HEY! WE HAVE A SOCCER TEAM!
The World Cup has always been an event Americans were aware of, but 2010 was the first time the general American public had a personal stake in the tournament. A lot of things conspired to generate the unprecedented interest in the game. First, the US got a marquee matchup against England in the opening game, that just happened to fall in primetime on a weekend. The dramatic comeback against Slovenia further whetted the appetite, and the last-minute winner against Algeria to advance the US out of group play was straight out of a Hollywood script.
But the on-field achievements in South Africa can’t explain all of the success the World Cup had with the general American sports fan. The US-Slovenia game drew record ratings – and was on a Wednesday morning. The England game can explain some of the attention the US team drew, but some of it has to be explained by the growth of the game itself. International club soccer, from the Premier League to the Champions League, and the growth of Major League Soccer helped set the table for the unprecedented attention the US team received in South Africa.
HEY! SOCCER SHOULD HAVE INSTANT REPLAY!
While an injustice makes for great television, the goal taken away from the US against Slovenia for a phantom foul helped to galvanize the casual US fans in support of the team. But it also introduced American fans to an ugly truth soccer fans have known for years – that some kind of instant replay review is needed to make sure the right call gets made.
FIFA is listening, apparently. With the combination of American fans (and the massive American sports market) awakened to soccer, along with the “daylight robbery” of the English and the Mexicans in an 8-hour period, FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to back off his “no technology ever” position he took just weeks before the World Cup started.
HEY! MAYBE SOCCER ISN’T JUST FOR WEIRDO EUROSNOBS!
Soccer has always been a favorite whipping boy of “real Amur’cun” sports fans. With its’ low scores, its’ embracing of ties, and its’ lack of a clock on the field – not to mention the fact that Americans in general weren’t very good at the sports – your average American sports fan felt comfortable in dismissing and making fun of the sport.
Not anymore. Landon Donovan has become a household name, showing up on cultural touchstones like the Tonight Show and the Daily Show. Heck, he might even show up on Dancing with the Stars! With the success the Americans achieved on the field and the attention the team drew from the public at large, soccer went a long way towards legitimizing itself with the average American sports fan.
No one is expecting that soccer will be replacing baseball or the NFL for the average American sports fan. But with the additional soccer availability for Americans on television and in person, and with the added legitimacy and popularity this year’s World Cup brought to the sport, it may just be that the foundations have been laid for soccer to become a vibrant part of the American sports landscape.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
The Rational Hand Ball
Uruguayan striker Luis Suarez is being demonized as a villain for his handball that denied Ghana a goal at the end of extra time. But his actions were perfectly rational.
For those of you returning from a weekend trip to Mars, here's the story. Ghana and Uruguay were tied 1-1 as extra time was ending. Ghana won a last free kick in the 120th minute of play. The free kick was curled in, and in the scrum the Uruguyan keeper attempted and failed to punch the ball clear. A shot was sent in and Suarez, the last man on the line, punched the ball away.
A red card was immediately shown to Suarez, and Ghana was given an penalty kick for the last kick of extra time. Asamoah Gyan stepped to the spot - and missed the penalty. The game went to a shootout, which Uruguay won 4-2.
Suarez is now being called a cheater, a thief, and immoral for his actions. And let's be clear - he did cheat and break the rules. But he was caught and the proper punishment was brought to bear. The laws of the game were executed and the offended team was given everything they were legally entitled to, in this case the spot kick and the red card.
That's why the Suarez handball his different from Thierry Henry's handball against Ireland. People were mad, not necessarily about the handball, but about the handball not being properly punished. If Ireland would have been given what was legally due to them - a disallowing of the French goal - the outcome of that game could have been very different.
Or, because it's Ireland, it could have ended in a different and even more heartbreaking way for Irish fans.
So the problem with the Henry handball wasn't the laws of the game, but FIFA's incomprehensible refusal to allow video replay in some circumstances. At least now FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to announce that FIFA will have a meeting to discuss the possibility of forming a committee to analyze the need for a panel to study the issue in greater detail. For FIFA, that's progress.
But Suarez's handball is different. The foul was seen and the laws were properly applied. And that's the problem. The punishment simply doesn't fit the crime in a circumstance when an outfield player is the last man on the line to stop a goal. If Suarez doesn't punch the ball out, it's a goal. If he does, there's at least a possibility that the other team won't score - a very high possibility, it turns out.
It's like if the punishment for stealing $100 was a $75 fine - and you got to keep the $100.
It's also analagous to, in American football, a cornerback getting beaten by a wide receiver on a deep pass. If the receiver catches the ball, it's a sure touchdown, so the cornerback has every incentive to commit a pass interference penalty. Sure, the cornerback gets penalized, but at least the other team didn't score.
Rather than navel-gaze about whether Suarez was immoral for doing what he did, a simple rule change needs to be put into place. If a defender is in the six-yard box, commits an intentional handball, and that handball, in the referee's judgment, is the only thing that prevents the ball from going into the net, then the goal should be awarded AND the player should be shown a straight red card.
By making such a rule change, FIFA would remove the incentive for a player to take the action Suarez did. With that rule change, it would no longer be a rational decision to intentionally handle the ball in that circumstance - a result that would be good for the game as a whole.
