CONCACAF Gold Cup 2013 (ENG)

FINAL REPORT OF THE TECHNICAL STUDY GROUP (TSG) TECHNICAL REPORT AND STATISTICS GOLD CUP 2013.

2

I- INTRODUCTION

Page 6

a- Game Results (Group, Quarterfinals, Semi-Finals and Finals)

b- Group Team Ranking Table

c- Outstanding Players By Match

d- List of Scorers

e- Team Statistics During the Tournament

f- When Were the Goals Scored?

g- Who Scored the Goals (defenders, midfielders, attackers)?

h- Where the Goals Were Scored From

i- How the Goals Were Scored

j- Real Playing Time by Match

k- Attendance by Match, by Group and the Tournament’s General Average

l- Changes in Line-up by the Teams During the Matches

m- Goalkeeper TSG Ranking Table and Most Valuable Goalkeeper of the Tournament

n- Summary Table by Team (Cards, Goals, Outstanding players)

o- Most Valuable Player in Each Team

p- Average Age by Team / Number of Players in Foreign Leagues

q- Average Age of all Teams

r- Fair Play Ranking

s- Number of Players by Team that Play in Foreign Leagues

II. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS

Pag 8

III. GENERAL COMMENTS

Pag 26

IV. STATISTICS V. TEAM BY TEAM ANALYSIS

Pag 36

VI. CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS

Pag 86

VII GOLD CUP REFEREE TECHNICAL REPORT

Pag 88

3

FOREWORD OF PRESIDENT

4

Gold Cup Message, President Webb The Gold Cup was a true celebration of the diverse talent and skills in our region, producing entertaining football for fans watching from all over the world and inspiring players from all of our Confederation to strive for excellence.

Our premier tournament for national teams attracted more than 500,000 spectators in 13 cities across the United States. After 25 exciting games where 12 countries from the region showcased their passion and talent, the United States collected their fifth CONCACAF Gold Cup title in front of a crowd of approximately 60,000 at a packed Soldier Field on Sunday, July 28, after winning against Panama.

The 12th edition of Gold Cup was one of the most successful tournaments in the history of this competition.

Television audience figures for the cup competition accumulated in excess of 100 million people, watching live or delayed coverage. The USA recorded the highest audience figures of the four markets, generating millions of viewers from five broadcasters including Fox, Fox Soccer, Unimas, Univision and Univision Deportes.

The Gold Cup is vital to our wide-ranging plans across the region as it provides significant resources for development programs and is an excellent platform to encourage Member Associations to realize their vast potential. We extend a special thanks to all those Member Associations, officials, coaches, players, partners, media and fans for their invaluable support of the tournament.

I trust you will find value in the contents of this report as we begin to turn our thoughts to assure the success of the 2015 Gold Cup. Sincerely,

Jeffrey Webb President of CONCACAF

5

6

I INTRODUCTION The Technical Study Group (TSG) was integrated by: 1. Luis Hernández Herez (Cuba), member of CONCACAF´s Executive Committee, Head of TSG. 2. Keith Look Loy (Trinidad and Tobago) Specialist 3. Ramón Enrique Madariaga Chávez (Honduras) Specialist 4. Juan Carlos Chávez (Mexico) Specialist 5. Javier Delgado Prado (Costa Rica) Specialist 6. José Mauricio Cienfuegos (USA) Specialist 7. Luis Manuel Hernández Valdivia (Cuba), Coordinator of TSG. The TSG performed the following duties: -Prepared a technical/ tactical analysis and a report for each of the games.

-Interviewed each Team’s coach through a questionnaire.

-Collected game statistics.

-Selected the Fair Play Team for each match and for the Tournament.

-Selected the Most Valuable Player for each match and the MVPs in each team.

-Selected the Tournament’s Most Valuable Goalkeeper.

-Selected the All-Star Team.

-Drafted the Preliminary and Final Tournament Reports.

-Prepared a performance analysis for each of the players that participated in the event.

With half qualification to the FIFA Confederations Cup 2017 as an additional incentive to the already prestigious title of CONCACAF Champion, 12 participant teams that had different expectations and objectives played the Gold Cup 2013.

Honduras, Martinique, Mexico and the USA excluded several of their best players from the teams due to different causes (injuries, commitments with their clubs, need to rest for the World Cup’s qualifying rounds in September and to try-out new developing star players). Panama and Costa Rica, which are included in the qualification for Brazil 2014, had teams with a mix of youth and experience, and great ambition to win the title.

El Salvador and Canada, two teams that are not participating in the qualifying rounds for the World Cup after being eliminated, faced this tournament with renewed air, ready to develop new star players. Cuba was affected by the lack of preparation time and by not having played international friendly pre-tournaments.

Haiti, another Caribbean team, entered the tournament with the weight of expectations on their shoulders after playing two interesting international matches (a loss 2-1 with Spain and a draw with Italy 2-2).

The newly arrived Belize, with its team of semi-professionals, and Trinidad and Tobago, a team that had not participated in the tournament since 2007 and which had not scored a goal in seven matches before the beginning of the tournament, were unknown teams. In fact, both teams changed their technical directors after their respective qualifications in their region to the Gold Cup 2013.

7

Landon Donovan (#10, USA)

Chris Wondolowski. (# 19 USA)

8

Jaime Penedo. (#1, Panama)

II TOURNAMENT AWARDS AND ALL-STAR TEAM

Most Valuable Player: Landon Donovan (#10, E.U.A).

Top Scorers: (5)

(5)Landon Donovan (# 10, E.U.A).

Chris Wondolowski. (# 19 E.U.A).

Gabriel Torres (# 9 Panamá).

Best Goalkeeper:

Jaime Penedo. (#1, Panama).

Fair Play Award:

Panama’s Team.

All-star Team: - Goalkeeper: Jaime Penedo (#1, Panama) - Center back: Román Torres (#5, Panama) - Center back: Clarence Goodson (# 21, USA) - Left winger: Da Marcus Beasley (# 7, USA) - Right winger: Miguel Layun (#19, Mexico) - Central midfielder: Luis Montes (# 8, Mexico) - Defensive midfielder: Kyle Beckerman (#14, USA) - Defensive midfielder: Julián de Guzmán (6, Canada) - Left midfielder: Marco Fabián (# 10, Mexico) - Forward: Langdon Donovan (#10, USA) - Forward: Gabriel Torres, (# 9, Panama)

9

RESULTADOS FASE DE GRUPOS

10

A. GROUP STAGE RESULTS

7th July

Canada México

0 - 1 1-2

Martinica Panama

8th July

El Salvador Haiti

2 - 2 0-2

Trinidad/Tobago Honduras

9th July

Costa Rica Belice

3-0 1-6

Cuba U.S.A

11th July

Panamá México

1-0 2-0

Martinica Canadà

12th July

Trinidad/Tobago Honduras

0-2 1-0

Haití El Salvador

13th July

U.S.A Costa Rica

4-1 1-0

Cuba Belice

14th July

Martinica Panama

1-3 0-0

México Canada

15th July

El Salvador Honduras

1 - 0 0 - 2

Haití Trinidad/Tobago

4-0 1-0

Belice

Costa Rica

16th July

Cuba U.S.A

11

B. RESULTS BY GROUPS

GP

W

L

D

GF

GA

GD

YC

RC

PTS

Panama

3

2

0

1

3

1

+2

1

-

7

Mexico

3

2

1

0

6

3

+3

2

-

6

Martinica 3 1

2 0 2 4 -2

6

1

3

Canada

1

3

0

2

1

0

3

-3

3

-

GP

W

L

D

GF

GA

GD

YC

RC

PTS

Honduras

3

2

1

0

3

3

+1

3

1

6

Trinidad & T.

3

1

1

1

4

4

0

2

-

4

El salvador 3

1

1

1

3

3

0

3

-

4

HaitĂ­

3

1

1

1

2

3

-1

7

-

3

GP

W

L

D

GF

GA

GD

YC

RC

3

3

0

0

11

1

+10

2

-

9

Costa Rica

3

2

1

0

4

1

+3

4

-

6

Cuba

3 1 2 0 5 7 -3 3 - 3

Belice

3

U.S.A

0

3

0

1

11

-10

4

1

PTS

0

NOTE: *GP=Games Played, W=Games Won, L=Games Lost, *D= Draws, *GF=Goals in Favor, *GA=Goals Against, *GD= Goal Difference, *YC= Yellow Cards, *RC= Red Cards, Pts.= Total Points.

Quarterfinals 20th July

Panama

6-1

Cuba

Mexico

1-0

Trinidad & Tobago

21st July

U.S.A

5 - 1

El Salvador

Honduras

1 - 0

Costa Rica

Semi-finals 24th July

U.S.A Panama

12

3-1

Honduras

2-1

Mexico

Finals 28th July

U.S.A

1 - 0 Panama

C. OUTSTANDING PLAYERS BY MATCH Partidos

Nombre

# Jugador

País

Canadá vs Martinica

Kevin Parsemain

17

Martinica

México vs Panamá

Gabriel Torres

9

Panamá

El Salvador vs Trinidad T.

Rodolfo A. Zelaya Garcia

11

El Salvador

Haití vs Honduras

Jorge Claros

20

Honduras

Costa Rica vs Cuba

Michael Barrantes

11

Costa Rica

Belice vs USA

Wondolowski Christopher Elliot

3

USA

Panamá vs Maritinica

Gabriel Torres

9

Panamá

México vs Canadá

Raul Jimenez

9

México

Trinidad T vs Haití

Jean Eudes Maurice

11

Haití

Honduras vs El Salvador

Rodolfo A Zelaya Garcia

11

El Salvador

Usa vs Cuba

Wondolowski Christopher Elliot

19

USA

Costa Rica vs Belice

Celso Borges

5

Costa Rica

Martinica vs México

Marcos Fabian

10

México

Panamá Vs Canadá

Julian De Guzman

6

Canadá

El Salvador vs Haití

Rodolfo A Zelaya Garcia

11

El Salvador

Honduras vs Trinidad T.

Khaleem Hylan

8

Trinidad T.

Cuba vs Belice

Ariel Pedro Martinez

11

Cuba

USA vs Costa Rica

Donovan Landon Timothy

10

USA

Panamá vs Cuba

Blas Perez

7

Panamá

México vs Trinidad T.

Raul Jimenez

9

México

4 Tos Usa vs El Salvador

Donovan Landon Timothy

10

USA

4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica

Andy Ariel Najar Rodriguez

14

USA vs Honduras

Donovan Landon Timothy

10

USA

Panamá vs México

Roman Torres

5

Panamá

USA vs Panamá

Kyle Robert Beckerman

14

USA

Honduras

13

D.

LIST OF SCORERS

Five Landon Donovan, E.U.A (1 vs Belice, 1 vs Cuba, 1 vs El Salvador, 2 vs Honduras).

Torres, Panamá (2 vs Mexico, 1 vs Martinica, 2 vs Cuba).

Chris Wondolowski, U.S.A, (3 vs Belice, 2 vs Cuba).

Four Rodolfo Zelaya, El Salvador (2 vs Trinidad/Tobago, 1 vs Haití, 1 vs U.S.A).

Three Marco Fabián, México (1 vs Panamá, 1 vs Canada, 1 vs Martinique).

Ariel Martínez, Cuba (3 vs Belice).

Blas Pérez, Panamá (2 vs Cuba, 1 vs Mexico).

Two Michael Barrantes, Costa Rica (2 vs Cuba).

José Ciprian, Cuba (1 vs E.U.A, 1 vs Panama).

Joe Corona, U.S.A (1 vs Cuba, 1 vs El Salvador).

Raùl Jiménez, Mexico (1 vs Canadà, 1 vs Trinidad and Tobago).

Eddie Johnson, U.S.A (1 vs El Salvador, 1 vs Honduras).

Kenwyne Jones, Trinidad/Tobago (1 vs El Salvador, 1 vs Honduras).

Jean Eudes Maurice, Haiti (2 vs Trinidad/Tobago).

Luis Montes, Mexico (1 vs Martinique, 1 vs Panama).

Brek Shea, U.S.A (1 vs Costa Rica, 1 vs Panama).

14

One Jairo Arrieta, Costa Rica (1 vs Cuba).

Marvin Chávez, Honduras (1 vs Haiti).

Jorge Claros, Honduras (1 vs El Salvador).

Keon Daniel, Trinidad/Tobago (1 vs El Salvador).

Mix Diskerud, U.S.A (1 vs El Salvador).

Dalton Eiley, Belice (1 vs Costa Rica, O.G.).

Ian Gaynair, Belice (1 vs E.U.A).

Clarence Goodson, U.S.A (1 vs El Salvador).

Stuart Holden, U.S.A (1 vs Belice).

Jairo Jiménez, Panama (1vs Cuba).

Jeniel Márquez, Cuba (1 vs Belice).

Rony Martínez, Honduras (1 vs Haití).

Nery Medina, Honduras (1vs U.S.A).

Kevin Molino, Trinidad and Tobago (1 vs Honduras).

Andy Najar Honduras (1 vs Costa Rica).

Michael Orozco, U.S.A (1 vs Belice).

