Contrary to what many of you may have been expected, the North Korean team, fresh off their embarrassing World Cup, is home safe and sound. The team has not been physically punished -- at least not yet -- but they were punished nonetheless.
As this report finds, the Red Mosquitoes were subject to a six-hour session of ridicule and abuse, or as the Guardian says eloquently, an excoriation, from the media, sports students, and the sports minister. Their failure reflects poorly upon Dear Leader's son and dictator-in-waiting, Kim Jong-un. They go so far as calling the team's actions a betrayal. I guess they should be relieved they haven't been sent to any gulags, though rumor has it that coach Kim Jung-hun may be sent to work at a building site. He may have to watch out for "falling" bricks or anvils or pianos (if they even have them in North Korea).
(By the way, what kind of nickname is Red Mosquitoes?? Hi, we're an annoying, malarial insect... even the USA's "Yanks" -- among the worst nicknames at the Cup -- is better than that. No wonder you suck -- your efforts at inspiration only bring to mind an easily swatted nuisance.)
Showing posts with label 2010 World Cup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2010 World Cup. Show all posts
Friday, July 30, 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Beautiful Reading on the Beautiful Game
Thanks to my friend for passing on the following links, which I'll gratefully pass on for anyone else to check up on. Here's an article from Slate on why we should root against the Dutch, a Vanity Fair piece by David Winner (he of the fantastic book Brilliant Orange) on the changing Dutch and German rivalry, and a really interesting blog post, a little older, on Barcelona and the Idea of the Beautiful Game.
It's always a pleasure to read good writing, and good writing on football is an even greater pleasure (makes me realize I'm not so good of a writer, at least not when I'm just posting randomly here and don't have much time to really compose something worthwhile).
The Barca piece was particularly interesting but I'd argue it wasn't entirely accurate in describing Madrid as existing solely to win without regard to aesthetics. Clearly Real doesn't try to sustain a moral idealism through their style like Barca, and they truly do exist to win more than anything else. But my friend who is a lifelong die-hard madridista would argue that there is a constant tension between that desire to win and the desire to do so beautifully, and it's a much greater aspect of the Real Madrid psyche than the article wants to give credit. It's the reason Capello was constantly pilloried for his pragmatism and was fired despite winning La Liga, while the madridistas looked longingly upon the previously unsuccessful galactico era simply because they played more adventurous football.
As for the Slate article arguing that we should root against the Dutch, well beside the fact that I'll be rooting for Spain because they attack better, don't have dirty midfielders, and I have Spanish blood, I sort of do think that there's something endearing about the image of the Dutch as the "almost" team, the purveyors of skillful football that can't quite win the big one. A loss by this team, even if they are far removed from the long deceased total football, would keep up the image of the Netherlands as everyone's favorite team that hasn't won the World Cup and would add another layer on top of the already complicated interrelationship between the Dutch philosophies regarding football, the desire to win and win beautifully, and the growing recognition of the benefits of pragmatism and the desire to simply win for all the lost opportunities of the great Dutch teams of yore (thereby also alleviating those past national traumas from the collective psyche). Not to mention the psychological intrigue that would result from losing to what is probably the closest relative to the total football ethos (as the article correctly notes, this Spanish team's style is largely based on Barca's style, and that style is largely the offspring of it's one-time star and ex-coach, Cryuff).
On an somewhat tangential note, it'd be nice if people would stop overplaying the angle of the Spanish as being historical underachievers. Yes the Dutch teams underachieved in the past. But Spain? The reputation of Spanish football is largely built on the reputations of its great domestic clubs, and those clubs built their reputations on foreigners from Puskas and di Stéfano (he's Argentine, let's not consider him Spanish please) to Zidane and Messi. Sure the Spanish have had good teams in the past that underachieved relatively, but as far as I can remember, and I've never really read otherwise, Spain has never come into a tournament as big favorites.
This version of la furia roja are favorites however and I expect them to keep up that artistic tiki-taka and win one for the lifelong lovers of the beautiful game and newcomers alike. You know there is something great about them because even the people who don't follow soccer and are just caught up in the spectacle of the World Cup appreciate Spain because they really do manage to create sudden coherence and eloquence out of chaos.
Need further reasons to cheer for Spain. I give you... paella and sangria v. Gouda and Heineken (does anyone who's not from the Netherlands even know a Dutch dish?). The defense rests.
It's always a pleasure to read good writing, and good writing on football is an even greater pleasure (makes me realize I'm not so good of a writer, at least not when I'm just posting randomly here and don't have much time to really compose something worthwhile).
The Barca piece was particularly interesting but I'd argue it wasn't entirely accurate in describing Madrid as existing solely to win without regard to aesthetics. Clearly Real doesn't try to sustain a moral idealism through their style like Barca, and they truly do exist to win more than anything else. But my friend who is a lifelong die-hard madridista would argue that there is a constant tension between that desire to win and the desire to do so beautifully, and it's a much greater aspect of the Real Madrid psyche than the article wants to give credit. It's the reason Capello was constantly pilloried for his pragmatism and was fired despite winning La Liga, while the madridistas looked longingly upon the previously unsuccessful galactico era simply because they played more adventurous football.
As for the Slate article arguing that we should root against the Dutch, well beside the fact that I'll be rooting for Spain because they attack better, don't have dirty midfielders, and I have Spanish blood, I sort of do think that there's something endearing about the image of the Dutch as the "almost" team, the purveyors of skillful football that can't quite win the big one. A loss by this team, even if they are far removed from the long deceased total football, would keep up the image of the Netherlands as everyone's favorite team that hasn't won the World Cup and would add another layer on top of the already complicated interrelationship between the Dutch philosophies regarding football, the desire to win and win beautifully, and the growing recognition of the benefits of pragmatism and the desire to simply win for all the lost opportunities of the great Dutch teams of yore (thereby also alleviating those past national traumas from the collective psyche). Not to mention the psychological intrigue that would result from losing to what is probably the closest relative to the total football ethos (as the article correctly notes, this Spanish team's style is largely based on Barca's style, and that style is largely the offspring of it's one-time star and ex-coach, Cryuff).
On an somewhat tangential note, it'd be nice if people would stop overplaying the angle of the Spanish as being historical underachievers. Yes the Dutch teams underachieved in the past. But Spain? The reputation of Spanish football is largely built on the reputations of its great domestic clubs, and those clubs built their reputations on foreigners from Puskas and di Stéfano (he's Argentine, let's not consider him Spanish please) to Zidane and Messi. Sure the Spanish have had good teams in the past that underachieved relatively, but as far as I can remember, and I've never really read otherwise, Spain has never come into a tournament as big favorites.
This version of la furia roja are favorites however and I expect them to keep up that artistic tiki-taka and win one for the lifelong lovers of the beautiful game and newcomers alike. You know there is something great about them because even the people who don't follow soccer and are just caught up in the spectacle of the World Cup appreciate Spain because they really do manage to create sudden coherence and eloquence out of chaos.
Need further reasons to cheer for Spain. I give you... paella and sangria v. Gouda and Heineken (does anyone who's not from the Netherlands even know a Dutch dish?). The defense rests.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
The Oranje v. La Furia Roja
While most people heading into the tournament were dreaming of a Brazil-Spain final, I think most neutrals would happily settle for the Dutch and Spanish - probably the two teams most stylish teams, the two most committed to playing attacking football (along with Argentina and Chile).
Let it be known that I predicted this final before the tournament in my bracket, which I ultimately never paid the $20 for my friend's pool, so I get nothing from it other than the satisfaction. Of course, also let it be known that I foresaw the very week part of the bracket that led to Uruguay's place in the final four, but mistakenly bought into the notion that the combined forces of Fabio Capello and Wayne Rooney would lead England to first in group C and therefore the easy path that quarter of the bracket contained. Still upsetting to think that could have been the US.
I grew to enjoy watching the new version of the German team, one of the few teams going out to demoralize their opponents by getting multiple closing goals. However, they were just no match for Spain, particularly with Ozil not influential enough and Mueller suspended. Spain are rightly through and I'm very aroused by the final matchup (it's the smell of desire m'lady).
You have the feeling Spain have yet to really hit full tilt, though yesterday was probably their best match so far. Iniesta seems to be becoming more and more influential, Xavi is still Xavi, and Pedro looked very dangerous before producing the worst 2-on-1 in history. The big difference between this Spain team and the 2008 Euro champions is that Torres is out of sorts, so the attack isn't quit as dangerous because they are playing better with Pedro rather than Torres, and Pedro plays more from the midfield than as an out an out lead striker, leaving Villa more isolated. Additionally, Marcos Senna was sensational in 2008, all due respects to Sergio Busquets, and that combined with the greater width and spacing in the midfield with da Silva playing on the wing rather than the deeper lying Xabi Alonso made the attack more adventurous.
