***Official Soccer Discussion Thread*** (8 Viewers)

[El Floppo]

I know the Laws of the Game well. Yes deliberately is in the law book. However, intent, as you stated, would have the referee trying to read the players mind. The questions you ask yourself here are

Was the players hand in a natural or unnatural position?

Was the player trying to make himself larger - instruction from this year - with his hands or amrs?

There are many more. The point I am making was that in this case - on the goal line - had the ref blown the whistle for the Penalty he would have been forced to give a red card. Otherwise what are you stopping the game for? There is no PK here without a send off. That was what I was trying to say. Perhaps not all that clear.

That just seems counter-intuitive. Say I'm a FB who's tasked with marking the front post on a corner kick. As the ball comes into the box I keep hold of the post so I don't drift. If a forward heads the ball and it strikes my arm on the goal line a penalty would be awarded and I would be sent off because it had the effect of making me bigger. But if the exact same situation happened and I didn't grab the post but the ball merely struck my arm preventing it from crossing the line, there's no card and no penalty? Even though my arm prevented the ball from going in the goal in both situations?

Ahhh... And now Christo my friend you see the beauty of being a soccer referee. These decisions can be difficult. I should have probably added one of the other questions we ask ourselves in these situations. Did the ball hit the hand or did hand hit the ball. Yes, you can say that if the hand hits the ball then there is intent. At the goal line what we are looking for is whether the defender is making hismelf bigger by extending his arms / hands in such a manner that impeded the oppositions opportunity to score. In the case above it would depend on where you were holding onto the post. If you were side by side with the post and you were holding onto the post with your left or right hand how could the ball hit your hand unless it were already inside the netting fully or out of play? If you are holding onto the goal post with your hand above your head, why one would do that I would not know, but let's say you were then yes you could potentially have a PK awarded and a red card for DOGSO by hand. Why you say, because what are the natural positions of ones arms? Either by their side or in an L shape when running. Not above your head. Same situation, the ball strikes your hand and your hands are in what would be considered natural positions then there would be no fould and no reason to stop the game.

Clear as mud and therefore the reason why there is so much confusion around handling in soccer.

reading this still gets me all riled up thinking about Berhalters lunge that was block by a German arm in the 2002 WC quarter finals against Germany on the friggan goal line.3:45 of this clip.

Arguably the best 90 minutes ever by a USMNT. ####### Germans.

 

[prefontaine]

Not to get away from this exciting ref talk but I've been a bit confused with tv rights the last week or so. I have no idea what will be on what.

Setanta still has rights to EPL in US

It has been announced today by the Board of Setanta Sport Holdings Limited that it has not proved possible to secure the additional financing required to ensure the future viability of certain Setanta businesses in Great Britain. As a consequence, the Board has taken the decision to seek the appointment of Receivers to the parent company, Setanta Sport Holdings Limited, and certain subsidiaries in Ireland, and Administrators to certain English subsidiaries.

Setanta International is not covered by these appointments.

Setanta’s services in the US will continue to trade normally.

Also, it has been widely reported in various media channels, Setanta Sports has had its agreement to broadcast 46 Barclays Premier League matches in the UK terminated.

This development does not affect our channels and other services in the US.

Setanta Sports in the US is a separate operation that has separate agreement to show the Barclay’s Premier League. Our channels and other services in the US continue to broadcast and our subscribers can still enjoy our programming including the Lions Tour of South Africa and the UEFA U21 European Championship.

New customers are welcome to subscribe to watch some of the world’s best soccer and rugby either by contacting our cable and satellite partners or online at www.setanta.com.

We thank you for your continued interest in Setanta Sports and look forward to bringing you a wealth of sport over the coming months and years.

 

[El Floppo]

re: US v Egypt handball... it was a clear handball, but a bang-bang play with the ball deflecting into the defender's hand. He was not "making himself bigger" (as was the case v Brasil in game one), he was just covering the goal-line, but without keeping his hands pressed to his sides... the offending hand seemed to move "naturally" as he moved- not swinging out to deliberately handle the ball.

Easy PK, less easy card.

There you go El Floppo and potentially why he did not award the PK. If you give the PK there you must give the red. This is what is called having the courage and character to make the right call at the right time even though there are dire consequences - i.e. a red card.

That makes no sense.He did none of the things you just described as necessary for a Red, but it was still handled in the box. Not every handball on the line is going to warrant a Red, in my humble opinion, and this one didn't.

 

[Christo]

re: US v Egypt handball... it was a clear handball, but a bang-bang play with the ball deflecting into the defender's hand. He was not "making himself bigger" (as was the case v Brasil in game one), he was just covering the goal-line, but without keeping his hands pressed to his sides... the offending hand seemed to move "naturally" as he moved- not swinging out to deliberately handle the ball. Easy PK, less easy card.

And that's why they should be treated differently. It seems fair to give the penalty but not to give the card in a situation like that. But unfair to whichever side gets the double whammy under the interpretation that walnutz is giving--no penalty, no red or penalty and red. Forcing that choice on the ref just seems to not give him enough discretion.

 

[El Floppo]

re: US v Egypt handball... it was a clear handball, but a bang-bang play with the ball deflecting into the defender's hand. He was not "making himself bigger" (as was the case v Brasil in game one), he was just covering the goal-line, but without keeping his hands pressed to his sides... the offending hand seemed to move "naturally" as he moved- not swinging out to deliberately handle the ball. Easy PK, less easy card.

And that's why they should be treated differently. It seems fair to give the penalty but not to give the card in a situation like that. But unfair to whichever side gets the double whammy under the interpretation that walnutz is giving--no penalty, no red or penalty and red. Forcing that choice on the ref just seems to not give him enough discretion.

 

[walnutz]

re: US v Egypt handball... it was a clear handball, but a bang-bang play with the ball deflecting into the defender's hand. He was not "making himself bigger" (as was the case v Brasil in game one), he was just covering the goal-line, but without keeping his hands pressed to his sides... the offending hand seemed to move "naturally" as he moved- not swinging out to deliberately handle the ball.

Easy PK, less easy card.

There you go El Floppo and potentially why he did not award the PK. If you give the PK there you must give the red. This is what is called having the courage and character to make the right call at the right time even though there are dire consequences - i.e. a red card.

That makes no sense.He did none of the things you just described as necessary for a Red, but it was still handled in the box. Not every handball on the line is going to warrant a Red, in my humble opinion, and this one didn't.

