A lot of narrative on this site and others is that Phil gets blamed for playing a high line, and because of that, it's not necessarily Zac's fault that he gets beat. I really don't get that. If you can't play a high line, what can you play? If the team were down in the other team's final third, what do you tell Zac, stay back on our own 18? Not being able to defend a ball over the top is like picking an outfielder who can't catch a fly, but you pick him to play because he has a great arm. Surman dealt with balls over the top all game long. This is the third time in four games this has happened to Zac. It's not tactics; it's just a fundamental thing that he is not good at, and it is costing the team every game. Sorry to be harsh here, but it boggles my mind. It's ok Zac, you can make a mistake, because we'll try you in there again.
If you can't play a high line, what can you play?" A low block. A mid block. A high line with fullbacks that stay home. A high line with a sweeper keeper. A high line with a central midfielder / 6 with some height and speed to put out fires. For a coach that doesn't keep utilizing tactics that don't work.
Surman might be faster than McGraw? I don't know. But the problem with the high line goes beyond McGraw. We've had the same problem with all of our CBs whenever we try it. Kamal Miller got burned similarly recently. So did Ortiz in midfield.
It is fundamentally a thing that McGraw is not good at, in the sense that he's physically not fast enough to do it. If it were a skill issue, I think he'd work at it. It also wouldn't come up with (nearly?) every other player. Regardless of why he's not good at it, why does Neville keep forcing it on him if he's not good at it? Why did they re-sign McGraw to another contract (not last offseason but last summer, just waiting to announce it in the offseason to distract us from the Evander debacle)?
Yeah, McGraw isn't perfect. He has limitations and sometimes has mental lapses. But the fucking coach should play tactics that fit the players he has. Also, a player is more likely to make mistakes when they are put in difficult to impossible situations. In addition to the high line, our attack doesn't press, our midfield doesn't close passing lanes, our keeper doesn't sweep, and our fullbacks don't always track back to defend, leaving a lot of space for the centerbacks to cover while our opponents have more time and space on the ball.
And who is Neville going to put in McGraw's place? Araujo is in visa purgatory, Zuparic is in the doghouse, Smith is technically a fullback, Eric Miller is a fullback and Mosquera is out, Kamal is slow and has poor judgment.
It is tactics AND the personnel. But the tactics should fit the personnel. To the extent that the personnel is a problem, you bring in new players. but Neville agreed to sign a contract extension for McGraw and he brought in Kamal Miller. Zuparic has been stuck here against his will for who knows how long. At least McGraw isn't a dickhead, as far as I know. He's not blaming anyone else, as far as I know.
"But the fucking coach should play tactics that fit the players he has. Also, a player is more likely to make mistakes when they are put in difficult to impossible situations."
So very much this. Always this.
"It is tactics AND the personnel. But the tactics should fit the personnel."
If a coach doesn't have the guys to play the coach prefers to play, the coach needs to tweak the way he plays to fit the guys he has. Phil doesn't do that, particularly in defense, and that's a huge problem.
I fully blame Ridgewell for a lot of the defensive problems as well, since he said in a podcast on this very site last season that he is fully responsible for the defense. Both he and Phil need to go. This isn't new.
Mo Edu made a great point on the LA goal. The defender has to see that there is no pressure on the pass and should be high tailing it towards his own goal before the pass is made. So it's not about speed or athleticism, it's about anticipation. The first 10 yards is between your ears. I'm sure Neville is coaching this. It's not complicated.
I have seen no evidence, over his season-plus here, that he is, except that he constantly says something about vibes. But if he is coaching that, either he has a unique collection of all the dumbest defenders in MLS history under one roof, or maybe...he's just not good at imparting a message and making it stick. Which is a huge problem.
Possibly I guess, but I think it's more likely that he has some players who have difficulty maintaining focus for 90+ minutes. They aren't dumb. They just don't stay switched on.
It's the coach's job to train them to maintain that focus, though, is it not? That's what training is for. That's what a coach is supposed to do. And if he can't, he either needs to get better players (and not re-sign the ones who can't absorb his coaching, which is what happened) or, not to sound like a broken record, coach better.
It is to a point, but it's not like good affordable defenders are growing on trees. Sometimes coach just has to work with what he's got. Can the coach just go out and "get better players" on his own?
Or the back line could effectively run an offside trap so they don’t have to high tail it all the time. It’s wild how we are relatively static in our first two lines, to the point that we don’t step to the ball, move into space to create opportunities to receive passes, move to block passing lanes, press, etc. but our back line is rarely well-organized. Some of that is 100% mental and players need to hold up their end. I can see Surman trying to lead out there at least.
But I agree with RCTeyeDee, in that Neville doesn’t seem like he’s working on the right things or even recognizes the problems. If the problem is the mentality of the players or talent, well, he signed off on McGraw’s renewal and brought in Kamal.
Anticipation and speed or athleticism aren’t mutually exclusive. There are other mental aspects as well but, as I mentioned elsewhere, a high line gives players less time to think. It compresses the field both ways. You’d also think Neville could anticipate that our high line and slow defenders would lead to more balls over the top, especially since he’s acknowledged it happening repeatedly, yet he makes no adjustments. He’s also talked about the need for repetition to ingrain some things in players but he constantly rotates players as punishment for mistakes, so they don’t get those reps. I’m not going to look up how many different back lines or center back pairings we used last year but you can if you want. I acknowledge that we’ve had injuries and international call ups as well.
I wonder if Neville has actually studied teams that are successful, which have a style of play that he likes, profiled their players, and tried to model us after them. I believe he knows how he wants the team to play but there appears to be a disconnect between how models teams achieve that and the types of players we bring in and retain.
It doesn't matter where the line is, if a guy is going by you and you can't recognize it and deal with it, you need to sit down. I'm singling out Zac here, and not the others, because the rest of them I have faith in.
His resigning was a head scratcher for me. That's a Ned and Phil boondoggle.
It’s not just the high line. It’s the lack of off the ball movement that allows the opportunity for the pass to begin with. It’s the lack of a sweeper keeper. It’s not having a central mid to drop into the gap between the CBs when they are pulled wide to cover space in behind the fullbacks when they don’t track back to defend. It’s such a systemic and structural thing. McGraw got re-signed because he’s good with the right system. Neville just isn’t smart enough to recognize the disconnect, or he’s stubborn, or he also thinks magic can defeat time and space. Maybe all of the above. I don’t know why you have more faith in anyone else than McGraw when they’ve had the same problems. But you’re missing the forest for the trees anyway, so it doesn’t matter if you were singling one of them out or has faith in them all equally.