Most people saw the great irony in Spain's semifinal winner coming from a thunderous corner kick header rather than the tiki-taka, death by a thousand paper cuts football. But to me the real irony was that the most important goal in Spain's history was scored by Puyol, the embodiment and symbol and captain of Barcelona and Catalonia. For so long Raúl dominated the Spanish team; as the longtime captain of Real Madrid he was a symbol of the capital, Spanish Nationalism and Castille (not to mention Francoism). Spain may be captained by another Real Madrid star (Saint Iker), but the heart of the team lies in the cadre of Barcelona maestros.
No matter who wins on Sunday, I'll be happy -- though not nearly as happy as an actual Spaniard or Dutchman; have you ever seen two countries so joyous at just reaching the final? They deserve to be so elated and I can only hope to feel the same way at some point in my life. Anyway, before the World Cup began I predicted Spain would win and I'm not going to change that pick now.
Let it be known that I predicted this final before the tournament in my bracket, which I ultimately never paid the $20 for my friend's pool, so I get nothing from it other than the satisfaction. Of course, also let it be known that I foresaw the very week part of the bracket that led to Uruguay's place in the final four, but mistakenly bought into the notion that the combined forces of Fabio Capello and Wayne Rooney would lead England to first in group C and therefore the easy path that quarter of the bracket contained. Still upsetting to think that could have been the US.
I grew to enjoy watching the new version of the German team, one of the few teams going out to demoralize their opponents by getting multiple closing goals. However, they were just no match for Spain, particularly with Ozil not influential enough and Mueller suspended. Spain are rightly through and I'm very aroused by the final matchup (it's the smell of desire m'lady).
You have the feeling Spain have yet to really hit full tilt, though yesterday was probably their best match so far. Iniesta seems to be becoming more and more influential, Xavi is still Xavi, and Pedro looked very dangerous before producing the worst 2-on-1 in history. The big difference between this Spain team and the 2008 Euro champions is that Torres is out of sorts, so the attack isn't quit as dangerous because they are playing better with Pedro rather than Torres, and Pedro plays more from the midfield than as an out an out lead striker, leaving Villa more isolated. Additionally, Marcos Senna was sensational in 2008, all due respects to Sergio Busquets, and that combined with the greater width and spacing in the midfield with da Silva playing on the wing rather than the deeper lying Xabi Alonso made the attack more adventurous.
Most people saw the great irony in Spain's semifinal winner coming from a thunderous corner kick header rather than the tiki-taka, death by a thousand paper cuts football. But to me the real irony was that the most important goal in Spain's history was scored by Puyol, the embodiment and symbol and captain of Barcelona and Catalonia. For so long Raúl dominated the Spanish team; as the longtime captain of Real Madrid he was a symbol of the capital, Spanish Nationalism and Castille (not to mention Francoism). Spain may be captained by another Real Madrid star (Saint Iker), but the heart of the team lies in the cadre of Barcelona maestros.
No matter who wins on Sunday, I'll be happy -- though not nearly as happy as an actual Spaniard or Dutchman; have you ever seen two countries so joyous at just reaching the final? They deserve to be so elated and I can only hope to feel the same way at some point in my life. Anyway, before the World Cup began I predicted Spain would win and I'm not going to change that pick now.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
The Dutch Back In the Finals
With today's victory over the Uruguayans, the Netherlands are a step closer to winning their elusive first World Cup title. Awaiting us is a possible classic rematch of the 1974 World Cup final with the Germans or a matchup with Spain that would guarantee a new country will win its first title (not too mention a great matchup of possession oriented attacking teams).
It's hard to root against the Dutch, but I think the best sentiment I've heard is that if the Netherlands wins the title this year it will be the equivalent of Martin Scorsese's "lifetime achievement" best director Oscar win for The Departed. I really really enjoyed the Departed, more than a lot of people, but it clearly wasn't Scorsese's best work and it was an injustice that he hadn't won a statue before.
Well, this isn't remotely the best Dutch team (would it even crack the top 5?), and there still seems to be something about them that is underwhelming. Their defense and Skelkenburg in goal don't exactly inspire tons of confidence, and despite their very good attack they've yet to really seem completely in sync and in a groove for a full 90 minutes. They've played wonderfully at times, but I haven't been truly awed at any point. But maybe that's what's needed to finally reach the summit.
I guess it also doesn't help that I still detest van Persie, van Bommell (and Nigel de Jong, though he was suspended today) continues to hack and foul at will, while Robben writhes in agony at the slightest breath blown his direction. Not to mention Dirk Kuyt is so ugly you almost want to root against him so he'll stop being shown in HD. Oddly enough the player I like the most is Wesley Sneijder, someone who was widely believed to be a rotten apple prior to leading Inter Milan's treble this season and now the Dutch World Cup run.
Couple all the above with Diego Forlan's brilliance -- it was quite amazing that he kept stepping up in the clutch and dragging Uruguay with him, an admiral feat even if you don't like the Uruguayans or if you felt wronged by the Most Infamous/Greatest Red Card in History -- I almost found myself rooting for La Celeste. But the Oranje wouldn't be denied, and neither are we denied one of the superior finals matchups that we've all been rooting for, and that ultimately left me happy with the day's result.
They won't be favorites in the Final, but bravo to the Dutch -- they've deserved all their victories, they brought style to the tournament, and they are worthy finalists.
It's hard to root against the Dutch, but I think the best sentiment I've heard is that if the Netherlands wins the title this year it will be the equivalent of Martin Scorsese's "lifetime achievement" best director Oscar win for The Departed. I really really enjoyed the Departed, more than a lot of people, but it clearly wasn't Scorsese's best work and it was an injustice that he hadn't won a statue before.
Well, this isn't remotely the best Dutch team (would it even crack the top 5?), and there still seems to be something about them that is underwhelming. Their defense and Skelkenburg in goal don't exactly inspire tons of confidence, and despite their very good attack they've yet to really seem completely in sync and in a groove for a full 90 minutes. They've played wonderfully at times, but I haven't been truly awed at any point. But maybe that's what's needed to finally reach the summit.
I guess it also doesn't help that I still detest van Persie, van Bommell (and Nigel de Jong, though he was suspended today) continues to hack and foul at will, while Robben writhes in agony at the slightest breath blown his direction. Not to mention Dirk Kuyt is so ugly you almost want to root against him so he'll stop being shown in HD. Oddly enough the player I like the most is Wesley Sneijder, someone who was widely believed to be a rotten apple prior to leading Inter Milan's treble this season and now the Dutch World Cup run.
Couple all the above with Diego Forlan's brilliance -- it was quite amazing that he kept stepping up in the clutch and dragging Uruguay with him, an admiral feat even if you don't like the Uruguayans or if you felt wronged by the Most Infamous/Greatest Red Card in History -- I almost found myself rooting for La Celeste. But the Oranje wouldn't be denied, and neither are we denied one of the superior finals matchups that we've all been rooting for, and that ultimately left me happy with the day's result.
They won't be favorites in the Final, but bravo to the Dutch -- they've deserved all their victories, they brought style to the tournament, and they are worthy finalists.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Are The Soccer Gods Chortling?
Has there even been an ending to match as happened today? Have many teams in any sport ever last so cruelly?
I was technically a neutral, but really everyone ends up rooting for a team during these matches. Today, I imagine most people were rooting for Ghana, which I'll be perfectly honest in saying I don't understand if you are a USA supporter how you could support Ghana.
People were trying to beat the whole last African team standing theme to death, and while it made for great theater because it seemed that about 83,000 of the 84,000+ inside Soccer City Stadium were cheering for the Black Stars, it was irrelevant to me. Let's face it, Ghana aren't a particularly great team, they cruelly beat the USA (though maybe deserved on the day), and did so by finishing the game with a level of time wasting and injury faking that simply disgusts me.
So I wanted Ghana to receive their just rewards, and maybe the soccer gods are laughing right now. But damn, that is traumatizing. As it is I'm pretty horrified of penalty shootouts and I'm not even English! Players have missed plenty of decisive penalties before, but has it ever happened on the last kick of the game, with the World Cup semis on the line, then seeing your team lose in the subsequent PK shootout, which, by the way, had to be a forgone conclusion after that miss silenced pretty much an entire continent of fans?
It was damn thrilling drama. This World Cup has only had a few great performances (and even calling those great is a stretch), but it sure hasn't been short of the amazing and dramatic. Wow, a perfect encapsulation of why football is beautiful and cruel, inspiring and tragic all at once.
I was technically a neutral, but really everyone ends up rooting for a team during these matches. Today, I imagine most people were rooting for Ghana, which I'll be perfectly honest in saying I don't understand if you are a USA supporter how you could support Ghana.
