Soccer: USA vs. Germany

[Senator]

They think it's over!

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Crapshoot is right too. There are a number of US fans who get highly defensive at ANY criticism of the US National Team and respond with "Eurosnob" and crap like that.

We Americans are very protective of our right to criticize other Americans. "The only person who is allowed to pick on my baby brother is me!"

[marshall881]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

So what are the chances of Gibbs, Ching, or Twellman making the squad?

I think that Gibbs and Twellman have a decent shot. Both should get another look against Jamaica.

Ching has played his way off the squad I would think.

[bbor]

Speaking as a German(well...German-Canadian as it is)i can trythfully say i would be surprised if the Germans do any damage in the WC.I was very much shocked at how well they did in the last WC as i thought they were an aging group then with few young players on the way up.I see them as much the same squad this time around,and i can tell you the people of the host nation are very nervous as to how well the team will do.

[moriarty]

If anything I think this highlights the lack of depth of the American team. Yeah, our first 11 - 14 players might be pretty good (albeit lacking in superstars), but we are still way behind other countries in terms of depth. I mean if McBride or EJ get injured do we really have anyone else that can play striker at the international level other than Donovan? And if Reyna can't perform, who is going to be our key central midfielder? I'd love to see the US team do well at the WC, but we're really dependent on a few folks being healthy.

Like it not, the 4-1 score is a bit of an embarrasment to the US program. How many soccer fans around the world really know/care whether we sent out our B/C team or not? All they know is a German team that got whipped by Italy, beat us bad 4-1. In a sport where the USA team is constantly striving for international respect, a poor outcome even in a friendly, is an embarrasment. Of course it's nothing that a strong WC performance can't overcome.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by moriarty

I'd love to see the US team do well at the WC, but we're really dependent on a few folks being healthy.

You can say this about virtually any country in the tournament, though.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

You can say this about virtually any country in the tournament, though.

Perhaps, but take England. Say Owen and (gasp) Rooney are injured. In step Crouch and Defoe. A step down, you bet. But both have proven they can play and score at the interational level and either would obviously start for USA. We would bring in Twellman/Ching?

In the midfield they have Gerrard, Beckham, Lampard, & Cole. Should they go down, they have more than capable players such as Carrick, Jenas and others who consistently play at a top level and in international competitions. That certainly beats a Pablo Mastroeni or Steve Ralston.

(note: England might have been a bad example as they seem awfully dependent on having a healthy Rooney).

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by moriarty

Perhaps, but take England. Say Owen and (gasp) Rooney are injured. In step Crouch and Defoe. A step down, you bet. But both have proven they can play and score at the interational level and either would obviously start for USA. We would bring in Twellman/Ching?

In the midfield they have Gerrard, Beckham, Lampard, & Cole. Should they go down, they have more than capable players such as Carrick, Jenas and others who consistently play at a top level and in international competitions. That certainly beats a Pablo Mastroeni or Steve Ralston.

(note: England might have been a bad example as they seem awfully dependent on having a healthy Rooney).

England definitely has one of the deepest pool of midfielders to pull from in the tournament.......Our lack of quality depth was painfully obvious in the Germany friendly.

[ISiddiqui]

Yep wrt to England's MF. I mean if Beckham goes down, Lampard slides over to the right and Carrick comes in (and with the emphasis on defense, maybe a better English team). If both Gerrard and Lampard go down, Carrick and Beckham can play in the middle and have Shawn Wright-Phillips on the right. Or bring in Jenas or Parker to play the other central MF spot.

Depth is necessary, unless you have an amazing injuryless run. The US doesn't have that sort of depth. The US looses someone like Donovan, and we could be fucked.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by moriarty

(note: England might have been a bad example as they seem awfully dependent on having a healthy Rooney).

Aye - to quote F365, with Rooney, they can win the world cup. Without him, they'd make it to the quarters at the best.

A better example might in fact be Brazil (but that's unfair) or the Spanish - up front, they go with Torres and Raul, but injuries to those guys mean that Villa/Reyes will step up - there's a limited fall. In the midfield, there are Valeron, Xavi, Joaquin, and Vicente- an injury means they go to Albelda/Barajas/Alonso, or Guti. In goal, an injury to Casillas means Valdez or Canizares - not much of a drop off. Spain can function without any one of those players IMO - the US without Keller (who's the one world-class player on the US team) is in grave danger, especially given that defense.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yep wrt to England's MF. I mean if Beckham goes down, Lampard slides over to the right and Carrick comes in (and with the emphasis on defense, maybe a better English team). If both Gerrard and Lampard go down, Carrick and Beckham can play in the middle and have Shawn Wright-Phillips on the right. Or bring in Jenas or Parker to play the other central MF spot.

