holz doesn't have cable, so when we're not at the bars, we've been watching the games on univision.com - the announcers are lively and significantly more credible than alexi lalas.
highlights thus far:
germany's thumping of australia
UK's meltdown against the US
paraguay nearly defeating le azzurri
ivory coast battling powerhouse portugal to a draw
the rest of round 1 seems a little weak, with the exception of france - mexico this thursday, and portugal-brazil on the 25th.
holz's prediction:
brazil-germany, germany for the cup, klose to get the golden boot.
hopefully this year's final won't see as much diving as the 2006 final or the 2008 10m Platform Synchronized.
wow a celebrity 'nect poster! Thom, youre my hero... for realz yo...
i have no idea what you're talking about though in regards to the announcers. The espn announcers during game time are pretty decent IMO, though decidedly american in their announcing style. By which I mean they talk more than English announcers might.
Saying they don't understand the game is just silly... Quite frankly, I am sick of the backhanded Americans don't understand soccer shiv... there are a great number of us who do understand it, and have been playing our whole lives.
As for the UK's apparent "meltdown"...
I am not dumb enough to ask internationals to respect what is a very, very solid American side. Yes, the British keeper made a massive mistake. But he also made a spectacular save on what was likely the BEST scoring chance in the 2nd half. Jozy Alitdore's scoring chance that is.
Secondly, the Americans really out possessed the English in the first half, and despite their early lapse looked every bit the equal to England for the majority of the game.
England obviously has substantially more offensive talent, but im telling you, their defense is terrible and i feel quite confident in saying that if England were not called England, the American's might very well have won that game. And by that i mean the English (and Euro teams in general) still intimidate the US... something we need to get over very quickly.
Maybe the preconception being challenged in that game Holz was that of the English. Who, as usual, hyped them selves up massively only to show that they are only marginally better than everyone's favorite whipping boy, the Americans.
Beyond that... Germany did look amazing and will probably whip the crap out of which ever team they face next, the US or England, who after 1 game look pretty comparable.
other notes... I really like South Korea... they look really strong, and super confident... Granted the Greeks looked terrible, but this is the world cup, and its hard to embarrass even the worst of WC qualifiers.
I guess I got a bad taste of ESPN soccer anyalysis from their afternoon sport shows (i.e. PTI, Around the Horn). You're right, the gametime announcers are fine, though I'm not sure they are actual ESPN guys.
I wasn't trying to be backhanded, I play the sport and continue to do so in league play to this day. And contrary to the real Thom Yorke, I support the Yanks! USA!
Yeah, Thom, those guys have no idea what so ever... in general, its true... you cant trust a Boomer aged american about soccer...
Sorry to snap at you a bit, but as a lover of the game whos played since i could walk and also happens to be american, i get tired of people downplaying american's ability to play and understand the game...
Oh, and on the announcers, I think ESPN brought in some outside people because they knew that there would be a much bigger audience than normal for soccer. Smart of them, in my opinion. Tommy Smyth has done many games before. I know he did a lot of the US games in previous World Cups.
Plus the fact that there are three games a day, they need lots of crews to cycle through to do all the games.
Thus far it hasn't been the most exiting worldcup, yet. Some highlights thus far: the rented Chinese folks acting as North-Koreans during the game agains Brazil; the close-up slowmotion replays during the game; Özil, Marin, Lahm and Podolski. The goal by Honda.
Some lowlights: the Dutch game; the lack of a plethora of great goals; getting kicked out of a bar for breaking someone's Vuvuzela.
Come on..announcers have been picked up mostly from the Premier League. The majority are not Americans and they DO know what they are talking about . This is not 2006 when they had Americans who really had no clue what they were talking or how to commentate (Balboa was HORRIBLE) all because the network was afraid of having an 'english' accent for it's commentators. Big mistake. But..they have made good on that this time, IMO.
Martin Tyler is no lightweight..haha. He is NOT American and he does know what he is talking about. Then throw in Adrian Healey, Derek Rae and Ian Darke. The coverage has been the highlight IMO.
