news
Forums
history
profile
guestbook
link
advertising
merchandise
contact us
thereggaeboyz
tell a friend
  The Reggae Boyz Forum
  Reggae Boyz Soccer Discussions
  Lazaroni is NOT a big time Coach (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Lazaroni is NOT a big time Coach
Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-19-2004 02:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have been reading a bunch of bull about this wasn't the coach's fault blah, blah. Well let me tell you this, the coach did the opposite of everything he was supposed to do to win this game. I had a deep pre-match discussion with some knowledgeable ballers during which I outlined the winning strategy for the occasion and particularly the conditions. After the game, the bredren dem come to me and sey "bloodfire, you call it from before the match." If I didn't know better, I would think that Lazaroni was a plant sent to to derail the program. He did everything that was necessary at the right time to make us lose or draw, all but one game under his tenure.

I won't waste time on the joke of the first US game when we lost in the final minutes with not one but two unused subs in a fast-paced encounter.

I won't waste time with the Panama loss where we had defenders lining up in the six-yard box for a free kick from half line so that a glancing header gave the goalie no recovery time.

Let me go straight to the final game to prove that this coach is a dunce.

Early Wednesday morning a steady but light rain began to fall. To a man in our group, we said, right time fi us di Englishman dem (even Burton) cause a fi dem conditions this. We even noted the propensity of our local players to slip and slide even when conditions dry and there seeming lack of skill when the use 6-studs. What happened -- the mascot not only didn't insert Euell or Burton but chose to drop the only Englishman who had been a regular starter. That was the first smell of sabotage.

I next noted that this is a game where the wingbacks need to be overlapping nonstop to put constant pressure on an experimental US squad. I noted the absence of Beasley and Lewis as important since there will be little or no counterattacking threat from the flanks. All the US attacks would be coming through the central strikers so we really only needed three out and out defenders. In that vein, it was clear that Zaidie could not be the starting wing back as he has no pace to do the up and down marauding up and down the flanks. I recommended Marshall or Fabian at a minimum. The next key insert would be the pacy and aggressive Garfield Reid who for some reason as been deemed a non-factor by the mascot. This means pushing Bibi into tyhe midfield. What did the mascot do? The exact opposite with the result that Zaidie played the whole game in some zonal neverland standing by himself for 90% of the game even when the US was only using one forward. He also failed to come out with the central defenders repeatedly and caused Johnson to be onside on two breakaways one of which resulted in a goal and the second in the save of the match. Bibi was not much better on the left as he ventured forward about five times in the whole match and only twice when the US was down to 10 men. He passed more balls back to Marhall in the last ten minutes than to any midfielder or forward. Worse, neither wingback had any of the shooting propensity of Reid or Fabian and as a result a whole facet of our game was lost.

Third, on a heavy, slippery pitch, it was clear that Tappa (prticularly coming off a ham string injury) would have no impact on this game. It was clear that Euell was an ideal replacement given the conditions. What did the mascot do -- not only start Tappa but add Andy (the fellow slow immobile playmaker) to the mix. The fool further compounded the issue by using two defensive midfielders, supposedly to compensate for the defensive liabilities of these two. Did anyone else notice that the US won every loose ball in the midfield before Hue came on and constantly outnumbered us. Did the coach think that two players can cover the same amount of ground as four and sometimes six when the US wingbacks came forward?

Fourth: Why in the world in a must-win game would you employ a four-man zonal defence against a two-man attack. Even if you wanted to play it safe at the outset, why would you stick with it until the very end even after the opponent was down to ten men. I was behind the Jamaican bench hollering for Bibi and Zaidie to go forward and leave Marshall, Pepe and Jamie Lawrence as the out and out defenders. Lazafoni (yes I said it Yardman) did nothing in this regard.

BTW! I HAD TO TELL BURTON TO TELL THEM THAT PANAMA WAS LEADING 3-0. HE WAS SHOCKED WHEN I TOLD HIM SO IT WAS CLEAR THAT NOTHING WAS SAID AT HALF TIME ON THIS ISSUE TO ADD TO THE URGENCY. BURTON WAS IN THE STANDS WITH STEPHENSON PRESUMABLY BECAUSE THE BENCH WAS FULL AND HE WAS NOT IN THE GAME PLAN AT ALL.

Fifth: Every Jamaican fan analyzed the negatives of Damaiani's play for the national team over teh last three games and noted that he would be a better sub than a starter. His first touch was deemed atrocious and his composure suspect. It was clear to all except the coach that the appropriate starting forwards in these conditions would be Fuller and King.

Sixth: and the worse of all -- if you were prepared to make an offensive sub in the twentieth minute of a must-win game, why didn't you start that player. Worse, why did you effectively substitute him for a more mobile player (putting Marshall back in defence) instead of an immobile Tappa.


Let me stop here but for the record let me state that there is no substitute in football for ball sense. I think I have disagreed once with people here who obviously have it (w/Chisel on Seedorf). Carl Brown has ball sense, Lazafoni does not and no amount of credentials can change that fact.

BTW! The starting line up I proposed to my group for Wednesday was:

Pepe Stew Peas

Fabian Marshall Reid

Andy Bibi

Euell

Fuller King

If we had lost with that squad under the circumstances, I don't think I would have complained, would you?


IP: Logged

Shatta_Cleve
Member
posted 11-19-2004 03:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Shatta_Cleve     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Agree a 100% on your post. Reid should have started. Lazaroni substitution patterns left a lot to be desired(and thats putting it nicely)

Won't even touch on the Euell thing the way mi vex but to sum it all up

Excellent post Jahjesty

IP: Logged

themightykool
Member
posted 11-19-2004 03:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for themightykool     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well Said Jahjesty!!

After I saw the blunder in the strating lineup I kept calling for changes at half time.

I was expecting that Euell and King would have come on because Tappa was a non factor and Damani was having an atrocious game. I did not expect him to start at all, seeing that the US knows his game pretty well and knowing that King has been producing the goals. I have always said that we needed a genuine playmaker hence my amazement that Hue was not started.

Still can not see through the use of a four man backline especially when the US was reduced to 10 men.

Well they now have the time to invest in the youths and rebuild starting with the Gold Cup.

IP: Logged

BadRas
Member
posted 11-19-2004 03:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for BadRas     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
In all honesty, I expected Damani to start. Didn’t expect such a dismal performance though. Mi tek Blame fi dat

Damani starting could have easily worked in our favor also. Just like they know him, he knows them, so it could have played to our advantage. I gave him the nudge to start because I thought he would have played against these guys, aware of their capabilities, and knowing the task at hand, raise his game and demolish them. Oh well. In hindsight, bad judgment on my part.

Euell should have started. No doubt.
Marshall should be at right back.

King should have been inserted earlier, as soon as we saw Ralph’s performance.

One of the RBZ fell and I noticed there were not wearing screw ins. How could they not on such a slippery pitch ???

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-19-2004 04:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by BadRas:
In all honesty, I expected Damani to start. Didn’t expect such a dismal performance though. Mi tek Blame fi dat

Damani starting could have easily worked in our favor also. Just like they know him, he knows them, so it could have played to our advantage. I gave him the nudge to start because I thought he would have played against these guys, aware of their capabilities, and knowing the task at hand, raise his game and demolish them. Oh well. In hindsight, bad judgment on my part.

Euell should have started. No doubt.
Marshall should be at right back.

King should have been inserted earlier, as soon as we saw Ralph’s performance.

One of the RBZ fell and I noticed there were not wearing screw ins. How could they not on such a slippery pitch ???


