
...and that's pretty much the thumping you expect when you throw your second-stringers out against Argentina, but it almost wasn't. Maybe not "almost". But it 2/3rds wasn't? Eddie Johnson drew a ninth minute penalty; Argentina responded with a set piece chip that bobbled around the box until Hernan Crespo slammed it home, and from there a stalemate settled in until Leo Messi did his Messi thing, found Crespo, and staked Argentina to a 2-1 lead, at which point things disintegrated.
Despite the constant exuberant praise heaped upon the US defenders by GolTV's shockingly not Scottish color guy (he's apparently from Newcastle, which is so close to Scotland it might not be total crap), it always seemed a matter of time before the Argentines got a grip on the knobbly oyster shell that was the US defense, inserted the knife, and prised it open to devour its meaty goodness. Tortured, shellfish-themed metaphors aside, this is exactly what happened in a deflating final half hour that firmly established that yes, Virginia, they're Argentina... and we are not.
It's not all bad. For 60 minutes the US played with one of the top teams in the world, and though they lacked the cutting edge near goal the Argentines had, large parts of the match were impressive soccer. The last 30 minutes, though, was another demonstration that the United States lacks the lethal quality of the world's best sides. Boxes post jump.
| THE GOOD |
| Benny Feilhaber, again. Created the US goal with a pinpoint long range pass to Eddie Johnson and ran the midfield with aplomb. Tested Argentina from long range, forcing a good stop out of their keeper. Showed some limitations when he tried to take on Argentine defenders 1-v-1 -- he doesn't have the burst to get past guys at this level of play -- but the best US player on the day. |
| Jonathan Bornstein. An assured performance from Bornstein, who was not at fault on any of the goals and capably shut down anyone who came into his area. Few crosses entered the box save for the one that turned into the Aimar bullet, and I don't think any of them came from Bornstein's side of the field. |
| Marvell Wynne. Wynne got stuck in a bad situation on the aforementioned Aimar goal, trying to shut down two players at once; the rest of the day he was a hard man to beat. He has outstanding recovery speed, which makes up for the occasional mis-step. Both outside backs were good today. One problem: neither provided much in the way of offense. Understandable, perhaps, against Argentina, but a reason the forwards got little service. More on that later. |
| Eddie Johnson? An up and down performance for the mercurial forward. The only time the US threatened is when long balls found Johnson on a run; he used his pace to stretch the Argentine defense. Drew and converted a penalty for the only US goal, but... |
| THE BAD |
Eddie Johnson. ...even that was a disappointing, if fortunate, end to an attacking adventure. Johnson was clean through and hesitated, allowing the defenders to react. Several other times he found himself not quite through but close; in each instance he held up, waiting for help and squandering useful opportunities. The contrast between Johnson's hesitancy and the lethal finishing of Crespo, Tevez, et al could not have been more stark. And when Johnson was not running onto balls, when the Argentine defense was set up, he lacked the ball skills to do much against world class defending. |
| Justin Mapp. Where possession went to die today. The dropoff from Beasley to Mapp was immense and obvious. Mapp has some dribbling skills, but failed to provide anything at all today except, like, two awful crosses. Quintessential moment came midway through the first half when he booted a ball directly out of bounds. Wing play, in general, was dreadful, though Mapp was (mostly) the only actual wing midfielder employed. |
| Taylor Twellman. A complete nonfactor. |
| THE UGLY |
| Eddie Gaven. Even Gaven was surprised when he was called up the Copa squad, and for good reason. The once-promising youngster has been doing nothing in particular for one of MLS' worst teams. His first contribution upon being subbed in was to escort Leo Messi (Leo Messi!) to the middle of the field, where he could leisurely pick out Crespo for the backbreaking winner. Minutes later, he completely failed to cover an overlapping fullback run and that led to a cross and Pablo Aimar's laser header. It makes no sense this guy is on the team at all, let alone actually on the field against Argentina. |
| Carlos Tevez. It's not nice, but it's true. |
| THE MISCELLANEOUS |
| An odd tactical decision from Bradley to go with a 4-4-2 that featured a midfield of Mapp on the left, then a mishmash of Ben Olsen, Ricardo Clark, and Feilhaber in the center of the pitch, largely forgoing any wing play on the right. It worked well enough until the ill-fated Gaven substitution, but maybe that was part of the reason the forwards could get no service at all? I don't know what to do with the center backs here; they were assured for most of the game; can they really prevent the run that led to the second goal? They were clearly torched on the fourth goal, but other than that I don't know who to blame. You concede four times and there is blame to spread around, but I'm having a hard time pointing the finger at anyone. Honestly, Conrad and Demerit seemed steadier than the Gooch-Boca pairing that came off as dodgy during the Gold Cup. Four goals is four goals, though. Also, thumbs up on the pinstriped blue uniforms the US wore for the second time today. I like 'em. |
| THE NEXT |
| Paraguay stomped Colombia 5-0 in the other Group A match; we get the high flying Paraguayans on Monday. A win puts us in good shape; a draw is okay; a loss and we're in trouble with the goal differential we ceded in the Argentina game. |
Eddie Johnson













Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
6-29-2007 @ 2:15AM
sid said...
