Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [NT] Chile WC
11 vs 11 Chile 2 New Zeland 0
:S
good luck the next mach ;)
:S
good luck the next mach ;)
bad game seca.but all the best for the next one.u have a selection headache now
Seca dont worry about it. Many a times when we predict the opponents formation and try to exploit their weakness the tactics doesnt seem to work.
Because we must remember that when we play to our opponents weakness we are not playing to our greatest strengths. And new zealand doesnt have many players to pick from, it is hard ;)
Just one loss no biggie. Why dont you play to New Zealand's strengths the next round. You might be surprised ;) They should be trying to exploit our weaknesses Muahahaha.
Again, Dont worry about the loss. It happens. Goodluck for the next match.
Because we must remember that when we play to our opponents weakness we are not playing to our greatest strengths. And new zealand doesnt have many players to pick from, it is hard ;)
Just one loss no biggie. Why dont you play to New Zealand's strengths the next round. You might be surprised ;) They should be trying to exploit our weaknesses Muahahaha.
Again, Dont worry about the loss. It happens. Goodluck for the next match.
yea. Just one of those horrid games. Lost game, red cards and bad injury's...next please :)
Bad luck mate
Hope you pull off some wins in the next 2 matches - as others have said - play to your strengths
Hope you pull off some wins in the next 2 matches - as others have said - play to your strengths
I've had a feeling for about a week that we wouldn't win this one, no idea why.. just the gut wrenching sensation. I have thought a long time that divine intervention would be needed to stop NZ progressing in this group with Seca in command and thats exactly what happened! (IMO).
our strikers played horrendously i must say and the defenders weren't in their best game. The two red cards and 20+ day injury showing you angered the gods.. Also i saw Hird hanging out on the wing far too often making him practically useless in the OMF role which he has lavished i think. Absence of Atkinson made a big difference because i think his passing would've been useful in this situation, esp with Hird being the one to take corners =/
Lets hope my gut feeling doesn't come with Peru ;]
our strikers played horrendously i must say and the defenders weren't in their best game. The two red cards and 20+ day injury showing you angered the gods.. Also i saw Hird hanging out on the wing far too often making him practically useless in the OMF role which he has lavished i think. Absence of Atkinson made a big difference because i think his passing would've been useful in this situation, esp with Hird being the one to take corners =/
Lets hope my gut feeling doesn't come with Peru ;]
I think Seca is cursed in the World Cup. I know it happened in the first one when I was England manager. I played a horrible tactic, yet still managed to beat the Seca managed Canada!
Next time better..I'm not cursed in the WC..won yesterday with 0-4 against Poland :D
Back from the cottage. :)
This was just the second match I've had as New Zealand manager where I felt beforehand the team would lose (the other was the second Canada match in qualifying with all the missing players). When Bodger, Hird and Gilbert all dropped 3 levels of form on Thursday, it really gave me a bad vibe. :S I also didn't like their fast strikers against a somewhat error prone NZ defense.
Thanks to all for the encouragement. :) I put a great deal of effort into the preparations for this match - but I made some poor decisions that cost the team.
The biggest error was the selection of the two offsensive midfielders. They did not provide any kind of useful service to the forwards. Richards was a poor choice - I went with him because of his superiour tackling. I should have gone with Tomlinson or Matthews. Richards' form crippled him. I was really looking forward to Sansom relieving him ... but alas.
I really thought Hird would do better. Bricoli's best stat is his defense, but Hird's technique is at least equal to it if not superior. I thought that with Hird's offset positioning Bricoli would be making alot of side and back tackles that would allow Hird to get through, and then draw one of the back's out of position before making his pass (or shooting). But Hird was completely undermined by his form - Bricoli was very effective against him.
Tactically I was pretty happy with most of the positioning. One big flaw was some of the forward positioning - in a few places they were not far enough upfield. The wide positioning also didn't work out, as it just complicated the job of the offensive midfielders who were already struggling.
(I did try this formation out beforehand with my club against a CPL mate who plays a system similar to Chile. It was much more effective - partly because the forward positioning was better, and partly because the defense did a better job keeping the ball in play.)