On your last point, very few yard man practice in pegs (due to the hard grounds we play on). So, even when they do wear them, they are out of their comfort zone because the sole of pegs are not as flexible as rubbers. That is why most of them will use molde soles even on wet pitches. No sensible coach would allow a player to leave the changing room in molded soles on a day like that. Molded soles aren't even good for lush g**** fields. That is why our players always seem to be slipping even when it's dry.

On Damiani -- God bless him because I love his spirit and he has a great future. However, he does not have ball sense right now and his first touch is atrocious. As a result, the ball directs where he has to go next rather than the other way round. He wastes a lot of time and energy just trying to settle the ball into a position to go to goal. A player like him cannot be given options. He has to be played into space with no choice but to shoot.

IP: Logged

ddread
Member
posted 11-19-2004 04:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ddread     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
If I didn't know better, I would think that Lazaroni was a plant sent to to derail the program. He did everything that was necessary at the right time to make us lose or draw, all but one game under his tenure.
Cho, nuh gi mi conspiracy suggestion fi mi hold on to bredrin, like how mi done feel seh a conspiracy mailed Lowe the kilo.

Wicked post!

IP: Logged

MikeU
Member
posted 11-19-2004 05:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for MikeU     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If Jamaica had put away their chances against Panama and El Salvador at home, something Laza can't do but the players, and something the U.S. and Panama did at home, the game in Columbus probably would have been meaningless as Jamaica would have already qualified.

Lazaroni is to blame ultimately for he is the coach; however, the lionshare of the blame falls at the feet of King who missed a sitter against El Salvador in Kingston, the forwards who threw away chance after chance against Panama, and the JA defenders who left Donovan wide open to pass to the Hawaiian striker who tied the game with the U.S. at 1-1.

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-19-2004 05:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MikeU:
If Jamaica had put away their chances against Panama and El Salvador at home, something Laza can't do but the players, and something the U.S. and Panama did at home, the game in Columbus probably would have been meaningless as Jamaica would have already qualified.

Lazaroni is to blame ultimately for he is the coach; however, the lionshare of the blame falls at the feet of King who missed a sitter against El Salvador in Kingston, the forwards who threw away chance after chance against Panama, and the JA defenders who left Donovan wide open to pass to the Hawaiian striker who tied the game with the U.S. at 1-1.


Puhleeze! If the coach had subbed in JJ and a defender in the last five minutes of the first US game, the game in Columbus would have been meaningless for us but not for the US. In fact, the whole campaign would have been settled from then. The high that such a start would have given us would have led us to thrash Panama and El Salvador. The US would have been the one needing a result Wednesday. Lazafoni's coup de grace was the first stroke he made as head coach. You remember what his explanation was?


IP: Logged

MikeU
Member
posted 11-19-2004 05:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for MikeU     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jahjesty:
Puhleeze! If the coach had subbed in JJ and a defender in the last five minutes of the first US game, the game in Columbus would have been meaningless for us but not for the US. In fact, the whole campaign would have been settled from then. The high that such a start would have given us would have led us to thrash Panama and El Salvador. The US would have been the one needing a result Wednesday. Lazafoni's coup de grace was the first stroke he made as head coach. You remember what his explanation was?


But Jahjesty, it is inexcusable to leave Donovan, one of the most dangerous strikers in the region, unmarked. Substitution or not, that is unacceptable. It is not the first time Jamaica's defense has been accused of not marking their players in key situations. This is a perennial problem and it must be addressed by the coaching staff with the young teams.

Secondly, you are assuming that Jamaica was still suffering from allowing the late goal against the U.S. and thus failed to dismiss Panama at home. The performance against Panama blunts that theory, as the RB was dominant against the Panamanians, but the historical problem of goalscoring was JA's demise in that game. This problem also led to the underwhelming display against a lowly Salvadorean side who were battered by every side in the round. Simply put:

USA 2 El Salvador 0
Panama 3 El Salvador 0

Jamaica 0 El Salvador 0 How can one explain this result? The players were told prior to this game (Carl Brown in particular) that they HAD to win or else the Germany dream may be just that - a dream. So the players were mentally prepared and rearing to go. What happened. They put up goose eggs.

The Americans and Panamanians progressed because they know when to execute in big game situations. Panama is an inferior side to Jamaica, but their players came through when they had to.

I do not know if Laza had made a move here and there the WC campaign would have been saved. That is debatable. But what I saw is the non-performance of players (mainly the srikers) Laza put on the pitch in crucial games at home, and that non-performance will get the majority of the blame over supposed substitutions and moves that I do not know would have panned out.

[This message has been edited by MikeU (edited 11-19-2004).]

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-19-2004 05:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MikeU:
But Jahjesty, it is inexcusable to leave Donovan, one of the most dangerous strikers in the region, unmarked. Substitution or not, that is unacceptable. It is not the first time Jamaica's defense have been accused of not marking their players in key situations. This is a perennial problem and it must be addressed by the coaching staff with the young teams.

Secondly, you are assuming that Jamaica was still suffering from allowing the late goal against the U.S. and thus failed to dismiss Panama at home. The performance against Panama blunts that theory, as the RB was dominant against the Panamanians, but the historical problem of goalscoring was JA's demise in that game. This problem also led to the underwhelming display against a lowly Salvadorean side who were battered by every side in the round. Simply put:

USA 2 El Salvador 0
Panama 3 El Salvador 0
[b]Jamaica 0 El Salvador 0
How can one explain this result?

The Americans and Panamanians progressed because they know when to execute in big game situations. Panama is an inferior side to Jamaica, but their players came through when they had to.

I do not know if Laza had made a move here and there the WC campaign would have been saved. That is debatable. But what I saw is the non-performance of players (mainly the srikers) Laza put on the pitch in crucial games at home, and that non-performance will get the majority of the blame over supposed substitutions and moves that I do not know would have panned out.

[/B]


Let me start with the easy one. Donovan was not "unmarked" in the classic sense. The cross from Cobi came to Claude who clumsily headed it against the back of the backpedalling Marshall. The ball comically fell to the feet of Donovan who had just been standing around expecting an easy headed clearance.

On the main point, if you had been in the national stadium when the US equalized you would understand what I mean. The fans and players were so deflated that you would have thought the campaign was already over. The game against Panama thus became a must win rather than a "mash up a idiot side" situation. Their early goal then further dampened the spirit. To their credit, the team rallied back and took the game to Panama but there was more through desperation than dominance. The bizarre loss again at the last minute put the team further back mentally. The win in ES again was done in a must win environment. The good news was that, at that point ES was very weak (even though they had beaten Panama 2-1 previously and only lost to the US 2-0 in the US) and there was still some pride in the camp. When we failed to beat Panama away, you know that the seeds of doubt had begun to settle in. By then I am sure the team was beginning to question the Coach's mettle and so on through to the last two games. ES at home became a must win but this time, the team spirit and pride had been called upon so many times before that it was found lacking. There was no cohesive confidence but rather a desperate drive to avoid a bad result. Same thing against the US.

IP: Logged

Senior Analyst
Member
posted 11-19-2004 06:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Senior Analyst     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jahj it was a pleasure catching up with you again and Peter Duggan, big time baller from my youth. I don't know if there is any sensible person who could disagree with the contents of your posts. Lazaroni a ediot! I think we should be refunded some of the money we paid him. You and I have disagreed on 'CB' as coach and I still have not recinded on my position. I felt going to this level we needed someone with more tactical and technical sophistication. Someone who was like a big time chess master, who could do the necessary analysis and formulate the appropriate response. I felt CB had some limitation there and after many reasoning accepted your point that he got the position by default. In comes this brethren who suppose to be a big time coach and the only thing I can think is, that the Brazilians must be embar****ed to recognize him as one of their nationals. He is clueless and as you well know I did not arrive at my position without giving him due process. An alarm went off after the first USA game but I really thought the team play relatively well and so I kinda back off. Each performance after that got increasingly worse save the ES game. It struck me that this man's knowledge of the game was suspect, in fact he was working with the exact template of CB ... Tappa the engine and everything else just the same. He never seem to have the ability to take it up a notch when it was required ... save the ES game. If you been following my posts, I have been highlighting his deficiencies game after game: starting with his scouting and team selection. Wednesday took the cake and demonstrated to me beyond doubt that Lazaroni is no football genius, in fact the man is a dunce.
Lets examine his starting team on sunday.

