Was Chile really toying with the Reggae Boyz?

[Lazie]

Based on what I saw in the Chile vs Ecuador game yesterday ... it was obvious they were tekking it easy on us.

Sorry ... affi keep it real. Mi all a wonder if Suazo did play ...?

[Muadib]

Based on what I saw in the Chile vs Ecuador game yesterday ... it was obvious they were tekking it easy on us.

Sorry ... affi keep it real. Mi all a wonder if Suazo did play ...?

What would be the basis of this 'tekking it easy' ?

Dem love Bob Marley ?

I was at the game.. the Chile side, Coach and bench nevah look to friendly to me...

[Lazie]

Di players were show boating as KArl would say, not playing team. All a dem wanted to show that they had skills. Last night, they did a little of that yes, but they did bring their passing game.

[Muadib]

Di players were show boating as KArl would say, not playing team. All a dem wanted to show that they had skills. Last night, they did a little of that yes, but they did bring their passing game.

Total and utter rubbish.

Chile was clearly playing possession ball.. showboating ??!

Is which game unnuh people watching ? Maybe unnuh was getting the wrong signal.. good ting mi was there in person.

[Lazie]

Total and utter rubbish.

Chile was clearly playing possession ball.. showboating ??!

Is which game unnuh people watching ? Maybe unnuh was getting the wrong signal.. good ting mi was there in person.

Well, the benefit of watching it on TV is the replay factor. Even if I'm wrong about tekking it easy on us, well they played nothing like last night and if we couldn't beat them playing so bad (if we want to use that word) what if they carried their A game? Then again, I'm rarely wrong. Dem was tekking it easy!

[Muadib]

Well, the benefit of watching it on TV is the replay factor. Even if I'm wrong about tekking it easy on us, well they played nothing like last night and if we couldn't beat them playing so bad (if we want to use that word) what if they carried their A game? Then again, I'm rarely wrong. Dem was tekking it easy!

What is the point you are trying to make ?

Who says Chile played their 'A' team in Jamaica.. why should they anyway.. did we play ours ??

Both teams played a FRIENDLY... do you want an explanation of what that means ?

[Lazie]

What is the point you are trying to make ?

Who says Chile played their 'A' team in Jamaica.. why should they anyway.. did we play ours ??

Point .. Chile was toying with us!!

[Muadib]

Point .. Chile was toying with us!!

You clearly have a different definition of 'toying'.

To toy with someone you must first establish a clear superior advantage as a point of reference.

Both teams gave as much as they got.. you probably were not able to capture the emotion of the game on your 50 inch..

[Lazie]

Superior advantage? Di man dem score early, saw that they could handle what was been put to dem ... then decide fi tek it easy. Yes, we did create some chances, but it was clear dem was playing Sunday evening ball.

[Muadib]

Superior advantage? Di man dem score early, saw that they could handle what was been put to dem ... then decide fi tek it easy. Yes, we did create some chances, but it was clear dem was playing Sunday evening ball.

Stap with the revisionist history and cut the crap.. no professional team takes it easy with a 1-0 advantage early in a game especially against a team that CLEARLY demonstrates and ability to threaten your goal...

Dun di folly argument.

[Karl]

Based on what I saw in the Chile vs Ecuador game yesterday ... it was obvious they were tekking it easy on us.

Sorry ... affi keep it real. Mi all a wonder if Suazo did play ...?

So you were questioning my match review?

Just two things I think some of us overlook or have a problem identifying and using to assess relative strengths of teams - (...and, thus reaching conclusions when making a judgement on strengths relative to third party - teams not being played - teams faulty).

When viewing matches.:-

1) Using past knowledge of "speed across ground" - player vs player. E.g. We have an idea of Beasley's speed. If we see him unable to out-run any of say, Panama's midfielder and or defenders. We then have relative idea of the speed of the Panama players in those positions.

If Beasely outruns our players and later we play Panama in Friendly Match and the Panama players do not outrun us...it may be sensible for us to assume the Panama players were taking it easy against us. That may even be re-inforced particularly if our "slower than Beasely players" out-run players Beasely could not outrun.



