Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [NT] World Cup - Season 15
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
Yeeeeeessshh. Another disaster. :)
I was pretty optimistic when the two sides took the field. Thought our tactic looked like a good choice.
The hope was that midfield would help significantly with ball recovery. The back 3 middies are all defenders by trade ... thought they would be able to win some balls. Not so much. :( Kelly especially really struggled to make tackles. The other two made tackles on occasion, but weren't able to do much with the ball. The downside of playing a scrappy midfield is not a lot of creativity. Got worse when Root took his knock - Petherick was meant more as cover for the back 3 mids then the top 1.
The defense really, really, struggled to make tackles. On at least 3 of the goals the German striker broke a minimum of 3 tackles on his way in. If the defenders are going to miss, they must at least get enough of the ball to chip it to a team mate. Just couldn't get it done.
As I couldn't get it done. :) Germany is clearly a better side, but the team shouldn't be getting out-shot 17-1. I didn't really see a lot I didn't like about the tactic (couple offensive throws didn't work the way I intended). Maybe I'll see more on a re-watch.
I'm just not getting much out of the team. Hopefully the next manager will do better.
I was pretty optimistic when the two sides took the field. Thought our tactic looked like a good choice.
The hope was that midfield would help significantly with ball recovery. The back 3 middies are all defenders by trade ... thought they would be able to win some balls. Not so much. :( Kelly especially really struggled to make tackles. The other two made tackles on occasion, but weren't able to do much with the ball. The downside of playing a scrappy midfield is not a lot of creativity. Got worse when Root took his knock - Petherick was meant more as cover for the back 3 mids then the top 1.
The defense really, really, struggled to make tackles. On at least 3 of the goals the German striker broke a minimum of 3 tackles on his way in. If the defenders are going to miss, they must at least get enough of the ball to chip it to a team mate. Just couldn't get it done.
As I couldn't get it done. :) Germany is clearly a better side, but the team shouldn't be getting out-shot 17-1. I didn't really see a lot I didn't like about the tactic (couple offensive throws didn't work the way I intended). Maybe I'll see more on a re-watch.
I'm just not getting much out of the team. Hopefully the next manager will do better.
Bad luck mate :(
I wouldnt be too discouraged, we obviously have played 2 far superior sides than our own. A shame New Zealand doesnt have a larger manager base.
I wouldnt be too discouraged, we obviously have played 2 far superior sides than our own. A shame New Zealand doesnt have a larger manager base.
Thanks for the encouragement. :) I fully expected to lose both matches (and again next week for that matter). But even with New Zealand's small user base, we shouldn't be getting demolished like this each week.
It is a discouraging loss. Those who've been following the Association forum may note we got the predicted tactic from Germany. If you guess right, then the counter tactic really should be more effective.
I thought the back line would be better today. I backed them up a little from last week to give them a little added advantage in encounters. This didn't work well with Germany's aggressive defensive line - allowed the play into our end - and it didn't seem to help the tackling much. :/
It is a discouraging loss. Those who've been following the Association forum may note we got the predicted tactic from Germany. If you guess right, then the counter tactic really should be more effective.
I thought the back line would be better today. I backed them up a little from last week to give them a little added advantage in encounters. This didn't work well with Germany's aggressive defensive line - allowed the play into our end - and it didn't seem to help the tackling much. :/
The other group match should make the New Zealand defenders feel a little better about themselves. Belgium's back line struggled to tackle Argentina's two strikers. Was a fairly open match with lots of good scoring chances and some great goal tending. Argentina's goal keeping was a little better. Either side really could have taken it.
"I thought the back line would be better today"
No Duncan Findlay, that was the problem :P
No Duncan Findlay, that was the problem :P
Heehee. Aye. I suspect he would have done just as well, if not better. :)
Belgium tomorrow. More of the same I'm afraid. Another big, well established Sokker nation with lots of skill and depth at every position. They will be a tough challenge ... especially for the back line that has struggled so far this World Cup.
New Zealand's tactic won't help. :P The offensive scheme is something I haven't really tried before. I look at it and think it has a very, very small chance of succeeding. But nothing else has worked, and at this point I see little harm in trying something different.