Miguel Ponce, México (1 vs Martinique).

Kevin Parsemain, Martinique (1 vs México).

Fabrice Reuperne, Martinique (1 v Canada).

Carlos Rodríguez, Panama (1 vs Cuba).

Román Torres, Panama (1 vs Mexico).

e.

Team Statistics

Cards, Goals and Goal Difference by Team Summary Table PaĂ­s

GP W L D GF GA GD YC RC

Belice 3 0 3 0 1 11 -10 5 1 Canada 3 0 2 1 0 3 -3 3 0 Costa Rica 4 2 2 0 4 2 2 6 0 Cuba

4 1 3 0 6 13 -7 6 1

El Salvador 4 1 2 1 4 8 -4 4 0 USA

6 6 0 0 20 4 16 7 0

Haiti

3 1 2 0 2 2 0 7 0

Honduras 5 3 2 0 5 5 0 6 1 Martinica 3 1 2 0 2 4 -2 6 1 Mexico 5 3 2 0 8 5 3 5 0 Panama 6 4 2 0 11 4 7 5 0 Trinidad T. 4 1 2 1 4 4 0 4 0 Total

50 23 25 2 67 65 2 64 4

GP

Total Games Played

W

Total Games Won

L

Total Games Lost

D

Total Games Draw

GF

Total Goals in Favor

GA

Total Goals Against

GD

Goal Difference

YC

Total Yellow Cards

RC

Total Red Cards

15

F- When Were the Goals Scored?

1-15 6 16-30 9 31-45 11 46-60 13 61-75 12 76-90 16 90-105 106-120 Período en que se anotan los goles

16

Match 1 to 15 16 to 30 31 to45 46 to 60 61 to 75 76 to 90 91 to 105 106 to 120 Total Canadá vs Martinica 1 1 México vs Panamá 1 2 3 El Salvador vs Trinidad T. 1 1 2 4 Haití vs Honduras 1 1 2 Costa Rica vs Cuba 1 1 1 3 Belice vs USA 1 3 1 2 7 Panamá vs Maritinica 1 1 México vs Canadá 1 1 2 Trinidad T vs Haití 1 2 Honduras vs El Salvador 1 1 Usa vs Cuba 2 1 1 1 5 Costa Rica vs Belice 1 1 Martinica vs México 0 Panamá Vs Canadá 1 2 1 4 El Salvador vs Haití 1 1 Honduras vs Trinidad T. 1 1 2 Cuba vs Belice 1 1 2 4 USA vs Costa Rica 1 1 Panamá vs Cuba 2 1 1 3 7 México vs Trinidad T. 1 1 4 Tos Usa vs El Salvador 2 1 1 2 6 4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica 1 1 USA vs Honduras 1 1 2 4 Panamá vs México 1 1 1 3 USA vs Panamá 1 1 Totales 6 9 11 13 12 16 0 0 67 Average 0.24 0.36 0.44 0.52 0.48 0.64 0.00 0.00 2.68 Percent 8.96 13.43 16.42 19.40 17.91 23.88 0.00 0.00 100

G. WHO SCORED THE GOALS Forwards 39 Midfield wingers 15 Defensive midfielders 5 Defenders 8 Goalkeepers 0 Matches Forwards Midfield Defensive M. Defenders Total Canadá vs Martinica 1 1 México vs Panamá 3 3 El Salvador vs Trinidad T. 3 1 4 Haití vs Honduras 2 2 Costa Rica vs Cuba 1 2 3 Belice vs USA 4 1 2 7 Panamá vs Maritinica 1 1 México vs Canadá 1 1 2 Trinidad T vs Haití 2 2 Honduras vs El Salvador 1 1 Usa vs Cuba 4 1 5 Costa Rica vs Belice 1 1 Panamá vs Canadá 0 Martinica vs México 2 2 4 El Salvador vs Haití 1 1 Honduras vs Trinidad T 1 1 2 Cuba vs Belice 4 4 USA vs Costa Rica 1 1 4tos Panamá vs Cuba 6 1 7 4tos México vs Trinidad 1 1 Usa vs El Salvador 3 1 2 4 4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica 1 1 USA vs Honduras 3 1 4 Panamá vs México 1 1 1 3 USA vs Panamá 1 Totales 39 15 5 8 0 67 Promedio 1.56 0.60 0.20 0.32 0.00 2.68 Por ciento 58.21 22.39 7.46 11.94 0.00 100

17

h. Where the Goals Were Scored From Inside the goal area 12 Inside the penalty area 39 Outside the penalty area

6 Penalties 10

Match

Inside the 5.50 Inside the 16.50 Outside the 16.50 Penalty Total

Canadá vs Martinica México vs Panamá

1

1

1

1

3

El Salvador vs Trinidad T.

3

1

4

Haití vs Honduras

2

2

Costa Rica vs Cuba

1

1

3

Belice vs USA

3

3

1

7

Panamá vs Maritinica

1

1

México vs Canadá

1

1

2

Trinidad T vs Haití

2

2

Honduras vs El Salvador

1

1

Usa vs Cuba

2

1

5

1

1

Panamá vs Canada

0

Martinica vs México

1

Costa Rica vs Belice

18

1

1

1

1

1

4

El Salvador vs Haití

1

1

Honduras vs Trinidad T

1

1

3

Cuba vs Belice

1

2

3

USA vs Costa Rica

1

1

4tos Panamá vs Cuba

6

1

7

4tos México vs Trinidad

1

1

Usa vs El Salvador

4

1

6

4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica

1

1

USA vs Honduras

2

2

4

Panamá vs México

3

3

USA vs Panamá

1

1

Totales

12

1

1

1

39

1

6

10 67

Average

0.48

1.56

0.24

0.40 2.68

Percent

17.91

58.21

8.96

14.93 100

i. How the Goals Were Scored Wing plays (Right 13 - Left 5)

Combination plays Penetrations through center Individual plays After corner kicks (Right 2 - Left 2) Free kicks (Direct 1 – Indirect 0)

Penalty kicks Own goals

18 1 18 7 4 1 10 1

Canada vs Martinica 0 - 1 1 Mexico vs Panama 1 - 2 1 1 1 El Salvador vs Trinidad T. 2 - 2 2 1 1 Haiti vs Honduras 0 - 2 1 1 Costa Rica vs Cuba 3 - 0 1 1 1 3 Belice vs USA 1 - 6 3 3 1 7 Panama vs Martinica 1 - 0 1 1 Mexico vs Canada 2 - 0 1 1 Trinidad T. vs Haiti 0 - 2 1 Honduras vs El Salvador 1 - 0 1 1 USA vs Cuba 4 - 1 3 1 Costa Rica vs Belice 1 - 0 1 Martinica vs Mexico 1 - 3 2 1 1 Panama Vs Canada 0 - 0 El Salvador Vs Haití 1 - 0 1 Honduras vs Trinidad T. 0 - 2 1 1 Cuba vs Belice 4 - 0 1 1 2 USA vs Costa Rica 1 - 0 1 4tos Panamá vs Cuba 6 - 1 1 4tos Mexico vs Trinidad T 1 - 0 USA vs El Salvador 5 - 1 1 2 1 1 1 4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica 1 - 0 1 USA vs Honduras 3 - 1 2 1 1 Panamá vs Mexico 2 - 1 1 1 1 USA vs Panamá 1 - 0 1 Totales

67 18 13

5

Average 0.72 0.72

1

7

2

2

1

0

10

1

0.04 0.28 0.16 .16 0.04 0.04 0.40 0.04

Percent 26.87 19.40 7.46 1.49 10.45 5.97 5.97 1.49 1.49 14.93 1.49

19

j. TIEMPO REAL DE JUEGO POR PARTIDO.

20

PARTIDOS

1 AL 15

16 AL 30

31 AL 45 1ER TIEMPO

46 AL 60

61 AL 75

76-90

2DO TIEMPO 91AL 105 106 AL 120 TOTAL

Canadá vs Martinica

8.51

8.37

8.19

25.07

9.17

9.18

8.22

26.57

51.64

México vs Panamá

7.1

8.16

11.36

26.62

8.04

9.05

10.21

27.3

53.92

El Salvador vs Trinidad T.

9.15

8.03

12.09

29.27

10.21

7.42

8.15

25.78

55.05

Haití vs Honduras

8

10.55

8.56

27.11

8.46

8.24

10.14

26.84

53.95

Costa Rica vs Cuba

9

10.58

11.52

31.1

11.26

7.38

11.52

30.16

61.26

Belice vs USA

9.44

10.37

7.53

27.34

8.5

9.12

10

27.62

54.96

Panamá vs Maritinica

8.09

7.35

10.19

25.63

9.44

7.57

10.15

27.16

52.79

México vs Canadá

8.22

9.15

10.16

27.53

8.05

9.14

11.15

28.34

55.87

Trinidad T vs Haití

11.32

8.19

10.28 29.79

7.39

10.33

10.18

27.9

57.69

Honduras vs El Salvador

9.59

10.02

8.06

27.67

11.29

10

9.56

30.85

58.52

Usa vs Cuba

9.21

9.13

11.43

29.77

7.28

7.5

12.23

27.01

56.78

Costa Rica vs Belice

9.15

9.32

10.47

28.94

8.42

9.19

11.5

29.11

58.05

Martinica vs México

9.3

6.23

8.22

23.75

8.44

7.24

9.49

25.17

48.92

Panamá Vs Canadá

8.12

8.48

9.26

25.86

8.28

7.4

9.59

25.27

51.13

El Salvador vs Haití

9.23

9.04

8.37

26.64

8

5.56

8.25

21.81

48.45

Honduras vs Trinidad T.

8.26

9.27

10.32

27.85

8.07

10.03

13.10

31.2

59.05

Cuba vs Belice

9.1

11.05

9.31

29.46

7.51

8.5

10.42

26.43

55.89

USA vs Costa Rica

10.54

11.38

9.01

30.93

6.42

7.55

10.13

24.10

55.03

Panamá vs Cuba

9.15

8.07

11.1

29.94

10.5

8.09

10

28.59

53.12

México vs Trinidad T.

7.3

8.42

9.43

25.15

9.23

7.52

10.3

27.05

52.20

4tos Usa vs El Salvador

9.31

9.19

11.44

29.94

10.5

8.09

10

28.59

58.53

4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica

8.25

8.43

9.35

26.03

7.2

8.3

11.46

26.96

52.99

USA vs Honduras

9.41

10.33

9.12

28.86

7.2

9.45

9.39

26.04

54.90

Panamá vs México

8.58

6.52

8.23

23.33

7.2

7.42

10.59

25.21

48.54

USA vs Panamá

9.10

7.56

10.11

26.77

9.34

7

11.1

27.44

54.21

Totales

222.43 223.19 243.11 688.73 213.40 206.25 255.06 674.71 0.00 0.00 2726.88

Average

8.90 8.93 9.72 25.26 8.54 8.25 10.20 26.99 0.00 0.00 54.54

Percent

8.16 8.18 8.92 25.26 7.83 7.56 9.35 24.74 0.00 0.00 100.00

k. ATTENDANCE PER MATCHES, PER GROUP AND FOR THE EVENT. Canada vs Martinica

28385

3.30

A

México vs Panama

56822

6.62

A

El Salvador vs Trinidad T.

20604

2.40

B

Haiti vs Honduras

25460

2.96

B

Costa Rica vs Cuba

18752

2.18

C

Belice vs USA

18724

2.18

C

Panama vs Maritinica

7300

0.85

A

Mexico vs Canada

28354

3.30

A

Trinidad T vs Haiti

20740

2.41

B

Honduras vs El Salvador

28713

3.34

B

Usa vs Cuba

17597

2.05

C

Costa Rica vs Belice

17597

2.05

C

Martinica vs Mexico

25895

3.01

A

Panama Vs Canada

25895

3.01

A

El Salvador vs Haiti

18684

2.18

B

Honduras vs Trinidad T.

21783

2.54

B

Cuba vs Belice

25432

2.96

C

USA vs Costa Rica

25432

2.96

C

Panama vs Cuba

33140

3.86

Mexico vs Trinidad T.

