US of A v. Portugal

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 7:40 pm

Don't the USA and Germany have enough money to force Ghana and Portugal to tie instead?

HaulCitgo · Post by **HaulCitgo** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 7:42 pm

All in all a triumph. World cup is a success so long as these guys leave it on the field. We all want to progress but its on the gods now.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 8:29 pm

My American wife has a glitch in her brain when it comes to understanding sports...

But she was screaming during this game, and perfectly understood the idea that a tie was a great result for the Americans.

She then went on Facebook and saw people talking about the USA's "choke" and got pissed off.

Love that woman.

And even though - as a Canadian - I am constitutionally forbidden from loving an American team... they are a very easy team to like. Other than Tim Howard, they pretty much had a great game and as near as I can tell, will advance even if they lose to the Germans.

But what a game.

tennbengal · Post by **tennbengal** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 8:56 pm

Still gutted over the giveaway by Bradley that led to the sadness. He has to be more aware of the game and situation than that. All he ended to do there was launch it to the Portugal end and game over.

Post by **Shirley** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 9:45 pm

Man.

Talk about conflicting feelings over a game. Before the game, I'd have been happy with a tie. For most of the game, I'd have been thrilled with a tie. But to lose the win like that. Ugh.

Has anyone seen an explanation for why we subbed Dempsey of all people? We had two defenders go down with injuries in the second half, but subbed neither. Bradley was clearly completely gassed, but we didn't sub him either. And we sub for our lone striker? I know he was limping, but so what. I have to think that some fresh legs in the center of our midfield and defense would have been way more useful.

Why did it have to be Ronaldo with that perfect pass?

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 10:24 pm

Fan me has barfed a lot of times but stats me understands Portugal is dead and we're still like 4:1 on Ghana to win on goal diff. Still, that's not what makes for awesome bar reactions.

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:16 pm

As long as we don't get blown out by Germany, we'd win the tiebreaker versus Portugal. And, here's how it looks versus Ghana (score differentials in next game - Ghana vs. Portugal and US vs. Germany.)

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:31 pm

We're presently ahead of Ghana on both goal differential and goals for. But those only matter if we lose to Germany and Ghana beats Portugal. And if that happens, we automatically lose our lead in goal differential.

About the only way we make it (if we lose and Ghana wins) is a one-goal loss in a high-scoring game, with Ghana getting a one-goal win in a low scoring game.

So I'm good with US and Germany playing for the 0-0 so we don't need tiebreakers.

What happens if we're tied on points, GD, and GF?

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:37 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: What happens if we're tied on points, GD, and GF?

I think the next tiebreaker is whoever can fill Sepp Blatter's undershorts with more money.

rass · Post by **rass** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 6:04 am

I talked myself down on the cab ride/walk home. Then I saw how badly Bradley played that last ball (I missed it in real time and didn't stick around for a replay) and got pissed off again.

tennbengal · Post by **tennbengal** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 6:07 am

rass wrote:I talked myself down on the cab ride/walk home. Then I saw how badly Bradley played that last ball (I missed it in real time and didn't stick around for a replay) and got pissed off again.

It was just so senseless. Of all the things that he could have done with it there, the only thing that would have been worse, maybe, was firing a shot at Howard. If he does anything else with it but hand it over at midfield, we win. I am still irate/frustrated. I really like Bradley, he's a class player, but that was such an awful miscue.

wlu_lax6 · Post by **wlu_lax6** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:10 am

Steve of phpBB wrote: What happens if we're tied on points, GD, and GF?

Then head to head
US would go on because of the 2-1 win over Ghana

If Portugal wins and manages to make up the -4 to +1 GD and they end up tied on the tie breakers....RANDOM Draw.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:18 am

Pruitt wrote:Other than Tim Howard, they pretty much had a great game and as near as I can tell, will advance even if they lose to the Germans.

There was nothing Tim Howard could do on both those goals. I think he played fine, and had a couple of key saves.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:33 am

Shirley wrote:Man.

