OT: Boneyard "Other Football" World Cup Thread

[ZooCougar]

No it wasn't. Our strength was sending our backs wide up the field to cross the ball to generate scoring chances. Doing that means they aren't back to defend. They were back to defend the counter. 4 of them were back. They just failed to actually defend. Beasley did the right thing. He took away the angle and forced Ronaldo to pass the ball to one player with 3 white jerseys in the box.

You can suppose that it was "momentum" that tied the game. I think everyone else can see that it was a failure to defend the one guy near the goal who could put the ball in the net. Momentum doesn't score, players do. That's why you have to defend.

Carl, when he says backs, he is talking about the two outside backs in the line closest to our own goal. Just an FYI.

 

[BlueMAB]

No Carl, you're irritating because you're a hypocrite. Football coaches do the same thing. Randy Edsall didn't invent the 4 minute offense. You don't have to like it, but if you're going to stop watching soccer because teams try to kill the clock, then stop watching football because the same thing happens.

You can pretend it's apples and oranges because you've proven yourself to be a borderline sociopath, but it's the same thing.

 

[RedStickHusky]

So specious. No one is arguing that you eat clock out of a sense of sportsmanship or a desire to not run up the score. The argument is over a tactical judgment that your best chance to win with a lead is to milk possession and deny scoring opportunity. This used to be fairly common in college hoops pre-shot clock. All of which may be reason for you to not like the game. You not liking the game is probably not reason for all the worlds soccer teams to change what they do. They'll get by without you.

 

[Carl Spackler]

No it wasn't. Our strength was sending our backs wide up the field to cross the ball to generate scoring chances. Doing that means they aren't back to defend. They were back to defend the counter. 4 of them were back. They just failed to actually defend. Beasley did the right thing. He took away the angle and forced Ronaldo to pass the ball to one player with 3 white jerseys in the box.

You can suppose that it was "momentum" that tied the game. I think everyone else can see that it was a failure to defend the one guy near the goal who could put the ball in the net. Momentum doesn't score, players do. That's why you have to defend.

Ok - I'm wrong. I concede. We did absolutely everything right, Landon Donovan in the studio in LA instead of the field in the Amazon knows best, and my impression of what happened is totally incorrect. We should have defended better (and that goes for the first goal too, and we should have had no reason to suspect that a one goal lead wasn't enough, and that our defense wouldn't make the same mistake, and we should have stopped attacking the goal after going up 2-1.

I was really starting to enjoy the sport too. I honeslty don't have much more to say aobut soccer, shocking I know - I hope I'm wrongand Klinsmann actually validates my opinion in the press in the coming days. Not like it hasn't happened before. USA should have won that game, and gave it away by relying on defense instead of offense late, and I'm told here that is exactly the way the sport and game should be played.

The best moment, for me, was when Dempsey gave that Portugese player such a disgusted look for flopping around.

Sorry for wasting everybody's time.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Ok - I'm wrong. I concede. We did absolutely everything right, Landon Donovan in the studio in LA instead of the field in the Amazon knows best, and my impression of what happened is totally incorrect. We should have defended better (and that goes for the first goal too, and we should have had no reason to suspect that a one goal lead wasn't enough, and that our defense wouldn't make the same mistake, and we should have stopped attacking the goal after going up 2-1.

I was really starting to enjoy the sport too. I honeslty don't have much more to say aobut soccer, shocking I know - I hope I'm wrongand Klinsmann actually validates my opinion in the press in the coming days. Not like it hasn't happened before. USA should have won that game, and gave it away by relying on defense instead of offense late, and I'm told here that is exactly the way the sport and game should be played.

The best moment, for me, was when Dempsey gave that Portugese player such a disgusted look for flopping around.

Sorry for wasting everybody's time.

Jesus Harold Christ on rubber crutches.

In baseball, you put in defensive replacements in tight games.

In football, you run the clock and play conservatively.

In basketball, you run down the shot clock.

In hockey, there are defensive tactics and strategies teams employ when they don't need to score.

There are a million reasons why I can't watch soccer. But going into a defensive tactic is not one of them.

 

[BlueMAB]

Jesus Harold Christ on rubber crutches.

In baseball, you put in defensive replacements in tight games.

In football, you run the clock and play conservatively.

In basketball, you run down the shot clock.

In hockey, there are defensive tactics and strategies teams employ when they don't need to score.

There are a million reasons why I can't watch soccer. But going into a defensive tactic is not one of them.

This is too complicated for my feeble mind to comprehend. Can you explain why Jesus would have rubber crutches?

 

[spsct]

Hence my comment to him on D Day. If he ran into a Normandy vet, he would proceed to tell him what the battle was really like.

Holiday Inn Express.

 

[spsct]

Wing - I understand the argument. I just don't like it, and I don't believe that I'm wrong. I do admit it when I'm wrong BTW. I have made it very clear that I think that the play was "correct", with the condition that is not the only "correct" play. We gave up both goals to Portugal, by failing to defend a pass into the box in front of the goal. it would seem to my annoying, untrained, non-expert, soccer eye - that kind of play is weakness for us, against teams with skill for it. (which Ghana was not) We defended the same kind of thing well against Ghana - and watned them to go to the wings and cross in the game plan.

Our strength in the game, yesterday, was generating scoring chances in the middle of the field approaching the goal. Clearly. Why on earth would it be smart to want to rely on a weakness to win a game, rather than a strength?