Everybody keeps saying we had the second-stringers out there but nobody will explain why (thumbs up for authentic, unfiltered blogginess, thumbs down for ignoring journalism 101 in this case).
So were they not allowed to play by their clubs? Or did Bradley just want to see what Gaven et al could do against the best national side in the world (as if that were some mystery)?
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 4:47AM
hector said...
Whoever decided in the US federation to send these roockies to copa america should be fired. It was an embarrassment on the last half hour of the game;the Afa fired passarella when he tried it in the 95 copa america.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 9:38AM
David P said...
Sid, to answer your question, it was the decision of the US Soccer Federation to send this squad to Copa America and have the main team play in the Gold Cup. This was done in the name of getting the US to qualify for the Confederations Cup, to be held one year before the World Cup at the World Cup host South Africa. The belief is that playing at the country of the World Cup before other teams will give them an advantage.
Not going to say I believe it, but there you go.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 9:55AM
GlobalWarmingWarning said...
Well, I don't like this "team" and I don't think it works. Proof: last night's game. They are mostly MLS players which isn't really an impressive league. That wasn't the national team. What's going on? I don't get it...
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 10:41AM
sid said...
Thanks for the explanation, David. What I still don't get is what the US Soccer Federation gains by sending the kids to play against Argentina. Wouldn't the A team have benefitted just as much, if not more? Or viewed the other way around: what would it have to lose by allowing the A team to go?
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 10:52AM
Andrew said...
The problem is that a lot of Euro clubs are starting their training camps (see Beasley in Glasgow) and it's not like players like Boca, Beasley, etc. are such assured starters that they can afford to miss camp (and the teams don't have to release them, since the Copa isn't the US regional championship). Feilhaber's an exception since he's in search of a new club, although now HSV is saying he might have a place there after all (amazing what a highlight real volley will do). Add in the prioritizing of the Gold Cup and MLS clubs who don't want their most recognizable players gone for a month and you get this team.
I think the thinking is to throw in a bunch of borderline players in order to see who can hang.
I liked Bornstein's game, but he's at least partially to blame for the second goal. He sucked inside instead of covering Crespo's run.
Also on either the bad or ugly: Keller. Nice international career, but he's so done.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 11:27AM
John said...
The other problem with sending the A team is that they would have to be there for the whole tournament. They can't just play one good game against Argentina and then go back to their clubs. Playing two tournaments in one summer would be pretty rough on them. I'd still prefer that we had sent the young'uns to the Gold Cup, but I guess we'll just have to trust that the higher-ups know what they're doing.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 11:27AM
Rick said...
I really didn't mind having our B team out there and for the first half they hustled their butts off, but they obviously got tired chasing the ball around and I cannot stand seeing soccer players walking on the pitch. Mr. Johnson is so one dimensional it is funny. All he has is speed and when he slowed down to wait for help or whatever he slowed down for he lost the ball every time. I did not even know we HAD another forward up there, he was non-existent. I would say that Keller's save was one of the best saves I had ever seen, a real classic!
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 11:48AM
G said...
To everyone who doesn't know (and it is out there - both here and at other MSM websites) - the US sent the JV squad to the Copa America because the US is a guest in that tournament, which means the USF couldn't require the attendance of Donovan, Gooch et al. as they could in the Gold Cup, where the US was basically a mandatory participant. Add to that the fact that the Gold Cup just happened, and you understand why clubs wouldn't want to let players go for two tournaments in a row, when they're not bound to do so for the second one.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 1:49PM
xavico said...
my heart bled last night. It was better not to send anybody than to send a group of young guys who do not have the international experience. We can defeat Argentina with our best team, we have done it before. I was sad. Bad decision by the US Soccer Federation. WE have to pray a lot for Monday's game with Paraguay.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 12:06PM
adam said...
copa america, European Chapiionship are the most important events, just second to the World Championships. National leagues in europe change their calendars accordingly to make sure players are in good shape for those tournments (Euro 2008 will be held next summer in Austria and Swithzerland)...MSL keeps on playing??? Just shows that American Federation does not understand the importance of continental championships, local thinking does not work in football.
