World Cup and European leagues

[Hoosier Titan]

I'll try the Draman-Reyna thing one more time, then I'll get off my soapbox.  A straight-ahead knee (accelerating towards full speed) to the side of an opponent's knee strikes me as a good definition of 'dangerous play'.  My experience is that that designation is usually a euphemism for 'high-kick' (at least on the youth soccer game reports I'm familiar with, 'tackle from behind' is a separate category of yellow card).  But if 'front-of-knee to side-of-knee' is not 'dangerous play', what is?  That can end careers!

I want to make it clear that I am not accusing Draman of deliberately injuring Reyna, just that I think he engaged in 'dangerous play'.

Ypsi,

I don't claim to be a real expert on this.  It's just my observation (I watch mostly the English Premier League, but have also watched MLS) that if a player gets the ball and some contact occurs (unless, as you point out, it's from the back), it's not a foul.  Sure, contact like that can end careers.  Michael Owen's career may be over after no contact at all and a minute on the pitch.  The Ghanian got the ball and did not come into Reyna's knee with his spikes up--another clear foul, as you point out.  The play today just wasn't "dangerous" by professional standards; those guys live with that.  And Reyna could have avoided it by getting rid of the ball quickly.

I'm sure things could have felt different had the game been tied at halftime; either of the Ghana goals could/should have been avoided.  But the fact remains that, for the first half and part of the second, the U.S. team looked to be moving in slow motion.  The Australia-Croatia game wasn't pretty, but it involved two teams playing with real desire and urgency, and a sense for how they were going to try to score.  I didn't sense that from the U.S. effort for most of the game.

[Jim Matson]

A couple of blunders and we give Ghana 2 goals.  The bad clearing attempt was bad enough but the call was even worse.

And the give away was..., well I'm not sure what it was.  But is was "lame" and was on national TV.  Hmmm.  Did anyone see him look up real quick right after he was "taken down?"  Yeah, I know the knee twisted, but still...

Ghana played well and certainly wasn't given the match, but I would have liked to see the US play better.  At least Beasley earned my respect today. 

[Gregory Sager]

another point he brought up was teh lack of diversity on the team. he basically said where are all the asian-americans, mexicans, etc? this country is a melting pot of cultures yet everyone looks the same (other than a couple african-americans). so i guess his point was that the team needs to look like its more than just composed of a bunch of white guys who grew up in white suburbia with soccer moms.

That's just plain silly. Diversity has nothing to do with athletic excellence. In fact, quotas are the bane of a meritocracy, and unless your players are selected by athletic merit your team will be no good.

The NBA is the greatest professional basketball league in the world. It's also three-quarters black, and of the quarter that's white, roughly half are foreign-born. So how is that diverse?

Canada has produced most of the world's great hockey players over the past century. For Canadians, diversity is almost always a matter of language rather than race (unless you live in Toronto, Vancouver, or in proximity to a First Nations Reserve). There were (and are) Francophonic Canadian hockey players and Anglophonic Canadian hockey players ... but the number of non-white Canadian hockey players could probably be counted on one hand. In America, too, the sport is lily-white. So how is that diverse?

sure we may be diverse than most other teams, but look at all the good countries, they aren't diverse to begin with and their guys are getting the job done. the white kids from the suburbs aren't.

Your syllogism is faulty, Scottie. The US falters in international soccer, but where is the evidence that it falters because the players are "white kids from the suburbs"?

There's more truth to the Trib article Hoosier Titan cited about the other American sports cutting into the potential national talent pool for soccer. Still, even that has to be weighed in light of the overall demographics of international play. Ghana has 22 million people. The United States has 300 million people. Even if you take into consideration the fact that almost every promising young Ghanian athlete will be kicking around a soccer ball while football, basketball, baseball, and the like are skimming off much of the cream of America's athletic talent pool, you still have a much larger base of potential soccer players in the States than you do in Ghana. Plus, you have all of the advantages that money can provide in the US (camps, specialized coaching, state-of-the-art equipment, fields, and sports medicine, etc.) that Ghana lacks.

I tend to side with those who chalk up the mediocrity of American soccer on the international level to the fact that, as Chuck said, soccer isn't "in the bones" of our compatriots. I don't think that you can overestimate the importance of cultural environment (in terms of a sport's importance, or lack thereof) to an athlete's development. Sure, Lance Armstrong is the world's greatest cyclist, and he's an American rather than a Frenchman or a Spaniard. And Dirk Nowitzki is one of the NBA's premier players, and he hails from the hoops-indifferent nation of Germany. But people like that are the exception. By and large, it seems to me that the vast majority of the best players in any sport will emerge from countries where that sport is an indelible, cradle-to-grave aspect of the national fabric.

