ACFC 0-0 Houston Dash

This is a hard game to categorize. Was it good? Was it bad? That’s the enigma of a 0-0 draw. There’s definitely both good and bad, and it will probably be what happens in the next couple games that will define how we look back at this game. If they go well, and this becomes part of an undefeated streak, we’d say good point on the road. At the moment though, it stands as part of a five game winless streak.

At first glance, there is a lot that looks good in this match. We had our 3rd highest Possession share of the season, at 58.4%. And the two games that are higher were the opener against Bay FC and away to the Spirit, and in both of those, I thought that our opponents were happy to give up the ball. In this case, I thought that the possession indicated that we were actually in control of the match for large portions, and there were some gratifying occasions where we were able to keep the ball in Houston’s end for a decent period of time.

We also outshot Houston 14 to 9, and 5 to 1 for Shots on Target. We had our highest xG of the whole season with 2.2. But this is also where the bad comes in. 0.79 xG came in the form of Emslie’s penalty, and Bright’s sequence at the end of the game gave her two shots, one worth .31 xG and the followup worth a whopping .87 xG. In real terms, though, those can’t both be goals, it would be one or the other. Or, as actually happened, neither*. So if we subtract that sequence and the penalty, we’re left with only .49 xG, or .0445 xG per shot. In fact, there was only one shot outside of the two big chances that generated an xG of at least .1: Le Bihan’s shot in the 19th minute that was blocked. That’s not really going to win you games. We did have those two big chances, though, and had Angel City won 2-0, I think that anyone watching would have said that was a fair result. Whether it was a good enough performance to beat most teams in the NWSL is another matter.

* According to the refs, neither shot went in.

Gisele Thompson

Gisele was definitely one of the bright spots of this match for me. For a fullback, she was incredibly involved in the attack. She had or was tied for the team lead in the following categories: Shot Creating Actions (5), Progressive Carries (6), Key Passes (2), Passes Into the Final Third (8), Progressive Passes (7). She was also second on the team in Crosses (4), Tackles (3, tied with Spencer), and Progressive Passes Received (8). The problem is that I’m not sure that the rest of our attack knows what to do when she gets up the field. Gisele can overlap or come centrally, and I think that she can really create problems for an opposition defense. But the rest of the team is just too static when she gets the ball into dangerous positions. When she overlaps, (and I think this is true of any of our full backs), it’s usually the winger that drops back as the safe backward pass, e.g. if Gisele takes the ball to the endline, Emslie will wait at the corner of the box. I don’t like this, because it’s not really overloading a side, it’s basically just having the fullback and winger switch places. It also puts some of our most dangerous attackers (Emslie and Thompson) in a position that when they get the ball, there are at least seven defenders between them and the goal. I’d much rather see our wingers moving into the box, and a midfielder coming across to provide the safe option. Similarly, when Gisele goes into a more central position, everyone else should be making some kind of run. But when she does get into those spots, I think everyone else is waiting to see what happens. Still, it’s a building block. I think that fullbacks can actually play the biggest role in overloads and chance creation, and Gisele is already making an impact in that regard. The rest of the team just needs to figure out how to capitalize on it.

Madison Curry and MA Vignola

Curry was a rock in defense, once again, and it cannot be underestimated how important she is to the team. She led Angel City in almost every defensive category. She finished with 10 Tackles + Interceptions (T+I), while the next best player on Angel City only had 3. She was also instrumental in the buildup. She led Angel City in Touches, Passes, and Carries. Her Progressive Carry Distance of 60 yards was actually even more than Spencer. The really striking thing to me is that this was the game in which Sarah Gorden returned. Now granted, she’s probably not back to 100% fitness, and she played 62 minutes to Curry’s 90, but Curry had twice as many Touches (82 to 41), and almost twice as many Carries (51 to 26) as Gorden. For me, Curry looked like she was the primary centerback, assuming the main responsibilities, both with the ball, and without. And it has to be reiterated that she hasn’t played this position since high school.

I want to mention Vignola here, too, and I’ll tie it together with Curry in a moment. Vignola only played 28 minutes, coming on for Emslie, and literally stepping into the same position, playing Left Wing. I don’t remember Vignola being an out and out attacker before, but obviously she has attacking instincts for a fullback. I think that she was decent as a winger, making some good runs, and she had a good header off a corner, forcing Campbell to make a pretty good save. Currently, I think that we are a little bit thin at winger, and if Vignola can develop that position, I think that’s good news for her and the team.

But this raises a question with both players: where to play them, and/or who do we build around? Gisele Thompson, to me is a player to build around. Curry has been fantastic, but is she a utility player that can be put in wherever she’s needed, or is she a cornerstone? So far injuries have guaranteed that she’s a starter, but if everyone is healthy, what does our best back four look like? Honestly, it’s probably too early to say what Curry’s best position and highest level look like, but this match actually provides an interesting counterpoint in Tarciane. Statistically in this match, Curry was not too different. She had 10 Tackles + Interceptions and 2 Blocks, compared to 8 T+I and 4 Blocks for Tarciane. But to me, Taricane looks scarier, and not just because she’s willing to go for possible leg-breaking tackles. She routinely muscled our players off the ball. Even when she was beaten, she could usually recover and make a tackle from behind. Yes, she gave up the handball, but by the end of the match, I was thinking that Angel City should just avoid her side of the field. She looked every bit like she was worth the nearly $500,000 that Houston paid to sign her (and I bet that someone like Arsenal or PSG will pay at least $1,000,000 in just a few years, probably after the next World Cup). But like I said earlier, it is probably too early to say with Curry. She’s only 11 games into her professional career, while Tarciane, despite being younger, has completed two full seasons as a pro, and has already made her national team debut for Brazil. Also, of course, Curry is traditionally a fullback, so maybe she never has to grow into that shutdown, bar-the-door kind of defender. But then if Curry and Gisele are the fullbacks of the future, where does that put Vignola?