People were trying to beat the whole last African team standing theme to death, and while it made for great theater because it seemed that about 83,000 of the 84,000+ inside Soccer City Stadium were cheering for the Black Stars, it was irrelevant to me. Let's face it, Ghana aren't a particularly great team, they cruelly beat the USA (though maybe deserved on the day), and did so by finishing the game with a level of time wasting and injury faking that simply disgusts me.
So I wanted Ghana to receive their just rewards, and maybe the soccer gods are laughing right now. But damn, that is traumatizing. As it is I'm pretty horrified of penalty shootouts and I'm not even English! Players have missed plenty of decisive penalties before, but has it ever happened on the last kick of the game, with the World Cup semis on the line, then seeing your team lose in the subsequent PK shootout, which, by the way, had to be a forgone conclusion after that miss silenced pretty much an entire continent of fans?
It was damn thrilling drama. This World Cup has only had a few great performances (and even calling those great is a stretch), but it sure hasn't been short of the amazing and dramatic. Wow, a perfect encapsulation of why football is beautiful and cruel, inspiring and tragic all at once.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
The Nike Ad Curse
Nike's "Write the Future" advertisement was a brilliant campaign, a continuation of the long history of great spots Nike has created for the World Cup. However, this year it seems they may want to re-consider their casting agency.
Let's see:
-Didier Drogba broke his arm before the games even started and Côte d'Ivoire never looked like going through their difficult group.
-Fabio Cannavaro looked like he was already in retirement and hitting up the talk show circuit, a step to slow for every attacker that came his way. Still, Italy probably should have had enough quality to qualify but were completely uninspiring.
-Wayne Rooney barely bothered to even show up. Was he still injured? Probably. At the least he was worn down from carrying Man U on his back all season. Not even Atlas probably beared such a burden. England were less inspiring than Italy, only they managed to get one round further before being humiliated by the Germans (controversial goal or no goal).
-Franck Ribéry... well, the less said about the French the better. Who is that player in the background of the play marking Theo Walcott (who didn't make England's roster)... that's right, Patrice Evra!
-Ronaldinho, as everyone knows and regrets didn't even get a plane ticket to South Africa. At least the Brazilians are still playing though.
-Cristiano Ronaldo was mostly anonymous save for his preening and grimacing after either diving or being fouled but not getting a call in either case, and now Portugal is out thanks to their superior Iberian neighbors. By the way, why does Portugal play such a horrible, defensive system? They actually have good defenders, so they should play creative, attacking football knowing the defense is solid behind them. I blame Carlos Queiroz (who proves that anyone looks like a great coach while assisting Alex Ferguson, but doing it yourself is a different matter... maybe it's leftover stink from his stint with the New York MetroStars).
On the other hand, three teams getting only minor cameos had better fortunes. OK, so the USA lost, but Landon Donovan was the only player of the entire commercial who truly "wrote the future" by scoring the goal against Algeria that so far is still probably the moment of the tournament. But maybe the US disappointment (I'd say failure) in losing still tied to this commercial?
The Spanish players also get a brief cameo (even though the Spanish team itself is sponsored by Adidas, which is why you only see Iniesta, Fàbregas, and Piqué wearing blank warm-ups with no logos) and they are still on course for a potential dream semifinal with Argentina/Germany and final against Brazil. Brazil, as mentioned before, are still in it, and looking pretty much locks to advance to the final, with only one threat in their half of the bracket, the Netherlands... who also happen to have a cameo in the Nike ad! That's them fouling Ronaldo.
The Dutch are impressing most people but honestly, do you think their D will hold up against the Brazilians? And of course they're up to their old tricks again, the Dutch, what with Robin van Persie acting like the spoiled arrogant brat (I'd also call him a certain name that rhymes with witch) that he is -- shocker considering he's coached by Arsène Wenger -- and showing hints of the internal dissension that has derailed so many better Dutch squads in the past. No matter what the Dutch camp says about unity and harmony within the team, don't buy it.
Adidas doesn't have any ad remotely as good right now, but at least they can tout Leo Messi and David Villa, who just keeps on scoring (god, how scary will Barcelona be next season).
It's not quite the Madden Curse or SI Jinx, but funny nonetheless.
Let's see:
-Didier Drogba broke his arm before the games even started and Côte d'Ivoire never looked like going through their difficult group.
-Fabio Cannavaro looked like he was already in retirement and hitting up the talk show circuit, a step to slow for every attacker that came his way. Still, Italy probably should have had enough quality to qualify but were completely uninspiring.
-Wayne Rooney barely bothered to even show up. Was he still injured? Probably. At the least he was worn down from carrying Man U on his back all season. Not even Atlas probably beared such a burden. England were less inspiring than Italy, only they managed to get one round further before being humiliated by the Germans (controversial goal or no goal).
-Franck Ribéry... well, the less said about the French the better. Who is that player in the background of the play marking Theo Walcott (who didn't make England's roster)... that's right, Patrice Evra!
-Ronaldinho, as everyone knows and regrets didn't even get a plane ticket to South Africa. At least the Brazilians are still playing though.
-Cristiano Ronaldo was mostly anonymous save for his preening and grimacing after either diving or being fouled but not getting a call in either case, and now Portugal is out thanks to their superior Iberian neighbors. By the way, why does Portugal play such a horrible, defensive system? They actually have good defenders, so they should play creative, attacking football knowing the defense is solid behind them. I blame Carlos Queiroz (who proves that anyone looks like a great coach while assisting Alex Ferguson, but doing it yourself is a different matter... maybe it's leftover stink from his stint with the New York MetroStars).
On the other hand, three teams getting only minor cameos had better fortunes. OK, so the USA lost, but Landon Donovan was the only player of the entire commercial who truly "wrote the future" by scoring the goal against Algeria that so far is still probably the moment of the tournament. But maybe the US disappointment (I'd say failure) in losing still tied to this commercial?
The Spanish players also get a brief cameo (even though the Spanish team itself is sponsored by Adidas, which is why you only see Iniesta, Fàbregas, and Piqué wearing blank warm-ups with no logos) and they are still on course for a potential dream semifinal with Argentina/Germany and final against Brazil. Brazil, as mentioned before, are still in it, and looking pretty much locks to advance to the final, with only one threat in their half of the bracket, the Netherlands... who also happen to have a cameo in the Nike ad! That's them fouling Ronaldo.
The Dutch are impressing most people but honestly, do you think their D will hold up against the Brazilians? And of course they're up to their old tricks again, the Dutch, what with Robin van Persie acting like the spoiled arrogant brat (I'd also call him a certain name that rhymes with witch) that he is -- shocker considering he's coached by Arsène Wenger -- and showing hints of the internal dissension that has derailed so many better Dutch squads in the past. No matter what the Dutch camp says about unity and harmony within the team, don't buy it.
Adidas doesn't have any ad remotely as good right now, but at least they can tout Leo Messi and David Villa, who just keeps on scoring (god, how scary will Barcelona be next season).
It's not quite the Madden Curse or SI Jinx, but funny nonetheless.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Things Fall Apart
I'm not sure I've ever felt so deflated about an entire tournament as the result of one loss. After all the great moments and excitement from the US the last two weeks, they just laid an egg against an inferior team. It's one thing to lose if we played well and just couldn't get it done, or we lost to a superior team. This time, there's just four years of regrets and what ifs.
First, I finally went ahead and praised Bob Bradley for his moves this World Cup, only for him to inexplicably make the boneheaded decision to start Rico Clark over Mo Edu. You know, because they're interchangeable defensive mids with the exception that Edu is better than Clark in every facet of the game save for long range shooting (not exactly what we should care about our D mid doing).
Clark has tremendous upside potential (thanks Simmons!) because in games where he plays well he can really be a great midfield destroyer. But he also has the worst downside, disappearing from games, being reckless in tackles, and hurting US possession. So despite Edu being the better player and playing very well against Algeria, Bradley went back to his boy Clark, who subsequently had to be embarrassed in front of worldwide millions when his poor play help spot Ghana a goal 5 minutes in and necessitated a wasted first half substitution. It's also pretty clear that Michael Bradley plays better and can advance forward more when Edu is playing alongside/behind him.
Not to put all the blame of Bradley Sr./Clark, Tim Howard played the shot by theGerman Ghanaian, Kevin Prince Boateng, very poorly and getting beat near post when that should never happen on that type of shot. I personally was disappointed with Howard this Cup, despite playing well against England and of course his great outlet pass springing Donovan against Algeria.
I don't know if it was naively thinking they could beat Ghana by just stepping on the field and they were looking ahead to a reasonable passage to a possible semifinals, or they were really just dead from the physical and emotional toll of the Algeria. But they wasted a half and they lacked concentration again in the beginning of the overtime.