Uhh... If the referee had awarded the PK for a handling call then yes he would have. Was the ball headed directly to goal - Yes, the defender was on the goal line.

What was the proximity of the foul / misconduct to the goal - It was right there. The ball would have gone in had it not been stopped by the defenders hand.

No, not every foul in the box or handball that occurs in the box would warrant a send off. However, the case we are talking about occured on the goal line and the ball would have gone in the goal if not for the defenders hand. Therefore, had the referee awarded the PK there must be a red card. I am not talking about other handling calls in different areas of the box. If you are on the goal line and the game is stopped by the referee because he deems you handled the ball there you are going to the showers early. There is no other way around it unless the referee decides to directly ignore the Laws of the Game. This may work on Sunday afternoon for the U12 game but does not cut it at the international level.

These calls are not easy to make. I am not saying it should have been a PK or not. All I am telling you is that had it been awarded there would have been a red to follow.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Strangely, the term "Hand Ball" is commonly used, but is not defined in the official FIFA rules. It is a "direct kick foul" if a player (other than the goalkeeper inside his own penalty area) deliberately handles the ball (meaning to deliberately touch the ball with any part of the arm from the finger tips to the top of the shoulder). If the player handles it for the purpose of preventing an opponent from gaining possession, it is a "cautionable offense" and a yellow card should be given. If a player deliberately handles the ball to deny an obvious goal scoring opportunity (e.g., to prevent a breakaway or to deliberately stop a shot), a red card should be given and the player "sent off". However, a hand ball foul should not be called if: (1) a player is instinctively trying to protect himself from injury or (2) the player did not deliberately touch the ball but the ball hit his arm & he did not move the arm toward the ball (however, if the player's arms were in an unnatural position such as above his shoulders or sticking out to the sides, then he should be called for a handball).

http://www.soccerhelp.com/Soccer_Tips_Dict...y_Terms_H.shtmlseemed to me that the player had his arm out away from his sides. I'm not sure it was a "deliberate" handball but it definitely prevented the goal. Seems like a red would have been too harsh there but a PK was warranted. IMO, anyway.

The rules don't seem all that clear regarding a player having his arm in an unnatural position where the ball hits it and it denies a clear goal-scoring opportunity.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

re: US v Egypt handball... it was a clear handball, but a bang-bang play with the ball deflecting into the defender's hand. He was not "making himself bigger" (as was the case v Brasil in game one), he was just covering the goal-line, but without keeping his hands pressed to his sides... the offending hand seemed to move "naturally" as he moved- not swinging out to deliberately handle the ball.

Easy PK, less easy card.

There you go El Floppo and potentially why he did not award the PK. If you give the PK there you must give the red. This is what is called having the courage and character to make the right call at the right time even though there are dire consequences - i.e. a red card.

That makes no sense.He did none of the things you just described as necessary for a Red, but it was still handled in the box. Not every handball on the line is going to warrant a Red, in my humble opinion, and this one didn't.

I think the point is that if the handball or other penalty denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity, the red card is mandatory. This used to be called a "professional foul" but that phrase was replaced with the "obvious goal scoring opportunity" language. If the referee determines that it was not deliberate, there is no penalty, no PK and no caution; but if he determines it was deliberate, and therefore a penalty, he has no discretion in the case of an obvious goal scoring opportunity and must send the player off. This is what happend in the Barcelona/Chelsea semifinal second leg, where it was highly questionable whether or not a penalty had occured, but once the referee determined that there was a penalty on Anelka's breakaway (an obvious goal scoring opportunity), he had no choice under the rules but to send off the Barca defender. If the handball occurs on a cross through the box or off the line, where it is unclear whether a goal was directly prevented, the referee has some discretion to award a PK but no card.I believe that is what walnutz is referring to regarding the courage it takes for a ref in this situation because he is forced to award a PK AND send off a player. That makes sense to me as penalty kicks are sometimes missed or blocked. In that situation, if no red card were given, a player directly prevented a goal through a deliberate infraction, and it paid off.

 

[eagles2007]

i'm going to take this handball discussion in another direction.

should the size of the box be smaller, at least in width? i think it should. there was a play in one of these games, which i can't remember, where the offensive team guy was dribbling toward the end line, but away from the goal. he was clearly not going to make an attempt at goal ... but he was taken down and a PK was given. he was probably 1/3 of the way between the goal post and the edge of the box. i don't think it warranted a PK.

 

[Desert_Power]

I don't think that the handball in the game sunday was PK worthy.

 

[Sebowski]

I remember Spain and Puyol in particular going at Adu hard and often. They clearly made stopping and frustrating Adu a part of the gameplan. This tells me he is a dangerous player and needs to be on the field. I'm not saying start him, but he needs to see the field tomorrow.

 

[Christo]

Or they could have been going after him because they determined he was the weak link.

 

[El Floppo]

Good stuff guys

I admit to being 15 years removed from playing competitively (semi-pro after div 1 college) and 20 from reffing (low level), so I am definitely behind in my "official" understanding of the game- especially any specific rule changes/clarifications.

What it sounds like you guys are saying is pretty much what Christo alluded to earlier- that kind of play has turned into an either-or situation where one team gets screwed by having the PK called against them AND losing a player or the other team gets screwed by not getting anything, even if it's a legitimate handball.

This makes no sense to me.

I may not have played in a long time, but I watch a ton of games (work from home... when I work ) but I rarely see it called that way in pro/national games. So color me confused.

 

[walnutz]

Good stuff guys I admit to being 15 years removed from playing competitively (semi-pro after div 1 college) and 20 from reffing (low level), so I am definitely behind in my "official" understanding of the game- especially any specific rule changes/clarifications. What it sounds like you guys are saying is pretty much what Christo alluded to earlier- that kind of play has turned into an either-or situation where one team gets screwed by having the PK called against them AND losing a player or the other team gets screwed by not getting anything, even if it's a legitimate handball. This makes no sense to me. I may not have played in a long time, but I watch a ton of games (work from home... when I work ) but I rarely see it called that way in pro/national games. So color me confused.

EF - You pretty much summed it up correctly there. There has been a lot of emphasis on handling over the past 6 years. As a result we have all seen that the # of times handling has been called has decreased. USSF did a study I believe on handling and identified that the majortiy of times it was being called it was being called incorrectly. There was a common misunerstanding, that still exists, that every time a player got a ball kicked into his hand that handling should be called. In actuality, this is one of the more difficult calls to make correctly because there is a lot of subjectivity to it.

