VPjr Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by FIRST ELEVEN I dont see how you can come to the conclusion that the players that you named," may figure well in future plans". Apparently there were several players that did well, including some from the CSL who were first timers, so lets leave the gate open instead of constantly repeating the same players. Yes the ones you mentioned, I agree, but Im hearing from sources who were at the games that several did well and its about time that we will be hearing 'other' new names.Maybe thats one of the problems that we have is only using household names that have been around forever. Trust me, I've heard the same things. The coaching staff has been pleasantly surprised by the group of players that were thrown together for this tournament. However, the reality is that if 1 or 2 ever figure into Canada's plans at the senior level, that would be pretty big success. That's just a simple fact. Look at the history of youth teams in this country (and almost every country for that matter) and you will see that this is true. Being part of a youth national team rarely translates into being a fixture for the Senior squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPjr Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca Somewhat surprising that they wouldn't have started Stillo from the get-go for this game, given that its a 3rd place game and usually players that weren't played much or at all are given a chance for these games. Robert fell ill over in Lebanon. Not sure if he regained sufficient fitness for Fonseca to feel comfortable with starting him today. He would have been my preference for today's start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklefan Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by FIRST ELEVEN I heard the whole team played well! I'd like to know the quality of players of the other teams, for example Cameroon. I'd like to know if Cameroon send a squad with players with a futur at professional level and maybe their national team. I hope that's the case, that they didn't do like England in the U20 WC who send their B or C team (they finished last in their group). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by FIRST ELEVEN I dont see how you can come to the conclusion that the players that you named," may figure well in future plans". Apparently there were several players that did well, including some from the CSL who were first timers, so lets leave the gate open instead of constantly repeating the same players. It's a general remark, FIRST ELEVEN. U20s are promising, whether or not they make it at the MNT level is strictly speculatory. Wynn Belotte was a promising U17 and U20 player and let's say he's not in the MNT radar since leaving Wisla Krakow. As an aside, do you have family members/friends on the U20 roster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay20 Posted October 5, 2009 Author Share Posted October 5, 2009 Canada’s men’s U-20 team came out on the wrong end of an unfortunate 1:3 loss to Morocco in the match for third place at the 2009 Francophone Games. The overall match play was pretty even between the two sides, however Morocco benefited from a kick from the penalty mark that was initially saved before it was retaken and put in the back of the net. Canada opened the scoring early on a misplay by the Moroccan goalkeeper, Mohammed Sokhra. Canada’s Alex Surprenant provided a great free kick into the box in the fourth minute, however Sokhra misjudged it and knocked it into his own net. Two minutes later, however, Morocco evened the score as it got behind the Canadian defence and hit a volley into the top left. With the score even, Canada still managed to maintain control and pressure. In the 21st minute, Surprenant had a good chance on an indirect free kick within the 18-yard box. The shot was blocked by the goalkeeper. The momentum changed after Morocco made it 2-1 in the 34th minute off another Canadian defensive error. Morocco kept its pressure up in the last 10 minutes of the first half, however Canada’s Michal Misiewicz made three very good saves in succession. In the second half, Canada’s first big chance came in the 55th minute. Mozesh Gyorio’s shot, however, went just over the crossbar. Next up was a great chance for Morocco after Canada’s Shaun Kodejs fouled a player in the box. On the kick from the penalty mark, Misiewicz made a great diving save to his right. Then in the 79th minute, an unfortunate play turned into a bizarre goal. A shot off Alex Surprenant’s foot deflected up and made contact with his hand, prompting the referee to call for a Morocco kick from the penalty mark. On the first kick, Misiewicz made the save, but the kick was called offside because two Morocco players were in the box. Morocco was given a second chance. On the second kick, the ball went into the back of the net, but once again Morocco players were positioned offside. This time, the referee let the goal stand. Up until Morocco’s bizarre goal, Canada had been pressing for the equaliser. Canada continued that push in the last 10 minutes, but could not score its second goal. In the dying minutes, substitute Jarek Whiteman had a great chance on a breakaway, but his chip shot went just over the bar. With the loss, Canada finished in fourth place at the 2009 Francophone Games. http://www.canadasoccer.com/tourney/FIFA_U20WC/game_profile.asp?gameId=1768 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay20 Posted October 5, 2009 Author Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca Somewhat surprising that they wouldn't have started Stillo from the get-go for this game, given that its a 3rd place game and usually players that weren't played much or at all are given a chance for these games. Why is that surprising ? I don’t understand, would you please explain this to me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.T. Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 I think the 2nd half of his statement is the explanation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Jay20 Then in the 79th minute, an unfortunate play turned into a bizarre goal. A shot off Alex Surprenant’s foot deflected up and made contact with his hand, prompting the referee to call for a Morocco kick from the penalty mark. On the first kick, Misiewicz made the save, but the kick was called offside because two Morocco players were in the box. Morocco was given a second chance. On the second kick, the ball went into the back of the net, but once again Morocco players were positioned offside. This time, the referee let the goal stand. This right here pretty much tells us the game was a sham. Seems like nobody likes Canada. CONCACAF, The French. Nobody calls a penalty on something like that. Also, the penalty kick is re-taken because the Moroccan players are offside? Than, to top it all off, they are offside a second time and the goal is allowed? Maybe we should pull the $1 million in funding this event recieves from us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Jay20 Why is that surprising ? I don’t understand, would you please explain this to me? It's suprising because it's a third place game. The bench players are usually used in third place games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay20 Posted October 5, 2009 Author Share Posted October 5, 2009 quote:Originally posted by L.T. I think the 2nd half of his statement is the explanation... You are right, sorry:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex36 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 who writes the game reports that go on the site? You get different versions on the games from the players but what do they know. just cuious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex36 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 seems like they brought Stillo in to be a striker since the game sheet says he entered in the 79th so we were playing with 2 keepers on the field. I find alot of the game info to be somewhat skewed or inaccurate that is reported Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 ^ the Canadian Soccer Association writes these game reports, from their points of view. I can't really say if they're erroneous, nor could too many people, as one would have to be in Beirut to watch the tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 quote:Originally posted by the CSA Then in the 79th minute, an unfortunate play turned into a bizarre goal. A shot off Alex Surprenant’s foot deflected up and made contact with his hand, prompting the referee to call for a Morocco kick from the penalty mark. On the first kick, Misiewicz made the save, but the kick was called offside because two Morocco players were in the box. Morocco was given a second chance. On the second kick, the ball went into the back of the net, but once again Morocco players were positioned offside. This time, the referee let the goal stand. What the hell is this nonsense? I almost hope the CSA report is completely making this up, as I'd prefer to believe that then that our team even has to get the shaft from the officials in a 3rd place Franchophone games match FFS. The team taking a PK doesn't get a second chance if their own players are in the box and the keeper makes the save! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex36 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 your absolutley right and the officials know the rules as well! We need to figure a way to win regardless of the officials and we seem to be on the losing end of most calls as a nation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 My guess is that a Canadian player was in the box or a Canadian and a Moroccan, not a Moroccan alone. That would be normal procedure to retake the kick. Just the wording from the CSA release (referring to the kick being called "offside") seems incorrect and makes me think we don't have a clear picture of what really happened. Anyways, it seems Misiewicz had a good tournament saving several PK's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPjr Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 My Ontario Soccer League team recently had a PK goal called back because one of my players put himself offside (of course, the re-take was saved). To call back a saved PK because players from the team taking the PK put themselves offside is beyond ridiculous though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 ^ I never understood that. Okay, I admit I'm a bit of a yob but I usually give the ref's an easy time when I'm playing. Whether they're right or wrong, whatever. I'm not being paid to play so it is what it is when it comes down to the ref'ing. Similar situation last year. I got adjudged to fouling an attacking player in the area (in this instance I plead innocence) but the attacker got around me and had an opportunity on goal. He rounded the keep but fired wide at which point the ref awarded a penalty. WTF? You play advantage or you don't! The player shouldn't get two kicks at the cat! Award the penalty outright or let the player have a go at goal but not both. That's rubbish. A yellow later (for protesting), a goal down and a year on I'm still boggled by that decision. To my mind, you can't reward a team twice for any infraction. You can't give them the best of every possible world, especially if they're the ones responsible for failing to convert an opportunity. It's double jeopardy and completely unfair. If your team commits an infraction on a penalty where you fail to score so what? It shouldn't allow you a "do over". You're being rewarded for committing an infraction? What the Hell? If you fail to convert your "advantage" on a play, because you spoiled the advantage which was afforded you on a foul you shouldn't be allowed a second opportunity. That's taking the advantage policy too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the biologist Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 ^ I agree obviously about the "offside" PK, that sounds ridiculous. Actually it is ridiculous. It just goes beyond any sense. However in your example Cheeta, I think we can't say it was a bad call. I know football is an entirely different sport but I think the next comparison has some value: think about the offside calls. Often, the ref will decide to keep the play alive but still, the team on offense will have a chance to accept the penalty if it benefits more them. Why ? Because the guy offside could have influenced what was going to happen, giving an excuse (righteously) for a failed play. In your case, the striker's attack was influenced negatively by the foul you commited on him (in the sense he missed his opportunity). It's like a freebie you're giving him: if he still scores, then good on him, he won over the obstacle. But if he misses, you still owe him a chance to play like you hadn't commited the foul, taking for granted with the PK rewarded that he would have beat you to face the keeper. That's a bit of a better chance, sure, and that's why it's called a PENALTY KICK. My 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex36 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 just found out that our keeper got a red card after the penalty shot and the substitution had to be made for a player on the field which is why Taylor Lord was subbed for Roberto Stillo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.