We'll have more reaction throughout the day as the midweek hangovers wear off and the fog clears after last night's win by Canada, but for now I wanted to pose a few questions.
Stephen Hart has come under increasing criticism this past year - mostly after half-hearted efforts like the one Canadians witnessed down in St. Kitts last week. That criticism is then shuffled to the side when they rebound - mostly after semi-complete efforts like the ones Canadians witnessed last night.
So, after a yo-yo year of opinions and play my question, at the present moment, are you happy with Stephen Hart's performance as head coach of this program?
And before you answer, something to chew on:
[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
Those that remember when Hart took over, that inaugural run at that Gold Cup, will tell you it was filled with a cavalier, carefree approach to Canada's game. They attacked, and attacked in waves and they genuinely looked like a team that could threaten to upend any opponent. They played with confidence - one that was largely exuded and projected by their coach's tactics.
Flash forward to this past summer in the game against the USA. They looked scared. Terrified even. Their tactics were stalled and straight ahead and nothing aside from a few flashes seemed to really elicit any fear from the Americans.
The cautious approach continued throughout the rest tournament and largely coloured their outcome - of course bombing out unceremoniously. Since that first year, Canada has not come close to replicating that initial Gold Cup success and that largely (in addition to an aging group of stars and ill-timed injuries) can be attributed to a change in tactics.
Last night Hart, with nothing to lose (or gain it should be mentioned), lined up his squad in what was a combination of 4-2-4 or 4-2-3-1 - one clearly intent on scoring goals. And score they did. That comes in stark contrast to this summer where we saw unimaginative 4-4-2's and 4-5-1's trotted out, with the results already well documented.
Two very different approaches. Two very different teams.
Quite simply, if Canada goes into the next round and lines up conservatively they're going to get run over just the same way they did this summer - with a whimper. They can't afford to go into places like Panama and Cuba, where they need results, and lineup with caution. Their aging midfield - and especially one when they're missing Atiba Hutchinson - won't be able to keep control the play enough to prevent the savior role falling to the likes of Nik Ledgerwood. Their best option is to attack with a return to those unbothered, un-chained tactics.
Some will argue that the recent weaker opponents have allowed Canada to play a less guarded game but against tougher opponents you cannot be so cavalier - and that's true, to a point. But, in reality, does anyone think Canada is going to qualify for the Hex and the World Cup by playing careful? A better question might be does anyone think Canada is going to win relying on the steadiness of its backline? No.
It's far better to go guns blazing into the night and surprise along the way, like they did under Hart in the early days, than slink away with these 0-0 results under the Hart of the present days.