We use cookies - they help us provide you with a better online experience.
By using our website you accept that we may store and access cookies on your device.

previous 6/10 next 8/10  GTeaM 3 - 0 CENI (379255961)

Weather conditions were fairly good for football, and GaF Stadium saw a crowd turnout of 1811. Ben James was the appointed referee with assistance provided by Paolo Perucci and Óscar Corral. GTeaM started off with a 4-4-2 lineup. Lineup: Stan - Bordea, Ardustra, Hiller, Vallière - Sağlık, Ansio, Treur, Andrei - Kyyhkynen, Mitrea.

A 3-4-3 alignment was the formation of choice for CENI. They fielded: Regufe - Simão, Ribeiro, Cardoso Gonçalves - Figueiredo, Rocha, Nogueira Gomes, Reyne - Peres, Correia, Ribeiro.

GTeaM tried to focus their attacks down the middle. The strategy for CENI was to use their ability to press. With 9 minutes played, GTeaM's well-worked indirect free kick caused havoc in the penalty area, and when the ball eventually fell to A. Hiller he gleefully slotted the ball home to make it 1 - 0. CENI's ability to press all over the field frequently paid dividends. The teams went for the halftime break at 1 - 0. GTeaM claimed to have seen most of the ball, and the statistics agreed with them - possession being 65 percent.

A speedy charge from the left side of the field increased the lead of GTeaM to 2 - 0 as M. Kyyhkynen finished it off competently, firing in from an acute angle. With 66 minutes played, H. Nogueira Gomes had a fantastic opportunity to reply but his shot flew harmlessly into the side-netting of the goal. GTeaM put themselves up 3 - 0 when D. Treur broke through on the right, leaving the entire defence trailing in his wake. By now, the players in GTeaM felt that victory was guaranteed and began to play it safe, focusing on defence and not risking too much going forward. GTeaM had most of the ball, with 60 percent of possession.

M. Ardustra performed admirably for GTeaM. However, H. Sağlık made a disastrous appearance. CENI's best player was E. Rocha. S. Ribeiro was a disappointment, however. The match ends 3 - 0.

Rating details

Midfield poor (very high) wretched (low) 12 6 3/20 2/20
Right defence inadequate (high) poor (high) 19 11 5/20 3/20
Central defence excellent (very low) inadequate (low) 29 18 8/20 5/20
Left defence passable (high) poor (very high) 23 12 6/20 3/20
Right attack weak (low) inadequate (very low) 14 17 4/20 5/20
Central attack poor (very high) inadequate (high) 12 19 3/20 5/20
Left attack weak (low) inadequate (low) 14 18 4/20 5/20
 
Indirect set pieces
Defence solid (low) weak (high) 26 15 7/20 4/20
Attack passable (high) weak (high) 23 15 6/20 4/20
 
Team attitude (Hidden) (Hidden)
Tactic Attack in the Middle Pressing
Tactic skill brilliant weak 11 4 11/20 4/20
 
Average midfield poor (very high) wretched (low) 12 6 3/20 2/20
Average defence passable (very high) weak (low) 24 14 6/20 4/20
Average attack weak (very low) inadequate (low) 13 18 4/20 5/20
Total average weak (very high) weak (very low) 16 13 5/20 4/20
 
 
Server 095