Red Bulls Fall at Home to DC

The MLS can be a very humbling league. The Red Bulls learned this first hand as they were beaten on Saturday night by DC United. Just three days after putting forth their best performance of the season and illustrating to the rest of league the force the Red Bulls can be, the squad regressed and slipped to their fourth defeat of the season. Perhaps the result would not have been so frustrating if DC was simply a better team or the Red Bulls played a strong game but were just unluckily. This, however, was not the case. Credit has to be given to a hard working DC team that had a strong performance, although the Red Bulls were a shade of the team that we were all dazzled by against TFC.

Of the things that went poorly in the game, some were to be expected and are understood, whereas others are more inexplicable, and consequently more frustrating. To start with the not so bad though, this game reaffirmed both that Teemu Tainio has a very, very important role within the team and also that Dax McCarty may be starting in the team now, but also still has a lot of developing to do. In addition to being a force in front of the back four that effecitvely breaks up attacks and essentially shields the backline, Tainio is also very important in starting the Red Bulls attacks and serving as the link between the defenders and the midfield. Tainio often finds the ball quickly after the Red Bulls win back possession and his intelligence and vision are utilized to start many of the attacks for the Red Bulls. While this may not seem like such a important task, his absence highlighted just how important his role is. McCarty was fillling in this role against DC and although he did not necessarily play a bad game, at this point in time McCarty does not have the ability to provide what Tainio does. For most of the night many of the attacking moves seemed disjointed and the Red Bulls were never really able to establish any sort of rhythm in the game. This is not to be blamed solely on McCarty – doing so would simply not be fair or realistic. However, Tainio certainly facilitates in establishing this rhythm and setting the tempo, which was definitely missed against DC.

Thanks to the new “Chalkboard” feature on the MLS website (which I highly recommend spending some time with), we are allowed to further examine such talking points as this and use evidence from the actual games to either reafirm or disprove such ideas. In comparing Tainio’s performance against TFC and McCarty’s against DC there are a few interesting differences that support the ideas above. McCarty was tackled and lost possession 16 times in the DC game, whereas Tainio was only dispossed 8 times. Furthmore, 7 of the 16 times McCarty lost possession were right in the center of the park, about 20-40 yards from the Red Bulls goal. In contrast, Tainio never lost the ball against TFC in this same area. In fact, virtually all 8 times Tainio lost the ball, he was high up the field, either at midfield or beyond. This area of about 20-40 yards from the goal is a crucial area to maintain possession and start to build attacks right after winning the ball of defense. By losing the ball 7 times in this area (compared to 0 from Tainio), McCarty demonstrated that he does not have the ability of Tainio to consistently and effectively pull the strings in the center of the park. Furthermore, these dispossesssions make it difficult for the Red Bulls to establish a rhythm in the game, which certainly showed against DC. This may seem a harsh criticism of McCarty, but it is not intended to be – no one would have expected him to be able to provide the same quality as Tainio. This was to be expected. The other problems for the Red Bulls, however, were more frustrating as they seemingly could have been avoided.

Even though the Red Bulls had a good amount of possession throughout the game, they failed to really create any dangerous chances. One of the contributing factors to this was the lack of width in their attack. By not posing any threat out wide, the Red Bulls made it easier for DC to defend because going through the center of the field was the only way the Red Bulls would be able to create chances. DC could therefore tuck more bodies, such as their outside midfielders, inside on defense to make their unit more compact and harder to break down. If however, the Red Bulls were able to pose threats out wide, the DC defense would have had to compensate by stretching more to cover the areas out wide, which would have created more space in the middle of the park and made it easier for the Red Bulls to create chances.

If we again look at the “Chalkboard” feature on the MLS website we can see the difference in the Red Bulls threat from wide positions from the game against TFC and against DC. Against TFC, the Red Bulls attempted 27 crosses, 8 of which were successful and only 2 of which were beyond 30 yards from the goal. In contrast, against DC the Red Bulls attempted 22 crosses (I’m not counting a corner kick), only 3 of which were successful. Furthermore, of those 3, 2 of them were from at least 35 + yards away from the goal. Although they may have been successful, services from that far away are rarely dangerous. These differences affirm that, unlike against TFC, the Red Bulls did not pose any danger from wide positions against DC and consequently were made to pay.

Building off of this problem of width, one of the contributing factors was Mehdi Ballouchy. I am a fan of Ballouchy and I think he is a smart, crafty player and can certainly contribute to the squad. But after yesterday’s performance it is evident that employing him in the left midfield position is not most effective for him or for the team in general. Unlike Dane Richards, Ballouchy is not a true wide player in that he doesn’t have the pace or dribbling abilities to go 1v1 at defenders at speed and whip balls into the box from the flank. He is a more intelligent player who likes to float around in the midfield, often drifting in from the left side to try to pick out pockets of space to receive the ball. However, as has been pointed out above, the Red Bulls need width in their attack to be effective. As good as they are or can be, they are not good enough to simply bounce the ball around midfield making the defense chase and eventually break them down. Similarly, Ballouchy is not good enough to just float around and find pockets of space to break the defense down – the Red Bulls are not like Barcelona and Ballouchy does not have near the same ability as someone like Iniesta to float and penetrate defenses.

I think that Ballouchy should either play centrally from the start and Lindpere should move out wide to the left. Although this may not be best suited for Lindpere, he is more effective out wide that Ballouchy is and I think Ballouchy would be more effective for the team as a whole by playing centrally. Another option I would like to see though is trying to play Ballouchy on the right side with Solli. Solli does a great job getting forward and providing width for the Red Bulls attack. If the two played on the same side, Solli would be able to get forward, which would allow Ballouchy to tuck in more to the center of the field and pick up space as he likes to while still having width on the right side. There are a few issues with this move as Dane Richards would be forced to be moved to the left and it would be difficult for him to provide service with his weaker left foot. Furthermore, Ballouchy starting out on the left and coming inside allows him to come into his stronger right foot for strikes on goal. However, it is not like either of these situations have been occurring frequently as of late – Richards has been pretty quiet recently and Ballouchy hasn’t wowed us with any strikes coming inside from the left. Therefore, I think the move is definitely something to consider as there is not a whole lot to lose at this point.

In the end, it was certainly a frustrating match but that is the nature of a full season and credit has to be given to DC for their performance. They were not scared playing in Red Bull Arena and matched the Red Bulls the whole way. They had no let downs and were very organized defensively for the entire 90 minutes to come away with the three points. It also didn’t help that DC outworked the Red Bulls for a large part of the second half, as we saw an annoyingly familiar lackluster Red Bulls side at times. I’ll have more on this issue posted some other time, but for now its on to the next one for the Red Bulls. Its a quick turnaround for them as the travel to Chicago on Tuesday to play the Fire in the quarterfinals of the US Open Cup.

(image courtesy of Getty Images)