The regret is that much greater because let's face it, Ghana is not a good team and they didn't even have their best player. Ghana's decision making was pretty ridiculous. A team that makes that many dumb decisions shouldn't be in the quarterfinals. They also don't even have that much skill, though Gyan did very well on his winning goal (set up as it was by the pure luck of a blind defensive clearance).
Then of Ghana went into among the worst time wasting I've ever seen unrewarded by a single yellow from the ref. It's understandable when teams waste time and exaggerate injuries when fouled, but the Ghanaians acted as if murdered when it was clear that they weren't touch at all. Not light brushed or small touch fouls, I mean absolutely no contact -- pure flopping. I have no love for Uruguay and their ugly style of play -- only marginally redeemed by the fact that it's executed by quality players, in particular that great strike force -- but I will be rooting strongly for Uruguay to beat the Ghanaians.
Lastly, even with all the above, the US still probably still should have put away their chances, only for the lack of a goalscoring striker to come back to haunt them. Gomez and Findley failed to put away their chances this Cup, showing that being on form in the Mexican league and MLS means very little.
If you're world class you're world class (watch Miroslav Klose and Podolski, scoring goals like clockwork for Germany again despite both having a very poor club season), and the US just doesn't have such a player. This is where they missed Charlie Davies, and Jozy Altidore showed how far he still has to go. He too missed his chances, and he constantly reminded why he sometimes gets labeled as lazy and as lacking a soccer brain (so said Martin Keown on the BBC). It's frustrating because despite all that, his talent and physicality still posed problems for defenders and gave the US great chances. He showed why he only scored two goals for Hull this year.
So where does this leave the US for the next World Cup? It's a big question mark. The US needs to start developing strikers. Can Jozy become world class? I hope so. Will Charlie Davies recover sufficiently? With his injuries, I really don't know. Before I would've said he was a better bet to become a great goal scorer than Altidore. Dempsey and Donovan will still be around in four years, but both will have a lot of miles on their legs. They'll still be key players, but need strikers to support them. The midfield will probably be very solid with Edu and Bradley both young, Stuart Holden also young, and I'm sure other midfield options will develop.
The defense is another matter. Based purely on age, we could see a number of the same players, but let's hope not. Spector and Bornstein are young and will be around. Gooch will only be 32, so he too could still be around, but let's see how his knee holds up. He wasn't exactly fast to begin with, so that's a big question mark. Even before this Gooch was too inconsistent and at 28, even for defenders who take a little longer to develop than great attackers, he's running out of time to turn into a world class defender. Boca and Cherundolo -- the USA's best defender this Cup -- will both be 35, too old to realistically be relied on to keep up with the speed and quality at the World Cup (just see how 36 year old Fabio Cannavaro fared with Italy). Similarly, DeMerit will be 34, and he's never really going to be much more than he is now.
With Germany embarrassing England this morning, we're slowly whittling away the weaker teams and setting up for some great matchups down the road. Possible Germany-Argentina and Brazil-Netherlands quarterfinals could be doozies, the semis could see Germany/Argentina against Spain, and the final will most likely have Brazil -- who has an extremely manageable draw on their half of the bracket aside from the potential Netherlands matchup -- against one of Germany/Argentina/Spain. If the trio from that half of the bracket wins this Cup they will have fully earned it. The Ghana match aside, this has been a mostly excellent and redeeming World Cup (including the French flameout, karma at its best), with the only thing missing as yet being a singular defining performance by one of the worlds greats (Messi, Ronaldo, etc.). I can only hope Messi chooses to oblige us against El Tri.
First, I finally went ahead and praised Bob Bradley for his moves this World Cup, only for him to inexplicably make the boneheaded decision to start Rico Clark over Mo Edu. You know, because they're interchangeable defensive mids with the exception that Edu is better than Clark in every facet of the game save for long range shooting (not exactly what we should care about our D mid doing).
Clark has tremendous upside potential (thanks Simmons!) because in games where he plays well he can really be a great midfield destroyer. But he also has the worst downside, disappearing from games, being reckless in tackles, and hurting US possession. So despite Edu being the better player and playing very well against Algeria, Bradley went back to his boy Clark, who subsequently had to be embarrassed in front of worldwide millions when his poor play help spot Ghana a goal 5 minutes in and necessitated a wasted first half substitution. It's also pretty clear that Michael Bradley plays better and can advance forward more when Edu is playing alongside/behind him.
Not to put all the blame of Bradley Sr./Clark, Tim Howard played the shot by the
I don't know if it was naively thinking they could beat Ghana by just stepping on the field and they were looking ahead to a reasonable passage to a possible semifinals, or they were really just dead from the physical and emotional toll of the Algeria. But they wasted a half and they lacked concentration again in the beginning of the overtime.
The regret is that much greater because let's face it, Ghana is not a good team and they didn't even have their best player. Ghana's decision making was pretty ridiculous. A team that makes that many dumb decisions shouldn't be in the quarterfinals. They also don't even have that much skill, though Gyan did very well on his winning goal (set up as it was by the pure luck of a blind defensive clearance).
Then of Ghana went into among the worst time wasting I've ever seen unrewarded by a single yellow from the ref. It's understandable when teams waste time and exaggerate injuries when fouled, but the Ghanaians acted as if murdered when it was clear that they weren't touch at all. Not light brushed or small touch fouls, I mean absolutely no contact -- pure flopping. I have no love for Uruguay and their ugly style of play -- only marginally redeemed by the fact that it's executed by quality players, in particular that great strike force -- but I will be rooting strongly for Uruguay to beat the Ghanaians.
Lastly, even with all the above, the US still probably still should have put away their chances, only for the lack of a goalscoring striker to come back to haunt them. Gomez and Findley failed to put away their chances this Cup, showing that being on form in the Mexican league and MLS means very little.
If you're world class you're world class (watch Miroslav Klose and Podolski, scoring goals like clockwork for Germany again despite both having a very poor club season), and the US just doesn't have such a player. This is where they missed Charlie Davies, and Jozy Altidore showed how far he still has to go. He too missed his chances, and he constantly reminded why he sometimes gets labeled as lazy and as lacking a soccer brain (so said Martin Keown on the BBC). It's frustrating because despite all that, his talent and physicality still posed problems for defenders and gave the US great chances. He showed why he only scored two goals for Hull this year.
So where does this leave the US for the next World Cup? It's a big question mark. The US needs to start developing strikers. Can Jozy become world class? I hope so. Will Charlie Davies recover sufficiently? With his injuries, I really don't know. Before I would've said he was a better bet to become a great goal scorer than Altidore. Dempsey and Donovan will still be around in four years, but both will have a lot of miles on their legs. They'll still be key players, but need strikers to support them. The midfield will probably be very solid with Edu and Bradley both young, Stuart Holden also young, and I'm sure other midfield options will develop.
The defense is another matter. Based purely on age, we could see a number of the same players, but let's hope not. Spector and Bornstein are young and will be around. Gooch will only be 32, so he too could still be around, but let's see how his knee holds up. He wasn't exactly fast to begin with, so that's a big question mark. Even before this Gooch was too inconsistent and at 28, even for defenders who take a little longer to develop than great attackers, he's running out of time to turn into a world class defender. Boca and Cherundolo -- the USA's best defender this Cup -- will both be 35, too old to realistically be relied on to keep up with the speed and quality at the World Cup (just see how 36 year old Fabio Cannavaro fared with Italy). Similarly, DeMerit will be 34, and he's never really going to be much more than he is now.
With Germany embarrassing England this morning, we're slowly whittling away the weaker teams and setting up for some great matchups down the road. Possible Germany-Argentina and Brazil-Netherlands quarterfinals could be doozies, the semis could see Germany/Argentina against Spain, and the final will most likely have Brazil -- who has an extremely manageable draw on their half of the bracket aside from the potential Netherlands matchup -- against one of Germany/Argentina/Spain. If the trio from that half of the bracket wins this Cup they will have fully earned it. The Ghana match aside, this has been a mostly excellent and redeeming World Cup (including the French flameout, karma at its best), with the only thing missing as yet being a singular defining performance by one of the worlds greats (Messi, Ronaldo, etc.). I can only hope Messi chooses to oblige us against El Tri.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
USA Advancing to the Round of 16
First, before some videos, I have a few thoughts to put out there, aside from the obvious of how amazing it felt when Donovan scored that goal.
I had no real reason to dislike Algeria before. I didn't particularly know much about the country. As far as I was concerned, they were famous for being the birthplace of a pair of immigrants to France who produced the greatest footballer of his generation, as well as that great goalkeeper-football fan-philosopher-Nobel laureate Albert Camus (therefore also being the setting for his great books).