My money is still on Argentina...Messi is going to dominate! :)
Is that story really true? that the North Korean fans are really paid chinese actors? the announcers mentioned that and i dont know if i believe it... though it does sound about the right level of crazyness for them...
my main problem with the US is that i feel as though the coach is always playing for a result, or more correctly playing to try and not lose..and it often backfires..
against brazil up 2-0...he starts bunkering at the beginning of the second half and has jozy as a lone striker..lose 3-2
against england play conservative in the second half..and make your subs at 80 and 90 minutes? it was evident that england could be scored on and that they were struggling at the back..they'd already made all of their subs and two of them VERY early..like before the second half started. so instead of putting in a fresh buddle or gomez for altidore and findley who had done nothing up to that point..you put them in at 80 minutes? a goal scorer needs a few touches..other than gomez apparently...how bout subbing at 60 instead...especially when the other team has already put on fresh legs.
bradley was playing to tie..not going for the jugular. if you want to win that game you sub findley who is inept for one of your two strikers who have been scoring at will in recent international and club play... it's almost like if england didn't play rooney.. of course the US don't have his quality..but what manager doesn't put in the players that have been playing the best...and buddle knows donovan and has been on fire.
fortuneately i don't think slovenia and algeria will beat them..but three points against england could've been a paradigm shift for US soccer...and would almost ensure you don't play germany second round.
Very true, lars, that game was there for the taking, but I just think England still intimidates the US by their very presence (at least on a soccer field).
As far as Germany's brilliance and Italy's mediocrity: Germany usually comes out smoking and evens out as the opponents get tougher...but they did look very impressive, with all the players in synch...and four different players scored.
The Azzurri always start out mediocre or even bad and usually squeak through the first round and then usually gel. That said, I don't think this is their year, I don't feel it like I did four years ago...but we'll see.
Argentina played ok, but I have a feeling they'll get much better too.
Brazil looked a little befuddled in the first half but came around in the second. Beautiful goals, and North Korea's goal wasn't too bad either.
disagree lars. brazil US was a final match. group play is totally different. as a coach, i would much rather play for a safe point than have to duke it out amongst the pointless. you gotta think about the rest of the tournament.
dot.
i understand...
i think in both cases bob played with a lack of aggression...it cost them against brazil. not against england of course... but the point still stands i think.
i want to get at least one point..but i think using subs to press england is a way to secure the point...and using fresh legs as well. i guess my basic thought is that the US doesn't play well when they're not aggressive and attacking...it worked against spain, but not against brazil...and i think it kept them from getting three points against england. when the US doesn't attack they have to rely on their defense, which i think we'd all agree is their biggest weakness.
basically what i'm thinkin is that the US already expects to win against slovenia and algeria...why not go for broke when you see that 3 points are there for the taking against england...which would also cripple england and help you in qualifying.
and i think the US just needs the confidence of knowing it can beat teams like brazil and england instead of settling for the result they expect. they're not going to win this world cup...why not play it a little less than safe for once for the sake of the potential for getting the team some notice and possibly turning on better future athletes to US soccer?
lars - given our history in group play, we shouldn't expect to beat any team. remember in 2006, we finished last and pointless in group play, losing to teams we expected to beat, and that was coming off slightly higher expectations from 2002. likewise, we shouldn't have a big head about the confederations cup. US national soccer needs to crawl before it can walk.
lars, i agree completely with what you are saying. And i feel like its even further enhanced by the fact that our strength is clearly on the offensive side of the ball. Beyond Onyewu, we dont have much defensive talent. We do however have guys like Bocanegra (defense yes, but i always think hes more dangerous jumping into midfield and farther) Donovan, Dempsy and Alitidore who MUST be aggressive in order to be effective.
I also agree that in the group stage its prudent to get your point from england and pick on someone smaller our own size ( or smaller ) in games 2 and 3.
So, Bradley is in a bit of a pickle. Go for broke against england and maybe we win that game, but more likely, we give up a 2nd goal on a counter and come out empty handed.
Either way, i am looking for, hoping for, and expecting the americans to come out on the attack against slovenia friday. We could really use a strong offensive showing. 2-0 or something would make me feel better about our chances moving forward. Because anyone whos seen this version of the American team can clearly see, we will not win many (if any) games playing defensively...
randomized.
italy calls it calcio..does that mean they don't know how to win at soccer or football?
dot.
we played in a far tougher group in 2006. we were unlucky to come out of the group. it was a bogus red against ghana and everyone in the football world knows it. if they win that game they're through. and it's hard to win with ten men... they even tied italy 9 on 10. imo the US gets called based on reputation more than what they're actually doing on the field.
and you're making my point. the US should start walking...a win against england is the first step. and the US got quality results against egypt, spain and even brazil...they should be proud of those results and move forward...the confed cup was crawling...but we now need coaches that coach to our strengths and make us better..not coaches like bradley and arena that coach to expectations or slightly increase expectations...in short we need a foreign coach who has won something abroad.
lletdownl.
