Why Jozy shouldn't be the main striker

A rather lively discussion ensued at CounterAttack headquarters yesterday:

After three matches in the World Cup, the US has played excellent on attack, held the ball well in the midfield and have been composed in defense. The MNT deserves to go through to the Second Round and further, to be honest.

One of the most exciting developments has been the progress of Jozy Altidore. He's been a monster, running down the wing, bringing the ball in a linkup from defense to offense, taking shots when possible, drawing fouls that leave defenders more cautious. There's no doubt he's one of the best players on the squad and a genuine star for the future.

BUT.

He is effectively playing as an attacking midfielder. And Jozy is a striker. If you look all the things he’s done well, there is one glaring omission. A striker scores goals and Jozy hasn't. In fact, in all of 2010, he has exactly one goal. That's not an indictment, it's just a statement of fact.

Good strikers need to score because they get into grooves. With that confidence, everything they touch turns to goal. Scoring is just infectious and feeds on itself and right now, the US player in that sort of groove is Clint Dempsey.

The difference between Deuce and Jozy is that Clint has been scoring for Fulham and the US. This doesn't mean Jozy shouldn't be on the pitch, but the CounterAttack would argue that he should switch roles with Deuce. What happens if Jozy moves back a bit, into that attacking midfield role, and Clint slides forward? We think it would create a more lethal strike combination.

Why not come out in a 4-3-1-2? That's with Bradley, Edu and Landon in the midfield, and Altidore just ahead of them. Play Deuce in the #10 role and Gomez as the #11 up front.

This creates a triangle formation with several options. Gomez at the apex, Deuce just off to the left or right, as needed. Jozy, meanwhile, plays right behind them and switches with Deuce; whenever Clint moves one way, Altidore goes the other. That leaves Donovan with a wing man at all times.

Effectively, this is a 4-3-3 but it means that Jozy doesn't need to run so much. If you watch his matches, he tends to lose the ball if he has too much green to run. So let’s limit how much he needs to roam, shorten that distance while still providing options up front for him to pass the ball. Or, to be fair, to take the shot if it's there. Why not, he's nearly scored twice.

Now, with Ghana you need to move quickly and decisively. This formation would provide two genuine goal-scoring threats in Donovan and Dempsey, plus Gomez, who we think still has a lot to offer, and Jozy’s potential to score. Now you have three- and four-pronged attack options from Gomez, Dempsey, Donovan and Altidore.

Meanwhile, Baby Bradley and Edu can hold the ball, a critical need against the Ghanese with their wide-open speed rush. The midfielders can start the attack off counters to feed Lannie, who can either take things up on his own or use Jozy as a wingman. Deuce and Gomez are still up front, denying defenders the luxury of leaving their marks to double-team any US attacker. Oh, by the way, Bradley can score too.

It also means that the US will have at least five or six men defensively protecting against Ghana’s counterattacks and yet not lose anything shifting towards attack. If Ghana attack down the right, Edu and the center-halfs can push the ball out towards Trumbolo. Ol’ Man Dolo has been completely overlooked by many as the true spark as wingback. He has started so many counterattacks with his runs down the wing and has not been beaten badly down his side in defense. So add yet another attacking option without losing anything in defense.

So right now, and only right now, and only based on these three recent matches, Jozy Altidore absolutely belongs on the pitch but as an attacking midfielder or a winger, to provide service to Clint Dempsey and whomever else is lucky enough to be paired with him up front.

Of course, that's a step too far for Bob Bradley. That’s not a criticism, especially as he has gotten more attack-oriented as the tournament has progressed. Bradley deserves enormous credit just for that alone, as it is a monumental shift in US tactics. But dropping Altidore back is too much for Bradley to envision, beyond his comfort zone.

But it could work.


Image via Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty from LA Times

GUEST POST: F-ing Clark

A supporting view of how Bob Bradley cost the US two precious points, from a guest blogger:

One could argue with Bradley about picking Findley. Ultimately he accomplished little in the game; but he didn't hurt the US, either. Bradley clearly wants an analog to Charlie Davies and there are few players of that class. But one Bradley's other choices, of which he really has no excuse is picking Clark to start alongside his son. I warned anyone that would listen that he needed to have someone more defensively sound in the position. I don't honestly know why Bob thinks someone as scatterbrained as Clark is capable of handling the pressure from two of England's three best players.

News flash: Bob, you tried this two years ago against England and Gerrard ran right by Clark to score a goal in that game, too. Miraculously, there were other Clark gaffes yesterday that did not come back to hurt us. Clark spaced out again later in the match, when it was clear that our midfield was tiring. This should have been Bob's opportunity to give Maurice Edu an opportunity to tighten things up again, or have Torres come in and try win the game.

Of course Bob, you hamstrung yourself by choosing Clark, so you didn't have the choice later on to sub in Torres for Edu or vice versa. Choosing to ignore the problems there really was trusting Fate that the US could survive the latter stages.

There were many reasons to have good cheer, yesterday. Failing to start one of your better midfield players, was not among them. Gooch looked better and better as the match wore on. Boca had some trouble with Lennon and Johnson; but so does everybody and that should be as bad as it gets. Altidore looked quite strong and Donovan was steady. His performance was mature and assured. He looks to be becoming the type of player who can positively influence a match even when he doesn't get the chance to do something spectacular.

