Subject: [NT] Copa América

Have a tactic set. Things have been slow this week, in part because I wanted to see what players would heal up. And in part because I am of many minds how to approach this match. :P

Hoping for a good showing. That would make me feel better after that awful World Cup match. I still think the concept behind the WC match tactic was ok - but that my execution of it was poor. It didn't help that everything that could possibly go wrong did go wrong. :P A little better luck this time round wouldn't hurt.

Not posting the line-up - sending messages to managers of involved players. Some are conditional - I may still change my mind. :)

Two weeks to go in the contest. If Wivak takes any more, the crown is his. Barhilo and Lilryan could still catch up if things go their way.

Chile Props
To enter, answer Yes or No to each of the following.

1. New Zealand will have a multiple goal scorer.
2. Chile will have a multiple goal scorer.
3. New Zealand will not have any injuries.
4. New Zealand will receive more cards (any colour) then Chile.
5. New Zealand will be flagged for more offsides then Chile.
6. New Zealand defenders will have fewer then 10 panic kick-outs.
7. A New Zealand striker will have an assist.
8. New Zealand will have a play with at least 5 successful passes in succession.
9. Taylor will make more saves then the Chilean keeper.
10. The result will be determined in regulation time.

Tie Breaker - Total Goals in Match ____

1.Yes
2.No
3.Yes
4.Yes
5.No
6.Yes
7.No
8.Yes
9.Yes
10.Yes

Tie Breaker:3

1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. No
5. No
6. Yes
7. No
8. No
9. Yes
10. Yes

Tie Breaker - Total Goals in Match 4

Hectic schedule this week. Playing in a large buy-in tourny so wish me luck in that! half the field gone already.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Yes
5. Yes
6. Yes
7. No
8. No
9. Yes
10. Yes

Goals - 5

1.Yes
2.No
3.Yes
4.Yes
5.No
6.Yes
7.No
8.Yes
9.Yes
10.Yes

Tie breaker= 5

1 yes
2 yes
3 no
4 yes
5 no
6 yes
7 no
8 yes
9 yes
10 yes

Tie Breaker - Total Goals in Match 5

Underway against Chile.

In the last meeting, the problems started in midfield. Chile’s 3 man midfield outplayed New Zealand’s 4 man. Chadwick’s pace was exposed, while Hird and Richards had horrid appearances (form). Losing midfield placed pressure on the New Zealand defense, which they didn’t handle particularly well.

I flip flopped all week between a 442 and a 433. The 442 would give the home team a better chance of controlling the ball and pushing the play to the other end. But with no top flight strikers at 100%, I feel an extra hand up front could go a long way. So in the end I’ve gone with the 433. I’m optimistic the midfield of Atkinson, Matthews and Kelly will hold up ok.

I expect Chile will use their 433. It seems to be their manager’s favourite tactic, and it got them the win in the last meeting. Cooper is a little banged up, but otherwise Chile is in fantastic shape.

Things to watch for:
- Chile played a very high defensive line in their last match. I expect them to shift back to normal this time. If they don’t I think it’s to New Zealand’s favour. Yes, they’d get some offsides, but the New Zealand strikers should be able to punish that positioning.
- zone 4 - the midfield line. The New Zealand defense will play well off, but will push up in zone 4. This is generally the best place to trap, as midfielders often carry the ball until they cross the mid-line. I don’t like pulling with 4 defenders, but think it’s worth a shot given Chile’s aggressive positioning. It’s still far enough out that if someone does sneak through, a defender should be able to put a touch on him before he reaches goal.
- Roza is playing a “wing-man” role. I’m hoping he will be covered and won’t receive direct service. Instead, he plays close to the other two strikers looking to pressure defenders. I don’t usually do this, but it suits Roza well.
- the defense may look a little odd at times with a ....XX..XX.... . It’s meant to encourage Chile’s midfielders to provide wide rather then inside service. If Chile plays a wing it will be a problem, but they rarely do that (and Cooper’s status makes it less likely again)
- Hird and Gilbert are both in despite their knocks. I think both knocks are fairly slight now - injuries suffered in NT matches are supposed to heal faster.

Line-Up

Taylor
De Bruin, Watts, Edwards, Dawkins
Atkinson, Kelly, Matthews
Hird, Roza, Gilbert

Bench

Welford
Kilkenny
Sansom (70 for Atkinson)
Morcombe (70 for Gilbert)
Hawkey (115 for Sansom)

Hird penalties, Atkinson freebies, Kelly covers the back 4 for when the red card comes. :)

Better then the first time round, but still a little disappointing.

Tactic could have been better. The offsides hurt, as it pushed more play into the New Zealand half. In the previous meeting the forwards weren't far enough upfield and couldn't get past the two central defenders. I wasn't going to make that mistake again. :) A few offsides I think are good, but there were too many in this one. For the "Wing-man" to work they should have pulled back a little more.