my point is that you expect to beat slovenia and algeria...it's possible five points gets it done..but do you want to go into the algeria game having to win? and england's counter is not exactly fast as far as i could tell.
in short i think bradleys substitutions are strange..and i hated that they were so late...if you're going to sub in forwards then you should do it early..if you're playing for the tie you should put in mids or defenders late.
holz.
i'm not sure what US team you're watching or more likely not watching. they play as much through the midfield as any other team...they also have as much or more speed than most teams in their mids and forwards...davies strength until he got hurt was to beat defenders with his speed..same with donovan and beasley when he was better.
and spain shocks noone by playing poorly again in the world cup.. the swiss actually deserved to win 2-0..although spain did hit woodwork..their attack seemed very predictable and their crosses were not at all dangerous.
also to further the point... when you score like the US did you know that the keeper is shaken...his hands looked fairly weak all game..even the altidore shot was somewhat mishandled. why not put in your forward subs at 60 minutes (as spain did today) and try and force him to make a few more saves... i realize that england could then counter...but i'm saying you sub forward for forward..so not much has really changed.. you're just putting in a better forward, buddle, for one that did nothing all game...and maybe even gomez for altidore since altidore is injured and probably not able to go 100%.
agreed lars.... and also agreed on the US style of play... they have very clearly become a possession style team since bradly took over. There is very little kick and run anymore... as a matter of fact, with our speed up top, we could have done with a bit more of that especially in the england game.
congrats to switzerland! its the chip on my shoulder talking, but god do i love to see pompous european teams bite it...
also agree with youre substitution assessment... though not as much with everyone trashing findley... i still feel like his speed is a real weapon if hes allowed to use it.
But his pairing with Altidore doesnt make a lot of sense to me... i would much prefer him with a holding forward type... someone who can play with his back to goal a bit more and come back to spring breaks from midfield. Altidore is not that guy...
Why are you guys underestimating Slovenia so much? they beat teams like Czech Republic, Poland and Russia in the qualifications...
To lesser extent, the same goes for Algeria: they reached the semi-finals of the Africa Cup earlier this year... Granted, the Africa Cup wasn't the best tournament ever, but they are still a side to recon with.
lletdownl
i was at a bar watching spain v switzerland..and boy did it make me happy to watch them losing...my friend is a huge fan of spain and was complaining that the swiss were bunkering and that spain had a ton of chances...but for the most part i felt like they forced spain to do what they wanted...play wide and cross...and spain isn't winning many head balls against the swiss. it was hard not to laugh or smile seeing a spanish fan (man) outside crying...cmon..you have costa rica and honduras in your group..your world cup is not over, but maybe he realizes that spain aren't going to walk through this thing just because they won the euro two years ago.
i know what they're going for...findley=davies, but his touch to me is not good...and buddle has been playing lights out and with a ton of confidence. i'd love to see him get a shot against slovenia...i think findley's speed could be even more effective as a sub...no?
altidore played more of a holding forward with Hull i believe...he is physical and is capable of at least winning the ball..maybe not holding it so much..but he does pass fairly decently. i just don't quite understand why he's almost going 90 on a bum ankle.
i feel like bradley keeps our team from improving in a way...especially young players...or at least those that aren't his son. (i do like bradley jr)...but why can't adu or torres find the field? these are the first creative players the US has had other than dempsey in years...they pass well, dribble well and in general hold the ball well...is torres not better than clark? i understand adu is a disappointment..but how many times has he had the chance to prove himself on a big stage?
- it was the other reason i wanted to see the US beat England... just to shut up all the smug English fans who have never seen the English perform all that well in the WC looking down their noses at the US and telling me that England would surely win 3-1 and that Slovenia is better as well.
Argentina wins this world cup...Im only bringing it up because no one has brought it up so far.
Interesting the talking point is the US...the US seems like a non-issue to me.
The US never scores a normal goal and its kind of sad. But I suppose they all count.
"never scores a normal goal and it's kind of sad"... you're not watching the US either...and the only thing that's sad is that you think that's analysis of any kind and that you're a football fan. the US may not score the prettiest goals in the world, but they definitely score very normal goals.
noone is claiming the US are going to win..we're just talking about the home side and tactics.
I am watching the US.
Confederation Cup..through qualifiying..now...the past two world-cups...they score rebound goals. Play off counter-attacks..boring long ball, hopeful soccer...and I'll go easy with all the negative adjectives I feel like using.
Im very much a football fan. I just had the privilege to grow up playing in a place that respected the game and had fun playing it - any other way is just laborious to watch.
now we're talking.