Image via AP Photo/Michael Sohn, from AZCentral.com

How Bradley cost the MNT precious points

The MNT rescued a point v England yesterday but here at the CounterAttack, we do not feel lucky. In fact, we are downright furious. England played their best side, took the lead, surrendered the softest goal in World Cup history...and were lucky to have a point. The US, on the other hand, pointedly did not play their best side, and Bob Bradley cost the MNT two points they could have had. Lots of cheerleading from the US media but Ruud Gullit was right that this was a match the US could have won.

Of course Green’s blunder was a gift, allowing Dempsey to score in a second World Cup tournament. You will read that the US were lucky. That is disingenuous by half: blunders are part of the game. Many will disagree but we believe things work out: this makes up for handling no-call in the 2002 quarterfinal match v Germany. That’s just how it goes.

What you won’t read anywhere else is that it was England that were lucky. Not the goal itself; that was skill from Heskey and Gerrard. The problem was that Ricardo Clark was on the pitch and that was a gift from the US to England. Bradley saw fit to put Clark was on the squad and now seems eager to prove that he was right to choose him. We are quite sure Clark is a nice guy. He’s probably many things except an international talent.

Bradley’s personnel choices meant the US were undermanned. The Clark mystery is one but also, why choose Robbie Findley as the other striker? What an enormous waste of a starting spot. For some reason, American soccer is obsessed with speed. It is a running game, yes, but quickness is more important than speed. Findley is fast but what good does that do if he can’t hold on to the ball? What good is it if he is a split-second too slow on decisions, and space is closed before he passes or shoots?

Once upon a time, the MNT had no choices. They were forced to go with players like Findley (see Cobi Jones) or Clark (see Joe-Max Moore) because the pool was shallow. If only Bradley had a player with demonstrated scoring ability in a professional league! You know, someone accustomed to scoring under pressure. We would settle for a player who has suddenly developed into a scoring machine, with the maturity that a nearly a decade of pro sports adds. How about a midfielder who can hold onto the ball and knows how to calm an offense. Hello Gomez! Hello Buddle! Hello Torres!

Going with the ones that brung you only works when those players are the best choices. That was not the case here. Besides being better players, Gomez and Torres both play in Mexico. Both are used to playing a Latin style -- quickness, movement, possession. You know who have a tough time against that? England, who match up well against a physical side. Two guesses which tactics Bradley opted for in yesterday’s match.

You cannot fault Bradley for his loyalty to players, but he is wrong about that. His loyalty should be to the US nation. There is a lack of criticism in the US sporting press, one of the reasons we started CounterAttack, so he gets free reign about that. Bradley was also wrong in his tactics. It would be one thing if we were just arguing a point, being unreasonable. But these were things we precisely said this should not happen, days ago.

The MNT should win their next two matches but hey, the ball is round. No one is saying that the US would definitely have beaten England. We are, however, saying that Bob Bradley’s conservatism cost the US two points that were there for the taking. We can be happy to take away a point yesterday.

Forgive us if we choose not to celebrate.

Image via David Leah from soccer.fanhouse.com

Let the smack talk begin, US-ENG style

Following up on assessing England’s frailties, the CounterAttack came across an article from London. The Times of London claimed the US exposed their weaknesses against Australia. While the article is not wrong, it also missed the point as badly as Robbie Findley going on goal.

We would expect that Carlos Bocanegra would slide into the other center-half position alongside Gooch Onyewu. The two have worked in tandem for the US until Carlos was recently converted to the left wingback role. While the US would miss his attacking forays, they make up for it with a more solid defensive center.

That means Jonathan Spector, a steady if unspectacular back, takes the right side while Steve Cherundolo shifts over to the left. Spector is accustomed to English attacks, playing at West Ham as he does. The US backline may not be as mobile as it could be with a healthy Gooch. It has, however, worked together as unit for some time now and, in fact, does work well.

The US tactic is to bend, allowing teams to enter up to 30 yards from goal, and then quickly break on a counterattack. Can it stop Rooney? Perhaps not but then, few can. But Rooney is prone to overreaching, leaving himself isolated, with few options. It could happen, if the US shuts down passing lanes as it has done with great success recently. That requires some other Englander to step up and do the business, as they say. Can they?

The American midfield is a lot stronger than the English might give it credit. It works well as a unit and they play off each other with effectiveness. No one at the level of Stevie G or Frank Lampard, of course, but Donovan was an instant hit with Everton and Dempsey is a key player at Fulham. Unglamorous clubs all…but all in England.

So yes, the Times is correct that they aren’t at Manchester or Chelski. On the other hand, US players (don’t forget Altidore) at least have a good idea of how English players like to defend. They can prepare mentally for what they will see because quite a few – including goalkeeper Tim Howard – do it every week in the Premier League.

We already discussed England’s weaknesses. The idea is that Rooney might beat you, just make sure no one else does. But factor in an intangible: while neither side has to win this first group match, a loss is more damaging to England than the Americans. After all, the English did not look good v Japan, and little (literally) Mexico gave the English fits. The US is a better team than the first and matches up well against the latter.

There is also the Unknown factor. This is where the US actually has an edge. The Times correctly points out that Heskey, Crouch, Lennon, Defoe, Joe Cole, et al could rise to the occasion. The CounterAttack, well, counters that all are players that are known to the US. Their playing styles are well known to both Howard and Hahnemann, the backup keeper. That doesn’t mean the English Unknowns can be overcome, it’s just that they present no surprises.