Of course, controversy and navel-gazing is what's really good for the sport, so we should not make that rule change and keep video replay out of football. Right, Mr. Blatter?
For those of you returning from a weekend trip to Mars, here's the story. Ghana and Uruguay were tied 1-1 as extra time was ending. Ghana won a last free kick in the 120th minute of play. The free kick was curled in, and in the scrum the Uruguyan keeper attempted and failed to punch the ball clear. A shot was sent in and Suarez, the last man on the line, punched the ball away.
A red card was immediately shown to Suarez, and Ghana was given an penalty kick for the last kick of extra time. Asamoah Gyan stepped to the spot - and missed the penalty. The game went to a shootout, which Uruguay won 4-2.
Suarez is now being called a cheater, a thief, and immoral for his actions. And let's be clear - he did cheat and break the rules. But he was caught and the proper punishment was brought to bear. The laws of the game were executed and the offended team was given everything they were legally entitled to, in this case the spot kick and the red card.
That's why the Suarez handball his different from Thierry Henry's handball against Ireland. People were mad, not necessarily about the handball, but about the handball not being properly punished. If Ireland would have been given what was legally due to them - a disallowing of the French goal - the outcome of that game could have been very different.
Or, because it's Ireland, it could have ended in a different and even more heartbreaking way for Irish fans.
So the problem with the Henry handball wasn't the laws of the game, but FIFA's incomprehensible refusal to allow video replay in some circumstances. At least now FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to announce that FIFA will have a meeting to discuss the possibility of forming a committee to analyze the need for a panel to study the issue in greater detail. For FIFA, that's progress.
But Suarez's handball is different. The foul was seen and the laws were properly applied. And that's the problem. The punishment simply doesn't fit the crime in a circumstance when an outfield player is the last man on the line to stop a goal. If Suarez doesn't punch the ball out, it's a goal. If he does, there's at least a possibility that the other team won't score - a very high possibility, it turns out.
It's like if the punishment for stealing $100 was a $75 fine - and you got to keep the $100.
It's also analagous to, in American football, a cornerback getting beaten by a wide receiver on a deep pass. If the receiver catches the ball, it's a sure touchdown, so the cornerback has every incentive to commit a pass interference penalty. Sure, the cornerback gets penalized, but at least the other team didn't score.
Rather than navel-gaze about whether Suarez was immoral for doing what he did, a simple rule change needs to be put into place. If a defender is in the six-yard box, commits an intentional handball, and that handball, in the referee's judgment, is the only thing that prevents the ball from going into the net, then the goal should be awarded AND the player should be shown a straight red card.
By making such a rule change, FIFA would remove the incentive for a player to take the action Suarez did. With that rule change, it would no longer be a rational decision to intentionally handle the ball in that circumstance - a result that would be good for the game as a whole.
Of course, controversy and navel-gazing is what's really good for the sport, so we should not make that rule change and keep video replay out of football. Right, Mr. Blatter?
The Moment I Knew
I've been following soccer for a long time, particularly for an American. I first began following the World Cup closely in 1998. I was recently divorced, and the spectacle and the games were something compelling to take my mind off my personal struggles. In 2002, I was mezmerized by the US run to the quarterfinals and was waking up at 2:00 a.m. to watch the quarterfinal game live. By then, I was a regular soccer watcher. I thought I was a fan.
I realized, though, that I hadn't made that transition until recently. It took a Saturday morning breakfast at the International House of Pancakes to make me see the light. I was having breakfast with my brother, who played soccer but isn't a particular fan. He did, however, watch the Ghana-Uruguay game, and we were discussing the game's dramatic end. He told me about how sad he was that Ghana lost, because they were carrying the banner of Africa in the first African World Cup, and how particularly bad he felt for Asamoah Gyan, who missed the decisive penalty kick at the end of extra time.
Of course he did, I thought to myself. Ghana was a great, heartwarming story, and all right-minded neutrals should have been pulling for Ghana's fairy-tale run to continue.
And that's the moment when I realized I had really become a soccer fan. Because I watched that game too. But I didn't see it the way my brother saw it. All I saw was the team that knocked my beloved Yanks out of the 2010 World Cup 2-1 in the Round of 16, the same way they knocked them out of the 2006 World Cup 2-1 in the group stage. When I saw Gyan striding to the spot to win the game for Ghana, I didn't see a noble man carrying the hopes of a continent on his shoulders. I saw the man who, a few days earlier, hit a thunderbolt of a shot in the 93rd minute over the outstretched arms of Tim Howard to end my World Cup dreams.
And, God help me, I wanted him to miss.
I'm not at all convinced that what's happened to me is a good thing. As I reflected to my brother, I believe I am now a step or two closer from burning tires in the streets and throwing bags filled with things bags should not be filled with at a stadium.
But I'm also feeling, I think, the true passion of the Beautiful Game. I am feeling the ebb and flow, the life and death that occurs every ninety minutes in a meaningful match. I'm thinking that a Captain America costume might very well be an appropriate thing to wear in public (even more than I would before). And I can't wait for the start of the Premier League season, so I can see Tim Howard, Clint Dempsey, and Landon Donovan play in the most exciting league in the world.