Yeah I understand the US talk...I suppose I just needed an avenue to talk about something else.
1-0 was not impressive. However their goalie had the game of his life..while Higuain did not. And messi had two that shoulda been. He was finally given freedom to roam like he has at barcelona...thats a promising avenue.
and enough shiv-talking on the US. We just want to be taken seriously and are sensitive to the lack of respect we get. There is no arrogance or entitlement involved... just americans who love soccer and want to see their team improve and be counted among the better teams in the world.
what makes football boring is how fans from other 'respectable' nations can't offer any kind of compliment to the US for their improvement... fans from other nations are just as ignorant and stuck in their opinions about US soccer as the typical US american football fan (that think soccer is a sissy sport) they make fun of. the US def don't play long ball soccer nearly as much anymore so i don't know what you're watching. donovan's goal against brazil was nice, so was altidore's against spain... you did say 'never' right? saying they only score rebound goals is just dumb...there's no absolutes about the US' goals... and of course they're goin to play counterattack soccer against strong sides...like spain or brazil or england...they don't have the players yet to fully hold the ball and play possession comparatively.
"Im very much a football fan. I just had the privilege to grow up playing in a place that respected the game and had fun playing it - any other way is just laborious to watch. "
so you grew up in england i'm guessing.
i grew up in the US and i respect the game and still have fun playing it and i know a ton of americans who feel the same way .. the US is going to be very good at soccer in a few cycles...most of our teams play in europe at this point and it's a matter of time before we'll be placing players on top sides. but you'll probably disagree
i am also in agreement that messi is a joy to watch...and that he was unlucky to not score three goals..i just think there are stronger more organized sides in the tourney..but we'll see.
If the US has shown one thing in the past three WCs is that they can score beautiful goals. In Korea/Japan they were a joy to watch...and they weren't that bad against England this time, although I think they can improve.
Argentina didn't show me that they're the top team in their opener, but I think they will come together in the next few games. Beckenbauer was quoted as saying that the worst mistake Argentina made was to put Maradona as coach.....remains to be seen.
As it stands now, I'm thinking Germany, but it's too early to really say.
After watching all the teams played once, my favorite is Germany. But this means very little after one good match and winning against not very well organized team.
Spain played well, better than Switzerland. But you can only predict so far in this game. The way Gokhan Inler and Eren Derdiyok played, Swiss should allow few minarettes.;.)
Its not the first time ive seen them, i caught a couple conembol qualifiers...
I know everyone is raving about their style of play, and i know they played a not so great team. But what an entertaining team. I will be making a point to watch them play as often as possible from here on out... that guy sanchez is a really impressive talent. passes 'the eye test' in seconds...
I suppose I will give the US the respect you are seeking when they improve. I honestly really dont see improvement if my lifetime...which may be shorter than yours. They are decent and make the tournament...or the last 12 years or so, consistently ( the teams they play to qualify are pretty weak comparatively, lets be honest)
I did say 'never', and you took me literally and gave me two examples. So I guess you won that argument. I'll be more careful next time.
Im not a maradona fan so I get beckenbauer's point. Actually I really, really dislike the guy...but if messi gets to do what he wants I cant complain too much. I would have like zanetti on the team but I cant have everything.
And no...I grew up in Argentina...explaining my bias.
2010 world cup
for those interested in following the world cup this summer... an aggregate thread for thoughts, summaries, predictions.
previous archinect threads:
Can Yanks handdle the Brits? decidedely YES!
US soccer uniform: why designed like that?
Vu Vu Zela - To love or not to love?
inhabitat write up on the 2010 stadia
arch daily's world cup stadia roud-up
holz doesn't have cable, so when we're not at the bars, we've been watching the games on univision.com - the announcers are lively and significantly more credible than alexi lalas.
highlights thus far:
germany's thumping of australia
UK's meltdown against the US
paraguay nearly defeating le azzurri
ivory coast battling powerhouse portugal to a draw
the rest of round 1 seems a little weak, with the exception of france - mexico this thursday, and portugal-brazil on the 25th.
holz's prediction:
brazil-germany, germany for the cup, klose to get the golden boot.
hopefully this year's final won't see as much diving as the 2006 final or the 2008 10m Platform Synchronized.
and remember, say no to racism, kids...
this is turning into a great summer to be out of work: hockey finals, NBA finals, giro d'italia, world cup and then the tour de france.
Why we are muting the world cup:
1)ESPN announcers talking about soccer is like listening to architects talk about asian culture books.
