Confederations Cup: United States vs. Egypt report card

• 

  Jose said,

  I agree with most of your grades and assessments here for the most part. I take issue with your grade for Altidore. I thought he held the ball up well and layed it off for his midfielders thereby retaining possession for the US. You cannot underestimate the importance of this seemingly simple task. Without this, the US is constantly on the defensive and is not able to make any kind of buildup in the attack. Would like to see him take on players more often every now and then. But overall I thought he had a pretty strong game and gave the Egyptian defenders a difficult time all game. I will give Bornstein credit for his effort but I think he clearly is not at this level at the moment. I think you are a bit generous with Dempsey’s grade. Had he not scored he earned an F as not only did he do nothing he lost possession on too many occasions and made little to no attempt at defending. Given that he did show heart in scoring the goal I would upgrade him to a D. I still think he is exhausted and should not have been starting which brings me to Bob Bradley. I think starting Dempsey was a huge mistake he could have been an option off the bench for 20 minutes or so. Imagine he comes on at 70 min and scores that goal. Probably earns an A for that. Bradley should have given Torres a shot in his place to start the match. Not getting Adu time I hope was just a situational thing. If they are up 1-0 with 15 min left maybe he brings Freddy on instead of Casey. Given the situation I could understand why he went with Casey instead but still disappointing these young guys are not getting opportunities. You might say you can’t argue with success, they did make the next round with a lot of luck. But their are just too many questionable decisions by Bradley to go unnoticed. Luck was on his side today but if they win 1-0 or tie or even lose this match people would be screaming, “wheres Adu and Torres”
  I am glad he gave Guzan an opportunity to gain some valuable experience and I thought he was solid if unspectacular same for Davies(nice hustle on the goal). But a good experience for them regardless and this is how this game should have been approached re: Adu and Torres. Let’s face it nobody thought in a million years Italy loses 3-0 while we win 3-0 so the game should have included the young guys for a look and some experience. That said I am glad it worked out and look forward to the match with Spain.

• 

  Bill said,

  Sometimes, its better to be lucky than good, today was testimony to this principle.

  Generally, your grading and commentary was spot on. We were tremendously lucky that Brazil beat Italy by three, thanks particularly to Maicon & Cesar who were tremendous. Italy hit a number of good strikes the second half. The US MNT were lucky that Egypt were flat and missing their two best players. On the other hand, they were down and we did what good teams are supposed to do, take advantage. Our second half performance was quite good especially considering that Donovan missed two chances to finish in one-on-ones with the keeper and came away empty.

  With regard to Bradley Jr., his yellow card could have easily been red, he just missed, but he was studs up and ankle/shin high.

  I would summarize Bradley Sr.’s performance as inept. Dempsey needed to sit, he is spent and despite his wonderful goal put in another poor performance. His substitutions were poor again especially with regard to choosing Casey. He was the wrong man at the wrong time for the wrong reason. He would have been wise to keep Davies on, and substitute Torres or Adu for Dempsey given that ball handling and possession were what the team needed most.

  We can be sure that this performance will end any reasonable chance that Bradley will be exiting. No matter what, US Soccer will declare success, despite an escape so improbable that would get any Hollywood scriptwriter tossed out of a meeting where he pitched that script. Every problem we have with Soccer in the United States will be swept under the proverbial rug until we get dumped out the World Cup next year. Too bad we don’t have leadership that aims higher.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Jonathan Spector had a nearless flawless performance? Really? Do you watch the game with one hand on the remote and the other on your? never mind…

  I’m a 38 year old that never made it past high school soccer and I could’ve played better than Spector.

  Egypt just plain didn’t show up. A 14 year old travel team player could’ve made that cross Spector did. The Egyptian defender was drinking water and making jokes through a dummy when Spector hit the ball. It was all ESPN could do to hide the Egyptians yawning from the beginning when their coach let loose a major ZZZZZZZZZZzz.

  Spector’s yellow card was earned on a play that would’ve made absolutely no difference in the match…wtf was he trying to do? Knock the ball out of bounds at mid-field? Watch the re-play…if he just backpedals he can control his man…instead, he slide tackles in a position on the field that is entirely not essential and picks up a yellow card…later, he trips over his own feet…I know even super stars occasionally trip over their own feet, but Spector stunk the whole match and even with his assist he should be sent back to the West Hamm hell from which he came.

  Your celebration of Landon Donovan is strangely confusing. Are you sure you’re watching the same games we are? He looks like a kid dribbling down the field while his mommy and daddy cheer him on and direct what he should do. Once he gets to a decision making point, he vomits. He blew his goal scoring opportunity in the 23rd minute and then wouldn’t pass the ball the rest of the match as he tried to make up for his indecisiveness.

  Finally, the goalie looked like he was trying to ream the ball up his ass on every save he made. He was never really tested, but on every on-goal shot he slammed his backside in the air like a stripper and made us all hold our breath hoping that he would some how hold onto the ball.

  Basically Eqypt knew they were advancing in the tourney and didn’t give a flying f*** what happened against the 11 losers Bradley fielded against them (pulling Altidore was final testament he’s a complete idiot). I’m happy his son scored again on father’s day, but let’s get someone in there that’s in shape and can run for 90 minutes.

  You used to be a voice of reason in the sea of f**ktards reporting on the american soccer team, but lately you’ve been riding Landon Donovan’s jock until it hurts to watch. Check out Tara Babcock dot com if you’re interested in one-hand typing and quit making excuses for a team that’s going to get its collective as* handed to it by Spain and stands no chance of competing in South Africa in 2010.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  Do we really expect JP to have a clue? Why can’t we have Derek Rae and retire JP? As for color, Wynalda used to be good. Harkes is too timid to say what needs to be said. I actually think it might be better to put Lalas in the booth and Harkes on halftime. And yes, both the 02 match and this were handballs. Criminy, the Egyptian player leaned towards the ball with his arm away from his body. That’s textbook “reaching for the ball in goal.” That’s not only a PK, it’s a straight red by rule.

  As for Bradley. I still think he’s lost most of the European based players. I also have heard from a few sources that USSF has no intention of replacing Bradley until after the cycle. Unless the qualification campaign falls apart, Bradley’s the guy. To be fair, I don’t think that there’s anyone I could name that would step in and fix things right now. The side needs a real tactician. Klinsmann isn’t that kind of coach. He’s a rah-rah CEO who needs a tactician as his #2. His lack of one at FC Bayern demonstrated his deficiencies. So what tactician is there? Scolari? Maybe. I doubt he’d take the job. Schmid’s name I’ve seen tossed around. I like him as an MLS coach, but I don’t think he’s an upgrade on the international level. The Feilhaber for Altidore switch befuddled me, too. But it didn’t hurt us in the end.

  As far as the ratings go. I think Gooch did better than you suggested. I don’t think he lost a header all match. And he stepped up well to cut off attacks. He and Demerit are developing a good understanding of each other. And I think a back 4 with Bocanegra at LB and Spector on the right may not be the most pacey backline in the world, but it wouldn’t beat itself.

  I agree on Dempsey. He did spring a couple of attacks however, as well. His play is always more maddening with the Nats than with Fulham. I agree he needed to be subbed out for Torres after the third goal.

  I’d say I thought Clark was a little better than you rated him. But I was shocked he played. And I don’t think he stamped authority on the match by any means.

  Bradley and Donovan were amazing in the middle of the park. They have a lot of understanding between each other now. And that can only get better if Jones comes in and lets Bradley push up into a more forward role. It’s clear to me that Donovan’s best place on the NATs is always going to be outside mid.

  I agree about needing to play 2 forwards against Spain, even if it’s Dempsey up top with Altidore. We can’t sit back and soak up pressure for 90 mins and expect that to work against the top team in the world. It didn’t work against Brazil, it won’t work against Spain. We at least have to counter.

