here's what I wrote...'other day.

[Tilla]

What are the differences in population before I answer?

Horti, agree seh you never did mek sense with your first statement/position nuh man? I am sure you are man enough to admit that making a statement about guaranteed victory because one country has a larger population simply does not make sense. You can come back now ans spin it bout minnoes or whatever, but that was not your initial position and not what I drag you up for. You know it too.

[Hortical]

Tillamawning, this is my original comment

When the team can ongle beat a tiny country of 55,000 1-0, it twas unlikely dem would get one of the ongle two spots fi the Olympics.

The comment is self explanatory, and size does matter especially for a country under 100,000. To compare Jamaica vs China does not make any sense, in terms of the football pedigree of Jamaica vs Cayman.

[Karl]

Except that I never considered Suriname a minnow like many of you do. Flashback to the 1998 WCQ when Jamaica scored two 1-0 victories each in home and away qualifiers against Suriname. A combined score of 2-0.

One key factor that the forumites seem to forget. These nations that you see as minnows. Their one objective is to beat Jamaica which would be a moral victory. Even if they don't advance to the next stage of any competition.

And Suriname has produce Dutch GREATS!

...and the great Suriname teams of past? ...just that of the past!
Andre Kamperveen's team may have just been the last quality team to come out of Suriname...and that was approximately 50 years past.

One or 2 good players do not of themselves make a TEAM.

A TEAM may not have even one top outstanding player but 11 individuals who understand the game - fast, technically skilled players, excellent at tactics... These players know functions and how those fit within the TEAM concept to make the sum of the parts produce an excellent unit - TEAM. Usually such player use a very simple game - where over 75% of the touches are not more than 2 touches - the ball is moved around swiftly and the players buzz around within those areas where effort is all about meeting TEAM goals/aims.

TEAM possession is most often very, very high.

Any which way you look at it all...the CFU teams are light weight. What I am impatient with is our not separating ourselves rapidly enough from these 2nd formers.

Tappa is clearly on the right path - In the match against China, Omar Daley and Luton Shelton where outstanding on the number of times they disrupted our play.

...and on attack? The number of times they absolutely ruined our attacks were numerous. Daley in particualar has been seen by me to play a 1000 times better.

Shelton?
He seems to have severe limitations when it comes to playing TEAM. The guy over and over draws 2 and 3 players or holds the ball until he is surrounded and not for hell can he recognise what is happening and release the ball to a TEAMmate? He plays the ass and then loses the ball.

Omar? I do not know why after falling over a number of times and losing the ball trying to twist and change direction he did not cut it out and instead use KISS. - pass to a TEAMmate...retain possession for the TEAM...help the TEAM?

Did he not recognise that what he was doing was ANTI-TEAM...not helping his TEAM but that of China?

Look the early things you recognise once you get on the field is 'who is faster than whom'...then how the ref is calling the game... Each player must see those things! That is a part of solving problems...

I really do not know what goes on when our players get out there...but too often they appear dunce.

Look if you step on the field pretty early you recognise if you are stronger than the players in your sphere...and across the field...but in any case you take the field knowing - football is a game of sudden i.e. fast actions and actions committed swiftly gives the opponent less time to think on and react and thus to prevent your aims being realized. You know if the pass - whether to a TEAMmate or into goal (shot) done one time and with necessary technical skills (accuracy) makes possibility of it 'working' greater.

We also all know that all the top TEAMs move the ball swiftly. ...and the players move and rotate rapidly...so what is taking our local coaches and our players so long to attempt playing that way????

The entire island watches ManU, Arsenal, BoyU and now City...Real Madrid, Barcelona...top teams...the Germans, Brazil, Spain...top teams...they all move the bloody ball fast and their players keep moving and rotating at tremendous pace...so what is it with us why it seems it does not make sense to ape that manner of playing?

...OK! OK! Tappa's team has started along that path...but what of the schjoolboy teams, the parish club teams the NPL teams and the age-group national teams?

...why would a Shelton and a Omar Daley perform the way they do against the Chinese...

...and why was it Dane Richards could not change - think through and adapt -his style of play to that higher level when he met Arsenal? Is it in all the hell of a time he was on the field he did not realise...did not see what was happening?

He sure as hell has the pace to move around and he did not show he was unfit...so why couldn't he make those one-time passes time and time and time again...and stop the nonsense of trying to run the ball...ending up in often giving it to the other team...either by getting himself into a
cul-de-sac or into an opposing player or into touch? ...or just plain not getting to the ball...

OK! Let us say the technical abilty to operate in tight spaces was not there...then why not a switch to KISS? He could not figure that out?

We need to have players who think quickly and solve problems once they get on the field.

That last Chinese v Jamaica match - The Chinese sure moved and passed the ball around. Good thing they are poor strikers and our 'keeper was top drawer.

Tappa is insisting on passing and moving - retaining possession - our players, all our players need to throw a little thinking into the pot to move us to top flavour. Yup...move us away from that 2nd form status.