Now however, I can throw this onto my list of countries to dislike. (OK, not seriously but you get the idea, in sporting terms). They were so intent on playing out political biases that they were actively trying to play defensively for a draw so as to eliminate the US rather than playing for the win they needed to give themselves a chance of advancing.
Well, for that, you Algeria join Costa Rica and others as countries that tempted the football gods with your negativity, or the Costa Rican's horribly blatant time wasting, only to be cruelly and justly felled by that great cliche, the American spirit.
Cliche though that fighting spirit may be, how awesome is this team's heart? You really couldn't have it any other way. People always deride the US for lacking a style, the way the Brazilians have (or used to at least) joga bonita, the Italians the catenaccio, Germans the machine-like precision, etc. But the US has a swagger and belief, without being cocky, that suggests you'll never outwork them and they'll never give up, and I love it, not the least because it's easy to rally around (check out the crowd videos below) and of course the late drama is amazing (if particularly heart attack/ulcer inducing).
Check out this list of comebacks:
-USA 1 - Algeria 0: Donovan scoring in the 91st minute.
-USA 2 - Slovenia 2: Two down, tying the game in the 82nd minute,winning it in the 85th.
-USA 2 - El Salvador 1: OK, a B team friendly, but Kljestan scored in the 92nd minute for the win.
-USA 2 - Costa Rica 2: Bornstein's 95th minute goal wins CONCACAF qualifying, on a night being played with recently injured Charlie Davies on everyone's mind.
-USA 2 - Panama 1: In the Gold Cup, a B/C team playing, US wins in overtime (105th minute).
-USA 2 - Haiti 2: Again in the Gold Cup, probably a C team playing (because otherwise a tie against Haiti is beyond embarrassing, and even still...), Stuart Holden ties it in the 92nd minute.
-USA 2 - El Salvador 2: In El Salvador for qualifying, two down, Jozy scores in the 77th minute followed by Hejduk equalizing in the 88th minute.
Those are merely the matches the US either tied or won on a goal after the 80th minute in 2010 and 2009. It doesn't count matches the US tied or won with earlier goals coming back from deficits, like against England or at Honduras in qualifying, or scoring 3 goals against Egypt to complete the five goal swing on the day needed to advance in the Confederations Cup.
Though I don't need to go over the particular performances by US players because we've all seen it, a few demand praise:
-Donovan has truly become a leader and star, if he wasn't already. He keeps this up, he'll be like Wayne Rooney in that Nike ad with all the baby names, and I'd even consider it.
-Michael Bradley is impressing everyone, not just the US faithful. It's not just his tackling and fabulous late runs into the box, which I guess not everyone has seen since he played at Heerenveen and now at Borussia Mönchengladbach, but also the clever footwork and passing -- see his play that set Donovan up leading to the goalbox scrum in which Jozy blasted over.
-Stuart Holden -- he's playing the Mark Madsen role of bench cheerleader and team celebrator perfectly. Maybe it's because he's so noticeable with his blond hair, but he's certainly managed to get to both Bradley and Donovan fast enough to start the big pile-ons. Kudos Mr. Holden, kudos.
-Altidore is playing great in all areas except goal scoring, which should be sort of important because he's a striker, but he's now teamed with Donovan to be responsible for assisting on both late goals against Slovenia and Algeria. We wouldn't be here without him. And he also pancaked the entire US team celebratory mob on top of Donovan. He's a big man to be doing that. Not to be outdone of course, I must mention Jay DeMerit, late arriving from the back, somersaulting over the pile and nearly taking the head off one of the team's staff. Great stuff.
-Steve Cherundolo is pretty good. I'd forgotten how good he was, I mean he's the captain of a Bundesliga team! To think Jonathan Spector started pushing him for a starting spot.
Lastly, gotta give props to Bob Bradley. I, as many have over his reign, have railed against him for his tactics and team selection. Well, he's gotten every decision spot on this World Cup. I have new respect for the man.
Lots of videos going 'round, here are some of my favorites that I've seen to keep giving you goosebumps:
And the scene at one of my faves, Lucky Bar in downtown DC:
In Seattle:
I had no real reason to dislike Algeria before. I didn't particularly know much about the country. As far as I was concerned, they were famous for being the birthplace of a pair of immigrants to France who produced the greatest footballer of his generation, as well as that great goalkeeper-football fan-philosopher-Nobel laureate Albert Camus (therefore also being the setting for his great books).
Now however, I can throw this onto my list of countries to dislike. (OK, not seriously but you get the idea, in sporting terms). They were so intent on playing out political biases that they were actively trying to play defensively for a draw so as to eliminate the US rather than playing for the win they needed to give themselves a chance of advancing.
Well, for that, you Algeria join Costa Rica and others as countries that tempted the football gods with your negativity, or the Costa Rican's horribly blatant time wasting, only to be cruelly and justly felled by that great cliche, the American spirit.
Cliche though that fighting spirit may be, how awesome is this team's heart? You really couldn't have it any other way. People always deride the US for lacking a style, the way the Brazilians have (or used to at least) joga bonita, the Italians the catenaccio, Germans the machine-like precision, etc. But the US has a swagger and belief, without being cocky, that suggests you'll never outwork them and they'll never give up, and I love it, not the least because it's easy to rally around (check out the crowd videos below) and of course the late drama is amazing (if particularly heart attack/ulcer inducing).
Check out this list of comebacks:
-USA 1 - Algeria 0: Donovan scoring in the 91st minute.
-USA 2 - Slovenia 2: Two down, tying the game in the 82nd minute,
-USA 2 - El Salvador 1: OK, a B team friendly, but Kljestan scored in the 92nd minute for the win.
-USA 2 - Costa Rica 2: Bornstein's 95th minute goal wins CONCACAF qualifying, on a night being played with recently injured Charlie Davies on everyone's mind.
-USA 2 - Panama 1: In the Gold Cup, a B/C team playing, US wins in overtime (105th minute).
-USA 2 - Haiti 2: Again in the Gold Cup, probably a C team playing (because otherwise a tie against Haiti is beyond embarrassing, and even still...), Stuart Holden ties it in the 92nd minute.
-USA 2 - El Salvador 2: In El Salvador for qualifying, two down, Jozy scores in the 77th minute followed by Hejduk equalizing in the 88th minute.
Those are merely the matches the US either tied or won on a goal after the 80th minute in 2010 and 2009. It doesn't count matches the US tied or won with earlier goals coming back from deficits, like against England or at Honduras in qualifying, or scoring 3 goals against Egypt to complete the five goal swing on the day needed to advance in the Confederations Cup.
Though I don't need to go over the particular performances by US players because we've all seen it, a few demand praise:
-Donovan has truly become a leader and star, if he wasn't already. He keeps this up, he'll be like Wayne Rooney in that Nike ad with all the baby names, and I'd even consider it.
-Michael Bradley is impressing everyone, not just the US faithful. It's not just his tackling and fabulous late runs into the box, which I guess not everyone has seen since he played at Heerenveen and now at Borussia Mönchengladbach, but also the clever footwork and passing -- see his play that set Donovan up leading to the goalbox scrum in which Jozy blasted over.
-Stuart Holden -- he's playing the Mark Madsen role of bench cheerleader and team celebrator perfectly. Maybe it's because he's so noticeable with his blond hair, but he's certainly managed to get to both Bradley and Donovan fast enough to start the big pile-ons. Kudos Mr. Holden, kudos.
-Altidore is playing great in all areas except goal scoring, which should be sort of important because he's a striker, but he's now teamed with Donovan to be responsible for assisting on both late goals against Slovenia and Algeria. We wouldn't be here without him. And he also pancaked the entire US team celebratory mob on top of Donovan. He's a big man to be doing that. Not to be outdone of course, I must mention Jay DeMerit, late arriving from the back, somersaulting over the pile and nearly taking the head off one of the team's staff. Great stuff.
-Steve Cherundolo is pretty good. I'd forgotten how good he was, I mean he's the captain of a Bundesliga team! To think Jonathan Spector started pushing him for a starting spot.
Lastly, gotta give props to Bob Bradley. I, as many have over his reign, have railed against him for his tactics and team selection. Well, he's gotten every decision spot on this World Cup. I have new respect for the man.
Lots of videos going 'round, here are some of my favorites that I've seen to keep giving you goosebumps:
And the scene at one of my faves, Lucky Bar in downtown DC:
In Seattle:
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Delayed First Thoughts on the World Cup
I haven't been able to post any thoughts on the World Cup yet, having caught the first weekend of games then spending the week watching games on travel. Finally home and with a chance to lay out some thoughts on a World Cup that has been all over the place.
After the first week, I don't think too many observers were surprised, if still disappointed, that the opening round of group matches were mostly cagey and unremarkable. Now that teams feel a sense of urgency to get the victory or see their second round hopes quashed, more wide open play has come with some more notable results.