2) Technical competence e.g. accuracy of passes - short and long & frequency of use of the passes - thinking behind the passes (some passes are bone-head passes and therefore not in interest of team, other passes are sensible passes...aid team e.g retention of possession, open avenues for defending or for attacking, make for easier scoring opportunities, etc., etc.)...; use of technical individual "on ball" skills particualrly in tight "confined" areas - observation of frequency ball "runs away" from player (and number of players on team with such a "ball running away" problem -effect on team - i.e. give aways to opponents)

3) How players play off and coordinate with each other.
An example could be a long ball from opponents goalkeeper to the head of one of our defenders - I would be looking to see what our supporting players are doing while the ball is in flight. If the players have had i) long periods of playing together and or ii ) are advanced in understanding of the game - While the ball is on its way to the defender it would be observed i) a moving into...away from our defender...position (positions - from a number of players) for receipt of "headed pass - outlet pass"...or, taking up support defensive positions. Circumstances - pressure and position relative to play) dictating whether attacking positions or defensive positions are assumed. In any case action by players away from play MUST occur to either aid "springing of an attack" or "solidifying defence"...or possible retention of ball.

When TEAM has not yet been made players on same team appear uncertain and or stand around as they have not a clue what to expect of TEAMmate to whom ball is about to meet head and no clue on what will be movement of other teammates not involved in heading the ball.

Against Switzerland, Panama and Chile it could be clearly seen that we had a problem with TEAM...excepting when we had possession of the ball at the back AND THERE WAS NO PRESSURE ON BALL OR ON OUR PLAYERS. In those no pressure situations...*the pressure requiring quick thinking was minimal and the requiring of quick action was non-existent. The demand on technical ability was low. To the casual eye we appeared "good".

In contrast whenever quick thinking, quick action and demand for display of high technical skill was crucial during high pressure situations we looked slow (of thought and movement) and were mistake prone.

Let's chose one area - ATTACKS on or around the opponents penalty-area - Our attacks too often broke down! Our passing sequence was often disrupted by a wayward pass or failure to provide support passing outlets.

...and, in the PENALTY-AREA and on or about the edge of the PENALTY-AREA when we actually got there we either a) failed to take our shots - making one pass too many or a bad pass or ii) failing to make the sensible play - e.g. shooting from "impossible angles" when say, a rolling of the ball across and behind the opponents 'keeper and or other defenders would have opened play for a "tap-in" or much clearer shot; or b) failing to make a diagonal pass to ensure comfortable run on to shoot by teammate...instead, passing the ball either behind or directly at teamate...or, making no pass at all.

A look at the Switzerland match, in particular the time just before through to just after the scoring of their goals would show swift movement of players and ball. Our team from the Lunar Cup series of matches through to the Chile match never ever showed such swift movement of ball or players. We have appeared slow - both of thought and physical action. We did not from the get-go and up to the Chile match have not shown TEAM! The reports on the matches in Asia - Should we also consider the FIFA Rankings of those TEAMs? - seem to suggest we are still far from TEAM. - Farther from TEAM than even we thought?

*Those situations also require a constant looking out for opportunities to exploit i.e. quick thinking, but, the appearance was our REGGAE BOYZ...I should have said, "Bora's Pupils" haven't attended the classes dealing with that yet

[Lazie]

Stap with the revisionist history and cut the crap.. no professional team takes it easy with a 1-0 advantage early in a game especially against a team that CLEARLY demonstrates and ability to threaten your goal...

Dun di folly argument.

Funny, is Ecuador a professional team? Well didn't they duh the same thing being up 1-0 and 2-1? You can categorize it as folly argument if you want, the reality is Chile was tekking it easy. Watching the game last evening proves my point.

[Muadib]

So you were questioning my match review?

Just two things I think some of us overlook or have a problem identifying and using to assess relative strengths of teams - (...and, thus reaching conclusions when making a judgement on strengths relative to third party - teams not being played - teams faulty).

When viewing matches.:-

1) Using past knowledge of "speed across ground" - player vs player. E.g. We have an idea of Beasley's speed. If we see him unable to out-run any of say, Panama's midfielder and or defenders. We then have relative idea of the speed of the Panama players in those positions.