Reply
7-06-2007 @ 1:41PM
Drgraziani said...
WOW! Luckluster, unfitted players. The played and ran for only 30 minutes, then they were tired and walking on the pitch, instead of keep up with the opponents and not letting them have their way of playing. Tota embarrassment after a gold cup.
There must some players with higher qualification and more talent as well as being able to run for the 90 minutes. Despite all the explaination that I have read one word explians the outcome- TOTAL EMBARRASMENT.
Dr. Joseph Graziani
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 1:26PM
chqta24 said...
Sid,
The "kids" are playing in Venezuela...and second they were invited to play. There is no gain, they just accepted an invitation.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 1:49PM
Rob said...
I understand all the comments made by everyone, and they all are valid points of who should have gone and why the US sent the B-team. But the bottom line to me is that ALL of the players on the national team should be capable of doing the job and getting it done. After all that is why they are on the team, get paid to be on the team and what they practice for. Some of these guys sit around and never get into a match. This gives these young ones the opportunity to play and get experience. I look at this for all sports too...why pay guys millions of bucks and never let them play...might save the money and just go with what you need to field a team for a match and a few extras. The game last night was not the end of the world. It was a learning experience for everyone including the fans. Lets not get on the players or the coaches or the US Soccer Federation, but rather see it as helping our team get better for the long haul.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 1:32PM
Mark said...
The Copa America is one the biggest and most competative cups that we can play in. Why in the world would we send the players we did. For the U.S. to get to the next level, they need to compete in this type of tournament. Other countries send their best players. I'm sure there are a few players that had to miss this tournament, but to not bring enough talent to give yourself a shot a competiting is a disgrace. For as much progress as U.S. has made over the years, these types of decisions will hold us back. Especially after the momentum we had after our victory with Mexico. Shame on whoever is responsible.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 5:13PM
G said...
Once again, for those of you who have trouble comprehending:
CONCACAF = Gold Cup = USF is final arbiter of which USMNT members play.
CONMEBOL = Copa America = USF is NOT final arbiter of which USMNT members play, their club teams are, and their club teams told the USMNT to suck eggs, or would have, which is why Bradley did this.
Yes, Copa America is much more prestigious than the Gold Cup, but because the US isn't a CONMEBOL member, it's less important to the US, to the USF, to qualifying for the Confederations Cup, etc.
To repeat - it's NOT the USF's fault.
Reply
6-29-2007 @ 8:50PM
npanaro711 said...
WHY THE SECOND STRINGERS.? THERE WAS NO REASON TO HAVE OUR BUTTS KICKED.
Reply
6-30-2007 @ 12:33PM
JJ said...
Fully understood why they took the "B" team. Really a B- or C+ team though! Those guys need top flight experience and using the A listers to get in the 2009 Confederations Cup was a must!
My big question is why didn't Argentina use last nights roster at the World Cup last summer?! Had they taken Veron and J. Zanetti I think they would be holding the Cup and not the Italians!
Reply
6-30-2007 @ 1:30AM
RUDY said...
why was mexico able to send ther a team to both copas
Reply
6-30-2007 @ 12:33PM
John Hofmann said...
First, the MLS season is scheduled when it is to survive in a highly competitive, multi-sport economy, something that a problem in almost any other soccer playing nation across the world. Thus, the international competitions come nearly always in direct competition with the MLS season, a major problem when trying to get US players to major competitions. Second, the US had by far a more realistic chance to win the Gold Cup then Copa America. That's a bonus, of getting reasonable competition for US players in the Gold Cup, strong experience for young players at Copa America, and a future major competition at which the US will have their top team, at the Confederations Cup in '09 as they (hopefully) prepare for the following world cup. No doubt US decision-makers have to take all of these factors into consideration, and all at the same time. Most of the postings tonight are by people focusing on one aspect only, and then complaining. Of the three competitions named, the US priority was for the Gold Cup and reaching the Confederations Cup. If they do well in the next few days in Venezuela, that's frosting on the cake. This is where younger kids are getting international experience they wouldn't otherwise get. That's important for Bradley, to see how they do.
Reply