Yes, I am singling out Zac. A single player can make all the difference. The midfield played pretty well due to the absence of one player this weekend, for example. The CBs definitely can be ranked, and they have their strengths and weaknesses. I happen to think that Zac's performances often get overlooked due to a "systemic issue" when it's really an individual issue. If there is a tree that is diseased, you don't cut down the whole forest.
Exactly. All the points you made are obvious to anyone that knows ball. Been saying the same things about this team for years. Passing lanes. Pressing. Movement. All has been terrible from a tactical standpoint
There are rumors that he's wanted out for years. He posted something on Instagram the other day that seemed to imply that he's been healthy and ready to play but isn't given the chance. Charitably, another interpretation is that he wants to play and help the team but he's been injured. Officially, he's been injured or questionable. I don't (fully) believe that. I feel somewhat validated in that he is no longer on the injury report but didn't even make the sub bench. Zuparic initially butted head with Gio and was benched for his dissent. He didn't have a great season last year, while McGraw looked improved. Kamal Miller was brought in to play Zuparic's spot. Some might say Neville wanted to switch to a back three, which would have made some sense given that's how Kamal and Araujo have played for their national teams, but Neville's now been on record a few times about his intention to play a back 4. So, my take is a combination of being replaced by an inferior player combined with criticism of lack of playing time (and possibly shitty tactics) has pushed Zuparic out of the picture.
It’s likely I’m thinking of the year before. He was down, McGraw was up. Zuparic was definitely better toward the end of last season. I think you’re right and I got my timeline mixed up.
Are you saying it's a bad narrative that Phil is at fault for playing a high line with Zac, knowing he can't play a high line? Somehow it is mcgraws fault for being played in a way that doesn't fit his strengths?
I guess every coach in the world that requests new players that "fit their system" needs to go back to coaching school because all players should be plug and play in any system.
Kinda sounds like you are just shilling and trying to control the narrative around Phil yourself
No, i remember one touch, definitely not me. I guess I was being too cute there. I blame Phil for putting in Zac when he clearly can't play. The backline was doing fine all game, and then within what, a few minutes of Zac coming in, ball over the top and bingo - goal. Yes, Zac is slow, but his big failing is he is slow to react, and also slow to anticipate. My point is why have a CB who can only play in his own 18. Kavalier above is talking about all kinds of schemes to protect a CB who has to be covered. That just sounds ludicrous. Kamal, who is not fleet, made a nice recovery run and tackle on Pec, I believe, in the second half, and Surman dealt with balls over the top several times. Zup can too. I have faith in those three to do a good job and play a style that Phil wants.
I think he made some very good points. The things he was talking about are the mid game adjustments coaches are payed the big money to make. You have to be able to look at your squad and adjust. The minute Miller came out (because of injury) they should have changed the formation and tactics to a mid block or low block and protect the lead.
Especially after removing da Costa. Our offense was dwindling and we were under a lot of pressure. the smart thing to do would have been to change formation and tactics to sit deep and hit on the counter. Probably switching to a 4-4-2. This way we could shrink the field and eliminate the channels, while simultaneously forcing LA to whip in crosses. the one thing mcgraw is excellent at defending. LA was pushing so high to find the equalizer. So catch them high and hit them with a direct ball between the lines or over the top. It's soccer 101 and something even Phil should know. But Phil reminds me of watching Jesse march at leeds. He was so stuck to HIS SYSTEM that he was unwilling to make adjustments. Even to the detriment of bad results.
The mark of a good coach is making adjustments that lead to positive results. I don't see that from Phil. Let alone a team cohesiveness that shows they know how to play a particular way at a high level. We had 3 shots in the first half. Despite that most would agree it was one of our best half's this year. I honestly do think this team would be a lot better under a different coach. I would get Jim curtin in a heart beat if we aren't gonna spend big on proven quality
Did you miss the first two minutes when Kamal almost gave up another PK? I don’t think the backline was fine all game. LAG is also riddled with injuries. Did you miss previous games when Kamal got red-carded because he couldn’t match an attacker for speed (yeah, someone else blew their coverage or kept their man inside)? For the umpteenth time, this isn’t a problem unique to this season or any one or two players. And the problem with balls over the top starts farther up the pitch when the passer has too much time on the ball, we get dispossessed, we don’t close passing lanes, etc. It’s a whole team structural problem.
Also, don’t misunderstand me with respect to McGraw. You’re reading way too much into that. I don’t want to play a low block. I don’t want to have any of our CBs be slow, use poor judgment, or not be technical enough with the ball at their feet. What we have is what we have though, so I’m just trying to think of what Neville can do to make the best use of what we have. We don’t have CBs that are appreciably faster, with better judgment, or better dribbling and passing. Some are better at one or two of those things but sacrifice something else, like ability to win headers. Not judging Surman yet. All things being equal, I’d probably start him and Zuparic in a mid block. If Araujo was back, he might give Surman some competition. Whatever, I’m not going to create a spreadsheet and break down all of their plus and minus attributes. The point is Phil collaborated with the scouts and GM to sign or re-sign at least 2 or 3 of our CBs that don’t fit what he’s trying to do.
Did Kamal's error result in a goal? Against Vancouver, did Kamal not try and cover for Zac, who admittedly said his job was to shadow Brian White and then got beat over the top? Yes, I agree with you in that there should be more pressure on passes. It's just that CBs need to be able to win balls over the top. And we shouldn't have to worry about that. I disagree when you say that the CBs are slow and bad at soccer and don't fit Phil's style of play. There really is only one who fits that description. Yes, best pairing I would also agree with Surman and Zuparic, followed by E. Miller and then Araujo.
I didn’t say our CBs are bad at soccer. I’ve said they’re good players who have a bad coach. They can at least point to success elsewhere. Neville has no track record of success. I’ve talked about the rest of this elsewhere and am not going to repeat myself again. I just replied to another of your comments to the effect that you’re missing the forest for the trees. We are talking past each other because we fundamentally are talking about different things. You seem to think upgrading McGraw with a player with a different brain will fix our problems. My argument is that our problems are with Neville’s brain and the shared physical limitations and tendencies among any of our available CBs with respect to certain tactics. If you don’t think speed or being able to dribble well, among other things I’ve mentioned, are assets when playing a high line especially, I do not know how to go about persuading you without doing more work than I can or will right now. So, agree to disagree and see how all this plays out.