Is it 2014 yet? Given the progress the US team is making, I can't wait to see them get beat 2-1 by Ghana in the quarterfinals.
I realized, though, that I hadn't made that transition until recently. It took a Saturday morning breakfast at the International House of Pancakes to make me see the light. I was having breakfast with my brother, who played soccer but isn't a particular fan. He did, however, watch the Ghana-Uruguay game, and we were discussing the game's dramatic end. He told me about how sad he was that Ghana lost, because they were carrying the banner of Africa in the first African World Cup, and how particularly bad he felt for Asamoah Gyan, who missed the decisive penalty kick at the end of extra time.
Of course he did, I thought to myself. Ghana was a great, heartwarming story, and all right-minded neutrals should have been pulling for Ghana's fairy-tale run to continue.
And that's the moment when I realized I had really become a soccer fan. Because I watched that game too. But I didn't see it the way my brother saw it. All I saw was the team that knocked my beloved Yanks out of the 2010 World Cup 2-1 in the Round of 16, the same way they knocked them out of the 2006 World Cup 2-1 in the group stage. When I saw Gyan striding to the spot to win the game for Ghana, I didn't see a noble man carrying the hopes of a continent on his shoulders. I saw the man who, a few days earlier, hit a thunderbolt of a shot in the 93rd minute over the outstretched arms of Tim Howard to end my World Cup dreams.
And, God help me, I wanted him to miss.
I'm not at all convinced that what's happened to me is a good thing. As I reflected to my brother, I believe I am now a step or two closer from burning tires in the streets and throwing bags filled with things bags should not be filled with at a stadium.
But I'm also feeling, I think, the true passion of the Beautiful Game. I am feeling the ebb and flow, the life and death that occurs every ninety minutes in a meaningful match. I'm thinking that a Captain America costume might very well be an appropriate thing to wear in public (even more than I would before). And I can't wait for the start of the Premier League season, so I can see Tim Howard, Clint Dempsey, and Landon Donovan play in the most exciting league in the world.
Is it 2014 yet? Given the progress the US team is making, I can't wait to see them get beat 2-1 by Ghana in the quarterfinals.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
So, Now What?
The final whistle has blown, and the US are all out of magic. The Americans rode their luck once too often, and have been knocked out of the World Cup as a result. There will be four long years to ponder what could have been, and what will be.
But where do we go from here? There's a lot of positive signs. First, and most obvious, is the young players that got a ton of playing time. Jozy Altidore was maddeningly inconsistent, but he's only 20 years old. By the time Rio rolls around in 2014, he'll be 24 and just starting to take off. Michael Bradley is 22, and is already showing signs of leadership at a young age.
And, of course, Charlie Davies is only 24. Remember Davies? How much different would this World Cup have looked had Davies been available instead of Bob Bradley having to rely on Edson Buddle, Robbie Findley, and Herculez Gomez? Davies is recovering and, if he stays healthy, will be in the prime of his career come 2014.
The US also has a youth academy setup that is just starting to put its' roots down. In 1999, the brass at the national team created Project 2010 with the intent of winning the world up in 2010. Obviously, that goal has fallen a little short. But by setting a target, movement towards it has been achieved. Part of project 2010 was the creation of a development academy which has produced players like Donovan and DaMarcus Beasley. The talent in that pipeline has been growing steadily since.
Another reason to be encouraged is the response to the US loss to Ghana. Yes, there's been a lot of attaboys thrown the way of the US team, and that's appropriate. But there's also disappointment and a little consternation that the US couldn't beat a team that hadn't scored a goal from open play in the tournament.
That is a good thing. We'll know the US has really arrived as a soccer nation when getting out of the group stage is something to be expected, not celebrated. There is a massive difference between hoping for success and expecting success. Right now the US public is somewhere in the middle, and that's probably appropriate given the maturity level of the US national soccer program. But if, as the program grows, the expectations of success for the program grow as well, then the two can feed off each other and push the team to greater heights.
But there's reason to be concerned as well. This team rose and fell in South Africa on the backs of Landon Donovan (27) and Clint Dempsey (28). Four more years will put both of those guys on the wrong side of 30. The Italians tried to ride into South Africa with thirtysomethings leading the way. How'd that turn out for them?
So, it's awfully tough to look four years into the future to see what the squad will look like. But it's fair to say at this point that the 2010 plan (give it to Donovan and hope for the best) will be successful in 2014. While 2010 might have been the breakthrough in terms of attention from the country as a whole, 2014 might be the year that the US can demonstrate that it's a program and not just one standout player.
But the two are a bit synergetic. Greater attention from the fan base as a whole will translate into more talent in the pipeline and better players on the field. So the success of the US in 2014 is very much linked to the success of the 2010 team in capturing the minds of the American sports fan.
And, in that goal, the US were hugely successful. The group stage games drew monstrous ratings for games on cable - and these were games televised at nine in the morning on a weekday. Prior to this World Cup, soccer was the butt of any number of jokes from sports-talk hosts belittling the game for any number of reasons - but mainly because the US wasn't particularly good at the sport.
ESPN's blanket coverage of the World Cup was a big help. By getting coverage on a regular basis, American sports fans are starting to get the feel of soccer as a part of their sports landscape. Having a team in red, white, and blue to cheer it even more a part of the landscape, and having the team succeed in such dramatic fashion puts the icing on the cake. Donovan's stoppage-time winner against Algeria has been described as soccer's "man on the moon" moment. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen.
