View Full Version: Dale Mitchell strikes back

U-Sector - The Original Toronto FC Supporters Group & Message Board > Canada > Dale Mitchell strikes back


Title: Dale Mitchell strikes back


ag futbol - October 9, 2008 12:50 AM (GMT)
QUOTE
"I wouldn't think if someone has turned down three call-ups [to the national team] in the past 18 months you would get a big song and dance when he doesn't make the selection," Mitchell said. "It was clear to me in selecting the team that our left side has been strong and I have had several conversations with Jim about the situation here and I felt we weren't getting anywhere. I don't think the timing of his comments helped either but that was Jimmy's decision."


http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/R...ortsSoccer/home


Hey don't expect him to save the team but if your asking for CYA, this is the CSA we're talking about! Clearly they wanted the same attributes in a coach they have themselves.

Edit: Check out these quotables from the sportsnet.ca article:

QUOTE
In terms of the qualifying campaign, I think the negativity started after the first game against Jamaica (a 1-1 tie), which I was trying to convince people was a good performance, not maybe the three points that we wanted obviously but certainly something to build on. But other people saw it differently," Mitchell said from Sunrise, Fla., where the Canadians are training.



QUOTE
Mitchell also suggested that some of the critics do not understand the sport at the highest level.

"I think there's enough scrutiny. I don't know if there's the experience, if that's the right word, within the people that are doing the scrutiny to know what it really is that we're dealing with here," he said. "That is the frustrating part. Without the background or really the knowledge to cover international soccer at this level -- I think that that's part of the problem that we're facing, but you know we're a country that's growing in every way in terms of the game and trying to grow it at the professional level, we're trying to grow it at the international level. But we don't have what other countries have -- we don't have the game played in Canada, at a high enough level, on a regular basis, for people to really know what to expect of our national team. I think that is part of the issue we're dealing with here."

huginho - October 9, 2008 03:10 AM (GMT)
When he's talking about the lack background and knowledge is he refering to himself? This guys full of excuses. You want to talk about scrutiny? you have no idea Dale! The fact is he took the most talented group in the last 15-20 years and failed miserably at getting the job done.

Bellerose - October 9, 2008 01:01 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Earlier in the week, Brennan, who has represented Canada 49 times, indicated that he would never play for Canada again as long as Mitchell was in charge of the team.


Atta' boy jimmy.

bgnewf - October 9, 2008 02:10 PM (GMT)
With due respect Dale, it is you that does not apparently understand the game, not your detractors. Mitchell should focus some of that razor sharp Soccer intellect he claims to possess inwards on himself. Perhaps then he can provide us with an answer as to why the best group of Canadian senior players in a generation has performed so poorly in qualifications this time around.

The CSA and Mitchell are disgraces. I am glad Brennan has spoken out and this is why he is respected by most of the TFC faithful as a great Captain.

CSA = Douches
Mitchell = As incompetent as Mo Johnston
Jim Brennan = Great Captain and proud Canadian

zacRWE - October 9, 2008 02:46 PM (GMT)
Mitchell is brutal. His tactics are falty and he is naive to believe that a 1-1 tie at home to the weakest team in the group is a good result. Canada should of won that game and at minimum drew with Honduras in the new Honduran colony - Montreal.
Like so many other times, I keep comming back to the players side because of how stupid our soccer people in the CSA are. They players really got on my nerves this past qualifying and I started to lean against them, but with this clown in the managerial chair, it's hard not to revert back to hating the managment.
Auf Wiedersehen Dale!

bfq - October 9, 2008 03:20 PM (GMT)
I can't believe someone actually asked him if he thought of resigning after the loss to Honduras.

Mitchell...resign? Here's a guy that accepted a promotion and then led our u-20's to a 0 win, 0 goal performance...on home soil. If ever there was a time to resign that would've been it. If he can't get our future to play well how does anyone expect our present team to play well?