This was positive progress from a team that is still creating its identity. Best midfield performance of the season. I remain optimistic #onwardRoseCity
So, is it a positive progress a draw against a team that has a porous defense (playing at home, nevertheless) and lost their previous games? Neville is an inept coach with a dubious past experience. I have little faith this team will go too far, based on last year and YTD performance. Long gone are the torrid seasons we've had with Potter and the reliable team work we've had back then. This is the worst-case scenario we've had, even compared with Spencer at the helm.
I take the first half as progress. But then that progress was all but erased in the second half, even before the non-penalty controversy, when the Timbers reverted to their old ways of not knowing what they wanted to do at any given time. I don't know why that happens, because if anything that first half should have given them confidence to build on, but instead they came out looking tentative and let LA take the game to them, and gifted them their first point of the season in a game the Timbers looked well in control of for the first 40ish minutes or so.
So I'm not sure I do put this in the "progress" bucket? Partial credit, maybe?
They did! And then what happened? The Timbers became super conservative, stopped playing for the win, and started playing not to lose. They should have kept their foot on the gas against a bad team and put the game to bed. They didn't. That's a problem.
If we're going to park the bus, park the bus. Whether he starts or subs, McGraw shouldn't be part of a high line. He's got plenty of other skills but he doesn't have the speed for that. Neville keeps setting him up to fail though. In fairness to McGraw, I don't think any of the other CBs have the pace either. I'm reserving judgment on Surman because I don't have enough info yet, but Araujo, Zuparic, and Kamal aren't cut out for a high line either. Even if the problem really is mentality and not physical limitations, we haven't played the same backline consistently enough for chemistry to develop and Surman looks like the only CB trying to lead or organize. Obviously, I can't hear what any of the field players or the goalkeeper are saying, but I see Surman's body language and gestures, and he's the only CB that looks like they know what an offside trap is.
I don’t expect CBs to as fast as the best attackers but they need to be faster than ours to play a high line, which also doesn’t give them as much time to think.
Wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up first. Until we can sell/trade some players, Neville recognizes and corrects the problems, or we get a new coach, thoughts and prayers.
His aerial ability is one of his primary assets for sure, especially if we expect a lot of set pieces, so we should probably effectively utilize that instead of playing in such a way that underscores his limitations.
Soccer really is simple. It's a collection of patterns. Patterns in movement, passing, pressing, Formations, tactics, and player profiles. It's so simple to see and yet it feels like Phil over thinks it.
When the opposition is playing out of the back, the Timbers should press as a unit to create turnovers high up the field.
If the press breaks down in the oppositions half, the Timbers track back and set up in a mid to low block. Play compact and look to play direct on a counter attack.
If we move into the oppositions half and are maintaining possession but are struggling to break down their low block, the Timbers need to have patterns of movement with overlapping runs and dummy runs to pull defenders out of space and create gaps to create chances.
(Something the Timbers have never been able to do. They always just rely on dumping in pointless crosses with one of the smallest lineups in the league)
If the Timbers drill the shit out of these tactics in those situations, this team would drastically improve. It wouldn't matter how the other team plays. It would only matter what situation is unfolding. If that makes sense. Then it solely becomes about the quality of players on the field to execute in those situations.
Im not good at eloquently putting into words how I see the game. I over simplify too much in description. But that's as simple as I can describe how I see the game.
1) Possession around the box. Patterns of movement.
2) opposition playing out of the back. Pressing as a unit in a quasi man marking system.
3) pressing break down. Mid to low block depending on the pressure being applied.
4) If the opposition is over committing (like we do so often) look to play direct on a quick counter. Be it over the top or through the lines.
5) if they are not over committing. Look to move the ball up field and pin them back, which then leads to 1) or look for line breaking passes which leads to going direct. Playing into spaces between the lines.
The way you set the team up (formation) depends on the player profiles you have. Would i try to press in a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 with a slow back 3. He'll no. Would i with a young athletic back 3. Yes. As long as the rest of the team can press as a unit.
Would I press the opposition playing out of the back in a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 (which fits our roster best) with a slower CB pairing. Yes.
I hope this makes sense. Tactics in certain situations are always the same. The formation you use to implement the tactics are based on the strengths of the players. Certain formations benefit certain player profiles.
NO TIMBERS TEAM HAS EVER PLAYED THIS WAY. I have been waiting a long time to finally see a coach implement this style of play. This identity in the team. Still waiting. I guarantee if the Timbers play this way in these situations and in a formation that fits the players, we would be a contender. Even with the quality of players we have now.
it's not an all out press. (Bielsa)
It's not tiki-taka. (Pep barca days)
It's not counter ball. (Jose Morinho)
It's a system that uses the best of those systems, in the situations those systems work best.
Lol if only a pro level coaching license wasn't so expensive. 🤣
I also have my own ideas when it comes to player development.
All youth players from age 5 to 9 should be in futsol leagues only.
From ages 10 to 13 should be outdoor leagues with mixed futsol training.
14 to 18 club leagues with classroom training on tactics of the game. Nutrution and physical development. The more they understand the game, the higher the soccer IQ they will have. The quicker they can see the game.
If MP were smart he would set up coaching facilities all around Oregon. Create a timbers development league at all levels and make it cheap. (My niece plays club soccer and it costs $3500.00 a year. That's insane)
The problem with T2 and academy players is that
1) timbers are getting players that have been developed in many different ways from many different level of coaches. Some just being parents that have no clue how to develop a player. This leaves kids far behind where they should be in their development.
2) if they can't find high level players in the Oregon market (most likely because they haven't been properly developed) then this means portland have to rely on scouting of young players around the world where they
A) don't get to see the day to day training of the player.
B) are relying on other scouts to give them an accurate evaluation of a player.
C) don't know how the player will handle being away. from their family and country.
D) will have a player that hasn't been trained to the identity and culture of the club.
This is how you develop world class players. It is not about market size. Geographical location. That has nothing to do with how a player develops. Portland is larger than most Spanish, Brazilian, German towns but somehow those countries develop world class players. It's about development.
I would also make sure to regularly have younger teams play older teams in scrimmage games. Leo messi used to play against kids twice his age. It forced him to see the game differently. He was never going to win a physical battle with an adult. It's why he has an extremely high soccer IQ.
