I remember there being a thread discussing whether the US has ever had a 'true number 10.' So, what do you think of this part of a Cyber Soccer News column by Merrill Ring? *** Melanie Hoffman, Anson Dorrance and the Creative Mid-fielder Last week, Anson Dorrance was cluck-clucking over the defensive play of Melanie Hoffman. He allowed that she was an excellent attacking mid-fielder but was more interested in the her defensive failures. As the season has gone along, it has become apparent that it is possible that Hoffman is up there with Hege Riise and Sissi as creative mid-fielders. She has been adapting to play in the fast paced WUSA game and the absence of Kelly Smith has prevented Hoffman from having a major gun to help increase her assist total. She wants the ball, comes to get it, judges quickly and makes incisive passes. Dorrance is impressed by all that. But for him, all that offensive success is outweighed by the fact that her defense and defensive effort is not up to his standards. It is those standards of his that I am interested in. Dorrance was the single most important factor in shaping the style of play among American women. In his role as the coach of the most successful college team and the continuation of that into coaching the WNT during its major formative years culminating in winning the first WWC, Dorrance shaped attitudes among players and coaches as to how the women’s game should be played. That style involved a 3-4-3 organization with huge amounts of running and harassing. With the best college players on his team and with many of the world’s best players on the US team, why not run and pressure the other teams into making mistakes? Forwards and mid-fielders especially were there to create havoc, cause turnovers and then race to score. The style was to put the other team into a high-pressure cooker. In that system, the mid-field priority was on running, working and all-around ability. There is no place for the amazingly creative attacking mid-fielder who specializes in seeing and making the killing pass. Dorrance still thinks of Julie Foudy as a play-maker, the paradigm play-maker perhaps. Of course, she’s not: she is a great all-rounder who can do some of everything. And that, for him, makes her into the model central mid-fielder, very unlike Melanie Hoffman. I think it an interesting question, whether Dorrance did recruit, or would have recruited, Aly Wagner for North Carolina. Wagner was committed from an early date to Santa Clara and so I have no idea - and would seriously like being enlightened - as to what Dorrance’s attitude was toward Wagner as she came up through the youth ranks. But she certainly did not, and does not, fit the Dorrance mold of what a successful mid-fielder is. April Heinrichs is a Dorrance off-spring, both as a player and as a coach. She was not warm toward Wagner at all in the beginning. Many lesser mid-fielders are given greater chances by Heinrichs than she gave Wagner, who had to work quite hard to improve her defense just be to be considered as a regular member of the national team. In fact, I recall the days when Heinrichs suggested that the mid-field distributor of the future would be Aleisha Cramer. Cramer played like Michelle Akers in the 1999 World Cup: a deep-lying mid-fielder whose primary job was to win balls but could then distribute by switching the point of attack. In those days, Heinrichs included Cramer - who has voluntarily ended her career it seems - much more frequently on the US team than she did Wagner. At any rate, it is great that the US, despite the Dorrance model, has produced a world class creative mid-fielder, someone who can join foreign players such as Riise, Sissi - and perhaps Melanie Hoffman - as genuine play-makers, genuine #10’s. *** http://www.cybersoccernews.com/columnists/ring/030528ring.shtml
When the author says, "April Heinrichs is a Dorrance off-spring, both as a player and as a coach..." he looses much creditability. April may have played for Dorrance but her coaching is VERY different. Dorrance wants pressure and creative attack while April seems content with possession for possession's sake. Wagner did not fit into April's idea of the midfield roll because she would take chances in the attack and actually try some things creative. This meant that she will give the ball away in the attack quite a bit. April wants safe soccer not creative soccer. Wagner has played her way into the mix only because she is so gifted that she cannot be ignored. However that creativity may hurt her chances as the few WUSA outings that I have seen have looked less that stellar due mainly to a lack of runs off the ball by others. Also this is wrong: "In that system, the mid-field priority was on running, working and all-around ability. There is no place for the amazingly creative attacking mid-fielder who specializes in seeing and making the killing pass." The US has many such players BUT they have played in the style that wins not the style that is pretty, like the author seems to want. What there is no place for is the midfielder that will not or cannot play both ways and switch rolls with others as needed. The movement under April to this pretty soccer is a lot of what is bringing the US back to the rest of the world. In good attacking soccer seeing and making the killer pass is only part of the problem, it also must be done FAST and with creative differences often. Hoffman is an OK midfielder with the potential for the creative spark to bloom BUT that is quickly being coached out of her and any influence April has will only serve to decrease her creativity. Again April wants possession not creativity. It is not the lack of Kelly Smith that is a problem for Hoffman it is the horrible pitch she plays on and the style that Philly plays. In Philly there is/will be many more unassisted goals that most other fields simply because of turnovers and unexpected bounces and speed changes of the ball. Also assist chances will often be blown for the same reason. However Hoffman could become a good to great player for the US given time and chances but, even after the WWC, I doubt she will get either from the current brain dead coaching pool in the US program.