But Dale, I forgive you. It's not your fault that your tactics are ineffective, it's ours because we clearly don't understand that when you tie a weak team at home and then lose another game at home to the team that is your biggest threat that it's a good thing. Here we thought that winning was a good thing. It does make sense, Montreal is winning in CCL and still can't sell out. Vancouver won their USL semi-final and only 4,000 come out. TFC had been in last place for so long yet they sell out constantly. It makes sense that you thought we'd support you for leading our best team in my lifetime into the gutter.

Oldtimer - October 9, 2008 04:07 PM (GMT)
Sack Mitchell!! Send him back to the minors!!!

...and lest we forget... SACK THE CSA who hired him!

StuGautz - October 9, 2008 04:36 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Oldtimer @ Oct 9 2008, 12:07 PM)
Sack Mitchell!! Send him back to the minors!!!

...and lest we forget... SACK THE CSA who hired him!

Send him to the Red Bulls...don't keep him in Canada.

Gian-Luca - October 9, 2008 05:05 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (zacRWE @ Oct 9 2008, 09:46 AM)
Mitchell is brutal. His tactics are falty and he is naive to believe that a 1-1 tie at home to the weakest team in the group is a good result.

That's not what he said though - he said the performance against Jamaica was good, not the result. Which it was, barring Pat Onstad.


ag futbol - October 9, 2008 05:23 PM (GMT)
Not really. We kept giving the ball to De Guzman who was predictably surounded by multiple people. Once that feel apart we had no other ideas about how to work the ball up the field on the ground. So the end result was Mike Klukowski acting as our playmaker in the left back spot trying to lob balls over the top.

Simoes predictably tried to take our best player out of the game and we had no idea how to counter that.

bgnewf - October 9, 2008 05:34 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (ag futbol @ Oct 9 2008, 01:23 PM)
Not really.  We kept giving the ball to De Guzman who was predictably surounded by multiple people.  Once that feel apart we had no other ideas about how to work the ball up the field on the ground.  So the end result was Mike Klukowski acting as our playmaker in the left back spot trying to lob balls over the top. 

Simoes predictably tried to take our best player out of the game and we had no idea how to counter that.

Agreed...Simoes took Dale Mitchell to school tactically.

Individually we were the better side in Toronto but in no way shape or form did Mitchell out coach anybody.

ThisIsAnfield - October 9, 2008 05:36 PM (GMT)
What the fuck is there not to understand about this game at the highest level?

You win, you qualify, you have good times and people stop referring to you as a cunt.

You lose, you don't qualify, you didn't do your job, you fucking cunt.

ag futbol - October 9, 2008 05:42 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (ThisIsAnfield @ Oct 9 2008, 12:36 PM)
What the fuck is there not to understand about this game at the highest level?

You win, you qualify, you have good times and people stop referring to you as a cunt.

You lose, you don't qualify, you didn't do your job, you fucking cunt.

Exactly, that's the best point anybody could make here.

You don't have to know a single thing about soccer to benchmark when a coach usually gets shown the door for poor performances. And Dale Mitchell's shit show has gone way past where any other country in the world would accept it.

Most coaches would get fired for what DM does in a given week.

huginho - October 9, 2008 06:00 PM (GMT)
exactly. even someone with no knowledge as Mitchell says know's that 1 point out of a possible 6 at home is a failure and not to mention no wins or no goals at the under 20.

ThisIsAnfield - October 9, 2008 06:04 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (huginho @ Oct 9 2008, 02:00 PM)
no wins or no goals at the under 20.

This is cause for a promotion, for God's sake! I'm baffled. I must be one of those that knows nothing about the sport at this level...

Bellerose - October 9, 2008 09:11 PM (GMT)
ugh dale mitchell talking hurts my fucking head <_< :wacko: :wacko:

Gian-Luca - October 9, 2008 09:42 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (bgnewf @ Oct 9 2008, 12:34 PM)
QUOTE (ag futbol @ Oct 9 2008, 01:23 PM)
Not really.  We kept giving the ball to De Guzman who was predictably surounded by multiple people.  Once that feel apart we had no other ideas about how to work the ball up the field on the ground.  So the end result was Mike Klukowski acting as our playmaker in the left back spot trying to lob balls over the top. 