For me the game changed when Neville pulled DaCosta. Of course there may have been a good reason to pull him such as cramping or other knock which I don't know. Otherwise he's a designated player for a reason and should be out there. I cannot think of more disastrous subs as in this game.
Totally agree on how the game changed once Da Costa left the game. It really seems like he is a two way player, providing defense and offense. While he doesn't provide the offense of Evander, he does work on defense and impacts the game more consistently that way. I have to assume that the coaches saw something and felt it was time for him to come out. There does have to be some management of minutes, even from a young player. I suspect he will be closer to a 90 minute player as the season moves on, but just may not be there right now.
"I suspect he will be closer to a 90 minute player as the season moves on, but just may not be there right now."
To me, that just speaks of a shortcoming of the training staff or lack of a plan, either or both of which are bad. Isn't that what preseason is for? He didn't arrive late, he didn't arrive injured; he had some green card delays, but he was able to train while those were happening. He's a DP. He should be 90 minute fit and ready to go from minute one of game one.
The late call on the Paredes foul is so confusing. Can a referee just decide to reverse a call they have already made? For a few seconds I thought we were going to get a PK and a red card on the Galaxy for the after foul fracas, but then the referee decides to just wave off what he'd already called and give a goal kick to the Galaxy. Seriously? Did VAR overrule his original call? I don't get it.
Apparently ref applied the Advantage rule and allowed play to continue. Where I get lost is since why does that mean you don’t call it if the advantage comes to nothing?
The ref is covering his ass with that makes-my-head explode explanation. Lassiter shot a second or two after the foul. What was he supposed to do, not touch the ball? How would he have known for sure that a foul had been called? And a random shot in the box is not an advantage exceeding the value of a PK.
I highly doubt PRO or MLS will cite a precedent for such a decision. I very much doubt there is one.
But I saw his arms well. He did not signal play on, he signaled a foul. And yes, the fact that one second after the original foul nothing came of it makes it even more confusing.
That one needs some explanation, which we know will never happen.
How freaking fun was it to see Moreno and Da Costa on the field together? I have not seen Moreno play that well in a good while, and that’s crazy for his first start of the year coming back from injury. I had some worries about how similar players him and Da Costa are, but it seems to amplify both of their strengths. They occupy like to spaces anywhere under the striker and through the midfield, and they pass and move SO well. And it seems since they understand each other’s play style (again, they’re like basically the same player), they’re really great at combining with each other, especially in the final third. Which is great news for a team that often doesn’t have a lot of patterns of play in the final third besides relying on individual talent. They were just so much fun
I thought Surman was excellent. Seems like him, his national team, and our coaching staff decided it would be best for him to stay here since it gives him the opportunity to really lock down that starting spot, which would be huge. He didn’t make a single mistake that I remember, and lots of really good headed clearances and interceptions (very McGraw-like, but without the slowness).
Chara was also awesome. Can’t believe he’s still got it. Managing his minutes and keeping him fresh will be a huge asset to us later in the year.
This young team is going to struggle in the road. Not looking forward to this next stretch where 5 of 7 are on the road
I'm not sure how many 90 minute Peak Chara starts we can count on from Chara this season, but Sunday was a masterclass in what he can still bring. Hopefully he won't be leaned on to do that week in week out, they've done a good job managing him so far and I hope they don't fall into the "he was great Sunday, let's just keep doing that!" trap and that they stick to whatever plan they've got for him.
"This young team is going to struggle in the road. Not looking forward to this next stretch where 5 of 7 are on the road"
Given that MLS is a much more difficult league away from home at the best of times, absolutely. And the Timbers don't make it easy on themselves, but their slowly improving defense at least might keep them somewhat competitive as their offense tries to figure things out and waits for J. Rodriguez to get back.
"So maybe we just don’t invest in VAR and give that money to charity."
I do not like Phil Neville, I want him gone, but credit where it's due, that is an A+ comment.
That game...hmmm. The first half looked really promising! Timbers actually looked somewhat coherent, the midfield wasn't wasting the ball with horrible passes, and they looked intentional in their movements. I'm not sure what happened at half time, but wow the second half was different. And why Phil decided to sub out da Costa when the Timbers were creating well through him and really needed another goal is definitely a headscratcher.
Yeah, why pull da Costa and Mora, when they’re our quality players up front, just combined for a goal, and we needed another? The subs made no sense. And why does the team go cold and cede possession to the Galaxy after scoring? An equalizer looked inevitable after they took control. Senseless!
I was at the game. The LA goal sure looked like off side both in live time and replay. The ref's explanation for not calling for a penalty kick against LA was ridiculous. I thought our D looked pretty good as did Jimmy Pants. Why still no Bravo? He was always the straw that stirred the Timbers drink. Anthony isn't starter quality IMO. I'd rather see more of Kelsey.
Apparently Neville doesn't like Bravo? I've heard that but it's not like Phil's said it outright, as far as I know. Bravo has been injured a lot and sometimes his recklessness causes problems too close to our box, or he goes to ground higher up the pitch and can't get up and track back in time to help our slow centerbacks recover. I like Bravo and think he's pretty good when healthy, but he's not in a good situation here right now.
The terrible call is going to overshadow the poor play in the second half. Probably one of the worst calls I've seen in a while. Still don't see this team being a contender or even a playoff team.
Great first half. They looked like a normal MLS team, combining and looking organized on defense and generally controlling things. Second half, they did take the lead, but despite some desperation by LA, were still keeping them at bay. One sub later, and a costly one, and got beat over the top. Shoulda been 2-0.
A lot of narrative on this site and others is that Phil gets blamed for playing a high line, and because of that, it's not necessarily Zac's fault that he gets beat. I really don't get that. If you can't play a high line, what can you play? If the team were down in the other team's final third, what do you tell Zac, stay back on our own 18? Not being able to defend a ball over the top is like picking an outfielder who can't catch a fly, but you pick him to play because he has a great arm. Surman dealt with balls over the top all game long. This is the third time in four games this has happened to Zac. It's not tactics; it's just a fundamental thing that he is not good at, and it is costing the team every game. Sorry to be harsh here, but it boggles my mind. It's ok Zac, you can make a mistake, because we'll try you in there again.
If you can't play a high line, what can you play?" A low block. A mid block. A high line with fullbacks that stay home. A high line with a sweeper keeper. A high line with a central midfielder / 6 with some height and speed to put out fires. For a coach that doesn't keep utilizing tactics that don't work.