  If we had the personnel, I’d say a 4-2-3-1 might work. But I’m not sure we have enough sophisticated players in midfield to handle that system. But that way we could put Dempsey in the hole behind Altidore. Donovan and Torres on the outside with Bradley and Clark behind. I think that would be a solid formation, if Clark, Torres, and Donovan could be expected to handle the Continental tactics. But that requires Bob Bradley to know it well enough to use it as well. So I think the best option we have is a 4-4-2 counterattacking setup like tonight.

  Hats off for a match with great heart though. If we’re going to grouse when they come out limp, we have to salute them for guts tonight.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Bornstein looks just plain goofy….and whoever was playing left back..Spector(?)…would’ve been outplayed by a U19 girl.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  IBgc,

  Bornstien was the left back. So you were smacking down Spector’s play without knowing his actual position? He was solid, not spectacular. The yellow card was a dicey moment, I agree. But he hardly was giving the ball away. And he locked down his flank despite the Egyptians thinking they could charge down it, and despite getting zero support defensively from his outside mid (Dempsey). That’s not a bad day at the office without the game-winning assist on a beautifully lofted cross.

• 

  Bill said,

  One correction: our outside backs are dismal although Spector redeemed himself a bit with that cross at the end. No doubt that the Spanish team has noticed that we stink defending wide and the Spanish will cross, and Torres and Villa can finish unless something is done. Why does the United States not have any outside backs? Why can’t someone else step in and do better? I’ll predict that unless we can fix this the Spanish team will simply take advantage of this. I doubt that Bradley has the answer, or maybe hasn’t even asked the question yet.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Why is it in the great melting pot that is the United States of America we have so many White Anglo Saxon Protestants (WASPS) playing on our National Mens Team?

  Would it tear Coach Bradley’s left testicle out of his nutsack to put Freddy Adu out on the field? I’ve been hearing about Freddy for 5-6 years ever since he turned 13 and got signed by DC United where the local coaching genius decided not to play him, but to let him ride the bench….are all the higher ups in US American Soccer completer ass hats? Put the effing Ghanan in the game and let’s see what happens.

  Am I the only white, middle-class US American tired of seeing Donovan, Mathis and Dempsey stink up the field? Give me an effing break that Onyeweyhu is the best playe out there..

  We are a nation of over 300 million…is it possibly we cannot roll over Egypt with a population of 64 million? With the likes of Bradley and the US Soccer Assocation, I am not surprised the our National Team sucks so much.

  Need I mention that the female US Team is kicking ass (once again) while US soccer ignores them?

• 

  lbgc said,

  Shawn…I respect your comments…but…didn’d Spector play left back in the second half?

• 

  Jose said,

  I think Spector overall has been playing reasonably well for the tourny. He had no help from Dempsey in this match for sure. He did allow too many crosses from the flank and if he does this against Spain could be a huge problem. This may be a result of tired legs as this is his third match in a weeks time and seemed slower than normal in closing off those crosses. Bornstein while you can’t deny his effort is clearly overmatched at this level. Perhaps Bocanegra plays on the left v Spain. We’ll see.

• 

  Jose said,

  Ibgc

  Spector has played right back every match and has not played on the left at all for these 3 matches although by some accounts he is capable of playing there.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Watch the first 10 minutes of the second half…honestly…Spector was playing left back…

  I know this because whoever was playing right back sucked donkey di** and I cursed Spector only to later realize he was on the left side…

• 

  lbgc said,

  Anyone else frustrated by internet coverage of the US team? Try searching for US vs Eqypt and you’re most likely to get June 20 results….

  I HATE how every American says futbol is boring, but is willing to watch golf while it rains…

  Spector SUCKS!!!

• 

  lbgc said,

  Is this guy retarded?

  http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/players-ratings-us-vs-egypt/

• 

  Jose said,

  Bill

  I agree ballhandling and possession were what was needed when he brought on Casey. He is supposed to be that target player the US coaches seem to love. He didn’t get it done but the objective was certainly for his big strong body to gain possession in the front and hold it until help arrived. Adu would not have provided this at that point in the match. That said Taking out Altidore who was doing the entire match exactly what he brought in Casey to do was a mistake. He actually succeeded at it so it was a head scratching moment for me. Dempsey should have been the one relieved at that point and since we still needed a goal at that time Adu would have been the logical choice. Once Dempsey scored however, he should have brought on an additional midfielder instead of Casey in my mind. But I can understand his thinking even if I don’t agree with it and remember if Italy gets one, we would need to score again so going 4 5 1 had some risk but Casey has shown me nothing in particular and has not even proven to be a good target player in this tourny. Yes Bob Bradley still makes a lot of very questionable decisions.

• 

  lbgc said,

  1) I like beer a lot.

  2) I’m an ignorant American…what has Bob Bradley done in the world of soccer?

  3) Don’t you hate those horn blowers?

• 

  Bill said,

  The US media is uneducated, lazy and stupid with regard to soccer (I choose not to say retarded since their performance is actually offensive to the retarded). ESPN is right at the head of the line, they are not the “World Leader in Sports” they are a myopic xenophobic extension of a lot of bad US stereotypes. Most of the media gives us sugar coated assessments of everything and generally speaking they are not educated about the game. What amazes me is the commentators can’t even pronounce the names of players who play for major European leagues properly, my 12 year can to it better, its literally beyond belief! What are these guys actually professionals at, broadcasting isn’t it!

  The issue with Dempsey is the continued coaching malpractice of playing him in the state he’s in.

  The issues with Torres & Adu are too numerous to mention.

  My issue with Casey is his touch and ball-handling both are so far below international standards that its not funny. This defeats his ability to be effective as a targer man and complete the task Bradley set for him. He loses possession of balls he should control far too often, and this hands the ball back to opponent when we can least afford it. At least he hustled a little bit more than against Brazil, so its improvement.

  Altidore should have stayed on. Feilhaber & Torres (Adu) should have come on for Davies and Dempsey (of course Dempsey shouldn’t have been on in the first place).

  Better yet Torres should have started for Dempsey, and maybe Dempsey could have come on in the 70th minute. Nonetheless, the US played better possession ball today which contributed to their good luck. Midfield play was generally good, with most of our losses of possession resulting from our outside backs (Bornstein in particular). I think our subpar opponents contributed greatly, and it’ll be interesting to see how our performance will or won’t carry over to the game with Spain. Their speed of play is blazing, and they punish mistakes.

  I’m more interested in seeing how we’ll stack up against South Africa on Sunday.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Think about it….the US needs a 3 nil win to advance COMBINED with a 3 nil win from Brazil over Italy…a miracle basically… and when it happens you guys are ready to say the US played well…well I’m not…our national soccer program sucks…my local newspaper (the washington post) runs women’s basketball and frigging golf ahead of our games…to get US men’s socer coverage I’ve got to flip past youth blue gill competition coverage…who wants to argue?

  Bitch me out for not knowing Spector sucks at left back over right back ,but don’t deny me that Spector sucks.

  This ain’t effing Kung Fu Panda…these guys bite…the whole United States Soccer Association bites. A nation of 300 million that can’t field 11 guys that can beat a small African nation let alone effing Italy or Brazil?

  Give me a break…let’s keep fielding white anglo saxons and see how much we suck through 2018.

• 

  lbgc said,

  I like your comments Bill, but I’ve been screwed too often by the Washington Redskins to ever consider that we have a chance against Spain.

  I hate to keep going back to population, but Spain has 45 million people compared to 300 million for the US….how can we not have better futballers given those odds?

  Anyway…Brazil vs Italy was a great match up…considering that I had to go to ESPN 13 while US GOLF was on major networks may be some indication how gay (boring) sports coverage has become.

  This is no excuse for how horrible our national team plays…our forwards are lazy, our mid-fielderrs traditionally get outrun and our full-backs are constantly watching the other team score.

  Let’s face it, celebrity nation has overcome America and our soccer players are not immune, even if they are not worthy.