Talk about conflicting feelings over a game. Before the game, I'd have been happy with a tie. For most of the game, I'd have been thrilled with a tie. But to lose the win like that. Ugh.

Has anyone seen an explanation for why we subbed Dempsey of all people? We had two defenders go down with injuries in the second half, but subbed neither. Bradley was clearly completely gassed, but we didn't sub him either. And we sub for our lone striker? I know he was limping, but so what. I have to think that some fresh legs in the center of our midfield and defense would have been way more useful.

Why did it have to be Ronaldo with that perfect pass?

Holy Crap...Bradley ran 7.6 miles during the game, more than anyone.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:58 am

If he really loved America, he would have run 7.7 with the last 0.1 him just holding the stupid ball.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:52 am

I know very little about soccer but from what I saw, Clint Dempsey is awesome, Old-man DMX guy was really good, and the guy who scored the first goal is like the Evgeni Malkin of soccer with his shots from that area. Bradley is awesome, and everybody else is just kind of there.

Hard hitting analysis! Oh and that sub dude that's really fast is cool too

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:03 am

One thing I do feel pretty awesome about is that the USA's next major tournament is going to be in the USA.

degenerasian · Post by **degenerasian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:04 am

He tried to get around one last guy and then probably hoof the ball down the wing to Yedlin. It's a play he makes all the time but fatigue probably set in by that time.

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:06 am

Gunpowder wrote:I know very little about soccer but from what I saw, Clint Dempsey is awesome, Old-man DMX guy was really good, and the guy who scored the first goal is like the Evgeni Malkin of soccer with his shots from that area. Bradley is awesome, and everybody else is just kind of there.

Hard hitting analysis! Oh and that sub dude that's really fast is cool too

I'm really really worried that if disaster hits on Thursday, Bradley will become a Buckner figure given the huge number of casual followers who are only going to know him for that awful decision not to boot the ball into the 20th row. He was not on his A game but still his movement and energy was essential to everything we were doing right in that game.

P.D.X. · Post by **P.D.X.** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:15 am

AB_skin_test wrote:
Pruitt wrote:Other than Tim Howard, they pretty much had a great game and as near as I can tell, will advance even if they lose to the Germans.

There was nothing Tim Howard could do on both those goals. I think he played fine, and had a couple of key saves.

Yeah, I have no beefs with Howard. Probably made the best save of the tourney so far.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:16 am

Sometimes I really wonder if I'm watching the same game as others.

We're going to put that goal on Bradley?? Really? I'm seeing some version of that everywhere today.

wow.

It's not like he took a shot on goal, or tried some crazy, ill-advised pass. He SLIGHTLY duffed a trap on the other side of the center circle. He put effort into recovering, got a touch on the ball and was dispossessed. It's not like he just said "fuck it" and gave up on the play. Reminder: This happened on the other team's half of the field. 60 yards from our goal.

The US had 5 guys back. In fact, one of the issues for Bradley was that we had 3 guys way down in the opposition's corner. Why? When you're killing the clock, you put 2 guys up there, max. Bradley was completely isolated. Even if he had had a better touch, he was surrounded by Portuguese players. But even more important, we had 5 guys back. While we should've had more, that should've been plenty. We didn't close down Ronaldo quickly enough, but more important than that, they had one guy making a run through the box, and no one put a body on him, and all of our guys were facing our own goal.

That's a HUGE MISTAKE by our defenders. I'm not going to single anyone out, because there's too much of that going on today, but putting that goal on Bradley is just ridiculous.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:26 am

Yeah, there were about four guys who could have done slightly more on that last play to change things in our favor. Beasley coulda run out closer on Ronaldo and forced him to try to dribble through him, but that's a dangerous prposition with one of the best dribblers in the world, and all the defenders could have just busted it as far in as possible without regards to the exact position of the man they were marking.

Howard's position was fine, it was just a great cross from a great player.

Post by **Shirley** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:38 am

I thought DMB played it right, considering it was Ronaldo and everyone had to assume at that point that Ronaldo was going to try to score. Play off him enough that he can't get around you and trust that your teammates have your back.