 

[Sebowski]

Didn't seem like that kind of attack to me. They gave him too much attention to be a weak link.

 

[Mjolnirs]

reading this still gets me all riled up thinking about Berhalters lunge that was block by a German arm in the 2002 WC quarter finals against Germany on the friggan goal line.

3:45 of this clip.

I'm very much a fan of Die Nationalmannschaft, but I'm a US fan first, and that non call still ticks me off.

 

[The Z Machine]

... Die Nationalmannschaft...

Every time I see that I read "National Man Shaft", of which I can say I'm not such an enthusiastic fan as you.

 

[Mjolnirs]

Clipped from www.fcb.de

Bayern have agreed a fee with Netherlands top flight outfit SC Heerenveen for Croatia international Danijel Pranjic. The left-sided player will now ink a three-year deal keeping him in Munich until 30 June 2012. “Pranjic is a very versatile player, and was one of the names at the top of our new coach Louis van Gaal’s wish list,” commented FCB chairman Karl-Heinz Rummenigge.The 27-year-old made his Croatia debut in 2004 and has earned 22 caps to date. His greatest success in national colours so far was reaching the Euro 2008 quarter-finals. At the same tournament, he laid on the opening goal in the Croats’ 2-1 group stage victory over Germany.Pranjic is the sixth confirmed new face at Bayern for the forthcoming campaign. The Bundesliga runners-up have also signed Anatoliy Tymoshchuk, Alexander Baumjohann, Ivica Olic, Mario Gomez and Edson Braafheid.

From www.goal.com

Negotiations between Eredivisie outfit Heerenveen and German giants Bayern Munich about a transfer fee for Croatian international Danijel Pranjic had reached an impasse in the past couple of days, but the transfer was all of a sudden sealed earlier today.Pranjic has now made it clear that he's the one to thank for the transfer as he has paid a fee of €700 000 to complete the deal."I got a phone call earlier today that Heerenveen's asking price was still a problem for Bayern. That's when I made the decision to pay the difference between Heerenveen's asking price and Bayern's offer myself," said Pranjic to Voetbal International."Heerenveen asked for €7.7 million, while Bayern refused to pay more than €7 million. The transfer has cost me a serious amount of money, but I'm happy that it's official now.

Also from www.goal.com

Bayern Munich’s current transfer market activity is proving that Juergen Klinsmann wasn’t to blame for the club’s poor showing last season, according to the former boss. Bayern took the decision to fire Klinsmann back in April, only ten months into his tenure at the Allianz Arena, in what was an admission that the club had chosen the wrong man to lead the club. Throughout last season, the former Bundestrainer stressed the need for more top players if the Bavarians were to challenge the top teams in the Champions League and, with Uli Hoeness now signing a number of stars for Louis van Gaal, Klinsmann says he feels vindicated. Mario Gomez, Anatoliy Tymoshchuk, Ivica Olic, Danijel Pranjic and Edson Braafheid have all arrived at the Allianz Arena, and the spending is unlikely to be over. In an interview with Bild, Klinsmann said he had been proven to have been right. "Seven, perhaps eight or nine new players - that is almost a complete team and shows that, with hindsight, they followed my analysis," Klinsmann was quoted as saying. "And it shows, very clearly, that the coach obviously was not solely to blame for last season's defeats - as it was so often presented.

 

[Mjolnirs]

... Die Nationalmannschaft...

Every time I see that I read "National Man Shaft", of which I can say I'm not such an enthusiastic fan as you.

(we really need to lobby for a yellow card and red card smiley)I could refer to Die Nationalelf, but it might make you think of a German version of Legolas. Picture Klinsmann with a bow.

 

[Steve Tasker]

is first-touch considered a skill you either are born with or without, or is it something you can learn/develop?

both

some technical skill but a good deal of instinct too.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Side note- I've seen two kids in the last couple of weeks with a soccer ball at the playground I take my kid to (one here in NYC, one near Ocean City MD). Each one was around 7 or 8 and each one was probably the best 7 or 8 year old US kid I've ever seen with a ball. Granted, it's been a long, long time since I've been around kids' soccer (I played through college, semi-pro after... no MLS at that point... and used to ref and coach soccer camps) but it got me thinking- was it a fluke that I was 2-2 in runing across two astonishing talents? Or has the level of play at the youth level risen that far. I fully believe it's the latter- and again, for their whole lives, these kids can go and watch MLS games- or watch European leagues on TV... neither of which were available to me (although I caught the tail end of NASL and Soccer made in German on PBS). Couple that with the fact that these kids' dads are essentially me and my peers- the first generation of US citizens to grow up en masse playing the game- so they can learn the sport at home.

While that's all true we still do a horrible job at the 9-14 year age groups of developing tactic and technical skill...just horrible. A lot of it goes back to the perverse incentive structure of the travelling teams (nevermind the cost involved which also self-selects) where the coach is baiscally paid to win which means going with the most physically advanced kids as opposed to the kids with the best skills.

Interesting... and I'd like to hear more about this.So maybe the advanced ball-skills I saw from these two 7-8 year olds was an anomoly? These were just kids kicking a ball around by themselves in a playground.

What do you mean want to hear more about it? I can tell you what it was like as of 7-10 years ago, not so much now.

 

[Steve Tasker]

-Arsenal sign a defender from Ajax, Thomas Vermaelen - frankly I'm not at all familiar with his play

I've heard good things about him. Robin van Persie lobbied hard for him too.

 

[Steve Tasker]

how did the refs miss the handball on Egypt? US should have had a PK for sure.

the announcers didn't seem to have a problem with it. went off his chest to his arm. it was unintentional.

weird. I thought Harkes or whoever was doing the color said the exact opposite.

Initially they were like "no biggie" and then out of the blue went the other way. The color dude definitely went off about it.

If I hear JP Dellacamera say "Ball to hand versus hand to ball" one more time, I quit. And he STILL doesn't get it.Somebody please step in and correct me if I'm offbase here because it's been a long time since my playing days and longer since my reffing days, but...It's not about intentionality. It's not about "hand to ball". I always understood that if your arm is away from your body- which can happen when you're running, jumping, etc- and the ball hits it, that's a handball. If that happens in the box, then it's a PK. You don't have to reach your hand/arm out to intentionally hit the ball; today was a perfect example- ball deflects off the defender's thigh and up into his arm (which was not against his body). If not for the arm, the ball goes in the net which makes it a really clear-cut case of a handball call and PK. IMHO.