The contrast is the US: how do you play a Gomez or a Buddle? What about a Jose Torres, do you know what he can do? Gomez and Torres both play in the hypercompetitive Mexican league, and play well. Truth be told, even the MNT is not 100% sure of what they bring because they literally are unknowns on the international stage.

Most of all, the ball is round. Anything can happen. But while the MNT would be disappointed with a loss, they would likely bounce back in their next two games, probably wins both. How do we know? Because they’ve done it before, recently.

For all the hype surrounding England, despite their fantastic qualifying record, the English have much more to lose than the Yanks and that could be a bridge too far for them on Saturday. One thing is sure: it should be a fun match.

Fingers crossed for that, at least….

MNT marches on, getting ready for ENG

Some positives came through after yesterday’s final tune-up match v Australia:

The midfield seem to get more solid with each outing. This is an increasing trend since WCQs. The unit is tidy and and seems to be hitting its collective stride at the right time. On the attacking end, they offer options, hold onto the ball against pressing defenders, and distribute as and when; all have been historical concern. In defense, the MF work well to disrupt attacks, continuing a formula they discovered v Spain in the Confed Cup semifinal. These days, they seem to spring counterattacks much quicker…and with more accuracy.

The squad knows each other very well. Team chemistry is overrated but players that actually like each other tend to fight harder for one another. These guys seem to really enjoy playing as a squad. This can be a critical edge – a player having a rough patch can be buoyed by his team mates, restoring confidence. There also very much seems to be an us-against-them mentality at work in the US locker room. As Sir Alex Ferguson would say, a tough mental edge can often be more important than physical fitness.

Scoring is suddenly a feature. Let’s take that in context – we’re not saying the US has the next coming of Pele, or even Paolo Rossi. But with Gomez and Buddle clearly in form, Jozy Altidore no longer needs to think he must carry the scoring load. Less pressure might help him. Add proven midfield scorers Dempsey and Donovan into the mix, and the US suddenly seem a threat up front.

Of course, a few negatives have also emerged:

Jay DeMerit cannot start at center-half. He’s looked shaky throughout the warm-up friendlies, unsure of himself and not mobile enough to defend properly. Yesterday, he committed three fouls within 24 minutes. But his replacement would likely be Goodson, which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence. Hopefully Gooch Onyewu is ready and fit for ENG, paired with Chuckie BlackMouth from his inspiring role as left wingback to the center again. Cherundolo on the left and Spector on the right could minimize a lot of damage. It’s all moot, though, if Gooch isn’t ready to be effective.

Robbie Findley and Rico Clark should not get meaningful minutes. Findley wasted two golden scoring opportunities. Goals are at a premium at the World Cup, so Findley condemned himself to the bench with those. Contrast with Hercules Gomez: forced a save and created a corner within two minutes of entering as a sub, and then scored the third US goal. THAT’S how it’s done. Rico is a slightly different issue: he just doesn’t offer enough to leave Torres (our preference) or Edu on the bench. A borderline inclusion to begin with – the CounterAttack thought Robbie Rogers should have been on the Final 23 at Clark’s expense – Rico has done nothing in these friendlies to show otherwise.

Coach Bradley’s conservatism could be a problem. Torres and Michael Bradley would be an excellent pair. There is very little chance, however, of Bob Bradley doing that. Baby Bradley and Torres seem to play the same role – holding MF – so Bradley won’t want to “waste” a spot. But Baby Bradley is more attack-minded, while Torres prefers to be a field general. They could start together no problem. Similarly, Torres and Buddle should start v ENG, with Altidore coming off the bench. Again, Coach Bradley is too dogmatic to even consider either.

Overall, the problems are about lack of depth on the MNT than anything that has to happen on the pitch. That’s ok – few squads have a solid starting lineup throughout, much less depth on the bench (just ask Fabio Capello). Remember: a US “B” side just played the Czechs to a standstill (final score aside) and then beat the Turks. Just five years ago, the MNT A side would have had a tough time against either.

Perhaps the most encouraging sign, however, is that no one seems to take the US seriously. Yes, some MNT supporters are a bit over the top but few others have caught on. The truth is, this is a very talented side. No top-tier superstar, but few are as solid top to bottom. It’s strong enough to go far with a little luck, and the US is due more than its share of breaks this time around. For once, the ball might bounce for the MNT.

Bring on the Three Lions!

Note to US national team: forget Rooney

The match v ENG looms on June 12th for the US and all supporters of the Men’s National Team are on tenterhooks. It’s the sort of match that in some ways is meaningless but yet could mean oh so much. An hour ago, England coach Capello released his final roster, with few surprises. It’s a fine squad, with some illustrious names but eminently beatable.

Since the WC draws were made, the CounterAttack and a Dutch friend have been mystified how anyone can rate England as one of the favorites to actually win the World Cup. The Three Lions should advance from Group C, yes (along with the US), and they should even advance to the quarterfinals. But the key word is “should” because the reality is that they could lose to the US and they could lose to Slovenia, who after all beat a Russian team that are only out of the tournament because they self-destructed.

For all the acclaim and hoopla surrounding England, the reality is that they have exactly three players that truly scare anyone. Wayne Rooney moved onto a higher plateau this past season and probably would have won the Golden Boot in the Premier League but for being injured most of the last month of the season. Rooney, however, is a workhorse and goal-scorer who is unable to take over a match on his own. He is not Messi or Torres or even Henry, strikers who can take over the match and make it their own. Rooney can be shut out and get frustrated – and the longer he is shut out, the more frustrated he gets. We follow Manchester United; we know this about Wazza quite well.