Melanie Hoffman is a former german national team player, so I guess the "brain dead coaching" is not decreasing her chances on the US national team
Actually you are right and I misread the original article. I thought the author was touting her for the USA. But the rest I said is still true and the reason there are no creative mids coming up through the ranks is that the style since Dorrance and Diccico left is not conducive to creativity. In fact creativity seems to be actively discouraged in instead the safe pass is encouraged.
I agree US has been playing too much dull soccer, but maybe that's going to get better eventually. When April first became coach, she had some big shoes to fill and was probably paranoid about making mistakes. Remember how she had them always stuck in that conventional 4-4-2? But now they're looking more flexible at least and mixing formations more often.
It was very interesting seeing the point-counterpoint between Tsunami and FanofFutbol in the prior two posts on this thread. While I will not enter the discussion about the merits of who should be the attacking midfielder, I do have some observations. I agree that Ape wants "safe soccer, not creative soccer." She insists on her 4-4-2 scheme even when she KNOWS that the other team will play with only one front runner (like Iceland). Our wing defenders are "supposed" to overlap and get into the offense. Sometimes, this doesn't work. While you can't argue with success, this 4-back zone marking started under Tony D., and has led to some boring matches. Passing the ball around among the four backers while the opponents drop back into their bunker seems to playing into their hands. You can be both safe and creative at the same time. I do not believe that these are mutually exclusive ideas. Ape has kept the same 4-back formation she inherited, but the problem as I see it now is that the central defenders (Joy and Brandi, normally) almost never push forward even when there is no one within 20 yards of them. This seems ludicrous, especially when playing against a severely overmatched side. I saw that for the first time several years ago with Tony coaching in a US-Italy match and saw it again first hand in Birmingham. England, to be precise, offered token resistance to our defenders, but other teams almost sprint back into their bunker. By making sure that every defender has at least one touch before we play the ball forward just contributes to a boring game. Will a creative midfield help our attack? Well, that depends on wwhat our tactics are on the pitch. If we continue to flight long balls to the wings to "spread the defense," then it may not. As was the case in Birmingham, Mia and Mac got all kinds and shapes of long balls, most of which were slightly off target requiring acrobatic skills just to control them. Unfortunately, Mac will probably miss the WWC. That will leave the US with two smurfs up front in need of through balls and the like. Both Mia and Millie can score all day long if the balls filter through the defense. The longer we allow teams to set their defense, the more difficult it will be and the less we'll need an attacking midfielder. You see, I wished for this in 2000 in Australia, but was disappointed by Ape's insistance on a controlled attack from the back. Under Ape's coaching stayle, a creative midfielder is wasted, because all we need is someone to pass it wide to the wings, not someone to thread passes running at speed in our own counterattack. Back to the need for creativity. It helped us equalize in the Olympic final. Remember CP's flick on to Mia as she ran the right side, then Mia's cross to Millie's head. Beautiful soccer. I haven't seen much of that. Wasn't it in the Alrgarve Cup that we scored a preponderance of our goals off set pieces rather than off action? While it's good to be able to convert on set pieces, if a majority of your scoring is off them, then that lends credence to the fact that there is little creativity during the course of playa and that starts in midfield. Along this same line, I would like to see some two-person games within the game. For example, when Mia, or Millie knocks the ball back, they normally turn and sprint forward on attack. More often than not, sadly, what I see is the person getting the ball looking AWAY from the cutter to make a "safe" pass to a teammate, sometimes even passing back. Nothing wrong with that, occasionally, but to make it seems like SOP is a bit much. I know that some of the newer players don't have the "sixth sense" of Mia-Lil or Mac-Millie, but they have to at least try. If Ape scolds them for trying, that's her problem. I can always accept technical shotrtcomings, but to criticize someone for trying to be innovative, that's poor coaching. A subset of this is Ape's insistence on low pressure up front, something FanofFutbol talked about. Of course, to do that you'll need 3 attackers - something Ape doesn't like no matter what formation the other team throws at us. Do we assume that Iceland's defenders are so skilled that they could elude the pressures of our three attackers. Maybe Ape wants to make sure that the ball gets back to our defenders so our side can start the attack from the back. Wouldn't it be refreshing to see Mia or Millie strip the ball and start an attack from 30-35 yards out rather than from just outside our penalty area? Perish the thought. Can a new attacking midfielder help solve this problem? I'm not sure. AW has shown some flashes of brilliance, but I'm afraid that she too will be molded into the un-creative player that Ape seems to love. Ape, when she was playing, was not necessarily creative on the 3-woman front line of Ape-Michelle-Karen (lesson forgotten?) that was called the "triple-edged sword" in the 1991 World Championship, but she was tenacious and a strong finisher. Foudy is not the attacking midfielder. In fact, she has trouble at times being the defending midfielder. As I mentioned in another thread, TR outplayed her in Birmingham. Aly got ridden off the ball too often in Birmingham; something that Julie does too. AH was better physically, but poorer technically. CP was physical on the right side, and Lil on the left was, well, Lil on the left. Please, Ape, please try and generate some creativity on the team. Another USA-China 0-0 final will NOT help the cause for W*USA or women's soccer in this country. Despite his many detractors, I still like Anson's approach: "I'd much rather win a match 4-3 and make it exciting, than to win 1-0 in a defensive struggle."