Simoes predictably tried to take our best player out of the game and we had no idea how to counter that.

Agreed...Simoes took Dale Mitchell to school tactically.

Individually we were the better side in Toronto but in no way shape or form did Mitchell out coach anybody.

Nobody said or implied that he did. That doesn't mean the performance was not a good one. We outplayed them and should have won, and the person responsible for not winning feels so bad about the horrendous mistake he made that he's temporarily quit the team.

The biggest problem facing the Canadian national team right now is one of attitude, IMO. When some of the players are still complaining about not having all the games in Montreal even after the debacle there and are seen partying at Montreal nightclubs after losses in between games while their supporters are in tears of depression, there's something not right. That's why the discussion of the negativity that started after the Jamaica is relevant - instead of building on the performance, we went the opposite direction.

It's also why Mitchell should have gone after the Mexico game. He can still prove me wrong of course, but it seems to me that he's unable to instill the correct attitude and belief in the players. It's a shame that a coach for a veteran team is needed to do that, but that's the situation we're in.

zacRWE - October 10, 2008 04:01 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Gian-Luca @ Oct 9 2008, 12:05 PM)
QUOTE (zacRWE @ Oct 9 2008, 09:46 AM)
Mitchell is brutal. His tactics are falty and he is naive to believe that a 1-1 tie at home to the weakest team in the group is a good result.

That's not what he said though - he said the performance against Jamaica was good, not the result. Which it was, barring Pat Onstad.

Ya, but performances are one thing results something else. I guess that's true, Canada did play well. They hit a crossbar and had some good scoring ops, but really didnt look terrifying, didnt strike fear into Honduras or Mexico.

Franky - October 10, 2008 12:01 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Gian-Luca @ Oct 9 2008, 04:42 PM)
QUOTE (bgnewf @ Oct 9 2008, 12:34 PM)
QUOTE (ag futbol @ Oct 9 2008, 01:23 PM)
Not really.  We kept giving the ball to De Guzman who was predictably surounded by multiple people.  Once that feel apart we had no other ideas about how to work the ball up the field on the ground.  So the end result was Mike Klukowski acting as our playmaker in the left back spot trying to lob balls over the top. 

Simoes predictably tried to take our best player out of the game and we had no idea how to counter that.

Agreed...Simoes took Dale Mitchell to school tactically.

Individually we were the better side in Toronto but in no way shape or form did Mitchell out coach anybody.

Nobody said or implied that he did. That doesn't mean the performance was not a good one. We outplayed them and should have won, and the person responsible for not winning feels so bad about the horrendous mistake he made that he's temporarily quit the team.

The biggest problem facing the Canadian national team right now is one of attitude, IMO. When some of the players are still complaining about not having all the games in Montreal even after the debacle there and are seen partying at Montreal nightclubs after losses in between games while their supporters are in tears of depression, there's something not right. That's why the discussion of the negativity that started after the Jamaica is relevant - instead of building on the performance, we went the opposite direction.

It's also why Mitchell should have gone after the Mexico game. He can still prove me wrong of course, but it seems to me that he's unable to instill the correct attitude and belief in the players. It's a shame that a coach for a veteran team is needed to do that, but that's the situation we're in.

G-L,

i understand what you are trying to convey, but...

in the end, it is still (truly) a loss and not a tie. Mitchell's strategy to not start Sutton and Brennan for a game held at BMO, should have been a no brainer. two players, in particular, that are familiar with the environment. when this coach does not own up to his errors and watching the team struggle, for it, STEP ASIDE.

his track record with the U-20s was very abysmal, but he gets the CMNT job?????

personally, those were huge alarm bells ringing at its highest decibel. Then there is the matter of the team's preparation. the next time the CMNT plays against malta, Luxembourg or estonia, think about that too. where are the rivals in your own region???

