Thoughts from Portland Timbers' 2024 Opener
Disclaimer. I do not have the MLS season pass. These thoughts are from the highlights.
Both sides played a 4-2-3-1. Pretty common nowadays. Even though statistically Colorado had higher possession, (59% to 41%) more passes, (539 to 375) and greater pass accuracy, (87% to 80%) it felt like Portland had the upper hand. Perhaps due to Portland's early goals, Colorado seemed desperate.
First goal:
Portland's early first goal started with a classic one two pass from Mosquera (no. 29) to Moreno (no. 30) in order to bypass the defender, allowing Mosquera to make a deep run down to the corner. Mosquera then sliced the ball through to roughly the penalty spot intended for no. 27 Asprilla. Asprilla did not time his run well, but fortunately Williamson (no. 19) had ran in to fill that central spot and finish the ball off. This strategy of driving the ball in deep then passing it back to the penalty spot is a very common tried and true attack.
Second Goal:
Portland's second goal resulted from a throw in. Upon receiving the ball, Paredes (no. 22) lobbed a high pass once again towards the penalty spot, which was met by Antony's (no. 11) header.
In preparation for the throw in, Timbers moved into 2-4-4. This is evident by the four players pressed against the penalty box, and another four (including the player making the throw-in) not far behind. This means that two defenders pushed up. Committing so many players up forward on a regular throw-in means that Portland would be very vulnerable to quick counterattacks if the other team play with a deep-lying striker. But Colorado had committed all players back to defend. Dear Rapids, what's the point of playing a 4-2-3-1 if that 1 is not going to stay way up like a dagger against the defensive line? This lack of preparedness to quickly counter would cause them to miss opportunities later in the game.
Third goal:
Williamson slices a long pass to the completely unmarked Antony! First it was Asprilla, now Antony who remains deep. Portland's commitment to having a player remain on the edge of Colorado's back line, which Colorado never really had, is what made the Timbers the bigger attacking threat in this game. The Rapids were caught lacking, the supposed back 4 was only a back 3. Where did their last defender go? Why is Antony completely unmarked? Did they push into center midfield? Is that why instead of 2 back pivots ahead of the defensive line they have four? Speaking of being unmarked, even though Colorado had a numerical advantage in the midfield, four players ahead of their defensive line to Portland's two, they still left players unmarked. Is that Asprilla down the right? I think that's Asprilla. Even though he didn't get the ball, there should have been no reason why Asprilla was charging forward unpursued.
Attempted Colorado counterattack:
As Colorado sought to pull a goal back before the half, they ran headfirst into the Timbers back 2 defensive midfielders before they could even make contact with the disciplined Timbers back 4.
Colorado did not have an attack ready. Their right flank struggles to catch up and are unable to connect into a front 4. Not willing to back pass and having the left flank cut off by Paredes, the Colorado midfield/attacker tries to go at it alone and is fouled. Colorado's momentum is rapidly (haha) dead in the water.
Colorado own goal:
The Colorado defender was just a step or two behind, but that was enough for the Timbers winger (Antony?) to beat him to the ball, drive deep, and lay a dangerous cross right in front of the goal which is deflected in by Colorado defender Vines. (no. 3) Again, the Colorado back 4 is just a back 3. Someone clearly didn't get the memo this game that they're supposed to be a defender.
There was a trio of Portland midfielders behind the Colorado midfield off screen. This means that Portland's 4-2-3-1 breaks off into the classic 4-3-3 when on a quick breakthrough and no time for set-pieces. The 4-3-3 is the default EAFC (formerly FIFA) default formation for a reason. Asprilla combines with Antony wonderfully to demonstrate the attacking prowess of the tried and true attacking trio formation.
A Better Colorado Attempt:
Yeah okay. Colorado pulled one back from a header from a corner kick. Not much Portland could have done about that. But what happened to the Timbers back 4 here? The Timbers were caught in a 1v1 situation by long, incisive passes through the lines. Portland defenders were caught watching the ball instead of the Colorado players and left strikers unguarded. The Rapids used the same attack Portland did, driving deep and lobbing a pass into the penalty area. The Timbers are lucky the Rapids striker missed the shot.
Conclusion:
The Portland Timbers are okay when they can control the pace of the game. The fairly consistent formation lines indicate a good understanding of basic principles of tactics. However, due to overcommitment on attacks, the Timbers are vulnerable to quick counterattacks. They were lucky Colorado’s finishing isn’t good.
Comments
Post a Comment