After all, the American sports fan's interest can be drawn every four years to sports that are otherwise inconsequential. Michael Phelps' mastery of the pool made everyone swimming fans for two weeks in Beijing, but no one is watching a swim meet three weeks after the Olympics ended. Is there any reason to think that soccer won't meet the same fate?
Indeed there is. ESPN has a lot to do with it, I think. When Setanta collapsed at the beginning of last year's Premier League season, ESPN snapped up their rights to Premier League coverage. The result was a season full of Saturday morning live Premier League matches on ESPN. It also meant, thanks to cross-promotion, that the result was a season of Premier League highlights and soccer discussion on SportsCenter. Those highlights get mixed in with ESPN's coverage of Major League Soccer, keeping soccer yet again somewhere in the highlight reel. Again, soccer gets into the mix for a sports fan's daily diet of sports consumption, and isn't something that disappears into the ether for another four years.
So, does that mean that potential success for the US in the 2014 World Cup could be due to the collapse of Setanta Sports? Well, you know what they say about a butterfly flapping its' wings ...
Soccer is sitting on the verge of unprecedented growth in the United States. No, it's never going to displace football (the American kind), baseball, or basketball. But soccer now has a toe-hold on the attention of the "average" American sports fan. Smart marketing from the professional leagues, including a successful reprise of the "summer of soccer" pre-season tour, along with continued interest in the Premier League and continued growth in Major League Soccer will push the game along to where it can be a regular part of the sports landscape in the US.
I happened to be staying in a hotel in rural Illinois with my mother and my wife on the day of the Ghana game. I had my US jersey on, and was in the lobby after the game. I was stopped more than once and asked about the result, and the nature of the questions made it pretty clear that they knew what happened before. As someone who has followed soccer for a while now, I can guarantee you that four years ago, no one in rural Illinois would have known about the US performance in group play. It's likely they wouldn't have known the World Cup was going on.
So there's reason to be hopeful. There's reason to expect the steady growth of soccer throughout the coming years. And there's reason to think that Project 2010 might not have been a pipe dream, but merely a bit premature.
Thank you to Landon Donovan, and the rest of the team for everything you've accomplished. It may have been a small step in the World Cup, but 2010 might well prove to be a giant leap for soccer in the United States.
But where do we go from here? There's a lot of positive signs. First, and most obvious, is the young players that got a ton of playing time. Jozy Altidore was maddeningly inconsistent, but he's only 20 years old. By the time Rio rolls around in 2014, he'll be 24 and just starting to take off. Michael Bradley is 22, and is already showing signs of leadership at a young age.
And, of course, Charlie Davies is only 24. Remember Davies? How much different would this World Cup have looked had Davies been available instead of Bob Bradley having to rely on Edson Buddle, Robbie Findley, and Herculez Gomez? Davies is recovering and, if he stays healthy, will be in the prime of his career come 2014.
The US also has a youth academy setup that is just starting to put its' roots down. In 1999, the brass at the national team created Project 2010 with the intent of winning the world up in 2010. Obviously, that goal has fallen a little short. But by setting a target, movement towards it has been achieved. Part of project 2010 was the creation of a development academy which has produced players like Donovan and DaMarcus Beasley. The talent in that pipeline has been growing steadily since.
Another reason to be encouraged is the response to the US loss to Ghana. Yes, there's been a lot of attaboys thrown the way of the US team, and that's appropriate. But there's also disappointment and a little consternation that the US couldn't beat a team that hadn't scored a goal from open play in the tournament.
That is a good thing. We'll know the US has really arrived as a soccer nation when getting out of the group stage is something to be expected, not celebrated. There is a massive difference between hoping for success and expecting success. Right now the US public is somewhere in the middle, and that's probably appropriate given the maturity level of the US national soccer program. But if, as the program grows, the expectations of success for the program grow as well, then the two can feed off each other and push the team to greater heights.
But there's reason to be concerned as well. This team rose and fell in South Africa on the backs of Landon Donovan (27) and Clint Dempsey (28). Four more years will put both of those guys on the wrong side of 30. The Italians tried to ride into South Africa with thirtysomethings leading the way. How'd that turn out for them?
So, it's awfully tough to look four years into the future to see what the squad will look like. But it's fair to say at this point that the 2010 plan (give it to Donovan and hope for the best) will be successful in 2014. While 2010 might have been the breakthrough in terms of attention from the country as a whole, 2014 might be the year that the US can demonstrate that it's a program and not just one standout player.
But the two are a bit synergetic. Greater attention from the fan base as a whole will translate into more talent in the pipeline and better players on the field. So the success of the US in 2014 is very much linked to the success of the 2010 team in capturing the minds of the American sports fan.
And, in that goal, the US were hugely successful. The group stage games drew monstrous ratings for games on cable - and these were games televised at nine in the morning on a weekday. Prior to this World Cup, soccer was the butt of any number of jokes from sports-talk hosts belittling the game for any number of reasons - but mainly because the US wasn't particularly good at the sport.