Steven Gerrard, despite having a sub-par season, is a class player. We would fully expect the real Stevie G to show up in Rustenberg on the 12th to create havoc. Now he is a player that can take over a match. But will he?

The only other English player who should scare anyone is…Frank Lampard. Ironically, he is a given on the squad but is rarely mentioned as a tipping point. The CounterAttack will propose that Fat Frank (we never understood this – he isn’t) is precisely that game breaker. His ability to create goals from distance and to force GKs into action is not to be taken lightly. The ball, as they say, is round and anything can happen. Lampard plays to that axiom better than any other Englander. He is impossible to shut down because he just pops up when you’re not paying attention to him. Easily overlooked, until he blasts a shot from 30 yards on the wing.

And that’s it. Sure, you can talk all you want about Aaron Lennon (a player the CounterAttack rates very highly, btw), Jermaine Defoe or the (non-brothers) Coles. Whatevs, we are unimpressed. Yes, perhaps they step up. Perhaps. They haven’t done so yet, so the question really is, when?

The England defense is quite suspect – nothing speaks louder than the fact that international retiree Jamie Carragher was called back into service. He and Rio have suddenly and shockingly lost a full step on the ball in a very short time. The CounterAttack has always considered John Terry to be overrated. Better, perhaps, than most American defenders, but still overrated. Let’s not even talk GKs….

The way to beat England is actually quite simple: isolate Rooney. Don’t lose sight of him, of course, but make sure his shots and passing options are limited. In other words, force England’s other players to rise to the occasion. Easier said than done but can be done.

Because that’s where the questions begin: Can Stevie G come back to form? Can Lampard be more than a threat and actually score? Can Terry link between defense and attack without leaving holes? Will the ENG second striker (probably Heskey) step up to the challenge? Will Defoe or some winger become the new hero? Will Glenn Johnson offer more on offense than he surrenders on defense? Can Barry continue where he left off with City?

Look, let’s be quite clear: any and all of these could very well happen. But will it? We just don’t believe it will, at least not enough to get past the second round.

The Japan match on Sunday was not a uniquely sub-par performance from England. The score line flattered to deceive, what with two JPN own goals. There was no “oomph” from anyone in a Three Lions shirt, not even with a few roster spots still at stake. Instead there was a rather tepid performance. It’s not just this match – little Mexico gave England fits, again with a score line that flattered.

Absolutely 100% the final score is more important than how you play in the World Cup. The CounterAttack fully expects that England will try play better when it really counts, because that's the problem: playing well is not something you just switch on.

We expect ENG to get out of the group but we would not be shocked if they didn’t get past the second round. They could beat Serbia (but then again not) but Germany? So it all depends on beating the US, setting the tone and winning the group.

And that all comes down to the MNT forgetting about Rooney. Just make sure the other Englanders don’t beat you.

Image via Getty Images, from ESPN Soccernet

US national team pieces falling into place

On the day after the afternoon before against Turkey, the CounterAttack found some causes for optimism ahead of lineup choices that Bob Bradley will have in South Africa. Certain things became more clear during the match. What is most encouraging is that certain players have started to step up, becoming impossible to overlook.

The experiment to use Carlos Bocanegra as a left wingback seems to be a success. Ok, it won’t work against teams with very quick wingers. On the whole, however, Chuckie does a good job bringing the ball up to provide more attacking options without losing too much on the defensive end. Think “Gary Neville Lite” (er, but on the left side).

It is also clear that gammy leg or not, Gooch Onyewu is the only choice for center-half. Too often the back line gave the Turks space to move. This led not only to their goal but also to several clear-cut opportunities. Gooch is a physical presence who presses his marks and doesn’t allow them space. He seems to inspire DeMerit when they partner, so hopefully Jay will have a better match than last night’s game.

Cherundolo as the other wingback is, in the CounterAttack’s opinion, a given. Trumbolo is too experience and yesterday showed what happens with unsteady players. The back line should therefore be set because Spector, Goodson and Bornstein all had iffy nights. It is difficult to see any of them called into a critical match.

Up front, let’s hope that Bradley will cut out the Dempsey-for-striker nonsense. An effective Clint Dempsey is a Deuce that has space to play into. He is most lethal from 20-30 yards out. Playing as attacking MF, he forces defenses to stretch further out from goal, opening up holes that can lead to goals. Deuce is neither a back-to-goal striker nor a go-ahead striker. He can, however, carve up a defense, create opportunities for himself, or lay passes off for teammates to run onto. These require space to roam and Bradley should harness Clint’s abilities properly.

Meanwhile, at this point Landon is the closest thing the MNT has ever had to an unstoppable player. He can move the ball at will and open up space. In fact, ever since the Italy match in Germany ’06, he has only been stopped by his teammates when they don’t score of his creations. Pairing Lannie as creative MF, with Dempsey as attacking MF, suddenly there are options for the US to score from distance and inside the area.

But the really good news is the emergence of Jose Torres. Immediately the Pachuca midfielder came on to replace the (again) ineffective Rico Clark, the complexion of the midfield changed instantly. Rushed passes do not mean quick decision-making; quite the opposite, they indicate that players are uncertain of what to do with the ball. Torres asserted a calm on the pitch, and suddenly passes were less rushed and more accurate. With Torres on, his teammates found space instead of clogging themselves up. Having a possession midfielder who knows how to hold, move and distribute the ball will do that.