"Ball plays the hand" vs. "hand plays the ball"As far as I know, if it's completely unintentional, it's not supposed to be called. You're partially right when you say that if the hand is outstretched, it should be a handball, but if you've got your arm at your side and get unlucky, it's not going to be called. If it's completely unintentional, it should be no-call.I know the amateur level refs aren't the top of the line refs, but I had a completely unintentional handball in the box earlier this season. Right off my arm out of nowhere...the ref kept yelling "the ball played the hand" and it wasn't called for a PK.

 

[Steve Tasker]

As is typical in soccer, teams peak at odd times. The Italian team was definitely clicking on all cylinders in WC2006. Since then they've had a disappointing Euros (losing to Holland, drawing w/ Romania, and beating France before losing to Spain in the first knockout round in penalties). Since then in WC qualification, they've played barely better than Ireland to sit atop their Group for the automatic bid. Ireland is at 13 pts, with italy at 14 pts, so it's conceivable that they could flip-flop and Italy would have to go to the 2nd round playoff stage to get into the WC2010.Obviously if Italian fans thought that winning WC2006 was the start of a dynasty or even a prolonged stretch of great Italian football, they've got to be disappointed.

They're too old, I think. They've got some young talent with guys like Balotelli, but they're going nowhere with the likes of Toni and Gilardino up front. Nowhere.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Question for the soccer fans - why is the US team not very good? Is it style? Speed? I'd genuinely like to hear informed opinions. I ask this not as a soccer hater, but as someone who has come to the game recently and appreciate the flow/movement of the game. I'm a huge hockey fan and I see a lot of similarities. TIA.

I like this question, and now that I'm finally caught up, here's what I think....First of all, I want to preface this by saying that the progress that the US has made in the last 20 years is (apparently) remarkable. I don't remember the 1990 World Cup, and I barely remember the 1994 World Cup, but to turn a team that hadn't made the Cup in literally 40 years into a perennial CONCACAF contender is not an easy feat.One thing I also want to mention that people sometimes forget is that the with the right circumstances, the right team chemistry and atmosphere, teams can play well above their individual skill level. As much as I might complain, I haven't forgotten the 0-0 draw we had against Argentina last year. But at the same time, that game was at the Meadowlands. I know home field advantage plays a bit of a role in every sport, but it's amazing how the US beats Mexico at home and loses to Mexico in Mexico almost every time they play. It's not like they're different players - it's a different location, different altitude, different atmosphere.To get into more technical aspects, a lot of the game falls on the midfield players. It's very noticeable when a striker makes a great play or a defender scuffs a clearance that leads to a goal, but much of the game's control/possession comes from the midfield. I mentioned it a few days ago too - our midfield in 2002 blows away, IMO, the midfield we have now. And based on that, I'm not really surprised that our 2002 team has outperformed (on the biggest stage of them all, at least) our more recent teams. I think it's a lot more noticeable when there's a certain aspect missing. I remember watching Arsenal games this past season that were ####### brutal when Fabregas was injured. And it's kinda the same now with the US. We've got talent with the likes of Bradley, et al. But we used to have Claudio Reyna and John O'Brien - guys who are sorely missed.Another thing I think the USMNT, and US youth system in general, is lacking is instruction on how to move without the ball/general game intelligence. Flat out, Eddie Johnson has absolutely no ####### clue what to do when he doesn't have the ball. And I know he doesn't get as much PT these days, but Jozy has looked Eddie-esque in the Confederations Cup. Put a ball into their feet or on Jozy's head and he's a finisher. Ask him to make a run and he is ####### clueless. Case in point is that Donovan-Altidore 2-on-1 against Egypt. Jozy should've been making a beeline for the backpost, and Donovan knew it. Jozy stopped his run at the top of the 18. Why?I think a bit of it goes back to the youth systems here. I read a few articles recently about La Masia, the famous training facility for Barcelona. They spend a ridiculous amount of time on aspects of the game that I never even considered when I was, say, a 13-year old. When I played premier level soccer for a few years, we did learn tactical things. We learned triangle passing down the field, small sided 3v3 or 5v5 games, flat-back four, etc. But at Barcelona, they learn things like "when to carry the ball and when to pass it" and "what to do when you don't have the ball". I mean, when you've been playing long enough, I think you figure out what to do when you don't have the ball, and maybe comparing Buffalo Premier's training tactics to those of FC Barcelona is ridiculous, but I don't think it's that farfetched. The US system, as Sammy put it pretty well, rewards you for winning, not developing players. So instead of spending our time intensely doing tactical training or watching film (which we did a little bit), we put more of a focus on scrimmaging against older and bigger kids and running wind sprints - things that will help us win the game next week.Maybe I'm being too esoteric. In terms of on-field, immediate tactical things, we have a lot of weaknesses. As you pointed out, we're not that fast. Compared to Brazil, no....we're not fast at all. But I don't think speed is our only problem, nor is it a huge problem. We have no one that strikes fear into the hearts of our opponents. We don't have a Brian McBride, a guy who other defenders elbow every time he goes up for a ball or try to take out of the game. Jozy's developing just fine, IMO, but I don't think Carles Puyol is going to be spending tonight tossing and turning because he has to face - gasp! - Jozy Altidore tomorrow. We don't have a chemistry in the midfield. Forget about the fact that our guys aren't as talented as they used to be or aren't as talented as Spain or Brazil....these guys don't always play well together. Dempsey's been trying to put on a one-man show so far this tournament for some reason, Donovan is playing well but looks frustrated at times. Basically, they're all disjointed....and I think that's because (Bob) Bradley's still trying to experiment in the midfield. The first touch has been collectively out of whack recently as well.I think I'll stop...I could go on for a loooong time...

 

[Christo]

is first-touch considered a skill you either are born with or without, or is it something you can learn/develop?

both

some technical skill but a good deal of instinct too.

My coach in high school used to say I had a deft left foot. And then he'd add how amazed he was my right foot was attached to the same body. I got to the point I didn't embarrass myself if I needed to use my right foot. But I always had to think about what I was doing rather than just doing what came naturally.

