[ngg_images source=”galleries” container_ids=”155″ display_type=”photocrati-nextgen_basic_imagebrowser” ajax_pagination=”0″ template=”default” ngg_triggers_display=”never” order_by=”sortorder” order_direction=”ASC” returns=”included” maximum_entity_count=”500″]
The New England Revolution got back to winning ways in style last Saturday night, shocking Western Conference leaders Sporting Kansas City, 1-0, at Gillette Stadium. New England’s result is certainly an eyebrow-raiser, as it came against the league’s strongest attacking team.
Here are three takeaways from the Revolution’s victory:
How good, really, is New England’s back line?
The New England Revolution defense got some praise over the weekend for the way it shut down Sporting KC, which entered last Saturday’s match having scored 20 goals, the most in Major League Soccer.
A clean sheet against the league’s best sides is always a good thing. That said, the Revolution back line is helping the team earn results in rather unconvincing fashion. Saturday night against Sporting was no exception.
New England’s passing out of the back continues to be suspect. Gabriel Somi completed only 56 percent of his passes – the worst of any outfield player – while Claude Dielna was at 61 percent. Both players struggled in one-on-one situations, needing their teammates – namely Andrew Farrell and Jalil Anibaba – to bail them out when the field got stretched.
Credit to Anibaba and Farrell for their focus throughout the game, and to Matt Turner for making four saves, including one in just the first 10 seconds.
But the Revolution defense continues to show it can be very much exploited, particularly on the left side. Sooner or later, opponents are going to start making more use out of that deficiency.
VAR to the rescue
At first, even Teal Bunbury didn’t think his goal was a goal. Neither did Revolution head coach Brad Friedel. Ditto for Sporting Kansas City head coach Peter Vermes and anyone else watching on television.
The angle on Bunbury’s goal shows that Roger Espinoza got a touch on something (he thinks it was Fagundez’s foot and VAR said it was the ball) to negate the offside flag.
After the game, both Vermes and Espinoza said they were as frustrated about the call as they were with how the call was made. Vermes even said he wasn’t sure if referee David Gantar’s first call was goal or offside.
In any case, VAR gave the Revolution a positive outcome. So far this season, the system has been win-some lose-some for the Revs. Two weeks ago, they had a pretty good shot for a penalty ignored.
Consistency continues to elude the VAR system, which is problematic. After the game, Vermes likened situations like the one that occurred Saturday to “growing pains.” But if a match is going to be stopped and a play is going to be reviewed from all possible angles, shouldn’t the process by which VAR is going to be used be, at the very least, consistent?
High-press magic
By now, all should know that New England’s preferred tactic is the high press. The Revs used it effectively on Saturday.
Even Friedel was pleased with how side executed.
The high press isn’t just meant to generate scoring chances. It’s also useful in transitions, regulating how opponents attack, and getting rest.
Friedel wants his team to rest when they have the ball, which isn’t as counter-intuitive as it seems. Beyond that, New England’s high press kept Kansas City – which was coming off a 6-0 victory – almost completely at bay in the run of play.