ESPN's blanket coverage of the World Cup was a big help. By getting coverage on a regular basis, American sports fans are starting to get the feel of soccer as a part of their sports landscape. Having a team in red, white, and blue to cheer it even more a part of the landscape, and having the team succeed in such dramatic fashion puts the icing on the cake. Donovan's stoppage-time winner against Algeria has been described as soccer's "man on the moon" moment. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen.
After all, the American sports fan's interest can be drawn every four years to sports that are otherwise inconsequential. Michael Phelps' mastery of the pool made everyone swimming fans for two weeks in Beijing, but no one is watching a swim meet three weeks after the Olympics ended. Is there any reason to think that soccer won't meet the same fate?
Indeed there is. ESPN has a lot to do with it, I think. When Setanta collapsed at the beginning of last year's Premier League season, ESPN snapped up their rights to Premier League coverage. The result was a season full of Saturday morning live Premier League matches on ESPN. It also meant, thanks to cross-promotion, that the result was a season of Premier League highlights and soccer discussion on SportsCenter. Those highlights get mixed in with ESPN's coverage of Major League Soccer, keeping soccer yet again somewhere in the highlight reel. Again, soccer gets into the mix for a sports fan's daily diet of sports consumption, and isn't something that disappears into the ether for another four years.
So, does that mean that potential success for the US in the 2014 World Cup could be due to the collapse of Setanta Sports? Well, you know what they say about a butterfly flapping its' wings ...
Soccer is sitting on the verge of unprecedented growth in the United States. No, it's never going to displace football (the American kind), baseball, or basketball. But soccer now has a toe-hold on the attention of the "average" American sports fan. Smart marketing from the professional leagues, including a successful reprise of the "summer of soccer" pre-season tour, along with continued interest in the Premier League and continued growth in Major League Soccer will push the game along to where it can be a regular part of the sports landscape in the US.
I happened to be staying in a hotel in rural Illinois with my mother and my wife on the day of the Ghana game. I had my US jersey on, and was in the lobby after the game. I was stopped more than once and asked about the result, and the nature of the questions made it pretty clear that they knew what happened before. As someone who has followed soccer for a while now, I can guarantee you that four years ago, no one in rural Illinois would have known about the US performance in group play. It's likely they wouldn't have known the World Cup was going on.
So there's reason to be hopeful. There's reason to expect the steady growth of soccer throughout the coming years. And there's reason to think that Project 2010 might not have been a pipe dream, but merely a bit premature.
Thank you to Landon Donovan, and the rest of the team for everything you've accomplished. It may have been a small step in the World Cup, but 2010 might well prove to be a giant leap for soccer in the United States.
YTG Re-View: USA 1-2 Ghana
THE GOOD ...
- RESILIENCE: Well, if nothing else, we know this team can take a punch. After conceding yet another early goal, the US dug in and gave as good as they got, particularly in the second half.
- MIDFIELD MAESTROS: Sure, we knew Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan were world-class players. But Michael Bradley, with his energy, vision, and desire, has put himself into the discussion of the must-have players from the US squad. He's got a nice gig in Germany, but don't be surprised if he gets a little attention.
- THE IMPACT SUB: Once again, Benny Feilhaber comes on at halftime and changes the game for the US. Much of the American resurgence in the second half came from Feilhaber's quickness and passing, as well as being able to stretch the field. One wonders what the game would have looked like if he started ...
THE BAD ...
- ISN'T IT OBVIOUS? A goal inside five minutes of the start of the game. A goal inside three minutes of the start of extra time. At this point, I think Bob Bradley's best option is just to have the US kick the ball into their own net at the start of each game. That way, we all get it over with and the players don't have to wait to "turn it on."
- THE GOAT: I know, it's harsh, but the facts are the facts. Ricardo Clark gave up the goal against England. Clark gave up the goal against Ghana. Bradley said that Clark's substitution was only because of the yellow card, but exactly no one believes him. There's a lot of reasons why the US got beat by Ghana, and a lot of blame to go around. But, unfortunately, you have to start with Clark.
- ROSTER CALLS: For much of this tournament, Bradley's squad selection has been right on the money. But by choosing Clark over Edu or Feilhaber, and by choosing Findley over Buddle or Gomez (or just starting Edu and Feilhaber and putting Dempsey up front), Bradley left the US vulnerable to the type of devastatingly slow starts they'd fell victim to throughout the tournament. I think Bradley, overall, did a good job, but this was a strike against him.
... AND THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
Ghana won this game, and as such deserve to go on in the tournament. But this was much more a US loss than a Ghana win. Both Ghana goals were gifts from defensive gaffes - if you allow a team who hadn't scored from open play the entire tournament to put two past you, you're doing something wrong. A better game against Ghana and the US moves on to the quarterfinals against a team that's not Argentina, and a chance to let the magic run. The Americans accomplished what they were supposed to accomplish in South Africa - get out of the group stage, and likely get knocked out in the first round. To meet your expectations is definitely a good thing - just ask Italy. But the opportunity was there to do more, and the US got in their own way of taking advantage of it.
THE BIG PICTURE.
That's worthy of another 'blog post. Check out "So, Now What?" soon to follow.
THE FINAL WORD.
