Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [NT] World Cup - Season 15
Seca [del] to
All
The World Cup gets underway this weekend. As discussed, New Zealand didn’t draw a particularly good group. All three matches will be very tough, with New Zealand as a decided underdog each time.
This doesn’t mean the squad is without hope. Any time you have a keeper the caliber of Taylor, a team has a chance. Add in a weapon like Brent Gilbert that can potentially give any defender in Sokker a headache, and there is more reason for optimism. If you further consider the success New Zealand has had in non-Seca World Cups (under Bball and Greiver-Cerb), there is even more basis to be encouraged.
The team is actually heading into the World Cup in it’s best shape in ages. Team form has greatly improved since last season, with only Kelly and Hird struggling amoungst New Zealand’s elite players. Even Richards is showing signs of life. The only real downer is the injury to Morcombe - an absence that will certainly be felt.
Before getting into the specifics of the first match, I should say that I’m not putting an emphasis on scouting opposing players for this World Cup. All three opponents are very large and mature Sokker nations. There is a fair amount of uniformity on these squads, and often not a lot to pick between the best player at a position and the next. Adding in the limitations of New Zealand’s roster (with a pretty well defined best 11) further reinforces the futility of extensive player scouting.
This doesn’t mean the squad is without hope. Any time you have a keeper the caliber of Taylor, a team has a chance. Add in a weapon like Brent Gilbert that can potentially give any defender in Sokker a headache, and there is more reason for optimism. If you further consider the success New Zealand has had in non-Seca World Cups (under Bball and Greiver-Cerb), there is even more basis to be encouraged.
The team is actually heading into the World Cup in it’s best shape in ages. Team form has greatly improved since last season, with only Kelly and Hird struggling amoungst New Zealand’s elite players. Even Richards is showing signs of life. The only real downer is the injury to Morcombe - an absence that will certainly be felt.
Before getting into the specifics of the first match, I should say that I’m not putting an emphasis on scouting opposing players for this World Cup. All three opponents are very large and mature Sokker nations. There is a fair amount of uniformity on these squads, and often not a lot to pick between the best player at a position and the next. Adding in the limitations of New Zealand’s roster (with a pretty well defined best 11) further reinforces the futility of extensive player scouting.
The first opponent is Argentina - arguably New Zealand’s best crack at a result. They are a very strong, deep side, though over the seasons I’ve got the impression they are a bit of an under-achiever.
I don’t know their roster as well as I used to. When I think of Argentina I visualize players like César Basualdo and Ezequiel García - players who now seem in the sunset of their careers. Doesn’t help when players like Adriano Armenteros (who if he isn’t triple divine is very close) are pushing at their position
Bit of a side note - Argentine defender Jorge Cuenca was the anchor of my club team’s defense for several seasons. He hasn’t been capped for ages, but is still on the roster.
For New Zealand,
Goal 1 in this match will be keeping all 11 players on the pitch. Last time I managed New Zealand in the WC this was a huge struggle. :)
Goal 2 will be minimizing mistakes on defense. If the back-line can manage few bobbles, few panic kick-outs, and can win their share of 50-50 balls that would be a huge plus.
Goal 3 is to have New Zealand’s two superstars in this match (Taylor and Gilbert) be influential in the outcome. They need to be stand-outs.
If the team can achieve these goals, then a result is possible. :)
There is a more detailed discussion of the preparations in the New Zealand Association. Stop by if you’d like to take part.
I don’t know their roster as well as I used to. When I think of Argentina I visualize players like César Basualdo and Ezequiel García - players who now seem in the sunset of their careers. Doesn’t help when players like Adriano Armenteros (who if he isn’t triple divine is very close) are pushing at their position
Bit of a side note - Argentine defender Jorge Cuenca was the anchor of my club team’s defense for several seasons. He hasn’t been capped for ages, but is still on the roster.
For New Zealand,
Goal 1 in this match will be keeping all 11 players on the pitch. Last time I managed New Zealand in the WC this was a huge struggle. :)
Goal 2 will be minimizing mistakes on defense. If the back-line can manage few bobbles, few panic kick-outs, and can win their share of 50-50 balls that would be a huge plus.
Goal 3 is to have New Zealand’s two superstars in this match (Taylor and Gilbert) be influential in the outcome. They need to be stand-outs.
If the team can achieve these goals, then a result is possible. :)
There is a more detailed discussion of the preparations in the New Zealand Association. Stop by if you’d like to take part.