[Greek Tragedy]

At least Beasley earned my respect today. 

Are you kidding me?  He had one good pass the whole game.  And yes, it resulted in a goal, but he was basically invisible the whole tournament.

Just a few words on recent posts.

Where are all the Asian-Americans, Mexican-Americans, etc?  They're playing for Asian countries and for Mexico probably!  All because you're born in the states doesn't mean you have to play for us.  You can have a GRANDPARENT from a different country and play for them!  In all honesty, I'd rather have white suburbon American-born players playing for us than players like Hugo Sanchez, David Regis and Thomas Dooley playing for us.  Obviously this isn't any rip on the African-Americans on our team, but having foreign born players with American passports isn't the answer either.  We resorted to that in the past because we didn't have our own players that were developed enough.

As for our players needing to play in Europe and how bad the MLS is for players...give me break.  If it wasn't for MLS, players like Eddie Lewis, Brad Friedel, Brian McBride, DaMarcus Beasley, Carlo Bocanegra, to name a few, wouldn't even be playing in Europe.  If it weren't for MLS, the US probably wouldn't be qualifying for thier 5th World Cup in a row.  Yes, European leagues improve our players, but they have to PLAY to improve.  I have nothing but admiration for Donovan for making the choice to come back to the US.  He was sitting on the bench in Germany and maybe playing reserve games.  You aren't going to get better doing that.  You know why Tim Howard didn't get a shot at the starting goalie job?  Because he was riding the pine at Manchester United.  Nearly every player on our roster either has played for MLS or is playing for the MLS right now. 

It's amazing that the US gets knocked out in the first round of the World Cup and everyone is throwing the whole team under the bus.  Wynalda even said it was Arena's fault.  Get rid of him?  Yeah, who's better?  Four years ago he was a genius and Beasley, Donovan and whomever were the faces of the US National Team.  You know what?  They still are.  They had a bad tourney and got knocked out playing in the group of death with the Czechs and pereninial power Italy (or group of death 1A, along with the group with Holland, Argentina, S&M and Ivory Coast).

France is on the verge of getting knocked out in the 1st round for the 2nd Cup in a row...this after WINNING IT in 98.  The #2 ranked Czechs are out.  Portugal was knocked out last WC.  Holland failed to even make the 02 WC!  These are teams with tradition.  Though I'm disappointed the US didn't advance, I wasn't surprised they didn't considering who else was in their group.   

Seriously people, I think we're taking this a little too harsh and I think a lot of us, the analysts, and maybe the general public that doesn't watch soccer expected too much (the latter because the "experts" drilled into their head about going to the Quarters last WC and expected us to do just as good). 

There are a lot of countries that haven't even qualified for the WC.  We should be proud that we're one of the best 32 teams in the world.  It took us 50 years to qualify after going in 1940.  Just remember for the 2002 WC that we almost didn't even qualify.  We placed 3rd.

Sorry for the long post.  I guess I'm just a little upset about how some have reacted, putting every play and player under the microscope (...if Bocanegra would've just cleared it...)  I am glad that the WC and the US National team is getting so much publicity! lol.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I think everyone was hoping for an American improvement on 2002, which was a totally realistic expectation (especially with Nike pushing it and all).  A World Cup in Europe favors European teams due to familiarity and less travel, just like the Korea/Japan Cup had both Korea and Japan get out of the group stage.

A lot of our problem is the chemistry.  When I read below that they need to have more experience together, my first thought was "they play just as many international friendlies as anyone else," but they don't.  Due to the extremes of travel over the Atlantic, Arean plays almost all of his home friendlies with MLS guys.  We need to schedule games in Europe, against good teams, and bring our best.  It's really the only way to get better.


And Ypsi, if you don't think Freddy Adu is gone to Chelsea the second he turns 18 (and can therefore get a work permit) you're crazy.  He'd be in their youth system right now if they could get him into the country.  With the exposure Champs League is now getting in the US, our young kids are coming up knowing that Europe is the goal and we will see it pay off in the future.  US Soccer just has the competing interest of MLS telling them to promote the domestic league.  In this World Cup, only two countries had all of their players playing in house, Saudi Arabia and Italy (which has one of the best leagues in the world to begin with).  Americans don't like having the best leagues be overseas, but that's how it is and if US Soccer is going to progress, we have to adapt to that.