While the Ghana loss is disappointing, ultimately you have to be proud as an American for how the team gutted out their group stage performances, got the results they needed, and accomplished what they set out to accomplish. Hopefully, between the success they achieved and the unprecedented support from the American sports fan they received, this will be the building block of the Beautiful Game's growth in the Land of the Free.
Is it 2014 yet?
- RESILIENCE: Well, if nothing else, we know this team can take a punch. After conceding yet another early goal, the US dug in and gave as good as they got, particularly in the second half.
- MIDFIELD MAESTROS: Sure, we knew Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan were world-class players. But Michael Bradley, with his energy, vision, and desire, has put himself into the discussion of the must-have players from the US squad. He's got a nice gig in Germany, but don't be surprised if he gets a little attention.
- THE IMPACT SUB: Once again, Benny Feilhaber comes on at halftime and changes the game for the US. Much of the American resurgence in the second half came from Feilhaber's quickness and passing, as well as being able to stretch the field. One wonders what the game would have looked like if he started ...
THE BAD ...
- ISN'T IT OBVIOUS? A goal inside five minutes of the start of the game. A goal inside three minutes of the start of extra time. At this point, I think Bob Bradley's best option is just to have the US kick the ball into their own net at the start of each game. That way, we all get it over with and the players don't have to wait to "turn it on."
- THE GOAT: I know, it's harsh, but the facts are the facts. Ricardo Clark gave up the goal against England. Clark gave up the goal against Ghana. Bradley said that Clark's substitution was only because of the yellow card, but exactly no one believes him. There's a lot of reasons why the US got beat by Ghana, and a lot of blame to go around. But, unfortunately, you have to start with Clark.
- ROSTER CALLS: For much of this tournament, Bradley's squad selection has been right on the money. But by choosing Clark over Edu or Feilhaber, and by choosing Findley over Buddle or Gomez (or just starting Edu and Feilhaber and putting Dempsey up front), Bradley left the US vulnerable to the type of devastatingly slow starts they'd fell victim to throughout the tournament. I think Bradley, overall, did a good job, but this was a strike against him.
... AND THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
Ghana won this game, and as such deserve to go on in the tournament. But this was much more a US loss than a Ghana win. Both Ghana goals were gifts from defensive gaffes - if you allow a team who hadn't scored from open play the entire tournament to put two past you, you're doing something wrong. A better game against Ghana and the US moves on to the quarterfinals against a team that's not Argentina, and a chance to let the magic run. The Americans accomplished what they were supposed to accomplish in South Africa - get out of the group stage, and likely get knocked out in the first round. To meet your expectations is definitely a good thing - just ask Italy. But the opportunity was there to do more, and the US got in their own way of taking advantage of it.
THE BIG PICTURE.
That's worthy of another 'blog post. Check out "So, Now What?" soon to follow.
THE FINAL WORD.
While the Ghana loss is disappointing, ultimately you have to be proud as an American for how the team gutted out their group stage performances, got the results they needed, and accomplished what they set out to accomplish. Hopefully, between the success they achieved and the unprecedented support from the American sports fan they received, this will be the building block of the Beautiful Game's growth in the Land of the Free.
Is it 2014 yet?
Thursday, June 24, 2010
YTG Re-View: USA 1-0 Algeria
THE GOOD ...
- RESILIENCE: More than anything, this game (and, quite honestly, the entire World Cup campaign) was a testament to a never-say-die attitude from the US team. They faced any number of obstacles, both created by themselves (see 0-2 Slovenia at half) and imposed upon them (see Coulibaly, Kouman). But they continually dug in, stayed in the game, and ultimately got rewarded for it.
- UNSUNG HEROES: Landon Donovan will rightly get all the glory for netting the game-winning and group-winning goal. But Jozy Altidore had one of his best 90 minutes, demonstrating speed and a deft touch. While Donovan definitely "wrote the future" with his goal, we may also have seen a glimpse of the future with Altidore. Also checking in with a great performance was Jonathan Bornstein, called into duty with Bob Bradley's brave decision to bench Oguchi Onyewu. After a less-than-stellar qualifying campaign, Bornstein acquitted himself very well helping to keep the Algerian attack at bay.
- JUSTICE: Sure, soccer is a game for drama queens and prone to hyperbole. But Donovan's stoppage-time winner really gave us what was the right result. Not only did the US advance and get the glory of winning the group, but by finishing first they get put into a four-team group with Ghana, Uruguay, and South Korea instead of Germany, Argentina, and Mexico. Sure, every game is tough, but I think if you shot Bradley full of truth serum he'd be pretty happy with his draw. Although, how could would a USA-Mexico quarterfinal match be ...
THE BAD ...
- THE WIDTH OF THE CROSSBAR: That's how close the US was from having yet another calamitous start to a World Cup finals game. Good grief, guys, how hard is it to get through the first 15 minutes of a game without killing the people cheering for you?
- THE FOLKS WITH THE WHISTLES: At least this time it was defensible. Once again, the US has a legitimate goal taken off the board. This time, it was early in the game, when Clint Dempsey had a strike erased for an offside call when replay showed he was even with the defender. It was a close call, to be sure, and that stuff happens. But, boy, it seems like it happened a lot to the US in group play.
