Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh
Latvia did not win, yes, but they could have by one lucky bounce/shot/breakaway. My point is that this is too close. How do you explain that Latvia can do it with all the incomparably inferior talent and resources they've got? Canadian team has everything better than Latvian, you cannot argue that. I can only explain it by better coaching.
"How would you have done it?" - is not a fair question to a layperson. I am not a coach. All of the factors you've provided as a proof of Babcock's doing it right could be considered wrong just as well. Why bother amplifying all of the things that don't work well in a given situation instead of making some adjustments that might work better? What are the effective ways of splitting the defending players collapsed in front of the net? How do you make PP more effective? For every weapon there should be a counter-weapon.
|
And just the same if Canada had a bounce go their way in one of those 57 shots, I'm sure most people could have easily just imagined the floodgates opening.
European football is a comparative sport that I'm reminded of from the Latvian effort. While not entirely equal (Singular almost game-changing performance from the Latvian goalie versus a defensive team effort in football), these sorts of defensive desperation tactics are the most effective in an elimination tournament. Make the most of set plays or special teams, and give everything you can defensively.
Not in any way saying what Babcock's tactics were flawless since I couldn't possibly consider a better strategy, but it look more like a combination of our best forwards not being as good as they should be, running into team who didn't even think about 'bringing their A game'. It was on the verge of being life and death for them.