54229

6.31

4 Tos Usa vs El Salvador

70540

8.21

4tos Honduras vs Costa Rica

70540

8.21

USA vs Honduras

59000

6.87

Panama vs México

81410

9.48

USA vs Panama

57920

6.74

Totales

858948 100.00

Average

34358

85207 46064 37476 36654 49453 35194 51790 40467 50864

21

L. Changes in Line-up by the Teams During the Matches Changes in Line-up by Team Team 2nd Match 3rd Match 4th Match 5th Match 6th Match Total Av. Pe. Belize 5 3 0 0 0 8 1.60 11.11 Canada 3 2 0 0 0 5 1.00 6.94 Costa Rica 6 0 0 0 0 6 1.20 8.33 Cuba 1 0 1 0 0 2 0.40 2.78 El Salvador 2 2 0 0 0 4 0.80 5.56 USA 4 2 1 1 0 8 1.60 11.11 Haiti 4 0 0 0 0 4 0.80 5.56 Honduras 3 5 1 1 0 10 2.00 13.89 Martinique 2 3 0 0 0 5 1.00 6.94 Mexico 3 2 0 0 0 5 1.00 6.94 Panama 0 9 0 0 0 9 1.80 12.50 Trin. & Tob. 1 4 1 0 0 6 1.20 8.33 Total 34 32 4 2 0 72 Average 2.83 2.67 0.33 0.17 0.00 14.40 Percent 47.22 44.44 5.56 2.78 0.00 100.00

Q- Most Valuable Players by Team Per TSG’s Ranking

22

Most Valuable Players by Team Per TSG’s Ranking Team Name Player Belize Elroy Smith 8 Canada Julian de Guzman 6 Costa Rica Michael Barrantes 11 Cuba Ariel Pedro Martínez González 11 El Salvador Rodolfo Antonio Zelaya Garcia 11 USA Donovan, Landon Timothy 10 Haiti Juan Eudes Maurice 11 Honduras Jorge Aaron Claros Juarez 20 Martinique Kevin Parsemain 17 Mexico Marco Fabian 10 Panama Gabriel Torres 9 Trin. & Tob. Kenwyne Jones 9

Position Defender MF MF MF F F Forward MF Forward Forward Forward Forward

GP 270 270 224 360 342 521 205 360 270 434 391 360

GF YC RC NL BP M 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 1 0 3 1 4 1 0 0 4 3 5 0 0 0 5 3 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 5 1 5 0 0 0 3 1 2 1 0 0 3 0

RNK 60.00 100.00 99.89 150.00 243.00 307.89 102.78 120.00 105.00 208.22 213.44 115.00

p. Goalkeeper with the Best Average Country Belize

Canada

Costa Rica

Cuba

El Salvador

USA

Haiti

Honduras

Martinique

Mexico

Panama

Trin. & Tob.

Goalkeeper Wooddrow West Frank Lopez Shane Orio Lars Hirschfeld Milan Borjan Simon Thomas Patrick Pemberton Leonel Moreira Luis Torres Odelín Molina Hernandez Julio Enrrique Ramos Pichardo Diosvelis A. Guerra Santiesteban Daroverto Portillo Gamero Derby Rafael Carrillo Berduo Benji Oldai Villalobos Segovia Bilal Abdul Hamid Sean Johnson Nicholas Rimando Frandy Montrevil Frandy Montrevil Ronaldo Elusma Donis Escober Izaguirre Kevin Hernandez Kirkconell Jose Alberto Mendoza Posas Kevin Olimpa Emmanuel Vermignon Loic Chauve Jonathan Orozco Alfredo Talavera Moisés Muñoz Jaime Penedo Luis Mejia Alex Rodriguez Jan Michael Williams Marvin Phillip Cleon John

Player Nº 1 22 27 1 18 22 18 1 23 1 12 21 1 22 18 22 12 1 1 1 0 22 18 1 23 1 16 1 12 23 1 12 15 21 1 22

Per. Goals 5 0 6 0 3 0 2 0 0 13 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 3 2 0 4 4 0 4 0 1 4 0 0 4 0 0

Ranking -5.00 0.00 -50.00 0.00 30.00 0.89 10.00 0.00 0.00 -75.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 -15.00 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 10.00 70.00 5.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 0.00

23

R- Fair Play Ranking Per the TSG. Changes in Line-up by Team Team

24

1 Match

2 Match

3 Match

4 Match

5 Match

5 Match

Total

Belize 27

27 24 78

Canada 32

32 31 95

Costa Rica

28

33

30

31

122

Cuba 30

26 33 23 122

El Salvador

35

32

28

30

USA

35

35

31

34

125

27 28 190

Haiti 31

29 28 88

Honduras 33

34

29

Martinique 33

33

28

Mexico 32

32

31 34 29 158

Panama 33

34

33 31

Trin. & Tob.

32

32

33

29

27 152 94

31 29 191

33

130

S- Number of Players by Country that Play in Foreign Leagues Panama 8 Mexico 0 Martinique 9 Canada 13

Honduras 6 Trinidad & T 12 El Salvador 4 Haiti 12

USA 13 Costa Rica 8 Cuba 0 Belize 2

25

26

III. GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE TOURNAMENT’S MAIN ASPECTS PHYSICAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITION Modern international soccer requires a high level of physical and mental condition from the players. The willingness of the participant teams of the Gold Cup 2013 became evident from the opening match of the tournament. In general, the matches were played with great intensity and rivalry. It was possible to observe that most teams had good physical condition throughout the event, with the exception of Belize and Cuba, which demonstrated that they did not have proper physical preparation, something that resulted evident as the tournament developed.

However, regardless of their physical strengths and/or weaknesses, the teams showed great determination to achieve the desired results in their matches. The first match between Canada and Martinique was the perfect example of the combination of physical and mental willingness to be successful in CONCACAF’s superior level. Martinique scored a goal in the (90+3”) minute to win 1-0 in the abrasive heat of Los Angeles, when it seemed that a 0-0 score was both acceptable and inevitable.

In Miami, Honduras imitated Martinique, playing with intensity up until the end of the match to score the winning goal in the (90+2”) minute, to defeat a difficult team like El Salvador. On the other hand, the teams generally maintained the intensity and game pace up until the end of the match.

It is worth highlighting that the average real play time of the tournament was very similar to that of recent FIFA tournaments.

A matter of concern was the warm-up by some teams. Playing two matches in a row in the same place limited the warm-up time for the teams that played the second match, which hampered their ability to carry out their normal routine. The organization of the warm-up and the exercises for some teams employed before the match was inappropriate. Besides, a team allowed its players

to warm-up without supervision during the match.

Also, the period of time between the teams going out into the field after warming up, and the end of the protocol before starting the match – up to twenty minutes – possibly affected at least some ability in the players to start the matches correctly. The fact is that in the first 15-minute period only 4 goals were scored (11% of all goals) in the entire tournament.

This possibly indicates that this is the effect of not carrying out a correct and appropriate warm-up. .

TECHNICAL LEVEL The players generally showed very good technique in defensive headers, together with skill and determination to defend in one-on-one situations.

Meanwhile, in individual terms, some athletes and teams had technical problems during ball possession when it was necessary to play under the opponent’s pressure. The general level of individual technique – ball delivery and control, dribbling, defensive headers, and skills in one-on-one situations – was good.

One characteristic of the tournament was the evident capacity of most players to play under pressure and in confined spaces – USA, Costa Rica, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico and Panama. However, it was possible to observe many attack opportunities being lost due to bad passes, lack of concentration, and wrong decisions. In general, those teams that used long passes and direct attacking plays did not have the technical capacity and quality to correctly complete those passes in order to show effective attacks.

Likewise, most opportunities to get to the opponent’s penalty area through the wings ended up in passes to the center with no clear objective or danger for the opponent’s goal.

Ball possession was clearly seen in the midfield and defensive lines, with USA, Mexico, Panama, Honduras and Costa Rica standing out in this sense, and Belize, Cuba and Martinique really struggling in this aspect.

The tournament also highlighted a key weakness in the game at all levels throughout the Confederation – the lack of effective attacks on goal and the lack of long-range shots on goal from outside the area.

Belize (75%) and Trinidad & Tobago (65%) showed the biggest inability to shot on goal. At the same time, of the 67 goals scored in the tournament, only 6 (9%)

27

28

were scored from outside the area. Once more, these statistics have implications for the formation of players, especially young players inside CONCACAF.

BASIC FORMATIONS 1-4-4-1 and 1-4-5-1 are the basic formations most used by the vast majority of the teams – Belize, El Salvador, Haiti, Martinique, Panama, Mexico and USA used the first one, while Canada, Cuba, Honduras and Trinidad & Tobago used the 1-4-5-1 system. Costa Rica employed a variety of systems, 1-4-4-1, 1-4-5-1 and 1-5-4-1, while Canada went from 1-4-5-1 to 1-4-42 in the last match of the group (against Panama) in an effort to win the match. Trinidad & Tobago went from 1-4-5-1 to 1-4-4-2 in the quarterfinals match against Mexico. The substitutes were mostly used as direct substitutions in the position and did not alter the formation system.

The teams in general did not change their formations during the matches, but did alter their basic system in accordance to the game stage – attack and/ or defense. All the teams moved their defensive wingers to the midfield to support the attack. The midfield wingers advanced to support the forwards in deep positions. When defending, the teams that played with two forwards had one of them move back to reinforce the midfield, while the midfield wingers would generally incorporate to rear positions to reinforce the defense of the pitch, giving their teams the aspect of having a defensive line of 5 players and a compact game between the lines. The teams who stood out in terms of organization were USA, Panama, Mexico, Honduras and Costa Rica.

ORGANIZATION AND DEFENSIVE TACTICS Most teams presented a basic formation for the defense, with two center backs and two or one defensive midfielders, which offered organization and defensive guarantee to use different variations during the development of the match. The best collectives (Mexico, USA, Panama, Honduras, Costa Rica, Trinidad & Tobago) present a very compact defensive organization, with good exchange between the lines, playing as a concentrated block. The pressure on the opponent in the midfield was the

most used tactic to recover ball possession; only the USA tried to pressure the opponent in their defensive area. Some teams, depending on the rival, chose to defend on the midfield line and counter-attack (for example Belize against USA and Cuba against Panama). Teams that use two forwards had one of them move back to the midfield to collaborate in the collective defense. Teams organized defensively like a compact block (USA, Mexico, Panama, Honduras, Costa Rica and Trinidad & Tobago in their final match against Mexico) maintained their concentration and tactic discipline throughout the matches.

ORGANIZATION AND OFFENSIVE TACTICS The tournament presented the difference between two rival attack philosophies – ball possession and counter-attack. In general, the teams tried to control the possession of the ball and build their attack from the back, showing the individual ability to play under pressure and in confined spaces. USA, Panama, Mexico, Honduras and Costa Rica were the best teams in ball passing and possession. The first one had an effectiveness of 87% in their passes and Mexico reached 80%. The teams that used the counter-attack tactic with long passes and direct attacks (Canada, El Salvador, Honduras, Martinique, Belize, Cuba, Haiti, Trinidad & Tobago) were in general terms not as effective against the excellent defensive headers and the good coverage in defense of the opponents, without ignoring the bad quality of the passes.

The attack focused on the exploitation of wide open areas in the field. The teams began their plays in a compact manner using ball possession and combination from the back of the field organizing their attack. They used the defensive wingers to support the midfield, with only one defender (Panama) or both at the same time (Mexico and USA), incorporating their midfield wingers higher on the field to support the forwards. As a guarantee in the defensive coverage against counter-attacks, a defensive midfielder stayed in contact with the defenders, while the rest of the team moved forward.

This way their game was compact between the lines.

A slow transition from defense to attack and the solid defensive organization of most teams contributed to having most of the matches played in the midfield, with most of the possession in that zone.

Facing a well-organized defense, the top-level

29

teams looked for a quick transition to attack mode, generally using the entire flanks, once they gained ball possession. The effectiveness of the counterattack tactics was widely shown by Panama in their first match against Mexico. The 2011 champion (Mexico) dominated the possession with 439 passes, while Panama only completed 138, but Mexico did not gain too much depth and penetration, ending up defeated (2-1) due to their slow transition from defense to attack. Panama, on the other hand, was very direct in the counter-attack, with a quick and wide penetration to create their two goals.

Mexico showed a much quicker transition in the second match, which translated into more depth in the game, earning a convincing victory by (2-0) against Canada. In the same way, in their second match of the group stage, Trinidad & Tobago completed 265 passes against only 71 from Haiti, however, the latter won the game 2-0 with a quick counter-attack game and an effective defense-attack transition.

LINE-UPS In general, the teams made changes to the lineups during the group stage. This was due to a combination of factors (player injury, suspension, rotation to provide rest to some players, offer the opportunity to others after qualifying). The objective before the tournament, as the USA coach stated, was to use the event to test the players and develop the strategy to use it in the qualifiers for the FIFA World Cup. Costa Rica offered rest to several players of the starting line-up in the last group match after they had qualified for Quarterfinals. Trinidad & Tobago did not use several players in their final group match to later face Mexico. .

KEY POSITIONS

30

To offer a quality performance in all the positions is obviously important for the success of any team, but the Gold Cup 2013 was the tournament of forwards and midfield wingers. The difficulties to penetrate well-organized and compact defensive lines especially through the middle obligated to organize the tactics of the attacks and opportunities to build them from the wings, using the midfield wingers.

Despite their key role in the attack game, the midfield wingers scored fewer goals than the forwards.

The forwards had the largest production of goals in the tournament, scoring 39 for a total of 58% of all the goals scored. The teams with good scorers were able to reach victory in difficult matches and achieve the desired result.

GOALKEEPERS The goalkeepers ranking used by the TSG is based on a combination of objective criteria: 1) Minutes played. 2) Goals against. 3) Goals in favor.

4) Disciplinary measures (yellow and/or red cards). 5) Election as the best player of a match.

There were excellent goalkeepers in this tournament and their general technical level was high. Basic ball handling and distribution technique – both from the technical and tactical point of view.

