ACFC 1-0 Chicago Red Stars
Finally, three glorious points! I’m not going to be super enthusiastic, however, as this didn’t exactly feel like the team turned a corner. Rather, it felt more like things just kind of worked out. And I think that we really got lucky with Mal Swanson missing the match with a knock. Still, three points on the road is three points on the road. We finally have a W, and maybe this will be something to build off. Only time will tell.
There were a lot of changes in this game, in terms of tactics, style, and personnel. Regarding the latter, I’m particularly interested to see what next week’s lineup looks like, as it seemed like a number of these changes were due to players getting limited minutes after international duty (which I think was absolutely the right choice. The biggest change, to me, was in midfield, with Lily Nabet and Rocky Rodriguez starting, and Henry and Fuller on the bench. I’ll look at some midfield statistics, share a few thoughts on the goalkeeping situation, and then look at some of the tactical changes as well.
Midfield
As I mentioned, Becki Tweed replaced two of the three starters in midfield, and I’m curious how much that changed the dynamic. At first glance, there’s not too much of a change in passing statistics (and I have to include the obvious caveat that we’re dealing with very small sample sizes). In the game against Chicago, the midfield completed 83 of 111 passes. The team as a whole attempted 477, so the midfield was responsible for 23.27% of those attempts. In the three previous games, the midfield averaged 21.14% of total pass attempts, so this was higher than average, although not the most (in the KC game, the midfield had 123 of 527 pass attempts, good for 23.34%). The completion percentage by the midfielders was 74.77% in the Chicago game, compared to an average of 72.64%. So, again, a little bit better than the last three, but not anything that really jumps off the page to me. So how much did those passes progress the ball? In the Chicago game, the midfield had 9 of the 30 total Progressive Passes, or 30%, compared to an average of 14.33 of 38.67, or 37.06%. Fewer overall Progressive Passes in Chicago, and a small percentage contributed by the midfield. In the Chicago game, the midfield also contributed 2 of ACFC’s 6 Key Passes, compared to 1 of 10 in KC, 2 of 11 in Orlando, and 5 of 11 vs Bay FC. I’m not sure that there’s enough data to extrapolate anything regarding Key Passes, but I thought it was interesting, especially regarding how little the midfield contributed in this area in the KC and Orlando games. In terms of Passes into the Penalty Area, the midfield was 0 of 2 in Chicago, compared to an average of 2.33 of 8.33. So, not a great job by the midfield in the final third in Chicago, but then again, not a great job by anyone.
The big distinction I saw was in the midfield’s defensive actions. In the Chicago game, they had 13 Tackles + Interceptions out of 25 T+I for the whole team, or 52%. The average of the past three games is 7.33 T+I for the midfield and 24 T+I for the team, or 30.54%. This also corresponds with the Chicago game featuring more tackles won in the middle third of the field. In every other match, it was the defensive third that had the most tackles by Angel City players. So not that the rate of tackling increased, they were happening in midfield now.
So my interpretation of all that data is that this new midfield did a better job of disrupting Chicago through the middle of the pitch, but also played safer passes, i.e less progressive and more sideways. That’s good in terms of winning the ball closer to the opposition goal, but it’s not too good in terms of creativity. And as creativity was already something of a problem, I think it’s a problem to see the midfield contributing even less here. And that’s probably why I’m not too enthusiastic about the win. After four games, Angel City has only scored four goals, two from set pieces (one of which was an own goal), one penalty, and one from open play. We need to find a way to get our central midfielders involved in this phase of play, and I’m convinced that when we see a higher numbers of Key Passes, and Passes into the Penalty Area from central midfielders, we’ll see more goals too. My thinking is basically this: when a winger receives the ball in the final third they basically have three choices. 1) Cross the ball, 2) Pass backwards to their fullback, or 3) If they can beat their defender, dribble along the endline and either take a low percentage shot or cut back into the middle. If they can beat their defender being the key part of that equation. However, if a central midfielder receives the ball in the final third, there are practically an unlimited number of options available, from a diagonal to the back post, a through ball to the striker, or a square ball to another midfielder. Eventually, I hope that we’ll find a balance that can provide both stability and creativity. Again, I’m really interested to see who gets the start when everyone is healthy and rested.
On the opposite side, Angel City has conceded six goals, two from giveaways in the defensive third, one from a goalkeeping error, one from a set piece, and two from transitions in open play. I’d argue that none of these would have been prevented by a more defensive midfield. Six goals is a small sample, but none of them felt like flukes. They almost all felt like breakdowns in organization and communication at the back. You could certainly say that in the last game, the midfield winning the ball higher up allowed the defense to stay more organized; everything is interconnected. But I really think that the improved defensive performance in Chicago had more to do with the fact that a Swansonless Chicago was the least fearsome attack that we’ve seen so far.
Goalkeeper
As I mentioned in my last article, I thought that Anderson should be pulled for at least a few matches, mostly to get her out of the firing line. The question is, did Haracic do any better? And on the surface, the answer is yes. She got a clean sheet after all. I’m not entirely convinced, however. There were at least three occasions where Haracic made an adventurous pass, but rather than being a turnover, the Angel City defender that received said pass was immediately fouled by a Chicago player. All it takes, though, is an attacker being a little more clever, or a referee a little more tolerant of physicality, and those could have been goals. Also, it felt like Chicago wasn’t pressing as much as other teams have. The Achilles heel for our goalkeepers this year has been distribution rather than shot stopping, and I don’t think that’s actually changed. In terms of team dynamics, I think Haracic is the better option right now, but the underlying problems in playing out of the back still exist.
Tactical Tweaks
Overall, Angel City seemed to play a little more pragmatically, and with a little bit more freedom, than in the previous three games. In particular, I thought they were playing closer together, and I was happy to see the stats bearing that out. In the first three matches, 35.97% of Angel City’s passes were short. In the Chicago game, that went up to 41.51%. I was particularly surprised to see that in the game against Bay FC, a game in which Bay parked the bus in the second half and Angel City had 59% possession, only 32.15% of the passes were short. If the idea, as I’ve heard from several people at ACFC, is to try to play “prettier,” soccer, more possession based, with better buildup play, then I think that keeping players closer together, and making shorter passes is going to be an important part of realizing that.
I also felt like Leroux was less constrained in her role. In particular, I thought that she was dropping deeper to get on the ball more often, with this being the first match that she had more touches in the middle third rather than the attacking third. I think that she’s better when she’s allowed to roam, instead of just a static target. The more freedom she has, the better she’ll perform.
I was also glad to finally see Le Bihan get some minutes, and I thought that she looked good, especially with with a corner that Henry almost put into the back of the net. I’d like to see Le Bihan and Emslie on the field together, because as good as Emslie has been on set pieces, and general delivery, I think that she’s also one of the best on the team in her off-the-ball movement. Le Bihan could free her up to be on the receiving end of good deliveries for a change.
Conclusion
I think that everyone can agree that this was an ugly game, and I also think that we can agree that every good team is going to need to win ugly sometimes. The question is, will this kind of win be an outlier or commonplace? And we won’t really know for awhile, maybe even until the end of the season. But for now, I think that we all take the three points and move on.
Next Match
Next up is the North Carolina Courage, back at home at BMO, on 4/21 at 4:30p. North Carolina will prove a tough test, as they’re currently second in the table, and lead the league in Goal Differential and xGD. They’ve had seven different goal scorers, but Ashley Sanchez, who they traded for at the draft, seems to be the one pulling the strings. If you’re going to be at the match, let me know!