Depth is necessary, unless you have an amazing injuryless run. The US doesn't have that sort of depth. The US looses someone like Donovan, and we could be fucked.

Sidenote: Lampard's ass should be on the bench to begin with - Carrick ought to be playing with Gerrard. Lampard thrives at Chelsea because he doesn't have to do the hard work in midfield (tracking back all the time, so forth). He's a great player- but 2 attacking central midfielders alongside an attacking left winger (Cole - who cuts in to the centre) is a recepie for disaster against a solid team like a Brazil or even a pacy Spanish team. I'm biased, but Gerrard is a better player than Lampard, and to give him the freedom to support the attack, you need Carrick or Scott Parker laying back in front of the defense for the sake of balance.

[Katon]

Oh, not this again. In order to give Gerrard the freedom to attack the way he wants to, you have to keep him out of central midfield - or at least not play him in a two-man central midfield. If he's playing his normal game from the middle then what you wind up with is a lot of surging runs that leave his partner standing all on his own badly outnumbered. There's a reason Liverpool got much better when Benitez switched to using him on the right or in the hole behind the lone striker. There's also a reason for that stat that under Houllier Liverpool had a better record without Gerrard than with him.

I also think you're underestimating Lampard's defensive abilities. He's definitely an AM, but he does work fairly hard - especially when Eidur Gudjohnsen's playing in the third midfield slot.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Sidenote: Lampard's ass should be on the bench to begin with - Carrick ought to be playing with Gerrard. Lampard thrives at Chelsea because he doesn't have to do the hard work in midfield (tracking back all the time, so forth). He's a great player- but 2 attacking central midfielders alongside an attacking left winger (Cole - who cuts in to the centre) is a recepie for disaster against a solid team like a Brazil or even a pacy Spanish team. I'm biased, but Gerrard is a better player than Lampard, and to give him the freedom to support the attack, you need Carrick or Scott Parker laying back in front of the defense for the sake of balance.

Bull. If we were deciding central MF, Lampard should get it over Gerrard. Gerrard plays just as much on the right side at Liverpool, and is far better there, then the center. Lampard is who you want for an attacking MF. It wasn't like Lampard was crap at West Ham because he didn't have Makalele. If we are talking about just the middle MF spots, I'd take Lampard over Gerrard any day. Gerrard would be far better off taking Beckham's spot.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Bull. If we were deciding central MF, Lampard should get it over Gerrard. Gerrard plays just as much on the right side at Liverpool, and is far better there, then the center. Lampard is who you want for an attacking MF. It wasn't like Lampard was crap at West Ham because he didn't have Makalele. If we are talking about just the middle MF spots, I'd take Lampard over Gerrard any day. Gerrard would be far better off taking Beckham's spot.

I'd throw my hate in for Gerrard (not sure how/when this became an England thread, but I suppose it's my fault). He may line up on the right side of the lineup sheet for Liverpool, but truth be told he spends much more time in the central, or at least tucked in on the right, and tends to roam quite freely all over the pitch. Having said that I do feel he's going to be exhausted by the WC (he's played an unbelievable amount of matches this year, and seems to be slowing down a bit IMO - lots of carelesss turnovers lately).

I'd like to see Gerrard as the AMC, Lampard or Carrick as DMF (depending on whether you want a more offensive or defensive team) and utilize Becks/SWP on the right depending on whether the defensive leftback can be exposed by SWP's speed or not.

[AlexB]

No matter what preferences people here have, I guarantee that for our first WC game, assuming all are fit, the team is:

Robinson; G.Neville, Terry, Ferdinand (or possibly Campbell, but more likely Rio), A.Cole; Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, J.Cole; Rooney, Owen

The team simply picks itself, and Gerrard & Lampard have to work out that when one goes, the other stays. Hopefully they will get it - if not we will be in trouble against a good counter attacking side (please let's avoid Italy!)

[ISiddiqui]

LOL! @ moriarty's post below

damn timestamp bug

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

The team simply picks itself, and Gerrard & Lampard have to work out that when one goes, the other stays. Hopefully they will get it - if not we will be in trouble against a good counter attacking side (please let's avoid Italy!)

See, if you weren't such a Eurosnob, you would realize the US will eliminate Italy for you.

[Blade6119]

Back on topic, that was a nice header by EJ in the 2nd half...even better save by kahn, but nice to see EJ doing anything. I never got why ching kept getting shots with this team...i have never seen him play well, and he has played quite a few friendlies already. They should have brought in Wolff or cunningham and given them another look.