New Zealand's tactic won't help. :P The offensive scheme is something I haven't really tried before. I look at it and think it has a very, very small chance of succeeding. But nothing else has worked, and at this point I see little harm in trying something different.
Underway against Belgium.
We're trying a 622 with two wide strikers. It's the same defensive scheme that was used against Estonia in the first Q match last season, except with no DM - which opens up a hole in the middle of the defense. A centrally positioned Belgium striker (something their new manager does employ) could be very useful. This defense wasn't very effective against Estonia ... but it gives each of the defenders more "help" - something that seems to be necessary given the first two weeks.
Not much presence or pressure in midfield. I don't expect them to make a single tackle (just be happy if they don't get into trouble). They are to serve as an outlet for the defenders, and a conduit for the wide strikers. Hoping they will be in the right spots to intercept some passes.
Two wide strikers ... which means no central striker. This seems like a bad idea. Defenders do have a tendency to blindly throw balls up the middle. The wide strikers are intended to provide some more possession ... eat some time off the clock ... maybe get the odd shot or corner kick.
Belgium has been playing a very aggressive defensive line. I expect that to continue this match. Will be tough for New Zealand to get play out of their end.
Things will get really wacky if a defender gets sent off. None of the 4 offensive players is a decent replacement, and I saw Morcombe as the least essential. So he's providing the red card coverage (for the first 70 minutes ... won't be any the final 20).
We're trying a 622 with two wide strikers. It's the same defensive scheme that was used against Estonia in the first Q match last season, except with no DM - which opens up a hole in the middle of the defense. A centrally positioned Belgium striker (something their new manager does employ) could be very useful. This defense wasn't very effective against Estonia ... but it gives each of the defenders more "help" - something that seems to be necessary given the first two weeks.
Not much presence or pressure in midfield. I don't expect them to make a single tackle (just be happy if they don't get into trouble). They are to serve as an outlet for the defenders, and a conduit for the wide strikers. Hoping they will be in the right spots to intercept some passes.
Two wide strikers ... which means no central striker. This seems like a bad idea. Defenders do have a tendency to blindly throw balls up the middle. The wide strikers are intended to provide some more possession ... eat some time off the clock ... maybe get the odd shot or corner kick.
Belgium has been playing a very aggressive defensive line. I expect that to continue this match. Will be tough for New Zealand to get play out of their end.
Things will get really wacky if a defender gets sent off. None of the 4 offensive players is a decent replacement, and I saw Morcombe as the least essential. So he's providing the red card coverage (for the first 70 minutes ... won't be any the final 20).
Well, at least the pain is over.
I thought 5 at the back was more likely from Belgium. That's most of why our offensive throw-ins were poor. It should have meant our striker positioning was even more effective, but striker service was rare and poor.
The problem, and not a new one, was the first pass from the defense. Granted, it was a little trickier in this match because there were only two targets ... but I'd still hoped for better. Recovered balls were immediately given back to Belgium time after time. Worse yet after Atkinson was sent off.
Didn't catch a lot of breaks IMO. Not that it would have mattered. :D Gilbert made bad turns or got a bad bounce in all of the rare occasions when he actually got the ball. Little things that could have gone better.
I think the defense played better. Hard to distinguish amoungst the 4 in the mob. They did miss lots of tackles, but made more then they have been. Watts stood out as having a pretty good game. Kelly stood out for having a crappy one ... beat repeatedly by Belgium's flank middie. Probably would have been a closer match had those two been reversed.
The gap in the middle of the defense wasn't really a problem until after Atkinson was sent off. The hole in midfield was massive after he left, which led to the gap being exploited at least twice.
Apologies to the New Zealand fans. I don't think anyone was expecting wins, but the team should have been more competitive. Limited resources is no excuse - previous managers were able to do far more with the same tools.
I thought 5 at the back was more likely from Belgium. That's most of why our offensive throw-ins were poor. It should have meant our striker positioning was even more effective, but striker service was rare and poor.
The problem, and not a new one, was the first pass from the defense. Granted, it was a little trickier in this match because there were only two targets ... but I'd still hoped for better. Recovered balls were immediately given back to Belgium time after time. Worse yet after Atkinson was sent off.
Didn't catch a lot of breaks IMO. Not that it would have mattered. :D Gilbert made bad turns or got a bad bounce in all of the rare occasions when he actually got the ball. Little things that could have gone better.