Control and total domination of the area was observed in most goalkeepers. The most outstanding include Vermignon (Martinique), Orozco (Mexico), Phillips (Trinidad & Tobago), Rimando (USA) and Belize’s goalkeeper, who despite of receiving many goals also had outstanding performances. The best goalkeeper of the tournament for his general and very stable performance throughout the tournament was Jaime Penedo from the Panamanian team.

TEAM DIRECTION It was possible to observe different levels of professional direction of the teams by the coaches and collectives.

The most outstanding ones: USA, Panama, Mexico, Costa Rica and Honduras offered the possibility to evaluate a coherent strategy in the different roles of the team and how the technical collective works.

In general terms, there was good use of the substitutes in order to fulfill the objectives in the attack and the defense. The following players not only improved the performance of their teams, but they also scored goals: Wondolowski (USA), entered the field in the match against Cuba to score two goals, while Ponce (Mexico) did the same against Martinique. The following players scored 1 goal each against the following teams: Chavez (Honduras) against Haiti, Holden and Shea (USA) against Belize and Panama respectively, Jimenez (Panama) against Cuba, and Eddie Johnson against El Salvador.

31

THE CARIBBEAN AND BELIZE Belize was a debutant in the Gold Cup, being eliminated in the first group stage. Cuba, who was champion of the Caribbean in 2012, and Trinidad & Tobago (runner-up) classified to the Quarterfinals.

Having said this, the teams of the Caribbean, in the 14 matches they played, only scored 14 goals and received 25. Haiti, together with Martinique, was eliminated in the group stage. Meanwhile, Belize only scored 1 goal in its 3 matches and conceded 11. In general terms, these five teams had less ball possession, presenting an average 24% of wrong passes. In this aspect both Belize and Cuba stand out with 33% of bad passes (1 out of 3 passes were not completed).

These teams showed serious technical, tactical, physical and strategic difficulties. This proves the limitations of these teams and the need to have an important development project in the Caribbean and Belize to improve the quality of the game in those countries, together with the competitive level of their national teams. The proper preparation of these teams is also a matter of concern, with more friendly matches before the tournament, which comprise a core aspect of any project that seeks to improve general performance.

It is not possible to participate in an event of this stature without proper previous preparation. Some countries did not have this.

LOS GOLES The tournament had an average of 2.7 goals per match.

Most goals were scored in the second half of the matches (41), reaching 61% of all goals scored.

Time periods when the goals were scored: 1- 15 Minutes. Goals scored: 6 Percentage: 9% 15-30 Minutes. Goals scored: 9 Percentage: 14%.

30-45 Minutes. Goals scored: 11 Percentage: 16%.

45-60 Minutes. Goals scored: 13 Percentage: 19%.

60-75 Minutes. Goals scored: 12 Percentage: 18%.

75-90 Minutes. Goals scored: 16 Percentage: 24%

32

1st. More goals were scored in the second halves.

2nd. It was possible to observe that the physical capacity of some teams decreased in the second halves and they received many goals (Cuba, Belize).

They were not able to maintain a compact game between the lines.

3rd. It was also possible to see the lack of concentration of the teams in defensive roles during the second halves, especially in the teams of the Caribbean and Belize.

Who Scored the Goals Forwards - 39 goals scored, for a percentage of 58%.

Midfielders - 20 goals scored, for a percentage of 30%. Of these, 15 goals were scored by midfield wingers.

Defenders - 8 goals scored, for a percentage of 12%.

1st.- Forwards were the tournaments’ top scorers thanks to the support and projection of midfield wingers and defenders. .

2nd.- Midfield wingers and defensive wingers were the most dangerous areas with their constant arrival and the widening of the pitch. They were a key factor in achieving a compact game between the attacking and defensive lines.

Where the Goals Were Scored From Inside the penalty area.-39 goals scored, representing 58%.

Inside the goal area.- 12 goals scored, representing 18%.

Outside the penalty area.- 6 goals scored, representing 9%.

1st - The majority of the goals were scored inside the area (51).

This shows the defensive errors and the lack of concentration when marking inside the area, whether it is the penalty area or the goal area.

2nd - The small amount of goals from outside the area proves the little use and effectiveness of long-range shots, which is a very deficient aspect in CONCACAF. 3rd - The creation of goal opportunities mainly occurred in the wings with the support of midfield wingers and defenders. 21 goals (31%) were the result of plays in these zones.

4th - 10 goals were scored in individual plays, due to the skills of some players. This ratifies once more that different players determine the result of a match, therefore they are very important in their teams.

33

5th - In standard situations it was possible to see the technical difficulties when kicking the ball and not too many elaborated plays were seen. The goals from corner kicks were very scarce and most corner kicks were harmless. Only 5 goals (7.5%) were scored from corner kicks.

6th - The number of penalties in this tournament was very high (10).

REAL PLAY TIME The average real play time during the group stage was 55:32, very close to the 56:24 average achieved in the FIFA Confederations Cup 2013. In 12 of the 18 matches played in the group stage, the average real play time in the last 15-minute period surpassed 10 minutes. The general average for the tournament, including the elimination and final rounds was 54:54.

The match with the longest real play time was Costa Rica against Cuba (61:26) The match with the shortest real play time was El Salvador against Haiti (48:45).

The time period when the shortest real play time was achieved was between the 60th and 75th minute with only 8:25 played. In comparison, more real play time was achieved in the first half than in the second.

FAIR PLAY The tournament was played with the best sportsmanship. The players and officials of the teams generally followed the concept of Fair Play.

This is reflected in the fact that there were no important incidents on the field and that only 58 yellow cards were shown throughout the tournament – an average of less than 5 yellow cards per team -, as well as in the four red cards shown in the entire tournament. The winner of the Fair Play Award was Panama, which only accumulated 3 yellow cards.

AGE AVERAGE

34

The event had mature teams and players. Six teams had an age average of 27 years, three teams had an average of 26 years, two teams had an average of 25 years and El Salvador was the youngest team with an age average of 24 years, which is a good omen for the future. The oldest player in the tournament was Odelin Molina (#1 Goalkeeper, 38 years old) from Cuba, while the youngest player was Samuel Piette (#14 Midfielder, 18 years old) from Canada. (See age

chart).

PLAYERS IN FOREIGN LEAGUES One of every three players in the Gold Cup 2013 plays in a foreign league (96) for a percentage of 35%. This high percentage demonstrates the improvement in the quality of the CONCACAF player. It also indirectly creates a problem for the member associations when selecting their best team. Several coaches in this tournament point out that they were forced to exclude some players with contracts abroad since their clubs did not agree on freeing them to play the tournament. As a matter of fact, Trinidad & Tobago had to replace a player in a foreign league (Belgium) with another player from a foreign league (USA) after having qualified to the Quarterfinals round, since the agreement between the TTFA and the Belgian Club required the player to return to Europe on a specific date.

ATTENDANCE The average attendance during the tournament was of 34,358 attendants per match, being Mexico the team that attracted the biggest number of fans. As a matter of fact, the Quarterfinals match between Mexico and Trinidad & Tobago broke the record of attendance to a soccer match in the Georgia Dome (54,229 attendants). The Quarterfinals match between the USA and El Salvador (71,000) was the third biggest attendance in the history of the Gold Cup. The average attendance per match in 2011 was 34,400 people (13 matches).

35

1 - USA Team – Champions 2013.

2 - Panama Team – Worthy 2nd Place of the Gold Cup. 3 - Landon Donovan – Most Valuable Player of the Gold Cup 2013.

36

37

The team achieved its historic qualification for the first time to a Gold Cup after qualifying in 5th place in the UNCAF finals.

With an age average of 27 years, it was part of Group (C), together with the USA, to which it lost (61) in the first match. It was defeated in the second match against Costa Rica (1-0).

In the final group match Belize faced Cuba, which defeated it by (4-0). The team ended its participation in the Gold Cup with a balance of three defeats, 1 goal in favor, and 11 goals against.

The tournament’s level was truly high for this team that was only able to offer the desire to win and a high fighting spirit, but lacked the fundamental soccer level in the technical, tactical, physical and strategic aspects.

The team demonstrated honesty and principles when it denounced bribing, corruption, and the sale of match results.

The sole fact that the team qualified to a Gold Cup for the UNCAF region is enough motivation to continue developing soccer in this neighboring country.

38

Tactical

Basic game system 1-5-3-2

Technical •Technically limited when under pressure from the opponent in confined spaces, where they missed many passes.

•Not much ball possession due to these technical limitations when passing and wrong decisionmaking when attempting to do such passes.

•They have several attack players with some individual quality that sometimes create danger in the opponent’s goal, especially in the counterattacks.

•Technical deficiencies in short and long-range shots on goal.

•Very good technical level of the goalkeeper.

Physical •The team’s physical level decreased as time went by in the matches. This was especially important in the last match against Cuba.

•The lack of defensive organization forced them to make great efforts in each match to counterbalance

the opponents, which in turn had a physical cost on the team.

•Tall, fast, and strong players.

Tactical

Basic formation system 1-5-3-2 with variations of 1-3-5-2, which makes difficult to determine if they are defending with 5 defenders with 3 center backs, one of them as a sweeper. It was a team whose performance level went from better to worse as the tournament developed.

They finished the tournament with a very deficient performance against Cuba, with total lack of organization in all aspects.

Their game was based on a solid defense and a good appearance of the goalkeeper. Their attack was based on direct plays and counter-attacks that in most cases ended with possession for the opponent.

They were good in aerial play thanks to the players’ height, but lacked defensive organization and their attack game lacked compact plays.

They left many free spaces for the opponents in all their lines.

39

Defense

•5-player defensive block, 3 of them being a defensive midfielder, two of which had marking roles and the third one played as a sweeper.

•Despite using 3 defensive midfielders, they offered many free spaces between the lines by stretching the formations when they were attacking, not playing in a compact manner. Effort was an individual, not a group, expression.

•They received 11 goals in three matches, proof of the lack of organization and evident fragility in the defensive line.

•Thanks to the outstanding performance of their goalkeeper they did not receive too many goals in each match.

Attack

•Basic formation with one center forward supported by another attacker that also had defensive roles by returning to the center of the field. This translated into physical exhaustion for both attackers.

•Their attack was based on counter-attacks and direct attacks that in many cases ended in losing the ball due to wrong passes and lack of collective play.

•Little support from the midfielders and defensive midfielders, which left both forwards isolated.

•They only scored one goal in the tournament. They did not have a good execution of collective plays in their attacks and in ball possession.

40

Physical

•The physical level of the team decreased as time passed; this became most evident in their last match against Cuba.

•The lack of defensive organization was compensated with great efforts in each match

to counterbalance their opponents, which led to physical exhaustion.

•Tall, fast, and strong players.

Deficiencies

•Little defensive and offensive organization throughout the event.

•One-on-one marking problems when the defensive midfielders faced skillful and agile forwards, offering many advantages when they were weak in marking, allowing the opponent forwards to turn around and control the ball.

•Lack of organization of the defensive midfielders in their defensive tasks, leaving free spaces in that area during some moments of the match.

•They were not able to develop a collective game between their lines.

•They had technical limitations, which led to insufficient ball possession when the opponent exercised pressure.

• Very few deep and dangerous opportunities in the attack.

•Technical limitations in short and long-range shots on goal.

•Low physical preparation for such a demanding tournament in the physical aspect.

JUGADORES DESTACADOS •# 8 Elroy Smith. Sweeper defender. Fast and secure •# 1 Woodrow West. Goalkeeper. Good saves.

•# 9 Deon Mc Caulay. Forward. Skillful, fast.

41

The national team of Canada appeared on the event with a renewed team comprised of young stars, most of them playing in teams abroad (13 players). With an age average of 25 years, they had the youngest player of the tournament.

It was part of Group (A) together with Martinique (0-1), Mexico (0-2) and Panama (0-0).

It was defeated in two matches and only achieved one draw, without scoring any goals in all three matches. It demonstrated good handling of the ball in the defense and the midfield but also lacked depth, conviction, danger and effectiveness in the attack.

42

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-5-1

Technical

•Good handling and individual and collective ball control, mainly in the defense and midfield, even under the pressure from the opponent.

•Technical deficiencies in short and long-range shots on goal.

•They used long-range shots with no precision and also had difficulties in the shots with moving ball.

Physical

•In general terms, the team did not show a stable physical performance in the matches. The midfield wingers lacked speed in the attacks.

•Their work capacity decreased in the second halves.

This meant the compact game was compromised in the attack formation.

•They had strong and fast players, especially in the defense. Good air skills in aerial plays.

•One of its best players (#7), was a very quick and skillful midfielder, but was only able to play in the first match. Due to illness, he could not participate in the last two matches. As a consequence, they lost depth and opportunities in that zone.

Tactical

•Basic formation system 1-4-5-1.

•They had good ball control in the defensive line and in the midfield. But they had serious deficiencies in the attack since they lacked depth, conviction, and yield of goals or goal opportunities in the opponent’s area.

•Good ball possession in the defensive zone using the width of the pitch but with many side passes that did not translate to depth.

•Slow ball transition from defense to attack and very little support from the midfield lines in the attack. They never had number superiority in the attack.