[Katon]

Originally Posted by moriarty

I'd throw my hate in for Gerrard

Oh come on, he's not that bad . . .

Originally Posted by moriarty

He may line up on the right side of the lineup sheet for Liverpool, but truth be told he spends much more time in the central, or at least tucked in on the right, and tends to roam quite freely all over the pitch.

Which is kind of my point. If you play Gerrard in a two-man central midfield, you have a simple choice: either stop him roaming around (which makes him much less of an offensive threat, to the point where I'd question whether he's even the best option), or leave his partner to cope with the other team's midfield entirely by himself. Because if he keeps charging forward, he's going to wind up too far upfield to track back effectively a decent amount of the time. Which is why you make sure you have two central midfielders who aren't wandering all over the place.

[Katon]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

No matter what preferences people here have, I guarantee that for our first WC game, assuming all are fit, the team is:

Robinson; G.Neville, Terry, Ferdinand (or possibly Campbell, but more likely Rio), A.Cole; Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, J.Cole; Rooney, Owen

The team simply picks itself, and Gerrard & Lampard have to work out that when one goes, the other stays. Hopefully they will get it - if not we will be in trouble against a good counter attacking side (please let's avoid Italy!)

Well, yes, obviously that's going to be the team that actually plays (and given his current form I really hope it's not Campbell). Sven would always rather drop the big names a week too late than a week too soon. I'm just not convinced the midfield's the best we can do.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Back on topic, that was a nice header by EJ in the 2nd half...even better save by kahn, but nice to see EJ doing anything. I never got why ching kept getting shots with this team...i have never seen him play well, and he has played quite a few friendlies already. They should have brought in Wolff or cunningham and given them another look.

wolff was there. he went out after 20 with an injury

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

...the US without Keller (who's the one world-class player on the US team) is in grave danger, especially given that defense.

Wrong again (why am I not surprised).

If Keller goes down Arena will be on the sideline with a cell phone talking to Brad and the problem will be solved.

[terpkristin]

From ESPNsoccernet...

Arena: Playing Germany was a mistake

Associated Press



HAMBURG, Germany -- A day after his team's fiasco against Germany, U.S. coach Bruce Arena blamed himself for scheduling the game.
An undermanned American team was overwhelmed by the Germans 4-1 Wednesday night in Dortmund, and Arena didn't offer much encouragement in his assessment.
"We had anywhere from two to three first-team players playing, seven, eight, nine players fighting for a roster spot," he said after arriving Thursday in Hamburg, where the United States will be based during the tournament.
Because of injuries and club commitments, Landon Donovan, Brian McBride, Claudio Reyna, DaMarcus Beasley, Oguchi Onyewu and Eddie Lewis weren't with the U.S. team.
Arena's starting lineup included goalkeeper Kasey Keller, defender Steve Cherundolo and midfielder Pablo Mastroeni -- who all could be World Cup starters -- plus defenders Gregg Berhalter, Cory Gibbs and Jimmy Conrad; midfielder Kerry Zavagnin; and forwards Josh Wolff, Eddie Johnson and Brian Ching. Coming in as reserves were defender Heath Pearce; midfielders Chris Klein and Ben Olsen; and forward Taylor Twellman.
"I think there's some disappointment in some players because it was an opportunity for them to try to convince me that they belong on our roster for the World Cup," Arena said. "Most did not have a strong argument; some did."
Some of the regular starters weren't available because Wednesday wasn't set aside by FIFA as an international fixture date -- when all clubs must allow players to join national teams.
"We've worked real hard to build our team to where it is today, and to not prepare properly to play a game of that magnitude is a mistake, and I accept the full responsibility for that," Arena said. "If I felt that it wasn't the right time for us to play that game, I should have been a little bit strong in saying this is not the right time to play."
Keller gave up four goals in the second half and was upset at his team's performance against 22nd-ranked Germany, a soccer power that has struggled of late.
"I don't know what some our players thought, that they could just run around, do what they wanted to and Germany's players were just going to roll over and let you do that?" he said.
The United States, which has a No. 5 ranking that even it admits is misleading, has four remaining World Cup warmups, all at home and all against relatively weak opponents: No. 45 Jamaica (April 11 at Cary, N.C.), No. 37 Morocco (May 23 at Nashville, Tenn.), No. 70 Venezuela (May 26 at Cleveland) and No. 68 Latvia (May 28 at East Hartford, Conn.).
Against Jamaica, the roster is likely to be filled from players in Major League Soccer. Most of the Europe-based group will be available for the final three games.
Arena plans to narrow his potential roster to 30-33 following the Jamaica game, then announce his 23-man team about May 1, well before FIFA's May 15 deadline. The Americans leave June 1 for Germany and have first-round games against the Czech Republic, Italy and Ghana.
He was not too concerned about the latest injury to Reyna, who separated a shoulder last weekend playing for England's Manchester City. The U.S. captain is expected to be sidelined about a month.
"I think Claudio is fairly fit right now," Arena said. "Getting over the broken ankle was big. His ankle now is sound, so that's a positive. I think the shoulder separation is a temporary setback."
Arena chose Hamburg last July over Berlin and Munich. He said the northern port city, where the Beatles got their start, will suit his team well leading to the World Cup.
"When I stepped off the train in Hamburg, we could sense this was the right city for the American team, an exciting environment," he said. "This is a city that's very similar to cities in the United States, and I just think it's a perfect match. Great restaurants, a lot of entertainment, a lot of things to do, a great hotel, great training facilities. Everything we wanted was here."

