By Cory Ritzau
Wednesday night was no doubt a bitter pill to swallow for Sounders players and fans alike. Penalty kicks are tough enough to take in and of themselves, combined with some questionable decisions along the way, and it is no doubt a tough way to lose with a trophy on the line.
As is often the case in cup finals, the game was a bit of a feeling out process, with the quality of soccer not on the highest of levels. The Sounders can take a bit of solace in the fact that they went 120 minutes without allowing a goal from the run of play, and despite Sporting’s numerous shots, not too many posed a serious threat to the net of Michael Gspurning.
The defense earned higher marks for their efforts Wednesday / Photo:Denise McCooey
Michael Gspurning – 7 – Gspurning played well to not allow a goal from the run of play. He stopped two of the six (or should I say three of seven) penalty kicks he faced and frankly it should have been enough. Perhaps most disappointing on the final penalty call was that he used the same technique and positioning that he had for the previous five PK’s he faced and nothing was called.
Zach Scott – 6.5 – Dealing with Kei Kamara is no small task, and with the big winger attacking down his wing Scott did well to keep him at bay for much of the game. The handball that was called on him was a bit unlucky, but he did well to respond with a nice header just moments after his mistake.
Patrick Ianni – 5.5 – The biggest attribute he provided on the night was quality service out of the back. With Alonso being tracked by Espinoza all over the field, Ianni was relied upon to start the attack with quality long balls to the next level of attack. Given the physical nature of the game, his two cautions could be called harsh, but in the end didn’t hurt the team.
JK Hurtado – 6 – Hurtado’s speed was a good matchup for Bunbury, and he kept the targetman quiet for much of the game. His positioning was solid and escaped the game without any key mistakes.
Leo Gonzalez – 6 – Gonzalez was very active on the left side. He had a number of timely tackles to thwart a developing Sporting KC attack and found himself well positioned when isolated on the back post.
Alex Caskey – 5 – Caskey had a quiet night on the left. With the attack being generated primarily through Rosales on the right, Caskey could have done better to make himself a target on the weak side but frankly he did little to impact the game on the night.
Andy Rose – 4.5 – Rose did well to provide cover in defense when needed, but lacked the ability to unlock the defense and generate attack. With Alonso being shadowed, Rose needed to be more assertive in demanding the ball and providing distribution.
Rose had a tough night with Nagamura and Espinosa / Photo: Denise McCooey
Mauro Rosales – 6.5 – Mauro had a great set piece that found the head of Scott and was relied upon as the primary playmaker as Rose and Montero had quiet nights offensively.
Fredy Montero – 4 – Montero failed to make an imprint on the game, and in all honesty could have come off much sooner. Too often the game would go long stretches of time without striker getting his foot on the ball and even when he was, he failed to generate much offense out of his few opportunities.
Eddie Johnson – 6 – He had a nice header off a set piece that forced a nice Nielson save as well as a break away just after the half hour mark that he would like to have back. Of course all of that is overshadowed by his game ending skyscraper of a penalty take, which is unfortunate given his high level of activity on the evening.
Substitutes:
Brad Evans – 6 — Evans helped settle the game down from his position on the left. After the Sounders got their equalizer they seemed to remain composed and retain possession much better then they have through the first 80 minutes and Evans was integral in that.
Christian Tiffert – 5.5 – Tiffert offered decidedly more in attack from the central midfield than Rose who he replaced, and looks to be a good pair for Alonso going forward. Nielsen made a good save on Tiffert’s effort in the shootout, and it was an interesting choice by Schmid given Tiffert’s short time with the team.
Marc Burch –5.5 — He provided added defensive cover after coming on for Montero in the second overtime. By the time he arrived, the game’s pace had slowed and he served his purpose by seeing the game out from a defensive perspective.
What were your thoughts on the performances of the Sounders? On the team as a whole?
August 9, 2012 at 2:31 pm
These grades lose any credibility when you give Zach Scott a 6.5. Scoring on a set piece does not redeem an otherwise awful performance.
August 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm
zack scott, 2nd best player on the field according to your ratings
im not sure whether to laugh at or be embarrassed for you
August 9, 2012 at 4:28 pm
These were not my ratings so I’m not going to comment on whether Scott should have got a 6, a 6.5 or a 5.
I will say this though:
Scott does get an extra point or point and a half for scoring the only goal of the game. Without that, there is a 90 minute defeat, no over time and no penalty shoot out. If you don’t get points for scoring then you are ignoring the actual point of the game.
Now, you could legitimately contend that Zach Scott gave away the penalty that gave Sporting the lead and that should go at least some way to cancel out the extra point for the goal.
However, then you also would have to accept it was a legitimate penalty call for which Scott takes the blame; which then forces you into dropping the ‘Ricardo Salazar Man of the Match’ routine.
So let’t see if any of you have the intellectual consistency to accept that either Scott does indeed get extra for scoring the goal OR that he, not the referee, is to blame for the penalty.
Are any of you prepared to exonerate the referee for that penalty call (not the subsequent shoot out events) and then retain the right to mark Scott down? Otherwise, you are trying to have it both ways.
August 9, 2012 at 4:46 pm
That a defender scores does almost nothing to his overall game performance. Was it a well-placed header? Yes. But there is so much chance that goes into such events that it shouldn’t count more than a half point for a defender’s overall score. Instead, look to the OTHER 120+ minutes where Scott was constantly out-matched and freely gave the ball away. Outside of that one event, Zach Scott was awful. Plain and simple. I neither mentioned the handball or Ricardo Salazar because I’m not marking him down for that event.
#consistency
August 9, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Ok – a fair and honest answer. Thank you.
But we’re not far away from each other. You concede half a point is reasonable for a defender scoring.
Although, we do NOT make any stipulations for our raters and let them do as they please, generally a forward scoring gets him an extra point. Generally.
Therefore, an extra 1.5 is not too obscene for a defender. Especially in a cup final. Especially a game saving goal. Without Scott’s goal, the cup is lost.
So in Cory’s mind, Zach is at 5.0 until he saves the game. In your mind, he should have been at nearer 4.5 or 4.0. Yes? Two observers therefore marked one player’s contribution slightly differently. That is to be expected with these ratings which as we both know, are not exactly scientific.