Straight from The Belly|| January 30, 2006 @ 10:20 pm || Major League Soccer, US Soccer
Back in 2002 Ray Hudson was asked to comment on Taylor Twellman before DC United hosted the Revolution at RFK. “He’s a poacher,” Hudson replied. “I’m not too worried about him to be honest. I don’t have too high a regard for Twellman. I think he’s a poacher and that’s it … I don’t see him as a special player at all.” United prevailed in the game, but they had to fight from behind after Taylor Twellman put the Revs up with two goals in two minutes.
Now, after years of struggle at the international level, Twellman finally tore it up against Norway. Problem is it’s simply too easy to discount the game. It wasn’t just that it was the Norwegian u-23 team with a few older guys evidently along for vacation, it’s that the Norwegian team was just plain awful. Sure, the US fielded a bunch of third-stringers, but even our third-stringers were light years ahead of Norway.
Was Ray Hudson right about Taylor Twellman? Let’s just say, for now, I remain firmly unconvinced about Twellman on the international stage. He’s a great MLS player, but is he, as Hudson put it, a special player? It’s pretty hard for me to take the hat-trick against Norway too seriously. It certainly didn’t qualify him as a special player in my eyes.
Don’t get me wrong. I’d love to have a guy on the national team that’s capable of putting up numbers the way Twellman does in MLS. And if Twellman turns into that player then it’s fine with me. But nothing says he’s that player yet - that includes last weekend’s hat-trick.
Of course he’s a poacher. But isn’t the difference between a “poacher” and a “target man” just semantic? Poaching is the art form of the target man. Cherry-picking, man. And when you’re as loaded as the US team is in midfielders who can set up the attack and send up nice balls and crosses, well, you need a good poacher.
You know who else is a poacher? Eddie Johnson. McBride is like a poacher-plus.
Another thought: Guys only get reptations as poachers if they know how to finish… And finishing, really having guys with a nose for the goal, is a relatively new thing for the U.S. team.
That’s just my interpretation of these terms, I’d love to hear some others…
Comment by Joe — January 31, 2006 @ 1:49 pm
I don’t think it’s just semantic.
Target man implies that you’re sending balls in from the wings. The target man is supposed to get on the end of those balls. Target men are part of a team attacking strategy.
Poacher basically implies a scrappy player who’s skilled at taking full advantage of errant balls, defensive mistakes and sloppy play. Poachers are “opportunistic” and get so-called garbage goals.
It’s not an absolute distinction - lots of guy combine aspects of both (and more), but I think that’s what Hudson was driving at.
There are other ways to play forward. Neither target men nor poachers are known for creating their own opportunities (except in so far poachers take advantage of opportunities). Nor are they known for setting up other players. Both are ultimately “lone wolf” approaches to forward play (even if target men are involved in a team attacking strategy).
That’s why I wouldn’t classify either Johnson or McBride as target men or poachers. McBride was once a target man, but his game has greatly expanded over the years. He can set guys up and create opportunities for himself. Eddie Johnson can do those things even better than McBride - well, maybe not set others up. (But I think that’s a maturity issue. It’ll develop. )
Comment by The Belly — January 31, 2006 @ 9:06 pm
Great points, all around. I stand corrected, and look forward to your next post.
(Still, isn’t there something to be said for poachers? A good poacher has a nose for the goal, that’s nothing to dismiss. Ah well. Long live Ray Hudson, especially since he doesn’t coach DCU anymore.)
Comment by Joe — February 7, 2006 @ 2:30 pm
Ray’s clueless
Comment by Bart — March 19, 2006 @ 9:36 am