Agent Orange: Reds Dead? Redemption?
Immediately after a vital derby victory
might be a strange time to say it, but this has to be my least favorite Omiya
Ardija season ever. Of the 32 games played this year, I've managed to get to
25. My personal record is a dismal 4-9-12.
I was there to see Omiya get blown out by an increasingly
unimpressive Kawasaki Frontale squad. I was present for not one but two losses
to a cynical Shimizu S-Pulse side. I watched as the team failed to score
against bunkering Kashiwa Reysol, Cerezo Osaka and Sanfrecce Hiroshima
teams. I was in attendance as Yosuke
Kataoka and Kim Young Gwon conspired to let Avispa Fukuoka get
easy goals and pick up their lone away win this season. I even headed to
Kumagaya to see Kataoka lamely attempt a heading clearance that was picked up
by an awaiting Fukuoka University attacker for their goal, setting the stage
for Chikara Fujimoto to choke on a PK.
I missed the victories against Kashiwa,
Jubilo Iwata, Cerezo and Urawa Reds. Omiya - is it something I said?
I'm happy about the win over Urawa, in what many are saying was
a dismal game. I'm overjoyed that my misgivings about starting Hayato Hashimoto turned out to be grossly incorrect. I
don't even mind missing the game to spend nine hours having elementary school
mothers give me the stink eye while I perform my daily routine as the talking
English monkey, in a tie, on a Saturday.
But none of what happened at NACK5 on Saturday masks the fact
that this team is fundamentally fucked. Even if Omiya is able to stave off relegation,
as looks increasingly likely, it still doesn't cover the fact that this season
has been a waste, mostly of my time and money. Trying in this article
to identify reasons for Ardija's poor results this year, Daily Yomiuri and
Weekly Soccer Magazine writer (and avid Reds supporter) Sean Carroll puts the
blame squarely on the shoulders of coach Jun
Suzuki and his player
selection and strategy. I'm not completely sure why Carroll goes to so
many Omiya games - hell, I don't understand why I go half the time - although
as one of the few members of the Japanese media who pays attention to the squad
I appreciate the columns.
And I for one can't argue with his point that Suzuki is responsible
for Omiya's failings, given that GGOA has consistently criticized Suzuki for
mismanagement. However, that doesn't mean that I agree with the article, in
which Carroll argues that the team is not attacking enough and advocates
incorporating substitute striker Naoki
Ishihara along with Rafael, Keigo Higashi and either Lee Chun Soo or Rodrigo
Pimpao in an attacking
4-4-2.
I think that would be suicide. First, I don't completely
buy the premise that we aren't an attacking team. In fact, the limited stats
available - that is, on crossing, passing, dribbling and shots - actually have
the Squirrels ranked in the top half of the league. For instance, the Weekly
Soccer Digest dated 25 Oct places Omiya fifth in shots, trailing only Kawasaki,
Cerezo, Vissel Kobe and Kashima Antlers.
The problem isn't that the team doesn't attack... it's that they
don't attack well. Carroll uses current league leader Kashiwa as
an example of a team that has a strong offense. However, the Sun Kings
rank lower in every one of the aforementioned attacking stats than Omiya. Of
their nineteen victories, Reysol managed ten or more shots on only nine
occasions - and two of their victories came in games when they mustered only
four shots. The real difference between the two squads is efficiency.
Kashiwa is very good at completing chances, doing so at nearly a 17% clip,
whereas Omiya ranks at the bottom of shot efficiency with a paltry 7.8%
success rate.
I'm not sure how Naoki Ishihara helps alleviate this
problem. Carroll thinks that coach Suzuki is making a mistake by not
starting the mercurial striker, an opinion that seems to be popular among many
members of the Squirrel Nation. He states, "So, essentially, it seems
that Ishihara doesn’t start because he’s good, whereas a less adaptable player,
Pimpao, gets a starting shirt because he’s a crap sub. Hmmm."
I think that's a pretty simplistic take based on the obviously
reasonable idea that coaches need to use their players in ways that will get
the best output from them. In 2009 Ishihara was starting and not getting much
traction in the offense, instead getting walloped by opposing defenders. Last
year, he went through similar struggles before he was moved to the bench and
used as a super-sub.
Few people have the ability to succeed in the role - Cerezo's Ryuji Bando is one that comes to mind and Ishihara
is another, a guy with speed and touch off the bench who can be mentally ready
to affect the game the minute he comes in. He's a hard-working player who
does the little things and is good when matched up against tired
opponents. But in the few starts he's had this year, Ishihara has managed
to get off only four shots, or about one a game. What happens is that Ishihara
defers to players who are more aggressive personalities - and so the
spectacularly inefficient Chun Soo (shooting at a 7% success rate) and Rafael
(9%) still take the lion's share of shots.
Two of the candidates for a wide midfield slot in Carroll's
scheme, Chun Soo and Pimpao, seem to me to be players who need a lot of the
ball to have an impact on the game. Both like to isolate on the wing and try to
dribble into the box instead of getting more teammates involved in the
offense. This usually has the effect of stagnating the rest of the attack and
dragging players over to their side of the field. Neither player seems to be
interested in helping out on defense - so Carroll's Omiya plan effectively
leaves the wing vulnerable to attack, with either an undersized Arata Sugiyama or a slow Kazuhiro Murakami forced to handle counterattackers and
causing poor decision-makers Kim Young Gwon and Yosuke Kataoka to have to
choose either to sit back in the middle or come out and help against wing
attackers. Numerous times this has spelled disaster for the squad.
One aspect of Carroll's argument that I do agree with is
that Suzuki always seems to wait until the situation is dire to make his
move. Pimpao and Chun Soo will be ineffective in games and last for sixty or
seventy minutes, even though it's clear that they should be subbed at half
time. This corresponds with the overall risk-aversion and fragility of the
squad, which rarely possesses the mental strength to bounce back in adverse
situations: Omiya has only managed one come-from-behind win in 2011,
although they've managed to blow leads on eight occasions. By contrast Kashiwa
hasn't lost a game they were leading all season.
That's the real Ardija problem that Suzuki hasn't addressed. And
it's not surprising considering the team's DNA comes from the J1 catastrophe
clubs that were 2009 Oita Trinita (Higashi, Yuki Fukaya and Shusuke
Tsubouchi), 2010 Kyoto Sanga (Kataoka and Daigo Watanabe) and 2010 FC
Tokyo (Kim).
The bad news is that while presumably very few Omiya supporters
are enamored with the product on the field (I overheard a boy talking to his
father after the Avispa game and calling the team boring), Ardija club
president Shigeru Suzuki is evidently satisfied with the direction of the
squad. So we're probably in for more of the same next year, or worse if some of
the bigger squads come sniffing around for Kota
Ueda, Higashi and Rafael. As for 2011, five more games to go.
It's not over yet.
0 comments:
Post a Comment