•Counter-attacking and direct play strategy that in many cases ended in losing the balls after bad passes and due to the isolation of their center forward.

•They lacked conviction and depth in their attack plays.

They attacked on the wings.

Defense

•The 4-player defensive block was well organized with the support of two defensive midfielders. They were very strong and quick. They anticipated and covered the areas in a good manner.

•Good air skills and man-marking on the opponent’s

43

attackers.

•They placed the defensive block in the midfield with the intensive presence of 6 and 7 players.

•Good work and performance of the goalkeeper with excellent saves and team direction.

Attack •Only with a center forward, who played isolated from the rest of the team and lacked the support of the other lines.

•Long passes to advance and direct attacks in most of their attempts that turned out to be ineffective as they lost the ball many times.

•Their main weakness was the lack of support and compact game in their attacks, which impeded collective game at the front.

•Very few short and long-range shots on goal.

•Too many side passes in the midfield with no deep passes and surprising attacks from the wings.

•They did not score goals in the tournament.

•They lacked fast players on the wings that could outrun the opponents.

Deficiencies •No depth, conviction, danger and effectiveness in the attacks on the opponent’s areas.

•They did not score any goals in the tournament.

•Many ball losses due to bad long passes and direct attacks.

44

•Little support (compact game) in the attack from the midfielders and the defensive wingers.

•Too many side passes using the width of the pitch but with no opportunities since they were too slow in their transition from defense to attack.

•They did not maintain a stable physical performance in the three matches, especially in the second halves.

•Conservative tactical formations throughout the tournament.

Outstanding players •Julian De Guzman. # 6 Defensive midfielder. Excellent technique. Organizer and team leader. Was part of the All-Star Team.

•Milan Borjan. # 18. Goalkeeper. Very good saves and team direction •Rusell Teibert # 7. Midfielder. Fast, dangerous and very skillful. Was only able to play the first match.

45

MĂŠxico

The Costa Rican team, which qualified for the UNCAF zone for the Gold Cup, had players with an average age of 27 years.

It was part of Group (C) in the qualifying stage, where it played against Cuba (3-0), Belize (1-0), and lost against the USA (0-1). During this stage the team obtained 6 points with 4 goals in favor and 1 against, qualifying for Quarterfinals behind the USA. During their match against Honduras in the Quarterfinals, they initially received 1 goal against.

The team collectively focused on scoring a goal to tie the game and developed a high game level and applied pressure on the opponent with offensive plays, but did so without potency or effectiveness in scoring. They finally lost 1 to 0.

46

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical •Really good technical level both individually and collectively.

•Good control and possession of the ball, mainly in its defensive and midfield lines.

•In the match against Honduras the team showed high technical level and combinations.

•Good technical level in the aerial play.

Physical •The team had good level in terms of physical fitness, keeping a compact game between the lines in every match.

•Strong on the mark and dispute of balls.

•Lacked speed and deep attacking plays.

Tactical Initial formation system 1-4-4-2 with variations in defense 1-4-5-1 and attack 1-3-2-5. The team uses

organized counter-attacking plays and good control of the ball from its defensive area, with elaboration of plays in the midfield zone.

Compact game in defense and attack. Somewhat slow in defense-deep attack transition.

Defense Organized and strong, they put intensive pressure on the opponent to regain ball control in the midfield zone; good aerial play, 4-defender line and 2 defensive midfielders.

Compact game between lines.

Good ball control in plays from the back.

Its goalkeeper had good performance during his few interventions.

Attack

•Organized and compact between lines with controlled ball.

•Two lone strikers receive support from midfield wingers, attacking defenders; somewhat slow in the defense-attack transition in the halfway line.

•Lacked depth and clarity in the combinations and

47

attacking plays in the opponent’s area.

Deficiencies •Low effectiveness in goal opportunities.

•Not much depth or danger in its attacking plays.

•Defense-attack transition in midfield is slow on occasions.

Outstanding players.

Celso Borges. # 5 Defensive midfielder. Team organizer Junior Diaz. # 15. Defensive winger. Fast and secure, good technique.

Michael barrantes. # 11 Attacking midfielder.

Skillful and dangerous.

48

49

The Cuban national team was the champion of the 2012 Caribbean finals, with an average team age of 27 years.

Cuba was part of Group (C), together with Costa Rica to which it lost (0-3), the USA, to which it also lost (1-4), and Belize, which it defeated (4-0) and qualified for Quarterfinals as one of the best third places in the event.

In this stage of the tournament, Cuba lost (6-1) against Panama.

The team scored 6 goals and conceded 13.

50

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-5-1

technical

Tactical

•Individual and collective inconsistent technical level.

•It has difficulties with control and possession of the ball when under pressure from the opponent in confined spaces.

•Few combinations in attack due to bad passes and wrong decisions.

•Technical difficulties in long-range goals and shots on goal.

Fixed formation system 1-4-5-1 with no variations.

They defend in their own area, trying to apply pressure in the midfield but in a disorganized manner. They do not have a compact game, do not tighten spaces; the team had counter-attacking plays and direct plays, but most times with bad passes.

Physical

•Only one forward #9 as lone striker #9, between 2 and 3 defenders.

•In the match against Brazil it showed higher offensive capacity thanks to the good performance of Ariel Martínez and the creation of deep attacking plays with the support of the midfielders.

•Direct counter-attacking and attacking plays that usually ended with bad passes.

•Lack of movement in midfield and attack, causing insufficient ball possession.

•Deficient in short and long-range shots.

•Worth outstanding the class and level of player

•Very low physical level displayed by the Cuban team in this tournament.

•Their low physical condition was evident after the 45th minute, which generated lack of concentration and total tactical disorganization.

Attack

51

Ariel Martínez # 11, right midfielder, in the attack.

Defense •4-men defensive block in the back with 2 defensive midfielders; they defend in 8-player blocks in their own area.

•Deficient in one-on-one situations with agile opponents; lack compact game, tightening spaces only after minute 50.

•The defense losses concentration after minute 50 due to lack of physical fitness.

•Clear examples of this are the last 45 minutes played against the USA, Panama, and Costa Rica.

Deficiencies •Poor physical condition for a tournament of this level and its requirements to play every 72 hours.

•Moderate ball possession.

•Low precision in short, medium, and long distance passes.

•Lack compact game in the attack and defense between its lines.

52

•Lack of mobility of the players in the midfield and front field to show up and support a teammate.

•The team did not use a well-planned and organized strategy for player substitutions.

•Weak in defensive coverage and man-marking pressure on the opponent; they left many spaces between the lines.

JUGADORES DESTACADOS. •Ariel Martínez. # 11. Attacking midfielder. Excellent skills. Scored 3 goals.

•Jorge Luis Corrales. # 13. Left defender. Technical and effective in the attack.

•Yenier Marquez. # 3. Defensive midfielder. Good organizer.

•José Ciprian Alfonso # 9. Forward. Scored 2 goals.

53

The national team of El Salvador qualified for the Gold Cup by obtaining the 4th place in the UNCAF tournament.

It was part of Group (B) during the qualifying stage, together with Trinidad and Tobago (2 -2), Haiti (1-0) and Honduras, to which it lost (0-1), scoring 3 goals and conceding an equal number (3) during qualifying.

In the Quarterfinals it played against a strong USA team and was defeated (5-1).

El Salvador conceded 8 goals and scored 4 during the tournament.

54

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical

Tactical

•Showed better technical level on an individual basis than on a collective basis. The team shows technical limitations in the possession of the ball when under pressure from their opponents.

•Has individual players with very good technical level and skills (Zelaya, Flores, Ceren).

•Lost combination attacking plays due to bad passes.

It used a basic formation system of 1-4-4-2, which it kept in all matches. Substitutions were all for the same positions.

Physical •The team’s physical condition decreases in the last 20 minutes of the match; lacked greater dynamic and intense match rhythm.

•Lacked speed in the midfield and in goal opportunities on the opponent’s goal.

•They were always defeated by their rivals in midfield plays as well as in aerial play.

•The team was defeated in heading disputes.

Defense •4- player block with the support of two defensive midfielders.

•The team had difficulties playing a compact game between its lines in defensive plays, leaving spaces between them; the forwards and midfield wingers had insufficient defensive functions.

•Great goalkeeper, outstanding in all matches.

•Against the USA in the Quarterfinals, the team was completely disorganized in its defense and conceded many goals.

•The team had tactical difficulties using zonal marking.

•They were surpassed in ball disputes during aerial play.

55

Attack •With 2 skillful and dangerous strikers, its attack is based on an individual rather than a collective game.

•Lacked depth and effectiveness in its attacking plays, with few plays in the opponent’s area.

•Good ball possession in the defense and midfield, and slow defense to attack transition.

•The team was not able to keep a compact game in the attack and did not have constant support from the wingers.

•They lost many combination attacking plays due to bad passes in the opponent’s area.

Deficiencies •The majority of players have difficulties making decisions on an individual and collective level under the opponent’s pressure with or without the ball.

•Ball possession is poor, with no depth, and without defeating the rivals.

56

•Lacked mobility, compact game between lines, and depth in attacking plays.

•Lacked dynamics, change of rhythm, and speed in all of its lines.

•Against the USA, it was completely disorganized in the defense and in the attack.

Outstanding players • Rodolfo Zelaya. # 11.

Very skillful and dangerous in the attack.

• Dagoberto Portillo. #1.

Very good saves and control of the area.

• Darwin Ceren. # 7.

Excellent technical skills and intelligence.

57

México

The USA team was the worthy champion of the Gold Cup 2013. With gradual improvement in their performance in each match as result of its excellent collective game, which was organized and disciplined, it was superior to other national teams.

A team with an average age of 27 years, it demonstrated very good direction and strategy from the collective coaches. The team won all matches (6), for a total of 20 goals in favor and 2 against.

The USA had Langdon Donovan (#10), the Tournament’s Most Valuable Player and one of the top scorers of the event.

Its’ main virtue as a team was its excellent collective operation, organization, discipline, tactics, and physical fitness.

58

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical

Tactical

•Technically very able, both individually and collectively. A team with a very consistent level among its players. They can play under pressure from the opponent in confined spaces.

•Very good ball possession, with elaborate combinations from the defense to the attack.

•Technically excellent in aerial play (heading), in the defensive line.

•Use of short, precise passes, play changes and deep passes, as well as walls, due to the mobility of its players and their technical level during movement.

•Basic formation system 1-4-4-2 with offensive variations 1-3-4-3 or 1-3-3-4 in the attack. They alternate to 1-4-5-1 on the defensive with Donovan supporting the midfield.

•Plays with one 4-men block, 2 center backs in the center and 2 defensive midfielders; very well organized and tactically disciplined, excellent collective game.

•It was a team with increasingly good performance in each of its matches; very compact between the lines both in the attack as in the defense.

Physical

Defense

•Very good physical fitness, strong, fast, and powerful players, capable of maintaining a high match rhythm for 90 minutes. Thanks to their athleticism, they maintain a constant compact game between the lines in the attack and defense.

•Defensive line (4) with (2) defensive midfielders, very well organized and with excellent tactical discipline.

•Excellent aerial play (heading) in midfield and direct plays from the opponent.

•Compact game between lines and in block in 40 or 50 meters.

•Very good coverage and anticipation.

59

•Tough and secure in one-on-one situations.

•Constant pressure when the ball is lost, rapidly reducing the spaces for the rival team.

•Great job by the goalkeeper in the few times he needed to act.

Attack •Basically, they maintain a target striker but finish deep in the opponent’s area with 3 and 4 players.

•Play the width of the pitch, building on plays from midfielders and defensive wingers mainly on the left; very good movement of players throughout the pitch in compact play and strong on the ball.

•They have Langdon Donovan in their squad, a “different” kind of player, organizer and scorer (the Tournament’s MVP).

•Excellent and elaborate passing plays from the midfield, with walls and penetrations in the opponent’s area.

•Team with even individual performance by its players.

60

Deficiencias •Need to have greater impact with their attacking plays, and effectiveness in goal scoring opportunities during the multiple offensive plays in the opponent’s area with a clear chance to score.

Outstanding players.

•Landon Donovan # 10. Forward. Most Valuable Player of the Tournament.

•Christopher Wondolowski. # 19 Forward.

Scored 5 goals.

•Clarence Goodson. # 21. Center back. Confident in the defense and good aerial play.

•Damarcus Beasley. # 7.

Defensive winger. Skillful support in the attack.

•Kyle Belckerman. # 14.

Defensive midfielder. Match organizer.

61

The Haitian national team qualified for the Gold Cup as result of its 3rd place in the Caribbean finals of 2013.

The team had an average age of 26 years and several athletes that play with foreign leagues.

It was part of Group (B) together with Honduras, to which it lost (0-2), Trinidad and Tobago which it defeated (2-0), and El Salvador, to which it lost (10) by a doubtful penalty kick in minute 89.

The team brought liveliness to the tournament due to its offensive game with wide mobility and ball possession in the midfield. However, they lacked effectiveness in scoring goals.

62

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical •Very good technique on an individual and collective basis.

•Most players were skillful and technically resourceful, mainly in the defense and midfield.

•The team has excellent possession of the ball thanks to its mobility in the midfield and defense.