Starting with the US, from a pure entertainment standpoint, they may have played the most exciting group stage match three World Cups in a row. The 2002 Cup had some memorable first round games, like Senegal upsetting what turned out to be a very poor French team, England-Argentina, a good Brazil-Turkey match, and Korea holding off nine man Portugal with the help of the post late on (ultimately sending the USA through), so maybe Portugal-USA isn't the undisputed best early match that year, but it was certainly up there and it was the biggest upset along with the Senegal victory.
In 2006, the USA-Italy matched was genuinely exciting as nine man USA nearly beat the champions-to-be. No other opening round matches really stick out, with the memorable performances being Argentina crushing Serbia and Montenegro and Germany surprising everyone with an exciting attacking style in all its matches.
Now, Slovenia-USA has been hands down the best match of this tournament, with the comeback, late drama, and controversy. I won't even go into that or I may have another conniption.
After two matches, the USA continues to be disconcerting in the back. Gooch has been particularly inconsistent, showing poor timing and a lack of tactical awareness one half, playing much improved the next. The attack is not that problematic as long as we can settle on the fact that Mo Edu is our second best center midfielder. Done. And we've barely seen attacking spark Stuart Holden other than his being the first man to tackle Michael Bradley after his game tying goal, nor any of DaMarcus Beasley. I'd like to see Jozy get a goal for all the good work he's put in up top. And Dempsey hasn't been at his best either (and that's not a reverse jinks, since it seems like whenever we start talking about how poorly Dempsey plays he suddenly starts popping goals in bunches).
Moving on from the US, the opening matches have probably produced three true favorites -- Brazil, Netherlands, and Argentina. Does anyone want to bet against this Brazil team marching to the finals? I wouldn't, even though something about them just doesn't feel right (maybe the lack of an inspirational practitioner of joga bonita in the midfield). I'm still not sold with the Netherlands defense, and before you point out the two clean sheets, I'll have you notice their two opponents were Japan and a Denmark team that is predicated on organization and defense, not scoring. No world beaters there. I'd like Argentina if their coach wasn't insane. Spain, meanwhile, hasn't played a second time yet so it's hard to make a full judgment after the Swiss stole the US playbook on how to beat La Furia Roja.
Meanwhile, the African countries are for the most part disappointing people who had high hopes for this World Cup mostly because no one actually watches African soccer enough nor paid enough attention to history to realize they weren't actually that good. Their "home field" advantage in South Africa doesn't amount to much and when looking at the draw, it was always going to be tough for multiple teams to impress. Ghana has been the standard bearer to date, and even though they lead Group D, there is a very strong possibility they could fail to advance because they still need to play Germany while Serbia take on Australia, who despite its draw with Ghana is among the worst teams in South Africa, not to mention they'll be missing their two best players.
I think we're all laughing at France right now, not least because anyone who knows anything about that team would've put money on the French imploding before the tournament started. Italy looks old and uninspired because, well, they're old and have no real inspiring players (oh Cannavaro, how you've fallen). As Alexi Lalas loves pointing out, England just isn't that good, plus Wayne Rooney can't be 100%.
If anything, all the craziness of this Cup has me remaining optimistic that IF the US takes care of business against Algeria, they could advance further into the knockout stages. The US would be underdogs against any of the group D trio they'd be likely to face, but I wouldn't be terrified of any of those potential match-ups. Just three days before boys can get the win their first round effortsalready got them deserve.
After the first week, I don't think too many observers were surprised, if still disappointed, that the opening round of group matches were mostly cagey and unremarkable. Now that teams feel a sense of urgency to get the victory or see their second round hopes quashed, more wide open play has come with some more notable results.
Starting with the US, from a pure entertainment standpoint, they may have played the most exciting group stage match three World Cups in a row. The 2002 Cup had some memorable first round games, like Senegal upsetting what turned out to be a very poor French team, England-Argentina, a good Brazil-Turkey match, and Korea holding off nine man Portugal with the help of the post late on (ultimately sending the USA through), so maybe Portugal-USA isn't the undisputed best early match that year, but it was certainly up there and it was the biggest upset along with the Senegal victory.
In 2006, the USA-Italy matched was genuinely exciting as nine man USA nearly beat the champions-to-be. No other opening round matches really stick out, with the memorable performances being Argentina crushing Serbia and Montenegro and Germany surprising everyone with an exciting attacking style in all its matches.
Now, Slovenia-USA has been hands down the best match of this tournament, with the comeback, late drama, and controversy. I won't even go into that or I may have another conniption.
After two matches, the USA continues to be disconcerting in the back. Gooch has been particularly inconsistent, showing poor timing and a lack of tactical awareness one half, playing much improved the next. The attack is not that problematic as long as we can settle on the fact that Mo Edu is our second best center midfielder. Done. And we've barely seen attacking spark Stuart Holden other than his being the first man to tackle Michael Bradley after his game tying goal, nor any of DaMarcus Beasley. I'd like to see Jozy get a goal for all the good work he's put in up top. And Dempsey hasn't been at his best either (and that's not a reverse jinks, since it seems like whenever we start talking about how poorly Dempsey plays he suddenly starts popping goals in bunches).
Moving on from the US, the opening matches have probably produced three true favorites -- Brazil, Netherlands, and Argentina. Does anyone want to bet against this Brazil team marching to the finals? I wouldn't, even though something about them just doesn't feel right (maybe the lack of an inspirational practitioner of joga bonita in the midfield). I'm still not sold with the Netherlands defense, and before you point out the two clean sheets, I'll have you notice their two opponents were Japan and a Denmark team that is predicated on organization and defense, not scoring. No world beaters there. I'd like Argentina if their coach wasn't insane. Spain, meanwhile, hasn't played a second time yet so it's hard to make a full judgment after the Swiss stole the US playbook on how to beat La Furia Roja.
Meanwhile, the African countries are for the most part disappointing people who had high hopes for this World Cup mostly because no one actually watches African soccer enough nor paid enough attention to history to realize they weren't actually that good. Their "home field" advantage in South Africa doesn't amount to much and when looking at the draw, it was always going to be tough for multiple teams to impress. Ghana has been the standard bearer to date, and even though they lead Group D, there is a very strong possibility they could fail to advance because they still need to play Germany while Serbia take on Australia, who despite its draw with Ghana is among the worst teams in South Africa, not to mention they'll be missing their two best players.
I think we're all laughing at France right now, not least because anyone who knows anything about that team would've put money on the French imploding before the tournament started. Italy looks old and uninspired because, well, they're old and have no real inspiring players (oh Cannavaro, how you've fallen). As Alexi Lalas loves pointing out, England just isn't that good, plus Wayne Rooney can't be 100%.
If anything, all the craziness of this Cup has me remaining optimistic that IF the US takes care of business against Algeria, they could advance further into the knockout stages. The US would be underdogs against any of the group D trio they'd be likely to face, but I wouldn't be terrified of any of those potential match-ups. Just three days before boys can get the win their first round efforts
Thursday, June 10, 2010
News and Bits - One Day Before Kickoff
Just one day before the fun kicks off with South Africa hosting perennial second round losers Mexico. So I'm sure everyone is fiending for their World Cup fix. There's plenty out there to read previewing the Cup, but here are some not so serious stuff to beware of.
It's being reported that FIFA apparently requires its referees to learn English swear words for the World Cup. Not just for the all-English speaking USA-England match mind you. Haven't you always wondered how the various teams and referees communicate when you have a Spanish speaking ref mediating an argument between a German and a Ghanaian? Now you know that apparently English is the universal language for telling the ref to go f*ck off.
While most of your World Cup viewing is going to be early in the morning, so unless you're one of those sick people who somehow can function off only five hours of sleep, you'll also want to be getting to bed early. However, you might not want to fall asleep too early because the Daily Show, where sadly to say I do in fact get a large portion of my information about the news, is sending senior foreign sports correspondent, John Oliver, to South Africa. Tonight will air the first segment, which features Oliver, aka Dr. Ian Duncan, psychology professor at Greendale Community College, hanging around the US Men's National Team training camp. Other segments will follow with the Liverpool supporter (Oliver was born in Birmingham but raised in Liverpool, so I imagine he has extra reason to root against Tim Howard and Landon Donovan).
In further evidence that politicians shouldn't get involved with sporting events, and of course vice versa (I'm looking at you Curt Schilling), the US Consul General in South Africa, Alberta Mayberry, is running her mouth off and claiming that, "Our men are preparing to crush your little boys," and that, "We're a nation of winners - we don't do losing." If this wasn't being reported in the Telegraph I wouldn't guessed it was part of some Onion-style fake article.