 

[Genedoc]

Question for the soccer fans - why is the US team not very good? Is it style? Speed? I'd genuinely like to hear informed opinions. I ask this not as a soccer hater, but as someone who has come to the game recently and appreciate the flow/movement of the game. I'm a huge hockey fan and I see a lot of similarities. TIA.

I like this question, and now that I'm finally caught up, here's what I think....First of all, I want to preface this by saying that the progress that the US has made in the last 20 years is (apparently) remarkable. I don't remember the 1990 World Cup, and I barely remember the 1994 World Cup, but to turn a team that hadn't made the Cup in literally 40 years into a perennial CONCACAF contender is not an easy feat.One thing I also want to mention that people sometimes forget is that the with the right circumstances, the right team chemistry and atmosphere, teams can play well above their individual skill level. As much as I might complain, I haven't forgotten the 0-0 draw we had against Argentina last year. But at the same time, that game was at the Meadowlands. I know home field advantage plays a bit of a role in every sport, but it's amazing how the US beats Mexico at home and loses to Mexico in Mexico almost every time they play. It's not like they're different players - it's a different location, different altitude, different atmosphere.To get into more technical aspects, a lot of the game falls on the midfield players. It's very noticeable when a striker makes a great play or a defender scuffs a clearance that leads to a goal, but much of the game's control/possession comes from the midfield. I mentioned it a few days ago too - our midfield in 2002 blows away, IMO, the midfield we have now. And based on that, I'm not really surprised that our 2002 team has outperformed (on the biggest stage of them all, at least) our more recent teams. I think it's a lot more noticeable when there's a certain aspect missing. I remember watching Arsenal games this past season that were ####### brutal when Fabregas was injured. And it's kinda the same now with the US. We've got talent with the likes of Bradley, et al. But we used to have Claudio Reyna and John O'Brien - guys who are sorely missed.Another thing I think the USMNT, and US youth system in general, is lacking is instruction on how to move without the ball/general game intelligence. Flat out, Eddie Johnson has absolutely no ####### clue what to do when he doesn't have the ball. And I know he doesn't get as much PT these days, but Jozy has looked Eddie-esque in the Confederations Cup. Put a ball into their feet or on Jozy's head and he's a finisher. Ask him to make a run and he is ####### clueless. Case in point is that Donovan-Altidore 2-on-1 against Egypt. Jozy should've been making a beeline for the backpost, and Donovan knew it. Jozy stopped his run at the top of the 18. Why?I think a bit of it goes back to the youth systems here. I read a few articles recently about La Masia, the famous training facility for Barcelona. They spend a ridiculous amount of time on aspects of the game that I never even considered when I was, say, a 13-year old. When I played premier level soccer for a few years, we did learn tactical things. We learned triangle passing down the field, small sided 3v3 or 5v5 games, flat-back four, etc. But at Barcelona, they learn things like "when to carry the ball and when to pass it" and "what to do when you don't have the ball". I mean, when you've been playing long enough, I think you figure out what to do when you don't have the ball, and maybe comparing Buffalo Premier's training tactics to those of FC Barcelona is ridiculous, but I don't think it's that farfetched. The US system, as Sammy put it pretty well, rewards you for winning, not developing players. So instead of spending our time intensely doing tactical training or watching film (which we did a little bit), we put more of a focus on scrimmaging against older and bigger kids and running wind sprints - things that will help us win the game next week.Maybe I'm being too esoteric. In terms of on-field, immediate tactical things, we have a lot of weaknesses. As you pointed out, we're not that fast. Compared to Brazil, no....we're not fast at all. But I don't think speed is our only problem, nor is it a huge problem. We have no one that strikes fear into the hearts of our opponents. We don't have a Brian McBride, a guy who other defenders elbow every time he goes up for a ball or try to take out of the game. Jozy's developing just fine, IMO, but I don't think Carles Puyol is going to be spending tonight tossing and turning because he has to face - gasp! - Jozy Altidore tomorrow. We don't have a chemistry in the midfield. Forget about the fact that our guys aren't as talented as they used to be or aren't as talented as Spain or Brazil....these guys don't always play well together. Dempsey's been trying to put on a one-man show so far this tournament for some reason, Donovan is playing well but looks frustrated at times. Basically, they're all disjointed....and I think that's because (Bob) Bradley's still trying to experiment in the midfield. The first touch has been collectively out of whack recently as well.I think I'll stop...I could go on for a loooong time...

Cool....Thanks for this. It makes perfect sense, though, since our basketball player development is exactly the same way. I'm only 10 years into learning hockey, and there's twice as many players on the field in soccer compared to hockey, so many of the soccer tactics discussed above are well beyond me. I have learned to really enjoy watching high level games, though.

 

[Christo]

Another thing I think the USMNT, and US youth system in general, is lacking is instruction on how to move without the ball/general game intelligence. Flat out, Eddie Johnson has absolutely no ####### clue what to do when he doesn't have the ball. And I know he doesn't get as much PT these days, but Jozy has looked Eddie-esque in the Confederations Cup. Put a ball into their feet or on Jozy's head and he's a finisher. Ask him to make a run and he is ####### clueless. Case in point is that Donovan-Altidore 2-on-1 against Egypt. Jozy should've been making a beeline for the backpost, and Donovan knew it. Jozy stopped his run at the top of the 18. Why?

That play was dumbfounding. Jozy actually pulled up and cut behind the defender towards Landon.

 

[Genedoc]

is first-touch considered a skill you either are born with or without, or is it something you can learn/develop?

both

some technical skill but a good deal of instinct too.

My coach in high school used to say I had a deft left foot. And then he'd add how amazed he was my right foot was attached to the same body. I got to the point I didn't embarrass myself if I needed to use my right foot. But I always had to think about what I was doing rather than just doing what came naturally.

Me and a buddy were recently talking about a sport I know a lot more about - college basketball. We were discussing big men and player development, particularly as it relates to foreign born players. In talking to a couple of D1 college coaches, one of them made a fascinating point I've never though of before. He said that if you walked up to an American 15 year old boy and had a ball with no markings on it whatsoever (i.e., not a basketball or a soccer ball, just a generic round ball) and rolled it to him, he'd reach down and pick it up 99 out of 100 times. Similarly, if you tossed the same ball at his chest, he'd catch it. However, do the exact same thing with a European or African born player, and they'd be much more likely to a) kick the ball or b) chest it like a soccer player. He said that by the time they're 18, it's too late to teach them hands. He said if they haven't grown up catching the ball in rhythm, you're very rarely going to be able to teach him that in 4 years on college campus. He indicated that most successful players that have made the jump started played basketball early or were defensive specialist. I can see the same thing re: soccer. You can teach "first touch" with children who develop so much more quickly, but if you're 18-20-22 and are still trying to "learn" those things, it's too late.

 

[AcerFC]

Side note- I've seen two kids in the last couple of weeks with a soccer ball at the playground I take my kid to (one here in NYC, one near Ocean City MD). Each one was around 7 or 8 and each one was probably the best 7 or 8 year old US kid I've ever seen with a ball. Granted, it's been a long, long time since I've been around kids' soccer (I played through college, semi-pro after... no MLS at that point... and used to ref and coach soccer camps) but it got me thinking- was it a fluke that I was 2-2 in runing across two astonishing talents? Or has the level of play at the youth level risen that far. I fully believe it's the latter- and again, for their whole lives, these kids can go and watch MLS games- or watch European leagues on TV... neither of which were available to me (although I caught the tail end of NASL and Soccer made in German on PBS). Couple that with the fact that these kids' dads are essentially me and my peers- the first generation of US citizens to grow up en masse playing the game- so they can learn the sport at home.

While that's all true we still do a horrible job at the 9-14 year age groups of developing tactic and technical skill...just horrible. A lot of it goes back to the perverse incentive structure of the travelling teams (nevermind the cost involved which also self-selects) where the coach is baiscally paid to win which means going with the most physically advanced kids as opposed to the kids with the best skills.

Interesting... and I'd like to hear more about this.So maybe the advanced ball-skills I saw from these two 7-8 year olds was an anomoly? These were just kids kicking a ball around by themselves in a playground.

What do you mean want to hear more about it? I can tell you what it was like as of 7-10 years ago, not so much now.

The problem I see from a JV coach perspective is the lack of knowledgeable coaches in the sport. Most youth coaches have kids on the team and come home from work and throw 10-15 kids in a practice and tell them to play. Maybe they practice heading, maybe they practice passing but they do it in a way that does not help kids get better. They run drills instead of game simulations/activities. This is the great thing about the national courses. I have been around the game my whole life. I started coaching JV 5 years ago. My teams were always pretty good and I thought I threw down a pretty good training session. However, after attending the E and D courses, I could not believe how bad my sessions were. We won our county championship this year and I have no doubt that my sessions helped with that. We may have won it anyway but they were prepared in a better more efficient way.I was at my D course with coaches who knew next to nothing about the game. Unfortunately they are more the norm for youth coaches then the exception. The kids that can play will wind up on ultra competitive ODP teams anyway and then it forces the high school coaches to adapt because these kids have 10 different people/coaches telling them 10 different things. It can be a major problem.

 

[Sand]

So what time/channel is the US Spain game on? ESPN is, of course, completely unhelpful.

 

[AcerFC]

So what time/channel is the US Spain game on? ESPN is, of course, completely unhelpful.

2:30 eastern, ESPN

 

[LHUCKS]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.

a) subpar coaching/development

b) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

 

[Steve Tasker]

I was at my D course with coaches who knew next to nothing about the game. Unfortunately they are more the norm for youth coaches then the exception. The kids that can play will wind up on ultra competitive ODP teams anyway and then it forces the high school coaches to adapt because these kids have 10 different people/coaches telling them 10 different things. It can be a major problem.

I agree with this, sorta. I don't think the problem is necessarily that the kids are being taught different things, but I think the issue is that players are forced to "play down" to their teammates level. There was a point where I was playing on 4 teams at a time - house, travel, high school, and premier. It wasn't confusing to me which coaches were telling me real, tactical strategy and which ones weren't, but you play to the level of your teammates. If I'm on a team that can't string 4 passes together, I'm not going to play well. And if I'm on a premier level team with Division 1 caliber players, I'm going to become a better player. Obviously this isn't an issue for the guys in Bradenton at the academy, but for joe schoe soccer player, sure.

 

[Steve Tasker]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

 

[prefontaine]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

My sentiments exactly on the best athletes commentary. We have a lot of people and a lot of money. For example. look at Argentina. They have 40m people and everyone knows all their best athletes play soccer. And yet they can still get good at basketball. Many of the best athletes play multiple sports. I know that was true from my experiences growing up. But I can tell you one difference that I don't think folks younger than me realize: when I was in school, there was no soccer team, there was only club (this was pre-1990 WC). A lot of the good players my age quit starting high school because of this to concentrate on other sports, because playing on the school teams made you popular. The fact that there is even a soccer team at your high school is a huge step. Btw, they started a team at my school a few years after I graduated but rather than hiring a real coach, they had a math teacher become the coach. It just takes time to change the culture. As the sport becomes more popular, as the MLS builds a fan base, as the EPL and CL (and La Liga now) start being shown more often, as the Natties participate in big tourneys and make the newspaper, the sport will grow. Kids will see being a professional soccer player as something real to aspire to. In 1986, I thought I had a better chance to make it as a pro runner than a pro soccer player (and while both were probably a pipe dream, I was probably better at soccer). That's how far we've come over the last 20+ years.

 

[Moe.]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

My sentiments exactly on the best athletes commentary. We have a lot of people and a lot of money. For example. look at Argentina. They have 40m people and everyone knows all their best athletes play soccer. And yet they can still get good at basketball.

It's a lot easier for a country to be good at basketball, though. The tenth best international basketball team has Yao, the 13th man for the Lakers, and a bunch of dudes who probably couldn't play at most d-1 schools. The tenth best soccer team has Franck Ribery and Karim Benzema.

 

[LHUCKS]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

Let me put it this way....99% of the top athletes where I grew up don't play soccer. At my high school, we had roughly the top 20 athletes on the football team...none of them played soccer. If our top athletes played soccer things would be a lot different.

 

[TwinTurbo]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

Let me put it this way....99% of the top athletes where I grew up don't play soccer. At my high school, we had roughly the top 20 athletes on the football team...none of them played soccer. If our top athletes played soccer things would be a lot different.

I think it may be partially true, although many of the top athletes in basketball and football probably wouldn't see their skills or size translate well to the game of soccer. The main problem is that the vast majority of the top basketball and football talent gets discovered early and often. Very little falls through the cracks, even with bad coaching. But I bet there are a lot of young, potentially talented US soccer players out there that nobody ever finds out about and so they end up taking a different path in life.

 

[Sammy3469]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.

a) subpar coaching/development

b) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

Let me put it this way....99% of the top athletes where I grew up don't play soccer. At my high school, we had roughly the top 20 athletes on the football team...none of them played soccer.

If our top athletes played soccer things would be a lot different.

I think it may be partially true, although many of the top athletes in basketball and football probably wouldn't see their skills or size translate well to the game of soccer. The main problem is that the vast majority of the top basketball and football talent gets discovered early and often. Very little falls through the cracks, even with bad coaching. But I bet there are a lot of young, potentially talented US soccer players out there that nobody ever finds out about and so they end up taking a different path in life.

I think the bigger problem is youth coaches in those sports know what attributes to look for at a young age (plus its a lot easier to identify those attributes since its easy to see who can throw the ball the hardest, hit the ball the farthest, who has a good jump-shot, etc.) while many youth soccer coaches just don't. I honestly think we're probably more or less on par with the top soccer nations in having enough 8-12 year old athletes playing soccer, but its what they practice and selection of our "best" players at those ages that needs to change.

 

[Mjolnirs]

Iranian football stars 'retired' after match protest

CNN) -- Four Iranian footballers have been "retired" from the national side after protesting against the contested election result in the country during a match against South Korea, according to media reports.

Members of Iran's national soccer team sported green armbands in their game against South Korea.

The players drew attention to the situation in Iran by wearing green armbands during last week's World Cup qualifying match in Seoul.

Green was the color used by opposition leader Mir Hossein Moussavi during his campaign for the presidency and has been widely worn by supporters protesting since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was announced the winner.

Six players wore the armbands during the first half of the match, returning in the second minus the accessories.

However, according to Iranian news reports four players -- Ali Karimi, 31, Mehdi Mahdavikia, 32, Hosein Ka'abi, 24 and Vahid Hashemian, 32 -- have been "retired" from the sport following the gesture.

Ahmadinejad is a known football fan, and has taken a keen interest in the national team's affairs.

Last week he compared protesters in Tehran to fans of a losing soccer team.

In 2006 Iran was banned from international competition for a short time by the world governing body FIFA after claims of improper interference by his government.

 

[AcerFC]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.

a) subpar coaching/development

b) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

Let me put it this way....99% of the top athletes where I grew up don't play soccer. At my high school, we had roughly the top 20 athletes on the football team...none of them played soccer.

If our top athletes played soccer things would be a lot different.

I think it may be partially true, although many of the top athletes in basketball and football probably wouldn't see their skills or size translate well to the game of soccer. The main problem is that the vast majority of the top basketball and football talent gets discovered early and often. Very little falls through the cracks, even with bad coaching. But I bet there are a lot of young, potentially talented US soccer players out there that nobody ever finds out about and so they end up taking a different path in life.

I think the bigger problem is youth coaches in those sports know what attributes to look for at a young age (plus its a lot easier to identify those attributes since its easy to see who can throw the ball the hardest, hit the ball the farthest, who has a good jump-shot, etc.) while many youth soccer coaches just don't. I honestly think we're probably more or less on par with the top soccer nations in having enough 8-12 year old athletes playing soccer, but its what they practice and selection of our "best" players at those ages that needs to change.

I think soccer sees a reverse trend a lot of times. Often the kid who is the best in the 5-9 age group is the besy because he is the quickest and has some sort of ball control that the kids looking at the butterflys dont have. Even if it is a semi competitive travel squad for that age group. However, once the kids start to mature, players catch up real quick. I dont think true soccer talent can be judged until a kid reaches 7th or 8th grade

 

[guru_007]

some more European transfer notes/rumors....

-Ribery's fate is probably the largest soap opera/drama remaining. He's been linked with every top side, and Bayern's asking price is ridiculous. For my money, it's either Real or stay put at this point. I think Real will probably get him in the end.

-Zlatan Ibrahimovic's name has been tossed around a lot lately also. I think his game is perfectly suited for the EPL to be quite honest, a tall, strong attacker, very good in the air. I don't see him moving to Spain, so I think he stays at Inter in the end, because I don't think the top EPL teams are going to give the type of money Inter is asking for a player that doesn't make much for himself, in particular one that is 27 years old. Inter is getting older as a side too, and need to start being buyers sooner or later.

-As expected, Casillas has squashed any rumors linking him moving to Man United.

-United is linked to rumors going after Sergio Arguero from Atletico Madrid....but I really can't see him leaving.

-City is now targeting Joleon Lescott from Everton. This would be a very nice signing for Man City, but I don't know if Everton could afford to lose Lescott as he is probably one of their top three guys (along with Arteta and Neville). It's tough for a team like Everton to keep their best players from the top teams, because money definitely plays a factor when all is said and done. And City has a lot of it now. Man City has added Gareth Barry and Rocque Santa Cruz already to pair up with Robinho, Ireland, Bellamy....and with Dunne and Bridge at the back, they could certainly add another solid defender. We shall see.

-Speaking of Man City, it looks like Chelsea may steal away their best young talent in Daniel Sturridge, a man sort of lost in the shuffle there (similar to Darren Bent at Spurs). I think Sturridge has a world of talent and could be a star. I'm not sure he is ready to be a first team player on a powerhouse club yet - but perhaps on loan to a Stoke City or a Sunderland and a star could be born.

Thats all I've got so far this morning. Still waiting to see what Man United is going to do to cope with the loss of Ronaldo, and the fact Tevez has rejected their long term contract offer.

 

[Steve Tasker]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

Let me put it this way....99% of the top athletes where I grew up don't play soccer. At my high school, we had roughly the top 20 athletes on the football team...none of them played soccer. If our top athletes played soccer things would be a lot different.

Of course it would, but that's just an easy excuse for us to say "we'll never be good because soccer isn't a popular sport".Can you define "athlete" for me, just so I know what you mean? I've played with a ton of great athletes over the years, but they're not the 6'6", 45" vertical leap "athletes"....it's a different kind of athlete.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Another thing I think the USMNT, and US youth system in general, is lacking is instruction on how to move without the ball/general game intelligence. Flat out, Eddie Johnson has absolutely no ####### clue what to do when he doesn't have the ball. And I know he doesn't get as much PT these days, but Jozy has looked Eddie-esque in the Confederations Cup. Put a ball into their feet or on Jozy's head and he's a finisher. Ask him to make a run and he is ####### clueless. Case in point is that Donovan-Altidore 2-on-1 against Egypt. Jozy should've been making a beeline for the backpost, and Donovan knew it. Jozy stopped his run at the top of the 18. Why?

My gut reaction to that play was that Jozy showed more instinct than Donovan, who should have shot the ball on goal. Altidore was putting himself in position for a rebound clean up goal.

 

[Sammy3469]

Another thing I think the USMNT, and US youth system in general, is lacking is instruction on how to move without the ball/general game intelligence. Flat out, Eddie Johnson has absolutely no ####### clue what to do when he doesn't have the ball. And I know he doesn't get as much PT these days, but Jozy has looked Eddie-esque in the Confederations Cup. Put a ball into their feet or on Jozy's head and he's a finisher. Ask him to make a run and he is ####### clueless. Case in point is that Donovan-Altidore 2-on-1 against Egypt. Jozy should've been making a beeline for the backpost, and Donovan knew it. Jozy stopped his run at the top of the 18. Why?

My gut reaction to that play was that Jozy showed more instinct than Donovan, who should have shot the ball on goal. Altidore was putting himself in position for a rebound clean up goal.

Yeah...I also think we as a nation have overall a horrible understanding of moving off the ball. Most US media observers (Harkes included who you would think would know better) have been vilifying Dempsey ad naseum for a whole host of reasons, but if you read most any story about the team with any Euro slant they all pretty much universally love his off the ball movement and understanding of where he should be.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Another thing I think the USMNT, and US youth system in general, is lacking is instruction on how to move without the ball/general game intelligence. Flat out, Eddie Johnson has absolutely no ####### clue what to do when he doesn't have the ball. And I know he doesn't get as much PT these days, but Jozy has looked Eddie-esque in the Confederations Cup. Put a ball into their feet or on Jozy's head and he's a finisher. Ask him to make a run and he is ####### clueless. Case in point is that Donovan-Altidore 2-on-1 against Egypt. Jozy should've been making a beeline for the backpost, and Donovan knew it. Jozy stopped his run at the top of the 18. Why?

My gut reaction to that play was that Jozy showed more instinct than Donovan, who should have shot the ball on goal. Altidore was putting himself in position for a rebound clean up goal.

I know what he was trying to do and I think he thought he wasn't going to beat the Egyptian defender to the back post. I just don't get it though...it looked like he just stopped his run altogether and gave up. I get what you're saying but Donovan knew he was coming....that's the kinda thing that two players in sync would've mastered.

 

[TLEF316]

A lot of reasons why American soccer isn't as good as it should be, but I think it comes down primarily to these two factors.a) subpar coaching/developmentb) our best athletes don't play soccer (generally)

Development I can agree on (obviously), I'm not sure about coaching. There comes a point where it's gotta fall on the players. Bob Bradley isn't Sir Alex Ferguson, and yeah, he does make some mistakes, but in the game of football, managers take the blame too often, IMO.I think 2 is a copout though. Our best athletes will probably never play soccer, but plenty of our good athletes do....

Let me put it this way....99% of the top athletes where I grew up don't play soccer. At my high school, we had roughly the top 20 athletes on the football team...none of them played soccer. If our top athletes played soccer things would be a lot different.

Of course it would, but that's just an easy excuse for us to say "we'll never be good because soccer isn't a popular sport".Can you define "athlete" for me, just so I know what you mean? I've played with a ton of great athletes over the years, but they're not the 6'6", 45" vertical leap "athletes"....it's a different kind of athlete.

I'm not going to go down this road again (tried it like 100 pages ago and had everyone jumping down my throat). But the fact is that US soccer is not going to get the elite US athlete (for the most part). The best athletes Italy produces play soccer. Same thing in Spain (for the most part), England, Brazil, German, ect. Does the US team have some GREAT athletes? (going by the traditional definition...size, speed, quickness, ect) Of course. But in terms of pure athletic talent, we're still behind the power teams. If great athletes like Chris Paul, Allen Iverson, Reggie Bush, Chris Johnson (just picking a few guys out of the air that might have the right size and speed to excel at soccer) were born in Europe, they'd have grown up playing soccer. In the US, they play football and hoops.

 

[Steve Tasker]

I'm not going to go down this road again (tried it like 100 pages ago and had everyone jumping down my throat). But the fact is that US soccer is not going to get the elite US athlete (for the most part). The best athletes Italy produces play soccer. Same thing in Spain (for the most part), England, Brazil, German, ect. Does the US team have some GREAT athletes? (going by the traditional definition...size, speed, quickness, ect) Of course. But in terms of pure athletic talent, we're still behind the power teams. If great athletes like Chris Paul, Allen Iverson, Reggie Bush, Chris Johnson (just picking a few guys out of the air that might have the right size and speed to excel at soccer) were born in Europe, they'd have grown up playing soccer. In the US, they play football and hoops.

I don't disagree, but I don't think you need to be the same kind of athlete to be a great soccer player. I liken it more to being a tennis-player type of athlete rather than a football player. I got caught up in an argument in the FFA awhile back about how great of an athlete Rafael Nadal is. I don't think you can really distinguish between a guy like Chris Paul and a guy like Rafael Nadal - they're both great athletes, but they're athletes in different ways.I don't know, I still think it's a copout. No, the best pure athletes in the US don't play soccer generally, but there are 300+ million people in America. And with the player development that we have right now, you can take the 11 best athletes that you can think of (the Lebron Jameses of the world) and imagine them as playing soccer only from their youth. I still don't think we'd be much better than we are now. Would we be a little better? Probably. Would we be a top 5-10 team in the world? I really don't think so

 

[TLEF316]

obvously, there are diferent types of athletes. Obviously a 6'9 guy like Lebron might have trouble with soccer. However, it would be great to see him try.

that being said, NFL RB's are generally like 5'11 200 lbs and lightening fast. Great stregnth, quick feet, great balance, good reflexes and peripheral vision. All those traits would transfer quite nicely to the soccer field. Defensive backs? same thing.

Lots of NBA guards in the 5'11 to 6'4 range have similar traits that i think would work for a soccer player.

Obviously this whole conversation is a tad silly, but i dont think its a total cop out. If germany produces a 6'3 athlete with tremendous vision, high sports IQ and good speed, he plays in the midfield. That same person born in the US becomes a quarterback or a guard. Its a built in disadvantage that the US has to overcome.