championships. In 1993-94 AC MIlan scored 36 goals in 34 games, and conceded 15. They won the scudetto.
I agree but I'm not discouraged by the lack of scoring yet, because we created plenty of quality looks. We should have put up at least 3 on Montreal, at least 2 against DC, and at least one or two against Toronto. And on the back end, we were not conceding a lot of great chances, and like you say, the one we gave up was a gift. This is essentially preseason that counts for something. I'd like to think Bou, Buksa, Penilla, Rowe, Gil (please for the love of God get healthy FAST) will put away more of those chances as the season goes on (assuming it does). And I feel a hell of a lot better about the team as a whole not being a leaky sieve.
I thought we were defensively solid for the first two matches, but didn't feel as good with Toronto. Akinola could have easily had two goals, but for him not finishing his chances.
Definitely agree, the first half in particular against Toronto. But I still felt more comfortable about the team overall for 2.5 games, more comfortable than I have felt about them in a LONG time.
[QUOTE="Quiz time. In Mls's preview, there are two errors, one factual and one grammatical (word choice): It should be noted, too, that Toronto started the 2020 season by going 1-0-1 and the Revs were 0-2. Will that matter at this stage or does the MLS is Back Tournament disregard early form? We'll soon find out as these 2019 Audi MLS Cup Playoff sides chance a Round of 16 berth. Rep if you find both.[/QUOTE] Revs were 0-1-1 and chance should be chase?