

Colorado Over LA - Yeah, It Was That Bad
By: Jeff | March 30th, 2008I think this gets it about right:

Things didn’t look so bleak for the Los Angeles Galaxy by the end of the first half. And, yeah, one could argue Omar Cummings picked up a soft penalty kick; as Max Bretos noted in his commentary Cummings popped back to his feet to continue the play after Abel Xavier’s challenge. But a couple other phrases by Bretos - these came on either side of Colorado’s 4th goal, a particularly humiliating poke that, again, victimized Xavier and added LA ‘keeper Steve Cronin for good measure - speaks to how the game played out after that PK:
“Like lambs to the slaughter….”
“Like a hot knife through butter.”
So, the Rapids beat Los Angeles 4-0, a grim score in any part of the world. But it’s particularly grim from LA’s perspective: the Rapids haven’t beaten a team this badly since…nope, not 2007…there’s the 5-4 playoff win over FC Dallas in the 2006 playoffs, but that’s a close game, unlike last night; you have to go back to July 23, 2005 in order to see Colorado knock 4 past another team while also dominating - in this case, the Chicago Fire (archived results are available here). And, for the record, they had let in four goals on a couple occasions during that period - including the 5-0 pounding in last year’s U.S. Open Cup against the USL-1 Seattle Sounders. Even if I fudged the details, the larger point holds: the Rapids don’t very often do what they did last night. Nice way to start the season.
At the same time, how much of this was LA? I hinted at how badly LA played over on Center Holds It. Let’s just say such was LA’s defending that I’d wager the J.V. squad from the nearby high school could find a way through. Sure, it’s possible I’m wrong about LA, but I wouldn’t count on it.
Getting back to Colorado, though, a couple things stood out. In spite of an entirely competent night - and scoring on a PK to top it off - Christian Gomez didn’t mean as much to the game as Terry Cooke and, in the late going, Colin Clark. The team so far seems wed to last year’s formula of flying down the flanks - with the difference being it worked like gangbusters last night. It’s possible Cooke benefited from facing off against LA’s Michael Gavin, not to mention having the support of Kosuke Kimura for overlapping runs (he also shut Landon Donovan down; nice bonus, that); suffice to say, Colorado’s right laid open like a freeway at midnight. The left only opened up later, when being behind forced LA to chase the game, hence Clark’s “punking” of Xavier (it’s a Hollywood thing, Abel; get ready for more). All that said, though, having the flanks work should allow Gomez some room to operate in future.
If there’s one thing I’m uneasy about where Colorado is concerned it’s the somewhat random feel to their game. At times, it reminded me of basketball - e.g. isolating one flank player against one of LA’s defenders and putting it on them to beat them and make the opening. In other words, I saw fewer complicated build-ups and spells of possession than I saw a series of good, but opportunistic, plays. That’s not bad so much as it’s something you may not want to rely on for offense.
All in all, however, what’s not to like about a 4-0 win for your side? If you’re fishing for a bottom line, I’d dub this an encouraging performance with an asterisk stamped on the end of it: Colorado hasn’t won like this in forever, but *do keep the opposition in mind. Whether LA will be this awful in a couple months isn’t really the issue: they were frankin’ awful last night, bad enough that I’d recommend taking at least two of those goals with a grain of salt. I think next week - the Kansas City Wizards away, who are fresh off a decent win over DC United - will give a better measure of where the Rapids are these days.
![]() |
MLS Forums | Colorado Results |
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share
![]() |
Comments
-



where is my sexy football?
- Ruud Gullit
Posted from
United States

-



agreed. wait til kc before making judgements. la was pathetic. even if that shitty call against xavier didn’t go through, you guys would’ve still beaten them. that was some painful shit to watch.
Posted from
United States

-



People keep referencing a “soft” penalty kick that went against LA. Perhaps someone could refer me to the rule where it states that a PK is determined by the reaction of the victim. Regardless of the fact that Cummings was able to bounce up (good reflexes), Xavier’s tackle was CLEARLY from behind, it CLEARLY swept out Cummings legs, and it didn’t even strike the ball. If Cummings acted like a typical flopping forward (see: Carlos Ruiz) and just stayed down after Xavier’s tackle, nobody would be bitching right now. The assorted unintelligent comments about the PK seem more directed to Cummings’ reflexes in popping up rather than the fact that Xavier’s tackle was illegal in the first place.
Posted from
United States

-



Au contraire, Joey. If he was flopping on the ground, I would have mocked him for making a meal of a light touch.
As to your overarching point, put it this way: I respect the letter of the law, but place an equal value on interpretation. By that I mean I don’t think one improves any game by rigid adherence to most of the rules. Watch any game and you’ll see something like a few score instances of situations in which a foul can be called and it is not. This might be done for any number of reasons, but, like anyone, I only appreciate when it is done well.
That said, what you’re talking about is certainly valid…I just disagree with you, something that, remarkably, doesn’t depend on “unintelligence,” but different reactions to the same event. Besides, as other comments and the overall piece point out, the PK was never going to determine the outcome.
Posted from
United States

-



Joey: I thought of a more constructive answer to your criticism. Again, I’d say you’re correct by the letter of the law (though there’s a large-ish bunch of people who think the ref just blew it; see the comments as well), but I’d think of the situation in this light: I’d say that tackle gets called about, oh, 50% of the time. This fell on the “right” side of that 50% - at least from one point of view (happens to be mine).
But that 50% is what I mean by soft. When your bunch doesn’t get the call, it shouldn’t be all that shocking.
Posted from
United States

-



How many times has Bretos made comments about the problems of players diving in the box or at least going down too easily? And now when a player gets taken down and instead of milking it, gets backs up and plays Bretos thinks it shouldn’t be a PK? Seriously, what’s next? Complaining about how we need more cheap hookers and then complaining about all the STDs we’re getting?
Posted from
United States

-



I’ll start by merely pointing out I am not Max Bretos; I’m not sure Allen’s comment opens the possibility for conflation, but wanted to clarify that.
That said, Allen makes a good point. I have nothing but respect for how Cummings handled himself; of all my pet peeves in soccer - and I do mean the little things here - few rank higher than the way players dramatically draw attention to fouls, whether by falling, flopping, waving their arms like twits, etc. As far as I’m concerned, if you can keep going, keep frankin’ going: never count on ref to make a call. When they do the “raise the hand” thing for offside, that really drives me batty.
Posted from
United States

Comments are closed













