Five Things Lone Star Lacked Against The Brave Warriors


Wleh Bedell

Yes, It was a costly and hard earned victory the hosts labored for, but the team’s faithful expected a comprehensive score line in making the second leg a mere formality. But, with the narrow 1-0 win, the Lone Star must go back to work quickly in preparing for the second leg in June.

But, what really cost the Lone Star not to get the big win everyone expected can be summarized into five major things or reasons from an analytical standpoint.

1. Neat Build up Play- In contemporary football, it is very advantageous to build form the back as the organization of a team in getting on the front foot starts from there. But, the Lone Star seemingly ignored such play as there were mainly long balls upfront, and with the back of the strikers turned to the towering defenders of the Namibians, life was a bit difficult for them. One thought the team would have made use of the full backs where for an instance a goal kick would have started with them since the opponents largely sat back and waited for the opportunity to avail itself. Thus, there was not much patience and neat build up play from a Lone Star perspective.

2. Width- Also in the modern game, most goals are initiated from the wings, and a team that has width will certainly have a foot hole in a melee. Taking into account from a tactical standpoint that the visitors were mostly congregated in the middle third, the red, white and blue outfit should have made full use of the wide areas in shifting the opponents’ defense. The full backs did not really venture forward to provide the telling and teasing crosses which could have spelled more danger for the Brave Warriors.

3. Penetration- No disrespect or discredit to Kojo and fellow technical staffers who made the team to record another victory at the ATS since the nervy 3-2 win against Rwanda’s Amavubi’s on October 8, 2006 in the 2008 qualifiers, but the decision to play with a double pivot or two deep lying playmakers or holding midfielders in Alseny Keita and Theo Lewis Weeks in a home match that needed a more positive or attacking posture or shape where many goals were needed, made the team game to also be characterized by low supply of passes and the lack of the element of surprise.
The game lacked the penetration or defense which could have put the strikers for glory.
 
4. Technical Aggression upfront- Though on paper the Lone Star implored their trusted 4-4-2 formation, in truth; they were organized in a 4-2-4 formation with the quartet of Jabateh, Laffor, Wleh and Williams doing a lot of interchanging mostly in a flat form. But, one talking point of their game generally was their inability to put the opponents under immediate pressure when they lost the ball. They were mostly strolling on the park and did not win many balls in the half of the opposition. Probably Laffor was less of a culprit. Due to this, there was much work to be done by the central defensive pair of Weeks and Keita as well as the flat back four of Grimes, (Jimmy) Dennis, Wesseh and Gebro.

5. Profligacy- Had the team made use of the chances they created mainly through individual brilliance after the interval, the score line would have been a bigger one. But, they squandered chance upon chance. And, though some were half chances, there were also some clear cut ones that should have being buried with much calmness and composure. Goals they say are the life blood of the game and they are the statistics that matter. The players needed to be clinical on the day to frustrate their opponents. They just failed to take the chances in punishing the visitors.