Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

DCU-Pachuca Video

By Steve Goff  |  April 2, 2008; 9:46 AM ET
Categories:  D.C. United  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: DCU-Pachuca, The Aftermath
Next: Midday Kickaround

Comments

Man, that's depressing.

Posted by: voyager | April 2, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Not sure I like watching highlights of my team get the beat-down...

Posted by: Juan-John | April 2, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

That's it? We let in those two crap goals?

Poor positioning on the first and poor marking on the second!

Altitude or not, those are inexcusable.

Posted by: delantero | April 2, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Good to show the folks talking all about Martinez'z class his utter laziness on the free kick. Didn't see a definitive replay last night.
He played pretty well most of the rest of the game.
I guess Wells was expecting a cross instead of a Hezbollah Rocket?
Goff said it in the last thread don't leave the near post hanging wide open...
Shoulda given the Peruvian goal keeper a shot playing at altitude, Zach stunk after the half.
I keep hoping Mediate will stop sucking but I doubt it.
DC played pretty ok last night but Pachuca is just better,deeper and unfortunately that's that.
Maybe we'll pull it out at home with the help of the Supporters.
If we can just get past PAC I KNOW we can beat Houston. (or the Costa Rican team).

Posted by: Dadryan | April 2, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

So... dc isn't as good as their fans say? no way dude they can still win by 3 goals! right? right?

Posted by: MarkVA | April 2, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Wells blows period!

Gomito is missed !

Gallina oops! Gallardo is not a threat!

SOHEN IT IS TIME TO GO!

What was the team told during half-time!

Sohen "MUCHACHOS KEEP IT UP THEY HAVENT SCORED, DONT WORRY ABOUT ATTACKING"

PATHETIC! PATHETIC!

DCU had to attack in order to keep the playing in the middle and not on DC's half...PATHETIC!

OH DID I FORGET QUARANTA! WOW! LOST FOR WORDS FOR THIS HERE CHARACTER...WOW HE BLOWS... COME BACK HERE TO THE GALAXY AND JOIN THE REST OF THE CIRCUS!

Posted by: DCU Fan in SoCal | April 2, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Rough game.

A little concerned with the decision on Gallardo. Ownership brought him in so that we could compete in these international tournaments. If I didn't know any of the players and watched the game I would have guessed that Fred was our DP. I know it's still early so I have to give it some time.

Christian Gomez just seems like a steal at the 325k and 3 years he initially asked for. Would have liked to see the DP spot go to an area where we really needed help. We needed a menacing striker. L Emilio puts the ball in the net, which is good, but I see him as a cherry picker type. He's not very fast, not much ball control, and not a good passer/playmaker. I won't discount his ability to score but maybe we needed to bring in a DP striker to play up top with him. Love the changes in the back but not happy so far with the change in the middle.

Just some thoughts.

Posted by: N. Daknow | April 2, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

When Gallardo learns to set up shop just on the attacking side of the center circle and Olsen comes back to stiffen up the midfield defense and give Simms more options to move the ball upfield, Gallardo will absolutely shred most MLS defenses. I love his passing (on par with Etcheverry's), but his defense is almost as bad as Carlos Valderrama's was, and in MLS there's no way to build a team around one player while retaining the net value of your squad (see LA Galaxy). So Gallardo needs to adjust.

Posted by: Mastodon Juan | April 2, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Give Gallardo a couple more games. We've played 4 and he's out of shape. That sky always seems to fall so quickly with D.C. United fans.

Posted by: OHboyohboy | April 2, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

regarding previous post:

Goff,
you mentioned depth and reinforcements for Pachuca. Are rosters larger in the mexican league compared to MLS? If so, this would seem to give an advantage to mexican league teams over MLS in these international competitions. If this is true, MLS needs to re-think its policy on roster size.

Agree about Bretos. He's always been entertaining and relatively well informed.

Posted by: Gburg | April 2, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

We are usually near catatonic at 5000 feet (Colorado) so I just do not have a good feelng about this one at 8000 feet.