C.Zaidie ... Pepe ... StewPeas ... Bibi


Marshall ... Jamie

Tappa ..........................Andy

Fuller ... Damani


What kind of idiot side that to start for a game you must win? Why such a heavy focus on defense? In addition, those of us who are students have this game have assessed that it is a serious risk to play Tappa & Andy together because they both have a tendency to perform disappearing acts and when this happens you have effective lost two linkmen. I will address the Tappa thing in more details later but lets look at what he could have done. Fabian had a decent game in the first USA game but This game I like you believe required someone more mobile down the flank and I would have opted for Marshall to play right wing back.
I would have stayed with Bibi at left wing back for this reason ... been watching a lot of Garfield in the NPL and his game seems a bit erratic and unsettled (maybe a short term thing). This is what my back would look like.

Marshall ... Pepe ... Stewpeas ... BIBI

In my link I would have played:

Andy ... Jamie ... Euell ... Hue

My starting forwards:

... Fuller ... King


I can't for the life of me understand Laza's thinking. It has been clear from the last 3 matches that Damani been playing with very little purpose ... he has been lost and proving to be of little threat. King's been getting goals in a condition similar to this and he is benched. Euell who we just froze time to get is left on the bench for 73 minutes and when he does come on shows immediately that he is a clear cut above the pack ... most importantly this is a man who just scored a brilliant goal couple days ago and is hungry.
I have never travelled near the precincts of the conspiracy club but trust me it is hard not have these 'sell out' thoughts.

I think this could possible be the ending of Laza's career, don't know who will ever employ him in such a capacity again.

Respect!

IP: Logged

brush
Member
posted 11-19-2004 06:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for brush     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jahjesty, I have been eagerly awaiting your response to the boyz performance and although it is your usual indepth analysis I must admit that I do not agree with most of it. And although I am not one of the "Knowledgeable ballers" that you regularly discuss games with, I will explain why I do not believe your post carry any water.

I have been reading a bunch of bull about this wasn't the coach's fault blah, blah. Well let me tell you this, the coach did the opposite of everything he was supposed to do to win this game. I had a deep pre-match discussion with some knowledgeable ballers during which I outlined the winning strategy for the occasion and particularly the conditions. After the game, the bredren dem come to me and sey "bloodfire, you call it from before the match." If I didn't know better, I would think that Lazaroni was a plant sent to to derail the program. He did everything that was necessary at the right time to make us lose or draw, all but one game under his tenure.
I won't waste time on the joke of the first US game when we lost in the final minutes with not one but two unused subs in a fast-paced encounter.

Coach Brown sat on the bench beside Lazaroni for every game during this round, did he not notice as the TD that Lazaroni still had two unused subs with 3-5 minutes to go? With him being more familiar with the players, wouldn't Lazaroni be receptive to any suggestion of viable subs to slow the game down from a coach who had more time with the players and happen to be sitted right beside him?

I won't waste time with the Panama loss where we had defenders lining up in the six-yard box for a free kick from half line so that a glancing header gave the goalie no recovery time.

I need some clarification with this one. Are you suggesting that professional players need their coach to consistently remind them on how to line up for a free-kick situated at the halfline? Also, who should take responsibility for all the missed chances during the Panama game?

Let me go straight to the final game to prove that this coach is a dunce.

Early Wednesday morning a steady but light rain began to fall. To a man in our group, we said, right time fi us di Englishman dem (even Burton) cause a fi dem conditions this. We even noted the propensity of our local players to slip and slide even when conditions dry and there seeming lack of skill when the use 6-studs. What happened -- the mascot not only didn't insert Euell or Burton but chose to drop the only Englishman who had been a regular starter. That was the first smell of sabotage.

Ouside of Damion Stewart and Jermaine Hue who replaced Stewart. Which of the local players that started are use to dry and hard fields for games and practices? Ricketts, Bibi, Pepe, Whitmore, and Fuller plays in England and Ziadie, Marshall, Ralph, and Williams plays in the USA.

I next noted that this is a game where the wingbacks need to be overlapping nonstop to put constant pressure on an experimental US squad. I noted the absence of Beasley and Lewis as important since there will be little or no counterattacking threat from the flanks. All the US attacks would be coming through the central strikers so we really only needed three out and out defenders. In that vein, it was clear that Zaidie could not be the starting wing back as he has no pace to do the up and down marauding up and down the flanks. I recommended Marshall or Fabian at a minimum. The next key insert would be the pacy and aggressive Garfield Reid who for some reason as been deemed a non-factor by the mascot. This means pushing Bibi into tyhe midfield. What did the mascot do? The exact opposite with the result that Zaidie played the whole game in some zonal neverland standing by himself for 90% of the game even when the US was only using one forward. He also failed to come out with the central defenders repeatedly and caused Johnson to be onside on two breakaways one of which resulted in a goal and the second in the save of the match. Bibi was not much better on the left as he ventured forward about five times in the whole match and only twice when the US was down to 10 men. He passed more balls back to Marhall in the last ten minutes than to any midfielder or forward. Worse, neither wingback had any of the shooting propensity of Reid or Fabian and as a result a whole facet of our game was lost.

I stated before I too felt that a team with Marshall and Reid has wingbacks would have been more effective. However, most of the US effective attacks resulted out of their forwards playing good one touch football with the middle and making timely runs from wide (Bibi's side of the field bared the brunt of these attacks) onto defense splitting passes from their midfield. Hence, Eddie Johnson's goal and Ricketts daredevil heroics at the feet of Johnson on a couple of occassion.

Third, on a heavy, slippery pitch, it was clear that Tappa (prticularly coming off a ham string injury) would have no impact on this game. It was clear that Euell was an ideal replacement given the conditions. What did the mascot do -- not only start Tappa but add Andy (the fellow slow immobile playmaker) to the mix. The fool further compounded the issue by using two defensive midfielders, supposedly to compensate for the defensive liabilities of these two. Did anyone else notice that the US won every loose ball in the midfield before Hue came on and constantly outnumbered us. Did the coach think that two players can cover the same amount of ground as four and sometimes six when the US wingbacks came forward?

The coach, like myself and Carl Brown I may add. Found it difficult to put a Jamaican team on the field w/o a Whitmore in the middle of the park. I believe it was dweetsweet2, a fellow ite, who gave us a practice session report (a report that is displayed on the intro page of this site)in which he stated that Whitmore looked good in training. So, I like Lazaroni and CB must be living in denial because a good looking Whitmore in training would get my vote of confidence. Unfortunately this decision backfired, although it pains my heart to admit it because Tappa is a ball genius IMO, our maestro was a big disappointment. In Andy's case he always put in credible performances against the USA, so why not start him, but looking back at the game maybe flipping the coin between him and Whitmore and inserting Euell would have been better. Hindsight is a hell-of-a-thing ain't it?

Fourth: Why in the world in a must-win game would you employ a four-man zonal defence against a two-man attack. Even if you wanted to play it safe at the outset, why would you stick with it until the very end even after the opponent was down to ten men. I was behind the Jamaican bench hollering for Bibi and Zaidie to go forward and leave Marshall, Pepe and Jamie Lawrence as the out and out defenders. Lazafoni (yes I said it Yardman) did nothing in this regard.