I sure wish Jon Spector could have made it to the Cup this year.  He and Onyewu are going to be a premier defensive force over the next ten years.  Someone else who watches EPL back me up here.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Oh, I did forget to mention that the Beasley to Dempsey goal was unlike anything we've seen in US football for a long time.  Those were talented guys who knew exactly what to do when the opportunity presented itself.  Too bad it came on a turnover; we really need to learn how to create those ourselves.

[foul_language]

Old School rants; now we're going. If there's nothing else U.S. citizens do well, it's to put teams on a pedestal so we can have the supreme pleasure of knocking them off. Rehash, rehash, rehash is what we do best. And I agree that the 2002 showing gave a lot of people this kind of sneaky hope that the United States was catching onto the game. I think we have caught onto the game, we just don't play it quite as well as everyone else does yet. We're still JV to everyone else's varsity.

I was impressed with Ghana's and Ivory Coast's footwork, the deceptive backpasses while moving forward, the spot on passes (were the passes that great or were the players just that good at moving to the ball? Was anyone standing flat-footed? Did anyone have to study the field before making a pass?). Those kinds of things come from hours and hours and hours and months and years of playing, practicing, pick-up games, league games... That's what we see on the basketball court when gym rats and street ball players get to play. They play the game obsessively. United States isn't obsessed by soccer; attention IS way divided by the menu of other sports out there to get into.

That isn't bad; and I repeat, it's not that bad to be knocked out in the first round (unless you had money on a U.S. win). There's still plenty of great soccer to be played.

[Hoosier Titan]

I have to agree, pretty much, with OS.  It's never a given for the great majority of sides to advance; even the perennial powers have their down years, as OS points out.  The U.S. has made progress and can continue to do so.

The only thing that I found truly disappointing with this year's performance--and this may just be me--was the war of words in the press between the coach and some of the players after the first match.  I just wish those kinds of things could be handled in the locker room.  I am not calling for Arena's head, just wishing it could have been done in private.

So which sides are people supporting now?

[sac]

Ladies and Gentleman........America has taken another step towards becoming a soccer nation.

Less than a few minutes after being eliminated from the World Cup, people want a change in the coach.   Isn't this what the European powers do?

Lots of progress over the last 12 years, the most significant is the thought that being eliminated from the World Cup's toughest group (by far) is now a disappointment.  Expectations are higher and thats a good thing.

Trivia question

What player become the first player (?) is World Cup history to receive two yellow cards and not be sent off........and then receive a third yellow and subsequent Red card after the game is over?

What was that all about?



.......and I'm sorry to see the World Cup is slowly reverting back to old habits........dive, dive, and then dive.  Disgracefull.......FIFA needs to start shelling out Red Cards if even they're bad ones for Diveing.  Maybe then these guys will stop.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Josep Simunic got the three yellows courtesy of Graham Poll, who, after the US-Ghana debacle by Markus Merk, would have been the favorite to ref the final.  Now, he's probably out too.

Without Poll and Merk (the two most respected refs in the world) and the forced retirement of Gianluigi Collina (who was the best ref of all time) there will be a new face for the final.  That should be interesting.  (Also interesting, Poll's 4th referee and the 5th, backup ref, were both Americans and will also be done officiating because they failed to intervene when Poll gave he second card, but didn't send Simunic off.)


I'm rooting for the Swiss, to answer Hoosier Titan.

[David Collinge]

There are a lot of countries that haven't even qualified for the WC.  We should be proud that we're one of the best 32 teams in the world.  It took us 50 years to qualify after going in 1940.  Just remember for the 2002 WC that we almost didn't even qualify.  We placed 3rd.

Being analytical by nature, I can't let incorrect assertions of material fact go unchallenged.  The US was in the finals at Brazil 1950, where they won that never-to-be-forgotten 1:0 decision over England at Belo Horizonte.  So when they qualified for Italia '90, the absence was 40 years, not 50.  (There was no 1940 World Cup; the war cancelled the 1942 and 1946 Cups.)  And the USA's result at Korea/Japan 2002 was a quarterfinal loss to Germany, however controversial.  They neither qualified for the semi-finals nor won the third-place game.  (The USA was a semi-finalist in the inaugural World Cup, Uruguay 1930.) 

I don't follow world football nearly as closely as the rest of you seem to; my interest piques every four years, like many Americans.  (I'm sure I'd be a fan of the EPL if it didn't cost me a fortune in cable or satellite fees to do so.)  I paid some attention to how the US was doing in qualifying and in friendlies, and based on that, I predicted that their difficulties in creating any offense would lead to a fourth-place group finish.  So, as these predictions came true, I can't say I am disappointed.  In fact, I think the knockout phase will be more enjoyable now, with relatively impartial coverage.  I found it very tiresome to listen to announcers discussing the USA's last or next match (or, in the case of Marcelo Balboa, whining about the officiating in the last USA match) while a perfectly exciting match between two other teams was going on in front of them.