If Beasely outruns our players and later we play Panama in Friendly Match and the Panama players do not outrun us...it may be sensible for us to assume the Panama players were taking it easy against us. That may even be re-inforced particularly if our "slower than Beasely players" out-run players Beasely could not outrun.



2) Technical competence e.g. accuracy of passes - short and long & frequency of use of the passes - thinking behind the passes (some passes are bone-head passes and therefore not in interest of team, other passes are sensible passes...aid team e.g retention of possession, open avenues for defending or for attacking, make for easier scoring opportunities, etc., etc.)...; use of technical individual "on ball" skills particualrly in tight "confined" areas - observation of frequency ball "runs away" from player (and number of players on team with such a "ball running away" problem -effect on team - i.e. give aways to opponents)

3) How players play off and coordinate with each other.
An example could be a long ball from opponents goalkeeper to the head of one of our defenders - I would be looking to see what our supporting players are doing while the ball is in flight. If the players have had i) long periods of playing together and or ii ) are advanced in understanding of the game - While the ball is on its way to the defender it would be observed i) a moving into...away from our defender...position (positions - from a number of players) for receipt of "headed pass - outlet pass"...or, taking up support defensive positions. Circumstances - pressure and position relative to play) dictating whether attacking positions or defensive positions are assumed. In any case action by players away from play MUST occur to either aid "springing of an attack" or "solidifying defence"...or possible retention of ball.

When TEAM has not yet been made players on same team appear uncertain and or stand around as they have not a clue what to expect of TEAMmate to whom ball is about to meet head and no clue on what will be movement of other teammates not involved in heading the ball.

Against Switzerland, Panama and Chile it could be clearly seen that we had a problem with TEAM...excepting when we had possession of the ball at the back AND THERE WAS NO PRESSURE ON BALL OR ON OUR PLAYERS. In those no pressure situations...the pressure requiring quick thinking was minimal and the requiring of quick action was non-existent. The demand on technical ability was low. To the casual eye we appeared "good".

In contrast whenever quick thinking, quick action and demand for display of high technical skill was crucial during high pressure situations we looked slow (of thought and movement) and were mistake prone.

Let's chose one area - ATTACKS on or around the opponents penalty-area - Our attacks too often broke down! Our passing sequence was often disrupted by a wayward pass or failure to provide support passing outlets.

...and, in the PENALTY-AREA and on or about the edge of the PENALTY-AREA when we actually got there we either a) failed to take our shots - making one pass too many or a bad pass or ii) failing to make the sensible play - e.g. shooting from "impossible angles" when say, a rolling of the ball across and behind the opponents 'keeper and or other defenders would have opened play for a "tap-in" or much clearer shot; or b) failing to make a diagonal pass to ensure comfortable run on to shoot by teammate...instead, passing the ball either behind or directly at teamate...or, making no pass at all.

A look at the Switzerland match, in particular the time just before through to just after the scoring of their goals would show swift movement of players and ball. Our team from the Lunar Cup series of matches through to the Chile match never ever showed such swift movement of ball or players. We have appeared slow - both of thought and physical action. We did not from the get-go and up to the Chile match have not shown TEAM! The reports on the matches in Asia - Should we also consider the FIFA Rankings of those TEAMs? - seem to suggest we are still far from TEAM. - Farther from TEAM than even we thought?

The First Half against Chile the Reggaeboyz looked cohesive and created several legitimate goal scoring opportunities. The shape of the team was good. Very good display by the Local boyz. Definite improvement over the what is normally on display by local contingent especially against a strong opponent. Left the game satisfied with the level of play although the second half was less cohesive.. I suspect the 8 substitutions contributed to that...

[Muadib]

Funny, is Ecuador a professional team? Well didn't they duh the same thing being up 1-0 and 2-1? You can categorize it as folly argument if you want, the reality is Chile was tekking it easy. Watching the game last evening proves my point.

Wrong.. you watching the game cannot prove your point.

No team plays the same in friendlies as they do in FIFA Competitions.. that includes Jamaica...

The attitude of the players, coaches and bench in the Chile game was far from 'taking it easy'

Stap di folly argument.

[Mosiah]

What would be the basis?!?! Erm...Copa America round di cahnah?!?!

Just a guess.