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

Wrong again (why am I not surprised).

If Keller goes down Arena will be on the sideline with a cell phone talking to Brad and the problem will be solved.

When was I wrong in the first place ? Viewing a 4-1 loss as irrelevant is the stupidity on your part, not mine. The drop off from Keller to Freidel isn't small - Freidel 3 years ago, was top notch, but he's not been at anywhere near that level - again, something you ought to know, but don't (shocking). I think Keller is the one guy who has the ability to keep the US in a game when the defense is absoltutely shit - Freidel is simply not as good. For what its worth, none of them are in the class of the
Lehmann/Castillas/Cech/Cudicini/Buffon/Robinson/Van Der Sar/Given/Reina/Valdes group to begin with, but Keller's closer than Freidel is.

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

When was I wrong in the first place ? Viewing a 4-1 loss as irrelevant is the stupidity on your part, not mine. The drop off from Keller to Freidel isn't small - Freidel 3 years ago, was top notch, but he's not been at anywhere near that level - again, something you ought to know, but don't (shocking). I think Keller is the one guy who has the ability to keep the US in a game when the defense is absoltutely shit - Freidel is simply not as good. For what its worth, none of them are in the class of the
Lehmann/Castillas/Cech/Cudicini/Buffon/Robinson/Van Der Sar/Given/Reina/Valdes group to begin with, but Keller's closer than Freidel is.

Oh, so it must be that OTHER Friedel who is guiding Blackburn to a Europe place?

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

Oh, so it must be that OTHER Friedel who is guiding Blackburn to a Europe place?

Yes, its all Friedel. Using the idiotic logic that the GK is the one responsible for a team's place in the standings, is David James better than Shay Given? Hell, are you going to argue Friedel is better than Shay Given - because that would take a supreme act of faith. Do you even watch the EPL ? You think the style of play, the defense in front of a guy, etc might be a wee factor ?

I think Freidel is a good player, but to argue that he's one of the world's best is ridiculous. He's no 2 to Keller for a reason.

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Yes, its all Friedel. Using the idiotic logic that the GK is the one responsible for a team's place in the standings, is David James better than Shay Given? Hell, are you going to argue Friedel is better than Shay Given - because that would take a supreme act of faith. Do you even watch the EPL ? You think the style of play, the defense in front of a guy, etc might be a wee factor ?

I think Freidel is a good player, but to argue that he's one of the world's best is ridiculous. He's no 2 to Keller for a reason.

You're making this easier and easier....

Keller is not number 2 to Keller. He's retired from international football on his own free will (but it's pretty clear that he'll be suited up if Keller can't go for some reason).

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

You're making this easier and easier....

Keller is not number 2 to Keller. He's retired from international football on his own free will (but it's pretty clear that he'll be suited up if Keller can't go for some reason).

Aye, my mistake on the no 2 bit - you're right. That being said, your arguement for Freidel being a great goalie today is based on a slipshod arguement.

[Ryan S]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

Oh, so it must be that OTHER Friedel who is guiding Blackburn to a Europe place?

I think Craig Bellamy and Morten Gamst Pedersen are probably the players guiding Blackburn to a European place.

[ISiddiqui]

No, you are wrong! It's all Friedel .

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Ryan S

I think Craig Bellamy and Morten Gamst Pedersen are probably the players guiding Blackburn to a European place.

I think we're a little closer to the action than you are mr. scot. We at least speak the same language:cheesy:

[Bisbo]

I think Twellman has a good shot of making the final roster; no way Ching does. I also thought Eddie Johnson had some good minutes out there.

The thing that most struck me about the game was the way Germany was all over us as soon as we touched the ball - seems we never had time to set up anything. They were constantly quicker to the ball than we were. I guess that's where guys like Beasley and Donovan would have made some difference.

