World Cup 2014
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
19 Jul 14
23:54
Joined:
Date Joined:
08 Feb 08
Exactly why didn't Van Gaal replace Cillessen again with Krul when playing against Argentina? The decision not to was obviously going to cost them their spot in the final as Cillessen had already shown that he wasn't up to the job, so was it done purposely?
Show More
all 3 subs already used. had to bring off Van Persie at start of ET because his legs were finished
Perhaps the greatest example of Van Gaal feeding his ego.
If the plan was to use Kruul in a penalty shoot out against Costa Rica then it means VG must have tactically decided to use 2 substitutes in 2 hours of football. So that limited not only his formation but also flexibility in being able to change the side. After 2 hours against the mighty Costa Rica his team still cant score and end up in a lottery. So hardly the tactical genius the press were trying to portray.
The second thing is that you cannot lose by changing the keeper. There are only two outcomes. Either you get knocked out because an outfield players misses (so no blame on your keeper). Or you win the shootout and everyone thinks you are a genius whether the keeper saves a penalty or not. There is no downside to subbing the keeper unless he lets a pen through his legs in embarrasing fashion.
If he wanted the best goalkeeper for penalty saving then Vorm was the correct option as his record is far better than Krul who had 2 saves in 20.
Van Gaal made a clever switch that created the illusion he was a tactical genius and helped cover up the facts that they couldnt score against Costa Rica. Most of the Dutch and German press werent fooled but everyone in the UK swallowed it hook line and copy of Angling Times. Shrood man.
If the plan was to use Kruul in a penalty shoot out against Costa Rica then it means VG must have tactically decided to use 2 substitutes in 2 hours of football. So that limited not only his formation but also flexibility in being able to change the side. After 2 hours against the mighty Costa Rica his team still cant score and end up in a lottery. So hardly the tactical genius the press were trying to portray.
The second thing is that you cannot lose by changing the keeper. There are only two outcomes. Either you get knocked out because an outfield players misses (so no blame on your keeper). Or you win the shootout and everyone thinks you are a genius whether the keeper saves a penalty or not. There is no downside to subbing the keeper unless he lets a pen through his legs in embarrasing fashion.
If he wanted the best goalkeeper for penalty saving then Vorm was the correct option as his record is far better than Krul who had 2 saves in 20.
Van Gaal made a clever switch that created the illusion he was a tactical genius and helped cover up the facts that they couldnt score against Costa Rica. Most of the Dutch and German press werent fooled but everyone in the UK swallowed it hook line and copy of Angling Times. Shrood man.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539