landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
I'm just happy there are at least 2 more matches to watch.
(There is a third place match next Sunday too, that I fully expect the US to be in.)
but those fucking trumpets make it completely unwatchable. I can't think of anything more grating on my nerves.
Apparently the official name for them is "vuvuzela," and FIFA is trying to ban them from the WC next summer:
On the other hand, part of me wishes we could try this out at Michigan Stadium for a game, just to see how the "down in front" crowd would respond.
Wow. I totally assumed Italy would destroy Egypt and didn't pay any attention after our loss to Brazil until just now.
guess the american who left us for italy can watch his homeland move on while he sits at home ... omg so pumped
although it is ironic that the US are moving on....
The Azzuri are still the World Champs, and they still beat the Americans in this particular tournament.I don't think he'll be regretting his decision to play for the Azzuri if that's what you're trying to imply.
idc if he regrets it or not ... its sweet for me because we advanced and they didnt ... basically italy won a battle but the US won the war
I like your take on it. Hopefully you guys can play as well against Spain as you did today. Like most people, I find Spain a little overrated. Should be a fun match to watch.
You guys? If you don't mind me asking, are you from somewhere outside of the United States?
I'm Canadian. I think there's some other Canucks around here somewhere as well.
Guilty of being a Canuck- luckily I hate soccer though
Overrated how? Because they are the European champions? I mean, I guess if you say that they were lucky to win the Euro, like the US is lucky to be in the semis, that they are overrated, that's fine. But the Spanish haven't lost since the World Cup three years ago. It's hard to knock that.
Plus, they have not one but two of the best strikers, if not the best strikers, in the world with Torres and Villa. For God sakes, Cesc Fabregas doesn't usually start for the team and he's an all-world player.
I'm still a little bitter over Spain beating us (Italia) in pk's at Euro last year. Granted, Italy had no business being in that game, but it's still tough getting over, haha. That being said ,I think Brazil vs. Spain would be a great matchup in the finals, assuming they both get there.
I would prefer Brazil meet Spain in a tournament that actually mattered, like the World Cup.
Italian soccer is unwatchable with the constant diving, acting and complaining. Also gatusso is dirty.
is the one Italian I respect. He is dirty, but he is physical and (in international play at least) seems to understand that if he is going to give some he is going to get some.
He is the exact opposite of the storkish poontang Fabio Grosso.
had just about the luckiest run of any player in history in the 06 World Cup:
Flopping for the PK against Australia.
THE Goal against Germany
The winning PK against France.
I agree that he is a physical player, dirty at times. I was more explaining his dirty facial hair.
the world cup is arguably the highest honor in all of sport. The world cup is easily the biggest, most watched sporting event in the world.
if you're suggesting that he made a mistake to play with Italy, World Cup champs, and that he learned his lesson by losing you're an idiot
im not saying he made a mistake, though i think he should play for the US as ive stated here before ... im saying its sweet for me to have the US moving on while Italy and Rossi go home
beating Ohio State is more important than winning the World Cup.
I just want to see Brazil vs. Spain, something I've been waiting a long time to see.
to see Spain v Netherlands in the WC finals next year.
Even though a nice accomplishment to move on in a FIFA tournament, this does not mean Bradley is doing well as a coach. Yes, we are not competing as a full squad, but look at our play as of late. Alexi Lalas was not joking when we said our "core" young players are not that promising to build around. ooooo well...... we have to contain Spain's mids and control possession as much as we possibly can. I have a feeling Xavi will dink around and dominate us though. We will see.
Welcome to mgoblog Ronaldo.
EDIT: And don't ever listen to Alexi Lalas, especially when he is evaluating talent. He's successfully driven every MLS franchise he's touched into the ground.
depressed by the actual play?
Their play wasn't good at all. I do think there is more of a problem (just slightly) with the coaching than talent however. I'm just saying that the opinion of Alexi Lalas shouldn't hold much weight.
Jozy, Bradley, Adu, Torres and Spector are pretty promising and I could easily see them playing for some of the upper level clubs in Europe (Everton/A Villa level and higher*). I wouldn't be surprised to see Jozy, Adu and Bradley playing for a Big 4 team or the like before their careers are done
Also guys like Feilhaber, Wynne and Davies could find themselves at a mid level team (Tottenham/Portsmouth)if they put in the work.