I have to agree with you on this one, playing that way for 90 minutes knowing that a win is our only hope baffles me also. The coach seemed pre-occupied with not getting caught on the break and forgot about pushing for the win. Another thing that baffles me is why do insightful ites like yourself and ddread keep quoting Yardman, it breaks my heart, unuh lose a couple stripes fi dat

BTW! I HAD TO TELL BURTON TO TELL THEM THAT PANAMA WAS LEADING 3-0. HE WAS SHOCKED WHEN I TOLD HIM SO IT WAS CLEAR THAT NOTHING WAS SAID AT HALF TIME ON THIS ISSUE TO ADD TO THE URGENCY. BURTON WAS IN THE STANDS WITH STEPHENSON PRESUMABLY BECAUSE THE BENCH WAS FULL AND HE WAS NOT IN THE GAME PLAN AT ALL.

Well, The JFF delegates decided to put a bunch of amateurs in-charge of Jamaica's football at the StarFish Resort. We need not look any further.

Fifth: Every Jamaican fan analyzed the negatives of Damaiani's play for the national team over teh last three games and noted that he would be a better sub than a starter. His first touch was deemed atrocious and his composure suspect. It was clear to all except the coach that the appropriate starting forwards in these conditions would be Fuller and King.

I agree, the only rational excuse maybe Ralph and Williams early demise in the MLS gave them more time with Lazaroni in training and this influence his decision.

Sixth: and the worse of all -- if you were prepared to make an offensive sub in the twentieth minute of a must-win game, why didn't you start that player. Worse, why did you effectively substitute him for a more mobile player (putting Marshall back in defence) instead of an immobile Tappa.

Good question, but to suggest that any coach would replace is most experience player and captain who is not displaying any signs of a injury after 20 minutes is crazy. Again, hind-sight is a mother.

Let me stop here but for the record let me state that there is no substitute in football for ball sense. I think I have disagreed once with people here who obviously have it (w/Chisel on Seedorf). Carl Brown has ball sense, Lazafoni does not and no amount of credentials can change that fact.

You are correct, there is no sub for ball-sense I think our players need some, dem mek the game look hard. CB should have imparted some of that ball-sense from his bird's eye view of the last six games. But, I guess his presence on the bench was just his way of getting a court-side seat to the fiasco that the JFF created.

BTW! The starting line up I proposed to my group for Wednesday was:

Pepe Stew Peas

Fabian Marshall Reid

Andy Bibi

Euell

Fuller King

I wished I had seen your starting line-up before the game. The one that I propsed on this site prior to the game was similar:

Ricketts

Marshall Stewart Goodison Reid

Williams Lawrence Whitmore Gardner

Fuller King

If we had lost with that squad under the circumstances, I don't think I would have complained, would you?

IP: Logged

CHISEL
Member
posted 11-19-2004 06:51 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for CHISEL     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I hear you on that post Senior and I would agree with almost everything. I would have used Bibi in midfield and benched Andy while bringing Reid in at left back. I tend to think that if you are going to use Andy he MUST line up as a playmaking midfielder in the middle of the park. He is useless outside because when you play close to the flank you have less space in which to operate and you consequently need to have pace. Andy is by far the slowest professional footballer I have seen (ok maybe that's a bit much). He is slow though and slow players can't operate in any wide position on my team. For that reason Zaidie couldn't play on my team either.

I cannot for the life of me understand how we could start the game with Ralph. All he has shown at the international level so far is his willingness to run. That is a good trait but at this level it takes a bit more. I would certainly have used King because of his strength and because of the fact that he is a proven goalscorer for us. Now to Jason Euell. How the hell do you start Tappa over this man if you know anything about this game. Tappa is one of my all-time favorite Jamaican players. I grew up watching this man do the draw play that he used to do and I loved his game. He is now lethargic and his skills have suffered because of his reduced strength. Why not play Euell from the start?

I could go on, but you get the point Senior. I must say that I remember you endorsing CB's removal though On that we differ. Not because CB is some great coach, but then again no coach is that great in my opinion. Coaching takes a bit of ball sense and the people skills to motivate men...

IP: Logged

CHISEL
Member
posted 11-19-2004 07:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for CHISEL     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Brush still finding a way to blame CB I am not sure his TD title gave him any authority over Lazza. OK, let me rephrase that. I am sure that his TD title didn't give him any authority over Lazza. Lazza made it clear to Boxhill (everytime I realize Boxhill is in charge of JA football I have to laugh) that he wanted full control or nothing before he came back. I don't think he wanted to hear from CB who or when people need to be changed.

[This message has been edited by CHISEL (edited 11-19-2004).]

IP: Logged

brush
Member
posted 11-19-2004 07:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for brush     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Brush still finding a way to blame CB I am not sure his TD title gave him any authority over Lazza. OK, let me rephraze that. I am sure that his TD title didn't give him any authority over Lazza. Lazza made it clear to Boxhill (everytime I realize Boxhill is in charge of JA football I have to laugh) that he wanted full control or nothing before he came back. I don't think he wanted to hear from CB who or when people need to be changed

Not true Chisel, I am not trying to put the blame solely on CB nor am I willing to absolve him of all responsibility for our current predicament. If you should take a look at prior postings of mine, you'd notice that I initially supported the appointment of CB. I believed his litmus test would have been our performance in the Gold Cup. The performance in the GC along with the U23 farce in Mexico left a sour taste in my mouth and I honestly believed that CB had lost the ear of his players. I felt that that occassion would have been the perfect time to bring in a new coach and his philosphy (I did not ask for Lazza, CB did, Simones, or Clovis). However, the president in his attempt to please everybody, took the face-saving decision of leaving a yardman wid im food money and left CB in place in- stead of sending him home early with a good compensation package.

[This message has been edited by brush (edited 11-19-2004).]

IP: Logged

firelynx
Member
posted 11-19-2004 08:06 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for firelynx     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
More like the President realized dat CB gave us a good chance but was forced to compromise by the sponsors. On your point about CB making Luseroni's decision he did the right thing and didn't try to coach the team. Luseroni was the coach and that excuse he made about not knowing the personnel shows how out of touch he is. Mi see it all the time new person come in to lead the team want to make a move but not sure who to give the task. They go to the former manager and or someone who is familiar with the runnings and consult wid them. If you don't know ask somebody. More time they will be glad to help. Its only if do it too often that they are offended and wonder about about you. You win on many fronts when you ask for help in Luseroni's situation, you appear humble you build a bond and you show common sense. Luseroni brought a bad vibe to the Boyz.Luzeroni didn't have a clue.

IP: Logged

Yardman
Member
posted 11-19-2004 08:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Yardman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Di fiyah CB crew get wha dem blood clawt deserve.

IP: Logged

Double B
Member
posted 11-19-2004 08:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Double B     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:

Well let me tell you this, the coach did the opposite of everything he was supposed to do to win this game.

I can't beleive it this! Man all a post the winning team after match done play already. Hind sight is 20/20!

It is no secret that Laza did not live up to the hype. I would not not call him a football dunce or novice but it was obvious that he not the right man for this job. He failed to motivate the team and looked totally lost when it comes on to the tactical aspects of the game. He was 'out-coached twice by Bruce Arena. I think JT decribed him the best "a fraud".
I am prepare to call him a fraud because a true 'professional' would not accept a job 2 days before WCQ'ers start without doing serious research and analysis of our players.
He obviously didn't do his home work and failed to take the time out to do the necessary research.
The least I expected of Laza was to demand one or two few friendly matches.