- THE SKIN OF THEIR TEETH: As the story unfolded, Donovan scored and the US team get to be the heroes of the country. But don't forget, they were about 150 seconds away from being eliminated from the World Cup at the group stage. It's not that far off from their performance in the Confederations Cup last year, when they needed to hammer Egypt and get help to advance to knockout competition. Yes, it's a great result, but it was razor-close in getting there.
... AND THE REASON WE WATCH THIS GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I said after the Slovenia game that if you weren't a soccer fan after that game, there was something wrong with you. After this game, if you aren't a soccer fan, you're just plain dead. This game had everything - massive emotional swings, villainous decisions going against the heroes, near-misses, and the final, dramatic ending. And it couldn't be better for the growth of the game in the United States. Thanks to ESPN's relentless promotion, and the US performance, the group stage games drew massive television ratings and delivered. Now, we'll have at least another week of soccer stealing the national spotlight in the US.
THE BIG PICTURE
At the start of the competition, we expected England and the US to advance. England and the US advanced. Should we look at this result as merely the expected coming to pass? Of course not, and it was the way the result occurred. For US fans,
THE NEXT GAME: United States v. Ghana. As if the Yanks needed motivation for a World Cup knockout round game, it was the Black Stars that ended their 2006 World Cup in the groups with a controversial penalty kick call. Ghana sets up very similarly to Algeria, lacking a true single goal-scoring machine but possessing a lot of quickness and danger throughout the squad. Yes, they haven't scored from open play, but it doesn't mean they won't be a very dangerous opponent.
FEARLESS FORECAST: Most observers would say that the US has achieved their reasonable objective at this year's World Cup by making it out of the group. That means the US will be able to play without fear, as they're already playing with house money. They can come out loose and aggressive against a Ghana team that sets up in a very similar manner to Algeria. Look for almost the same lineup, with the exception of Edson Buddle or Robbie Findley starting up front instead of Herculez Gomez, and for the US to convert on some of the chances missed against the Desert Foxes. US 2-0 Ghana, equaling the American's best performance at a World Cup.
- RESILIENCE: More than anything, this game (and, quite honestly, the entire World Cup campaign) was a testament to a never-say-die attitude from the US team. They faced any number of obstacles, both created by themselves (see 0-2 Slovenia at half) and imposed upon them (see Coulibaly, Kouman). But they continually dug in, stayed in the game, and ultimately got rewarded for it.
- UNSUNG HEROES: Landon Donovan will rightly get all the glory for netting the game-winning and group-winning goal. But Jozy Altidore had one of his best 90 minutes, demonstrating speed and a deft touch. While Donovan definitely "wrote the future" with his goal, we may also have seen a glimpse of the future with Altidore. Also checking in with a great performance was Jonathan Bornstein, called into duty with Bob Bradley's brave decision to bench Oguchi Onyewu. After a less-than-stellar qualifying campaign, Bornstein acquitted himself very well helping to keep the Algerian attack at bay.
- JUSTICE: Sure, soccer is a game for drama queens and prone to hyperbole. But Donovan's stoppage-time winner really gave us what was the right result. Not only did the US advance and get the glory of winning the group, but by finishing first they get put into a four-team group with Ghana, Uruguay, and South Korea instead of Germany, Argentina, and Mexico. Sure, every game is tough, but I think if you shot Bradley full of truth serum he'd be pretty happy with his draw. Although, how could would a USA-Mexico quarterfinal match be ...
THE BAD ...
- THE WIDTH OF THE CROSSBAR: That's how close the US was from having yet another calamitous start to a World Cup finals game. Good grief, guys, how hard is it to get through the first 15 minutes of a game without killing the people cheering for you?
- THE FOLKS WITH THE WHISTLES: At least this time it was defensible. Once again, the US has a legitimate goal taken off the board. This time, it was early in the game, when Clint Dempsey had a strike erased for an offside call when replay showed he was even with the defender. It was a close call, to be sure, and that stuff happens. But, boy, it seems like it happened a lot to the US in group play.
- THE SKIN OF THEIR TEETH: As the story unfolded, Donovan scored and the US team get to be the heroes of the country. But don't forget, they were about 150 seconds away from being eliminated from the World Cup at the group stage. It's not that far off from their performance in the Confederations Cup last year, when they needed to hammer Egypt and get help to advance to knockout competition. Yes, it's a great result, but it was razor-close in getting there.
... AND THE REASON WE WATCH THIS GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I said after the Slovenia game that if you weren't a soccer fan after that game, there was something wrong with you. After this game, if you aren't a soccer fan, you're just plain dead. This game had everything - massive emotional swings, villainous decisions going against the heroes, near-misses, and the final, dramatic ending. And it couldn't be better for the growth of the game in the United States. Thanks to ESPN's relentless promotion, and the US performance, the group stage games drew massive television ratings and delivered. Now, we'll have at least another week of soccer stealing the national spotlight in the US.
THE BIG PICTURE
At the start of the competition, we expected England and the US to advance. England and the US advanced. Should we look at this result as merely the expected coming to pass? Of course not, and it was the way the result occurred. For US fans,
THE NEXT GAME: United States v. Ghana. As if the Yanks needed motivation for a World Cup knockout round game, it was the Black Stars that ended their 2006 World Cup in the groups with a controversial penalty kick call. Ghana sets up very similarly to Algeria, lacking a true single goal-scoring machine but possessing a lot of quickness and danger throughout the squad. Yes, they haven't scored from open play, but it doesn't mean they won't be a very dangerous opponent.