I put Vignola in the category of players to (possibly) build around, because I think that she has a unique skill set. She scored 3 goals last year, which doesn’t seem like a lot necessarily. But most fullbacks, in terms of offense, are going to be contributing crosses, or getting to the endline, and cutting it back. Vignola is the only one I can think of in the NWSL that can finish off plays, rather than creating them. At her best, she’s a weapon that opposing defenses aren’t used to coping with, and I think that’s why she got a call up to the USWNT. Last season compared to other NWSL fullbacks per 90, Vignola was in the 98th percentile for Goals, Shots, Shots on Target and Progressive Carries, and in the 92nd percentile for xG. Nobody else is quite as effective at driving directly at goal.

The issue behind all of this, for me, is Angel City’s ongoing identity crisis. I think that there are tactical issues to work out, as I’ve mentioned before. But I also think that clarity about each player’s role will go some way toward solving that, both in terms of how they play, and who takes the lead. This is not just clarity for each player, but also for their teammates. And honestly, I don’t think that we’re winning a trophy this year. We need to be building a foundation and deciding who is a part of that.

Bright vs. Leroux

There seems to be a pretty vocal group of Angel City fans calling for Bright to start, either in place of Leroux, or Le Bihan. I, personally, would not take off Le Bihan. But this match illustrates the conundrum, I think. As is fitting with the theme, they both have good and bad on display. Leroux did not offer much in her 90 minutes. She only had 1 Shot that was blocked in the 45+3 minute, worth .08 xG, and 2 Passes into the Final Third and 2 Progressive Passes, but 0 Passes into the Attacking Penalty Box and 0 Key Passes. Bright, on the other hand, had 2 Shots, both on target, in her 18 minutes, and as they came in the same sequence, she gets a .9 xG. She also had 1 Pass Into the Final Third, and 1 Progressive Pass, and I think those were actually both the same pass. So, based on this game, Bright looks like more of a threat than Leroux. If we look at the season, this is also true. Bright has 3.5 Shots per 90, compared to Leroux’s 1.18. Bright has .72 xG per 90, while Leroux is only getting .24. They’re pretty similar on xG per Shot, at .24 versus .2, in favor of Bright.

There is more to being a striker than shooting, however, and that’s where the tables turn. Leroux had 71% Passing (22 0f 31), while Bright was only 40% (2 of 5). And even one of those completions was an easy pass, that she made much, much harder than it should be. Leroux and Bright both had 3 Miscontrols in the game, but of course, Bright played 1/5th as many minutes. Bright was also Dispossessed 3 times in her 18 minutes, while Leroux had 0. Going by The Athletic’s Turnover Percentage stat, Leroux had a 39.22% Turnover Rate, while Bright had a staggering 52.94%.

So to me, it boils down to Bright is more of a threat, but she’s also more of a liability, and makes it harder for the rest of the team to consistently build attacks. So the pattern of Bright not starting, but getting some time off the bench in almost every game does make sense when framed in this fashion. The thing is, I think that Leroux is leaving the door open. She’s safer on the ball, but not exactly safe, and she provides some threat, but not a lot. Her 3 Goals put her in the 53rd percentile, compared to other forwards in the NWSL this year. Her Totals Shots are only enough for the 3rd Percentile (!), while her xG is in the 25th percentile. Angel City’s No 9 spot is available. But if Bright wants it, she has to stop turning the ball over.

One last postscript to this matter is that we can’t forget Casey Phair. She’s played 0 minutes for Angel City, but we were able to see her play in some matches for South Korea vs the USWNT. These are friendlies, but she’s also going against some the best defenders in the world. And generally, I was impressed, especially in the second game. I thought that she had more tools in her locker than either Leroux or Bright. We saw Phair running the channels, dropping into the half-space, playing dummy passes, and more. Not everything worked, but again, for her age and the level of competition, it was fantastic. She probably needs more technical polishing, but I really like her approach to playing striker.

We have two more games in quick succession this week, though, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see more rotation, and probably more minutes for Bright.

Conclusions

As I said at the start, there was some good and there was some bad in this Houston match. But the more I look at the squad, the more I’m convinced that we do have talent on the roster, but we just can’t get everyone on the same page. From the outside, I’m not sure that we’ll ever know what the problem is. But my impression is that the front office told Becki Tweed at the outset of the season that Angel City couldn’t play the same underdog football that worked for her last year. So she’s trying to do something different, namely controlling possession more. But things weren’t going well at the start of the season, so some players are reverting to what worked before, namely trying to grind out ugly wins, while others are trying to go in the new direction. I’m not sure that we’re going to see this disconnect resolved any time soon. But I am increasingly convinced that there is talent in this team, with Gisele Thompson being the latest to show her quality. Just imagine if there was a way that everyone could be playing well at the same time.

And finally, just to touch on THAT shot, yes, I think it went in. Maybe it was also a handball. I was actually surprised that there isn’t goal line technology, as I thought that was easier to implement than VAR. I’m curious what it would take to add it, and whether the league would accept only some stadiums having it. The thing that I don’t get is why the ref never looked at the replay himself. There’s no way that was clearly not a goal. I haven’t seen an official explanation from the league. But maybe next time, let’s just finish a little more convincingly.

Upcoming games are Wednesday June 19th at home vs Racing Louisville, 7p Pacific, at BMO and on CBSSN and Saturday June 22nd, away at Bay FC, 7p Pacific, on Ion.

Stats are from FBRef and The Athletic