Having said all of that, I strongly believe that we played great football in our 3 home games and could have easily qualified from this group if we had put away our chances.

I was a bit surprise when I saw the team that was selected to play the Americans on Wednesday but I saw what Laza was trying to do. He knew that Bruce was going to use mostly MLS based players so Laza started all our MLS players.
The fact that these guys failed to rise to the levels that they are capable of playing at cannot be blamed soley on the coach.
Take Demani Ralph for example. He was the leading scorer and rookie of the year in MLS last year. This year he finished about 3rd or 4th with 11 goals. Now compare him to Ed Johnson. Johnson is a 20 year old MLS striker who started the same time as Demani. He is not half as lethal as Demani in MLS but he is able to score 5 goals in 61 minutes for the US! If it wasn't for Rickettes, he could have had even scored a hattrick easily against Jamaica. Why this guy gets into goal scoring position so easily? This guy is coming off a hattrick against Pamana, why did we allow him so much room?
Somebody please explain that to me. Don't tell me that it is the coach fault because you already think that we were too defensive!

My big friend put a team out there without Jamie Lawrence but he faild to see that Jamie kept London Donavon out of the entire game.

I totally agree that Laza waited too long to take out Ralph. He should have substituted Ralph (for King) and possibly Tappa (for Euell) at half time but the way Rickettes kept injuring himself after each save, you had to keep one of the subs in case.

The bottom line is that the coaching staff took a gamble with the MLS based players and it did not work.

Laza is gone now. CB should do the honourable thing and leave as well. In fact I think Boxhill should also resign as well.
Let's us start from scratch with a new slate!

PS. Concerning Reid not starting, all you have to do is look back at the Panama game (the last game he played in) and you will see why. Reid and Bibi do not (have the chemistry like Tappa - Bibi and Pepe) play well together. If you check out that game you will see that Reid never passes the ball to Bibi and was always further ahead of Bibi almost all the time. It was as if Reid was playing Left wing and Bibi playing Left back in that game.

IP: Logged

russian
Member
posted 11-19-2004 09:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for russian     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jahjesty you hit the nail on the head.I wanted to post the very same info, but because I am still sick to the stomach.For some reason I still think C.B. was behind the selection of the starting team.From the moment I walked into the stadium and saw the team on the field I said to myself and some guys that were beside me that there is noway on earth the coach should not have started Jermaine Hue.....a guy who is on fire and has alot to prove.Then came the 24th min a wasted changed if he had started Hue in the first place, Garfield Reid and Fabian Davis our two most mobile and ovelapping wing backs sitting on the bench in a game where we would need a lot of crosses in....because Gardner and Zaide have forgotten how to do this in this campaign.... and how often have we preached about Williams and Whitmore on the field at the same time.For the entire 1st half I kept telling the guys around me that the coach..s are stupid becacuse they should have known that the field would be slippery and they did not address that problem...thought they would at half time, did they?,hell no....I think the T.D and the coach need to be put in a barrel and rolled down a hill.and for the veteran players who should have stepped up their game needs to be lined up and flagged.We now need to clean house and sideline all except Hue,F.Davis, Ricketts,King,Ralph,Johnson,Daley,C.Davis,Fuller,Stewart,Kelly,L.Hyde and the rest of the U-20 team.....Gardner seems to have lost it for the national team so him get left also until he finds himself. I am so mucking fad.... it's not even funny....I had to pay for tickects that I did not use because my friends from Florida could not make the trip.
The only thing that kept me through the night was the fact that..........anyways. Just before hue came on I told the guys around me that this guy is going to change the game totally and that he did, only a pitty the other guys didn't follow his lead.

PEACE EVERYTIME.

IP: Logged

chaz
Member
posted 11-19-2004 09:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for chaz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think you guys have provided some good analysis of the game and the ineptness of the coaches, but I cannot understand for the life of me why you would seek to cloud your analysis by continuing to insist that the coaches were at fault for the late lapse by the players on Cobi's side of the field in the first USA game. Carelessness, not fatigue, was the obvious culprit. What would have been the argument if a fresh sub caused a penalty in the dying minutes of the match ? dont change a winning team ?

Now with regards to the players, I could see the coaches thinking that Damani might provide more speed and mobility against the USA defense, but leaving off your leading goal rat makes no sense, especially given the conditions. Whitmore does not bring enough to this team to be played in cold conditions with a recent hamstring injury, that was a waste of a starter, Hue proved to be a better option. For all the crap we went through to get Euell, I would have started him over Andy, after all, what exactly has Andy accomplished during this campaign? Starting Jamie and Marshall in defensive link was understandable, we needed to sure up our worthless defense, a draw was still an option at the outset. The back line was simply a mess. Bibi's passing leaves a lot to be desired, The center halfs looked as if they have never player together, and Zaidie, though steady, is way too conservative a player to be kept after half time. My biggest disappointment with the coaches, is the teams repeated inability to create opportunities against teams that choose to lay back in defense. Both the USA, El Salvador, and Panama had success against us with this strategy. I would have preferred to see the following lineup:

--Zaidie--Pepe--Stewart--Bibi

--------Marshall--Jamie------

----------Euell--Hue---------

---------King--Fuller--------

Once we discovered at the half that a win was our only option (by the way, some coaches dont think the score should be told to the players - whats the benefit, for them to play harder ? they just become more anxious), I would have pulled Zaidie and inserted Damani upfront. The other two changes would have been driven by fatigue and performance (more is not always better).

IP: Logged

cruyff14
Member
posted 11-19-2004 09:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for cruyff14     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The 'ites(the vast majority anyway) got their wish of a fully certified, highly credentialed 'tactically astute' coach, so I don't see what all the complaining is about. We took a man that was doing a fine job within the limitations he was working under, and essentially ran him out of town for having the audacity to defeat a team like Haiti by only three clear goals over two legs. Now I see people still insisting how well we played at home under the new coach where we garnered 2 points from three matches against the US and two teams inferior to Haiti.

To say his his replacement's tenure was a failure is a grand understatement. Take a look at his decisions in this most recent match and it becomes obvious that this man is not nearly the coach Brown is. When I looked at the team sheet before the match, I nearly walked out of the Stadium. There was no Godly reason to have either Gardner or Zaidie playing wing-back, if there are capable replacements. Marshall should have been deployed at right-back where he would give us an overlapping option as well as natural defensive qualities to recover when we are defending. Gardner is among our best attacking players and should be playing on the left of midfield, especially as his defending of late has been atrocious. We have the ideal player for the style we needed to play in Garfield Reid.

Ok, maybe not the best selection for the back, but surely he would select the correct players in midfield. . .To have two defensive midfielders in the middle coupled with Whitmore and Williams on the flanks(especially with a non-attacking wing-back on one side) was tragic. In the abscence of Johnson and the decision that Langley is not up to this level(which for the life of me I cannot understand), I would have played Williams nominally on the right(more narrow than the usual right midfielder) and allow Marshall the opportunity to use that space. I would then have considered Fabian Davis at some point in the second half to add more running power on the right. I would have had Lawrence in the holding role, and Euell(yes I would have thrown him in right away instead of Whitmore, especially in the conditions) as the most advanced midfielder.

I don't think there was any justification for starting Ralph. I would have gone with Fuller and King with Ralph off the bench. Since this coach came in he has made mistake after mistake after mistake. And only now that we have ultimately failed, do we hear people saying what was obvious at the outset.

Football is a bottom line game and especially in a situation like ours when the coach has to work with so many limitations, there is no justification for calling for the head of a man that is doing a creditable job at the very least. I kept asking the ultra-critics what was the objective criteria which they based their unreasonble levels of criticism on. . .and am yet to hear anybody put forward a reasoned argument.