Kilkenny had for sure the worst match I've ever seen from him. He was brutal in all aspects of play. In Watts the team has one defender well suited to the middle. In retrospect, I should have used Kelly back there, slide Kilkenny wide and moved Dawkins (who was great in this game) to DM. Another mistake.
The biggest problem I had going into this match was deciding how to do the defense. Chile plays their forwards very high - makes it very difficult to get the defense behind them. IMO the proper play is a trapping defense. I don't like trapping with 4 at the back (it's hard enough to find 3 defenders with similar pace, PM & form). I thought long and hard about using a tactic similar to the Denmark match - I suspect it would have been more effective, but lost my nerve playing 3 at the back when I was expecting 3 pacey strikers against (not sure why - worked fine against Denmark). In the end, if random is going to throw 2 red cards and a significant injury New Zealand's way, it probably wouldn't have mattered.
The loss itself wasn't necessarily crippling, but the -3 is going to be tough to overcome. Especially missing Watts and Dawkins next week (as Mr. Gibbage pointed out).
This was just the second match I've had as New Zealand manager where I felt beforehand the team would lose (the other was the second Canada match in qualifying with all the missing players). When Bodger, Hird and Gilbert all dropped 3 levels of form on Thursday, it really gave me a bad vibe. :S I also didn't like their fast strikers against a somewhat error prone NZ defense.
Thanks to all for the encouragement. :) I put a great deal of effort into the preparations for this match - but I made some poor decisions that cost the team.
The biggest error was the selection of the two offsensive midfielders. They did not provide any kind of useful service to the forwards. Richards was a poor choice - I went with him because of his superiour tackling. I should have gone with Tomlinson or Matthews. Richards' form crippled him. I was really looking forward to Sansom relieving him ... but alas.
I really thought Hird would do better. Bricoli's best stat is his defense, but Hird's technique is at least equal to it if not superior. I thought that with Hird's offset positioning Bricoli would be making alot of side and back tackles that would allow Hird to get through, and then draw one of the back's out of position before making his pass (or shooting). But Hird was completely undermined by his form - Bricoli was very effective against him.
Tactically I was pretty happy with most of the positioning. One big flaw was some of the forward positioning - in a few places they were not far enough upfield. The wide positioning also didn't work out, as it just complicated the job of the offensive midfielders who were already struggling.
(I did try this formation out beforehand with my club against a CPL mate who plays a system similar to Chile. It was much more effective - partly because the forward positioning was better, and partly because the defense did a better job keeping the ball in play.)
Kilkenny had for sure the worst match I've ever seen from him. He was brutal in all aspects of play. In Watts the team has one defender well suited to the middle. In retrospect, I should have used Kelly back there, slide Kilkenny wide and moved Dawkins (who was great in this game) to DM. Another mistake.
The biggest problem I had going into this match was deciding how to do the defense. Chile plays their forwards very high - makes it very difficult to get the defense behind them. IMO the proper play is a trapping defense. I don't like trapping with 4 at the back (it's hard enough to find 3 defenders with similar pace, PM & form). I thought long and hard about using a tactic similar to the Denmark match - I suspect it would have been more effective, but lost my nerve playing 3 at the back when I was expecting 3 pacey strikers against (not sure why - worked fine against Denmark). In the end, if random is going to throw 2 red cards and a significant injury New Zealand's way, it probably wouldn't have mattered.
The loss itself wasn't necessarily crippling, but the -3 is going to be tough to overcome. Especially missing Watts and Dawkins next week (as Mr. Gibbage pointed out).
sorry but 11 v/s 11 chile 2-0 =)
Congrats on the win. :)
May sound strange, but I don't feel you won this game so much as I lost it. Your tactic and player selection was very predictable. My Sokker career has been built on out-manouervering predictable managers. Unfortunately for New Zealand, I made some poor decisions this time. :(
Congrats on the win. :)
May sound strange, but I don't feel you won this game so much as I lost it. Your tactic and player selection was very predictable. My Sokker career has been built on out-manouervering predictable managers. Unfortunately for New Zealand, I made some poor decisions this time. :(
Achmid seems to have gotten more temper since he capitalised his username.