While not the Onion, the Sports Pickle is also good for a laugh, and here's a piece on why you should root against the other 31 teams in the World Cup. Want a specific reason to root against Uruguay, look no further. They're greedy bastards, having won two Cups despite having only 3.5 million people, and here in America we don’t take kindly to nations who want to hog a disproportionate share of the world’s resources. And, Uruguay produces no oil. None. What good are they?
With two days before the US-England match, I'm already giddy with anticipation. And with the early kickoff times during the week, let me just say thank you to ESPN3. What the hell would I do without you?
It's being reported that FIFA apparently requires its referees to learn English swear words for the World Cup. Not just for the all-English speaking USA-England match mind you. Haven't you always wondered how the various teams and referees communicate when you have a Spanish speaking ref mediating an argument between a German and a Ghanaian? Now you know that apparently English is the universal language for telling the ref to go f*ck off.
While most of your World Cup viewing is going to be early in the morning, so unless you're one of those sick people who somehow can function off only five hours of sleep, you'll also want to be getting to bed early. However, you might not want to fall asleep too early because the Daily Show, where sadly to say I do in fact get a large portion of my information about the news, is sending senior foreign sports correspondent, John Oliver, to South Africa. Tonight will air the first segment, which features Oliver, aka Dr. Ian Duncan, psychology professor at Greendale Community College, hanging around the US Men's National Team training camp. Other segments will follow with the Liverpool supporter (Oliver was born in Birmingham but raised in Liverpool, so I imagine he has extra reason to root against Tim Howard and Landon Donovan).
In further evidence that politicians shouldn't get involved with sporting events, and of course vice versa (I'm looking at you Curt Schilling), the US Consul General in South Africa, Alberta Mayberry, is running her mouth off and claiming that, "Our men are preparing to crush your little boys," and that, "We're a nation of winners - we don't do losing." If this wasn't being reported in the Telegraph I wouldn't guessed it was part of some Onion-style fake article.
While not the Onion, the Sports Pickle is also good for a laugh, and here's a piece on why you should root against the other 31 teams in the World Cup. Want a specific reason to root against Uruguay, look no further. They're greedy bastards, having won two Cups despite having only 3.5 million people, and here in America we don’t take kindly to nations who want to hog a disproportionate share of the world’s resources. And, Uruguay produces no oil. None. What good are they?
With two days before the US-England match, I'm already giddy with anticipation. And with the early kickoff times during the week, let me just say thank you to ESPN3. What the hell would I do without you?
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Bradley With Decisions To Make
The US closed out its World Cup tune ups with a 3-1 victory over Australia this morning, leaving Bob Bradley with a few big decisions to ponder.
Starting from the back, this match didn't really provide many answers, other than confirming that the US backline is probably the USA's biggest problem area, not the forwards that so many people fretted over.
Going into the training camp, the first choice back line would have been Spector/Cherundolo-Gooch-DeMerit-Bocanegra. However, Gooch clearly isn't 100%. I'm sure Bradley was holding him back because of the horrible field they were playing on, but that doesn't hide the fact that Gooch hasn't played a full match since October. At one point they followed him walking/jogging during a lull in play, and John Harkes had to call him out on his awkward gait.
Would you trust Gooch against Wayne Rooney? I wouldn't at this point. That means the new central pairing is Goodson-DeMerit. Today was probably DeMerit's worst match with the US that I can remember. Goodson was just as poor on crosses and set pieces, something he's usually good at, but was more solid that DeMerit. Is Bradley confident enough in this duo? Boca is playing every minute at right back, because no matter if Bornstein played much better today in his cameo he still better not see a minute in the World Cup. So Goodson and DeMerit it is.
On the bright side, the midfield looked good. Or at least Donovan and Dempsey looked sharp. Donovan's killer passes are making Buddle and co. look like an actual area of strength. Bradley was Bradley, tracking back nicely (particularly one nice play where he covered for Bornstein after an ill advised foray). He almost had another classic Bradley goal, cleaning up a rebound in the box, except Mark Schwarzer made a great reaction save. (The follow up from that shot was definitely a goal. Dempsey was onside, Findley was not, but Findley never made a play on the ball. Bad call by the linesman.)
The only question in midfield is the other center midfielfer. Rico Clark was ok, generally solid again. I think it's clear Coach Bradley prefers Clark over Edu or Torres. Against England he'll clearly go for two defensive mids, and even though I think Edu has a better overall game, Clark is solid enough and will get the nod. I've liked Torres the best in these friendlies, and he'll definitely see the field at some point, and probably get at least one start in the group stage.
The other dilemma for Bob Bradley is going to be his starting duo up top. Before the past two matches, this was an area of concern, but I'd have to say I'm not so worried anymore. Now that's not saying I think Buddle, Findley and Gomez are sure things, but the overall flow of the US attack, with Donovan and Dempsey linking with the forward tandems, has generally produced chances and led to goals.
One sequence on the counter looked positively Brazilian/Dutch in the 27th minute, when Clark won the ball in the back from Tim Cahill, Goodson released Donovan to one-touch to Bradley, who played to Buddle checking nicely at midfield to one touch right back to Donovan, one touch to Dempsey, who was denied by Schwarzer. Reminiscent of Donovan's goal against Brazil in the Confederation's Cup final.
The dilemma though is presented by the fact that Jozy Altidore may not be entirely healthy and there's not much separating Buddle, Gomez, and Findley. If you want another finsher, it looks like Buddle could be called to start, and Gomez is a good option off the bench.
As the speed option, Findley is sort of infuriating. He made great runs, harassed the Aussie defense, showed surprising touch (and that after his fantastic pass releasing Donovan that led to Jozy's goal against Turkey), BUT also missed a few glaring chances. There was no excuse for missing the open net after he beat the offside trap and rounded Schwarzer, and he hit the post on the sequence leading to Dempsey's "goal," though he probably should have scored then too. And he also never could get the final pass right the could've set up Buddle for a hat trick goal. As my best friend texted me, he's ALMOST a good player.
So who starts? A lot depends on Altidore's ankle. If he's healthy he still needs to be in the lineup, and whether it's Buddle or Findley opposite him comes down to who has the best chemistry with Jozy. I'm inclined to go with the speed option Findley so he can harass an England back line that could isn't exactly fleet of foot with Ferdinand now out of the Cup injured.
The best thing to come out of the past two friendlies is an increased confidence in the US attack, and it's tempering my increased nervousness with the backline. And let's face it, the English generally present a number of match-up nightmares for the US (good in the air up front and in the back, negating a US strength, and pacy wingers that could expose the slower US fullbacks), so a draw would be a good result. But I'm being encouraged that a draw is still a good possibility, and win is certainly not of the cards (and neither is an embarrassment).
Just under 7 days before the US adventure kicks off.
Starting from the back, this match didn't really provide many answers, other than confirming that the US backline is probably the USA's biggest problem area, not the forwards that so many people fretted over.
Going into the training camp, the first choice back line would have been Spector/Cherundolo-Gooch-DeMerit-Bocanegra. However, Gooch clearly isn't 100%. I'm sure Bradley was holding him back because of the horrible field they were playing on, but that doesn't hide the fact that Gooch hasn't played a full match since October. At one point they followed him walking/jogging during a lull in play, and John Harkes had to call him out on his awkward gait.
Would you trust Gooch against Wayne Rooney? I wouldn't at this point. That means the new central pairing is Goodson-DeMerit. Today was probably DeMerit's worst match with the US that I can remember. Goodson was just as poor on crosses and set pieces, something he's usually good at, but was more solid that DeMerit. Is Bradley confident enough in this duo? Boca is playing every minute at right back, because no matter if Bornstein played much better today in his cameo he still better not see a minute in the World Cup. So Goodson and DeMerit it is.
On the bright side, the midfield looked good. Or at least Donovan and Dempsey looked sharp. Donovan's killer passes are making Buddle and co. look like an actual area of strength. Bradley was Bradley, tracking back nicely (particularly one nice play where he covered for Bornstein after an ill advised foray). He almost had another classic Bradley goal, cleaning up a rebound in the box, except Mark Schwarzer made a great reaction save. (The follow up from that shot was definitely a goal. Dempsey was onside, Findley was not, but Findley never made a play on the ball. Bad call by the linesman.)
The only question in midfield is the other center midfielfer. Rico Clark was ok, generally solid again. I think it's clear Coach Bradley prefers Clark over Edu or Torres. Against England he'll clearly go for two defensive mids, and even though I think Edu has a better overall game, Clark is solid enough and will get the nod. I've liked Torres the best in these friendlies, and he'll definitely see the field at some point, and probably get at least one start in the group stage.