•The team has technical difficulties in shots on goal.

•Lacked quality and organization in passing plays in the attack.

Physical •Fast, powerful, strong players, eager to work.

•Despite their physical abilities, the players wear out due to lack of tactical organization.

•Its defensive wingers have good physical fitness.

Tactical Basic formation system of 1-4-4-2 with a man in the midfield. The defensive variation is 1-4-51, supporting players in the midfield. They have very good ball possession during defense and in the midfield. The team likes to start playing from

behind, controlling the ball.

On the offense it uses 1-3-4-3 giving its wingers the freedom to attack, mainly by the wings and leaving only one defensive midfielder. The team uses greater number of players in the midfield than its opponent; thanks to its mobility and technique it has great ball possession in this area.

The lack of support in the attack, resulting from its tactical fragility and lack of discipline, weakens its defense since it leaves wide spaces behind the wingers and the same number of the opponent’s attackers and Haiti’s defenders during counterattacks, leading to failure of possible defensive coverage.

Defense •They play with a 4 men formation from behind; they are very fast and have good aerial play. Great mobility in this area.

•This defensive formation in the attack leaves 3 defenders due to the permanent support of its wingers in offensive plays.

•They leave wide spaces open in the defensive area, which are exploited by the rivals.

•In many occasions its defensive lines have the same number of players as the rival team, creating difficulties in one-on-one situations and coverage.

63

•The team gathers many players in the midfield, where they constantly pressure when they lose ball possession, but lack compact organization throughout the match.

•Haiti’s goalkeeper lacked precision in several saves and passing plays.

Attack •Create attacking plays from their goal and defensive line using ball control and possession.

•Gathers 5 and 6 players in the midfield with very good mobility and rotations, which usually enables them to have greater numbers of players and wide ball possession in this area. They pass and support teammates constantly.

•The support from its 2 defensive wingers is crucial in the attack; players #2 and #4 are fast and skillful and give width to the team.

•They have 2 fast strikers but with bad positioning when the wingers breakaway and focus on the opponent’s area. They have fast and agile forwards, but do not use these qualities at the precise time.

•Lacked depth and effectiveness during plays with danger in the opponent’s area.

•Only scored 2 goals in the 3 matches.

•Technically deficient in shots on goal.

64

Deficiencies •Technical difficulties in passing plays and attacking plays in front of the opponent’s goal.

•Decision-making during attack with or without the ball is not in line with its good technical and physical abilities; very deficient in shots on goal.

•Lack of concentration in the attack and defense; they get easily distracted.

•Disorganized during compact plays in the midfield; leave many open spaces during defensive plays.

•At certain times during the match the support from the wingers to the attackers is such that center backs are numerically matched by rival forwards.

Had difficulties in one-on-one situations and coverage.

Outstanding players •Jean Sony Alsenat # 2.

Defensive winger. Very good in the attack.

•Jean Marh Alexandre # 16.

Midfielder. Match organizer.

•Jean Eudes Maurice # 11.

Forward. Scored two goals.

65

The Honduras national team also came to the event with a renovated team, with an average age of 26 years.

In was part of Group (B) together with Haiti, which it defeated (2-0), El Salvador which it also defeated (1-0), and Trinidad and Tobago, to which it lost (0-2), qualifying for the next stage in which it won against Costa Rica (1-0).

The team was eliminated during Semifinals by the USA.

66

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical

Tactical

•Good individual and collective technique, maintaining ball possession during combination plays in the defensive and midfield zones.

•The team had technical difficulties in combination attacking plays and long runs due to bad passes.

•Technical difficulties in short and long-range shots on goal.

•Skillful forwards with technical resourcefulness in one-on-one situations.

Basic formation system 1-4-4-2 with 1-4-5-1 and 1-4-3-3 variations according to the opponent’s level and objectives.

Compact game between its lines in a 40-meter range.

Gathers players in the midfield where they have better ball possession.

Often uses individual game for its attackers during counter-attacks (sometimes in excess).

Physical

Defense

•Good physical fitness, fast players, who were strong in ball disputes.

•Maintained good rhythm during its matches.

•The team established a 1-4-5-1 formation, gathering players and narrowing spaces in the midfield; one of its defensive midfielders reinforced the 4-men defensive line.

•Intensive pressure on opponent when they lost possession.

•Had difficulties with coverage and anticipation, particularly against the USA.

67

Attack

Outstanding players

•Its attack is based on counter-attacks, and individual game by its forwards is often unproductive.

•Lacked potency, deep attacking plays.

•Defensive wingers and midfielders were incorporated as support and to provide width in the attack.

•Were not able to do much against the defensive strategy and organization of the USA team in the Semi-finals.

•Jorge Aaron Claro # 20.

Midfielder. Match organizer.

•Andy Ariel Najar # 14.

Midfielder. Good game level. Intelligent.

•Donis Escober # 22. Goalkeeper. Secure in plays and saves.

Deficiencies •Technical difficulties in combination plays in the attack and direct plays.

•Difficulties with shots on goal.

•Excessive use of individual play generated loss of ball possession during attack plays.

•Had a disorganized defense, particularly in the match against the USA.

68

69

The Martinique national team, which represented the CFU in the Goal Cup, was the fourth team to qualify during the last Caribbean tournament of 2012.

The team had an average age of 27 years. It was part of Group (A) together with Canada, which it defeated during its first match (1-0). It lost its second match against Panama (0-1) and against the strong Mexican team (1-3), ending its participation in the Gold Cup with 3 points, 3 goals in favor and 4 against.

70

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical Its general technical level varied greatly among its players, some of which had a wide technical repertoire while others had very limited technical expertise. This contributed to many bad passes in long-range plays, direct attack plays, and combination plays.

Players such as #7, #9, #17 have good technical level and skills, making them very dangerous.

Physical Strong, tall, fast, and powerful players.

Despite of this, their physical condition decreased during the second halves from minute 70 and onwards, being incapable of maintaining an intense

match rhythm.

Tactical Basic formation system 1-4-4-2 with midfielders on the defensive 1-4-5-1, counter-attacking plays based on ability and combination plays between its strikers #9 and #17. Often used long plays and direct attack plays, which were generally deficient due to bad passes.

Well organized and strong in the defensive line.

Had high spirits and winning attitude.

Defense Strong and fast plays with good anticipation and coverage. Defensive block system of 6, 7, and 8

71

players, narrowing spaces for the rivals in the defensive area. Good in heading and strong in ball disputes involving one-on-one situations.

Attack Their offensive play is based on counter-attack, with 2 skillful strikers with good connection between them.

Martinique scored goals in all of its matches.

A deficient aspect was its constant loss of passes in long runs and direct attacks by the goalkeeper and defender on the center forward.

Lacked depth on attack plays in most matches and in creating dangerous plays in the opponent’s area.

72

Outstanding players •Kevin Parsemain # 17.

Skillful and dangerous.

•Kevin Olimpa # 23.

Excellent reflexes and performance.

•Steve Gustan # 7.

Very skillful and dangerous in the attack.

73

The Mexican national team, traditionally a headliner and past champion in several occasions, came to the Gold Cup tournament as one of the favorites.

With an average age of years, the team showed up without some of Mexico’s main football players.

The team played 5 matches, winning 3 and losing 2 against Panama, with the exact same score of 2 to 1. The team scored 8 goals and conceded 5.

Mexico lacked potency, depth, and effectiveness in the attack. However, it had great support from the Mexican fans residing in the USA.

74

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical

Tactical

Very good individual and collective technical level, allowing them to have good ball possession.

Able to play and control the ball in confined spaces and under pressure from the opponent.

Good control of the ball and passing plays, mainly in the defense and midfield, but not in attacking plays where they lost combination plays due to bad passes.

Basic formation system 1-4-4-2 with attack variations 1-3-4-3 and even 1-3-3-4, with plays by several players in the midfield and defensive wingers in the attack who use the total width of the pitch.

Compact game between its different attack and defensive lines, narrowing the spaces for the opponents and pressing the mark on the midfield.

Very good tactical discipline and order in the pitch.

Physical Good level of physical fitness, allowing them to have good performance in all matches, with high rhythm and intensity during the 90 minutes of the match.

The majority of its players have medium to low heights, but have great jump reach.

Defense The team starts the match with a 4-men block and 1 fixed defensive midfielder who allows rotation during attacking plays by defensive wingers, remaining with a 3-men block in the back.

Compact game between the lines with intensive pressure on the opponent when ball possession was lost, was key to the Mexican team.

Constantly narrowed the spaces.

Lacked tighter defense against Panama during the

75

finals in the last area, and winning the aerial play (heading) against the opponent’s forwards.

Attack Basically with 2 forwards but with permanent variations of plays with 3, 4 and 5 players thanks to its formation, the mobility of its players, and the support from its midfielders and defensive wingers.

Organized attacking plays in an elaborate form from the defensive line and midfield, sometimes with slow transition, which allowed the opponent’s defense to get organized.

Great depth in the attack, - mainly on the right-, with constant plays by its # 19 defender.

Had difficulties with potency and attacking plays due to bad passes and lack of precision in the opponent’s defensive area.

Did not have a different player (forward) capable of cutting through the opponent’s defense in one-onone situations.

76

Deficiencies Difficulties with aerial play (heading) against tall teams.

Lost ball possession during combination attacking plays due to bad passes.

Lacked potency, creativity, clarity and depth in the attack.

Slow transition of the ball from defenders to midfielders and forwards in the attack Outstanding Players •Marcos Fabián. # 10.

Midfield winger. Top scorer and organizer.

•Raùl Jiménez. # 9.

Center forward. Dangerous and timely in the attack.

•Luis Montes. # 8. Midfielder. Organizer and top scorer.

•Miguel Layun. # 19.

Defensive winger. Great support in the attack.

77

The Panama national team showed up with a combination of seasoned players and a group of up-and-coming developing young stars of great quality.

The team, with an average age of 25 years, was able to bring excitement to the event with its skillful and organized game, always seeking a victory.

Well-organized and coached, they won in a convincing manner against Mexico, one of the favorites, in two occasions.

Panama had a lively and deep game.

78

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-4-2

Technical Good individual and collective technical level.

The team likes to start playing from the defensive line with controlled ball.

Good ball position in the defensive line and midfield thanks to the mobility of its players in rapid combination plays.

They lose the ball in the attack due to bad passes.

Technical difficulties with shots on goals and longrange passes.

Physical Very good physical fitness. They maintain the rhythm and intensity for the duration of the match. Fast, strong, and powerful players.

Excellent fighting spirit and winning mentality.

Tactical Basic formation system 1-4-4-2 with attack variations 1-3-4-3 thanks to the support from defensive wingers

and midfielders.

In defensive plays the team uses 1-4-5-1, sending one of its forwards to the midfield.

Rapid defense to attack transition and use of width of pitch with plays from wingers and midfielders.

Defense Defensive block with 4 men, with 2 defensive midfielders. Well-organized in anticipation and coverage. Excellent in aerial play (heading). Tough and victorious in one-on-one situations involving ball disputes.

When they lost the ball, the entire team was on the defensive and kept an organized compact game between lines. They applied pressure and intensive presence in the midfield.

Its excellent goalkeeper, Jaime Penedo, was the tournament’s Most Valuable Goalkeeper.

79

80

Attack

Deficiencies

Used counter-attacks in dangerous ways thanks to the skills of its attackers, mainly midfield wingers #19 and #8.

Capable of rapidly organizing attacking plays, even under pressure from its opponents.

Very good connection between its attackers.

Player #9, Gabriel Torres, scored 5 goals; he is timely, a good organizer, and scorer.

Despite of this, they sometimes lost combination attacking plays due to bad passes. They scored 11 goals and conceded 4.

Lost ball possession during combination attacking plays and direct plays due to bad passes.

Had technical deficiencies in short and long-range shots on goal. Potency in attacking plays.

Outstanding players.

•Jaime Penedo # 1. Goalkeeper. Most Valuable Goalkeeper of the Tournament.

•Román Torres # 5. Center back. Very secure and strong in one-on-one situations.

•Gabriel Torres # 9 Center forward. Scored 5 goals.

•Alberto Quintero. # 19. Midfield winger. Very skillful, fast, and dangerous in the attack.

81

The Trinidad and Tobago national team won its qualification for the Gold Cup by being the runnerup of the Caribbean area. The team had 13 players in foreign clubs.

With an average age of 27 years, Trinidad and Tobago was part of Group (B) together with El Salvador, with which it tied (2-2) in its first match.

They lost their second match against Haiti (0-2), and concluded with a clear victory against Honduras (2-0).

In the Quarterfinals stage the team played against Mexico, losing (0-1) in a close match. They scored 4 goals and conceded 5. The team’s technical, tactical and physical performance increased with every match they played.

82

Tactical

Basic game system 1-4-5-1

Technical

Tactical

Very good technical level, more on an individual level than on a collective level. The team had fast and skillful players in incursions and dribbling.

They had technical difficulties due to lack of precision in long passes, long plays and direct plays.

Good at aerial play.

Technical difficulties when under pressure from the opponent in confined spaces.