Wow......good stuff folks...sure beats the heck out of the typical rumor mill and "my dog's bigger than your dog" stuff. The true cause of whatever's missing is perhaps subject to debate. But the common denominator is that something's missing. It's boring and not good for the game as a whole. Wagner not given the opportunity to use her obvious creativity......bad ......very bad.
Tom_T, thanks for your perspective. "Wagner not given the opportunity to use her obvious creativity......bad ......very bad" To encapsulate what I said in my long post, I believe it all starts with the coach. If you don't want to be creative and exciting, and enter each match with the primary goal of not wanting to lose rather than showcasing your sport, you get dull, boring soccer. That started with Tony, but Ape has taken it to a new level. And, once again, US Soccer doesn't care. So we won't see any impetus from that end to change. Only we, the fans, can try and voice our concerns. Too bad there is no reporter who can give an honest appraisal of the program - we won't get that from the team's mouthpiece, Aaron Heifitz.
This is a good thread. Thought-provoking. I've never liked Apr, and this may be one of the main reasons.
I'm going to stick the following excerpt from SA's "Women's Soccer Insider" here, becuase I think it has bearing on the current discussion. It looks like the Chinese squad is thinking about changing personnel and tactics now that the Cup has moved to the US. I don't think we have much wiggle room with player selection, but how those players get coached is definitely relevant.
So we're supposed to believe China is relieved the Cup has been moved? Their comments sure don't sound like the "pressure is positive" line coming from the US camp. I'm not sure I buy either side's line.
The 1st paragraph is true. Anson's system works because he had faster players. My impression from watching UNC is that speed is emphasized more than skill. Watching UNC play is like watching U13s play. UNC play like a flock of headless chickens. A lot of running, and little else. Whack the ball upfield and watch them outrun everyone else. No wonder they run the ACC to the ground. The 2nd paragraph is misleading. There was no need to develop a creative mid in UNC's system because it was not encouraged. With UNC's brand of pressure-cooker environment, creativity was sacrificed in lieu of pure speed. With free substitution, UNC put a new trio of forwards every 20-30 minutes. No wonder Aly Wagner spurned UNC in favor of Notre Dame or Satan Clara. We all know who she chose eventually.
The importance of a creative mid will be made evident in this Cup. There are probably three sides that could win it all, and the rest are pretenders. The way the competition is set up, there will be a group stage, then the knockout stage(s). In the group stage, getting wins and inflating the goal differential are important objectives for Ape. I expect a lot of attacking football and hopefully there will be no mercy for the other guy. The knockout stages present a different challenge for Ape. For the underdog to reach the next stage, their emphasis is not to lose, i.e. prevent USA from scoring. USA's opponents in the knockout stages will play a lot like CAN have been doing - get numbers behind the ball, and counter-attack when the opportunity presents itself. It is at this point when a creative mid like Aly is most needed - her great vision and that killer pass enables her to unlock defenses.
