Player Ratings versus China

Player Ratings versus China

Love to hear peoples thoughts... too busy to start it myself.

Moss - 7 - Made some great saves and is, in my mind, our best keeper.
Boyens - 4 - Poor across the board. Unlucky with the OG though. VERY slow
Vicelich - 5 - As slow as Boyens. Served NZ football well but is past it at international level now.
Smith - 6 - Solid with out being spectacular.
Lochhead - 5 - Looked slower than usual. Not his best game.
Wee Mac - 8 - Worked hard. Great goal. Best AW performamce so far.
Mully - 6 - Also worked hard and always wanted the ball. Avg first half. Decent 2nd half. Needs regular football at a higher level than NZFC.
Brockie - 5 - Should have scored at the end of the first half. Caused problems but not too many.
Killen - 5 - Shown up for pace against quick opposition. Thought playing in China may have been a benefit for him but it just meat they new his game and nullified him.
Smeltz - 7 - Missing in the first half. Decent 2nd half when Kosta arrived.
Wood - 6 - Solid but unspectacular. Great first touch from that long ball but poor finish attempt.
Kosta - 7 - Made a big difference with real pace. Could have cost us the goal but not sure if he would have been off-side if he'd gotten a touch
Boxall - 7 - Brought some pace and solidity to the back line. I was impressed with what I saw.
Rojas - Not on long enough
Fitzgerald - Same as Marco
Ranga - Did he touch the ball?

Tim Brown invisible again.

Harris, Hay, Sumner all questioning the timing of the subs (did I miss anyone out - how about Thompson?).

not sure about that junior, China were pretty good and certainly tested us on set pieces, their first goal was unlucky and really poor marking from us. 1 - 0wuld have been a fair reflection I think.

Still...

I thought Sumner was actually defending Ricki somewhat...

I think Glen Moss was a 6 at best. Yes he had good saves but spilled the ball on several occasions.

Pasty still kicks his ass 1 on 1 and knows that if he's not going to catch it cleanly then punch the phuker away.

Bit harsh on Moss - without 3-4 of his saves we'd have lost that game comfortably.

Without 2-3 of the Chinese keepers saves we'd have won comfortably.

What 2-3 saves from the Chinese keeper? Killen had a good chance that he saved and that was it.

What about mulliagans... oh... thats right... never mind!

A shot from 30 yards that went straight at him?

Still a save, and dont forget the save from Brockie in the first half.

Killen surprised me with his shot, had plenty of time, I was ready to celebrate and he hit it straight at the goalie. Ugh

You mean the one that lobbed into his outstretched hands?

The issue isn't the number of saves but the degree of difficulty - save from Killen required moving off the line and closing down the angles, and a bit of athleticism to actually save the shot which wasn't exactly going directly at him (what Killen could have done differently is a different kettle of fish altogether).

The other two saves required nothing more than just standing in the middle of the goal and waiting for the ball to arrive to save it. Not exactly a difficult task for an international keeper.

The point is, Moss had at least 3 (writing from memory, may have been more) saves to make that were equivalent of the save that the Chinese keeper had to make from Killen. And that shouldn't be scoffed at, because it did make a difference in the final analysis.el grapadura2011-03-29 11:19:20

Im doing this from memory also. Chinese keeper was well positioned in each case to make the saves he did/ on the flip side, our shots were poor

I agree that Moss had to make  more difficult saves than the Chinese keeper. He did make the one on one saves very well, almost made them look easy, when often you see the keeper beaten in those situations. I can remember thinking you beauty Mossie. There is no doubt he kept us in the game, equal MOM with Mac and Kosta for me

Although Moss did make 2 or 3 great saves, that is what you want of a keeper. If he had not spilled a couple of simple balls, and not made some very dodgy clearances from back passes, then I think he might have been a 7, or even an 8 based on those saves. From memory, at least one of those good saves came from play after he had either spilled or poorly cleared the ball. So a solid 6 for me, but nothing more.

Wood muffs 100% of his shots on goal. AJ132011-03-29 19:10:25

Spoken like true outfielders.

touche!  (and not even a very good one- sometimes they even make me play goalie!