I'm rooting for Mexico, as far as it goes, but I actually prefer to watch a match where I have no rooting interest.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Reyna is out; McBride has hinted he's next and Arena will be gone by 2007.  It looks like the changes we've been calling for are coming and coming quickly.

I'd love to steal Hiddink from the Russians.  He might be the one to take us to the next level in 2010.  I just don't know if USSoccer has enough money to pay him.  He double dippd with PSV and Australia for two years before coming full time at the start of qualifying.

[Greek Tragedy]

There are a lot of countries that haven't even qualified for the WC.  We should be proud that we're one of the best 32 teams in the world.  It took us 50 years to qualify after going in 1940.  Just remember for the 2002 WC that we almost didn't even qualify.  We placed 3rd.

Being analytical by nature, I can't let incorrect assertions of material fact go unchallenged.  The US was in the finals at Brazil 1950, where they won that never-to-be-forgotten 1:0 decision over England at Belo Horizonte.  So when they qualified for Italia '90, the absence was 40 years, not 50.  (There was no 1940 World Cup; the war cancelled the 1942 and 1946 Cups.)  And the USA's result at Korea/Japan 2002 was a quarterfinal loss to Germany, however controversial.  They neither qualified for the semi-finals nor won the third-place game.  (The USA was a semi-finalist in the inaugural World Cup, Uruguay 1930.) 

No problem Dave.  It was 1940 like you said.  If I would've used my Lakeland College math correctly, going every four years, I would've figured out there wasn't a 1940 WC!  Oh well, what are you gonna do?

Also, read the end of my quoted post a little more carefully.  I said, for the 2002 WC, they almost didn't even QUALIFY, we placed 3rd...this means we placed 3RD IN OUR QUALIFYING GROUP, CONCACAF, I believe behind Costa Rica and Mexico.

I think everyone was hoping for an American improvement on 2002, which was a totally realistic expectation (especially with Nike pushing it and all).

Get serious! lol. :-) It was a totally realistic expectation because NIKE pushed it?  Anyway, as compared to the 2002 quarterfinal run, I think it was hopeful we'd get out of the 1st round, especially after the draw was made and we knew who was in our group.  In 2002, we shocked Portugal and made it to the 2nd round.  We were VERY fortunate to get Mexico in the round of 16 because they were a very familiar foe and we've had good recent success against them.  We outplayed an aging Germany team, but as we all know, we lost.  So to say that we were expected to do the same or better, with the Czechs and Italy in our group and then get past Brazil in the 2nd round to make the quarters is wearing red, white and blue tinted glasses.  I love the US team, but I'm also realistic.

A lot of our problem is the chemistry. When I read below that they need to have more experience together, my first thought was "they play just as many international friendlies as anyone else," but they don't. Due to the extremes of travel over the Atlantic, Arean plays almost all of his home friendlies with MLS guys. We need to schedule games in Europe, against good teams, and bring our best. It's really the only way to get better.

Part of this is a false excuse.  What about our South American counterparts?  How come they are so good then?  Most of the reason why our players may not play together as much as some countries is because our league is not played with the International Calender.  We play our league when most of the world is on break.  That's part of the reason.  Chemistry a problem this WC?  What about last WC?  We had the same circumstances then!  What changed that caused us to lose chemistry in the last 4 years?

And Ypsi, if you don't think Freddy Adu is gone to Chelsea the second he turns 18 (and can therefore get a work permit) you're crazy. He'd be in their youth system right now if they could get him into the country. With the exposure Champs League is now getting in the US, our young kids are coming up knowing that Europe is the goal and we will see it pay off in the future. US Soccer just has the competing interest of MLS telling them to promote the domestic league. In this World Cup, only two countries had all of their players playing in house, Saudi Arabia and Italy (which has one of the best leagues in the world to begin with). Americans don't like having the best leagues be overseas, but that's how it is and if US Soccer is going to progress, we have to adapt to that.

If I'm correct, Freddy Adu doesn't need a work permit to play in Chelsea's youth system.  Actually, I believe the reason why he didn't move overseas is because he and his family wanted to stay in the states and staying in MLS, he knew he'd have the opportunity to play right away.