Torres is a very different midfielder than the MNT has enjoyed in some time, since at least the Tab Ramos days (damned shame he was born about 10 years too soon). The only problem is that it will be either Torres or Michael Bradley as starter. Baby Bradley has too much experience and a scoring touch that cannot be ignored. But the emergence of Torres means that Bradley is going to be pushed – a bad series of plays, a stupid foul or caution, and by rights Torres should get the call straightaway.

The US still does not have a player that breaks into any top international side as a starter. But this is definitely a tight squad whose best players know how to play amongst each other quite well. There is a very skilled midfield that can match up well against all but the best squads. The MNT have developed into a really tough lineup, top to bottom, that few will want to face. The last remaining question is “will they score” – but then, that’s the million-dollar question, isn’t it?

Image via AP Photo/Matt Slocum on The Morning Call

Handicapping the Final 23

The CounterAttack is back, just in time for the 2010 World Cup. To get started, we’re going to predict Bob Bradley’s final 23 for the roster to South Africa.

First, we can eliminate some players after last night’s match v Czech Republic. Defense was poor in Hartford, so Heath Pearce made the wrong mistake at the wrong time. Considering that Chad Marshall didn’t play, that speaks volumes. In the midfield, Sacha Kljestan is also out – we never liked him and always wondered why the hype. Forward Robbie Findley is out because he didn’t play, while Eddie Johnson is out because he didn’t do enough last night and is still recovering from injury. Now for who's going:

GKs
Brad Guzan – the Villa keeper still has some work to do. Third-string but on the plane.

Marcus Hahnemann – in our view, the best keeper on the squad but inertia will keep the Wolves man as backup to…

Tim Howard – the US No. 1, his job for this cup and at least the next one too.

DFs
Carlos Bocanegra – a solid, experienced and physical defender. Prone to silly yellow caution cards, but Chuckie Black Mouth is a no-brainer and will captain the squad.

Jonathan Bornstein – we want him to do well. He can do well. He can also stink it up. Let’s hope the Good Bornstein shows up in South Africa.

Steve Cherundolo – the man from Hannover is solid, steady and knows how to bring the ball forward. He’s recovered from injury so he gets a ticket to South Africa.

Jay DeMerit – another one graced by lack of options. A bit slow and not that great moving forward but has done enough to claim a spot.

Clarence Goodson – a work in progress but a decent match last night, on a night where few defenders shined, should be enough. Besides, Bradley said he liked him. Oh well.

Oguchi Onyewu – he looked tired, very tired in the second half last night but that’s match fitness. Two more friendlies should be enough to put the Milan defender back.

Jonathan Spector – the CounterAttack has always liked the West Ham man. He’s unspectacular but calm. He can be beaten by speedy attackers but Fernando Torres and Lionel Messi are in other groups.

MFs
DaMarcus Beasley – Run DMB has had to work his way back into contention. He’ll be going to his third World Cup and if there is any justice, will get a goal to make up for his disallowed goal v Italy in ’06.

Alejandro Bedoya – the CounterAttack has to admit not knowing much about him but he was a calming presence v CZE last night. And, everyone seems to think he’ll go. We won’t argue.

Michael Bradley – no question. The attack will run through him and Donovan.

Ricardo Clark – a stronger squad might leave him off but he’s come on strong. Rico seems to have learned from his mistakes. Not a starter but he’s going.

Clint Dempsey – there are quite a few no-brainers. The Fulham man is one of them.

Landon Donovan – (no comment, none needed)

Maurice Edu – he’ll likely make it after last night’s performance. Scored the goal and offers some options as a defender. That’s key in tournament play.

Benny Feilhaber – oh, we like the kid who scored that wonder goal v MEX in the 07 Gold Cup final. We want him to do well.

Stuart Holden – we have been impressed with Holden since his Dynamo days. It’s his brain that makes him so important. Apparently Bolton were impressed with his match last night – they’ve just offered to extend his contract while he’s still inexpensive.

José Torres – nice to see the Pachuca man out there. We think he did enough to impress.

Strikers
Jozy Altidore – but we think he should come off the bench v ENG.

Edson Buddle – World Cup history is full of strikers who got hot at the right time. With his hot streak in MLS right now, it's tough to leave him out. We're going out on a limb on this one.

Herculez Gomez – the CounterAttack has been screaming for his inclusion. He came on last night, everyone expected him to score. He did. End of.

Wild Card
Robbie Rogers – we like him. A lot. Think he should go. Might go. Don’t be surprised, probably at Rico's expense.


image via John Dorton/US Soccer

MLS 2010 kicks off and a few thoughts

Well, after a long absence, we return in time to warm up so that our wits are in shape for this summer's World Cup. The 2010 MLS season kicked off on Thursday, as last season's surprise Seattle faced the latest newcomers, Philadelphia. Some general comments:

-- Seattle = good; Philly = not ready for prime time - they were that bad last night. At one point, Harkes (already in mid-season form with his inane comments) pointed out that the statistics showed both teams were nearly equal in shots or something equally insignificant. Perhaps on a radio broadcast this might fly but anyone actually watching the match (as you do on telly) could see that there was no comparison.

-- Ricardo Salazar had a pretty good match last night as referee. It seems clear that the league is trying to clamp down on over-the-top physicality. Still, the CounterAttack thinks that Ljundberg could have been saved from some of the hacks that knocked him out of the match with more aggressive, pro-active refereeing. Ricardo's performance was an improvement over what has been whistled in recent years. Let's hope that he established the standard for the season last night.