Good luck for the world cup. You are due a win after the last month, so hopefully you're able to catch Argentina on an off game. I think you can beat them but it's not going to be easy (no game is in the world cup these days). Will be watching with interest, after we hopefully polish off Singapore.
Underway against Argentina.
Going to be tough. Even if everyone plays their heart out, it’s likely going to take a bit of kindness from the referee to get a result.
Playing a 532. Might look like a winger out there, but he’s got an ATT order. Don’t expect crosses. If (no, when :D) he beats his man he’ll cut for the goal. Either get a shot or a corner or a short pass to Bodger.
Big fear is the defense. They can’t make mistakes. Any fumble, bobble, lost header or slow pass may well cost a goal given Argentina’s #1 striker. Even if the defense plays well Taylor will have to be on his game.
Root takes freebies, Bodger penalties. Edwards provides the red card coverage for the back line. Gilbert covers Bodger in case of red card. Sansom the only sub - relieving his team mate Atkinson at 60.
LINE-UP
............................Taylor................................
Kelly, Williams, MGilbert, Kilkenny, Watts
...........................Edwards.............................
........Root..............................Atkinson.........
......................................................................
...........................Bodger................BGilbert.
BENCH
Alves
Harris
Petherick
Sansom
Pollock
Going to be tough. Even if everyone plays their heart out, it’s likely going to take a bit of kindness from the referee to get a result.
Playing a 532. Might look like a winger out there, but he’s got an ATT order. Don’t expect crosses. If (no, when :D) he beats his man he’ll cut for the goal. Either get a shot or a corner or a short pass to Bodger.
Big fear is the defense. They can’t make mistakes. Any fumble, bobble, lost header or slow pass may well cost a goal given Argentina’s #1 striker. Even if the defense plays well Taylor will have to be on his game.
Root takes freebies, Bodger penalties. Edwards provides the red card coverage for the back line. Gilbert covers Bodger in case of red card. Sansom the only sub - relieving his team mate Atkinson at 60.
LINE-UP
............................Taylor................................
Kelly, Williams, MGilbert, Kilkenny, Watts
...........................Edwards.............................
........Root..............................Atkinson.........
......................................................................
...........................Bodger................BGilbert.
BENCH
Alves
Harris
Petherick
Sansom
Pollock
Disappointing result.
Got the tactic expected from them, but it didn't make any difference. The defense was simply over-matched. Kilkenny epitomized the effort - he failed numerous front-on tackles against Argentina's 2nd best striker (even after he was injured :P). Too many missed tackles, too many fumbled, bumbled balls. Too many fouls and conceded penalties.
I was happy with the tactic. Their strikers and midfielders were marked fairly well. Passing lanes, for the most part, were occupied (couple of through balls in the 2nd half). Throw-ins could have been tighter. The technique-tackling disparity in midfield and between Argentina's strikers and New Zealand's defense was simply too much to overcome.
Bodger and BGilbert finished well, but both had some bad bounces. Root played some nice balls, but despite being one of NZ's quickest middies looked sluggish at times. Edwards covered a lot of territory and played well. Watts' mediocre PM was evident, tho for the most part he played ok. Kelly was lousy, as was Kilkenny. Taylor made a couple nice stops, but was by no means a brick wall.
The final goal was a kick in the gut. -3 probably means two wins are required from here, which is unlikely given the opponents. :)
Got the tactic expected from them, but it didn't make any difference. The defense was simply over-matched. Kilkenny epitomized the effort - he failed numerous front-on tackles against Argentina's 2nd best striker (even after he was injured :P). Too many missed tackles, too many fumbled, bumbled balls. Too many fouls and conceded penalties.
I was happy with the tactic. Their strikers and midfielders were marked fairly well. Passing lanes, for the most part, were occupied (couple of through balls in the 2nd half). Throw-ins could have been tighter. The technique-tackling disparity in midfield and between Argentina's strikers and New Zealand's defense was simply too much to overcome.
Bodger and BGilbert finished well, but both had some bad bounces. Root played some nice balls, but despite being one of NZ's quickest middies looked sluggish at times. Edwards covered a lot of territory and played well. Watts' mediocre PM was evident, tho for the most part he played ok. Kelly was lousy, as was Kilkenny. Taylor made a couple nice stops, but was by no means a brick wall.
The final goal was a kick in the gut. -3 probably means two wins are required from here, which is unlikely given the opponents. :)
Thought the result was a bit harsh. There wasn't really a 3 goal difference out there today I didn't think. Tactic wise seemed to work (wondering if the fade out in the 2nd half was of a result of all the movement in the 1st half to perform the trap). Had them pretty well contained 1st half but the wheels came off in the 2nd half as they came home the stronger.