I think the core of young players are there to build around but we're missing the depth. We're not going to be contenders until we get the point where our coach has to decided to sit a player like Alves, Pato, Gerrard or Toni in favor of a Lampard, Maicon, Robinho or Gilardino. Not say our guys have to be at that level but there is quite a big drop off in talent after 1 or 2 deep.
*I'm not advocating all our players play in the EPL, I was just using those teams as a point of reference.
1) Adu can't crack the lineup for Benefica; he's in no way ready for the EPL. Personally, I think he should head to Ajax. I'd say Ajax is a lateral move from Benefica, but Ajax of late has become a developmentally factory.
It's a sad reality in the Netherlands, but no team has the money to hold onto it's talent for very long. But that means there's an atmosphere conducive to players performing well and moving on.
2) Jozy is already in Spain, and Bradley is already playing in the Bundesliga. Sadly, they're probably the only two promising futures on the team.
3) Spector is a facepalm machine. He's got some promise, but it's the kind of promise where at best you're projecting uninspired competence.
"*I'm not advocating all our players play in the EPL, I was just using those teams as a point of reference."
^ I was just using EPL teams as a reference point because the EPL is the most popular league in the world so it might be easier for the less informed mgoblog reader to relate. Bradley would thrive in the EPL and Jozy would/will do well in the EPL or La Liga. I do not want to see Adu in the EPL, Netherlands would be good along with La Liga.
"I wouldn't be surprised to see Jozy, Adu and Bradley playing for a Big 4 team or the like before their careers are done”
^ a big 4 team or the like (R. Madrid, B. Munich, Barca, Inter, AC Milan, etc...) are superior in talent and coach than Villareal and far superior than Borussia Monchengladbach.
How dare you call Tottenham a mid level team in the EPL!!
COME ON YOU SPURS!
A jaded and delusional Tottenham fan.
I didn't see the game but from from the sound of it the US played really aggressively, which I like. It seems like when the US tries to be conservative and defensive they get crushed but when they play aggressively and use their speed they have a chance. So hopefully they push forward and try to put some pressure on Spain, because I think if they sit back and play defensively Spain will pick them apart.
This is the first major international tournament in which we've gotten out of the Group Stage since '02... I'll take it however we did it. Can we please play with this same desperation and grit against Spain?
Does this really qualify as a major international tournament?
"All of the critics in America who said we were no good after losing to Italy and Brazil, let's see what they say now," Michael Bradley said.
Look, I'm a fan of US soccer and excited to see if they can give Spain a match but to suggest that a win over Egypt and subsequent advancement in the tournament thanks to Brazil pasting Italy should silence the "critics" is just absurd.
Does this mean the guy can't coach? Of course not, but it's another example of the "us against the world" mentality being expressed in a way that just sounds stupid.
Not trying to be a wet blanket, but since I have seen approximately no soccer from this tournament, I've got no other frame of reference to comment on this tournament run.
Bob and Michael Bradley are 2 different people.
And you are correct. That statement was ridiculous.
about this. This has to be the ugliest advance to the knockout round I've ever seen. But then I start to wonder what they might have looked like had they NOT played 90 minutes down a man in the previous two matches. There might be hope yet.
I guess they can come out of this tournament looking respectable by reasoning of "what if"?
I've been wanting to get a jersey for a while now but I didn't know if I wanted a club one or a national team. So I finally decided I should support the old Stars and Stripes but I can only find ones that are Small. Does anyone know where I can find one? Also is the jersey that they wear now the same as it will be for the World Cup in a year, or should I wait until the new design comes out?
^They have the home whites in all sizes. ussoccer.com has the home in small and i think xl and they have the away in all sizes (i think) for cheap.
They will be same ones for the WC but they will get new designs the year after the cup. If you dig around a bit in a few months you can probably find some for real cheap.
I just want it known that I hate these. Gray? Seriously? Do you have any idea how bad that confused me when I turned on a qualifier for the first time? I liked the offset stripe we had for 2006. Who on earth decided we would be dark gray?