I guess the ultimate blame for what I said at the outset was a senseless decision can only rest with the individual(s) making the decisions, but I don't see why all those that were calling for this so vehemently all along should be so up in arms for the Federation doing exactly what they suggested.

IP: Logged

panjam
Member
posted 11-19-2004 10:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for panjam     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I must say I agree with Lazaronni's team selection. Damani has played in that area many times before and so has Andy. Both of them have combined well to score goals for Chicago Fire.

Regarding Reid getting the left back position, I disagree. In the first match agains the USA he was constantly exposed and seemed to not have a clue to good defensive play. Furthermore, that was the area where Eddie Johnson was patrolling and if BiBi had difficulty stopping Johnson, I don't think that Reid would have done a better job.

With Withmore, he has been a good performer for us in the past. he had one good game in Panama and possibly in EL Salvador. He was due for another good game. I would gamble with him rather than an untried J. Hue.

With Zaidie, again familiarity with the MLS players and he has had a better game than Fabian Davis in my mind. Zaidie reads the game better and his knowledge of the game makes up for his lack of speed in many occassions.

The changes were justified. In hindsight, Euell could have come on earlier.

I would blame the players for not scoring their opportunities and the defensive lapses that led to the goals scored against us. But ultimately, the coach must shoulder the responsibility of the teams' failure.

IP: Logged

jamatl
Member
posted 11-20-2004 01:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jamatl     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Laza only won two games in over 10 matches coaching the Reggaeboyz, him should not even be allowed to set foot on the island again. Also Bibi was taken to school by Ed Johnson on both ends of the field.

IP: Logged

Topnotch
Member
posted 11-20-2004 02:05 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Topnotch     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cruyff14:
I guess the ultimate blame for what I said at the outset was a senseless decision can only rest with the individual(s) making the decisions, but I don't see why all those that were calling for this so vehemently all along should be so up in arms for the Federation doing exactly what they suggested.


I want to write a long post like everyone else but I can't even bother. I think that the change of coach at the time it was done was wrong. I think we would have had a slightly better chance with CB. He knew his team and he for the most part was getting them to do what he wanted. However there is a bigger problem that some of us refuse to face up to.

The two last years of the Simoes stint was undistinguished. He went from miracle worker to taxi driver. Then we had Clueless Clovis, then dunce CB and now Lazafoni. So I am led to believe that all is well with our players and all we need is a good coach to make them dun the place.

I wonder how we are going to qualify for world cup with one goal scoring option. Don't get me wrong bad coaching does hurt teams and bad coaching did hurt Jamaica. But coaches all over the world make bad decision all the time and some have more consequences than others. Had Jamaica put away a few of their chances against El Salvador for example we wouldn't be having this discussion. The point is that bad decisions are always exagerated when your team is substandard. And let's face it Jamaica has been especially substandard up front. Only King has done anything.

So lets wait on the next coach. In the mean time I am going to make a list of comical names for future TD because until we have 3 or so players who can put away half chances consistently, we are always going to need names for our coaches.

IP: Logged

Guidance
Member
posted 11-22-2004 01:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Guidance     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jahjesty maybe ‘the mascot’ started Tappa and kept him in the game because he played for his club after returning from the hamstring injury AND the team tends to be nervous at the start of the game and you need an experienced holding midfielder like Tappa to keep control of the middle. The first 20 minutes with Tappa in the middle is priceless and he like the coach before just could not afford to bring a Hue into the program earlier depending instead on diplomacy to shore up the middle.

I remember Senior commenting after watching the team that something was wrong with the engine but he couldn’t put his finger on it(I stand to be corrected). Analyst came back after another match and identified the middle at fault saying Tappa was the main reason the engine was sputtering and backfiring. Many ites who don’t know ball agreed. But some of the ites who know ball said leave Tappa alone caus he alone can hold the ball for the Important first 20 mins which is where we usually win most of our matches.

Maybe they should have played Tappa as a forward to hold up the ball in the 18 until there is an opening he tries to shoot or lays it off for a shooter?


how is jt and princess doing?

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-22-2004 02:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Guidance:
Jahjesty maybe ‘the mascot’ started Tappa and kept him in the game because he played for his club after returning from the hamstring injury AND [b]the team tends to be nervous at the start of the game and you need an experienced holding midfielder like Tappa to keep control of the middle. The first 20 minutes with Tappa in the middle is priceless and he like the coach before just could not afford to bring a Hue into the program earlier depending instead on diplomacy to shore up the middle.

I remember Senior commenting after watching the team that something was wrong with the engine but he couldn’t put his finger on it(I stand to be corrected). Analyst came back after another match and identified the middle at fault saying Tappa was the main reason the engine was sputtering and backfiring. Many ites who don’t know ball agreed. But some of the ites who know ball said leave Tappa alone caus he alone can hold the ball for the Important first 20 mins which is where we usually win most of our matches.

Maybe they should have played Tappa as a forward to hold up the ball in the 18 until there is an opening he tries to shoot or lays it off for a shooter?


how is jt and princess doing?[/B]


I am always one that advocates Tappa starting for the same reasons you state. However, under the circumstances, i.e., wet conditions, his coming off an injury, lack of game practice (I didn't hear of him playing a game for Tranmere after the injury), the need to take the game to the US from the outset and the fact that the US was fielding a fairly weak squad (thus less need for a general role) I thought he would be a poor choice to start. As it turns out, I was right.

IP: Logged

Guidance
Member
posted 11-22-2004 04:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Guidance     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Seen, seen but what to do after Tappa engine sputter with 70 mins left on the clock?

If it was basketball I could see...but
Which big timefootballcoach make a midfielder who is suspect at disappearing at the 20-25 mins timer and who shows up every third game an auto-select on his team just for his initial calming effect for the first half of the first half only.
Kinda leaning on your experience to understand the game Jj.

IP: Logged

ddread
Member
posted 11-22-2004 04:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ddread     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Guidance:
Seen, seen but what to do after Tappa engine sputter with 70 mins left on the clock?

If it was basketball I could see...but
Which big time[b]football
coach make a midfielder who is suspect at disappearing at the 20-25 mins timer and who shows up every third game an auto-select on his team just for his initial calming effect for the first half of the first half only.
Kinda leaning on your experience to understand the game Jj.[/B]


.

Jj rough still and gets nuff respect but I have to say there are 2 things that he says that I can't make any sense out of, this and the issue with the "pro league" being a necessary component (and sometime seem to imply sufficient) for having a solid national team.

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-22-2004 05:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Guidance:
Seen, seen but what to do after Tappa engine sputter with 70 mins left on the clock?

If it was basketball I could see...but
Which big time[b]football
coach make a midfielder who is suspect at disappearing at the 20-25 mins timer and who shows up every third game an auto-select on his team just for his initial calming effect for the first half of the first half only.
Kinda leaning on your experience to understand the game Jj.[/B]


He disappears because he is trying to pace his unfit self. The second part of my proposal to use Tappa has always been to sub him at half time with Andy, regardless of how well he played in the first half. Until Hue or KK or some other younger fitter player with the same calming influence emerged, I was willing to work with his deficiencies.

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-22-2004 05:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ddread:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Guidance:
[b]Seen, seen but what to do after Tappa engine sputter with 70 mins left on the clock?

If it was basketball I could see...but
Which big time[b]football
coach make a midfielder who is suspect at disappearing at the 20-25 mins timer and who shows up every third game an auto-select on his team just for his initial calming effect for the first half of the first half only.
Kinda leaning on your experience to understand the game Jj.[/B]


.

Jj rough still and gets nuff respect but I have to say there are 2 things that he says that I can't make any sense out of, this and the issue with the "pro league" being a necessary component (and sometime seem to imply sufficient) for having a solid national team.