I think it's possible - maybe - that Howard could have come out to challenge that cross. Considering how little time was remaining, the risk might have been worth it.

That said, I put the blame mainly on the central D - particularly Cameron who appeared to have nobody. Bradley deserves some blame for muffing that trap and moreso for not hustling enough to fight for it. Again, the problem is he was dead tired. We were commenting on how he was jogging and/or walking a lot in those last few minutes.

I still think the biggest mistake we made was subbing for Dempsey instead of a defender. Why in the world did we need a fresh striker in the fucking 89th minute? Hell, we could have put in Brooks for Dempsey and just had one more central defender.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:55 am

Shirley wrote: I still think the biggest mistake we made was subbing for Dempsey instead of a defender. Why in the world did we need a fresh striker in the fucking 89th minute? Hell, we could have put in Brooks for Dempsey and just had one more central defender.

No, that is the right move. You need a fresh forward to pressure the ball. Don't let the defenders pass forward, chase down the sideqays passes across the back, force them to make a badd pass, or not even see the breakout pass. Forwards run a lot more than defenders. It is very rare to see a defender pulled out of a game, unless they are injured or it's a strategic move to bring on a player with a different skill set, typically a wingback if you are losing. It's also much harder for a defender to step into a game and catch up to the speed and flow, and difficult to gel with the rest of the defense. A forward playing alone up top just needs to run and try to maintain possession.

howard · Post by **howard** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:02 am

As I mentioned above, Cameron had an opportunity for redemption. He could've busted back harder; he could've had more (some) (any?) awareness of Varela driving to the net behind him.

But Nonlinear is right--singling out Bradley or anyone else for a 'what if' 60 meters away is kinda unfair, when there are so many other 'what ifs' for the rest of the defense on the last possession.

Hey, I'm a soccer expert now! Me and GPJ will fire up a podcast to drop more of our insight and analysis on you folks.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:12 am

I'm in!

wlu_lax6 · Post by **wlu_lax6** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:17 am

Yeah instead of blaming him for the goal at the end, lets blame Bradley hitting the defender standing on the goal line for the "gimmie". 8 out of 10 times that is a goal.

degenerasian · Post by **degenerasian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:29 am

howard wrote:As I mentioned above, Cameron had an opportunity for redemption. He could've busted back harder; he could've had more (some) (any?) awareness of Varela driving to the net behind him.

But Nonlinear is right--singling out Bradley or anyone else for a 'what if' 60 meters away is kinda unfair, when there are so many other 'what ifs' for the rest of the defense on the last possession.

Hey, I'm a soccer expert now! Me and GPJ will fire up a podcast to drop more of our insight and analysis on you folks.

That will be a great podcast.

I don't think anyone had any energy left to bust back. Varela was a substitute remember.

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:45 am

Omar Gonzalez had just come in and he's a defender. I'm not sure what instructions he got but he certainly wasn't on the back line when that play started.

Post by **brian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:01 pm

Hopefully the Nats are doing a better job of putting this game behind them than we are.

Jurgen has hopefully reminded them of the same thing we have been reminding ourselves. Coming into this group, having a chance to move on with a draw against Germany (especially the very realistic chance of a "wink-wink" draw since it helps Germany avoid Belgium in the Round of 16) would have been considered an almost best case scenario.

There's also very few scenarios where the US gets eliminated even with a loss though again, they shouldn't be contemplating that.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:04 pm

Rex wrote:Omar Gonzalez had just come in and he's a defender. I'm not sure what instructions he got but he certainly wasn't on the back line when that play started.

This.

If you look at the replay, he was very close to the center spot when Bradley was dispossessed. Why? Seriously. What's he doing that high. He was head of Jones, not to mention being completely untethered from his backline mates.

Again, if you want to pick that entire sequence apart, putting everything on Bradley is REALLY suspect. How about Dempsey and Beckerman(!) losing the ball in the corner? The aforementioned Gonzalez who is no where near the box when that cross comes in. Beasley, worried about being rounded or cut to shreds, could've just take Ronaldo out - we pack the box and win the ensuing header. We've already talked about Cameron.