I think Nike's assorted attempts have been disastrous. The offset stripe was probably as good as it's been yet. The white home jersey is merely accented with red and blue. It's a declaration of nothing. If you don't look badass, how can you play badass?
the gray is whack.
Thanks a lot
I used Eurosport [www.soccer.com] to buy my offset-stripe Donovan jersey (only named player they sold at the time) before living in Germany for the 2006 World Cup.
It looks like they sell quite a few other names now (Adu, Altidore, Torres, Onyewu, ...) Unfortunately, I couldn't tell you about the styling. It seems like they like to have something fresh for the World Cup, but who knows. Either way, the ones on sale now look nice.
I wanted to post a new thread on this hours ago, cept the wonderful new changes to the site mean I'm a n00b who can't do shit.
1) Anyhoo, today was an impossible confluence of events. Italy always scores late, its like their motherfucking MO. So staying shutout, even against Brazil, is unbelievable.
2) Also, we show what can nearly be described as disdain for scoring. I blame this on the MLS. The level of competition in our domestic league is so low that sloppy finishing is a kink that has never needed to be ironed out.
3) Moreover, Coach Bradley is a fucking moron. I'm sorry, but anyone who thinks, in 2009, that Beasely is an event half-decent player needs to be kicked in the nards. I know he didn't play today, but one's attitude towards Beasely is an aptitude test of sorts. If you believe he is puppy cancer, you are allowed to coach at the world stage.
If you not only put him into a game, but give him the starting nod, a full 3 or 4 years after hes dropped below the mendoza line of sucktitude, you need to hand in your coaching license and hang yourself.
I mean for god sakes, Beasely was in for the full first half, even his crippled play for a corner that led to Brazil's fast break goal.
4) Our team performed shamefully against Brazil and Italy. If we lost 15-0 each game but put in solid, respectable efforts I wouldn't bat an eye. "The realities of fielding a squad from an indifferent nation," I would say.
But against those two teams we saw players dogging it, players incapable of completing simple passes, players that saw 5 yards of space and sprinted into it like high school forwards only to realize they hadn't planned on what to do next.
If a team gives up a goal in the first 7 minutes FOUR CONSECUTIVE GAMES (prior to the Egypt match), then that is on coaching.
5) All that said, we looked better today. Egypt is not a bad team - they've been in Africa's top tier for quite a while now. Losing their best player to injury certainly hurt them, but its not an excuse for what could easily have been a 6-0 loss.
6) Also, my opinion of Donovan -- inability to consistenly finish aside -- has only gone up. Seeing him coming back 80 yards on defense, then push the attack forward shows hes one of the few that gives a damn about the team. This isn't any new development or anything, but I like him.
I also think Coach Bradley is not a very good coach. He needs to stop his loyalty to older players and start giving the younger more athletic players some playing time. It is not possible for players like Adu, Torres, Feilhaber, Clark and Davies to get experience if he never plays them.
So Italy and the US play in the same pool, both finish 1-2, and Italy beats the US 3-0, and the US advances due to goal differential? That's dumb.
I am not even close to a soccer fan, so maybe this is a long debated and accepted practice, but it doesn't really make any sense to me. Italy smoked the US and they had the same record, Italy should advance.
Brazil won the group with 9 points.
Egypt, Italy, and the US all tied for second place with 3 points.
Egypt beat Italy
Italy beat US
US beat Egypt
With a three way tie there is no way to do head to head. Hence goal differential. Italy and US tied in goal differential, so they went with the next tie breaker, goals scored.
Not a lot of people point out that there was a three way tie for second place, which makes the head to head fucking useless. If Italy says they should go through because of head to head because they beat the US. Egypt says they should go through because they beat Italy. The US says they should go through because they beat Egypt. It's a big circle jerk. That's why they have to go to the next tie breakers.
The three way tie never crossed my mind, my bad. Come to find out I should have read more of the article...
I realize there's the three-way tie and all, but I kind of like it better the way the NCAA conferences break ties. If there's a three-way tie, they apply tiebreakers until somebody is eliminated, then they apply the two-team tiebreakers. So in this case, Italy would advance because Egypt would be eliminated thanks to goal differential, and then it's just US vs. Italy and Italy wins. I mean, I like that we advanced, I just think this way makes more sense.
