Back to the game at WCC...Both Kiwis and imports did not have a good game at WCC.
In summary, a) very average performance by Auckland City versus average home team. The way how Auckland City played is similar to the last WCC. b) The team played more not to concede goal/s, rather than to win. City created two half chances for 95 minutes of the game. c) They couldn't put three passes together, struggled at the back, in the mid field and Dickinson was invisible up front (not his fault, he is not the striker and never was, although he scored one goal at WCC with his shin-pad and became ACFC hero "striker").
Even players from the bench had no impact. Tade lost the ball 5-6 time committed 4-5 fouls and that was his contribution to the game. Krishna scored the goal described by the commentator as " three defenders disaster", but the finish was calm and composed. Apart from that, he tried to do too much and play individually. Midfield (Danko, Bale, Bilen, spanish guy) completely lost the battle in the midfield.
I am not sure how Ramon can say that he is disappointed because he thinks ACFC deserved more out of this game??? Although, overall d)host team was pretty ordinary, they still created a number of chances and deserved to win.
Interesting that ACFC players went down in the penalty box a few times, where in Kiwitea the ref would most likely give them penalty, but not at the WCC...
You seem to have been watching a rather different game to the one I saw. Although I am an ACFC supporter and of course you're not, which certainly makes for viewing difference - though not wth everybody.
a) Average performance? Compared to what? To City's usual game? To the EPL? To Barcelona? Average home team. Again, compared to what? To your average African club outfit? To the EPL? To Barca?
b) You mean they should have thrown three strikers on from the beginning? They shouldn't have played not to concede? They shouldn't have saved breath and legs until the 2nd half? They shouldn't have been cautious waiting to see what they were up against?
c) I counted quite a few times when they strung MORE than three passes together. Watch the replay. You're saying this from biased recollection.
d) The host team was pretty ordinary. Again, compared to what? (see above) I wonder if the Morrocan supporters would agree with you? But of course you're an far off commentator judging them from the educated Kiwi footballing fraternity's high standards. Are you not? Or perhaps, heaven forbid, you're a COACH!
And your last point gives the game away - Ramon of course coaches ACFC players to dive. Interesting. Of course he does. He's the ACFC coach after all.
Mate chill out, were are all entitled to have own opinion. If you read my previous post you will see that I wished to ACFC all the best in this WCC. My disappointment is a result of my belief that ACFC had a chance to do better for the club and NZ football.
a) Average performance based on:
1) Number of chances created/shots on goals
2) Number of passes put together
3) Number of times that players gave the ball away with very little or no pressure
4) Off the ball movement and shape
b) The team played more not to concede goal/s
Way to often there was a huge gap and no linkage between midfield (who stayed closer to the back four). It look like the game plan to utilise Krishna's speed, and Dickinson to hold the ball up and take some pressure of the defence. They looked happy to sit back and play nil all game and wait for penalties.
b) In my view the host team was pretty ordinary.
4) They had no flow if their game, way to often they play individually. Technically their team had capacity to play much better football.
The last point has nothing to do with Ramon. You can count how many times City was given soft penalties in Kiwitea, I am not going to...
d) I suggest take ACFC supporter's hat off and watch the game again then comment... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sB9N8hzEBeQ
Have a good day.
I think those critical of ACFC's performance still don't appreciate the gap between being a part-timer and full time professionals like Casablanca, who incidently have beaten the champions of Mexico Monterrey 2-1. Despite the nonsense the ACFC-haters put out sometimes on this forum most ACFC players hold down full-time jobs and train at night. What they achieved, playing to Ramon's ball retention strategy was tremendous. Casablanca were a better fitter side but the City boys stepped up a gear and gave as good as they got. I think some of you critics need to take off your "dislike ACFC" hats as well when you look at the punch above its weight effort of this small NZ club playing in a big competition like the CWC. I doubt the Phoenix, who are professional and train full-time, could have done better.