They were exhausted. degen brings up a great point about Valera's legs.

You also, grudgingly, just have to tip your cap to them. While they made it look easy, and we can pick apart what the US did wrong... That was a brilliant goal. BTW, part of the brilliance of that ball from CR is that there's no way Howard could've gotten to that ball. No. Way. I think ppl have the wrong impression of where that cross was from, thinking it was from 40 yards or something. He was just over the 18 yard mark, about 7 yards outside the box. The cross was whipped in, swinging towards the penalty spot and Valera hit it from about 8 yards out. There's no way Howard could've taken 2 steps and flung himself out there fast enough.

I would agree if that cross had been on or inside the 6. It wasn't.

Rams Fanny · Post by **Rams Fanny** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:09 pm

I'm a frequent critic of the US team but yesterday was an impressive performance. They were rattled after the early goal but eventually got their feet under them. The Jones strike was magnificent.
Not sure I understand the seeking to blame someone on the US side. Ok there was a turnover, but those happen throughout every match. IMO there were worse defensive lapses earlier that simply went unpunished. That cross from CR was inch-perfect and no goalie in the world was going to stop that header. Yahoo has a ridiculous headline this morning that the US wilted late in the heat. What crap. They were drawn by a world-class player making a world-class play. Chin up, my fellow Americans. I'm pretty sure Germany isn't looking forward to playing this American team playing for its life.

degenerasian · Post by **degenerasian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:16 pm

Growing pains. As soccer grows in the US it's going to go through painful headlines and analysis from those who watch the World Cup every 4 years and think they're experts. If you take the 'any press is good press' philosophy, this world cup has been everywhere. I mean the google doodle changes for every game!

If USA-Germany play to a dire draw (especially if Portugal have a 1 goal lead late and can't get anywhere near scoring another 2 goals), there will be talking heads saying the US qualification was tainted.

This happened in 2002. Once Italy and Mexico found out (through cell phones) that Ecuador had beaten Croatia, they kicked the ball around for the last 5 minutes cause either side scoring even 2 goals wouldn't have mattered. But they got crushed for it by ESPN.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:35 pm

degenerasian wrote:Growing pains. As soccer grows in the US it's going to go through painful headlines and analysis from those who watch the World Cup every 4 years and think they're experts. If you take the 'any press is good press' philosophy, this world cup has been everywhere. I mean the google doodle changes for every game!

If USA-Germany play to a dire draw (especially if Portugal have a 1 goal lead late and can't get anywhere near scoring another 2 goals), there will be talking heads saying the US qualification was tainted.

This happened in 2002. Once Italy and Mexico found out (through cell phones) that Ecuador had beaten Croatia, they kicked the ball around for the last 5 minutes cause either side scoring even 2 goals wouldn't have mattered. But they got crushed for it by ESPN.

1) I don't give a shit. Not one fuck will be given. If we know Ghana is bringing the pain and beating a hobbled Portugal, we bunker and hopefully GER just takes the top spot in hand and leaves us to battle Belgium.

b) With that said... This is a US squad that has twice scored goals at the death that saved Honduras (2010) and Mexico (2014). I'm not really sure it's in our DNA to try play a cynical, "wink wink" style. I don't know that I've ever seen us do it effectively, and asking this team to play that way is REALLY risking a complete meltdown.

We need to come out, play conservatively (in terms of sending numbers forward) but press them and play to win. Any other posture and I'm convinced things will end very badly. 2- or 3-0 and a Ghana 2 or 3 goal win. (I don't know how Portugal is going to cover their flanks. We beat them pretty routinely out there, and we're not Ghana.)

Post by **brian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:41 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote:
degenerasian wrote:Growing pains. As soccer grows in the US it's going to go through painful headlines and analysis from those who watch the World Cup every 4 years and think they're experts. If you take the 'any press is good press' philosophy, this world cup has been everywhere. I mean the google doodle changes for every game!