• 

  lbgc said,

  OK…you guys are candy asses as well as your players you defend…

  Explain to me why Freddy Ady and 10 other guys/girls couldn’t perform as well as these puftahs could…

  My prediction for Wednesday 4-0 Spain over USA regardless of which side Spector ends up on (I think it’s Wednesday…as if I could get interweb coverage of US National Soccer).

• 

  Mike said,

  Ibgc,

  Do you make up most of what you right? You make no sense.
  1. Spector never played on the left.
  2. If I remember correctly, we’re not all WASPS:
  Onyew-black
  Clark-black
  Altidore-black
  Davies-black
  Bornstein-Jewish/Mexican
  Feilhaber-Jewish
  Howard-black
  3. There’s no ESPN 13.
  4. Bob Bradley has done more than you in world soccer.
  5. Clint Mathis hasn’t played for the US in a long time. Why bring him up?
  6. What’s your issue with Spector? He’s a good player.

• 

  garbogas said,

  Creaven, I’d like to start a debate with you on Feilhaber. Clearly, you aren’t one of his proponents. I am. Before I get to your counter-arguments, here is my case for Feilhaber.

  Nearly every game seems to be a referendum on the current status of the USMNT. Taking a step back, this program has plateaud as a top 15-20 team in the world. At their best, they are hard-working, organized and physical. Good enough to threaten anybody on set plays but able to control the game/create run of play chances against mid-level to weak competition.

  It’s not hard to see why the US has topped out at this level. The level of technical ability and creativity across the team is lacking. Obviously, more flair-oriented teams such as Brazil and Spain are filled to the brim with technical ability, but even more “industrious” quality teams like England and Germany are light years beyond the US in technical ability. To varying degrees, top-level teams possess central midfielders that can possess/create under intense pressure (England – Lampard/Gerrard; Spain – Xavi, Fabregas, 8 others; Italy – Pirlo, De Rossi; etc.) fullbacks that can add something to the attack (A. Cole, P. Lahm, Grosso, Dani Albes, etc.) and obviously first-rate forwards.

  With the lineups that BB has been trotting out, the US is lacking in all 3 areas compared with top-flight sides. Every player except Donovan struggles to do something positive with the ball when placed under high defensive pressure (i.e. they have to create rather than receive in a high % position). Several US players (Dempsey, Altidore, Donovan) can do something when given space to run at players, but they rarely receive the ball in this position b/c of other players technical weaknesses and lack of vision.

  Enter Feilhaber. He is the one player on the US team that has the technical ability and vision to make everyone else around him better. Call him the Steve Nash of the USMNT. There’s a reason he completely changed the tone of the Honduras game when he came in: his ability allows his teammates to get the ball in better positions. Simply put, he helps compensate for the technical weaknesses of his teammates and helps maximize their strengths.

  Case in point: Goal against Italy. Watch the replay of Feilhaber’s pass to Altidore. To make that pass, he had to turn away from pressure, look up under intense defensive pressure, and fire a 35 yard pass while falling down. Ricardo Clark wouldn’t even realize that pass is there. Consequently, instead of being asked to chase down long balls or hold the ball up 1 against 4, Altidore receives the ball in space 1 on 1. Result = PK.

  Now, I know that Feilhaber hasn’t been lighting the world on fire in club play, but that’s not a reason to dismiss him. He adds another dimension to this team whether he’s been playing fantastic club ball or not (injuries have been a big issue). I think the bigger argument against Feilhaber is his defensive liabilities. I would argue though that those could be minimized in a 5 midfielder formation with Jones and Bradley in the center-mid along with Feilhaber.

  That’s my case for Feilhaber. I’d love to hear your retort.

• 

  Jose said,

  Mike

  Well said. He’s obviously not here to talk intelligent soccer just here to stir the pot. Best left to his own devices.

  Garbogas

  I mostly agree with your assessment on Feilhaber but I don’t think he is in top form due to lack of PT. However he needs to be on the field to improve his all around game. Torres brings exactly the same kind of ability on the ball and should also be getting some game. The problem I see is Bob Bradley will not play these guys especially when Jermaine Jones arrives. No question Jones will play alongside Michael Bradley in the middle which should prove to be an excellent combination. The real question can Torres play on the left effectively so Dempsey can play up front . Donovan will more than likely be on the right so unfortunately it doesnt leave room for Feilhaber UNLESS like you say they play with 5 in the midfield. Otherwise the current scenario leaves him as an offensive option off the bench. Either way he needs to get time and be ready to step in when called upon due to situation or injury. Time will tell where his fate lies.

• 

  Jose said,

  Bill

  I agree with you on Casey he has no business and lacks the ability to do what Bradley is asking him to do. He doesn’t belong here and won’t be here when Ching gets back(He’s another story). What I was trying to say was Bob Bradley envisioned him performing in the manner of a “target man” so I could at least understand the substitution he made at that time, while not agreeing with him I got the concept. Altidore was already performing admirably in that role and should have been left on and Casey left on the bench. I agree Dempsey should have been on the bench with Torres getting the start. Unfortunately Adu wasn’t the guy to bring on given the situation in the match but I agree that B. Bradley has badly mishandled the young players. They need to get PT. I am happy with the result but still extremely disappointed with Bob Bradley and his poor, puzzling decisions.

• 

  frank said,

  Wow, what a match, what a tournament, I was screaming from my living room sofa, to Bradly to take Demspey out but he obviously couldn’t hear me or he was ignoring me. It was a brilliant move to put Casey in for Davies and to push Dempsey up. How we did not conceed a goal with Dempsey’s lack of defensive work is beyond me. The Eygptians were torched by the 70th minute. We were lucky Italy failed to score and again I thought we played to conservatively in the last 10 minutes, I would have put Adu in for M. Bradley or Clark (prob. Bradley since he was on a yellow).
  I thought Altidore played well better in the second half. I thought Dempsey, Bornstein and Clark were the weakest players in the first 60 mintues. Why Bradley didn’t use a 3rd sub stoppage time is beyond me. I prefer this for time wasting as opposed to Dempsey’s holding the ball at the corner flag in the 92 minute (but I hate that tactic its stupid, it wastes about 3-10 seconds at best, when you’re up by three goals and simply need a win its fine but not when you have to consider goal differential and getting through to the next game). I think Bradley is learning to be a better coach. Donovan was fantastic!!!! Wow,do they still believe in themselves or did they blow there wad and entirely too spent to compete with Spain? I think we will lose 4-1.

• 

  Bill said,

  Everyone,

  I hear that Gulati says everything is OK now.

  So I’m to believe that the one in a million shot winner yesterday cures all our problems? The problem is that the new media is lame enough to buy it and go back for seconds!

• 

  Jose said,

  Bill

  You are correct. It amazes me that the luck we recieved yesterday translates into all is well with the USMNT. I don’t want to take away from the heart and determination to take advantage of a miraculous situation, but cmon everything is not fine. Let’s see them play good soccer consistently before we declare the problems solved. UGGH!

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  1) Spector has played left back at club level. I think he covered left for a couple mins in the 2nd half after a throw in. But he wasn’t playing there. He’s never played it for the USMNT that I know of. If I were Bradley (hah!) I would slot Bocanegra in at LB (which he still plays at club level) and leave Spector on the right.

  2) I’m not anti-Feilhaber in the long term. But he’s not match fit now and when he’s mentally not there either (witness the strip against Italy). I think Torres can do everything Benny can and is in better form. Of course, I think Bradley would take a bullet before playing Torres right now, but that’s another issue.

  3) Freddy Adu might have come in if they still needed a goal in the last 10mins. But they didn’t. Given the circumstances, bringing him in would’ve been a Bad Idea since he doesn’t play defense at the best of times. I’ll still say he doesn’t belong in the squad if he can’t play at club level in France and Portugal. It’s not the job of the senior National Team to develop players. If he needs match time, he needs to be on the U-20 and U-23 teams. Not the USMNT’s “A” squad. Since we’re sending the B squad to the Gold Cup, I’m fine with him playing that just to see if he can do anything (which he won’t). The simple fact is, he’s done nothing but honk off every coach he’s ever played for at club level. A TV commercial does not make a guy a great player.