2)those durn hornzzzzz
wow a celebrity 'nect poster! Thom, youre my hero... for realz yo...
i have no idea what you're talking about though in regards to the announcers. The espn announcers during game time are pretty decent IMO, though decidedly american in their announcing style. By which I mean they talk more than English announcers might.
Saying they don't understand the game is just silly... Quite frankly, I am sick of the backhanded Americans don't understand soccer shiv... there are a great number of us who do understand it, and have been playing our whole lives.
As for the UK's apparent "meltdown"...
I am not dumb enough to ask internationals to respect what is a very, very solid American side. Yes, the British keeper made a massive mistake. But he also made a spectacular save on what was likely the BEST scoring chance in the 2nd half. Jozy Alitdore's scoring chance that is.
Secondly, the Americans really out possessed the English in the first half, and despite their early lapse looked every bit the equal to England for the majority of the game.
England obviously has substantially more offensive talent, but im telling you, their defense is terrible and i feel quite confident in saying that if England were not called England, the American's might very well have won that game. And by that i mean the English (and Euro teams in general) still intimidate the US... something we need to get over very quickly.
Maybe the preconception being challenged in that game Holz was that of the English. Who, as usual, hyped them selves up massively only to show that they are only marginally better than everyone's favorite whipping boy, the Americans.
Beyond that... Germany did look amazing and will probably whip the crap out of which ever team they face next, the US or England, who after 1 game look pretty comparable.
other notes... I really like South Korea... they look really strong, and super confident... Granted the Greeks looked terrible, but this is the world cup, and its hard to embarrass even the worst of WC qualifiers.
Rant Over
Go USA!
ESPN Has an Irish Announcer today!
Thanks lletdownl,
always nice to meet a fan! haha
I guess I got a bad taste of ESPN soccer anyalysis from their afternoon sport shows (i.e. PTI, Around the Horn). You're right, the gametime announcers are fine, though I'm not sure they are actual ESPN guys.
I wasn't trying to be backhanded, I play the sport and continue to do so in league play to this day. And contrary to the real Thom Yorke, I support the Yanks! USA!
Yeah, Thom, those guys have no idea what so ever... in general, its true... you cant trust a Boomer aged american about soccer...
Sorry to snap at you a bit, but as a lover of the game whos played since i could walk and also happens to be american, i get tired of people downplaying american's ability to play and understand the game...
I think the US side has the potential to surprise many people. I'm pretty excited about our chances.
What's up with no one being able to score?? Glad it's not just my Sounders who suffer from this.
Oh, and on the announcers, I think ESPN brought in some outside people because they knew that there would be a much bigger audience than normal for soccer. Smart of them, in my opinion. Tommy Smyth has done many games before. I know he did a lot of the US games in previous World Cups.
Plus the fact that there are three games a day, they need lots of crews to cycle through to do all the games.
Thus far it hasn't been the most exiting worldcup, yet. Some highlights thus far: the rented Chinese folks acting as North-Koreans during the game agains Brazil; the close-up slowmotion replays during the game; Özil, Marin, Lahm and Podolski. The goal by Honda.
Some lowlights: the Dutch game; the lack of a plethora of great goals; getting kicked out of a bar for breaking someone's Vuvuzela.
Oh, adding to the highlights: the goal Maicon just scored...
yo thom when ya gonna drop lp8 on us?
When you bloody americans clean up your oil spill!
...wait, i guess that ones on the british. in that case, our next album will also be free to america.
ouch, that was embarrassing...
Come on..announcers have been picked up mostly from the Premier League. The majority are not Americans and they DO know what they are talking about . This is not 2006 when they had Americans who really had no clue what they were talking or how to commentate (Balboa was HORRIBLE) all because the network was afraid of having an 'english' accent for it's commentators. Big mistake. But..they have made good on that this time, IMO.
Martin Tyler is no lightweight..haha. He is NOT American and he does know what he is talking about. Then throw in Adrian Healey, Derek Rae and Ian Darke. The coverage has been the highlight IMO.