If USA-Germany play to a dire draw (especially if Portugal have a 1 goal lead late and can't get anywhere near scoring another 2 goals), there will be talking heads saying the US qualification was tainted.

This happened in 2002. Once Italy and Mexico found out (through cell phones) that Ecuador had beaten Croatia, they kicked the ball around for the last 5 minutes cause either side scoring even 2 goals wouldn't have mattered. But they got crushed for it by ESPN.

1) I don't give a shit. Not one fuck will be given. If we know Ghana is bringing the pain and beating a hobbled Portugal, we bunker and hopefully GER just takes the top spot in hand and leaves us to battle Belgium.

b) With that said... This is a US squad that has twice scored goals at the death that saved Honduras (2010) and Mexico (2014). I'm not really sure it's in our DNA to try play a cynical, "wink wink" style. I don't know that I've ever seen us do it effectively, and asking this team to play that way is REALLY risking a complete meltdown.

We need to come out, play conservatively (in terms of sending numbers forward) but press them and play to win. Any other posture and I'm convinced things will end very badly. 2- or 3-0 and a Ghana 2 or 3 goal win. (I don't know how Portugal is going to cover their flanks. We beat them pretty routinely out there, and we're not Ghana.)

I'm hoping that having Jurgen as our manager will help here. You have to appreciate the irony of playing Germany in a relatively rare situation where a wink wink draw is possible. That said, I don't think either team will play cynically or to draw. The only point where I could see the scenario playing out is if the game is still tied around the 70th/75th minute or so. At that point I don't think you'll see either team sending any kind of numbers attacking the goal. At least that's my guess.

howard · Post by **howard** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 2:17 pm

degenerasian wrote:I don't think anyone had any energy left to bust back. Varela was a substitute remember.

Absolutely. Agree 100%.

degenerasian wrote:Growing pains…painful…analysis from those who watch the World Cup every 4 years and think they're experts.

HEY!

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:33 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote:
b) With that said... This is a US squad that has twice scored goals at the death that saved Honduras (2010) and Mexico (2014). I'm not really sure it's in our DNA to try play a cynical, "wink wink" style. I don't know that I've ever seen us do it effectively, and asking this team to play that way is REALLY risking a complete meltdown.

While I tend to agree, Kyle Beckerman told a great story on Men in Blazers that could explain this. The US was playing Panama in the last Qualifier. The US came into the game with a spot in Brazil locked up. Panama needed a draw or Mexico draw (iirc) to advance. The US played full out. Beckerman said a Panamanian player came up to him asking why they were playing so hard if they already locked up a place in the WC. Beckerman replied, "we have a spot in Brazil, but I don't know if I do."

cerrano · Post by **cerrano** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:42 pm

i still have trouble talking about this. so many levels of wtf.

argh!

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:46 pm

The Sybian wrote:
Nonlinear FC wrote:
b) With that said... This is a US squad that has twice scored goals at the death that saved Honduras (2010) and Mexico (2014). I'm not really sure it's in our DNA to try play a cynical, "wink wink" style. I don't know that I've ever seen us do it effectively, and asking this team to play that way is REALLY risking a complete meltdown.

While I tend to agree, Kyle Beckerman told a great story on Men in Blazers that could explain this. The US was playing Panama in the last Qualifier. The US came into the game with a spot in Brazil locked up. Panama needed a draw or Mexico draw (iirc) to advance. The US played full out. Beckerman said a Panamanian player came up to him asking why they were playing so hard if they already locked up a place in the WC. Beckerman replied, "we have a spot in Brazil, but I don't know if I do."

It was the same thing in 2010. The point is the same. We're not capable of playing any other way. That's not some patriotic, macho posturing. We just don't have the experience necessary to do it well.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:50 pm

cerrano wrote:i still have trouble talking about this. so many levels of wtf.

argh!

Same. I haven't been mentally blaming anyone but I just can't stop playing it over in my head and the reaction of all of us who were watching at the party I was at. We were just stunned into silence for the next 20 minutes.