Basic formation system used in the group stage was 1-4-5-1 with offensive variations 1-4-4-2 and 1-3-4-3 depending on the objectives and opponent’s level.

In the match against Mexico they had a 1-4-4-2 stable formation, with 2 lone strikers.

Its game was based mainly on counter-attacks, with long plays and aerial play over #9 Jones, who won them all.

Not much ball possession when under pressure from the opponents.

Physical Tall, strong, fast, and powerful players; however, in the second half, after minute 60, the rhythm decreased, leaving spaces between the lines and affecting the compact formation.

Winning mentality.

Defense Well-organized and disciplined, they played in their assigned roles; good in aerial play (heading).

They withdraw and form a single compact block of 7 and 8 players, narrowing the spaces for the opponents. Strong in one-on-one situations involving ball disputes. Weak in the defense on the left field due to slow coverage plays. Reduced defensive plays with each match. Its defensive organization was outstanding during the final

83

match against Mexico.

OUTSTANDING PLAYERS

Attack

•Kenwyne Jones # 9. Center forward. Tall, strong and strong in aerial head play. Zone man.

•Keon Daniel # 19. Volante.

Midfielder. Organizer and hard worker.

•Jan Michael Williams # 21.

Goalkeeper. Secure and good in the center.

Its game was based mainly on long plays, direct attacks and counter-attacks focused around its center forward #9 Jone, a tall player with good head play, who created problems for the opponent’s defense.

It used long passes in the attack, the biggest part of which ended in the opponent’s possession. For example, in the match against Mexico, the team used between long attacking plays and long plays (44) passes, winning only (11).

Deficiencies Many bad passes in direct attack plays and long plays.

Little effectiveness and depth in attack.

Lost passes in combination attacking plays and generated almost no danger to the opponent’s goal.

84

85

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMMENDATIONS

The following are TSG’s conclusions about CONCACAF’s Gold Cup 2013:

86

1. The teams had good overall physical performance. Only three teams had limitations: Cuba, Belize and Canada.

2. From a technical perspective, most teams had good technical levels, and many players with great skills focused on collective play. The teams that had significant technical limitations were Belize and Cuba.

3. Ball possession, a key aspect in football, was good even in confined spaces and under pressure from the opponent. Despite of this, some problems with the decision-making process generated difficulties for game continuity.

4. A deficient aspect was the amount of long plays and direct attack plays lost due to bad passes.

5.Fast combination attacking plays were problematic due to lack of connection between the attackers and as result of bad passes.

6. The level of shots on goal and goal technique was not appropriate for a tournament of this level.

7. There was scarce use of shots on goal from half distance.

8. In general, there was very good level among the goalkeepers who participated in the tournament.

They were confident and had good technique and

control.

9. Apart from the basic formation, all teams used similar tactical concepts: a 4-men formation in the back with 2 defensive midfielders, and defensive wingers as support to the attack to provide width.

Teams gathered the majority of players in the midfield, where space was narrowed and they had intensive presence to regain possession.

10. The best teams had tactic stability, organization, discipline, and good concentration in the different positions. They had compact game both in the defense as well as in the attack.

11. We observed two game trends: counter-attacks used mainly by the Caribbean teams, and elaborate plays from the defensive line used by the Central and North American teams.

12. In this Gold Cup the majority of goals were scored by forwards, but always with support from midfield wingers.

13. In the offensive plays we saw use of the width of the pitch in the attack with constant plays from midfielders and defensive wingers as strategy to break through the defensive block in the midfield.

14. We observed an appropriate and well-planned strategy for changes in line-up and substitutions by most teams, which contributed to better performance.

15. When we do a comparison of the three

CONCACAF regions, we can state that there are three different levels of football in terms of performance: North America Central America

Caribbean and Belize The Technical Studies Group (TSG) has the following recommendations: 1. The Confederation should review the dates of the Gold Cup with the purpose to guarantee participation of CONCACAF’s best players in the event. This would improve the technical level and marketing of the tournament.

2. Call on the other member federations to present their best players. The Gold Cup is our flag event and show for the World.

3. Establish holding a match to define the 3rd place of the event.

The Gold Cup is the only official World event that does not have a match for the third place.

8. Based on the deficiencies and mistakes in preparation, and on the technical, tactical, and strategic aspects of the teams, we recommend the following: • Develop a specific training program on these aspects, both theoretical and practical, with the national coaches from the teams qualified by regions.

• The objectives, methods, and means used will be the same deficiencies and practical experiences of the Gold Cup. • We must face our technical and performance limitations and reduce the differences in regards to football development levels within our own regions.

Prepared by all the members of the Technical Study Group (TSG).

Lic. Luis Hernández Herez.

Member of the Executive Committee of CONCACAF. Head of the Technical Development Committee of CONCACAF. Head of the TSG Group.

4. Organize the competitive calendar and schedules so that the group’s final matches are played at the same time, to prevent potential advantages from prior knowledge of other teams results.

5. Analyze and study the possibility of reducing the timeframe between warm-up and start of the match to have better willingness of the athletes for it.

6. Teams that qualify for the Gold Cup should: • Develop an appropriate training stage for the event Avoid improvisations of all kinds Not participate without adequate basic physical training • CONCACAF must put in place mechanisms to monitor and gain knowledge about prior training by qualified teams.

7. Provide deeper training on the following aspects to youth and school-age categories: • Technical • Tactical • Strategic • Concentration • Physical • Game

87

88

Gold Cup Referee Technical Report Written by Brian Hall (Head of Refereeing, CONCACAF) September 5, 2013 1. Overview

trios were missing from the competition due to their assignments in the FIFA under-20 World Cup in Morocco. See Appendix A for the list of referees selected to participate in the Gold Cup and Appendix B for the list of officials who attended the Elite Referee Course. Input on the selection of the officials was also provided by the Head of Refereeing from both the Caribbean zone (CFU) and the Central American zone (UNCAF).

1.1. Event Background As in previous years, CONCACAF’s Elite Competition was preceded by an Elite Referee and Elite Assessor courses. Each of the selected Gold Cup referees, assistant referees, and assessors were required to attend the five day Elite Course as preparation for their managing CONCACAF’s most important competition. All referees were required to pass the FIFA fitness test administered as part of the Elite Referee course.

The six assigned assessors were chosen based upon past performance leading up to the Gold Cup and are part of the Elite Assessor list.

Three of CONCACAF’s seven 2014 World Cup candidate trios were missing from the competition due to their assignments in the FIFA under-20 World Cup in Turkey.

1.3. Profile of Participants 1.3.1. Referees A group of 15 referees and 15 assistant referees formed the Gold Cup referee team. These officials represented all three CONCACAF zones (UNCAF, CFU, and the North). The following diagram profiles this group of match officials.

1.2. Selection Process for Participants Prior to the Gold Cup, match officials were selected from CONCACAF’s Elite Referee List as well as the Elite Referee Course participant list. Three of CONCACAF’s seven 2014 World Cup candidate

PARTICIPANT PROFILE: REFEREES & ASSISTANT REFEREES Zone

Average Age Referee

Experience (Years FIFA) Referee

Average Age Assistant Referees

Experience (Years FIFA) Assistant Referees

CFU

39

8

41

11

UNCAF

35

7

33

5.6

NORTH

38

7.75

39

5.3

All Zones

37

7.5

38

6.9

89

REFEREEING REPORT The CFU zone provided both referees and assistant referees with the most experience. In fact, the average years of FIFA experience for CFU assistant referees was approximately twice the average age of assistant referees from both UNCAF and North zones. The average age of UNCAF referees and UNCAF assistant referees was the lowest in both categories.

After the last group stage match, 10 referees and 10 assistant referees were designated to remain through the semifinals. These selections were based upon merit and performance(s) during the group stage.

Match officials selected for the quarterfinal through semifinal stage:

REFEREES

ASSISTANT REFEREES

David Gantar

Canada

Joseph Fletcher

Canada

Hugo Cruz

Costa Rica

Octavio Jara

Costa Rica

Jeffrey Solís

Costa Rica

Juan Francisco Zumba

El Salvador

Walter Quesada

Costa Rica

Hermenerito Leal

Guatemala

Elmer Bonilla

El Salvador

Christian Ramírez

Honduras

Joel Aguilar

El Salvador

Garnet Page

Jamaica

Courtney Campbell

Jamaica

Ricardo Morgan

Jamaica

Marco Rodríguez

Mexico

Marvin Torrentera

Mexico

Enrico Wijngaarde

Suriname

Ramon Louisville

Suriname

Jair Marrufo

USA

Eric Boria

USA

Mark Geiger

USA

Match officials selected for the final:

90

Referee:

Joel Aguilar

El Salvador

Assistant Referee:

Juan Francisco Zumba

El Salvador

Assistant Referee:

Ricardo Morgan

Jamaica

Fourth Official:

Enrico Wijngaarde

Suriname

Fifth Official:

Hermenerito Leal

Guatemala

1.3.2 Referee Groups Due to the logistical requirements of the Gold Cup, referees and staff were divided into three groups. These groups were assigned one of the three competition groups and traveled city-to-city as a unit. Groups arrived at a venue two days prior to game day and traveled to the next venue the afternoon following the games.

1.4 Support and Administrative Staff The referee support staff for the Gold Cup was represented by the following individuals: 1.4.1 Administrative The administrative staff was responsible for all logistical issues in support of their assigned referee group during the competition.

Carlos Batres – Head of Refereeing UNCAF Alfredo Whittaker – Head of Refereeing CFU Rodolfo Villalobos – CONCACAF Referee Committee 1.4.2 Technical Staff Technical staff was responsible for the instruction provided the referees during the Gold Cup. The instructors headed the daily debrief sessions in their referee group.

• Carlos Gonzalez – Instructor from Mexico • Peter Prendergast – FIFA Instructor and FIFA RAP Member • Rodolfo Sibrian – FIFA Instructor and FIFA RAP Member 1.4.3 Fitness Instructor Staff Fitness instructors were appointed to each of the three travel groups. The fitness instructors had primary responsibility for ensuring referees maintained a high-level of fitness during the three week tournament and had sufficient post-game recovery sessions.

• Alan Morgan Brown – FIFA RAP Fitness Instructor • Dr. Joseph Caroccio – Trained Physiotherapist an Trainer • Erick Samayoa – FIFA RAP Fitness Instructor 1.4.4 Debrief Staff Two individuals had the responsibility to develop the post-game debrief sessions used by the

Technical Instructors following every game day.

The debrief staff watched each game live and then communicated with the technical instructor responsible for the affected games and CONCACAF Head of Refereeing, Brian Hall, to develop a unified feedback mechanism utilized by all three refereeing groups. The goal was to provide a professional feedback mechanism involving game situations which would ensure a more consistent approach throughout the tournament.

• Manuel Armenteros – FIFA Information Technology • Sandra Hunt – Technical Instructor 1.5 General Comments

1.5.1 Experience Continued efforts must be implemented to provide learning opportunities to the “talented” referees.

These opportunities must not only be provided at the CONCACAF level but Member Associations must find ways to challenge their match officials by taking them out of their “comfort zones” and placing them in more difficult situations. In other words, all factions must work to expose match officials to new challenges outside of their “back yards” or local areas.

Referees need to be put into environments where they can gain experience and, thus, develop their character and stature. Referees must be placed in situations to test them while giving them the stage to take calculated risks in terms of game and player management.

1.5.2 Referees In-Training As part of the Gold Cup referee team and Elite Referee course as well as provide development opportunities for CONCACAF referees, nine “prospective” or “talented” referees were given the opportunity to (a) Attend the Elite Course; and (b) Travel with one of the three groups. These nine officials were selected as a result of their participation in the 2013 versions of CONCACAF’s under-20 and under-17 tournaments or the CONCACAF Referee Academy held during the Dallas Cup.

The objective of including these “talented” referees was to expose them to the highest competition in CONCACAF in hopes of preparing

91

REFEREEING REPORT them (psychologically and physically) for more significant appointments within the Confederation.

These nine individuals not only attended the Elite course but were required to take the FIFA fitness test and attend each training session as if they were an Elite Referee. In addition, their participation included traveling (venue-to-venue) with the referees while partaking in referee pregame planning sessions, attending daily debrief sessions as well as the daily fitness training regimen. Of vital importance to the program’s success was the fact that the participants were exposed to the pressures of the stadium atmospheres. Every attempt was

made to have the referees in-training be included in a manner that would replicate a real Gold Cup experience.

The nine referees in-training were:

Referee Country William Anderson

Puerto Rico

Henry Bejarano

Costa Rica

Juan Guzman

USA

Valdin Legister

Jamaica

Ricardo Montero

Costa Rica

Jafeth Perea

Panamá

John Pitti

Panamá

Oscar Reyna

Guatemala

Sandy Vasquez

Rep. Dominicana

1.5.3 Pregame and Post-Game Recovery by Match Officials

92

Additional focus was provided on the level of fitness of referees. This marked the first Gold Cup tournament in which match officials were provided the opportunity to receive post-game massage therapy as well as sessions the day prior to game day. These sessions were extremely successful in assisting the referees in maintaining a high-level of fitness and aided in speeding up the post-game recovery cycle. During the Gold Cup, there were no reported injuries.

test. The single assistant referee who did not pass, was replaced by a reserve and did not participate in the Gold Cup. 1.5.5 Match Official Fitness and Conditioning

1.5.4 FIFA Fitness Test

As a result of positive instruction and direction, referees and assistant referees are now focusing on “match fitness” and not just fitness. Officials realize that to pass the fitness test is not good enough. They must possess the ability to position themselves correctly given the speed of the game.