  4) I agree that I was appalled at Bornstien’s “run” into the center of the pitch with the ball, which predictably led to him being dispossessed and only a great play by Demerit bailed him out. Bornstien is a debacle. Unfortunately for us, Pearce is just as bad.

  5) Gulati wasn’t going to make a change no matter what from the Confed Cup. And since the B team is playing the Gold Cup, there’s no chance of that bringing pressure on Bradley. The only way Bradley’s job is in jeopardy is if he the wheels come off the qualification campaign. We might hope that since Nowak is coaching Philly now, they might find a tactical assistant to replace him. Don’t hold your breath.

• 

  Dirk said,

  Although it is clear that the majority believe Bradley was insane to take Altidore out and push Dempsey up, it may have been the smartest thing he did yesterday.

  Remember that the entire objective for the United States yesterday was to score goals. We are all very aware by now of Dempsey’s defensive inefficiencies (actually its probably more along the lines of ‘indifference’ as when he does hustle back he normally helps dispossess opposing attackers). However, the United States wasn’t playing for a defensive battle yesterday looking to win 1-0. We were looking to win 3-0, and there are very few players in the pool that are able to ignite an otherwise flat and predictable US attack like Dempsey can. Yes, due to his lack of hustle to get back on a regular basis, he is a defensive liability. So yes, putting him at outside mid where his weakness would be magnified and also hurt the US’ defensive shape is obviously a mistake. Dempsey should have been in the game yesterday, and yes, for the whole 90, or at least until the goals were scored. Just not on the wing. Put him as a witholding striker to play off of Altidore as a point man to sit in front of Bradley and Clark. That is where he is dangerous, where he can sort of ‘go hunting’ for the ball and float to where he thinks he can receive it. To saying he played poorly the rest of the game aside from the goal he scored, I direct your attention to 2 of the 3 best opportunities the US had other than the actual goals. He set them both up in the first half. A clever through ball to Bradley on the ground where Bradley’s one-timer was knocked away. And the precise diagonal ball to Donovan that saw him try to make one pass too many instead of finishing himself.

  Dempsey’s offensive contribution is the premise to any value he has on the field. He doesn’t get back on defense very often, and he sometimes gives the ball away at times where he could keep it simple. But thats what separates him from the rest of the predictable mediocre attackers we have (aside from Donovan). In order to make those special things work at times (which he does without question), he is going to fail at them too. We didn’t want another blue collar attacker, we have enough of those. We needed goals yesterday and thats why he was on the field.

  For a different assignment (if we could’ve moved through via a 0-0 draw), he wouldn’t have been on the field, and that would’ve also been the right move.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  Dirk,

  Oh, I was all for moving Dempsey up top. I just thought Altidore was the wrong guy to take off, given that he was starting to look more dangerous than he had been any time before in the match. I thought Davies was done, and he should’ve been the guy to take off.

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  Everyone is letting Harkes influence them on Dempsey – Dempsey was responsible for setting up two of the more inspired 1st half plays – the through ball for Bradley and the lofted ball for Donovan who eventually attemped to feed Jozy when Jozy checked back -

  Also, no one scores on that header other than Dempsey, maybe Bradley, on the entire US team. You can break this game down a million different ways, but you need someone to score, and Dempsey can, something none of the forwards have shown.

• 

  Jose said,

  I have no issue with Dempsey being a quality player. My issue is he is exhausted and not playing to his potential. Did he make a few nice plays. Yes. He made many more bad ones and against a different team on a different day they could have been disastrous. When he is rested he deserves to be and should be back in the lineup. To say no one else scores on that header is sheer speculation and anyone can make a claim like that. We will never know the answer so it’s not an intelligent claim. Everyone here makes observations and I believe as most of you probably do that coach Bradley doesn’t seem to make decisions based on observations and common sense. Jozy was playing well and if left in maybe he scores. We will never know one way or the other. I stand by my observation that Dempsey is tanked and Bob Bradley is not a genius for keeping him in the match just a very lucky coach. You guys of course can agree or disagree but that is my feeling.

• 

  Dirk said,

  I can agree that Dempsey has not recently shown the fire and passion (and at times, speed) that he originally brought to the USMNT a few years ago. But in a game where you need goals, he really is one of the best playmaking options available. He’s not known for his 50 yard lightning fast breaks like Donovan, so we dont need him to provide that. We needed him to provide playmaking on the ball, which he did in several ocassions. Please watch the game again (I have three times now). He did NOT play poorly. He gave the ball away no more times than Donovan and Bradley, he just may have looked slightly more foolish doing it the times he did. He did not do many things spectacularly, but he did set up two of the games best scoring chances as I mentioned in the post above. But the reason he is unable to get involved in the way he is most effective is because he is positioned on the wing. You tell him to play attacking center mid and you see an even greater contribution from him.

  No wonder he is exhausted. In England, he does play outside mid but his limits are defined. With the US Nat. team, he is an outside mid that also drifts into the middle and make plays because on this team, not many other are doing it. I can only imagine how exhausting trying to play two different positions can be. That is his fault for not being more disciplined, but even he knows that he’s useless as a wing, so he finds a way to get involved whenever he can.

  Again, the main point is that he did not give the ball away much yesterday. The first two games he was not a positive force. Yesterday he was, even without the goal. He did give the ball away but no more than our other main players. My evidence is the game tape, review it before you claim again that he was not in form. He played as well as any of the others except possibly Bradley, so to make a case that he should’ve been benched yesterday is to make the case that most others should have been too, and I don’t hear you trying to make that claim.

• 

  Jose said,

  I stand on my revue of Dempsey.
  Consider the situation before kickoff.
  1. US needs a 6 goal swing to advance. (not likely)

  2. Dempsey already exhibited signs of exhaustion in the previous two matches.

  3. Based on these two facts Dempsey and yes several others should have been benched to give the young players some valuable game experience.

  No one not even Bob Bradley thought they had a chance to advance. Cmon Italy lose 3-0, when does that happen. So realistically the game should have been used as experience for young players. Anyone who thinks Bob Bradley played Dempsey because he knew Brazil was gonna thrash Italy and the US was gonna thrash Egypt is just blowin smoke. Based on the facts pre kickoff he shouldn’t have been playing. And you know what. At halftime when he hears the score of the Italy game and we are up 1-0 Bob Bradley can decide to bring on Dempsey then if he thinks he is our best offensive option. But pre kickoff he made a bad choice and I stand by my opinion.

• 

  Dirk said,

  You are right in that they knew it was unlikely, nearly impossible. But if you paid attention to conferences all week they didn’t count themselves out. Neither did Bradley. He went out with the team that had the best chance to get the result they needed, and it worked. Everyone calls him lucky, stupid, etc. Well, he invests every hour of his day in looking at the team and making those decision, while the rest of us have other jobs and we just speculate. With that fact in mind, I think we owe him the benefit of the doubt in calling it smart rather than lucky, because as much as any of us think we know, we would be fools not to admit that he knows plenty about this team that we don’t. And this time, too. Nobody on this board would’ve said moving Dempsey to forward rather than taking him out for the last 20 minutes would pay off. He clearly believed it would so he made that decision. That makes everyone on this board wrong and him right. Everyone here would just like to think they know more than the coach of the team. Theres a reason he’s the coach, nobody here would do better despite how sure they are that they would. Because they would’ve been the ones to pull (or not play) Dempsey and would most likely be going home today instead of preparing for a match against Spain.

  I’m not asking this to absolve Bradley of blame for any and every ‘mistake’ we think we see. But in this instance, he was right, we (I myself doubted Dempsey would be in the line up) were wrong. Have some humility and give the man credit for having the foresight none of us would’ve had. You’re crazy if you dont think he shared the same opinion about Dempsey’s first two games as the rest of us. We all know he was extremely lacking. But he obviously left him on for a reason and it worked out the way we ALL wanted.