Canada, did play a better game against jamaica, but Simoes neutralized DeGuzman very smartly and DeRosario, was non-existent. due to an unfortunate, shaky game on onstad's part, it cost canada the easiest possible result they could have gained.

the game in Montreal, the CMNT literally died once Radzinski got injured. enough said. i am soo bitter about that game, in all aspects.

loyola - October 10, 2008 02:58 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Franky @ Oct 10 2008, 07:01 AM)
QUOTE (Gian-Luca @ Oct 9 2008, 04:42 PM)
QUOTE (bgnewf @ Oct 9 2008, 12:34 PM)
QUOTE (ag futbol @ Oct 9 2008, 01:23 PM)
Not really.  We kept giving the ball to De Guzman who was predictably surounded by multiple people.  Once that feel apart we had no other ideas about how to work the ball up the field on the ground.  So the end result was Mike Klukowski acting as our playmaker in the left back spot trying to lob balls over the top. 

Simoes predictably tried to take our best player out of the game and we had no idea how to counter that.

Agreed...Simoes took Dale Mitchell to school tactically.

Individually we were the better side in Toronto but in no way shape or form did Mitchell out coach anybody.

Nobody said or implied that he did. That doesn't mean the performance was not a good one. We outplayed them and should have won, and the person responsible for not winning feels so bad about the horrendous mistake he made that he's temporarily quit the team.

The biggest problem facing the Canadian national team right now is one of attitude, IMO. When some of the players are still complaining about not having all the games in Montreal even after the debacle there and are seen partying at Montreal nightclubs after losses in between games while their supporters are in tears of depression, there's something not right. That's why the discussion of the negativity that started after the Jamaica is relevant - instead of building on the performance, we went the opposite direction.

It's also why Mitchell should have gone after the Mexico game. He can still prove me wrong of course, but it seems to me that he's unable to instill the correct attitude and belief in the players. It's a shame that a coach for a veteran team is needed to do that, but that's the situation we're in.

G-L,

i understand what you are trying to convey, but...

in the end, it is still (truly) a loss and not a tie. Mitchell's strategy to not start Sutton and Brennan for a game held at BMO, should have been a no brainer. two players, in particular, that are familiar with the environment. when this coach does not own up to his errors and watching the team struggle, for it, STEP ASIDE.

his track record with the U-20s was very abysmal, but he gets the CMNT job?????

personally, those were huge alarm bells ringing at its highest decibel. Then there is the matter of the team's preparation. the next time the CMNT plays against malta, Luxembourg or estonia, think about that too. where are the rivals in your own region???

Canada, did play a better game against jamaica, but Simoes neutralized DeGuzman very smartly and DeRosario, was non-existent. due to an unfortunate, shaky game on onstad's part, it cost canada the easiest possible result they could have gained.

the game in Montreal, the CMNT literally died once Radzinski got injured. enough said. i am soo bitter about that game, in all aspects.

I don't get that Sutton over Onstad no brainer thing. First, Onstad is a much better keeper at the club level and has played well with Houston and Canada in the year prior to the WCQ. Sutton is an average MLS keeper and has given his share of soft goals with TFC this year while, I admit did also save his team asses a few times as well. Sutton has only played one game with Canada in the last year (close door friendly against Panama in June). Prior to the game against Jamaica, there were no reason to start Sutton over Onstad just because of fieldturf. If they had been of same quality I would've agree but that wasn't the case. Second, the goal wasn't turf related anyways.

For the rest I agree that DM hiring was a botch operation but that's not really his fault.

Team prep was pretty good. Look at the results, we played in competitives games (Iceland, CR, South Africa, Estonia, Brazil, Panama). This to me looks like a good prep if you add to that last year GC and the Venezuela friendly. If we would win those games 4-0 I would be complaining about the prep but when we can't win any of those friendlies. You might want a complain about the choice of Iceland and Estonia as opponent but you have to remember that those games happened on single FIFA date where you get your release 48 hours prior to the game. So we need to find an opponent in Europe for those dates.