Lots of fumbles in the defense most of them falling the way of their strikers, whilst the fumbles or the dislodging of the ball from Gilbert just never seemed to roll your way.
Interesting try, for the first half it looked like it might come off then the 2nd half you got overrun.
Better luck next week, definitely thought you played better than the scoreline suggests.
Lots of fumbles in the defense most of them falling the way of their strikers, whilst the fumbles or the dislodging of the ball from Gilbert just never seemed to roll your way.
Interesting try, for the first half it looked like it might come off then the 2nd half you got overrun.
Better luck next week, definitely thought you played better than the scoreline suggests.
Idd. The match followed my expectations completely.
I thought Gilbert was magnificent today with his goal as the cherry on the cake :) Tactically Seca outsmarted the Argentines although I don't think a five man defense was necessary. Four man at the back would have done fine (maybe even better considering the placing of the Argentinian strikers who were placed quite wide), but I suspect you chose to play with 5 at the back to cover a potential winger.
At the end it was a good performance by NZ!
I thought Gilbert was magnificent today with his goal as the cherry on the cake :) Tactically Seca outsmarted the Argentines although I don't think a five man defense was necessary. Four man at the back would have done fine (maybe even better considering the placing of the Argentinian strikers who were placed quite wide), but I suspect you chose to play with 5 at the back to cover a potential winger.
At the end it was a good performance by NZ!
seems like there are no new players.. its like the same team as when i was NT coach, 3 seasons ago.
somebody should really promote this game in NZ... :)
somebody should really promote this game in NZ... :)
The match followed my expectations completely.
You were right that an Argentine striker would be too much, though you picked the wrong one. :D Despite going up against the stronger side of the defense, it was Yonsky that got the first two goals, drew both penalties, and caused general havoc by breaking tackles. Armentaros really didn't have much influence (aside from taking penalties) until the final moments after the game was settled.
I don't think a five man defense was necessary. Four man at the back would have done fine (maybe even better considering the placing of the Argentinian strikers who were placed quite wide)
This was the expected approach from Argentina (without a winger), and I still think 5 at the back was preferable. I wasn't expecting a great deal of clean tackling from the New Zealand defense. It was hoped the extra body would help with gang tackling and picking up loose balls. I don't think it hurt considering the Argentine striker placement - there were few through balls. Argentina's chances didn't come from picking the defense apart, but from bullying their way through.
You were right that an Argentine striker would be too much, though you picked the wrong one. :D Despite going up against the stronger side of the defense, it was Yonsky that got the first two goals, drew both penalties, and caused general havoc by breaking tackles. Armentaros really didn't have much influence (aside from taking penalties) until the final moments after the game was settled.
I don't think a five man defense was necessary. Four man at the back would have done fine (maybe even better considering the placing of the Argentinian strikers who were placed quite wide)
This was the expected approach from Argentina (without a winger), and I still think 5 at the back was preferable. I wasn't expecting a great deal of clean tackling from the New Zealand defense. It was hoped the extra body would help with gang tackling and picking up loose balls. I don't think it hurt considering the Argentine striker placement - there were few through balls. Argentina's chances didn't come from picking the defense apart, but from bullying their way through.
Thought the result was a bit harsh. There wasn't really a 3 goal difference out there today I didn't think.
Despite the shot margin and the territorial advantage, I thought the game was fairly competitive, especially in the first half. Thought Argentina's shot total flattered them a little. Both teams did a pretty good job of finishing their quality chances. The 3rd goal always hurts - 2 goals feels like a loss, but 3 goals feels like a drubbing. :)
wondering if the fade out in the 2nd half was of a result of all the movement in the 1st half to perform the trap). Had them pretty well contained 1st half but the wheels came off in the 2nd half as they came home the stronger
Interesting suggestion. Though the line was somewhat aggressive it wasn't overly aggressive. I wouldn't say I made the defense run any more then usual. With 5 at the back there is actually less lateral movement then with 4.
Does make you wonder when a closely fought first half is followed by a more lop-sided second. Fatigue is an obvious possible cause. In this match I thought it was more a matter of some of the "micro" luck turning in the second half. Bounces weren't as good for New Zealand, and BGilbert showed more of a tendency to turn in to the defender rather then away. So New Zealand didn't get the ball as deep would put more pressure on the defense - leading to more fumbles, misses and kick-outs.