[/B][/QUOTE]

On the pro league thing, name me another WC qualifier that doesn't have one. I think we are the only top 50 team w/o such a league. I know we are a third world country and cannot support a full-blown pro league but there are cost-effective ways to do it. In fact, some teams are creeping up on it already: Harbour View, Portmore, Arnett and Waterhouse. What we need is a league-wide upgrade that would both motivate players to develop into international caliber while standardizing the physical and tactical aspects of their game at a higher level. Interestingly, with our endless talent pool, professionalization would have a bigger impact on OUR national program than on any other in my view. The only reaosn we have survived so long is the effect of professionalization through external forces (imports from England or exports to foreign leagues). If these guys weren't in the program, we would be back to the pre-Simoes days -- flattering to deceive every now and then.

IP: Logged

ddread
Member
posted 11-22-2004 06:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ddread     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
but Jj that is exactly the point. The vast majority of the players on the senior team do play overseas in pro leagues so the argument for the local pro league dictating conditioning does not follow. Unless the league is as successful as the Mexican league is at retaining its senior players the best the pro league could present is what we have now where essentially our entire senior team play in the top leagues around the world.

Since the TD can not dictate where the players play he has to devise a system where he ensures the players get requisite conditioning regardless of where they play. Don’t get me wrong; I am not averse to having a pro league. The problem is that we are somehow suggesting it is the way to nirvana and it is not. At best it will be a launching pad for a wider pool of local players to get overseas contract but after they get their contracts we will be right where we are now where most of our senior team play overseas and excuse will still be “we only have 2 days to get the team ready for games.”

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-22-2004).]

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-22-2004 07:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ddread:
but Jj that is exactly the point. The vast majority of the players on the senior team do play overseas in pro leagues so the argument for the local pro league dictating conditioning does not follow. Unless the league is as successful as the Mexican league is at retaining its senior players the best the pro league could present is what we have now where essentially our entire senior team play in the top leagues around the world.

Since the TD can not dictate where the players play he has to devise a system where he ensures the players get requisite conditioning regardless of where they play. Don’t get me wrong; I am not averse to having a pro league. The problem is that we are somehow suggesting it is the way to nirvana and it is not. At best it will be a launching pad for a wider pool of local players to get overseas contract but after they get their contracts we will be right where we are now where most of our senior team play overseas and excuse will still be “we only have 2 days to get the team ready for games.”

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-22-2004).]


Oh, I see! You obviously are way more optimistic than I that we will constantly manage to export talent to leagues abroad. I see that well drying up significantly, particularly after our recent exit from qualifiers. What I do note with respect is teh dramatic change in fortunes of the US team post-MLS after they came last in WC 1998. A player like Landon Donovan choosing to play at home says wonders for a home-based league. When a KK gets sent home from abroad, there should be no risk that his conditioning should fall off. There should be no doubts about whether the Hues or Davis's are ready for international call ups. And finally, and most important, the best jamaican talent has emigrated out of serious football because there is no future in the sport locally. If you don't believe me, visit the various leagues in NY, FL and DC for proof.

IP: Logged

Fully
Junior Member
posted 11-22-2004 07:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fully     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I don't think anything anyone said would have swayed the Coach and/or TD view point.
I remember hearing Craig Zaidie telling the sport commentator on Irie FM before the Jamaica/EL Salvador game in Kingston, that he and (maybe a couple of other players on the squad) begging and pleading with the Coach and TD to insert BIBI as a left midfield/winger and Reid as the left back. This was get BIBI more involved in the game as an offensive player without having to worry about his defensive responsibilities and also to balance the left hand side of the team which was lacking natural left footed players. Zaidie stated that he doubted the Coach/TD would ascede to this request has they had already had their pre-conceived image of what the team composition should be.
This I think was one of the failure of this Mgmt Team setup as they were unwilling to adapt and accept new strategies on a a game per game basis based on players merits and opposition setup. It's just mind bogling when the RB players themselves had serious doubt about the technical expertise and knowledge of their own Mgmt Team. That to me is one of the contributing factor to the demise of the Road to Germany.

IP: Logged

ddread
Member
posted 11-22-2004 08:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ddread     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Oh, I see! You obviously are way more optimistic than I that we will constantly manage to export talent to leagues abroad.
Not really, but the lack of pro league was given as an excuse for THIS senior team not qualifying.

I see that well drying up significantly, particularly after our recent exit from qualifiers. What I do note with respect is teh dramatic change in fortunes of the US team post-MLS after they came last in WC 1998. A player like Landon Donovan choosing to play at home says wonders for a home-based league.agree.

When a KK gets sent home from abroad, there should be no risk that his conditioning should fall off.If there was any real interest in KK his conditioning would not have been allowed to "fall off".

There should be no doubts about whether the Hues or Davis's are ready for international call ups.Well, the problem there is that the jokers we have in charge[including CB] evaluate talent based on where the player plays and thus the UB40 will always be ranked higher than our local player regardless of pedigree. Hue and Davis gets no props because them local. Imagine what they will think of an entire local squad?

And finally, and most important, the best jamaican talent has emigrated out of serious football because there is no future in the sport locally. If you don't believe me, visit the various leagues in NY, FL and DC for proof. If I recall, the pro league as proposed didn't really offer much in the way of a professional salary so the exodus may slow but wont stop.

My main beef with the clinging to the “pro league or no senior team” crutch is that the countries that use that model have the resources (namely a fan base willing to pay player millions) to support it. I think we need to think creatively in solving this problem. For example, the pro league (as I recall) proposed to pay each player around 20k per year. If that’s enough to attract the topnotch players in DC,FL and NY then we could have taken the top 25 players in the NPL and put them on a 20k per year stipend with half the money we gave Lazza and dictate their conditioning.

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-22-2004).]

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-23-2004 10:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ddread:
[b] Oh, I see! You obviously are way more optimistic than I that we will constantly manage to export talent to leagues abroad.
Not really, but the lack of pro league was given as an excuse for THIS senior team not qualifying.

I see that well drying up significantly, particularly after our recent exit from qualifiers. What I do note with respect is teh dramatic change in fortunes of the US team post-MLS after they came last in WC 1998. A player like Landon Donovan choosing to play at home says wonders for a home-based league.agree.

When a KK gets sent home from abroad, there should be no risk that his conditioning should fall off.If there was any real interest in KK his conditioning would not have been allowed to "fall off".

There should be no doubts about whether the Hues or Davis's are ready for international call ups.Well, the problem there is that the jokers we have in charge[including CB] evaluate talent based on where the player plays and thus the UB40 will always be ranked higher than our local player regardless of pedigree. Hue and Davis gets no props because them local. Imagine what they will think of an entire local squad?

And finally, and most important, the best jamaican talent has emigrated out of serious football because there is no future in the sport locally. If you don't believe me, visit the various leagues in NY, FL and DC for proof. If I recall, the pro league as proposed didn't really offer much in the way of a professional salary so the exodus may slow but wont stop.

My main beef with the clinging to the “pro league or no senior team” crutch is that the countries that use that model have the resources (namely a fan base willing to pay player millions) to support it. I think we need to think creatively in solving this problem. For example, the pro league (as I recall) proposed to pay each player around 20k per year. If that’s enough to attract the topnotch players in DC,FL and NY then we could have taken the top 25 players in the NPL and put them on a 20k per year stipend with half the money we gave Lazza and dictate their conditioning.