Surman might be faster than McGraw? I don't know. But the problem with the high line goes beyond McGraw. We've had the same problem with all of our CBs whenever we try it. Kamal Miller got burned similarly recently. So did Ortiz in midfield.
It is fundamentally a thing that McGraw is not good at, in the sense that he's physically not fast enough to do it. If it were a skill issue, I think he'd work at it. It also wouldn't come up with (nearly?) every other player. Regardless of why he's not good at it, why does Neville keep forcing it on him if he's not good at it? Why did they re-sign McGraw to another contract (not last offseason but last summer, just waiting to announce it in the offseason to distract us from the Evander debacle)?
Yeah, McGraw isn't perfect. He has limitations and sometimes has mental lapses. But the fucking coach should play tactics that fit the players he has. Also, a player is more likely to make mistakes when they are put in difficult to impossible situations. In addition to the high line, our attack doesn't press, our midfield doesn't close passing lanes, our keeper doesn't sweep, and our fullbacks don't always track back to defend, leaving a lot of space for the centerbacks to cover while our opponents have more time and space on the ball.
And who is Neville going to put in McGraw's place? Araujo is in visa purgatory, Zuparic is in the doghouse, Smith is technically a fullback, Eric Miller is a fullback and Mosquera is out, Kamal is slow and has poor judgment.
It is tactics AND the personnel. But the tactics should fit the personnel. To the extent that the personnel is a problem, you bring in new players. but Neville agreed to sign a contract extension for McGraw and he brought in Kamal Miller. Zuparic has been stuck here against his will for who knows how long. At least McGraw isn't a dickhead, as far as I know. He's not blaming anyone else, as far as I know.
"But the fucking coach should play tactics that fit the players he has. Also, a player is more likely to make mistakes when they are put in difficult to impossible situations."
So very much this. Always this.
"It is tactics AND the personnel. But the tactics should fit the personnel."
If a coach doesn't have the guys to play the coach prefers to play, the coach needs to tweak the way he plays to fit the guys he has. Phil doesn't do that, particularly in defense, and that's a huge problem.
i blame ridgy!
I fully blame Ridgewell for a lot of the defensive problems as well, since he said in a podcast on this very site last season that he is fully responsible for the defense. Both he and Phil need to go. This isn't new.
Mo Edu made a great point on the LA goal. The defender has to see that there is no pressure on the pass and should be high tailing it towards his own goal before the pass is made. So it's not about speed or athleticism, it's about anticipation. The first 10 yards is between your ears. I'm sure Neville is coaching this. It's not complicated.
"I'm sure Neville is coaching this"
I'm not.
I have seen no evidence, over his season-plus here, that he is, except that he constantly says something about vibes. But if he is coaching that, either he has a unique collection of all the dumbest defenders in MLS history under one roof, or maybe...he's just not good at imparting a message and making it stick. Which is a huge problem.
Possibly I guess, but I think it's more likely that he has some players who have difficulty maintaining focus for 90+ minutes. They aren't dumb. They just don't stay switched on.
if they can't stay "switched on" for 90+, then they're dumb.
It's the coach's job to train them to maintain that focus, though, is it not? That's what training is for. That's what a coach is supposed to do. And if he can't, he either needs to get better players (and not re-sign the ones who can't absorb his coaching, which is what happened) or, not to sound like a broken record, coach better.
It is to a point, but it's not like good affordable defenders are growing on trees. Sometimes coach just has to work with what he's got. Can the coach just go out and "get better players" on his own?
Or the back line could effectively run an offside trap so they don’t have to high tail it all the time. It’s wild how we are relatively static in our first two lines, to the point that we don’t step to the ball, move into space to create opportunities to receive passes, move to block passing lanes, press, etc. but our back line is rarely well-organized. Some of that is 100% mental and players need to hold up their end. I can see Surman trying to lead out there at least.
But I agree with RCTeyeDee, in that Neville doesn’t seem like he’s working on the right things or even recognizes the problems. If the problem is the mentality of the players or talent, well, he signed off on McGraw’s renewal and brought in Kamal.
Anticipation and speed or athleticism aren’t mutually exclusive. There are other mental aspects as well but, as I mentioned elsewhere, a high line gives players less time to think. It compresses the field both ways. You’d also think Neville could anticipate that our high line and slow defenders would lead to more balls over the top, especially since he’s acknowledged it happening repeatedly, yet he makes no adjustments. He’s also talked about the need for repetition to ingrain some things in players but he constantly rotates players as punishment for mistakes, so they don’t get those reps. I’m not going to look up how many different back lines or center back pairings we used last year but you can if you want. I acknowledge that we’ve had injuries and international call ups as well.
I wonder if Neville has actually studied teams that are successful, which have a style of play that he likes, profiled their players, and tried to model us after them. I believe he knows how he wants the team to play but there appears to be a disconnect between how models teams achieve that and the types of players we bring in and retain.
It doesn't matter where the line is, if a guy is going by you and you can't recognize it and deal with it, you need to sit down. I'm singling out Zac here, and not the others, because the rest of them I have faith in.
His resigning was a head scratcher for me. That's a Ned and Phil boondoggle.
It’s not just the high line. It’s the lack of off the ball movement that allows the opportunity for the pass to begin with. It’s the lack of a sweeper keeper. It’s not having a central mid to drop into the gap between the CBs when they are pulled wide to cover space in behind the fullbacks when they don’t track back to defend. It’s such a systemic and structural thing. McGraw got re-signed because he’s good with the right system. Neville just isn’t smart enough to recognize the disconnect, or he’s stubborn, or he also thinks magic can defeat time and space. Maybe all of the above. I don’t know why you have more faith in anyone else than McGraw when they’ve had the same problems. But you’re missing the forest for the trees anyway, so it doesn’t matter if you were singling one of them out or has faith in them all equally.
Yes, I am singling out Zac. A single player can make all the difference. The midfield played pretty well due to the absence of one player this weekend, for example. The CBs definitely can be ranked, and they have their strengths and weaknesses. I happen to think that Zac's performances often get overlooked due to a "systemic issue" when it's really an individual issue. If there is a tree that is diseased, you don't cut down the whole forest.
Exactly. All the points you made are obvious to anyone that knows ball. Been saying the same things about this team for years. Passing lanes. Pressing. Movement. All has been terrible from a tactical standpoint
What’s the deal with Zup being in the doghouse?