Despite the shot margin and the territorial advantage, I thought the game was fairly competitive, especially in the first half. Thought Argentina's shot total flattered them a little. Both teams did a pretty good job of finishing their quality chances. The 3rd goal always hurts - 2 goals feels like a loss, but 3 goals feels like a drubbing. :)
wondering if the fade out in the 2nd half was of a result of all the movement in the 1st half to perform the trap). Had them pretty well contained 1st half but the wheels came off in the 2nd half as they came home the stronger
Interesting suggestion. Though the line was somewhat aggressive it wasn't overly aggressive. I wouldn't say I made the defense run any more then usual. With 5 at the back there is actually less lateral movement then with 4.
Does make you wonder when a closely fought first half is followed by a more lop-sided second. Fatigue is an obvious possible cause. In this match I thought it was more a matter of some of the "micro" luck turning in the second half. Bounces weren't as good for New Zealand, and BGilbert showed more of a tendency to turn in to the defender rather then away. So New Zealand didn't get the ball as deep would put more pressure on the defense - leading to more fumbles, misses and kick-outs.
WC is an older players game. Sokker has matured to the point that youngish players don't crack the best 11 of the top 32 squads.
Williams has established himself since you were at the helm. If Findlay had better stamina he'd have been at least on the bench. Players like Murray, Perry and Campfens weren't all that far from selection.
Still, it is a little worrisome. New Zealand's older players aren't world beaters anymore, and their replacements may struggle to keep New Zealand in the upper echelon.
Williams has established himself since you were at the helm. If Findlay had better stamina he'd have been at least on the bench. Players like Murray, Perry and Campfens weren't all that far from selection.
Still, it is a little worrisome. New Zealand's older players aren't world beaters anymore, and their replacements may struggle to keep New Zealand in the upper echelon.
"If Findlay had better stamina he'd have been at least on the bench"
I'll work on it after one more pace pop. He still has a lot of time..and I want to develop him into a superstar.
I'll work on it after one more pace pop. He still has a lot of time..and I want to develop him into a superstar.
I don't really like seeing players train stamina during their prime, so I was hesitant to say that (tho it is the reason he hasn't played more).
I'd encourage you to stick with the pace, maybe do some stamina in the off-season.
I'd encourage you to stick with the pace, maybe do some stamina in the off-season.
Germany this week. Played them in the last WC when I was manager of Canada. Felt they were the best performing team in the group (which included Finland). Their team passing was sensational - Konrad was brilliant, and just picked defenses apart.
They don't have strikers quite as good as Argentina, but Wessels & co. are pretty darn good. The rest of their squad is a step above Argentina IMO - not in primary skills, but in secondary ones, which really make a big difference at the NT level.
Germany received one of the tougher results last week. Thought they really outshone Belgium, but did not take their opportunities very well.
I have two formations planned. Still waffling some on which one to use. That discussion is going on in the association forum for accredited managers. :)
They don't have strikers quite as good as Argentina, but Wessels & co. are pretty darn good. The rest of their squad is a step above Argentina IMO - not in primary skills, but in secondary ones, which really make a big difference at the NT level.
Germany received one of the tougher results last week. Thought they really outshone Belgium, but did not take their opportunities very well.
I have two formations planned. Still waffling some on which one to use. That discussion is going on in the association forum for accredited managers. :)
Heehee. Do our best. :)
Underway. :)
Been tweaking and re-tweaking. Didn’t leave much time to write up.
Gambling that Germany either doesn’t play much width, or that the width doesn’t play well. 442. Trying to get a little more midfield possession to take some pressure off the somewhat error prone defense. Have the two quickest defenders in the wide spots ... hopefully if Germany does play width they can get out there.
Expecting a very aggressive defensive line from Germany. Hopefully Gilbert can make them pay. Will need a good match from everyone plus some luck to get a result I think.
Du'oh. Notice an injury already. :S
Underway. :)
Been tweaking and re-tweaking. Didn’t leave much time to write up.
Gambling that Germany either doesn’t play much width, or that the width doesn’t play well. 442. Trying to get a little more midfield possession to take some pressure off the somewhat error prone defense. Have the two quickest defenders in the wide spots ... hopefully if Germany does play width they can get out there.
Expecting a very aggressive defensive line from Germany. Hopefully Gilbert can make them pay. Will need a good match from everyone plus some luck to get a result I think.
Du'oh. Notice an injury already. :S