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-22-2004).][/B]


DDread, I hate to pull a Chisel on you but I must ask "have you played this game or are you close to NPL-level players?" If you don't know the difference between professional training and amateur then this conversation is a waste of time. To say the national program should be responsible for the ongoing fitness of KK and other locals is almost bizarre. Why them and not the hundreds other under-achieving locals who aren't putting out more because there is no health plan to address the even minor injuries that are bound to occur. Do you know that we have lost more talent to the drug trade (economis) and injury (no health coverage) than is now included in the current player pool. If the semblance of local professional preparation was present during this campaign, I doubt if we would have been here discussing Tappa and Andy. No doubt we would have been discussing KK and Hue's performance as they would have been tried and tested at a higher level and would be deemed ready for national duty way earlier. National duty cannot be a testing ground for a player's conditioning or international match pace.

The MLS is not based on fan support but rather the support of corporate investors looking for a capital loss to shelter them from tax on capital gains from affiliated businesses. The proposal I have voiced ad nauseum is just a ramping up of the current Business House football model and merging it with the NPL. I understand Tankweld has entered into something of this sort with Waterhouse recently.

Embarking on a search for a new coach and the youth development center are mere smokescreens. The Manning and DaCosta Cup along with the myriad youth leagues in the island are currently workable vehicles for unearthing young talent. What's missing is an economic vehicle for these youth academy graduates. Donovan, Beasley and Adu have the MLS, while our young ones will have the NPL's "pay-when-we-mek-a-money" program. How can you take a country seriously in football terms when its schoolboy competitions get more fan support than the senior leagues. What's wrong with that picture. Why are most local players remembered more for their high school exploits than their club exploits. Can you name Lenny Hyde's club team as a player? What about Skill Cole's? Do we even realize how national youth programs really work. Here we are already calling for the heads of 22-26 y.o players just because we want a change. Doesn't it make sense to invest in one crop of outstanding youth and give them a performance-based tenure like Holland does with the Davids, Seedorfs, Kluiverts, etc..

Check yourself before you start arguing for arguing sake. I predicted this merry-go-round process from the very first time I started posting here.

IP: Logged

Guidance
Member
posted 11-23-2004 11:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Guidance     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:

He disappears because he is trying to pace his unfit self. The second part of my proposal to use Tappa has always been to sub him at half time with Andy, regardless of how well he played in the first half. Until Hue or KK or some other younger fitter player with the same calming influence emerged, I was willing to work with his deficiencies.


That is so true.
And any TD preparing to play Jamaica know that.

"Midfielders, take your time, Jamaica always surrenders the middle at the 25 min marker"

Your forthrightness is like a breath of fresh air.

He disappeared so often his fellow midfielders would run themselves into the ground

"Push a foot nuh Tappa, push a foot nuh"
'bwoy mi tiyad'

He disappeared so often he became the Eleventh Man
As in a 12th man - spectators or the ref.
Tappa was the 11th man !
Take whatever help he gives out and be glad for it caus is only us 10 roun here!!
And when he gets the ball he dribbles and dribbles and dribbles and dribbles strait to the feet of a waiting opponent.

What else you have in your bag of tricks?

PS:
As soon as Tappa benefit match announce gimme a shout.

[This message has been edited by Guidance (edited 11-23-2004).]

IP: Logged

ddread
Member
posted 11-24-2004 12:53 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for ddread     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"have you played this game or are you close to NPL-level players?"
No, but mi used to know 2 yout from balmoG. That count?
I am beginning to feel that this conversation may very well be a “waste of time” too bredrin.

The issue is simple but yuh sliding right past it. The reason given for the lack of conditioning was that the coach does not have any influence over the clubs and players when they are not in camp. With the pro league coach still won’t have any control over the players conditioning. The league is a good idea but not a solution to the problem.

If you don't know the difference between professional training and amateur then this conversation is a waste of time.I think I heard somewhere that “Tappa fitness level is suspect”, apparently the “professional training” him getting not doing much different than the amateur training Hue getting.

To say the national program should be responsible for the ongoing fitness of KK and other locals is almost bizarre. Why them and not the hundreds other under-achieving locals who aren't putting out more because there is no health plan to address the even minor injuries that are bound to occur.Not sure but maybe because the coach scouted them and conclude they could have impact on his programme.

[url= National duty cannot be a testing ground for a player's conditioning or international match pace. Yet our coach has to waste time on it despite the fact that most or our players already get “professional training” from their clubs.

Anyway, if any meaningful change is to happen in the programme the idea of a pro league has to happen independent of devising a means of getting the coach more of a handle on the players throughout the whole year and not just the 2-3 days before games or the 1 week camp. The pro league doesn’t guarantee a thing. Canada has a pro league, T&T has a pro league and I will take my chances with the reggaeBoyz over them any day.

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-24-2004).]

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-24-2004 10:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ddread:
The issue is simple but yuh sliding right past it. The reason given for the lack of conditioning was that the coach does not have any influence over the clubs and players when they are not in camp. With the pro league coach still won’t have any control over the players conditioning. The league is a good idea but not a solution to the problem.

This is why I asked the facetious question about your ball background. Do you know the dramatic difference a full day training regimen makes in a players conditioning and match preparation compared to running to training from work or whatever in the evening while grabbing a sky juice along the way. By default, a player's involvement in a pro setup where they are charged exclusively with playing ball and getting their body ready for playing ball will double his physical conditioning. More importantly, the risk of losing salary and benefits give club management clout over the training process unlike now when stars can train when they feel like or give all kind of lame excuses for missing training. If you don't see those basic improvements as attendant to a pro setup, then you are psoting on te wrong site. You need a chat room to labrish.

I think I heard somewhere that “Tappa fitness level is suspect”, apparently the “professional training” him getting not doing much different than the amateur training Hue getting.

Have you ever wondered why the immensely talented Tappa and Nandi ended up in the lower leagues while the relatively less talented Bibi is thriving at a higher level? Basically, you cannot teach an old dog new tricks. These guys have an ingrained amateur approach to training that will not be tolerated at top flight clubs regardless of their talent. Fortunately, Bibi, Fuller, Claude, etc. got picked up early enough in their careers and thus avoided those pitfalls.

Anyway, if any meaningful change is to happen in the programme the idea of a pro league has to happen independent of devising a means of getting the coach more of a handle on the players throughout the whole year and not just the 2-3 days before games or the 1 week camp. The pro league doesn’t guarantee a thing. Canada has a pro league, T&T has a pro league and I will take my chances with the reggaeBoyz over them any day.

If either of those countries had the vast and endless flow of talent that we do, they would be world powers. So would most of the oil-rich middle-eastern countries with pro leagues that have to be majority populated by foreigners. Why are so many yard players playing for Trinidad's top pro team. Can you envision any pro club in Jamaica having to populate their teams significantly with foreigners. We have an unique situation and that's why I am proposing an unique solution.

BTW! What is your proposed solution for breaking this merry-go-round coaching and administration cycle.

IP: Logged

ddread
Member
posted 11-24-2004 01:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ddread     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Tap dancing...

All I see is another side step an a few scratches and clawing. The problem of conditioning is not addressed by a local league if 18 out our 20 players play in foreign leagues.

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-24-2004).]

IP: Logged

Jahjesty
Member
posted 11-24-2004 02:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jahjesty     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ddread:
Tap dancing...

All I is another side step an a few scratches and clawing. The problem of conditioning is not addressed by a local league if 18 out our 20 players play in foreign leagues.

[This message has been edited by ddread (edited 11-24-2004).]


Since you cannot see the big picture try this narrow response. A local pro league would result in less export of those players to foreign leagues and thus make it impossible to get them in camp for more than 3 days before a game. BTW! Did you know that the English-based players first travelled to Kingston before immediately reembarking on a 9-hour journey to Ohio on the Monday before the game (with a lengthy layover in either Miami or Atlanta).

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are ET (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Reggae Boyz


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47e