I realize we were missing most of our starters, but that was a very disappointing result - brought back memories of Sampson in France.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Bisbo

I think Twellman has a good shot of making the final roster; no way Ching does. I also thought Eddie Johnson had some good minutes out there.

The thing that most struck me about the game was the way Germany was all over us as soon as we touched the ball - seems we never had time to set up anything. They were constantly quicker to the ball than we were. I guess that's where guys like Beasley and Donovan would have made some difference.
.

Yeah, I think the US team is going to see that kind of ball pressure a lot in the WC. Our weakness IMO is our technical skill, our strength is our raw physical abilities. So the other teams would be wise to pressure the ball, and force turnovers not giving us free time and room to set up moves and utlilize our speed. That's why I think Reyna's health is so key to our midfield and our performance in general. He's one of our few players who is comfortable on the ball, and can still execute with WC level pressure/defenses.

[daedalus]

Originally Posted by bbor

Speaking as a German(well...German-Canadian as it is)i can trythfully say i would be surprised if the Germans do any damage in the WC.I was very much shocked at how well they did in the last WC as i thought they were an aging group then with few young players on the way up.I see them as much the same squad this time around,and i can tell you the people of the host nation are very nervous as to how well the team will do.

I wouldn't be. If Klose comes back (I haven't checked, will he be healthy by then?), then it'll be the same Ballack and Klose and pray for rain show (come up with your own damn rhyme) that can be really dangerous in close games. Especially if the goalkeeper (I'm not naming names since I'm curious if Mad Jens' form and big year can help him supplant Kahn and his rep . . . I'm betting on no, at the moment, especially with the WC being in Germany) comes up big.

[daedalus]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

or the Spanish - up front, they go with Torres and Raul, but injuries to those guys mean that Villa/Reyes will step up - there's a limited fall. In the midfield, there are Valeron, Xavi, Joaquin, and Vicente- an injury means they go to Albelda/Barajas/Alonso, or Guti. In goal, an injury to Casillas means Valdez or Canizares - not much of a drop off. Spain can function without any one of those players IMO

The Spanish will need to see if Raul can get back in form before the WC. I also hope they don't put JAR up front since he's proven that he's not nearly as effective there.

Just nitpicking, of course.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by daedalus

The Spanish will need to see if Raul can get back in form before the WC. I also hope they don't put JAR up front since he's proven that he's not nearly as effective there.

Just nitpicking, of course.

aye - but he'll play, no matter what.

[daedalus]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

No matter what preferences people here have, I guarantee that for our first WC game, assuming all are fit, the team is:

Robinson; G.Neville, Terry, Ferdinand (or possibly Campbell, but more likely Rio), A.Cole; Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, J.Cole; Rooney, Owen

Well, yeah. SGE doesn't deviate his lineup (only women and bosses).

I agree with Katon about Sol not being in the first XI. In fact, unless he finishes the year really strong, I'm not even sure about him being on the squad.

How is Woodgate doing at Real? Or is King the more likely 3rd/4th centreback?

[Then after the WC, he can follow Sol up the road. Yay! ]

[daedalus]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

aye - but he'll play, no matter what.

True that, true that.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by daedalus

Well, yeah. SGE doesn't deviate his lineup (only women and bosses).

I agree with Katon about Sol not being in the first XI. In fact, unless he finishes the year really strong, I'm not even sure about him being on the squad.

How is Woodgate doing at Real? Or is King the more likely 3rd/4th centreback?

[Then after the WC, he can follow Sol up the road. Yay! ]

There was a line I read about Real's good form in Soain in February that sums Woody up: '...and even Jonathan Woodgate has managed to play two games in a row without picking up an injury'.

His fitness record is horrible - when he's fit he's class: I would put him above both Rio and Sol, but if he's in the party he could end up simply taking up a spot in the squad and occupying one of the physio's benches all tournament. Unless he comes back soon and plays every game to the end of the year I can't see him getting a place, and even if he does play every game his record means he is still only a maybe because of the inherent risk.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

I thought Convey was about the only player worth a damn on the field for the US. God help us if any of those players are pressed into duty in the actual World Cup.

Update for you on the Leicester vs. Reading game at the weekend. Bobby Convey started brightly when Reading were the better side for the 1st 15 minutes, had one good effort on goal, but basically disappeared once we got the upper hand. Even when Reading were back on top for the 2nd half, Convey was anonymous, and was subbed.

Hahnemann was in very good form - could no nothing about our goal, and saved two efforts that could easily have beaten him, including one late reaction save with his foot from a Joey Gudjonnson 45 yard free kick that moved about five times in the air! Was very impressed with his keeping tbh.