Starter? Poor Sinc isn't even an impact sub at this point.
I think Ken ran them out in some sort of weird formation in the Seattle Cup tie, that sort of morphed from a 3-4-3 to a 3-5-2 and occasionally looked very 4-4-2-ish. But not since Parsons, really, and even then he didn't use it much. RW and Norris didn't, at all; Wilkinson going f…
Starter? Poor Sinc isn't even an impact sub at this point.
I think Ken ran them out in some sort of weird formation in the Seattle Cup tie, that sort of morphed from a 3-4-3 to a 3-5-2 and occasionally looked very 4-4-2-ish. But not since Parsons, really, and even then he didn't use it much. RW and Norris didn't, at all; Wilkinson going from 3-5-2 to 4-2-3-1 (mostly) and Norris never straying from the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1.
Reality is she shouldn’t even be a backup at this stage. She’s a team leader who would be better off taking Rob’s old slot as a coach than be on the field at this stage of her career. She still does something’s well, but the pace has lapped her.
The problem isn't even whether she does anything well (she does). The problem is that her presence on the field changes the game in ways that mostly negate the strengths of the other players. The team has the skill and pace to give opposing defenses fits, but having to constantly slow down and wait takes away the transition game and throws everyone's rhythm off.
Totally agree. Between Weaver, Smith, and Turner … they will have three burners out there with Linnehan also high up on that skill set. Add Sugita and Fleming with plus athleticism, they really could do a lot of their coach just acknowledged that Sincy probably doesn’t warrant playing now
That is a good summation of what I was trying to say (at least in part). We could say that she does some things well, but not the things the team needs. Perhaps if Sinclair buried a header off of a corner kick once every game, then I'd say, "OK. Let everyone else be fast and excellent on the ball." But she's no longer that kind of player (if she ever was a fantastic set piece header a'la' Wambach.)
Starter? Poor Sinc isn't even an impact sub at this point.
I think Ken ran them out in some sort of weird formation in the Seattle Cup tie, that sort of morphed from a 3-4-3 to a 3-5-2 and occasionally looked very 4-4-2-ish. But not since Parsons, really, and even then he didn't use it much. RW and Norris didn't, at all; Wilkinson going from 3-5-2 to 4-2-3-1 (mostly) and Norris never straying from the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1.
Reality is she shouldn’t even be a backup at this stage. She’s a team leader who would be better off taking Rob’s old slot as a coach than be on the field at this stage of her career. She still does something’s well, but the pace has lapped her.
The problem isn't even whether she does anything well (she does). The problem is that her presence on the field changes the game in ways that mostly negate the strengths of the other players. The team has the skill and pace to give opposing defenses fits, but having to constantly slow down and wait takes away the transition game and throws everyone's rhythm off.
Totally agree. Between Weaver, Smith, and Turner … they will have three burners out there with Linnehan also high up on that skill set. Add Sugita and Fleming with plus athleticism, they really could do a lot of their coach just acknowledged that Sincy probably doesn’t warrant playing now
Think we have to see what the lineup is in a week or so. Ultimately you don't make the move to get Spaanstra and Turner to have both of them sit.
That is a good summation of what I was trying to say (at least in part). We could say that she does some things well, but not the things the team needs. Perhaps if Sinclair buried a header off of a corner kick once every game, then I'd say, "OK. Let everyone else be fast and excellent on the ball." But she's no longer that kind of player (if she ever was a fantastic set piece header a'la' Wambach.)