Jump to content

The Importance of Alphonso Davies


jpg75

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dyslexic nam said:

Just goes to show how crazy it was that we didn’t bunker and counter at the WC against Croatia.   If ever there was a team where that should have been the tactical approach…

The more I re watch that game versus Croatia, the more I watch, the more i am starting to convince myself that our down fall had little to do with tactical formation and setup.  Its rather starting to look like 1-3 players having a bad game and making mistakes and/or not having the legs/fitness for what was at hand.  

I just re watched it on TV for the second time yesterday after have watched it live and once on the TV replay prior to that.   That's the sense I am getting more and more.  There were very long stretches of the match where we played very well and whereby we had the upper hand on Croatia, like the first 30 minutes of the game for example.   If it was a coaching and tactical setup issue,  the shortcomings should have been evident throughout the match and from the start. 

Edited by Free kick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Free kick said:

If it was a coaching and tactical setup issue,  the shortcomings should have been evident throughout the match and from the start. 

Tactical and setup issues need not appear right out of the gates. And, games go through phases, which means sometimes you need to shift tactics. And, the opponent may shift their tactics--or make substitutions--that might require some sort of tactical adjustment on our side.  

My biggest beef with the game vs. Croatia is that we were getting slice and diced in the midfield, especially down Hutch's side, and we did not adjust quickly enough for it.  (Not sure if we adjusted adequately for it either).  We were getting killed on that side. Before we knew it, we were out of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Beaver 2.0 said:

Tactical and setup issues need not appear right out of the gates. And, games go through phases, which means sometimes you need to shift tactics. And, the opponent may shift their tactics--or make substitutions--that might require some sort of tactical adjustment on our side.  

My biggest beef with the game vs. Croatia is that we were getting slice and diced in the midfield, especially down Hutch's side, and we did not adjust quickly enough for it.  (Not sure if we adjusted adequately for it either).  We were getting killed on that side. Before we knew it, we were out of the game.

The bolded part is kind of the point I am trying to make,  but in a more subtle way 🙂

Therefore, is the problem, the formation or the player himself?  Thats what I was thinking when mentioned  "not having the legs/fitness for what was at hand."  If we just replaced Hutch with either MAK or Piette or Kone and one of the fwds with OSO.  There was also one shot that should have been stopped (the goal from Livaja) by the keeper.  

Edited by Free kick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a circular argument.  if you were playing a particular system with 2 mids of questionable health/fitness you should have played a different formation or different players.  Neither would be perfect but you mitigate the risk. If it HAS to be those 2 mids, playing THAT formation no matter the fitness of the players and the mess of it they make on the field, then thats bad coaching.  It may have worked for a bit but they figured it out pretty quick and by the time we adjusted it was all over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bison44 said:

Its a circular argument.  if you were playing a particular system with 2 mids of questionable health/fitness you should have played a different formation or different players.  Neither would be perfect but you mitigate the risk. If it HAS to be those 2 mids, playing THAT formation no matter the fitness of the players and the mess of it they make on the field, then thats bad coaching.  It may have worked for a bit but they figured it out pretty quick and by the time we adjusted it was all over.  

Re-watching this game for the umpteenth time, one thing that stands out is that the set up and pressure which would have generated really good chances for us in the Ocho weren't going to be coughed up by this opponent.  They moved the ball pretty crisply while under pressure.  Ironically, the sequence which led to their tying goal came from their press resulting in Laryea conceding a throw in deep when we should have done better moving the ball out from the back.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Free kick said:

There were very long stretches of the match where we played very well and whereby we had the upper hand on Croatia, like the first 30 minutes of the game for example. 

I think both teams took turns looking threatening during that time.  We had a good short stretch around the 18' mark and then a longer one just before the 24th minute but the momentum for that was killed by Laryea's foul throw (two minutes later, eight of our guys were on the wrong side of the ball only to have the slimmest of offsides prevent a tying goal).. Otherwise, the Croatians generated more and better chances.

I thought we had a better stretch of 25 minutes when Osorio and Kone joined Hutchinson in midfield to start the second half, with Osorio and David having some good cracks toward target but we were done in not only by a Hutchinson midfield turnover but also Miller being badly caught out on an ill advised run way up the field, having to bust his lungs to get back but never getting truly set up to deal with the cross to the goalscorer Kramaric.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to that As cover. 

Today in Sport they repeated the As article basically; they also picked up on David's statement about going to EPL.

Marca on the other hand says 0 about Davies, and focuses on Bellingham. And that is in a feature article about how much they need to remake the team for the future. 

So it is a bit of a press rivalry thing, but a bit exagerrated: AS puts Davies on the cover, Marca puts Bellingham, then they ignore each other because its just speculation anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Stryker911 said:

Blind set to sign for Bayern. Primarily plays as a left back. I wonder if this will change how Davies is deployed.

I'd think the same if it were not for Lucas Hernández losing the entire season to an ACL injury, happened in the WC. So they need that coverage, Lucas plays CB or often covers as LB. 

I'd personally like for him to be reconverted into more of an attacking player, it'd be better for Canada too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I think Unnamed Trialist is right. Cover for Hernandez. 

Agreed, he is just a depth player. Can play CM and CB as well. He isnt being released by ajax and then joining BM because hes going to start. He's not good enough to play for ajax every week so he was released to join van bommel at antwerp. Now BM is offering him a chance and he'll likely take it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GasPed said:

Yup.  Unlike the CMNT, Bayern has exactly one left-footed defender on their roster right now and that's Alphonso Davies.  (Two with Blind.)

For sure, and as @Bigandy points out, he can also play CB (just like Hernandez).

Despite the terrible injury Lucas Hernandez is obviously part of their future, so I imagine they want a short-term solution that's cut from the same cloth (i.e. someone who can play both positions). By the time Hernandez recovers and gets back to his best, it could be 12 months from now, and by then Blind will be 33 going on 34, which is still not THAT old for a defender, but I imagine his usefulness will be fading away by then (just as Hernandez comes back into the fold). Furthermore, bringing in Blind just enhances the groups big-game mentality, as he's won tons of silverware at a high level. You know what you will get with him, and he won't be over-awed by any occasion.

And for Blind it's a great deal, because even as cover he'll get to play in some big matches and win some silverware. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Unnamed Trialist said:

Well I like that guy Davies, but neither he nor de Bruyne really should be here. 

Then just because Salah's Egypt doesn't make the World Cup, he's not here. 

Gvardiol, we all knew who he was and watched him all year long.

If not Davies, then who?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Well I like that guy Davies, but neither he nor de Bruyne really should be here. 

Then just because Salah's Egypt doesn't make the World Cup, he's not here. 

Gvardiol, we all knew who he was and watched him all year long.

Thats a hot take. De bruyne is the best midfielder in the world right now. 

Salah is great but i cant understand dropping one of Benzema whos a ballon dor winner, Haaland who is tearing apart every prem record in half the time, and mbappe who was lights out at the world cup and has almost double the league goals of salah/ and more goal contributions in the champions league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Obinna said:

If not Davies, then who?

You are asking about left back, right? The position he never plays for Canada? We are not seriously saying yeah for a player in a position he never plays for us?

So since it is only about what he plays at Bayern, not for Canada, how do you justify a guy who was injured half the year? On a team that did not win in Europe and coasted, once again, in a league that is not seriously competitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...