ECW

We got pasted pretty bad by Holland. 15 minutes of over the top, full out unsustainably naive gegenpressing, 30 mins of adequately hanging in, 45 mins of nothing that could win anything much (at least, not anywhere of note). Overall 90, the approach did not make sense. But since then it’s been a quite different approach. And tonight we had urgency too (lacking somewhat since the first 15 mins against Holland). So hats off to him. I’m very interested to see what we look like when he’s had more time to work with the group. And totally excited about Tuesday. Tonight was a great win. Not perfect, of course, but who cares about that.

I’d like to see Davies closer to goal at times but he ain’t a winger or a striker (as Herdman had him at times) so I’m not going to complain. We’ll see what happens when Marsch has more time with the group but it is pretty great to have a solid back four and young as well, average age about 24…. Certainly though Davies gets forward more when he plays with Millar. It’s unlikely that’s going to happen when Shaf is bombing straight up the pitch.

On Johnston, I think Charlie O’Connor-Clarke got this about right. Solteldo will always win a few but I don’t think we could have had anyone better against him: ”Alistair Johnston led the way for Canada with five tackles in the first half and eight total defensive actions, winning six out of seven ground duels. The Celtic fullback went head-to-head with the shifty winger Soteldo and largely got the better of him, as the ex-Toronto FC attacker won just one of his eight duels in the first 45 minutes.” ”The Venezuelans had adjusted well in the second half; they swapped Soteldo to play on the right side, trying to get him in behind Alphonso Davies. He still struggled to deliver into the box the way he wanted, but he did seem to find more space with the marking less tight to him on that flank.”

Speechless. I hope you’re all enjoying this. And had company for the match. Seems like any crummy bar will do to find the game in Canada these days.

I’m always pleased when Canadian athletes are articulate and thoughtful. But then, growing with a devoted family in a big house in (let’s say) Brampton, should produce a certain amount of basic articulateness. I wonder how many of the South and Central American players are from the bourgeois families and have decent scholastic experience. From my time living in Brazil and Argentina I suspect not many. Also, I would say, it makes for different football. (Not a perfect comparison because there wasn’t much middle class in either country. Most people are either poor or wealthy and I suspect the players don’t come from that upper class.)

Hats off to Marsch. Looks like actual, sustainable football. Unlike the Holland match. More intensity all around too than in the France friendly.

Let’s see what Osorio as a ten looks like. I think it’s his best position (even if not for 90).

Richie doing his thing.

Millar! We always often come to life when we counter.

Seems more like a friendly than the Netherlands match. Otherwise, this approach seems more sustainable for us than the swarming, gegenpressing we kept up for 15 mins or so against the Netherlands.

That’s really interesting, thanks. An excerpt of an article that mentions the 1984 Olympics: Two years prior to Mexico, Canada got their first taste of big-stage international football after qualifying for the Olympics. The Canada squad’s inexperience proved something of a blessing. This was the first Olympic football competition that allowed professionals to compete, provided they had no fewer than five senior caps at a tournament. Those rules allowed Canada to field a near full-strength team. After drawing their opener with Iraq and going down 1-0 to a Yugoslavia side featuring future greats like Dragan Stojkovic and Srecko Katanec, the Canucks faced an all-or-nothing final group game against Cameroon, who had won the African Cup of Nations just a few months earlier. Two goals from Dale Mitchell either side of a strike from youngster Igor Vrablic helped Canada claim a memorable 3-1 win which set up a quarter-final showdown with tournament favourites Brazil. “Beating Cameroon at the Olympics was an important game for us, not least because it gave us a chance to play Brazil,” Wilson said. Though the Selecao were far from being at full strength, there was still plenty of star quality in their line-up, including future World Cup winner Dunga. Played just three days after their victory over the Indomitable Lions, Wilson recalled the game taking place in an unexpectedly frenzied atmosphere. “We had to travel from Boston to San Francisco for the quarter-final game,” the then Canada captain recalls. “The game was played at Stanford University stadium. There were over 36,000 spectators there. For a Canada game in the USA. What are the odds? Canada didn’t let the occasion get to them though and took a deserved lead through Mitchell on 58 minutes. In fact, Canada had the ball in the net a second time only to have it incorrectly ruled out for offside. Brazil eventually equalised before winning on penalties. Despite the disappointment, the Maple Leafs earned rave reviews in the Brazilian press.

