RSL cautious around Fire, heed warnings about getting burned

RSL cautious around Fire, heed warnings about getting burned

There are two kinds of draws: There's the exciting draw — you know the sort! The ones where you come from behind, you battle, you fight, and you end up snatching a point when it looked like you were destined for an ominous zero. Those, I can deal with. Then, there are draws like last night's: You play, you play, you play, and a good 90 minutes passes, then the match is over.

That's not to say that we didn't just earn a valuable point, and that we didn't put forth a lot of effort. We clearly did, and our players can hold their head high on effort: Jonny Steele, Ned Grabavoy and Kyle Beckerman in the midfield formed an effective block against Chicago's midfield, while the defensive line was superb. Chris Schuler in particular came into the side and showed why resting Nat Borchers wasn't just possible, but not a difficult decision.

The Shoe is an excellent defender, and at this point, he will only improve with match time. What will this mean for him as a player? We'll see, I suppose. It's exciting, isn't it? Just a year ago, we'd be shocked for him to see time on the pitch. Now? "Oh, hey, Chris Schuler's starting. Cool! Good time for Borchers to rest."

If we're to speak tactically of the match, there were two big things: First, Chicago wanted to cross, and to a small extent, we let them. They lumped ball after ball into the box, and time after time we cleared it away. But for a single intensely nervy moment at the beginning of the match, we never really looked genuinely worried. Second, we couldn't find a passing rhythm to save our lives. We'd connect with a few passes, and — boom! — long ball. Lacking in support, Saborio couldn't get on as many as he'd like, and Paulo Jr. is never likely to win too many headers with a stature such as his.

So why did we insist on lumping the ball long so often? I was a bit confused by that. It did help remove pressure, we know that much, but it didn't help much in build-up play. There were some instances, sure, where it worked out well and the defense was almost sprung, and perhaps those instances make the passing approach worth it if we bury our chances early. I can't really say. I do know, however, that this was one of those matches where a goal in either direction would have radically changed the look and feel of the match. Ah, well.

The one negative to come from the match is the early departure of Javier Morales to what seems to be a right quad strain. It was before he had much chance to make an impact, and perhaps he could have been the player to turn it on its head.

Right, well, I'm struggling here. What do we say about a draw like that? It's great that we didn't concede. I'm proud of our lads for their work rate. We had some wonderful standout performers. And? Well, that's about it. We had a few chances, we missed them. They had a few chances, they missed those. Even barely starts to describe it.

Right, some stats, then I'm off.

  • We conceded only six fouls — prior to this match, we had conceded an average of 13 per game.
  • We were outpassed: We went 345/464 in the pass, while Chicago went 442/570. It's the first time since the Sporting KC match that we've been out passed like this without extenuating circumstances (a referee coughing up red, for one).
  • Kyle Beckerman really led the team once again: 60/71 in passing, 4/4 in the tackle, six interceptions, 15 recoveries. If you needed evidence that he leads our side from his defensive midfield spot, this is it. I'd love to see him get just a little further forward at times and score the odd goal, but he knows better than I do what's needed for this side. We've got to trust in the dreadlocks.
  • 19/20 in the tackle. Really, 19/20. That's excellent. The one missed was high up the pitch by Bonfigli late in the match. What a performance defensively. Talk a bow, lads.

More stats tomorrow, then, but for today, let's just revel in a fine defensive performance and wonder if we could have done more.