  And while Bradley could’ve used the game to give ‘experience for young players’, he instead put in a line up that he thought had the chance to pull of the miraculous if it were to be possible (help from Brazil) and that happened to work, too. So I close by repeating that instead of calling these moves that just happened to work out ‘lucky’, give the guy who spends his entire life working on this team some credit… because if he didn’t just prove that he knows something we don’t, then I don’t know what will.

• 

  Jose said,

  Another thing. You state yourself “even he knows he is useless on the wing”. This brings me to my main point which is that Bob Bradley hasn’t a clue. No you are correct he is not a winger. If anywhere he should play up top preferably withdrawn and when fit and rested may do well there paired with Jozy. But my point is: based on the facts and circumstances pre kickoff he should not have been in the lineup at all, most certainly not on the wing. Bob Bradley is to blame here.

• 

  Jose said,

  The US advancing was pure luck plain and simple. I am happy they advanced. I still believe he should have played the young players and could always have changed tactics and players at the half after hearing the Italy score. If Italy and Brazil tie or have a close match as they usually do we are not having this conversation. We are questioning why Torres made the trip to sit on the bench in a meaningless game while Dempsey starts again after already having two stinkers. Yes, it worked out for Bradley this time and you make think he’s a genius or stayed up for 3 days straight considering the odds and circumstances and made an educated decision. And thats ok you are entitiled. I however still think he started the wrong squad given the circumstances and happened to get lucky and get two good results. Hooray for us but I am no longer a fan of Bob Bradley. I did support him until the last month. I don’t like to question the coach too much because I know a lot of thought goes into their decisions and often info we are not privy to is involved. But I just haven’t liked too many of his choices lately especially his handling of Torres.

• 

  Dirk said,

  I’ll agree to that being a fault. He wanted to fill the line-up with his playmakers at the risk of conceding counter attacks down Clint’s side and consequentially a goal. That, I guess was the risk he took. But while I would’ve personally put Dempsey in the middle of perhaps Clark, you once again have to give credit to the decision made that worked. I was wrong, too, clearly. I don’t think he is a wing. Bradley put him there. They won 3-0.

  Joe: “Bob Bradley is to blame here”.

  Haha, he is to blame for what? A 3-0 win and a semifinal berth? Yeah, I think he’ll take that. Please.

  I guess Bob Bradley is also to blame for being outclassed by one of the best teams in the world while playing more than half of it a man down. And also for having his team playing VERY strongly against the World Champion Italians before and even for a bit after losing a man early to be a man down.

  Epic failure, you’re right. Get real.

• 

  Dirk said,

  Jose, (apology for mistyping ‘Joe’ in last post)

  I’ll leave this conversation with you on an understanding that Torres was suitable for playing time yesterday after Dempsey’s poor efforts. Once again, as you lent to in your last post (thank you) the Coach knows and sees more than we, and perhaps Torres has been miserable on the practice field and has other issues with him. We, not being with the team, will never know.

  I share your joy in the team moving on.

• 

  John said,

  Jose

  I agree with you. I like Dempsey but this was a missed opportunity to play those young guys that worked out very well for us and especially coach bradley.

• 

  Jose said,

  Dirk

  By my comment “blame” etc…I was referring to his playing Dempsey on the wing and starting him in the match based on the circumstances. Just because he won you choose to see the bottom line as black and white. I am looking at the 2010 WC as the bottom line and right now I see problems one of which is young players not getting valuable experience for the 2010 WC and IMHO this game was the perfect opportunity in that regard. Bradley’s boys won the match and for that I am glad. Maybe Torres is out of form, badmouthing the coach or called his son a nasty name. You are correct I am not privy to that info so yes I cannot say for sure why he isn’t getting game. I am only basing “my” opinions on what I know. No problem by the way my friends call me “Joe”. Thanks

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  BTW, this game was an absolute joke. Egypt was completely exhausted after playing two draining, competitive games against Brazil and Italy. The US, to their credit, played well – but I cannot believe how open the midfield was the entire game, was Egypt down 2 men? That team was a far cry from the Egypt squad that played so well the first two days, and unfortunately I think this leaves somewhat of an inflated view of what this US team actually is…

  That being said… I’ve been extremely critical of Landon Donovan in the past, but that was the best he’s ever played, and I’m basing this on how much he tracked back in addition to how good he was in the attacking end of the field. The best part of the Bradley goal was his first touch, which was not easy, right in stride to Bradley moving forward.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  Beaumont,

  The US played the same two teams. The whole “Well Egypt was exhausted” line just doesn’t hold water to me. Fitness is just as much part of the sport as tactics. If the Egyptian coach can’t work his tactics and squad to fit a tactical situation where all he has to do is DEFEND and not get slaughtered for 90mins, whose fault is that?

  If Bradley had conceded a 3 goal advantage in a cup format, he’d be crucified. And rightly so. Defending in depth is something international players ought to be able to do. The US kicked the door down to win that match. They deserve the credit for doing so. All the advantages were on the Egyptian side. And anyone who tells you otherwise is kidding you.

• 

  Creaven said,

  garbogas — In my Italy game report card I wrote about why I’m puzzled USMNT fans are high on Feilhaber. In short, I don’t think he’s very good. In this current stretch of U.S. matches, he has impressed me twice. His 50-yard pass to Altidore against Italy, which led to a penalty and his clever chip pass to the far post against Honduras, which Dempsey mangled. Unlike you, and others, I don’t think he had big impact in the second half against Honduras.

  More to the point, I don’t think Feilhaber has great technical abilities. He does have good vision, but I don’t think he makes his teammates better. For every great pass there seems to be three or four poor passes. He isn’t a great dribbler, he hasn’t shown anything on free kicks and he isn’t a very good in the air. He also doesn’t score goals. Physically, he isn’t fast, or tall or strong. He’s just a player that makes the occasional nice pass.

  People give Adu a hard time because he has only shown promise at the youth level. But Feilhaber was also on last year’s Olympic team and he no impact on that team. That said, I hope you’re right and I’m wrong about Feilhaber and he can become a consistent attacking midfielder for the U.S. But I have higher hopes for Adu and Torres than I do Feilhaber.

  About Dempsey — My biggest problem is his poor attitude and I thought after his embarrassing performance in the second half against Brazil he had no business starting. Unlike you guys, I was shocked he scored. He showed almost nothing in four games. If you had no idea who the players were and you watched the Costa Rica match to the 70th minute of the Egypt match, I think you would have thought Dempsey was by far the worst midfielder. That said, it was a great header. Is it worth having a player play bad for multiple games knowing he is capable of scoring? Maybe, I guess.

• 

  frank said,

  Dempsey, was he tired? or was he conserving his energy for attacking and that was why he looked pittiful on the defensive half of the field during the game against Eygpt?

  To me I thought he looked apathetic but he certainly did play some very dangerous balls on the attack.

  Its easy for us to critisize but I thought Bradley’s pushing Dempsey forward at the end of the game was brilliant.

  Sure, I think the USMNT still has a lot to learn, as does the coach and I think they are learning.

  In retro spect from my perspective the biggest coaching errors in the Eygpt game were subbing too late in the game and not using a 3rd sub during stoppage time and these have been consistent problems.

• 

  garbogas said,

  Creaven: I’ll concede your points about Feilhaber that he’s not the fastest, the strongest, or the best in the air. I disagree with you on his technical ability and especially his passing.

  Most of the time, he makes the simple pass that doesn’t grab anyone’s attention but helps keep possession and keep the ball moving quickly instead of deliberately. A player doesn’t need to be the fastest or strongest to make those kind of passes. I would argue most of the times he gives the ball away are when he tries to hit more creative passes that other players don’t even see. Sometimes they don’t work out, but sometimes they do like the two you mentioned (as well as one other time in the 2nd half against Egypt when he found Dempsey in acres of space but nothing came of it). Given the nature of those passes, I’m willing to accept a lower success rate assuming they’re made in the right parts of the field.