This includes the importance of sprinting and getting to the next phase of play quickly in order to make the correct decision.

With the exception of one assistant referee, all 30 Gold Cup match officials passed the FIFA fitness

Another area of significant improvement as it relates to the athleticism of CONCACAF match

officials relates to body composition and body fat.

During the 2011 version of the Gold Cup, officials recorded an average of 14% body fat. As a result, a target of 12% was given. The results of the efforts of match officials was very evident in the 2013 CONCACAF Gold Cup. Body fat for referees averaged 11.98% while the assistant referee average was 11.12%. Referees are now more athletic in movement and in appearance.

1.5.6 Musculoskeletal Evaluation Referees and assistant referees were given a full evaluation relative to the following components.

After the evaluation, the match official received a personalized report covering the results.

• Manual muscle test: Assesses the strength of a muscle or muscle group to show muscle imbalance or weakness.

• Joint integrity and mobility assessment: Evaluates joint movement and quality.

• Range of motion: Determines current joint health and function.

• Flexibility: Assessment of muscle balance and evaluates proper muscle balance (strength, flexibility and muscle length).

• Biomechanics: Assessment of muscular, joint and skeletal action of the body while doing a task like running.

1.5.7 Futline Aerosol Spray This edition of the Gold Cup marked the first that used the Futline aerosol spray to mark free kick distance. The use of the spray was a success as the management of free kicks was much easier and the game was restarted much quicker thereby ensuring the ball was in play for longer periods of time. As CONCACAF referees gain more experience with the utilization of the Futline spray, it will provide a very good tool for the referee relative to the management of the game.

2. Elite Referee Course Prior to the start of the CONCACAF Gold Cup, the Elite Referee and Elite Assessor courses were held in Pasadena, California. There were 50 participants in the Elite Referee course (25 referees and 25 assistant referees). The Elite Assessor course, on

the other hand, had 14 participants (13 others were scheduled to attend but were assigned to work the Gold Cup and had to travel with their designated referee group).

The focus of the course was to provide a foundation for consistent application of the Laws of the Game, not only during the Gold Cup but also for the CONCACAF’s other major competitions like the CONCACAF Champions League. FIFA instructors lead technical as well as theoretical sessions for all participants.

Agenda items for the referee course included: • Offside • Handling the ball • Practical refereeing techniques • Positioning – classroom and field sessions • Video analysis from CONCACAF matches over the last year with the focus on foul and misconduct discrimination • Expectations of the CONCACAF Elite Referee All presentations and materials were provided to the participants in English and Spanish. Translation into both languages was provided for all in-class sessions.

3. Elite Assessor Course The assessment of referees in CONCACAF continues to be a focal area. Hence, it is important to regularly meet with the assessors and provide feedback to the following the submission of their reports on referee performance.

It is not common practice, throughout CONCACAF, to assign assessors to top division matches. As a result, the referees do not get regular feedback and assessors struggle to practice their trade as well as stay abreast of the modern game. Often, this lack of consistent and formalized member association assessment programs results in match officials going long periods of time without independent, experienced post-game feedback.

The Elite Assessor course covered the same topics provided the match officials during the Elite Referee course but also included assessment-specific items

93

REFEREEING REPORT such as: • Written feedback • Verbal feedback • Observing the referee and the match • Scoring or marking the referee’s performance 4. 4.

recognition and discrimination. Below is a summary of assessment scores by experience level (years on the FIFA list):

Referee Performance – Gold Cup

Overall, referee performance was good. Based upon assessment feedback, there were a number of games in which the referee or assistant referee performed at a low standard (7.5 or less). As in any tournament of this magnitude, referee performances did influence the outcome of specific games. In all cases, coaching was provided the impacted referee as were solutions. Technical instruction, relative to these game situations, was provided all participating Gold Cup match officials.

4.1 Performance by Experience Referee experience played a significant factor in the overall performances. It was evident that the less experience referees struggled with their foul Years Experience As a FIFA Referee

# of Referees

# Games Officiated

Average Assessment Score

1-2 0 0 NA 3-4 5 4 7.3 5-6 4 5 7.7 6-8 6 7 7.7 9+ 5 14 8.2

94

Gold Cup referees with the most experience were the most successful on the field. As the chart illustrates, experience (years as a FIFA referee) resulted in higher average assessment marks. In addition, the referees with the most experience (9-plus years) also officiated the most games (over 50% of the 25 matches).

CONCACAF must continue to explore mechanisms to provide “talented” referees opportunities to develop and grow and gain the experience needed to

direct competitions at the highest level.

4.2 Performance by Zone The table below indicates the number of games officiated and the average assessment score for both referees and assistant referees by zone:

TOTAL GAMES & AVERAGE ASSESSMENT SCORES Zone

Total # Games Referees

Total # Games Assistant Referee 1

Total # Games Assistant Referee 2

Referee Average

Assistant Referee Average

CFU

7

4

11

7.9

8.1

UNCAF

13

9

8

7.8

8.2

NORTH

5

12

6

8.3

8.3

All Zones

25

25

25

7.9

8.2

Note the following items related to the analysis of the assessment scores: • Assessment scores for referees ranged from 7.0 to 8.6 while assistant referees scores fell between 7.2 and 8.6.

• North zone referees scores were 0.4 points higher than the average scores for the next closest zone.

• Assistant referee performance across all zones was fairly consistent with the North zone assistant referees averaging slightly higher scores (0.1) than the average of all zones 5. Technical Summary The following summarizes the “areas of strength” exhibited by match officials during the CONCACAF Gold Cup and analyzes the “areas for improvement.”

These are vital issues not only at the highest levels

in CONCACAF but at the Member Association level as well. Member Association instructors and administrators should take note of this section and look for ways in which to implement programs that address the issues referenced below.

5.1 Areas of Strength 5.1.1 Fitness Overall fitness was at a high level. CONCACAF has made significant strides in this area over the past 3 years. Improved instruction at the RAP level has led to the referees gaining better knowledge of the fitness requirements for an Elite Referee.

95

5.1.2 Prospects – Talented Referees in the Pipeline There are several very talented referees that have been developed and that participated in the Gold Cup as a match official. Continued efforts to develop these officials is vital as their overall performance levels were often below those with more experience.

5.1.3 Assistant Referee Performance Assistant referee performance and decision making continues to be a highlight of match official performance in CONCACAF. Assistant referees exhibit high levels of fitness, solid mechanics, and a hunger to improve on a game-by-game basis.

5.1.4 Reinforcement of Positive Performance As the tournament progressed, the referees exhibited improvement in many areas that were initially identified as issues. This was due to the positive reinforcement of the instructors and the daily debrief sessions. For example, referees modified their approaches to running to the spot of every foul and to the penalty mark when a penalty kick was awarded. In the early games, multiple referees ran to the spot of every foul and stood on the penalty spot when indicating a penalty kick. As the tournament progressed, the referees developed a comfort level with the modified procedures.

Hence, it is vital that member associations continue to reinforce the practices taught during the Gold Cup and that referees continue to implement the techniques as instructed and not regress to old habits.

5.2 Areas for Improvement

96

5.2.1 Positioning Despite exhibiting relatively high levels of fitness, referees often found themselves in less than advantageous positions with poor angles of vision to play. Referees were observed giving too much responsibility to assistant referees by being too far from play as play progressed in front of the assistant referee. Additionally, improved lateral movement (across the field of play) will improve decision making.

5.2.2 Misconduct Discrimination and Consistency Focus must continue on improving discrimination of misconduct and the referee’s ability to distinguish between careless, reckless and the use of excessive force. Within a particular game, referees were also inconsistent in their interpretation and application of misconduct. Similar fouls were not dealt with consistently within the match.

Handling the Ball – Consistent Interpretation and Application Correct interpretation of handling offenses was an ongoing issue. Handling decisions are often difficult due to multiple factors needed to interpret the offense. Hence, more time needs to be spent analyzing videos and reviewing the factors that are related to correct interpretation. There were multiple handling decisions in and around the penalty area that were critical in various games.

5.2.4 Player Management Skills Focus must be given to referees developing player management skills through the use of personality and character. Referees can enhance their game management skills with positive player interaction and communication. Personality should be used as a preventative officiating tool.

At the same time, referees must be positive in their interaction with players. Match officials must not be antagonists and must ensure that they do not add to player frustrations through their own body language and method of communication. Referees were observed being too aggressive in the manner in which they dealt with players thereby causing negative player responses.

APPENDIX A

Referees and Assistant Referees Participating in the Gold Cup

Referee

Country

Assistant Referee

Country

Joel AGUILAR

SLV

Eric BORIA

USA

Elmer BONILLA

SLV

Philippe BRIERE

CAN

Marcos BREA

CUB

Graeme BROWNE

SKN

Courtney CAMPBELL

JAM

Joe FLETCHER

CAN

Armando CASTRO

HON

Mark HURD

USA

Hugo CRUZ

CRC

Octavio JARA

CRC

David Gantar

CAN

Hermenerito LEAL

GUA

Mark GEIGER

USA

Ram贸n LOUISVILLE

SUR

Jair MARRUFO

USA

Ricardo MORGAN

JAM

Walter QUESADA

CRC

Garnet PAGE

JAM

Hector RODRIGUEZ

HON

Marcos QUINTERO

MEX

Marco RODRIGUEZ

MEX

Christian RAMIREZ

HON

Javier SANTOS

PUR

Marvin TORRENTERA

MEX

Jeffrey SOLIS

CRC

William TORRES

SLV

Enrico WIJNGAARDE

SUR

Juan Francisco ZUMBA

SLV

97

APPENDIX B CONCACAF Elite Referee and Assistant Referee Course Participants Referee

Region

Assistant Referee

Region

AGUILAR CHICAS, Joel (SLV)

UNCAF

ANDERSON, Frank (USA)

North

ANDERSON, William (PUR)

CFU

BORIA, Eric (USA)

North

BEJARANO, Henry (CRC)

UNCAF

BRIERE, Philippe (CAN)

North

BONILLA, Elmer (SLV)

UNCAF

BROWNE, Graeme (SKN)

CFU

BREA, Marcos (CUB)

CFU

CASTRO, Warner (CRC)

UNCAF

CAMPBELL, Courtney (JAM)

CFU

DE LA CRUZ, Ronaldo (GUA)

UNCAF

CASTRO, Armando (HON)

UNCAF

FLETCHER, Joe (CAN)

North

CRUZ, Hugo (CRC)

UNCAF

HURD, Mark Sean (USA)

North

DELGADILLO, Paul (MEX)

North

JARA, Octavio (CRC)

UNCAF

GANTAR, David (CAN)

North

LEAL, Hermenerito (GUA)

UNCAF

GEIGER, Mark (USA)

North

LOUISVILLE, Ricardo (SUR)

CFU

GUZMAN, Juan (USA)

North

MARS, Venton (GUY)

CFU

LEGISTER, Valdin (JAM)

CFU

MENDOZA, Rey (PAN)

UNCAF

MARRUFO, Jair (USA)

North

MORALES, Jairo (PUR)

CFU

MONTERO, Ricardo (CRC)

UNCAF

MORGAN, Ricardo (JAM)

CFU

PEREA, Jafeth (PAN)

UNCAF

MORGANTE, Charles (USA)

North

PITTI, John (PAN)

UNCAF

NEIL, Dion (TRI)

CFU

QUESADA, Walter (CRC)

UNCAF

PAGE, Garnett (JAM)

CFU

REYNA, Oscar (GUA)

UNCAF

POWELL, Kedlee (JAM)

CFU

RODRIGUEZ, Hector (HON)

UNCAF

QUINTERO, Marcos (MEX)

North

RODRIGUEZ, Marco (MEX)

North

RAMIREZ, Christian (HON)

UNCAF

SANTOS, Javier (PUR)

CFU

TORRENTERA, Marvin (MEX)

North

SOLIS, Jeffrey (CRC)

UNCAF

TORRES, William (SLV)

UNCAF

VASQUEZ, Sandy (DOM)

CFU

VELASQUEZ, Oscar (HON)

UNCAF

WIJNGAARDE, Enrico (SUR)

CFU

ZUMBA, Juan (SLV)

UNCAF

Not Attending Due to FIFA U-20 World Cup

98

GARCIA, Roberto (MEX)

North

CAMARGO, Jose Luis (MEX)

North

LOPEZ, Walter (GUA)

UNCAF

CORRALES, Keytzel (NCR)

UNCAF

MORENO, Roberto (PAN)

UNCAF

LEAL, Leonel (CRC)

UNCAF

LOPEZ, Gerson (GUA)

UNCAF

MORIN, Alberto (MEX)

North

WILLIAMSON, Daniel (PAN)

UNCAF