-- Jack McInerny (17 yrs old) came on as a second-half sub for Philly. He is a highly rated player by the National team staff, so he's worth watching. He didn't do much but didn't embarrass himself either. Following up with the CounterAttack's viewing of his play for the Little Nats, Mac continues to suggest he has potential to play at this level. Still, he ain't the second coming of a world-class player.

-- Following up on that, the CounterAttack was flipping past MSG HS Sports, which were announcing the NYS Miss HS Basketball Player of the Year. Clips of the girl who won the award were interspersed with the presentation. Instantly, you could tell that she was clearly in a different class than the other players in the clips; wasn't even close. Now, the CounterAttack really doesn't like basketball but her clips were that good that we had to stop to watch for a few minutes.

The reason we mention this is simple: when you see top-tier talent, it's instantly recognizable. We couldn't tell you what it takes to be a good basketballler but the girl we watched clearly had "it".

Sadly, and to this day, after 15 years of watching youth players, NCAA players and MLS rookies, only one player has come close to making us sit up and say, "THIS kid can make it" - Jozy Altidore. Then again, his Beckham match performance was, to date, a one-off.

The US won't reach the pinnacle of the international stage until we start developing kids whose play is so good, it demands that you stop just to watch him play.


Image via WV Hooligan.com

One step back, then moving forward

There is nothing more frustrating than a buzz kill. And just as there is nothing more derisive than a German laughing at you, there are few things more condescending than being dismissed by an Englishman.

To whit: a good time was had by all when the US beat Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinal last Wednesday. Well, maybe a few (million) Spaniards, and some Liverpool fans (cheering for Torres and Alonso, hah), were put out. Most football watchers, however, enjoyed a good match. Who, after all, doesn’t enjoy watching an underdog beat the Big Bad Bully? Record-setting unbeaten Spain was as big a bully as they get.

So the reaction in the States about the win was over the top. Suddenly soccer was in the news. American soccer was in the news. One can excuse a little irrationality -- like some saying that the Men’s National Team were legitimate contenders to win next year’s World Cup -- from US soccer fans and media. They have been constantly overlooked, reviled, treated like third-class citizens. Heck, even ESPN, the channel fighting for international soccer broadcasting rights, seem to favor the X-Games more. Why else would ESPN condemn US fans to broadcasts with Tommy Smythe?

A good result against a Very Good Team was always going to be a release for long-suffering MNT fans. It would be the same anywhere, to be honest, to beat the top-ranked team in a FIFA tournament. Celebration and a little chest-thumping is the norm. Enter Football365’s sarcastic Mediawatch, buzzkillers.

The day after the historic win, Mediawatch wrote:

Perhaps understandably, the three people that care about football in America are quite excited this morning after their brave collection of Bobby Sues and Jimmy Maes beat Spain in the Very Important Confederations Cup last night.

'U.S. Victory Was a Miracle on Grass,' reads the headline from the usually sober New York Times.

The paper goes on to say: 'A performance like Wednesday's, if it can be repeated often enough, could change the way the world views American soccer and perhaps even the way American players view themselves, not as merely able to challenge the top international teams but to beat them.'

Hmmm. Steady on there chaps.

Sigh. “Miracle on Grass” is something that any American sports fan recognizes, echoing as it does the then-equally improbable 1980 Olympic win against the Soviet hockey juggernaut. And duh -- those are girls' names. Mediawatch piled on:

Finally, Fox News comes up with the goods to reassure any confused Yankee Doodle who didn't understand why they weren't picking the ball up with some textbook, utterly baffling and largely meaningless numbers:

'Meanwhile, the United States had been 1-7-1 against No. 1 teams, beating Brazil in the 1998 CONCACAF Gold Cup and tying Argentina last summer in an exhibition at Giants Stadium.'

It is that last bit that really got to the CounterAttack. Yes, there are times when American soccer media resorts to the need for statistics but bringing up previous performances is legit. (And yes, we are fully aware it is a Sarcastic Site. No matter -- CounterAttack still wanted to punch the English column. Figuratively.)

The English football forums were little better. After the US let a 2-0 half-time lead slip away to Brazil in the championship match, even non-Americans were impressed. One forum started a ‘The US Comes of Age!’ thread. Most of the comments were positive, commiserative in the “join us in the bitter taste of defeat” mold, and supportive. Like most things, however, it was the few ruiners that, erm, ruined it (typos in original, but sadly, no way to properly convey the tone):

• Soccer ball rules. Fuck yeah!
• fuck football...its all about SOCCER!!!! get your baseball caps on lads and crack open your miniture cans of beer…
• What an awful thread
• They are just deluded

Ugh. It is tired. It is annoying. It is...frustrating because to a certain extent, it is still true. The irony is that the US does have a history. One of the oldest FAs, semifinalists in the 1930 World Cup and…. Ok, it is quite a thin history.

The US is on course to qualify for its sixth consecutive World Cup. Still, it is a no-win situation, those pesky results getting in the way of consistent respect. That is a bit galling. Weak confederation, never-win-in-Europe, Mickey Mouse tournaments…

The team is getting better. Media coverage is improving -- the Confederations Cup was the first time that the American soccer media went after the coach for poor tactical decisions. Never before has a USSF president had to give an MNT coach a vote of confidence. Players were criticized, and then responded by word, perhaps by deed.