  As for your claim he doesn’t score goals, I would first argue that he’s more of a creator than a scorer. Secondly, though, he’s had some of our most dangerous chances in South Africa that haven’t ended in goals. The cross bar against Brazil. Several half-volleys (one against Egypt, one against Italy I think) that were extremely difficult technically and again were efforts that many US players wouldn’t even try. I know it was a once-in-a-decade strike, but how many US players would even have tried his famous volley against Mexico in ‘07.

  As for Adu, I consider him a different kind of attacker. He’s a better dribbler than Feilhaber, yes, but he has a lesser overall effect on the game. Feilhaber is a guy you can run your offense through. Adu is a guy that can receive the ball in the attacking zone and create dangerous situations by beating one or two players. Both are useful, but they’re different.

  I’ll concede that I haven’t seen much of Torres. I’m looking forward to the Gold Cup where presumably he’ll get PT, and I’ll start to form an opinion then on what he brings compared to Feilhaber.

• 

  garbogas said,

  Jose: I agree with a lot of your comments so far. I too was shocked to see the starting line-up against Egypt. Perhaps the biggest shocker for me wasn’t Dempsey but Clark.

  I don’t get the recent love affair with Clark. He had a decent game against Honduras (Honduras!?!) and now people are acting like he’s a first-class international holding midfielder. Well, he’s reckless, unimaginative and a possession nightmare. He covers ground well, but he’s a C international level player at best. More importantly, we know more or less what he brings to the table. Why would Bradley put a marginal international player coming off a red card back in the line-up over players like Adu, Torres and Feilhaber?

• 

  Jose said,

  I’ve stated in previous commentaries that Clark doesn’t belong on this team and you are correct a C team product at best. Not for lack of effort, can’t fault him there but his technical ability is lacking and he has no vision and no ability to keep possession. The good news is when Jermaine Jones arrives he won’t even get a sniff at the team. But, then again with Bob Bradley at the helm you never know.

• 

  Jose said,

  I want to say I enjoy reading everyone’s comments here even when I disagree with some of them. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

• 

  Dirk said,

  Jose,

  I do agree with you that my gauge of success for the U.S. was a shortsighted one. It was one based on today’s success and not preparation for the World Cup next year, you’re right. However, After some disappointing performances the past few months I feel that now rather than next year was the best time to live for before more fans and even the players began to lose confidence, which will certainly affect them in the World Cup next year as well. I do see your point, though.

• 

  Jose said,

  Understood, I respect your opinions and look forward to more of them. Go USA!

• 

  Bill said,

  In leading up to, tomorrow’s game with Spain and reflecting on Sunday’s, some things come to mind. Sunday’s games were a marvel with the most unlikely outcome coming to fruition. At the same time, Sunday’s result for the US MNT will assure that the USSF will wait another year before addressing the problems endemic to the game in America. As I’ve said before, the US MNT is a canary in the coalmine for the game. In keeping with the spirit of this blog, I’ve decided to post grades for the key elements of the game in the US.

  Here we go.

  Players: B-

  There’s no doubt that our players are better than years past. This has made the performance of the MNT more dire. We have more players than ever playing in Europe at higher levels, MLS is viable warts and all, and we ought to be able to start supporting a better brand of soccer. Even with the shortcomings of our technical abilities, the improvement over the past is undeniable. All of this stands to indict Bob Bradley’s coaching for failing to meet these expectations. The other problem is the failure to meet our potential. I truly believe that the US can produce much better players, but simply can’t bring itself to produce an environment capable of doing the job.

  Coaching: C-

  This is higher than Bob Bradley’s solid “D”. Ideally, the coach of the US MNT would be a beacon of innovation and improvement. Instead, we have a coach who embodies yesterday’s game. We have the problem that there isn’t another coach in the US game who might obviously step in and improve things. The issues with coaching continue as you work backwards down the ranks. We have too little professionalism and too much reliance on a traditional approach to the game. If the game is to improve, the coaches need to take the step (or two) forward. We need tactical sophistication and a modern approach to playing instead of an adherence to outdated principles of play.

  USSF: D

  US Soccer is dedicated to the mediocre status quo. This mediocrity permeates their decision-making and serves as the reason for accepting the poor performance of the US MNT and the modest results that stand in for success. The USSF is also unwilling to make necessary changes to improve the game for fear of upsetting the status quo.

  Referees: D+

  I’m a referee (at a youth level) and the impact on the game of how the laws of the game are applied is too often underestimated. Our referees allow the game to be too physical, which stunts a more technical approach to the game, validates the bias toward more physically powerful players, and trains our players to react in a way that is unacceptable at an international level. Refereeing is cultural. This is just as true in the UK where soccer is a blue-collar sport and getting “stuck in” is a sign of manliness. In the US soccer has the chip on its shoulder from its lineage as a “sissy sport”. Physical play, hard studs up tackles are evidence that the sissy label is misplaced. Plain and simple our referees need to start modifying standards at all levels to allow a more technical game to develop in the US.

  Fans: B for the new “hard core” fans, C- for the public at large

  One big positive of the Confederations Cup is the awakening of the hard core fans who don’t accept mediocrity. Unfortunately, we don’t have enough fans, and too many of the ones we do have simply wave the flag and live by the maxim of never speaking ill of the team. They’re team USA, how can they do anything wrong.

  Media: D+

  The news media is starting to have some voices that demand what the hard core fans demand, results. On the other hand, there are too many apologists, especially the on-camera “talent”. ESPN’s soccer coverage is horrible, and so many mistakes are made that it’s a joke to someone who knows the game. The treatment of the game away from soccer is simply put, offensive. Soccer is almost always discussed in a disrespectful manner (see ESPN Sportscenter’s top 10 plays for example). Look at what happened to the Sounders-DC United game last week, where two-thirds of a great game was displaced by the College World Series (and teams no one outside Arkansas or Virginia cares about!). Let’s hope that ESPN treats La Liga better and potentially the EPL too. On the positive side Fox Soccer, Gol TV and Setanta are bringing first-rate European games to the cable/satellite viewing public.

  Leagues: D

  Our high-level soccer league needs dramatic improvement, and connection to the full hierarchy of the professional game. We need a schedule that matches the World calendar, relegation/promotion with a better standard of play. It should be a vehicle for player, coach and referee development. It should be a way for the US to develop an American style of play. Instead it’s a brewing ground for long ball, kick-and-run, red card tackles, and the sort of ball skills that make Conor Casey the league’s scoring king. College soccer is a joke as far as developing players ready for international competition or European leagues.

  Youth Development: C for the youngest, D- for competitive club soccer, C- for older kids.

  The USA does a fantastic job of getting a whole bunch of kids on the field and exposed to the game. We counter the numbers with a relatively awful skill development. Its still viewed as a starter sport rather than something to continue as kids get older. The real damage happens when the Club soccer scene kicks in. The damage continues with ODP. Competitive soccer starts when kids are undergoing puberty resulting in the loss of a lot of skill and talent that just happens to be slower to develop physically. The style of play rewards the team that stocks up on the big, fast early developers who kick, run and push their way to relative success. This all comes at the cost of long-term player development. This goes on top of the tournament driven competition model that does nothing but generate alot of generally low quality games. At the oldest age and highest level there is a push toward Academies which have a better model for player development, but its too late to fix the earlier damage. At every level, soccer (as the USSF sees it) continues to predominantly a suburban middle class sport with little outreach to rural or urban communities. The hispanic/latino communities are also under-represented compared to their potential.

  I hope its all food for thought or discussion.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  The displacement of the Sounders/United game last week was disgraceful. I was furious. MLS really ought to seriously consider switching to FSC, where it would be a top banana that’s still on most basic cable, instead of being buried at the bottom of ESPN’s coverage and preempted by every dog show that comes on.