There are rumors that he's wanted out for years. He posted something on Instagram the other day that seemed to imply that he's been healthy and ready to play but isn't given the chance. Charitably, another interpretation is that he wants to play and help the team but he's been injured. Officially, he's been injured or questionable. I don't (fully) believe that. I feel somewhat validated in that he is no longer on the injury report but didn't even make the sub bench. Zuparic initially butted head with Gio and was benched for his dissent. He didn't have a great season last year, while McGraw looked improved. Kamal Miller was brought in to play Zuparic's spot. Some might say Neville wanted to switch to a back three, which would have made some sense given that's how Kamal and Araujo have played for their national teams, but Neville's now been on record a few times about his intention to play a back 4. So, my take is a combination of being replaced by an inferior player combined with criticism of lack of playing time (and possibly shitty tactics) has pushed Zuparic out of the picture.
I thought Zup was one of our better defenders last year, but what do I know lol
It’s likely I’m thinking of the year before. He was down, McGraw was up. Zuparic was definitely better toward the end of last season. I think you’re right and I got my timeline mixed up.
Onetouchpassing is that you?
Ummmmm.......I don't understand your comment.
Are you saying it's a bad narrative that Phil is at fault for playing a high line with Zac, knowing he can't play a high line? Somehow it is mcgraws fault for being played in a way that doesn't fit his strengths?
I guess every coach in the world that requests new players that "fit their system" needs to go back to coaching school because all players should be plug and play in any system.
Kinda sounds like you are just shilling and trying to control the narrative around Phil yourself
No, i remember one touch, definitely not me. I guess I was being too cute there. I blame Phil for putting in Zac when he clearly can't play. The backline was doing fine all game, and then within what, a few minutes of Zac coming in, ball over the top and bingo - goal. Yes, Zac is slow, but his big failing is he is slow to react, and also slow to anticipate. My point is why have a CB who can only play in his own 18. Kavalier above is talking about all kinds of schemes to protect a CB who has to be covered. That just sounds ludicrous. Kamal, who is not fleet, made a nice recovery run and tackle on Pec, I believe, in the second half, and Surman dealt with balls over the top several times. Zup can too. I have faith in those three to do a good job and play a style that Phil wants.
I think he made some very good points. The things he was talking about are the mid game adjustments coaches are payed the big money to make. You have to be able to look at your squad and adjust. The minute Miller came out (because of injury) they should have changed the formation and tactics to a mid block or low block and protect the lead.
Especially after removing da Costa. Our offense was dwindling and we were under a lot of pressure. the smart thing to do would have been to change formation and tactics to sit deep and hit on the counter. Probably switching to a 4-4-2. This way we could shrink the field and eliminate the channels, while simultaneously forcing LA to whip in crosses. the one thing mcgraw is excellent at defending. LA was pushing so high to find the equalizer. So catch them high and hit them with a direct ball between the lines or over the top. It's soccer 101 and something even Phil should know. But Phil reminds me of watching Jesse march at leeds. He was so stuck to HIS SYSTEM that he was unwilling to make adjustments. Even to the detriment of bad results.
The mark of a good coach is making adjustments that lead to positive results. I don't see that from Phil. Let alone a team cohesiveness that shows they know how to play a particular way at a high level. We had 3 shots in the first half. Despite that most would agree it was one of our best half's this year. I honestly do think this team would be a lot better under a different coach. I would get Jim curtin in a heart beat if we aren't gonna spend big on proven quality
Did you miss the first two minutes when Kamal almost gave up another PK? I don’t think the backline was fine all game. LAG is also riddled with injuries. Did you miss previous games when Kamal got red-carded because he couldn’t match an attacker for speed (yeah, someone else blew their coverage or kept their man inside)? For the umpteenth time, this isn’t a problem unique to this season or any one or two players. And the problem with balls over the top starts farther up the pitch when the passer has too much time on the ball, we get dispossessed, we don’t close passing lanes, etc. It’s a whole team structural problem.
Also, don’t misunderstand me with respect to McGraw. You’re reading way too much into that. I don’t want to play a low block. I don’t want to have any of our CBs be slow, use poor judgment, or not be technical enough with the ball at their feet. What we have is what we have though, so I’m just trying to think of what Neville can do to make the best use of what we have. We don’t have CBs that are appreciably faster, with better judgment, or better dribbling and passing. Some are better at one or two of those things but sacrifice something else, like ability to win headers. Not judging Surman yet. All things being equal, I’d probably start him and Zuparic in a mid block. If Araujo was back, he might give Surman some competition. Whatever, I’m not going to create a spreadsheet and break down all of their plus and minus attributes. The point is Phil collaborated with the scouts and GM to sign or re-sign at least 2 or 3 of our CBs that don’t fit what he’s trying to do.
Did Kamal's error result in a goal? Against Vancouver, did Kamal not try and cover for Zac, who admittedly said his job was to shadow Brian White and then got beat over the top? Yes, I agree with you in that there should be more pressure on passes. It's just that CBs need to be able to win balls over the top. And we shouldn't have to worry about that. I disagree when you say that the CBs are slow and bad at soccer and don't fit Phil's style of play. There really is only one who fits that description. Yes, best pairing I would also agree with Surman and Zuparic, followed by E. Miller and then Araujo.
I didn’t say our CBs are bad at soccer. I’ve said they’re good players who have a bad coach. They can at least point to success elsewhere. Neville has no track record of success. I’ve talked about the rest of this elsewhere and am not going to repeat myself again. I just replied to another of your comments to the effect that you’re missing the forest for the trees. We are talking past each other because we fundamentally are talking about different things. You seem to think upgrading McGraw with a player with a different brain will fix our problems. My argument is that our problems are with Neville’s brain and the shared physical limitations and tendencies among any of our available CBs with respect to certain tactics. If you don’t think speed or being able to dribble well, among other things I’ve mentioned, are assets when playing a high line especially, I do not know how to go about persuading you without doing more work than I can or will right now. So, agree to disagree and see how all this plays out.
I think you are both right it your viewpoints but both disagree who is at fault and where the adjustment needs to be.
Yes mcgraw is at fault for not being able to play the way phil wants. Yes Phil's at fault for not being able to adjust.
It's the egg or the chicken argument
This was positive progress from a team that is still creating its identity. Best midfield performance of the season. I remain optimistic #onwardRoseCity
I agree. Defending with 11. What a sight to behold! And being very physical.