The other dilemma for Bob Bradley is going to be his starting duo up top. Before the past two matches, this was an area of concern, but I'd have to say I'm not so worried anymore. Now that's not saying I think Buddle, Findley and Gomez are sure things, but the overall flow of the US attack, with Donovan and Dempsey linking with the forward tandems, has generally produced chances and led to goals.
One sequence on the counter looked positively Brazilian/Dutch in the 27th minute, when Clark won the ball in the back from Tim Cahill, Goodson released Donovan to one-touch to Bradley, who played to Buddle checking nicely at midfield to one touch right back to Donovan, one touch to Dempsey, who was denied by Schwarzer. Reminiscent of Donovan's goal against Brazil in the Confederation's Cup final.
The dilemma though is presented by the fact that Jozy Altidore may not be entirely healthy and there's not much separating Buddle, Gomez, and Findley. If you want another finsher, it looks like Buddle could be called to start, and Gomez is a good option off the bench.
As the speed option, Findley is sort of infuriating. He made great runs, harassed the Aussie defense, showed surprising touch (and that after his fantastic pass releasing Donovan that led to Jozy's goal against Turkey), BUT also missed a few glaring chances. There was no excuse for missing the open net after he beat the offside trap and rounded Schwarzer, and he hit the post on the sequence leading to Dempsey's "goal," though he probably should have scored then too. And he also never could get the final pass right the could've set up Buddle for a hat trick goal. As my best friend texted me, he's ALMOST a good player.
So who starts? A lot depends on Altidore's ankle. If he's healthy he still needs to be in the lineup, and whether it's Buddle or Findley opposite him comes down to who has the best chemistry with Jozy. I'm inclined to go with the speed option Findley so he can harass an England back line that could isn't exactly fleet of foot with Ferdinand now out of the Cup injured.
The best thing to come out of the past two friendlies is an increased confidence in the US attack, and it's tempering my increased nervousness with the backline. And let's face it, the English generally present a number of match-up nightmares for the US (good in the air up front and in the back, negating a US strength, and pacy wingers that could expose the slower US fullbacks), so a draw would be a good result. But I'm being encouraged that a draw is still a good possibility, and win is certainly not of the cards (and neither is an embarrassment).
Just under 7 days before the US adventure kicks off.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
The Yanks Going to South Africa
Bob Bradley has just announced the 23-man USA roster for the World Cup:
Goalkeepers: Brad Guzan, Marcus Hahnemann, Tim Howard.
Defenders: Carlos Bocanegra, Jonathan Bornstein, Steve Cherundolo, Jay DeMerit, Clarence Goodson, Oguchi Onyewu, Jonathan Spector.
Midfielders: DaMarcus Beasley, Michael Bradley, Ricardo Clark, Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Maurice Edu, Benny Feilhaber, Stuart Holden, Jose Torres.
Forwards: Jozy Altidore, Edson Buddle, Robbie Findley, Herculez Gomez.
I don't think there are any surprises in the back. Guzan showed last night that he is the number three goalie behind Hahnemann, and Bradley was forced to choose at least one natural left back, meaning Bornstein obviously gets the nod over slightly more horrible Heath Pearce.
That said, is anyone else not horrified by our defense at the moment? Gooch just looks off, which shouldn't be surprising, seeing as he hasn't played a single match in seven months! The US has depth at center back, until you realize that Bocanegra just had surgery for a hernia and he also probably needs to play left back if only because playing Bornstein would be like inviting the apocolypse upon the team's hopes of advancing. Imagine Aaron Lennon or Theo Walcott racing past a hapless Bornstein as he either falls to the turf or concedes another penalty. Yikes. Once again I'll clamor for Spector to play at left back, even though he's stated that he's more comfortable on the right, and Bradley has never seemed inclined to play him there. I don't know if Gooch can get up to full speed in time, and I'm a little worried.
The midfield brings practically no surprises. Bedoya and Rogers made late pushes for inclusion, and I thought they looked alright last night, but Beasley has also looked better recently and his experience won out. He did well last night, cementing his place. I won't really argue with anything here. Holden looked good last night and can argue for a starting spot if Dempsey goes up top. Remains to be seen.
One slight disappointment I had was with Edu. Yes he scored, but I just wasn't as impressed with his control of the defensive midfield area as I was hoping. Was I the only one? There were times where he just didn't seem as engaged and was too passive in the middle when the Czech's had the ball and were attacking. This is when it would help to have no life to be able to re-watch the game for such things. Still, I think he's better all-around to Rico Clark and should start with Michael Bradley, but we'll learn more with the Turkey match.
Finally, the forwards are the one area where Bradley shook things up. The big surprise, causing outrage amongst some, is Findley over Brian Ching. Personally I thought Ching had a roster spot all but guaranteed, especially after another good showing last night where it was clear that his hold up play and ability to link with other attackers is head and shoulders better than the rest of the US forwards, even if that's not saying much.
Findley clearly won out because he has speed and will be replacing Charlie Davies. In an ESPN chat recently Bocanegra revealed that he was impressed with Findley in training and was hoping he could make an impact, so maybe there were signs behind the scenes we just didn't see. I could even see taking Findley, but at the expense of either Buddle or Gomez. Gomez looked more dangerous and scored last night, all but sealing his spot on the roster, so in my opinion Buddle should have been cut. Again, it would be nice to be able to go back and watch the game and analyze how Buddle played, but from my viewing last night I just didn't see anything from him that lends me to believe he'll make any impact against world class calibre defenders.
I'm trying to stay positive because all the key players except Gooch were in the stands last night. Hopefully the Turkey match will provide more answers, because I think last night raised a few more questions. 16 days until June 12...
Goalkeepers: Brad Guzan, Marcus Hahnemann, Tim Howard.
Defenders: Carlos Bocanegra, Jonathan Bornstein, Steve Cherundolo, Jay DeMerit, Clarence Goodson, Oguchi Onyewu, Jonathan Spector.
Midfielders: DaMarcus Beasley, Michael Bradley, Ricardo Clark, Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Maurice Edu, Benny Feilhaber, Stuart Holden, Jose Torres.
Forwards: Jozy Altidore, Edson Buddle, Robbie Findley, Herculez Gomez.
I don't think there are any surprises in the back. Guzan showed last night that he is the number three goalie behind Hahnemann, and Bradley was forced to choose at least one natural left back, meaning Bornstein obviously gets the nod over slightly more horrible Heath Pearce.
That said, is anyone else not horrified by our defense at the moment? Gooch just looks off, which shouldn't be surprising, seeing as he hasn't played a single match in seven months! The US has depth at center back, until you realize that Bocanegra just had surgery for a hernia and he also probably needs to play left back if only because playing Bornstein would be like inviting the apocolypse upon the team's hopes of advancing. Imagine Aaron Lennon or Theo Walcott racing past a hapless Bornstein as he either falls to the turf or concedes another penalty. Yikes. Once again I'll clamor for Spector to play at left back, even though he's stated that he's more comfortable on the right, and Bradley has never seemed inclined to play him there. I don't know if Gooch can get up to full speed in time, and I'm a little worried.
The midfield brings practically no surprises. Bedoya and Rogers made late pushes for inclusion, and I thought they looked alright last night, but Beasley has also looked better recently and his experience won out. He did well last night, cementing his place. I won't really argue with anything here. Holden looked good last night and can argue for a starting spot if Dempsey goes up top. Remains to be seen.
One slight disappointment I had was with Edu. Yes he scored, but I just wasn't as impressed with his control of the defensive midfield area as I was hoping. Was I the only one? There were times where he just didn't seem as engaged and was too passive in the middle when the Czech's had the ball and were attacking. This is when it would help to have no life to be able to re-watch the game for such things. Still, I think he's better all-around to Rico Clark and should start with Michael Bradley, but we'll learn more with the Turkey match.
Finally, the forwards are the one area where Bradley shook things up. The big surprise, causing outrage amongst some, is Findley over Brian Ching. Personally I thought Ching had a roster spot all but guaranteed, especially after another good showing last night where it was clear that his hold up play and ability to link with other attackers is head and shoulders better than the rest of the US forwards, even if that's not saying much.
Findley clearly won out because he has speed and will be replacing Charlie Davies. In an ESPN chat recently Bocanegra revealed that he was impressed with Findley in training and was hoping he could make an impact, so maybe there were signs behind the scenes we just didn't see. I could even see taking Findley, but at the expense of either Buddle or Gomez. Gomez looked more dangerous and scored last night, all but sealing his spot on the roster, so in my opinion Buddle should have been cut. Again, it would be nice to be able to go back and watch the game and analyze how Buddle played, but from my viewing last night I just didn't see anything from him that lends me to believe he'll make any impact against world class calibre defenders.
I'm trying to stay positive because all the key players except Gooch were in the stands last night. Hopefully the Turkey match will provide more answers, because I think last night raised a few more questions. 16 days until June 12...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)