  MLS’ standard of play is improving consistently. I’m not going to say it’s a top tier league. But it is, in terms of average quality, on par with the second tier European leagues, which isn’t to be sneezed at given it’s not even been around for 20 yrs yet.

  I think as the standard of play increases in the league, and more and more people see what is acceptable and expected in the world game, that will filter back into MLS’ coaching and refereeing. I don’t think its surprising these are increasing at a slower standard than the quality of play.

  I agree about Bradley. I always have thought he was someone who might someday be the head coach, but wasn’t ready when he was appointed. The USSF needs to bring in quality people to oversee the technical development of the sport. That includes camps that would serve to train our coaches and referees getting quality OVERSEAS talent to teach our coaches and refs about tactics, technique, and player development. We don’t need instruction about fitness and sports psychiatry, our coaches can find that anywhere in this country (indeed, most other countries come HERE for that kind of training).

  The USSF needs to focus on the money and marketing aspect of the game, and bring in technical people to actually work with the quality of the GAME, and get away from that. Gulati and co. know nothing, at all, about the world game. And their decisions have hindered our development on that front. He may be well connected with the kleptocrat Blatter. And that’s useful for the WC bid. But we don’t need people like Gulati telling us about the state of the game in this country.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Media = E in my opinion.

  The Washington Post devoted 6 paragraphs, roughly 18 sentences, to our win over Eqypt…the reason they had so little space available? Article after article over how much rain the golf tournament received…I don’t understand how the average american is always bitching about how boring soccer is, but they somehow find golf exciting.

• 

  frank said,

  I love soccer for several reasons most notably is the artistic, intellectual, skillfull and emotional nature of the game. The sense of a united freedom is awe inspiring. What drives me crazy is how everyone thinks they “know” the game and how it should be played and how it should be refereed, which is really not a bad thing it helps drive the emotionalism.
  What it does for the USA now is a good thing, it reveals our personal audacity our narrow mindedness and promotes a picutre for the future. We can no longer be an island unto ourselves, we are not the super power we think we are and we can be beat in more ways than one.

• 

  Bill said,

  Shawn,

  I really enjoyed your comments, lots a very good points especially with respect to USSF. Right on the money.

  Ibgc, The only reason the media got a higher grade were the new voices that were critical of Bradley and the team’s recent performance. There is also the availability of high quality matches on cable/satellite TV. Without those voices the media gets a D- to F.

• 

  lbgc said,

  Bill…I see and agree with your point.

  I would like to note, though, that the Washington Post has the predicted starting lineup and not much more as far as coverage today…AND you’ve got to get all the way to the last page of the Sports section, bottom 2 left inches of the page…

  GO USA!

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  Of course, after watching the standard of refereeing in the US/Spain match just now. GREAT JOB GUYS! I can’t believe MLS’ looks *that* much worse.

  What a disgraceful red card. That was a yellow at worst. No intent, studs barely showing, he hit where the ball had been not a half-second before, and it was his first real foul of the match. And it gets a straight red?!!! Wow. Could you see this was the same moron who reffed the US/Italy 06 match? I think that clown needs to be bounced from FIFA competitions. Maybe…MAYBE a yellow. All the commentators agreed it was harsh on every feed I read. Every…single…one.

• 

  Bill said,

  Wow, didn’t see that coming. Hats off to the USA.

  I might have more to say after watching the game tonight, can’t really comment on the red card. Sounds like it might be more reputation working against Bradley than the actual act… If so, its a damn shame.

• 

  Jose said,

  Hi all,

  Just finished watching recorded match. Wow! Talk about heart. Bill I thought the red card was harsh. To me it was a clean hard tackle, maybe just maybe a hair late but definitely not red in my mind. Team played how they needed to play to win this match. Noone is gonna confuse us for Brazil anytime soon. But the lads showed that with the right game plan, a bit of luck and a lot of heart they can compete with the worlds best. Spain is clearly a more talented team but that’s football the better team doesn’t always win. Heart Heart Heart thats what this match was all about and thats what I as a US fan want to see more than anything else. Do I want them to play beautiful football? Yes of course but it all starts with heart, desire , courage and commitment. Even with the win we can all find negative things to say but I think I will just savor this for a while before I comment further. When I do comment further I will limit it to constructive criticism because after a match like this where the team left it on the field you can’t really blast anyone. Great job US. Bill you said it best. WOW!

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  Jose,

  yeah, I’m not kidding when I said “every” feed considered that a harsh red. Yahoo/UK, ESPN Soccernet, Goal International; every one said it was a yellow at worst.

  And I don’t think it’s “Bradley” having a reputation. It’s that ref and the US. Like I said, he’s the same moron who called (destroyed) the US/Italy 06 match. And he was waiting, he gave Landon an early yellow (probably deserved, but given LD is the only player on the side with stature, you’d think he’d have talked to him first). Then he had the red out from 20yards on Bradley. It was a joke. The US didn’t commit a host of fouls. In fact, their challenges were very clean, by and large, and they played positionally to funnel Spain to the flanks. Spain didn’t try to force the middle really, so the US didn’t have to lunge for the ball often.

  It was a well thought out gameplan. Well executed. They saw that Spain wouldn’t have Iniesta, so they locked down Xavi and forced things wide. And Gooch and Demerit were never going to beaten in the air. They’ve been a revelation these last two matches. And I think this is a good backline moving forward. It’s not going to beat other teams. But it’s not going to GET beat either. And that gives the rest of your team something to build on moving forward on the counter.

• 

  Jose said,

  Shawn

  Spot on with your observation. I thought in the first half they were giving an awful lot of space on the flanks and of course as the game progressed it became obvious to me that was the plan. Pack the center and let them try to beat us on the cross which for the most part had to be in the air because of the packed box. Well it worked to perfection. A few times it was dicey when Spector and Bocanegra gave a little too much space after they had closed and got beat on the dribble to the inside. But for the most part they did well to force a mostly hopeful cross in the air or many times were even able to block the cross. I like the backline as it was today and I have been hoping for these 4 for a while. Hopefully it will remain intact and even have time to grow even stronger together. Defensively like you say pretty solid, biggest weakness here is ball distribution but the nerves of playing Spain had to be a huge contributor toward that today.

• 

  Jose said,

  Tale of 2 halves here I think. First half I thought the US played fairly well taking the game to Spain in spots and having several decent chances with Spain also getting a few. Overall a positive first half for the US. Great turn by Jozy using his strength to make a great play. Shot not the best but he caught Casillas heading the wrong way. This changed the whole game of course. 2nd half pack the box mode for the US. Played with heart and grit and did what they needed to do. Now to my “constructive” criticism which really is nothing new. Most important thing they need to improve is holding more possession when they have a lead. They gave the ball away way too cheaply in most instances which only put them under more pressure almost immediately. Center Backs panicked a bit too much with the ball looking to blast it away immediately even when they had a bit of time to play it back to Howard. I spoke about our back 4 in my last post and though solid defensively, distribution needs to get better and of course with these 4 we are not going to get a lot of offensive production from the outside backs. Spector does make an effort to get forward and should improve in this regard but no one will confuse him for Roberto Carlos. Bocanegra is not known for his attacking prowess and I don’t see any reason to expect him to change at this point. That said they are pretty solid defensively and most teams we play in the world cup will be technically superior and outside backs more than likely will have few opportunities to get forward anyway. Midfielders were chasing most of the game, played with heart but left a lot of space in the center uncovered. Clark still making bad decisions and his technical ability is just not up to par. Bradley had a very quiet game. Dempsey had his best game of the tourny and I thought it was more a result of more effort from him than anything else. Donovan like him or hate him he has had a good tournament and you cannot question his commitment. He for the most part made good decisions and even in the 2nd half when almost everyone else was just kicking upfield attemted to hold possession at least for a bit to reieve some of pressure.
  Davies had a good first half didn’t do much in the 2nd half same for Jozy. Biggest issue is recieving and holding possession for these two and some others as well. First touch was horrendous at times. So those are what I see as our first order of business. Improving first touch, holding possession better, better decision making are at the top of the list. On the positive side we saw what a role heart and determination can play in a match. If they can improve on some of these other things we may be able to close out a game without so much of my hair falling out(not much left anyway). Well theres alot to be proud of alot to improve on and alot to look forward to. Go USA!

