Unbelievable - Sneijder rumours abound!
Labels: Alex Ferguson, Cantona, Keano, Manchester United, Sneijder
An insider's analysis of football for those who enjoy talking football, while challenging conventional wisdom whenever possible. The focus is on Manchester United, the US Men's National Team and controversial referee decisions, but anything is fair game.
Labels: Alex Ferguson, Cantona, Keano, Manchester United, Sneijder
The CounterAttack returns, after a season-long layoff, thanks to an incredible season from Manchester United. A record 19th English top-division league title was won. We had thought that 2010-11 was not the year for United but were we ever wrong!
Last year’s analysis is why we’re back. We didn’t think Manchester would win last season mainly because of personnel. We didn’t think Chicharito would settle in as quickly, and that the midfield would be exposed for its frailties. Luckily in the league, the other clubs couldn’t seize the moment; cruelly, we were exposed in the last match, at the Champions League final.
So this season, we’re pleased to see Sir Alex sign David De Gea to replace the incomparable Edwin Van der Sar. Despite his precocious youth, De Gea does nothing but win everywhere he goes, an irreplaceable quality that will belie his age.
Adding another winger in Ashley Young is never a bad idea. He offers options and allows Ferguson the flexibility to consider the transfer market to raise funds – even though we firmly believe that the Glazers have always made funds available, it’s always a good idea to be able to raise money through player sales.
Phil Jones is a combination of the De Gea-Young signing – he adds youth to the defensive mix, allows for options in terms of selling players on, and provides flexibility in squad selection.
But the big story all summer has been Wesley Sneijder and his will-he-won’t-he saga. He’s on, he’s not, he’s signed, he hasn’t, he wants to come, he doesn’t want to leave Italy, he’s agreed to terms, his wages aren’t being matched, it’s his wife, it’s his gaffer, it’s UK taxes it’s….ENOUGH!
Manchester United need Sneijder because he instantly solves the midfield problem that has existed ever since Roy Keane left. Sneijder would link to the strikers, working between the wingers. He would be the bulwark to stop opponent attacks, beginning the defence from the midfield.
Sneijder would perfectly replace Scholes, as the Dutchman can score from distance. His work rate would help Rooney – they would split the middle so Wazza won’t need to run all over the place as much. And, his national coach said that Manchester United would be the best system for Sneijder to play, as it mirrors what the Dutch use.
But all these things are known. And if we’re honest, with some luck, one of Fergie’s latest Fledglings could be that player. There is, however, one reason why United should sign Sneijder, above all others:
So that no one else can.
Sneijder is the final puzzle piece for Manchester United. He is the best two-way midfielder of his generation. As such, he could also be the building block from which to build for clubs with pretensions. Perish the thought another Premier League club might sig... (shudder)....
So for this reason and this reason alone, it is critical that should Wesley Sneijder leave Inter, he wind up only at Old Trafford.
(Image owner unknown; not property of The CounterAttack; will attribute properly upon notification.)
Labels: Manchester United, Sneijder
Labels: Brazil, Dutch, Holland, World Cup 2010
Labels: Dempsey, Donovan, Jozy Altidore, MNT, US National team, World Cup 2010
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
Labels: Bob Bradley, England, MNT, World Cup 2010
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
Labels: Bob Bradley, England, MNT, World Cup 2010
Labels: Referees, World Cup, World Cup 2010
Labels: Dempsey, Donovan, England, Gooch, MNT, Rooney, US National team