I also think you are contradicting yourself a little.  How can the MLS compete with top European leagues if we are sending all of our good players there?  Yeah, you said US Soccer just has a competing interest in MLS.  The league has done wonders for US Soccer and it knows without the domestic league, the national team would not be where it's at today.  MLS is considered a stepping stone for many, IMO.  Will it ever become the Italian league or the English league, no.  But neither will the Dutch league, Mexican league or Scottish league. 

[Browneagle64]

Words from the L.A. Times today stated that Coach Areana might be calling it over for his career as head US national coach. In doing so, as the paper mentioned, he does have other career deals that he is interested but has still not made up his mind.

In my opinion, even though we could not get it done, this man and his staff woke up US Soccer for the past 8 years in the yes. I don't remember another coach who could have done this. It sure wasn't Bora (i don't even want to spell his last name.

I agree with OLD SCHOOL, the US really needed MLS and a system that would prepair them for big games like the World cup. Like i had mentioned, before its debute in 1997 or so, US soccer really wasn't that good. True their was talent, but the rest of the team couldn't really square it off against really good competition. Unless you went abroad.

In saying so, i hope that more U.S players get their feet wet abroad. I know Keller did and needs to do more of. Donovoan needs to face his fears and return back abroad to become better.  Same goes as well for Beasly.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I think everyone was hoping for an American improvement on 2002, which was a totally realistic expectation (especially with Nike pushing it and all).

Get serious! lol. :-) It was a totally realistic expectation because NIKE pushed it?  Anyway, as compared to the 2002 quarterfinal run, I think it was hopeful we'd get out of the 1st round, especially after the draw was made and we knew who was in our group.  In 2002, we shocked Portugal and made it to the 2nd round.  We were VERY fortunate to get Mexico in the round of 16 because they were a very familiar foe and we've had good recent success against them.  We outplayed an aging Germany team, but as we all know, we lost.  So to say that we were expected to do the same or better, with the Czechs and Italy in our group and then get past Brazil in the 2nd round to make the quarters is wearing red, white and blue tinted glasses.  I love the US team, but I'm also realistic.

Typo on my part...I meant unrealistic.

A lot of our problem is the chemistry. When I read below that they need to have more experience together, my first thought was "they play just as many international friendlies as anyone else," but they don't. Due to the extremes of travel over the Atlantic, Arean plays almost all of his home friendlies with MLS guys. We need to schedule games in Europe, against good teams, and bring our best. It's really the only way to get better.

Part of this is a false excuse.  What about our South American counterparts?  How come they are so good then?  Most of the reason why our players may not play together as much as some countries is because our league is not played with the International Calender.  We play our league when most of the world is on break.  That's part of the reason.  Chemistry a problem this WC?  What about last WC?  We had the same circumstances then!  What changed that caused us to lose chemistry in the last 4 years?

South Americans field their teams mostly of European players and play many of their freindlies in Europe, which is exactly what we should be doing.  The US plays too many games in CONCACAF and doesn't have the Euro players play together often enough.  Those were my points.

If I'm correct, Freddy Adu doesn't need a work permit to play in Chelsea's youth system.  Actually, I believe the reason why he didn't move overseas is because he and his family wanted to stay in the states and staying in MLS, he knew he'd have the opportunity to play right away.

He does need one and its a complicated process.  Some Americans have done it, but very few.  Freddy, as you stated, could play right away and develop fine until he's 18, so it wasn't a big deal.  It's very tough for a foreign under 18 player to be a proffessional footballer in England.

I also think you are contradicting yourself a little.  How can the MLS compete with top European leagues if we are sending all of our good players there?  Yeah, you said US Soccer just has a competing interest in MLS.  The league has done wonders for US Soccer and it knows without the domestic league, the national team would not be where it's at today.  MLS is considered a stepping stone for many, IMO.  Will it ever become the Italian league or the English league, no.  But neither will the Dutch league, Mexican league or Scottish league.

That was exactly my point.  I hope I didn't say I wanted MLS to compete with the Euro leagues; that's an impossibility.  However, when MLS started, their stated goal was eventually to do just that.  It might happen in 50 years, but I wouldn't put money on it.  The controversy you brought up, is the very controversy that I claimed in plaguing USSoccer, namely that the best thing for the national side is for players to be in Europe, but the best thing for MLS is for players to be here.  It's a problem.  Although if MLS can develop guys until they are 21 or 22 and then send them to Europe (listen up Dempsey and Johnson), it will be a great thing.  I also think we'll start to see lots of aging stars end their careers here, where the earn potential is greater.  I wouldn't doubt Beckham or even Zidane come over for $1 Million per for a season or two after their prime is over in Europe.  Combining young Americans with veteran world-class footballers could make MLS a prime feeder for the national team.