I think the defense played better. Hard to distinguish amoungst the 4 in the mob. They did miss lots of tackles, but made more then they have been. Watts stood out as having a pretty good game. Kelly stood out for having a crappy one ... beat repeatedly by Belgium's flank middie. Probably would have been a closer match had those two been reversed.
The gap in the middle of the defense wasn't really a problem until after Atkinson was sent off. The hole in midfield was massive after he left, which led to the gap being exploited at least twice.
Apologies to the New Zealand fans. I don't think anyone was expecting wins, but the team should have been more competitive. Limited resources is no excuse - previous managers were able to do far more with the same tools.
Well, what can you do Seca. NZ national team is kinda hm...deteriorating...can't help it mate :(
I wouldn't say deteriorating. I think a better answer would be due to the lack of users the growth has slowed substantially compared to other NT's and hence the NT appears to underperform when it's the case that others have significantly improved.
Australia might be in a similar position in the future although atm we're going alright, except in U21's where it's obvious we lack sufficient users to be able to match it with most other U21 sides.
I really don't think there was a lot you could have done there Seca. You got given an extremely tough run. Against Argentina you were imo unlucky to concede so many goals, haven't watched the Belgium one yet though.
I guess getting extra users to get NZ back up somewhere around the 40-50 mark like they were a couple of seasons ago might help but again it's the activeness of the user that counts most.
I think too with the latest M.E change, those sides with weaker midfields are getting punished more, certainly seems to be the case then in past versions but I could just be seeing things that aren't there.
Australia might be in a similar position in the future although atm we're going alright, except in U21's where it's obvious we lack sufficient users to be able to match it with most other U21 sides.
I really don't think there was a lot you could have done there Seca. You got given an extremely tough run. Against Argentina you were imo unlucky to concede so many goals, haven't watched the Belgium one yet though.
I guess getting extra users to get NZ back up somewhere around the 40-50 mark like they were a couple of seasons ago might help but again it's the activeness of the user that counts most.
I think too with the latest M.E change, those sides with weaker midfields are getting punished more, certainly seems to be the case then in past versions but I could just be seeing things that aren't there.
Stagnation is probably a better term then deterioration. While other teams improve, New Zealand stays pretty much the same. The new players coming into the line-up, like Williams, will replace an older player pretty much on even terms without a lot of upside.
New Zealand's team is a bit of a catch 22. The best players are clearly the strikers. Usually when you play stronger opposition you sacrifice a striker to reinforce another part of the field. With New Zealand, an approach like that would mean sitting one of your best assets (or playing him out of position, which I tried without much success in qualifying). One might look at a match and say a 541 is the best approach, but when it means sitting a Morcombe for say ... a DeBruin, it's really tough to follow through.
I liked the approach in the first match, and should have just repeated that tactic. I think that would have been a surprise given my track record. Again, it wouldn't have changed results. But it's really deflating getting outshot 17-1 and 24-3. :(
New Zealand's team is a bit of a catch 22. The best players are clearly the strikers. Usually when you play stronger opposition you sacrifice a striker to reinforce another part of the field. With New Zealand, an approach like that would mean sitting one of your best assets (or playing him out of position, which I tried without much success in qualifying). One might look at a match and say a 541 is the best approach, but when it means sitting a Morcombe for say ... a DeBruin, it's really tough to follow through.
I liked the approach in the first match, and should have just repeated that tactic. I think that would have been a surprise given my track record. Again, it wouldn't have changed results. But it's really deflating getting outshot 17-1 and 24-3. :(
Pitty you got such a tough group at the Word Cup, almost impossible to win a match! But still a great job with the qualify :).
Does New Zealand play at the U21 WC? Or an other cup? Good luck with the rest off the season. I'll keep supporting you guys :).
(edited)
Does New Zealand play at the U21 WC? Or an other cup? Good luck with the rest off the season. I'll keep supporting you guys :).
(edited)
I did not enter the team in the U21 competition. I didn't feel I could assemble a competitive squad. The first half of this season has done a fair bit of damage to New Zealand's ranking. We'll be trying to repair that as much as possible during the second half of the season in hopes of earning a #2 spot in WC qualifying next go round.