Like I,ve said on the V's board, I feel like our players have a bit of an attitude problem. Of course Mitchell is in part responsible for that but the players must be held accountable as well, they are grown adults, pro athletes, they shouldn't need their coach to realize how important is a WORLD CUP QUALIFIER.

ag futbol - October 10, 2008 03:37 PM (GMT)
Onstad probably has one of the best defense in MLS standing in front of him, while Sutton would most likely have the worst. If you really think Sutton has been that average while Onstad has been outstanding i question how many MLS game you've actually watched this year. What Sutton is asked to do in an average game Onstad doesn't face in a year. Neither has been perfect, but to call Onstad a class above is completely untrue.

While he might be better at organizing a defense, he's getting old and slow, he simply can't do the job trying to stop shots at a high level. Either Lars or Sutton would have made a better choice.

Stepping on the field and playing does not consistute good preperation. Good preperation organizes a team and builds cohesion and chemistry. It should also give us a good idea of who our best players are. Why are we shuffling strikers and goal keepers at the last minute if our prep was so solid? Why can't we figure out how to work the balll up the field on the ground if the other team decides to mark De Guzman out of the game?

The players deserve some blame, but last i checked the coach is still ultimately held accountable in these types of situations, Mitchell shouldn't be any different.

loyola - October 10, 2008 03:58 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (ag futbol @ Oct 10 2008, 10:37 AM)
Onstad probably has one of the best defense in MLS standing in front of him, while Sutton would most likely have the worst. If you really think Sutton has been that average while Onstad has been outstanding i question how many MLS game you've actually watched this year. What Sutton is asked to do in an average game Onstad doesn't face in a year. Neither has been perfect, but to call Onstad a class above is completely untrue.

While he might be better at organizing a defense, he's getting old and slow, he simply can't do the job trying to stop shots at a high level. Either Lars or Sutton would have made a better choice.

Stepping on the field and playing does not consistute good preperation. Good preperation organizes a team and builds cohesion and chemistry. It should also give us a good idea of who our best players are. Why are we shuffling strikers and goal keepers at the last minute if our prep was so solid? Why can't we figure out how to work the balll up the field on the ground if the other team decides to mark De Guzman out of the game?

The players deserve some blame, but last i checked the coach is still ultimately held accountable in these types of situations, Mitchell shouldn't be any different.

I've seen a few Houston games in different competition this year and I've watched a lot of TFC games as well and Onstad is a much better keeper than Sutton IMO. Except from TFc fans, yu won't hear many MLS fans talking about Sutton as one of the league best keeper, Onstad is being much more respected in the league and that base on his current form.

You're bringing a good point abut the defense. Did you notice that Sutton can't manage his? He's a very poor communicator while Onstad is much better and effective. Onstad is still able to pull some incredible saves as we saw in the Superliga games this summer. Let's avoid talking about distribution, I know CIS and NCAA freshmen who are better than Sutton at it.

Of course, after the Jamaica game, Onstad had to be replace due to his mistake but that doesn't mean it was a bad decision to play him in the first place. Stuff like that happens.

As for the prep, of course the coach is responsible to make it work but the point that was brought up was that the quality of the opposition was the problem. So that's why I address that question.

I'm not trying to save Mitchell face, just questionning the fact that if the players can't be motivated by the prospect of playing Honduras in a crucial WCQ, what will motivate them???

ag futbol - October 10, 2008 04:21 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (loyola @ Oct 10 2008, 10:58 AM)
As for the prep, of course the coach is responsible to make it work but the point that was brought up was that the quality of the opposition was the problem. So that's why I address that question.

I'm not trying to save Mitchell face, just questionning the fact that if the players can't be motivated by the prospect of playing Honduras in a crucial WCQ, what will motivate them???

I agree motivation still seems to be a problem.

I'd be willing to give Sutton a pass on distribution, simply because we know the TFC coaching staff is living in the dark ages when it comes to how to play the ball up field. Rick Titus, said as much when he was told to play the ball over the top all the time. He's lofting that ball up field because that's what they are telling him to do.

I don't think Sutton is an all-star keeper at all, but I'd still rate him above Onstad simply because Pat has severly lost a step with age at this point. Lars should have been the choice from the start, regardless of his position at his club he's still the best player we have.

It's not like we leave Stalteri on the bench because he can't get a game anywhere.




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree