***Official 2014 World Cup Thread*** (1 Viewer)

[Sinn Fein]

I think we woulda won that game if we had Donovan.

/wilbon

That reminds me - #### Wilbon.

Klinsmann was right - sorry he hurt your sacred cow, but Kobe is getting paid based on what he already did - not what he is going to do. Thats fine, if you have the money to spend - but don't act like the contract was in expectation of what Kobe was going to do last season, or next season.

####### fat ### from Chicago.

 

[Cold Dead Hands]

First soccer game I have ever watched was US v Portugal. I liked it.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I've been watching the WC for some time now, at least since 94, and I've gotten into EPL and La Liga, especially over beers at a couple local pubs, been to some minor league soccer here in NO (even gotten to know their coach) and helped with a local soccer association. But there are things that I still don't get. Can someone explain how the extra time is calculated? How is it validated, ie how do we know that 5:00 minutes is the correct and proper time? I think the American sports fan in me wants some kind of certainty or verifiability as to why the teams get the extra time that they do? That just seemed like a lot of ET in that game.

Supposedly the ref is suppose to keep track of it during the game to account for goals, subs and injuries and other time wasting tactics but most fans will tell you it is rarely accurate.Up until fairly recently, the fans were not told how much extra time there would be. You just waited for the whistle. They made a tiny improvement to at least post it now after the 90 minutes is up.

I've explained this to several new viewers the last few weeks and they've all rolled their eyes and asked why they can't just stop the clock. I really didn't have an answer. It's not a good system.

We talk about this from time to time in the soccer thread. Some long time fans love injury time.

Stopping the clock on goals, subs and injuries would be the first rule change I would make.

It should entirely remove three massive problems

1) time wasting

2) inaccurate measurements of how much time was wasted

3) removes a tool used by refs when corruption occurs. We all know many games have either way too much or way too little injury time added.

I look at it like I do the shaving cream for free kicks. Extremely easy to fix and it serves an immediate purpose.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I've explained this to several new viewers the last few weeks and they've all rolled their eyes and asked why they can't just stop the clock. I really didn't have an answer. It's not a good system.

This was the one "innovation" I thought MLS got right. They stopped the clock for injuries and time wasting and everyone could see exactly how much time was left. No need to have the clock count down, but it was a better system IMO.

 

[BassNBrew]

I've explained this to several new viewers the last few weeks and they've all rolled their eyes and asked why they can't just stop the clock. I really didn't have an answer. It's not a good system.

This was the one "innovation" I thought MLS got right. They stopped the clock for injuries and time wasting and everyone could see exactly how much time was left. No need to have the clock count down, but it was a better system IMO.

Been this way in college soccer too. Not sure who started it though.

 

[NewlyRetired]

First soccer game I have ever watched was US v Portugal. I liked it.

Well to be fair to your embarrassment you did pick a pretty good game to watch. It was not the best of the tournament by any means but certainly not how poor a couple of the games have been.

Had you chosen say the Nigeria Iran game, you would have never watched the sport again.

 

[GoFishTN]

I've been watching the WC for some time now, at least since 94, and I've gotten into EPL and La Liga, especially over beers at a couple local pubs, been to some minor league soccer here in NO (even gotten to know their coach) and helped with a local soccer association. But there are things that I still don't get. Can someone explain how the extra time is calculated? How is it validated, ie how do we know that 5:00 minutes is the correct and proper time? I think the American sports fan in me wants some kind of certainty or verifiability as to why the teams get the extra time that they do? That just seemed like a lot of ET in that game.

Supposedly the ref is suppose to keep track of it during the game to account for goals, subs and injuries and other time wasting tactics but most fans will tell you it is rarely accurate.Up until fairly recently, the fans were not told how much extra time there would be. You just waited for the whistle. They made a tiny improvement to at least post it now after the 90 minutes is up.

I've explained this to several new viewers the last few weeks and they've all rolled their eyes and asked why they can't just stop the clock. I really didn't have an answer. It's not a good system.

We talk about this from time to time in the soccer thread.Some long time fans love injury time.

Stopping the clock on goals, subs and injuries would be the first rule change I would make.

It should entirely remove three massive problems

1) time wasting

2) inaccurate measurements of how much time was wasted

3) removes a tool used by refs when corruption occurs. We all know many games have either way too much or way too little injury time added.

I look at it like I do the shaving cream for free kicks. Extremely easy to fix and it serves an immediate purpose.

I like it. You should run against Sepp.

 

[BassNBrew]

Yeah, I was wrong to say what I did. Sorry all. I let the true trolls get the better of me there.

Trolls aside... it's very frustrating to see the US freakin' outplay Portugal in a game that couldn't matter more and all the newbies are doing is #####ing about minor stuff. We went down 1-0 to a pretty good team and roared back to take control of the game. After the first ten minutes, we were the better team. That's amazing.

#### like the last minute goal happens -- especially when every one of the guys who's gone 90 minutes can barely run. Our last goal was down to the Portuguese defender who fell being slow to get up and set the offside line higher. But it's hard to do. If Bradley was fresh maybe he holds onto the ball.

We didn't freakin' outplay Portugal. Portugal got a lucky goal and then tried to sit on the lead for the most part. If Portugal doesn't get that earlier break the game plays out entirely different (except for the weather). Portugal let us outplay them. Really not that much different than us conveniently taking it to Ghana anytime the score was level.

Furthermore, based on what we saw, neither team was a good team. What we saw yesterday on 2/3s of the field didn't resemble much in the way of good soccer.

Some of what you're saying is true... the early flukegoal changed the innitial gameplan for both teams. But you're way off in not thinking the US played well the reat of the way. Some of their better flowing and attacking soccer. And I have to lol at Portugal "letting" the US play that well.

The US played well in the Portugal end and defended well for the most part. What we saw from both teams in the middle of the field was pathetic. There were times that if you had hidden the ball from sight on TV you wouldn't have been able to tell who had possession. Both teams looked liked they were walking around in aimlessly quicksand or/and were disinterested in the game for huge chunks of time.

 

[NewlyRetired]

One thing the US play has assured was removing the possible embarrassment if having re-signed JK before the WC started.

Whether you like him or hate him, nothing has happened in this incredibly hard group to say he should be fired.

 

[Anarchy99]

I don't know if this has been addressed already, but . . .

Back when I played soccer in high school a zillion years ago, when we were trying to hold on to win at the end we played 11 guys on defense and whenever we got possession of the ball we would kick it as far downfield as we could and would not even bother to run after it. If needed, we were also coached to just keep kicking the ball out of bounds.

Are there rules against doing stuff like that in the World Cup? Would players be given yellow cards for intentionally delaying the game or unsportsmanlike conduct? I could understand if they didn't want them kicking the ball out of bounds, but clearing the ball the length of the field would keep the ball in play and keep the clock running.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Both teams looked liked they were walking around in aimlessly quicksand or/and were disinterested in the game for huge chunks of time.

I think some/much of this had to do with a combination of bad field conditions and the weather.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

First soccer game I have ever watched was US v Portugal. I liked it.

Well to be fair to your embarrassment you did pick a pretty good game to watch. It was not the best of the tournament by any means but certainly not how poor a couple of the games have been.

Had you chosen say the Nigeria Iran game, you would have never watched the sport again.

I think one of the reasons I wasn't as gutted as others last night (in addition to the long-term vs immediate results thing) was that I couldn't help be think how exciting that game was to a neutral. People all around the entire planet saw that game and thought, "damn -- that was awesome".

Love when the US is in those kinds of games. The 1-0 loss to Germany in 2002 was like that. A bad result, but great from the standpoint of knowing everyone saw the team play a high-quality game. And heat aside the US played great last night.

With the exception of a few bad calls (sorry BIH) this tournament has been filled with incredible games day after day.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I don't know if this has been addressed already, but . . .

Back when I played soccer in high school a zillion years ago, when we were trying to hold on to win at the end we played 11 guys on defense and whenever we got possession of the ball we would kick it as far downfield as we could and would not even bother to run after it. If needed, we were also coached to just keep kicking the ball out of bounds.

Are there rules against doing stuff like that in the World Cup? Would players be given yellow cards for intentionally delaying the game or unsportsmanlike conduct? I could understand if they didn't want them kicking the ball out of bounds, but clearing the ball the length of the field would keep the ball in play and keep the clock running.

There are no rules against this at any level of the game. You can kick it where ever you want when ever you want.

Typically pro teams try to run out the clock by keeping possession rather than just hoofing it up the field since that only kills a few seconds at a time.

 

[Sammy3469]

Yeah, I was wrong to say what I did. Sorry all. I let the true trolls get the better of me there.

Trolls aside... it's very frustrating to see the US freakin' outplay Portugal in a game that couldn't matter more and all the newbies are doing is #####ing about minor stuff. We went down 1-0 to a pretty good team and roared back to take control of the game. After the first ten minutes, we were the better team. That's amazing.

#### like the last minute goal happens -- especially when every one of the guys who's gone 90 minutes can barely run. Our last goal was down to the Portuguese defender who fell being slow to get up and set the offside line higher. But it's hard to do. If Bradley was fresh maybe he holds onto the ball.

We didn't freakin' outplay Portugal. Portugal got a lucky goal and then tried to sit on the lead for the most part. If Portugal doesn't get that earlier break the game plays out entirely different (except for the weather). Portugal let us outplay them. Really not that much different than us conveniently taking it to Ghana anytime the score was level.

Furthermore, based on what we saw, neither team was a good team. What we saw yesterday on 2/3s of the field didn't resemble much in the way of good soccer.

Some of what you're saying is true... the early flukegoal changed the innitial gameplan for both teams. But you're way off in not thinking the US played well the reat of the way. Some of their better flowing and attacking soccer. And I have to lol at Portugal "letting" the US play that well.

The US played well in the Portugal end and defended well for the most part. What we saw from both teams in the middle of the field was pathetic. There were times that if you had hidden the ball from sight on TV you wouldn't have been able to tell who had possession. Both teams looked liked they were walking around in aimlessly quicksand or/and were disinterested in the game for huge chunks of time.

This was the Manaus effect. Guys were just gassed. Italy-England was the same way.

 

[17seconds]

Errr... I assume it's trolling.

No one is really this stupid, right?

I think it's pretty courageous to have such a strong opinion with little knowledge of the subject at hand. We have a lot of brave newcomers in this thread.

I don't get it....do soccer fans in this country want Americans to embrace the sport or just leave it the hell alone? Mixed messages being sent. Complain that soccer is the red headed step child here for decades, then complain when newcomers chime in with their thoughts. There's a learning curve for new fans to any sport. Labeling observations of the new followers as 'ignorant' or calling their criticisms 'invalid' because they aren't sophisticated fans does not do the sport of soccer any favors here.

Not to mention they're forgetting where they are. How does NBA, golf, NASCAR, and baseball (pre-baseball forum) talk go around here?

 

[MattFancy]

One thing the US play has assured was removing the possible embarrassment if having re-signed JK before the WC started.

Whether you like him or hate him, nothing has happened in this incredibly hard group to say he should be fired.

Agreed. I remember before the games started a couple weeks ago there were guys saying the US wouldn't even score a goal in the Group Stage. We've scored 4 now in 2 games. And honestly, the 2 goals last night were due to lazy play, not necessarily anything JK did.

 

[berndog]

[SIZE=medium]I’m very interested to see the starting 11 on Thursday. Outside of the Altidore/Zusi switch the starters have played 180 minutes and have a short recovery period. I’m sure we will see some fresh legs but who? I’m guessing we see Chandler come in for Beasley and Diskerud knock someone out of the midfield. [/SIZE]

 

[Fariq]

From Twitter. The Univision ratings and viewership numbers for both networks will come later today

==================

ESPN: USA-Portugal overnight TV rating was a 9.1, "the highest overnight rating for a World Cup match on ESPN or ESPN2."

9:39 AM - 23 Jun 2014

==================

For those wondering, a 9.1 relates to ~10.5 million households(not viewers, just households).

If you roughly guess 1.3 viewers per household that gets you ~13-14 million viewers on ESPN, which puts it in the ball park to break the 19.4 million record for a US game when the Univision number is released.

My friggin' MIL of all people voluntarily watched the whole game. I guess my kids making her turn it on when they're over there got her curious. She came running over (they live next door) to talk about the game. Her family is the most non-sports oriented family I know. Pretty darn cool even they're into this.

Of course the real key is how many first time fans stay with the sport and go to an MLS game or watch an EPL game.History tells us that after every WC the sport tends to get a boost, so I don't see why it would be different this cycle.

Just compare the interest level from 2006 to today at all levels (MLS, Liga MC, EPL, qualifiers, the WC itself etc), the growth is steady and impressive.

It likely can't continue this growth curve of course but any small boosts help the sport long term.

She obviously won't care after/if the US is booted, but they've certainly won our household over for the long term.

If 1 out of 10 new viewers become a casual fan or better, it would be a good result long term for the sport. Hope you come over to the soccer thread and jump in after the WC is over. Following the full 4 year cycle really increases the fun of the WC itself.

I'm in partly because the NBA sort of sucks now, I dislike hockey and my baseball team is horrendous and I don't find the sport thrilling enough to watch baseball games that don't involve my team. I have room for soccer now.

 

[BobbyLayne]

https://g.co/doodle/2djdtj

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Also... for the newbies who are wondering about Bradley's fitness. The US does a test at the start of each training camp (and again later I think), called the beep test. It's supposedly brutal.

The beep test is a multiple-stage fitness test used to estimate an athlete's VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake). This test is sometimes referred to as beep test, pacer test, or twenty-meter shuttle run test. It is a very popular test used by soccer teams because it is a great test for cardiovascular fitness, a valuable asset for soccer players.

To set up a beep test, place two cones twenty-meters apart that a player can run continuously back and forth between. Player runs are synchronized with an audio cd or computer software program that beeps at set intervals, so every time the athlete hears a beep, they run to the opposite cone. As the test advances, the interval between each beep reduces, forcing the athlete to increase speed and reduce rest time.

The test continues until the athlete is unable to keep up with the recording.

The recording is set into twenty-one levels, with each level lasting approximately sixty-two seconds. The intervals between beeps at each level is calculated by requiring a speed at the starting level of 8.5 km/h, and increasing the speed required by 0.5 km/h with each level. The athlete's score from the test is the highest level attained before failing to keep up to the recording. There is no mistaking that this is an grueling assessment test, but is valuable for soccer players.

Michael Bradley broke the beep test. He's only the third US player ever (Donovan and Hejduk) to make it through to the end.

 

[BassNBrew]

[SIZE=medium]I’m very interested to see the starting 11 on Thursday. Outside of the Altidore/Zusi switch the starters have played 180 minutes and have a short recovery period. I’m sure we will see some fresh legs but who? I’m guessing we see Chandler come in for Beasley and Diskerud knock someone out of the midfield. [/SIZE]

I know these guys are older and the conditions tough on Sunday, but four days seems like a nice rest period. Pretty typical for college matches.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I’m very interested to see the starting 11 on Thursday. Outside of the Altidore/Zusi switch the starters have played 180 minutes and have a short recovery period. I’m sure we will see some fresh legs but who? I’m guessing we see Chandler come in for Beasley and Diskerud knock someone out of the midfield.

I speculated earlier that it would not shock me to see Yedlin start over Bedoya especially with the short turn around.

Yedlin and Fab on the right could cause a lot of problems for Germany.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I still feel gutted, but it's time to move on. Germany and Ghana fought a hard game, but in much easier conditions and the extra approx 30 hours rest until Thursday games could be a factor. Jones gave an interview on German television and said an average person couldn't walk for 20 minutes in the conditions in Manaus yesterday. Kinsman deserves massive credit imo, the team looks so much better than I expected. But one potential mistake USSoccer made was to have their base in Sau Paulo - seems inconvenient given the locations of the games in the north.

 

[Slapdash]

Also... for the newbies who are wondering about Bradley's fitness. The US does a test at the start of each training camp (and again later I think), called the beep test. It's supposedly brutal.

The beep test is a multiple-stage fitness test used to estimate an athlete's VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake). This test is sometimes referred to as beep test, pacer test, or twenty-meter shuttle run test. It is a very popular test used by soccer teams because it is a great test for cardiovascular fitness, a valuable asset for soccer players.

To set up a beep test, place two cones twenty-meters apart that a player can run continuously back and forth between. Player runs are synchronized with an audio cd or computer software program that beeps at set intervals, so every time the athlete hears a beep, they run to the opposite cone. As the test advances, the interval between each beep reduces, forcing the athlete to increase speed and reduce rest time.

The test continues until the athlete is unable to keep up with the recording.

The recording is set into twenty-one levels, with each level lasting approximately sixty-two seconds. The intervals between beeps at each level is calculated by requiring a speed at the starting level of 8.5 km/h, and increasing the speed required by 0.5 km/h with each level. The athlete's score from the test is the highest level attained before failing to keep up to the recording. There is no mistaking that this is an grueling assessment test, but is valuable for soccer players.

Michael Bradley broke the beep test. He's only the third US player ever (Donovan and Hejduk) to make it through to the end.

I guess fitness isn't an excuse then.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I've been watching the WC for some time now, at least since 94, and I've gotten into EPL and La Liga, especially over beers at a couple local pubs, been to some minor league soccer here in NO (even gotten to know their coach) and helped with a local soccer association. But there are things that I still don't get. Can someone explain how the extra time is calculated? How is it validated, ie how do we know that 5:00 minutes is the correct and proper time? I think the American sports fan in me wants some kind of certainty or verifiability as to why the teams get the extra time that they do? That just seemed like a lot of ET in that game.

Supposedly the ref is suppose to keep track of it during the game to account for goals, subs and injuries and other time wasting tactics but most fans will tell you it is rarely accurate.Up until fairly recently, the fans were not told how much extra time there would be. You just waited for the whistle. They made a tiny improvement to at least post it now after the 90 minutes is up.

I've explained this to several new viewers the last few weeks and they've all rolled their eyes and asked why they can't just stop the clock. I really didn't have an answer. It's not a good system.

I guess I have never really had a problem with the way the cloak is handled. Players generally know when time is running out, and know that the added time is posted, they generally know exactly how much time is left. I don't watch enough MLS to see how they operate their clock - i.e. what constitutes stoppage?

I am not opposed to an official clock, but I guess I am so used to the official running the clock on his own, that I don't see any real benefit.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I’m very interested to see the starting 11 on Thursday. Outside of the Altidore/Zusi switch the starters have played 180 minutes and have a short recovery period. I’m sure we will see some fresh legs but who? I’m guessing we see Chandler come in for Beasley and Diskerud knock someone out of the midfield.

I know these guys are older and the conditions tough on Sunday, but four days seems like a nice rest period. Pretty typical for college matches.

Another factor is the travel and the opponent. The US has the most travel of any team and is facing a team who has 27 more hours of recovery time.

 

[BassNBrew]

Excited for today's game. Unfortunately it will be DVR.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Also... for the newbies who are wondering about Bradley's fitness. The US does a test at the start of each training camp (and again later I think), called the beep test. It's supposedly brutal.

The beep test is a multiple-stage fitness test used to estimate an athlete's VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake). This test is sometimes referred to as beep test, pacer test, or twenty-meter shuttle run test. It is a very popular test used by soccer teams because it is a great test for cardiovascular fitness, a valuable asset for soccer players.

To set up a beep test, place two cones twenty-meters apart that a player can run continuously back and forth between. Player runs are synchronized with an audio cd or computer software program that beeps at set intervals, so every time the athlete hears a beep, they run to the opposite cone. As the test advances, the interval between each beep reduces, forcing the athlete to increase speed and reduce rest time.

The test continues until the athlete is unable to keep up with the recording.

The recording is set into twenty-one levels, with each level lasting approximately sixty-two seconds. The intervals between beeps at each level is calculated by requiring a speed at the starting level of 8.5 km/h, and increasing the speed required by 0.5 km/h with each level. The athlete's score from the test is the highest level attained before failing to keep up to the recording. There is no mistaking that this is an grueling assessment test, but is valuable for soccer players.

Michael Bradley broke the beep test. He's only the third US player ever (Donovan and Hejduk) to make it through to the end.

I guess fitness isn't an excuse then.

I'll chalk it up to his work rate and the heat. But If that's what you get after reading the above

 

[NewlyRetired]

I've been watching the WC for some time now, at least since 94, and I've gotten into EPL and La Liga, especially over beers at a couple local pubs, been to some minor league soccer here in NO (even gotten to know their coach) and helped with a local soccer association. But there are things that I still don't get. Can someone explain how the extra time is calculated? How is it validated, ie how do we know that 5:00 minutes is the correct and proper time? I think the American sports fan in me wants some kind of certainty or verifiability as to why the teams get the extra time that they do? That just seemed like a lot of ET in that game.

Supposedly the ref is suppose to keep track of it during the game to account for goals, subs and injuries and other time wasting tactics but most fans will tell you it is rarely accurate.Up until fairly recently, the fans were not told how much extra time there would be. You just waited for the whistle. They made a tiny improvement to at least post it now after the 90 minutes is up.

I've explained this to several new viewers the last few weeks and they've all rolled their eyes and asked why they can't just stop the clock. I really didn't have an answer. It's not a good system.

I guess I have never really had a problem with the way the cloak is handled. Players generally know when time is running out, and know that the added time is posted, they generally know exactly how much time is left. I don't watch enough MLS to see how they operate their clock - i.e. what constitutes stoppage?.

MLS handles the clock the same way as the rest of the world. He was talking about the early days of the league when they experimented with the clock counting down, shoot outs to decide draws etc.

All experiments were dumped when Garber became commish at the turn of the century.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I am not opposed to an official clock, but I guess I am so used to the official running the clock on his own, that I don't see any real benefit.

Removing time wasting tactics is more than enough benefit for me. Watching guys fake injuries in the second half is no fun.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Weighing in on the Bradley debate. Bradley completed 87% of his 69 passes. The only player he attempted nearly that many passes was Kyle Beckerman, who completed a tidy 90%

One thing to think about in soccer is context. We're used to Bradley completing a high percentage of his passes because he has traditionally played either as a dedicated "#6" or at least as a box to box guy with lots of defensive responsibilities in distributing the ball safely out of the back. In this World Cup, Bradley is being played as an attacking MF. He should complete less passes because we want him attempting ambitious passes that put pressure on the defense. Alejandro Bedoya completed 91% of his passes, but I'd argue that he played far, far too safe for even a "defensive" winger. Yedlin probably had more giveaways in a fraction of the minutes, but Yedlin created the second goal. Context.

Another thing to consider in these situations is where the giveaways occur. Jermaine Jones, who seems to be the popular pick for Man of the Match, completed 77% of his passes. At least three of his giveaways were central, in bad areas. Portugal didn't capitalize on them, so we never think of them again. Of Bradley's giveaways before that final minute, I can only think of one that was in a bad area that might have led to a transition. That was bad.

Of the offensive giveaways (which, again, I think you tolerate out of AMs), the one that was slightly behind Deuce stands out. But for somewhat different reasons. The US had a numbers breakaway. Zusi (I think) out on the left was the easiest ball. It would have produced a low percentage shot chance or a possible cross into the box. The pass to Deuce was higher difficulty, but would have produced a clear chance. Bradley tried the harder pass and played it a hair behind Deuce. Now, it was no more behind Deuce than Jones' assist on the first goal against Ghana. The difference was that Deuce couldn't execute the drag back this time. I'd argue that Bradley played the pass we want our CAM to play in that situation. And those aren't always going to come off.

Now, it's perfectly fair to assign blame to Bradley for the late giveaway. Knowing what we know now, he probably should have just volleyed it first time out of bounds or something. But he did have room. If it's not the last minute of the game, the decision to control is obviously correct. The execution with regard to the first touch wasn't. With that said, when I look at that goal again, I see tons of numbers back for the US. And I see that Portugal got on runner into the box. Bradley (and Beasley too) share some blame on the goal. But the lion's share has to go to Cameron.

 

[Sebowski]

POSTED BY ROGER BENNETT

50 minutes ago
2
Tweet
Share
America's team are very much alive
The United States could taste the knockout round, but a late stoppage time winner saw Portugal escape with a 2-2 draw.RIO DE JANEIRO -- This is some hangover. We wake up battered and bruised, as if we slept fitfully besides our requisite US Soccer pajama tops, crushed in a ball on the bedroom floor, covered in the stains, sweat and terror of the night before. America. This may be the closest you will come to feeling like we English do on a daily basis.

It could get worse. If the U.S. do not physically -- and mentally -- rebound to claim at least a tie against Euro-power Germany this Thursday, the pain will become a searing perma-bruise on our national footballing psyche.

Yet.

If at halftime last night, as Jurgen Klinsmann's team stumbled into the Amazonian locker room a goal down against Cristiano Ronaldo's Portugal, and you had been offered a draw, wouldn't you have taken it in a heartbeat.?

If I told you back on the day of the World Cup draw (as I did) that the United States would have four points and remain undefeated after two rounds of Group G play, you would have rolled your eyes and looked at me with a concerned pity.

And if you knew this young, inexperienced U.S. team could control their own fate entering the final group game, you would have dropped to your knees to thank the soccer gods and Mike Tirico.

In football, the emotional and the rational run on parallel lines. As the smoke clears from a tingling night in the jungle of Manaus, unpredictable enough to make the opening scene of Apocalypse Now appear sane, America's team are very much alive. But they must travel to the unforgiving heat of Recife to face a talent-rich German side, knowing they missed a glaring opportunity to provide the nation with a memory which could have existed in the Great American Sports Pantheon alongside the Miracle on Ice, Doug Flutie's Hail Mary and Montana to Clark.

Such is the walk through the shadow of the Valley of the Group of Death. This was a game sufficiently dramatic to help Americans cope with their Game Of Thrones withdrawal. One spectacular minute, Jermaine Jones, long derided by the U.S. media, showed why Klinsmann has long believed in him. Then Clint Dempsey became the most swaggering American since Steve McQueen's Hilts, the "Cooler King" in Great Escape. The MLS contingent -- Kyle Beckerman, Matt Besler and in a late cameo by Deandre Yedlin -- shone, German-American Fabian Johnson reveled in Portugal's disjointed tactics to dominate the flanks, and Klinsmann demonstrated the magical touch in the choices he has made with this young, fearless, athletic U.S. squad.

Two minutes of clown defending obliterated all that. (For the last one of which Michael Bradley has become a Twitter pinata. Please leave him alone. He is the best American player of his generation. Believe in his ability because you will need him.)

Yet I feel more pride than pain this morning. There was much talk about last week's 2-1 win against Ghana being "American" thanks to the Hollywood ending of John Brooks 86th minute winner. Yet, to me, that was nostalgic "American soccer" -- collective, never-give-up, huff 'n' puff endeavor. As devastating as the outcome of this 2-2 performance felt, I hope, it redefines what it means to be "American" in relation to soccer: Klinsmann's team took on Portugal, ranked 4th in the world, and outplayed them not just with guts, pluck and tenacity but with bold, optimistic, inventive, relentless and confident football. And I love that.

 

[17seconds]

The way extra time works is another opportunity for controversy and corruption. It's better that they tell you the minutes now. When they didn't it seemed really fishy to me. Big improvement to give the minutes.

 

[Sebowski]

https://g.co/doodle/2djdtj

 

[Jaysus]

So Mexican World Cup fans decided to change its chants to avoid FIFA's sanctions, the new chant? PEPSI!!! (Coke is the official WC sponsor)

 

[GoFishTN]

The way extra time works is another opportunity for controversy and corruption. It's better that they tell you the minutes now. When they didn't it seemed really fishy to me. Big improvement to give the minutes.

What's fishy is not adding any time for a water break, but deciding five minutes seems right for the second half, but I digress.

 

[GoFishTN]

So it appears both Group B games are pointless, but the two Group A games matter. Especially Mexico and Croatia. Should be exciting.

 

[Jaysus]

RVP's ban means Holland won't have player with 'Van' in name for first time since 1996

 

[NewlyRetired]

So it appears both Group B games are pointless, but the two Group A games matter. Especially Mexico and Croatia. Should be exciting.

The Netherlands Chile game is not pointless imo. I think both teams would prefer to avoid Brazil in the second round.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

So it appears both Group B games are pointless, but the two Group A games matter. Especially Mexico and Croatia. Should be exciting.

I'm sure Chile and the Netherlands both want to avoid Brazil.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

RVP's ban means Holland won't have player with 'Van' in name for first time since 1996

Like for like replacement.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Weighing in on the Bradley debate. Bradley completed 87% of his 69 passes. The only player he attempted nearly that many passes was Kyle Beckerman, who completed a tidy 90%

One thing to think about in soccer is context. We're used to Bradley completing a high percentage of his passes because he has traditionally played either as a dedicated "#6" or at least as a box to box guy with lots of defensive responsibilities in distributing the ball safely out of the back. In this World Cup, Bradley is being played as an attacking MF. He should complete less passes because we want him attempting ambitious passes that put pressure on the defense. Alejandro Bedoya completed 91% of his passes, but I'd argue that he played far, far too safe for even a "defensive" winger. Yedlin probably had more giveaways in a fraction of the minutes, but Yedlin created the second goal. Context.

Another thing to consider in these situations is where the giveaways occur. Jermaine Jones, who seems to be the popular pick for Man of the Match, completed 77% of his passes. At least three of his giveaways were central, in bad areas. Portugal didn't capitalize on them, so we never think of them again. Of Bradley's giveaways before that final minute, I can only think of one that was in a bad area that might have led to a transition. That was bad.

Of the offensive giveaways (which, again, I think you tolerate out of AMs), the one that was slightly behind Deuce stands out. But for somewhat different reasons. The US had a numbers breakaway. Zusi (I think) out on the left was the easiest ball. It would have produced a low percentage shot chance or a possible cross into the box. The pass to Deuce was higher difficulty, but would have produced a clear chance. Bradley tried the harder pass and played it a hair behind Deuce. Now, it was no more behind Deuce than Jones' assist on the first goal against Ghana. The difference was that Deuce couldn't execute the drag back this time. I'd argue that Bradley played the pass we want our CAM to play in that situation. And those aren't always going to come off.

Now, it's perfectly fair to assign blame to Bradley for the late giveaway. Knowing what we know now, he probably should have just volleyed it first time out of bounds or something. But he did have room. If it's not the last minute of the game, the decision to control is obviously correct. The execution with regard to the first touch wasn't. With that said, when I look at that goal again, I see tons of numbers back for the US. And I see that Portugal got on runner into the box. Bradley (and Beasley too) share some blame on the goal. But the lion's share has to go to Cameron.

great post.

 

[GoFishTN]

So it appears both Group B games are pointless, but the two Group A games matter. Especially Mexico and Croatia. Should be exciting.

The Netherlands Chile game is not pointless imo. I think both teams would prefer to avoid Brazil in the second round.

Good point. Even better!

 

[Sand]

Again, I don't know much about soccer, but it seemed to me that Portugal was playing it back after scoring the first goal and US had a bunch of chances. Is this similar to 'prevent' defense in football? If so, it seems like when a team is playing that way it burns them. Why wouldn't a team play aggressive all game? Is it to keep from getting tired?

When Portugal was down 1 they picked up the pace and seemed to have a lot more chances.

Unlike football, defense turns to offense very quickly in soccer. One reason why teams defending a lead tend to concede some possession to a team chasing a goal is because a the counter-attack is an extremely effective offensive strategy. In fact, it's how Portugal prefers to play in the first place, because that's Ronaldo's game.

Which is why I see Ghana giving up 2 to Portugal. Ghana may still win, but they're going to give up some. They have been very shaky defensively and are fully capable of letting some quality plays go by.

 

[Sand]

Also... for the newbies who are wondering about Bradley's fitness. The US does a test at the start of each training camp (and again later I think), called the beep test. It's supposedly brutal.

The beep test is a multiple-stage fitness test used to estimate an athlete's VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake). This test is sometimes referred to as beep test, pacer test, or twenty-meter shuttle run test. It is a very popular test used by soccer teams because it is a great test for cardiovascular fitness, a valuable asset for soccer players.

To set up a beep test, place two cones twenty-meters apart that a player can run continuously back and forth between. Player runs are synchronized with an audio cd or computer software program that beeps at set intervals, so every time the athlete hears a beep, they run to the opposite cone. As the test advances, the interval between each beep reduces, forcing the athlete to increase speed and reduce rest time.

The test continues until the athlete is unable to keep up with the recording.

The recording is set into twenty-one levels, with each level lasting approximately sixty-two seconds. The intervals between beeps at each level is calculated by requiring a speed at the starting level of 8.5 km/h, and increasing the speed required by 0.5 km/h with each level. The athlete's score from the test is the highest level attained before failing to keep up to the recording. There is no mistaking that this is an grueling assessment test, but is valuable for soccer players.

Michael Bradley broke the beep test. He's only the third US player ever (Donovan and Hejduk) to make it through to the end.

I guess fitness isn't an excuse then.

PLAYERS

Distance Covered

15.42mi - 24.82km - Carl Valeri (Australia)

15.05mi - 24.22km - Gerardo Torrado (Mexico)

15.01mi - 24.16km - Sami Khedira (Germany)

14.81mi - 23.83km - Benjamin Huggel (Switzerland)

14.80mi - 23.81km - Michael Bradley (USA)

Link.

And he did half of that in Manaus. Dude is a beast.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Also... for the newbies who are wondering about Bradley's fitness. The US does a test at the start of each training camp (and again later I think), called the beep test. It's supposedly brutal.

The beep test is a multiple-stage fitness test used to estimate an athlete's VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake). This test is sometimes referred to as beep test, pacer test, or twenty-meter shuttle run test. It is a very popular test used by soccer teams because it is a great test for cardiovascular fitness, a valuable asset for soccer players.

To set up a beep test, place two cones twenty-meters apart that a player can run continuously back and forth between. Player runs are synchronized with an audio cd or computer software program that beeps at set intervals, so every time the athlete hears a beep, they run to the opposite cone. As the test advances, the interval between each beep reduces, forcing the athlete to increase speed and reduce rest time.

The test continues until the athlete is unable to keep up with the recording.

The recording is set into twenty-one levels, with each level lasting approximately sixty-two seconds. The intervals between beeps at each level is calculated by requiring a speed at the starting level of 8.5 km/h, and increasing the speed required by 0.5 km/h with each level. The athlete's score from the test is the highest level attained before failing to keep up to the recording. There is no mistaking that this is an grueling assessment test, but is valuable for soccer players.

Michael Bradley broke the beep test. He's only the third US player ever (Donovan and Hejduk) to make it through to the end.

I guess fitness isn't an excuse then.

PLAYERS

Distance Covered

15.42mi - 24.82km - Carl Valeri (Australia)

15.05mi - 24.22km - Gerardo Torrado (Mexico)

15.01mi - 24.16km - Sami Khedira (Germany)

14.81mi - 23.83km - Benjamin Huggel (Switzerland)

14.80mi - 23.81km - Michael Bradley (USA)

Link.

And he did half of that in Manaus. Dude is a beast.

Those numbers are from South Africa in 2010.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Four years ago, at the start of the tournament, I reallllllllllllly hated Bradley, and was convinced that he was only on the team due to his Dad. Then, he won me over with his ability and his play. Four years later, I came into the tournament really liking him and expecting a lot, and I've gotten a turd sandwich.

 

[El Floppo]

I have a hard time believing Portugal was content on sitting on a 1-0 lead that early in the game when their goal diff is so poor. You'd think they'd want to step on the US' throat after getting the early/deflating goal. I just don't buy it.

This is a good point.

totally agree

 

[Sinn Fein]

Again, I don't know much about soccer, but it seemed to me that Portugal was playing it back after scoring the first goal and US had a bunch of chances. Is this similar to 'prevent' defense in football? If so, it seems like when a team is playing that way it burns them. Why wouldn't a team play aggressive all game? Is it to keep from getting tired?

When Portugal was down 1 they picked up the pace and seemed to have a lot more chances.

Unlike football, defense turns to offense very quickly in soccer. One reason why teams defending a lead tend to concede some possession to a team chasing a goal is because a the counter-attack is an extremely effective offensive strategy. In fact, it's how Portugal prefers to play in the first place, because that's Ronaldo's game.

Which is why I see Ghana giving up 2 to Portugal. Ghana may still win, but they're going to give up some. They have been very shaky defensively and are fully capable of letting some quality plays go by.

I think both teams have been shaky in the back - likely to see a 3-2 game imo.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I have a hard time believing Portugal was content on sitting on a 1-0 lead that early in the game when their goal diff is so poor. You'd think they'd want to step on the US' throat after getting the early/deflating goal. I just don't buy it.

This is a good point.

totally agree

I don't think Portugal wanted to bunker. But I think they probably wanted to let the US take initiative and counter. In that situation, Portugal wasn't trying to improve its goal differential. It was trying to get 3 pts so that it could focus on getting 3 pts against Ghana without having to worry about adopting a goal differential strategy.

Portugal probably thought they'd get chances on the break (and in fact, they did at the end of the half).