FEARLESS FORECAST: Most observers would say that the US has achieved their reasonable objective at this year's World Cup by making it out of the group. That means the US will be able to play without fear, as they're already playing with house money. They can come out loose and aggressive against a Ghana team that sets up in a very similar manner to Algeria. Look for almost the same lineup, with the exception of Edson Buddle or Robbie Findley starting up front instead of Herculez Gomez, and for the US to convert on some of the chances missed against the Desert Foxes. US 2-0 Ghana, equaling the American's best performance at a World Cup.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Happy/Sad: USA - Algeria
For the US fan watching the Algeria game Wednesday morning:
YOU'LL BE HAPPY IF:
- THE US DOESN'T COLLAPSE EARLY. It's becoming almost cartoon-like in its' predictability. After conceding in the fourth minute against England, the black-comedy buzz around the establishment at which I was watching the Slovenia match was that they'd better not let the Charlie Browns score early. Oops. Algeria has shown the least amount of firepower in Group C, but that doesn't mean they're not capable of scoring and putting the US in (another) hole to start the game.
- GOOCH IS READY TO GO. Particularly with the first goal against Slovenia, defender Oguchi Onyewu looked off the pace of the game. Given the length of time he's been out of action with injury, some rustiness would be expected. But the US will need their star defender to be alert and ready to go from the opening whistle against the Desert Foxes.
- BRADLEY GETS THE MIDFIELD RIGHT. Coach Bob Bradley has been tinkering with the midfield, starting a defensive Ricardo Clark against England, a more creative Jose Torres against Slovenia, and subbing Maurice Edu for Torres when he needed a spark in the second half. Given that the US could advance even with a draw, and given his innate conservatism, I would be surprised if Clark doesn't get the nod, with Edu coming on if the US needs some attack.
YOU'LL BE SAD IF ...
- ENGLAND SCORE BEFORE THE US. The US has a two-goal advantage over England in their group standings, meaning if everything stays the same then the US would advance over England. Even if everything else remains the same, if England score early and get up on the Charlie Browns, there will be added pressure on the US to push forward and score.
- THE US THINKS THE SLOVENIA SECOND HALF MEANS THEY ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING. It was a phenomenal second-half performance against Slovenia the US put in, maybe the best I've ever seen from an American team. But if the US thinks, in any way, that performance did anything other than give them an opportunity, then they're set up to come out flat again, go behind again, and have to go to the well again for a miracle comeback. It was pretty tough to imagine the US fighting back once from a deficit - it's even more tough to imagine them doing it again.
- ALGERIA FIND THEIR MOJO. While they've been the worst of the four Group C teams so far, it's not like Algeria haven't had their moments. They had quite a bit of the run of play against Slovenia, and had their chances against England. If the Desert Foxes are able to get a toe-hold into the game, they could cause the US some real heartache.
YOU'LL BE HAPPY IF:
- THE US DOESN'T COLLAPSE EARLY. It's becoming almost cartoon-like in its' predictability. After conceding in the fourth minute against England, the black-comedy buzz around the establishment at which I was watching the Slovenia match was that they'd better not let the Charlie Browns score early. Oops. Algeria has shown the least amount of firepower in Group C, but that doesn't mean they're not capable of scoring and putting the US in (another) hole to start the game.
- GOOCH IS READY TO GO. Particularly with the first goal against Slovenia, defender Oguchi Onyewu looked off the pace of the game. Given the length of time he's been out of action with injury, some rustiness would be expected. But the US will need their star defender to be alert and ready to go from the opening whistle against the Desert Foxes.
- BRADLEY GETS THE MIDFIELD RIGHT. Coach Bob Bradley has been tinkering with the midfield, starting a defensive Ricardo Clark against England, a more creative Jose Torres against Slovenia, and subbing Maurice Edu for Torres when he needed a spark in the second half. Given that the US could advance even with a draw, and given his innate conservatism, I would be surprised if Clark doesn't get the nod, with Edu coming on if the US needs some attack.
YOU'LL BE SAD IF ...
- ENGLAND SCORE BEFORE THE US. The US has a two-goal advantage over England in their group standings, meaning if everything stays the same then the US would advance over England. Even if everything else remains the same, if England score early and get up on the Charlie Browns, there will be added pressure on the US to push forward and score.
- THE US THINKS THE SLOVENIA SECOND HALF MEANS THEY ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING. It was a phenomenal second-half performance against Slovenia the US put in, maybe the best I've ever seen from an American team. But if the US thinks, in any way, that performance did anything other than give them an opportunity, then they're set up to come out flat again, go behind again, and have to go to the well again for a miracle comeback. It was pretty tough to imagine the US fighting back once from a deficit - it's even more tough to imagine them doing it again.
- ALGERIA FIND THEIR MOJO. While they've been the worst of the four Group C teams so far, it's not like Algeria haven't had their moments. They had quite a bit of the run of play against Slovenia, and had their chances against England. If the Desert Foxes are able to get a toe-hold into the game, they could cause the US some real heartache.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