Pachuca 2:0 DCU

Posted by: Ron | April 1, 2008 03:33 PM

================================

Good call.

Posted by: WNT fan | April 2, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

I don't think the link to Goff's report in the vending-machine Post has yet been posted:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/02/AR2008040200235.html

Nor this Olympic-related item:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102345.html

Finally, a reminder about today's online chat:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/28/DI2008032802755.html

(Be sure to submit your questions there, not here.)

Posted by: tri-village | April 2, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

you mentioned depth and reinforcements for Pachuca. Are rosters larger in the mexican league compared to MLS?
==========================================

Perhaps they are, but that is probably not the biggest factor, since in the end both teams bring 18 players to each game. Perhaps what Goff was getting at (although only he knows for sure) is that Pachuca's players 12 through 18 are better than their United counterparts, at least in part because they can afford a bigger payroll. With MLS clubs, it is often the case that one or two players in the first 18 are on developmental contracts.

Posted by: tri-village | April 2, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Not sure about the criticism of Gallardo. The way I see it, it's the strikers who are off. Who's making the runs to connect with those fantastic passes? Where are the shots on goal? Emilio doesn't look like a leading scorer -- he looks slow and behind the play.

Posted by: anon | April 2, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

------------------

Give Gallardo a couple more games. We've played 4 and he's out of shape. That sky always seems to fall so quickly with D.C. United fans.

Posted by: OHboyohboy | April 2, 2008 11:02 AM
------------------

Sky is not falling...I'm simply stating that the salary jump from Gomez to Gallardo will not be proportional to the impact to the team.

Several other factors that I can describe in their styles of play...

Gomez...hustle player that when given an opening will attack, even from midfield. Understood the skill level of his teammates and played to their advantages.

Gallardo... will take time for him to understand the other players strengths and weaknesses. Time will tell. He has always been surrounded by better players than what we have and he works well in a system where he can distribute and his mates don't lose the ball after two touches (emilio). Might be a little too unselfish on the field. Plays a great ball but players can't reach it due to their limitations. You can say that's not his fault but what's a great ball when nothing comes of it. (i.e. Beckham). Certain players fit certain systems better and I'm hoping he turns out to be a good fit. Gomez was a proven good fit.

I'm not questioning whether Gallardo is a good player or not. I am simply stating that Gomez did extremely well for us and I think his price tag was fair. Even if Gallardo is marginally better than Christian, is he worth the 1.5-2 million, plus jersey profits, plus any other incentives.

I would have liked to have used that money on another player, preferably a striker, while keeping Gomez.

Hope this clears up my point...regardless, it's just my opinion.

Posted by: N. Daknow | April 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Sorry...one last comment.

Rumor has it that we are looking at bringing in a DP striker in the summer transfer window (this may be common knowledge). This was part of the reason for the Gomez trade. Still too early to know who, but I have heard some names being thrown around. If I hear something that is more solid I will share.

Only reason I mention this is because it's obvious that Gallardo needs a nice target to feed those great passes.

Posted by: N. Daknow | April 2, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

There is no way in H-E-double-hockey-sticks that first goal came from an intended shot. Montes's lousy first touch led the ball out further and wider than he wanted. He was too far behind the ball to hit the cross he intended. That looked like the goal Landycakes scored in '02 against Portugal. At least Landy had the sense to shrug it off instead of faking like he was bad-a$$ enough to try a shot like that.

Posted by: Jay Five | April 2, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

N. Daknow - gomez a hustle player? Christian Gomez a hustle player? REAAAALLLLYYY - in his time here in DC he never once made it to the defending third of the pitch. Gomez would pick his spots and rarely ventured from them.
Gallardo will be fine once he can link to Mr. Flop (Neill) and Mr. I Turn the ball over faster than my flapjacks (Emillio).