My money is still on Argentina...Messi is going to dominate! :)
Is that story really true? that the North Korean fans are really paid chinese actors? the announcers mentioned that and i dont know if i believe it... though it does sound about the right level of crazyness for them...
it might be, probably can't leave north korea due to defection issues...
that stadium image reminds me of a james turrell skyspace [/off topic]
the celestial, pantheon-ized eye of god now stares upon the futbol in great judgment and vengeful wrath.
my main problem with the US is that i feel as though the coach is always playing for a result, or more correctly playing to try and not lose..and it often backfires..
against brazil up 2-0...he starts bunkering at the beginning of the second half and has jozy as a lone striker..lose 3-2
against england play conservative in the second half..and make your subs at 80 and 90 minutes? it was evident that england could be scored on and that they were struggling at the back..they'd already made all of their subs and two of them VERY early..like before the second half started. so instead of putting in a fresh buddle or gomez for altidore and findley who had done nothing up to that point..you put them in at 80 minutes? a goal scorer needs a few touches..other than gomez apparently...how bout subbing at 60 instead...especially when the other team has already put on fresh legs.
bradley was playing to tie..not going for the jugular. if you want to win that game you sub findley who is inept for one of your two strikers who have been scoring at will in recent international and club play... it's almost like if england didn't play rooney.. of course the US don't have his quality..but what manager doesn't put in the players that have been playing the best...and buddle knows donovan and has been on fire.
fortuneately i don't think slovenia and algeria will beat them..but three points against england could've been a paradigm shift for US soccer...and would almost ensure you don't play germany second round.
Very true, lars, that game was there for the taking, but I just think England still intimidates the US by their very presence (at least on a soccer field).
As far as Germany's brilliance and Italy's mediocrity: Germany usually comes out smoking and evens out as the opponents get tougher...but they did look very impressive, with all the players in synch...and four different players scored.
The Azzurri always start out mediocre or even bad and usually squeak through the first round and then usually gel. That said, I don't think this is their year, I don't feel it like I did four years ago...but we'll see.
Argentina played ok, but I have a feeling they'll get much better too.
Brazil looked a little befuddled in the first half but came around in the second. Beautiful goals, and North Korea's goal wasn't too bad either.
We still haven't seen Spain...
disagree lars. brazil US was a final match. group play is totally different. as a coach, i would much rather play for a safe point than have to duke it out amongst the pointless. you gotta think about the rest of the tournament.
oooh spain... spain will dismantle switzerland. le suisses have some good tennis players, but their soccer team is le awful.
do they get an automatic berth cos FIFA headquarters is in CH?
replace those annoying horns with Crazy Train and Welcome To The Jungle!!!!!!
dot.
i understand...
i think in both cases bob played with a lack of aggression...it cost them against brazil. not against england of course... but the point still stands i think.
i want to get at least one point..but i think using subs to press england is a way to secure the point...and using fresh legs as well. i guess my basic thought is that the US doesn't play well when they're not aggressive and attacking...it worked against spain, but not against brazil...and i think it kept them from getting three points against england. when the US doesn't attack they have to rely on their defense, which i think we'd all agree is their biggest weakness.
basically what i'm thinkin is that the US already expects to win against slovenia and algeria...why not go for broke when you see that 3 points are there for the taking against england...which would also cripple england and help you in qualifying.
and i think the US just needs the confidence of knowing it can beat teams like brazil and england instead of settling for the result they expect. they're not going to win this world cup...why not play it a little less than safe for once for the sake of the potential for getting the team some notice and possibly turning on better future athletes to US soccer?
US will only win the worldcup when you guys start calling the game football, as it should be. :-)
lars - given our history in group play, we shouldn't expect to beat any team. remember in 2006, we finished last and pointless in group play, losing to teams we expected to beat, and that was coming off slightly higher expectations from 2002. likewise, we shouldn't have a big head about the confederations cup. US national soccer needs to crawl before it can walk.
lars, i agree completely with what you are saying. And i feel like its even further enhanced by the fact that our strength is clearly on the offensive side of the ball. Beyond Onyewu, we dont have much defensive talent. We do however have guys like Bocanegra (defense yes, but i always think hes more dangerous jumping into midfield and farther) Donovan, Dempsy and Alitidore who MUST be aggressive in order to be effective.
I also agree that in the group stage its prudent to get your point from england and pick on someone smaller our own size ( or smaller ) in games 2 and 3.
So, Bradley is in a bit of a pickle. Go for broke against england and maybe we win that game, but more likely, we give up a 2nd goal on a counter and come out empty handed.
Either way, i am looking for, hoping for, and expecting the americans to come out on the attack against slovenia friday. We could really use a strong offensive showing. 2-0 or something would make me feel better about our chances moving forward. Because anyone whos seen this version of the American team can clearly see, we will not win many (if any) games playing defensively...