re: Great discussion folks, enjoying it very much but i would say that creativity as a whole is missing from this team, that the team seems restrained. I have seen so many times Mia in particular pull back. almost like april has a choke chain on her. What happened to our swarming defense in the mid-feild. Do you guys remember how teams didn't even have time to breath never mind figure out who they were going to pass to?. The mid-feild is the beginning and end to anything. Begining for a quick counter, and is meant to stymie the oppositional attack. i don't see it doing that. We have an enormous amount of talent on the feild that is naturally creative, and ping the ball around so very well, and this is an aspect of the play that often earned us opertunities. But so many times i have seen a forward...be it mia or millie or mackie or whoever, wide open 18 yards out from goal, with no defender in front of them,calling for the ball only to see the ball go in the opposite direction. Millie and Mia were like watching two people with ESP. they knew where the other would be. now it is like their passes are already designated and that they can not choose any other option. and frankly dependent upon the scenario, I suspect it is true to a degree. Shame really, that April is so caucious, and analytical, that she does not allow these players to be creative, and really work together as they once did. She has turned this team into individuals with a simple primary task. And it is clear that they are not allowed to move outside those tasks. I say let um' run. let them play freely, and in so doing creatively and watch the score board light up. Defensively we are sound. But the real freedom Must start in the Mid. and move forward. let One Forward run high as we used to. And that player was usually millie...let mia track back to mid. and help out defensively. Why should everyone pull back in an attempt to win back the ball. Let the forwards preasure.
Great stuff Hamm-star! I agree. Things must start with the midfield, not the back as Ape likes to do. I especially agree with your analogy of the choke chain in keeping the players locked into certain roles on the team and positions on the pitch. Let Mia and Millie run and have fun. As I mentioned earlier, it's almost a crime to see one of the smurfs cutting through the defense calling for the ball, only to see the mid with the ball turn and pass it the opposite direction. For goodness sakes, at least try! I remember a MWC several years ago where the Danish team had tactics to outman the opponent in a specific part of the pitch and make the passes to free up one of their players for a shot on goal. If we outnumber the opponent, it's like Ape's rule states that we have to change fields...just for the sake of changing fields. Grrrrrrr...I want to see the "beautiful game" once again.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Millie say several years ago that she has become a more "freer" or "creative" player under Heinrichs than she was with DiCicco...she was playing more up to her potential now?
That was my opinion, Fear. I remember when April became coach, there were quotes from the players that she had freed them up. That under Tony they were supposed to make specific passes, but that April said, in essence, "You know how to play this game, Just go play it." Does this mean she has changed over the years? Does this mean that the players are inherently just not very creative? Does this mean that our BS posters are mistaken in what they are seeing? Just asking...
I believe Chastain's move to the center is also a contributing factor to this "lack of creativity". Her service from the outside, over-laps, etc have all-but disappeared. Perhaps she has lost a step or two as others have suggested, but the service is still available - just not utilized .............boring
To Tom T I believe that Brandi's move to the middle was a necessity. She had become a liability as a wing defender, becuaue she had gotten lazy. I also believe that the reason why Anson placed her in the back. Yes, she was a forward and a scorer in college, but she was not a good passer (not in midfield either). He also thought her defensive skills and mobility on the pitch were pretty good. On the outside, however, since most teams are right-handed, her lapses in concentration proved a little more problematic then Christie Pearce or Kate's would be on the defensive right side. The Chinese figured that the best way to attack Brandi was to come at her head-on. I can't count the number of times she kicked the ball directly into a Chinese opponent. Then it was a foot race up the touch line. I believe that in the middle, she HAS to perform and can't be lazy and she is a vocal presence there. Besides, there is Joy next to her. Also, as I witnessed in Birmingham, her tendency to try and flight the ball to one of the forwards when no one was within 20 yards of her is most likely from her past problems of not disengaging from the opponents. It is good to have her in the middle, because she can flight the ball, while Joy passes it outside or up the middle.
If Brandi has ever been "lazy" I've never witnessed it. I certainly didn't see it as she stuffed every attack the Breakers made on her side last weekend. How very easy to sit at home and make such pronouncements.
I do not think anyone can or should accuse Brandi of ever being lazy. However, she has always been a bit unpredictable (AKA loose cannon) while on the field. In the past, her athleticism would almost always enable her to recover when caught out of position or to recover from a poor pass. Age catches up with all of us though, and now has much more difficulty recovering. While this is not nearly as evident in the WUSA games against some average players or teams, on the world stage against world class teams it is much more evident.
I veered this off-topic by bringing-up Chastain so I have to steer it back............ 1.Turn Wagner loose - get creative 2. Have at least two of the "big three" on the roster (or four, or five - Fotopoulis doesn't get the mention she deserves) and one on the field at all times ......they all appear slow - it's a physics thing......... besides, who cares if they are slow if they put it in the net. Put them in the midfield or wherever you want, just put them in there. Try as we may, I really don't think we can justify the second-guessing of having CP in the line-up. more?