|
|
Posted by
Ian Clarke,
June 15, 2011 |
|
Email Ian Clarke
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Panama 1 – Canada 1
And that’s a wrap. Canada bows out of the 2011 Gold Cup after a heartbreaking 1-1 draw against Panama when they needed the win to ensure passage to the knockout round. An extra-time goal saw multiple Canada players standing and watching their tournament hopes go off the crossbar, land at the feet of a Panamanian who sent the ball on goal to squeeze past keeper Milan Borjan.
A very solid first half of play, that needs to be put in the context of Panama resting six starters, was put to waste as three glorious chances for Canada were unable to get to the back of the net. No goals from open play for the Canucks in this tournament is the major statement and cause for concern as Simeon Jackson, Josh Simpson and Dwayne De Rosario needed to deliver more of an impact on goal and in the end came up short.
What was most disconcerting was that once Panama chose to bring in their best players and pour on the pressure, Canada could not cope and in the end folded up like a cheap lawn chair. There can be many fingers pointed on the final play that secured the draw, and Milan Borjan himself noted how unlucky they were for how the play unfolded. However, the expression, “the more I practice, the luckier I get” might be taken into consideration when Canada is often facing teams who are sometimes playing three times the amount of games.
Several players did not step up when needed most and especially with Atiba Hutchinson out, Canada could have used huge performances from either Julian De Guzman or Josh Simpson and neither looked capable of what supporters have seen in the past.
It will be tough to sit back and watch the Gold Cup continue as Canada had been able to advance into the knockout stage for the last two editions of the tournament. Many questions will be raised as to what is the next step for the program, but solutions will need to be found quickly as Canada will commence World Cup Qualifying in September.
The key to the ratings, as seems to be the logic on a scale of 1-10, is not to view it as a “grade”, as in a 6 would be a 60 or a C. The formula is that each player begins the game with a 5 and is the equilibrium from which their performance either improves or degrades (positive or negative influence on the match) moving in increments of .5.
Here is the breakdown of the starting XI:
Milan Borjan – 4.5
A mixed bag for Borjan who showed good composure and distribution in the first half, but as the game wore on, pressure mounted and Panama’s strength grew, became more erratic. Communication on corners and balls into the box appeared confused and this was most evident on the final play that lead to the tying goal.
Mike Klukowski – 4.5
Showed that right now is still the best option at left back despite appearing as though he is still regaining match fitness. Unfortunate that a game of this magnitude had to be a part of him searching for his form, but showed he has the technical skill on crosses and linking up down the wing that provides Canada with a much needed option in the attack and set pieces.
Andre Hainault – 5
Did well through the tournament in a position he does not regularly get time at the club level. Made up for his lack of pace with good challenges and formed a decent partnership with McKenna.
Kevin McKenna – 5.5
Good in the air and sound positionally McKenna will be one of the few who can walk away from this tournament with no blood on his hands. Put in a professional display and showed his experience in this match.
Nick Ledgerwood – 4.5
Showed glimpses of what he could offer, but needs to be playing at a higher level against better opposition to not look on the brink of being overwhelmed against the top sides in CONCACAF. Many of the characteristics are there in terms of a good foundation, work ethic, etc … but his passing and positioning looks suspect and will need to keep improving to be counted on at right back.
Terry Dunfield – 5
Works well both ways, made timely tackles and overall did well in the middle of the park. However, was unable to provide an impact pushing forward and that was desperately needed in this game as De Guzman was falling short in this department.
Julian De Guzman – 5
Tough to see how far he’s fallen off playing for Canada. Once could do everything when in possession and could be relied on to pop up and send a ball into goal like a dagger. Now is just a step off and non-threatening. In a game like this, where Atiba Hutchinson was out, it should have been De Guzman taking the game by the shirt-collar and delivering what was needed in the midfield, but in the end did not stand out or apart from his teammates who aren't fortunate enough to have the same experience or natural talent.
Will Johnson – 5
May not have had an impact in the attack, but his determination is nearly unmatched in this squad. Coming back to strip what could have been a dangerous shot from distance at the 33rd minute is evidence that his presence and grit goes a long way in balancing out and being essential to the starting XI.
Josh Simpson – 5
Another player who should have been able to step up, lay claim to being one of the best Canadians on the field and deliver the performance to seal the result. Instead did not show the skills we have become accustom to seeing where he easily wins 1v1 battles, or even double teaming. Simpson did not appear to have that extra step or little bit more in the tank to cut through and provide a much needed option in the attack.
Dwayne De Rosario – 5.5
Got the penalty and finished his chance to notch two goals for the tournament, but from open play needed to be more lethal.
Simeon Jackson – 5
Had his chances and could not deliver anything to test the keeper. Must be more clinical when given his chances as it could have made the difference. Jackson is known to score in bunches and it should have been Canada’s task to find the right balance to put him in the situations that made his tally at Norwich impressive down the stretch. At the end of the day, Jackson is not a lone striker and struggled to be as dangerous as he can be without a more physical teammate to play off of.
|