Yes. Progress is relative to what preceded it.
So, is it a positive progress a draw against a team that has a porous defense (playing at home, nevertheless) and lost their previous games? Neville is an inept coach with a dubious past experience. I have little faith this team will go too far, based on last year and YTD performance. Long gone are the torrid seasons we've had with Potter and the reliable team work we've had back then. This is the worst-case scenario we've had, even compared with Spencer at the helm.
I take the first half as progress. But then that progress was all but erased in the second half, even before the non-penalty controversy, when the Timbers reverted to their old ways of not knowing what they wanted to do at any given time. I don't know why that happens, because if anything that first half should have given them confidence to build on, but instead they came out looking tentative and let LA take the game to them, and gifted them their first point of the season in a game the Timbers looked well in control of for the first 40ish minutes or so.
So I'm not sure I do put this in the "progress" bucket? Partial credit, maybe?
"but instead they came out looking tentative and let LA take the game to them". we scored within 10 minutes of the restart!
They did! And then what happened? The Timbers became super conservative, stopped playing for the win, and started playing not to lose. They should have kept their foot on the gas against a bad team and put the game to bed. They didn't. That's a problem.
Here are the photos I got Sunday on my currently-under-reconstruction website:
https://www.pdxcite.net/soccercityusa/2025/03/16/timbers-draw-with-la-galaxy-by-1-1-score/
Nice shots!
Phil's post-match comments were spot on... Unfortunately, his subs weren't.
Insert Zac into the back line - when clearly LAG will send long balls until the cows come home??
If we're going to park the bus, park the bus. Whether he starts or subs, McGraw shouldn't be part of a high line. He's got plenty of other skills but he doesn't have the speed for that. Neville keeps setting him up to fail though. In fairness to McGraw, I don't think any of the other CBs have the pace either. I'm reserving judgment on Surman because I don't have enough info yet, but Araujo, Zuparic, and Kamal aren't cut out for a high line either. Even if the problem really is mentality and not physical limitations, we haven't played the same backline consistently enough for chemistry to develop and Surman looks like the only CB trying to lead or organize. Obviously, I can't hear what any of the field players or the goalkeeper are saying, but I see Surman's body language and gestures, and he's the only CB that looks like they know what an offside trap is.
Well I don't think any CB can match speed with the attacking talent on the other side of the ball. "The 1st 10 yards are between your ears."
I don’t expect CBs to as fast as the best attackers but they need to be faster than ours to play a high line, which also doesn’t give them as much time to think.
I think mostly they just need to stay switched on.
Wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up first. Until we can sell/trade some players, Neville recognizes and corrects the problems, or we get a new coach, thoughts and prayers.
I didn’t question the decision- Zac choice was also for height in the box- but he did lose his man and it was a shame 🙁
His aerial ability is one of his primary assets for sure, especially if we expect a lot of set pieces, so we should probably effectively utilize that instead of playing in such a way that underscores his limitations.
Soccer really is simple. It's a collection of patterns. Patterns in movement, passing, pressing, Formations, tactics, and player profiles. It's so simple to see and yet it feels like Phil over thinks it.
When the opposition is playing out of the back, the Timbers should press as a unit to create turnovers high up the field.
If the press breaks down in the oppositions half, the Timbers track back and set up in a mid to low block. Play compact and look to play direct on a counter attack.
If we move into the oppositions half and are maintaining possession but are struggling to break down their low block, the Timbers need to have patterns of movement with overlapping runs and dummy runs to pull defenders out of space and create gaps to create chances.
(Something the Timbers have never been able to do. They always just rely on dumping in pointless crosses with one of the smallest lineups in the league)
If the Timbers drill the shit out of these tactics in those situations, this team would drastically improve. It wouldn't matter how the other team plays. It would only matter what situation is unfolding. If that makes sense. Then it solely becomes about the quality of players on the field to execute in those situations.
Im not good at eloquently putting into words how I see the game. I over simplify too much in description. But that's as simple as I can describe how I see the game.
1) Possession around the box. Patterns of movement.
2) opposition playing out of the back. Pressing as a unit in a quasi man marking system.
3) pressing break down. Mid to low block depending on the pressure being applied.
4) If the opposition is over committing (like we do so often) look to play direct on a quick counter. Be it over the top or through the lines.
5) if they are not over committing. Look to move the ball up field and pin them back, which then leads to 1) or look for line breaking passes which leads to going direct. Playing into spaces between the lines.
The way you set the team up (formation) depends on the player profiles you have. Would i try to press in a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 with a slow back 3. He'll no. Would i with a young athletic back 3. Yes. As long as the rest of the team can press as a unit.
Would I press the opposition playing out of the back in a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 (which fits our roster best) with a slower CB pairing. Yes.
I hope this makes sense. Tactics in certain situations are always the same. The formation you use to implement the tactics are based on the strengths of the players. Certain formations benefit certain player profiles.
NO TIMBERS TEAM HAS EVER PLAYED THIS WAY. I have been waiting a long time to finally see a coach implement this style of play. This identity in the team. Still waiting. I guarantee if the Timbers play this way in these situations and in a formation that fits the players, we would be a contender. Even with the quality of players we have now.
it's not an all out press. (Bielsa)
It's not tiki-taka. (Pep barca days)
It's not counter ball. (Jose Morinho)
It's a system that uses the best of those systems, in the situations those systems work best.
Nice post. “No Timbers team has ever played this way.” Tactically in the final half. Can you apply for coaching job next time?
Lol if only a pro level coaching license wasn't so expensive. 🤣
I also have my own ideas when it comes to player development.
All youth players from age 5 to 9 should be in futsol leagues only.
From ages 10 to 13 should be outdoor leagues with mixed futsol training.
14 to 18 club leagues with classroom training on tactics of the game. Nutrution and physical development. The more they understand the game, the higher the soccer IQ they will have. The quicker they can see the game.
If MP were smart he would set up coaching facilities all around Oregon. Create a timbers development league at all levels and make it cheap. (My niece plays club soccer and it costs $3500.00 a year. That's insane)
The problem with T2 and academy players is that
1) timbers are getting players that have been developed in many different ways from many different level of coaches. Some just being parents that have no clue how to develop a player. This leaves kids far behind where they should be in their development.
2) if they can't find high level players in the Oregon market (most likely because they haven't been properly developed) then this means portland have to rely on scouting of young players around the world where they
A) don't get to see the day to day training of the player.
