No. 3--Soccer: DC United vs. Chicago Fire with Some Good and Bad Offensive and Defensive Strategy

DC United vs. Chicago Fire
On Thursday October 25, 2007, I saw the Eastern Conference soccer Semi Finals, Game 1on TV. There were some positive points on both sides as well as negative points to be mentioned. First, I will discuss the general negative points: Here is my opinion. It frequently looked like an amateur game, especially in the first half. However in the second half, DC United offensively outplayed Chicago and looked more professional. DC had more possession and ball control, better traps, passes, goalkeeper throws and short kicks. But, they seemed to favor a certain field location to begin most of their attacks. That location was generally their left midfield. As a result, certain DC players and the ball often got tied up there because Chicago was ready for them. This often resulted in turning over the ball to Chicago. This type of play can occur when the distribution of passes favors certain teammates and easily gets noticed by opposing players.

Chicago’s offensive players played sloppy the whole game. This also included their defenders and goalkeeper as they pushed the ball up field with offensive up-field kicks etc. Nearly all their goalie's kicks were sent far up-field instead of being thrown or kicked to their defenders to start a controlled attack. This sloppy play included up-field headers, amateurish up-field head flicks, long kicks and missed traps. One must ask oneself if the Chicago players have ever watched a control ball soccer game; such as, one that might be seen played by top South American or Continental European teams? Much of what was seen in this game did not demonstrate to young soccer players as what to strive for in order to become a more competitive player. That type of kickball can ordinarily be seen with many undisciplined youth teams. Young North American players need to observe and emulate the skillful techniques of control ball soccer practiced by countries that produce top-notch soccer, if they wish to ever become world class players.

The game was not a good spectator game either. The ball all too often passed over the sideline. This in itself is annoying. Along with these discontinuities, constant fouls (many trips and pushes from behind) and out of control player’s arguments took away from the enjoyment of the soccer match. Having been a referee myself, my opinion is that the referee should have had better control of the game. Even though I thought that the game was not a good spectator game, I am nearly certain that the loyal fans probably differed in their opinion. And while on the subject of loyal fans, I think that they (Chicago fans) should be disallowed from producing billows of smoke in the stadium. I found these smoke scenes annoying to watch. I also wonder if there may be a safety issue too.

Now, getting back to the plusses and minuses of the game. On one hand, DC’s defense (on defense) made capitol mistakes by being out of position. This was the case when Chicago’s Chris Rolfe scored the only goal of the game. Rolfe was clearly ahead of the DC defenders as he raced towards the goal. And this type of situation occurred at other times with DC’s defense. Soccer note: A defender should always be in front of his or her attacking opponent To be chasing an attacker with no other defender in-between the attacker and the goalie is a capitol error.

On the other hand, Chicago’s defense (on defense) was superb. In the second half, DC dominated the first three-quarters of the field with quick short passes, trapping and shielding. However in the final quarter of the field, they had very few chances to score due to the Chicago defenders being in strategic positions to disallow DC to get set up for clear shots on goal. It appeared to me that the Chicago defense (on defense) was doing everything right; and thus, deserves an important comment:

I have learned to win games and championships by having a well oiled and a trained defensive team. And this starts with the goalkeeper. This individual, when being a true leader, calmly controls and positions his or her defensive players during attacks. He or she also assures that defensive player errors are kept to a minimum. When all this occurs, these same defensive players need not worry about being out of position when under attack because the goalkeeper directs and commands with full vision of the game. For younger teams, a defensive coach can take the job until it can eventually be transferred over to the goalkeeper. Furthermore, with confidence in one’s defensive players, the midfield and the forward players are better able to concentrate on their own attacks and not be too concerned about opposition attacks occurring in their own defensive part of the field. This defensive strategy has worked well with teams that I coached or managed. It also worked as well for Chicago.