US will only win if they stop playing kick and chase. it is really annoying...
ok, I guess we've seen Spain now...wow, didn't expect them to be at the bottom of the group. Hats off to the Swiss.
oh, and way to go switzerland...
randomized.
italy calls it calcio..does that mean they don't know how to win at soccer or football?
dot.
we played in a far tougher group in 2006. we were unlucky to come out of the group. it was a bogus red against ghana and everyone in the football world knows it. if they win that game they're through. and it's hard to win with ten men... they even tied italy 9 on 10. imo the US gets called based on reputation more than what they're actually doing on the field.
and you're making my point. the US should start walking...a win against england is the first step. and the US got quality results against egypt, spain and even brazil...they should be proud of those results and move forward...the confed cup was crawling...but we now need coaches that coach to our strengths and make us better..not coaches like bradley and arena that coach to expectations or slightly increase expectations...in short we need a foreign coach who has won something abroad.
lletdownl.
my point is that you expect to beat slovenia and algeria...it's possible five points gets it done..but do you want to go into the algeria game having to win? and england's counter is not exactly fast as far as i could tell.
in short i think bradleys substitutions are strange..and i hated that they were so late...if you're going to sub in forwards then you should do it early..if you're playing for the tie you should put in mids or defenders late.
holz.
i'm not sure what US team you're watching or more likely not watching. they play as much through the midfield as any other team...they also have as much or more speed than most teams in their mids and forwards...davies strength until he got hurt was to beat defenders with his speed..same with donovan and beasley when he was better.
and spain shocks noone by playing poorly again in the world cup.. the swiss actually deserved to win 2-0..although spain did hit woodwork..their attack seemed very predictable and their crosses were not at all dangerous.
also to further the point... when you score like the US did you know that the keeper is shaken...his hands looked fairly weak all game..even the altidore shot was somewhat mishandled. why not put in your forward subs at 60 minutes (as spain did today) and try and force him to make a few more saves... i realize that england could then counter...but i'm saying you sub forward for forward..so not much has really changed.. you're just putting in a better forward, buddle, for one that did nothing all game...and maybe even gomez for altidore since altidore is injured and probably not able to go 100%.
agreed lars.... and also agreed on the US style of play... they have very clearly become a possession style team since bradly took over. There is very little kick and run anymore... as a matter of fact, with our speed up top, we could have done with a bit more of that especially in the england game.
congrats to switzerland! its the chip on my shoulder talking, but god do i love to see pompous european teams bite it...
also agree with youre substitution assessment... though not as much with everyone trashing findley... i still feel like his speed is a real weapon if hes allowed to use it.
But his pairing with Altidore doesnt make a lot of sense to me... i would much prefer him with a holding forward type... someone who can play with his back to goal a bit more and come back to spring breaks from midfield. Altidore is not that guy...
Why are you guys underestimating Slovenia so much? they beat teams like Czech Republic, Poland and Russia in the qualifications...
To lesser extent, the same goes for Algeria: they reached the semi-finals of the Africa Cup earlier this year... Granted, the Africa Cup wasn't the best tournament ever, but they are still a side to recon with.
Both teams aren't easy walk-overs for the USA...
lletdownl
i was at a bar watching spain v switzerland..and boy did it make me happy to watch them losing...my friend is a huge fan of spain and was complaining that the swiss were bunkering and that spain had a ton of chances...but for the most part i felt like they forced spain to do what they wanted...play wide and cross...and spain isn't winning many head balls against the swiss. it was hard not to laugh or smile seeing a spanish fan (man) outside crying...cmon..you have costa rica and honduras in your group..your world cup is not over, but maybe he realizes that spain aren't going to walk through this thing just because they won the euro two years ago.
i know what they're going for...findley=davies, but his touch to me is not good...and buddle has been playing lights out and with a ton of confidence. i'd love to see him get a shot against slovenia...i think findley's speed could be even more effective as a sub...no?
altidore played more of a holding forward with Hull i believe...he is physical and is capable of at least winning the ball..maybe not holding it so much..but he does pass fairly decently. i just don't quite understand why he's almost going 90 on a bum ankle.
i feel like bradley keeps our team from improving in a way...especially young players...or at least those that aren't his son. (i do like bradley jr)...but why can't adu or torres find the field? these are the first creative players the US has had other than dempsey in years...they pass well, dribble well and in general hold the ball well...is torres not better than clark? i understand adu is a disappointment..but how many times has he had the chance to prove himself on a big stage?
- it was the other reason i wanted to see the US beat England... just to shut up all the smug English fans who have never seen the English perform all that well in the WC looking down their noses at the US and telling me that England would surely win 3-1 and that Slovenia is better as well.
Argentina wins this world cup...Im only bringing it up because no one has brought it up so far.