B) are relying on other scouts to give them an accurate evaluation of a player.
C) don't know how the player will handle being away. from their family and country.
D) will have a player that hasn't been trained to the identity and culture of the club.
This is how you develop world class players. It is not about market size. Geographical location. That has nothing to do with how a player develops. Portland is larger than most Spanish, Brazilian, German towns but somehow those countries develop world class players. It's about development.
I would also make sure to regularly have younger teams play older teams in scrimmage games. Leo messi used to play against kids twice his age. It forced him to see the game differently. He was never going to win a physical battle with an adult. It's why he has an extremely high soccer IQ.
For me the game changed when Neville pulled DaCosta. Of course there may have been a good reason to pull him such as cramping or other knock which I don't know. Otherwise he's a designated player for a reason and should be out there. I cannot think of more disastrous subs as in this game.
Totally agree on how the game changed once Da Costa left the game. It really seems like he is a two way player, providing defense and offense. While he doesn't provide the offense of Evander, he does work on defense and impacts the game more consistently that way. I have to assume that the coaches saw something and felt it was time for him to come out. There does have to be some management of minutes, even from a young player. I suspect he will be closer to a 90 minute player as the season moves on, but just may not be there right now.
"I suspect he will be closer to a 90 minute player as the season moves on, but just may not be there right now."
To me, that just speaks of a shortcoming of the training staff or lack of a plan, either or both of which are bad. Isn't that what preseason is for? He didn't arrive late, he didn't arrive injured; he had some green card delays, but he was able to train while those were happening. He's a DP. He should be 90 minute fit and ready to go from minute one of game one.
The late call on the Paredes foul is so confusing. Can a referee just decide to reverse a call they have already made? For a few seconds I thought we were going to get a PK and a red card on the Galaxy for the after foul fracas, but then the referee decides to just wave off what he'd already called and give a goal kick to the Galaxy. Seriously? Did VAR overrule his original call? I don't get it.
Apparently ref applied the Advantage rule and allowed play to continue. Where I get lost is since why does that mean you don’t call it if the advantage comes to nothing?
The ref is covering his ass with that makes-my-head explode explanation. Lassiter shot a second or two after the foul. What was he supposed to do, not touch the ball? How would he have known for sure that a foul had been called? And a random shot in the box is not an advantage exceeding the value of a PK.
I highly doubt PRO or MLS will cite a precedent for such a decision. I very much doubt there is one.
But I saw his arms well. He did not signal play on, he signaled a foul. And yes, the fact that one second after the original foul nothing came of it makes it even more confusing.
That one needs some explanation, which we know will never happen.
How freaking fun was it to see Moreno and Da Costa on the field together? I have not seen Moreno play that well in a good while, and that’s crazy for his first start of the year coming back from injury. I had some worries about how similar players him and Da Costa are, but it seems to amplify both of their strengths. They occupy like to spaces anywhere under the striker and through the midfield, and they pass and move SO well. And it seems since they understand each other’s play style (again, they’re like basically the same player), they’re really great at combining with each other, especially in the final third. Which is great news for a team that often doesn’t have a lot of patterns of play in the final third besides relying on individual talent. They were just so much fun
I thought Surman was excellent. Seems like him, his national team, and our coaching staff decided it would be best for him to stay here since it gives him the opportunity to really lock down that starting spot, which would be huge. He didn’t make a single mistake that I remember, and lots of really good headed clearances and interceptions (very McGraw-like, but without the slowness).
Chara was also awesome. Can’t believe he’s still got it. Managing his minutes and keeping him fresh will be a huge asset to us later in the year.
This young team is going to struggle in the road. Not looking forward to this next stretch where 5 of 7 are on the road
I'm not sure how many 90 minute Peak Chara starts we can count on from Chara this season, but Sunday was a masterclass in what he can still bring. Hopefully he won't be leaned on to do that week in week out, they've done a good job managing him so far and I hope they don't fall into the "he was great Sunday, let's just keep doing that!" trap and that they stick to whatever plan they've got for him.
"This young team is going to struggle in the road. Not looking forward to this next stretch where 5 of 7 are on the road"
Given that MLS is a much more difficult league away from home at the best of times, absolutely. And the Timbers don't make it easy on themselves, but their slowly improving defense at least might keep them somewhat competitive as their offense tries to figure things out and waits for J. Rodriguez to get back.
"So maybe we just don’t invest in VAR and give that money to charity."
I do not like Phil Neville, I want him gone, but credit where it's due, that is an A+ comment.
That game...hmmm. The first half looked really promising! Timbers actually looked somewhat coherent, the midfield wasn't wasting the ball with horrible passes, and they looked intentional in their movements. I'm not sure what happened at half time, but wow the second half was different. And why Phil decided to sub out da Costa when the Timbers were creating well through him and really needed another goal is definitely a headscratcher.
Yeah, why pull da Costa and Mora, when they’re our quality players up front, just combined for a goal, and we needed another? The subs made no sense. And why does the team go cold and cede possession to the Galaxy after scoring? An equalizer looked inevitable after they took control. Senseless!
I was at the game. The LA goal sure looked like off side both in live time and replay. The ref's explanation for not calling for a penalty kick against LA was ridiculous. I thought our D looked pretty good as did Jimmy Pants. Why still no Bravo? He was always the straw that stirred the Timbers drink. Anthony isn't starter quality IMO. I'd rather see more of Kelsey.
Apparently Neville doesn't like Bravo? I've heard that but it's not like Phil's said it outright, as far as I know. Bravo has been injured a lot and sometimes his recklessness causes problems too close to our box, or he goes to ground higher up the pitch and can't get up and track back in time to help our slow centerbacks recover. I like Bravo and think he's pretty good when healthy, but he's not in a good situation here right now.
I saw the replay, the Galaxy goal was definitely onside, just a really good run and our defense got caught napping.
I was at the game too. The replay in the stadium of their goal was deceptive. He was onside, just cooked Zack for pace.
The terrible call is going to overshadow the poor play in the second half. Probably one of the worst calls I've seen in a while. Still don't see this team being a contender or even a playoff team.
Great first half. They looked like a normal MLS team, combining and looking organized on defense and generally controlling things. Second half, they did take the lead, but despite some desperation by LA, were still keeping them at bay. One sub later, and a costly one, and got beat over the top. Shoulda been 2-0.
Glad I don't pay apple to watch this and the local tv stations hardly waste time on our local team.Shame.