• 

  Jose said,

  All this BS and I left out Timmy Howard.
  Outstanding!
  Enough said.

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  I thought Ricardo Clark was terrible in both of his previous games – today I would rate him a 10, most improved player in shortest turnaround all-time.

  My player ratings:
  Howard – 8
  Bocanegra – 7
  Gooch – 9
  DeMerit – 9
  Spector – 8
  Donovan – 9
  Bradley – 8
  Clark – 10
  Dempsey – 9
  Davies – 8
  Altidore – 9
  Feilhaber – 8
  Casey – 7
  Bradley – 9

  I thought his sub was way stupid, Feilhaber for Davies, turned out to be a inpsired stroke of genius

• 

  Jose said,

  Let me get this straight
  Howard gets an 8
  and
  Clark gets a 10?
  Clark?
  a 10?
  Oh I’m not gonna say a word I’ll just wait for the onslaught.

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  Jose, are you this guy:

  http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/us-topples-spain-2-0/

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  Jose –

  Certainly no one will confuse Spector for Roberto Carlos, especially considering Roberto Carlos plays left full back and Spector plays right.

• 

  Jose said,

  No definitely not
  I would have given Landon an 8
  Jozy a 7, Gooch a 7 and Demerit a 7 and I even would have given Clark a 6. After that effort no one deserves a 5. Clark played with a lot of heart and made some fine defensive plays. When he has the ball that’s when the problems start. Won’t matter anyway Jemaine Jones will be the US holding midfielder and I believe he will make a huge difference. Unlike Clark, he can actually play with the ball at his feet.

• 

  Jose said,

  I think you get the point on the Roberto Carlos comment , yes!

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  I agree this game is probably a one off for Clark, considering he couldn’t do anything fundamental in either of his first two games against Italy & Egypt – but in this game he tackled with precision, passed with skill, trapped, blocked etc. Maybe I’m guilty of overreacting b/c I set the bar so low for him heading into this game, but go back and watch, and tell me how many times he turns the ball over, makes a dumb foul, is in the wrong place. Ideally, the US should play a 4-4-2 with Jones on the right, with Bradley and Edu in the middle, with Dempsey & Altidore up front, keep Landon on the left.

• 

  Jose said,

  I like Edu and hope he finds a spot. I’m not sure Jones is a flank player. He is known as a fierce holding mid who does go forward at times, a perfect compliment to Bradley if they can learn to work together. I also prefer Dempsey up top and Landon on the left. I think Landon plays better on the right but he is our best option on the left and is strong there too. Don’t know if either of the 3 Edu, Jones or Bradley can play on the right effectively but maybe we will find out. Feilhaber is starting to get stronger and perhaps Torres will get a shot and prove himself. If all of these guys play to their potential it would leave us with 6 nice options and also leave the ability to move Landon up top in the right situations. Good problem for any coach is to have options. We’ll see how this all plays out over the next year and I hope for the teams sake they all do well.

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  I never saw him play for Frankfurt, but at Schalke I watched him play a lot, especially in the Champions League, and Jones played on the right as much as he did in the middle

• 

  Jose said,

  Ok, Well like I said we will see how it pans out. If he can play on the right then absolutely slot Edu in next to Bradley with Landon on the left. Still got Feilhaber and Torres waiting in the wings too. Seems like a good situation to me.

• 

  Chris said,

  I can’t say I like Dempsey’s game. He can’t hold possession and he is not a skilled striker. I much prefer Davies, whose speed caused Spain all sorts of problems after essentially tearing Egypt apart. Having Donovan and Davies on the same side is a very effective combo, with Davies taking a defender or two with him on his run and leaving gaps for Donovan behind him. Dempsey doesn’t do that.

  That said, Davies is mostly just fast and fearless, and he works very hard. He’s not a true international striker and isn’t ever going to be. But then, neither is Dempsey, despite his excellent header vs Egypt and his opportunism vs Spain. We haven’t got a lot of options at striker, and we never have had.

  My preference would be Jones in the midfield with Bradley, and Donovan on one wing and Edu on the other (or, possibly, Adu), and Davies and Altidore up top. Both of those guys ought to be 90-minutes fit by next year. They’re clearly not at the moment.

  Great match today, incredible defending by Gooch and Demerit, which is something I never thought I’d be able to say.

• 

  Beaumont Livingston said,

  Agreed on Gooch and Demerit – downright heroic. The BBC min by min guy had Demerit as the second coming of Tony Adams.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  Well, I agree that Jones is going to take the starting spot Clark is holding now. But Clark as a deputy is not a bad choice. When you need a forward/midfielder swap or someone is in card difficulty in a tournament or has a knock, it’s nice to have a little depth. And I think Clark is good for depth.

  If he can play smart in the future, he can make himself a role on the team. His size, mobility, and strength in the tackle is a good thing to have when you want to mark down an opposing playmaker or clog the middle of the pitch. So I think if we’ve got Bradley, Jones, Clark, and Fielhaber or Torres for our 4 central midfielders; that’s not a bad group to bring to a tourney. Not worldbeating. But it can control the center of the pitch and spring the counter effectively.

  I’d like to see Dempsey permanently in the withdrawn striker role, with Davies being the #3 striker to provide energy when we need a boost or to deputize one of the other two. When Ching comes back, I think he’s #4 and you use him like they did Casey in this match. He’s smart. He can hold the ball up. He draws fouls and can frustrate the opposition for 15mins or so when you want to destroy the game to keep a win. His work rate in defending from the front can never be overestimated either. He’s not a finisher. He’s not someone I want starting. But he can play that role well.

  Obviously the distribution at the back could improve. But I do think we saw tonight even there were times they won the ball and then stepped forward a couple strides with it. Learning where each other are and how to play the ball to feet out of the back is the last thing to develop in a backline’s chemistry. I’m not going to criticize them for not having that tonight. Especially given the circumstances. But I would like to see it improve by the World Cup, yes.

• 

  Jose said,

  Shawn
  Like your comments and agree with all of them. Guess we think alike.

• 

  Jose said,

  One thing though,
  I think Clark gets slotted at #3 in the depth chart behind Jones and Edu.

• 

  Shawn Gillogly said,

  From what I’ve seen of Edu’s skillset, I would want him in the side as a “utility player.” Similar to Hargreaves used to do with FC Bayern. It never hurts to have a guy who can play DMC, MC, MR, or DR in your lineup. Edu is versatile. I don’t think he’s better than anyone we have starting right now at any of those positions. But he’s good enough to be in the squad filling in for depth wherever you need him. And a good guy to have a tourney squad because he can play so many positions adequately, if not exceptionally.

• 

  Dirk said,

  Chris,

  Have you ever seen an EPL game featuring Fulham? Dempsey does not play striker for the squad, but a lot of the goals he scored this season (he shared the team lead) he does show he is a skilled striker when he pushes himself to the role. He scored every type of goal expected of a true striker, so I think your observation may be limited to USMNT games which is certainly not conclusive evidence of a player’s ability. He can hold possession as well as anyone when he chooses. In fact, in reviewing the past couple games, several times you see him taking one or two touches horizontally or backwards because nothing is on up top. He is able to dribble himself out of trouble (most of the time) and when nothing is on he does make the simple pass. He is as viable an option at forward as anyone aside from Altidore. He does not possess lightning speed but his knack for finding the ball and opportunities is unrivaled on the squad.

  I’m excited to see who Bradley agrees with and if Dempsey becomes more of a withdrawn forward for the team.

Add A Comment