How about this? If they're going to do goal differential in a three way tie, just make it among the 3 teams that tied. In that case Italy would have been +2, US even, and Egypt -2. They all lost to Brazil, so who cares what the scores were?
in soccer. I'm a long-time soccer fan, but one thing you won't get in the game is common sense (or a respite from those god awful horns being used in South Africa).
In order to improve the game, soccer needs to:
(1) abolish the away goals rule and go to straight head to head results;
(2) abolish penalty kicks in elimination games in all tournaments;
(3) abolish the stupid current red-yellow card system. Make it this way - if a player gets 5 fouls of any kind, he sits for 10 minutes. If he gets 10 fouls or commits a major foul, out of game.
(4) no more suspensions based on accumulation of cards. No other sport would accept a final without one team's 3 best defenders (Barca). Imagine if Michigan had to play a Rose Bowl without Forcier, Mouton and Minor because they each had 4 penalties against Ohio State. Ridiculous.
(5) instant replay for penalty and goal-line decisions. For offsides, the players should play through, and plays should only be called offside unless they're obvious. go to the quick replay if a play is determined marginally offside, because it's called incorrect waaaayyyy too often.
1, 2, and 4 I agree with.
3 is kinda ridiculous. If you commit 10 fouls in a game you should have already been tossed. At the highest level center referees do a pretty good job in deciding what fouls are worthy of a caution and what aren't (although somehow the US constantly gets screwed with straight reds). I don't understand how anyone could think the yellow-red system isn't a great system. To me it is completely logical and makes perfect sense. The problem is when you use it over several games, like you said.
5 I have a fundamental belief against replay. Even more so in soccer. Soccer is the beautiful game. It is a game that is so pure that I would hate to see it tarnished like that. Think about it - there's a constant running clock in soccer. What happens with replay? We stop the game for 5 minutes? How do you think that would go over? And I think the linesman do a remarkable job with offsides calls.
...well, I don't like the fact that if, say, Messi is tripped from behind clear through on goal, sometimes it won't be a red card. Sometimes it will. I'd rather it just be a "foul," added to a tally.
And I don't like that the penalty for preventing a clear goal opportunity can be the same as the penalty for taking too long to take a throw in, or mouthing off to a ref. It doesn't make sense.
Finally, I don't like the idea that people spend hundreds of dollars to go to a match, and it can be over as a contest within 3 minutes if there is a red card. I realize people will pay and I realize I'm in the minority. Turning a game into the whole "can the 11 men break down the 10" really does a disservice to the paying spectator who expected a fair 11-on-11 match. I for one turned off the U.S. games this past week once they incurred red cards. I know it doesn't always dictate the result, but I wouldn't watch 3 1/2 quarters of Ohio State playing Michigan 11 on 10.
As to (5), first off, soccer is only beautiful if Barcelona or the Dutch are playing well (the rest of the time it's painfully boring, and I'm a huge soccer fan).
The replay situation I suggest would come up once every 5 or 10 games and would take the same amount of time it takes a player to celebrate the goal. How hard is it to determine if a ball crosses the line if you have a camera trained on the line? Think to when Roy Carroll dropped a ball over the line for Man U against Spurs, or when Paul Scholes' goal against Porto was incorrectly wiped off (which, ironically, led to Jose Mourinho winning the Champions' League and becoming the enormous arrogant sod he is now). Those decisions would have taken 10 seconds to review and correct. How about reviewing Rivaldo when he grabbed his face after being kicked in the shin with the ball by a Turkish player in 2002?
OR, how about when the ref looked at the screen to eject Zidane in 2006? Was that the wrong decision?
you mean by #1. Away goals only come in to play after the head to matchup has been split equally and the aggregate score is tied.
You make it sound as though there is some sneaky way to circumvent game results by scoring away goals and still losing both legs.
my problem is the Chelsea - Barca problem this year. 0-0 in Nou Camp, 1-1 at Stamford Bridge. They're tied, there should be no advantage at that point. Keep playing for the win, especially in a Champions' League semi-final.
the idea behind it is that its "harder to score goals on the road" which i counter with the obvious that it must be eaiser to score at home so teams that dont should be punishded ... i dont like that it leads to home teams playing conservative and trying to keep the score low ... just keep playing till you get a aggregate goal advantage
I'd like to see them go to penalties ahead of away goals, because I don't think infinite overtime can work in soccer unless you reduce the number of players on the field at set intervals so that every OT game doesn't become Italy v. Italy (i.e. 10 pussies playing defense and hoping their one striker can draw a penalty kick).