I think that’s true. Also, to me, asking him to take on the captaincy and to play left back in a role that makes it difficult to get forward is a mixed message. Putting Shaffelberg in front of him against Holland was another reduction in capacity.

A good case can be made that we suit gegenpressing: a good amount of young sprinters who have, already in place, a “brotherhood”; we are Canadians who do “all for one”, the team over the individual, very well; we want to beat the more skilled opposition ranked above us; we’re lacking clear and good players who suit the ten and the six. I don’t have much to add to the questions and answers already posted which have to do with the frantic tempo required: can we sustain it with MLS conditioning?, can we do it in the southern U.S. and Central America in summer?, do we need it to beat the lesser sides in our region? will it help us be more successful against Mexico and the U.S.? I think that my main response to it all is aesthetic (if you will allow me that term). In contemporary art and contemporary football (can we call it futebol-arte?) there is not much talk of beauty (and maybe not much beauty, either), and the gegenpress to me is ugly to watch. Yes, of course, it is not without its own interest and intricacy, but of what I’ve seen of Marsch’s version of it, it attempts to reduce the depth and complexity of what the opposition does, and it fails to mine the depths of what we are capable of (which is a hell of a lot more than we used to be capable of). So, whether we win or lose, complexity is reduced. Which to some is good but to me often becomes uninteresting. Maybe that has to do with a certain rigidity applied to what can be a supple game. In a time in which the classic ten has been eclipsed, I expect some high pressing, at least. But too, hybrid versions, interesting adjustments, are more compelling to me than an ‘everyone run to the ball at once and, in effect, as much as possible’ philosophy. If we want to discuss politics (as some posters have) I don’t think I want to get too much into the ‘rah rah MLS branded American leading the Canadians’ aspect except to say that we are used to being colonized by England and the U.S. and, one way or the other, we tend to like it. And that there is something genuine (if ingenuous) about Marsch. But I would say it’s pretty tough to disengage the obvious use made of gegenpressing by the energy drink company (who our manager has done most of his footballing for). Rarely has a style of a game been so solidly applied to a mass (and unhealthy) commercial product. As Marsch puts it, his system should be a way of life. I will, of course, be watching the next match with great interest. It should be too early to tell if this system will work for us in terms of results, but it should be telling as to what we can expect (as the first match was). So far, other than the overall question, I found David’s role in the first match pretty interesting and wonder what we will do with our (no longer) wingbacks given that Davies and Layrea have at times been our most effective players.

Here’s an “in his own words”, for what it’s worth: https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/jesse-marsch-ralf-rangnick-red-bull-salzburg-rb-leipzig/

One of my concerns about Marsch is that I haven’t seen him be very adaptable. (With the exception of developing a not very adaptable variation on the red bull model?) I realize that in the game thread I was getting into the ‘what is Marsch’s version of the high press’ conversation?’ and this is no doubt a better thread for it. So I wonder what those who know better than I do think about this? Given that Bielsa and Marsch have recently managed the same club and that the former was brought up in the game thread, I wonder if that comparison would offer any insight? Based on what I’ve seen they might be at opposite ends of the high pressing spectrum (if there is such a thing). The approach to width and marking, are certainly very different. The subs in this game: could be a manager getting to know his players. But also, his choices become a whole lot less reckless and certain to see us getting pasted if we think of someone who thinks that anyone can play in his system. Some stuff is predictable. I think most of us knew Millar would start (and I have no problem with that)… Shaff coming on at the half (given the quick turnaround to France) was also somewhat predicable.