Posted by: bobf | April 2, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

On the first goal it is still amazing to me that at this level you can have three defenders converging on the man with the ball and no one looking for someone making that outside run through the freed up space...irrespective of whether that was a cross or a goal attempt.

He should never have been that clear.

Posted by: seahawkdad | April 2, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Hustle Player...that's what I said. Don't compare him to players like Josh Gros, who played on the outside. Compare him to other attacking central midfielders. When it was time to move on the field, he moved. If the defense gives him a gap he attacks. He would take the ball from our side of the field and push the ball up while bringing the team with him. This fits our style much better than kicking the ball up field to our forwards and letting them run on to it. We all know the story...opponent intercepts the ball and we never move out of our half of the field.

I went to every single RFK game last season sitting near the press box and I got a good view of player movement without the ball. Not everything is what you see on camera. I've only seen Gallardo when we played Harbour View so the jury's still out. What I can say is that he had a 'quiet' game. Only time will tell.

Posted by: N. DaKnow | April 2, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

what we need is a healthy Ben Olsen and a healthy Jaime. At least Jaime can hold the damn ball unlike the other forwards. And I'm sure that Gallardo is used to having a wrecking ball for a Dmid behind him. That is, he probably always had one of the top three dmids in his league to cover for him in Argentina and France. Although Clyde Simms is above average for MLS play, we'd need a significantly better dmid to allow Gallardo to focus on the attack in international competition against Mexican opposition. Just my two cents.

Posted by: BigWave | April 2, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Bobf, you speak the Gospel Truth.

Gomez usually was sucking wind at sea-level come the 60th minute. Put him at altitude against a top Mexican side and nothing changes.

Gallardo covers much more of the field than Gomez. At least at sea level, he plays box to box, regularly dropping back and picking up the ball and starting the attack from around the defensive third. Gomez would need an inhaler or John-Riggins-style oxygen mask to do the same. I don't know how many minutes he is playing in Colorado...then again, Colorado WON, so who knows?!?

Posted by: Erick | April 2, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Erick...

"he plays box to box, regularly dropping back and picking up the ball and starting the attack from around the defensive third."

What game were you watching? I have yet to see Gallardo build an attack.

Posted by: N. Daknow | April 2, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Gomez played 71 minutes last game.

I think we can all agree that both are good players. To reiterate my point...

"I'm simply stating that the salary jump from Gomez to Gallardo will not be proportional to the impact to the team."

and...

If I didn't know any player on the team and watched last game...I would never guess that Gallardo was our DP.

This can change and it's still early in the season but I have my concerns.

Posted by: N. Daknow | April 2, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I was against letting Gomez go, but if you could not guess that Gallardo was the DP in black last night, then we're watching different games. He has a different style than CG, drops deep to pick up the ball, holds it well until he finds his spot, and sends killer balls every which way. The problem so far is on the receiving end, not with Gallardo, IMO. If he had a Gambian wing or a 2d forward not from the Lollipop Guild, he'd look a lot better. He delivered some great balls last night.

Gallardo is much more active out of possession than I recall of Gomez, and much deeper, although it seems to me he's more trying to force play and make it predictable than actually win balls himself. He got nutmegged last night when he did step in.

Posted by: WNT fan | April 2, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

@Posted by: Gburg | April 2, 2008 11:02 AM
rosters are bigger. but as someone else mentioned you still only get 18, but when the other team isn't bringing in 4 players who are the equivalent of youth academy players, they will always have better options off the bench.
MLS is really going to have to think about raising the cap before the CBA negotiations. They are looking TERRIBLE having LA as the face of their league and sucking so bad.
Since this is the 'on the fly rules changes' MLS they should increase the cap by $750 right now, or change the DP to only count as $200K towards the cap or something.
I know it sucks to make moves to aid Galaxy's ineptitude, but it's a bit embarrassing that the face of the league to the world is worse than an English League 2 side.

Posted by: papa bear | April 3, 2008 6:01 AM | Report abuse

PACHUCA kicks Asssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

Posted by: Luass | May 13, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company