Interesting the talking point is the US...the US seems like a non-issue to me.
The US never scores a normal goal and its kind of sad. But I suppose they all count.
"never scores a normal goal and it's kind of sad"... you're not watching the US either...and the only thing that's sad is that you think that's analysis of any kind and that you're a football fan. the US may not score the prettiest goals in the world, but they definitely score very normal goals.
noone is claiming the US are going to win..we're just talking about the home side and tactics.
Argentina aren't winning this thing either.
I am watching the US.
Confederation Cup..through qualifiying..now...the past two world-cups...they score rebound goals. Play off counter-attacks..boring long ball, hopeful soccer...and I'll go easy with all the negative adjectives I feel like using.
Im very much a football fan. I just had the privilege to grow up playing in a place that respected the game and had fun playing it - any other way is just laborious to watch.
cheers
lots of americans on this forum... thats probably why the US is being discussed so much.
I like argentina a lot... they look to me like they are, individually, one of the most talented teams in the tourn... maybe the most...
1-0 though was not impressive... messi looked incredible...
get the rest of that team going and ill buy them winning the whole thing. I doubt anyone will argue they dont have the talent to do it.
now we're talking.
Yeah I understand the US talk...I suppose I just needed an avenue to talk about something else.
1-0 was not impressive. However their goalie had the game of his life..while Higuain did not. And messi had two that shoulda been. He was finally given freedom to roam like he has at barcelona...thats a promising avenue.
and enough shiv-talking on the US. We just want to be taken seriously and are sensitive to the lack of respect we get. There is no arrogance or entitlement involved... just americans who love soccer and want to see their team improve and be counted among the better teams in the world.
i'll agree to disagree
what makes football boring is how fans from other 'respectable' nations can't offer any kind of compliment to the US for their improvement... fans from other nations are just as ignorant and stuck in their opinions about US soccer as the typical US american football fan (that think soccer is a sissy sport) they make fun of. the US def don't play long ball soccer nearly as much anymore so i don't know what you're watching. donovan's goal against brazil was nice, so was altidore's against spain... you did say 'never' right? saying they only score rebound goals is just dumb...there's no absolutes about the US' goals... and of course they're goin to play counterattack soccer against strong sides...like spain or brazil or england...they don't have the players yet to fully hold the ball and play possession comparatively.
"Im very much a football fan. I just had the privilege to grow up playing in a place that respected the game and had fun playing it - any other way is just laborious to watch. "
so you grew up in england i'm guessing.
i grew up in the US and i respect the game and still have fun playing it and i know a ton of americans who feel the same way .. the US is going to be very good at soccer in a few cycles...most of our teams play in europe at this point and it's a matter of time before we'll be placing players on top sides. but you'll probably disagree
i am also in agreement that messi is a joy to watch...and that he was unlucky to not score three goals..i just think there are stronger more organized sides in the tourney..but we'll see.
If the US has shown one thing in the past three WCs is that they can score beautiful goals. In Korea/Japan they were a joy to watch...and they weren't that bad against England this time, although I think they can improve.
Argentina didn't show me that they're the top team in their opener, but I think they will come together in the next few games. Beckenbauer was quoted as saying that the worst mistake Argentina made was to put Maradona as coach.....remains to be seen.
As it stands now, I'm thinking Germany, but it's too early to really say.
After watching all the teams played once, my favorite is Germany. But this means very little after one good match and winning against not very well organized team.
Spain played well, better than Switzerland. But you can only predict so far in this game. The way Gokhan Inler and Eren Derdiyok played, Swiss should allow few minarettes.;.)
HA! good one Orhan...
Who watched chile play this morning?
Its not the first time ive seen them, i caught a couple conembol qualifiers...
I know everyone is raving about their style of play, and i know they played a not so great team. But what an entertaining team. I will be making a point to watch them play as often as possible from here on out... that guy sanchez is a really impressive talent. passes 'the eye test' in seconds...
I suppose I will give the US the respect you are seeking when they improve. I honestly really dont see improvement if my lifetime...which may be shorter than yours. They are decent and make the tournament...or the last 12 years or so, consistently ( the teams they play to qualify are pretty weak comparatively, lets be honest)
I did say 'never', and you took me literally and gave me two examples. So I guess you won that argument. I'll be more careful next time.
Im not a maradona fan so I get beckenbauer's point. Actually I really, really dislike the guy...but if messi gets to do what he wants I cant complain too much. I would have like zanetti on the team but I cant have everything.
And no...I grew up in Argentina...explaining my bias.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.