1) doesn't the away-goals rule only come into play when two teams play a home-and-home and each score the same number of goals? In that case I think away goals makes good sense.
2) I totally agree. Play the damn game.
3) 5 and 10 are a lot. I think the yellow and red card thing is fine.
4) The NBA does something similar with technicals and flagrants. Ask Sheed.
5) Absolutely. Instant replay improves almost everything.
Actually I could simplify this, though, and implement one rule and one rule only and make soccer ten zillion times better than it is now. If a player appears to be hurt, he must sit out a minimum of ten minutes for his own safety. He may be substituted for immediately or the team may elect to wait the ten minutes and play down a man. For his own safety, you know. Just to make sure he's OK. These Italians are very fragile - they seem to break forty bones in their leg whenever they get bumped or looked at meanly or the wind blows or something, and we need to make sure they're not really injured.
about the injury rule. Goalkeepers aside, if a field player goes down with an injury and takes more than a minute or so to get back on his feet, then they can take him off on a stretcher. But it means he's going to stand on the sideline for 5-10 minutes and they're going to be down a man.
I think its well within the right of the center ref to refuse to acknowledge the player's re-entry under the current rules, but it would cause such a shitstorm if it happened that nobody will do it.
Minute schminute, you're being too generous. What I mean is, the moment he goes down screaming and bawling and holding his knee or ankle, whether or not he needs the stretcher, he sits for ten minutes. To protect his health, see. Right now I think the rule is that if he goes off on the stretcher he has to sit for a bit, but I say take the stretcher out of the equation. Because then what happens is they roll on the ground yelling like they've been shot, until the stretcher comes out and then they're miraculously cured. "For the safety of the players" is the phony justification - I really just want to stop this nonsense of faking injury to get a call.
This would be an interesting rule change/application.
Here's my attempt at not shocking the system but setting a new standard:
First, center R has the right to not wave on a player. Utilize this with a slight addition:
If a player goes down and forces a stoppage in play, the referee may not wave him back on the field for a minimum of the amount of time that he held up play.
This now prevents a guy from going down and crawling around for three minutes. If he does, he's costing his team a man for three minutes.
If the ref feels like a little too much acting was used, he should be encouraged by FIFA to keep the player on the sideline longer. This is tough from an officials' standpoint though - you're asking him to judge the very gray area of how much the player was injured, and then try to determine what should be an apt punishment. An extra minute? Three minutes? At what point does it seem like the ref is giving one team an unfair disadvantage?
See, that's why I'd want to take the referee's judgment out of it. It's best to just say, if a guy appears hurt - and if he's doing like they always do, he's trying to appear hurt so there's not much judgment involved - then he has to leave the pitch. Period. Maybe ten minutes is a bit harsh - make it five maybe, I suppose that's up to debate. But nothing turns me off of soccer more than these diving Europeans (and everyone else too, really) that act like little girls, no offense to any little girls who are reading.
One addendum to #2: because it can be so tough to score in OT, when everyone's exhausted, allow unlimited substitution then.
Italy beat the US
Egypt beat Italy
US beat Egypt
How do you propose we figure out who gets to move on?
with the US team is their style of play. As soon as they posses the ball, they fast break and pass it all the way to the front lines. 98% of the time the ball is right back to the opposition, and here we go on defense again... If they had a more patient and methodical approach, they would put more pressure on opposing teams and less pressure on our defense. Everyone knows they are going to just pass it over the top and hope for a miracle. Why do they stick with this juvenile strategy?
this always seems to be the USA problem ... it gets them playing on their heels and killed in time of possesion
I'm going to blame my stupidity in this case on heat stroke after 5 hours in the South Florida sun on the golf course before reading that article.
Thanks for pointing this out though, definitely makes a huge difference that it was a player and not the coach.