Soccer fans in the US are great. They are often knowledgeable about the overall game beyond the shores of England, even as they are loyal to their (usually English) adopted clubs. On that note, Americans demonstrate an inspirational level of dedication to follow their adopted teams. East Coast fans get up as early as 7 am (that's 4 am in California) to watch those games.

But because they did not grow up in the shadow of a stadium, they are considered ‘plastics’, fake fans, by English media types looking for an easy target. Accidents of birth do not impress most Yanks, but this is another annoyance they have to bear.

Unloved at home. Dismissed abroad. A schizophrenic national team that alternates between flashes of could-be-good and embarrassing. One might ask: is it all worth it?

Last week in South Africa, for 90 minutes on a Wednesday evening, for 45 minutes and 20 seconds on a Sunday evening, including one world-class goal, it surely was.

Here endeth the rant, as the CounterAttack looks forward to the game v Mexico, and another chance for the MNT to make history. Again.

Photo via Laurence Griffiths/Getty Images, @Soccernet.com

A great result and a saving performance

Wonderful result, absolutely wonderful on so many levels. The US indeed did win their match v Egypt, 3-0.

Brazil did the US a favor by beating Italy by the same score, so as improbable as the MNT's performance in its first two matches were, the US will advance to the Confederations Cup semifinals v Spain.

This is by dint of having scored four goals in the first round to Italy's three, and having given up one less goal than Egypt. Donovan's PK v Italy turned out to prove that in tournament play, all goals matter.

Considering the CounterAttack's last proclamation, the MNT stepped up when the opportunity presented itself. The US seized the moment, while Italy and Egypt folded, either of whom needed just one goal to advance. It was the most improbable win in US national team history for 59 years, since the 1-0 World Cup victory over England in 1950.

So is Bob Bradley's job safe? Yes but not because of the results. It mattered that the US won and that they scored three goals. More important, however, was the way in which they played. It was intelligent football, attacking when the opportunity opened, staying in formation when falling back to defend. It was mature football, the kind that gets results during international tournaments. Indeed... it did.

The give-and-go between Donovan and Bradley on the second goal was pretty, and the cross that resulted in Dempsey's goal eight minutes later was equally picturesque. It is this sort of upfront partnership that is needed if the MNT is to improve its stature on the international stage.

Playing with this sort of discipline is well within this squad's ability. The problem was that it hadn't been on display in the first two matches. It could be a matter of "playing the shirts", awestruck by Brazilian yellow and Italian blue. Or it could simply be that the US did not have anything to fear in Egypt, a side that the US rightly reckoned it could outplay. This manifested itself in more deliberate play. The MNT did not stumble even when losing the ball. Egypt held onto the ball for stretches at a time but the US never panicked. Disciplined, the defence held against Egyptian incursions.

Still, Egypt had stifled Italy just three days earlier, 1-0. It was a result the US might have been able to get had they been able to finish. Without question, the US should have offered more of a result to the Italians. So American presumption of winning against the Pharaohs was by no means a certainty. Still, the MNT appeared more confident, relaxed, if not swaggering.

This time, Bob Bradley made the right player selection, putting Davies up front with Altidore. It was energetic and physical, with skill on display. With Dempsey, Donovan (who really thrives in the wing support role) and Michael Bradley behind Charlie and Jozy, it was a pyramid that formed a wedge that could spread out when necessary. Coach Bradley also made the right substitutions, particularly with the 82nd minute insertion of Conor Casey. The bull-chested forward was able to hold the ball and keep the Egyptians from retaking possession immediately upon stepping onto the pitch.

Things got a little dicey at the last few minutes, but only because the ball is round and anything can happen when you need to keep a team from getting even a fluke goal. But this was the MNT's day and the ball bounced their way. The MNT has plenty of talent. Not as much as some, certainly not a Brazil or Spain, but definitely enough to consistently get through to the knockout rounds of the World Cup and Confed tournaments.

Hopefully, the US will recognize that tournament play is about intelligence as much as talent. This afternoon, both were clearly on display. Teams build their futures off improbable results such as this one, and the US got it right when it mattered.

And that's why Coach Bradley deserves to continue on.

Oh what could have been

The one that got away came back to bury the Men's National Team. Giuseppe Rossi, born and raised in New Jersey, decided to ply his footballing wares for Italy, land of his parents. Rossi came on in the 56th minute, replacing Gattuso, signaling Italy's slight desperation as coach Lippi had to find some goals to make up for the 1-0 deficit.

Clearly Italy were the better squad on the night but the good news for the US - although not for the tournament - is that Italy did not bull rush the US off the field. The final 3-1 scoreline was justified but the US could have done better with some finishing of their own.

In the first half, Jozy Altidore missed a 1-on-1 with keeper Buffon, deciding to try to square a pass back to Donovan and winding up mishitting the ball altogether. Later in the half, Donovan had the ball, streaking through a crowd of Italian defenders. It would be uncharitable to say he should have kept the ball but it is definitely fair to say that he had little chance of keeping it. Once again, finishing plays was what kept the US from putting paid to Italy's lapses, exactly as in the 2006 World Cup. In effect, Italy's 21-yr-old did what the MNT's 19-yr-old was unable to do - take the shot and score.

And once again, the US is exposed for not being able to create opportunities, to make something from nothing. Both De Rossi (he of the '06 elbow that bloodied Brian McBride) and Rossi took their shots from 30-35 yards away. They had an opening, and took measured shots, on goal, that beat Howard.