The tactic worked as I hoped defensively. Chile were kept wide for the most part. Unfortunately the wide defenders - particularly Dawkins (who got his 60th cap this match) - didn't play very well.

The two SI forwards looked sluggish. Hird is ever so slightly injured, so I think part of his was form. I was surprised Morcombe wasn't able to take advantage of the red card. I thought he would have an easy time with all that space.

yep i agree with what you said about the match. Thought the wingers fizzled a little but there were too many offsides for comfort, but the ones that got through were pretty good. The SI's definitely hurt and if Bodger was playing then i think we would've definitely grabbed it.

I was guilty of over-managing. Took the deficiencies from the last match, and over-compensated. :) I have a tendency to do that when I feel an opponent has undue good fortune in a previous match - makes me try to do too much.

IMO striker placement is the most important and perhaps most difficult part of making a tactic. When it's done well, you don't even notice it. When it's poor (either too aggressive or too conservative) it's painful to watch.

I usually try to "hedge" my bets by placing one striker where I think he will be safe, and the other striker where I think he will be just off-side. Because I was over-compensating, I placed everyone aggressively in this match, which was detrimental.

Midfielders can really help a manager out in this regard if they can hold the ball up that one extra second and allow the strikers to get back on-side. That is one of the risks of the 433 - same thing happened against Croatia in qualifying.

Not all offsides are equally damaging either. I don't mind the ones in enemy territory. The ones that hurt are close to the mid-line, as the restart gives the opponent a free shot at a striker-defender 50-50. So a lesson (or reminder for us older managers) to take away from this one is to err on the side of caution with your strikers when the ball is deep in your own end - especially if your strikers have some tackling and can make life miserable for defenders around midfield (where they are more likely to take a few steps with the ball).

Canadian Thanksgiving this weekend, so I haven't had time to do up the Props. It won't be a good week for "homers". :) Will check that out after Turkey.

Another quick thought - the 442 probably would have been the better choice. Don't think much was gained by the 3rd striker (I know Roza scored, but it wasn't what I'd call a "3rd striker" goal - when I play 3 up front, I expect some garbage collection). An extra midfielder would have soothed the offside problem some (IMO).

The loss means New Zealand gets Canada next week, which should be fun. :D

hahaha, give that nasty slavko a whipping!

And make sure Amado gets injured this evening ;P

Amado and Wang were both fine - tho both have been playing 2 matches a week since the cup ended - so they have another hurdle to jump before the weekend. :)

Chile Results

1. New Zealand will have a multiple goal scorer.
No. Gilbert looked the most likely, despite his injury.

2. Chile will have a multiple goal scorer.
Yes. Clarence Torino had two by minute 9. First one he fumbled into the net - ended 2 for 2 shooting (had a miss in the 2nd half).

3. New Zealand will not have any injuries.
Yes. Thankfully the medical staff was given a break.

4. New Zealand will receive more cards (any colour) then Chile.
Yes. New Zealand picked up an extra yellow.

5. New Zealand will be flagged for more offsides then Chile.
Yes. New Zealand picked up 7 offsides in the first half, 3 more in the second. Another 5 in added time. My mini-trap was not effective - only 1 Chilean offside.

6. New Zealand defenders will have fewer then 10 panic kick-outs.
Yes. Even with added time, I only counted 9. Dawkins was the main culprit - quite out of character for him.

7. A New Zealand striker will have an assist.
No. I was really expecting this to be a “yes”. With 3 strikers up front rebound goals are more likely. But New Zealand strikers had difficulty getting the first shot on target.

8. New Zealand will have a play with at least 5 successful passes in succession.
No. Had the 442 in mind when I wrote this proposition. Less likely to happen with a 433. Had 4 successful passes off the opening kick - that was the longest play I observed.

9. Taylor will make more saves then the Chilean keeper.
Yes. Taylor made 5 saves to Mellado’s 2. I didn’t think Chile’s chances were any better, but their strikers did a better job of making the keeper work.

10. The result will be determined in regulation time.
No. Not surprising - the teams are fairly evenly matched. Chile’s defense is under-rated. Streeter and Rasmussen have been nearly flawless in the 2 encounters this season. Bricoli played over his head the first meeting, and Solabarrieta over-achieved in this one.

And this week's champ is:

Barhilo - 8
Wivak - 7
Al Thore - 5
Cerb - 5
Lilryan19 - 5

Congrats! With 1 week to go, Barhilo is making it interesting. Now a 2 horse race.

Standings:
Wivak - 3 rounds
Barhilo - 2 rounds
Lilryan19 - 1 round

go barhilo,wooooot