![]() |
| Counts just the same...just not a good look... |
[Each week I (try to) watch three full, 90-minute games. And I write ‘em up. Part 1 of 3, for Major League Soccer’s Week 21.]
Why This Game? I wanted New York City FC’s attack measured against the Colorado Rapids’ league-best defense because, per reports and rumors, NYCFC has a bad enough defense that they need the offense to matter. And, going the other way, could the Rapids rack up the goals against NYCFC’s allegedly “shaky D”?
On the Result
Did not see that coming. I knew NYCFC’s offense had the mirror-image rep to contrast with their defense, but to drag the Rapids’ defensive record back into the pack with a 5-1 win? The first two goals deserve more focus, and not just because they came before Michael Azira got absolutely, totally justifiably sent off (we’re talking a text-book-stupid second yellow), but because their manner. NYCFC pushed players into the attack in a way that meant getting the ball past the first guy only meant you had to deal with the second guy, like, right away. Think World War I, only with success. They kept piling on after Azira came off and, before long, the bottom of the field dropped off on the Rapids’ side...sorta like watching Inversion. (Is that the title of that Leonardo DiCaprio joint, the one that choked on its own exposition? Crap, no, it's title Inception. Still didn't like it; goddamn gimmicks). The thing that really struck me is that I’ve seen Colorado work an outlet ball pretty reliably in the past – when they don’t play out of the back (where they usually do all right), they’ll bomb long balls to Kevin Doyle, or maybe Marlon Hairston. They couldn’t find either player Saturday, and they struggled mightily as a result. Also, I think I saw a lot of New York’s attack go through gap between Mikeil Williams and Jared Jeffrey…often enough to wonder what the hell happened to Bobby Burling (he was on the bench, so OK, answered that one….partially). I think the real point of curiosity came with what happens if Colorado falls behind – by more than two goals, especially.
Why This Game? I wanted New York City FC’s attack measured against the Colorado Rapids’ league-best defense because, per reports and rumors, NYCFC has a bad enough defense that they need the offense to matter. And, going the other way, could the Rapids rack up the goals against NYCFC’s allegedly “shaky D”?
On the Result
Did not see that coming. I knew NYCFC’s offense had the mirror-image rep to contrast with their defense, but to drag the Rapids’ defensive record back into the pack with a 5-1 win? The first two goals deserve more focus, and not just because they came before Michael Azira got absolutely, totally justifiably sent off (we’re talking a text-book-stupid second yellow), but because their manner. NYCFC pushed players into the attack in a way that meant getting the ball past the first guy only meant you had to deal with the second guy, like, right away. Think World War I, only with success. They kept piling on after Azira came off and, before long, the bottom of the field dropped off on the Rapids’ side...sorta like watching Inversion. (Is that the title of that Leonardo DiCaprio joint, the one that choked on its own exposition? Crap, no, it's title Inception. Still didn't like it; goddamn gimmicks). The thing that really struck me is that I’ve seen Colorado work an outlet ball pretty reliably in the past – when they don’t play out of the back (where they usually do all right), they’ll bomb long balls to Kevin Doyle, or maybe Marlon Hairston. They couldn’t find either player Saturday, and they struggled mightily as a result. Also, I think I saw a lot of New York’s attack go through gap between Mikeil Williams and Jared Jeffrey…often enough to wonder what the hell happened to Bobby Burling (he was on the bench, so OK, answered that one….partially). I think the real point of curiosity came with what happens if Colorado falls behind – by more than two goals, especially.