This is something that the MNT is categorically unable to do. They still rely on set pieces, penalties and follow-up shots to score their goals. Long-range shots tend to be wildly off the mark, Feilhaber's wonder goal to help beat Mexico in the 2007 Gold Cup notwithstanding. Yes, most of the time long-range shots from any player in any shirt will be wide of the mark. Paul Scholes, for instance, has shot enough balls way off goal to fill a bank of stands.

But for the better players, the do put away at least some of their 25+ yard shots to make them dangerous. For the US, there is no one with that consistent capability. That means that defenders can simply collapse on MNT attackers, knowing that our players will be forced to pass, which can be intercepted. At best, it pushes the shot further back, with low odds of being on target.

How do we fix this? The MNT needs more one-touch passing, accurate one-touch passing, in order to open up defenders. Scoring opportunities need to be more quickly identified - once the space is noticed, it's too late, as international defenders know to close down open space. Anticipating the opening is what's being missed. Better on the ball skills, so that 1-on-1 opportunities can be better exploited.

But some of that is inherent, unteachable. What can be taught, however, are spot kicks. If MNT is not dedicating a significant portion of their training sessions to free kicks on target, over and over and over again, then they should be. If they are, they need to do more. No, it's not easy, but it is learnable. Not hundreds of free kicks but thousands.

The US MNT can play with the Big Boys of Football, but they have yet to learn how to win against the Big Boys, consistently.

And a little luck from referee decisions would help. The red card against Rico Clark was borderline. The kick to Gattuso's knee was part of Clark's challenge - clearly reckless and perhaps excessive. But two minutes after Clark was sent off, Donovan was elbowed in the jaw by Grosso, with only a caution to the Italian. Elbows to the head are much more serious than kicks to the knee, especially when the elbow is used to create space, as it was in this case. It was a poor decision not to send off Grosso.

Late in the second half, with Italy still up only one goal, a cross was made to Donovan, who was in the penalty area. The Italian defender, Legrotagglia, thought Landon was a ladder, climbing all over Landon's back to win the ball (see pic above). A clear penalty but no call was made. Ten minutes later, the Azzuri scored their third goal.

Italy deserved the win, clearly the better side. The US would have been lucky to get a point. The fact remains, however, that playing a man down for nearly an hour and then not getting a penalty that should have been made it nearly a foregone conclusion.

Worst of all, the US has improved since 2006 but not enough.

The future, nearly here

Back to back matches for Jozy Altidore, and four more goals to his tally. Six in nine games is a legitimate pace. Can anyone doubt that he is the future of American soccer? Nah, this is what everyone expected from Altidore, the first true international striker the US has ever had.

The fun begins now, though. For the first time, the Men's National Team is solid up the middle. Altidore is a true go-ahead striker with a nose for goal. He is balanced by attacking midfielder Clint Dempsey. It remains a mystery why Deuce is not featured more for his club but the fact remains that this guy can play. Both attackers are supported by midfielder Michael Bradley, who was good enough to play below his own usually-high standards and yet remain effective. Behind them is Oguchi Onyewu, the imposing central defender called Gooch who is a monster in defense, strong enough to make up for lack of pace. And then the anchor, Tim Howard, the latest in a decade-long run of excellent US goalkeepers.

The revelations from the Trinidad & Tobago and El Salvador matches: Landon Donovan is an excellent winger, DeMarcus Beasley can play a wingback from the left side, and Pablo Mastroeni still has mileage left as a defensive midfielder. While Steve Cherundolo should still be the right fullback when he returns, Frankie Hejduk is making himself indispensable. I still think he wouldn't be as effective against top-tier sides; one goal and an impressive game-saving tackle make it impossible to overlook him.

Let's hope that Coach Bradley keeps this formation, with Donovan on the wing and Jozy up front. Heck, even the pairing of Jozy with Brian Ching could be really effective - Brian is strong enough to create space for Altidore if necessary, and he can mop up on goals, putting away second-chance opportunities.

It is the new role for Donovan, however, that really excites. Putting him a little further back in the formation means he gets the ball earlier, which puts his on-the-ball talents to work. He can still shoot and even wander into the penalty area but if defenders collapse on him, then Landon can simply dump out to Altidore... or Dempsey. Both have a nose for goal, and suddenly the US has a three-pronged attack.

Having Beasley as left fullback, in a wingback role where he pushes the ball up from the back, might be another stroke of genius. It all depends whether he can regain his ability to withstand physical challenges. If he can, the tradeoff in defensive abilities would more than pay off.

Of course, playing in Confacaf doesn't provide a good enough test of what's up. Beating T&T is not necessarily saying much. But then again, Holland had to play Macedonia - roughly the same test. That said, it's important for teams to beat up the weaker sides, so a 3-nil victory is indeed impressive. Let's not forget that the MNT can consistently beat second-tier European sides.

The frustration is when the MNT plays the Italys and Hollands in a match, friendly or tournament. One of these days the US will not be impressed by England's shirt and get a win against the Three Lions, which historically flatter to deceive.

What we can see now is the future of the US national side. US Soccer should look to schedule friendlies against top-tier sides, heading down to South America for a different style of play besides playing the usual Euros. And if they play European teams, they should concentrate on playing France, Spain, Germany in favor of the Polands of Europe.

This is a solid team that can begin to establish itself as a perennial second-round-or-better, and eventually perennial quarterfinalists. It's not an automatic path, of course, but watching Jozy makes it a more realistic possibility.