In football, if you rely on your defense to win you the game, you will ultimately fail more than you win, no matter how good your defense is, it's the nature of the game. maybe it's not so in soccer - and that's my issue, percentage wise over time it's better to rely on defending to win - and that's probably the case, and I would agree that over time, that's a good strategy. BUt in the case of this single game, expecting our defense to win the game would be a dumb thing to do, especially after they way they scored their first goal. Best defense in this game, was a good offense.

Have a nice day all.

WTF are you talking about?!?!?!? The VAST majority of our chances came from runs down the wing by Johnson and Beasely!

 

[BlueMAB]

WTF are you talking about?!?!?!? The VAST majority of our chances came from runs down the wing by Johnson and Beasely!

This is precisely why he doesn't get it.

 

[spsct]

This is too complicated for my feeble mind to comprehend. Can you explain why Jesus would have rubber crutches?

They're not so abrasive on the arm pits...

 

[ZooCougar]

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Ok - I'm wrong. I concede. We did absolutely everything right, Landon Donovan in the studio in LA instead of the field in the Amazon knows best, and my impression of what happened is totally incorrect. We should have defended better (and that goes for the first goal too, and we should have had no reason to suspect that a one goal lead wasn't enough, and that our defense wouldn't make the same mistake, and we should have stopped attacking the goal after going up 2-1.

The problem is that you do not have a firm understanding of the sport and yet you think you do. It's okay to just not know and enjoy the game and actually listen to people who know more than you rather than pretend you're capable of fully understanding a complex subject based on however many World Cup games you've actually watched.

Myself, I've really only gotten into soccer the past couple of years once I started following EPL, and there is still a TON I don't know. And when people who know more than me talk about the subject, I generally defer to their opinion because I accept that while the sport can seem deceptively simple at times, in reality, it's actually fairly complex and I have a lot to learn.

You just refuse to accept your lack of knowledge and you're too stubborn to admit that the folks on this board who DO watch a ton of soccer do, in fact, know what they're talking about.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Here - read this - and believe it or not, I think the writer is COMPLETELY WRONG. In here - is the mental mistake that cost us the win.

http://www.businessinsider.com/usa-world-cup-loss-portugal-2014-6

Klinsmann in the picture, is supposedly signaling his players to get back and play defense very late - the camera angle, and his positioning an orientation on the actual field (and guess what folks, I know people tthat were there - believe it or not) suggests a hand signal to block and push forward based on his orientation on the field. The writer has the photo backwards. He wants the team to pressure up the field and attack, not get back on defense, the USA completely crumbled with our control of the game after scoring the goal to go up. There are other examples, but this is one, wehre you don't have to deal with anything I write -t he proof is on the film.

The U.S. player's mistake in the corner was keeping the ball in play, and not letting it roll out off the Portugal player, thus giving a dead ball stop, with the clock running. Had the player done that, the U.S maintains possession, with a throw in, and the clock running. Mental mistake. Not a physical mistake - there - right there is the focal point to the final play that gave up the goal, a mental mistake that led to the game tying play. Not Bradley's physical mistake. That came after the ensuing throw in by Portugal. The mental mistake, contrarty to what the writer states, is not trying to push the ball to the middle to score in 3 v 5 situation. We had players back. Klinsmann wanted the pressure to stay up front and to keep going forward to goal. The guy has to know what our weaknesses are and our strengths are - and he wanted the team playing forward - not back.

I am completely wrong about the play to the corners, I've written today, Wrong. Pile on me all you want.

The problem which cost us the win in that game, came with the decision making that came wehn the ball was in the offensive corner by our player. You clearly can still generate offensive pressure putting the ball into the corners, but the key is maintaining the possession of the ball in that corner.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Jesus Harold Christ on rubber crutches.

In baseball, you put in defensive replacements in tight games.

In football, you run the clock and play conservatively.

In basketball, you run down the shot clock.

In hockey, there are defensive tactics and strategies teams employ when they don't need to score.

There are a million reasons why I can't watch soccer. But going into a defensive tactic is not one of them.

Jimmy, are you not entertained? You don't like soccer and you're reading.

 

[junglehusky]

Its. All. Situational. Attack as much as you're comfortable in the first half or deep into the second half. Send Fabian Johnson and Beasley on overlaps (as long as they can track back when the opponent gets possession). Klinsi wants to stay aggressive to put the opposing defense under pressure because they have their starters out? Fine. Maybe you concede a goal but if there's 15 minutes or more, you can roll the dice knowing that you'll have time to make it up, or at least try, if your aggressiveness comes back to bite you. You are trying to put yourself in a position to get three points when it is not yet certain that you have three points, or don't.

WHEN YOU HAVE THE LEAD AND IT IS A MATTER OF 2-3 MINUTES the situation is different. You have three points IN YOUR POCKET and the payoff for getting the additional goal IS NOT BIG ENOUGH to gamble. Now it turns out we gave away two points because of two players made bad plays. But I assure you, with a one goal lead in stoppage time if a coach aggressively sends an extra midfielder or defender up the field to attempt to double the lead (and it's not a situation where you're trying to make up goal differential) he would get rightly criticized if those tactics backfire, much more than Bradley and Cameron are getting criticized today.

 

[ZooCougar]

@GrantWahl: USA-Portugal had the biggest US TV audience ever for a soccer game, averaging 24.7 million viewers (18.2M ESPN, 6.5M Univision).

 

[Carl Spackler]

Ok soccer folks - sooner or later, there will be a clip that shows it all to put up, with quotes from somebody that actually can't be refuted, about what I'm about to write, and you don't have to deal with old me.

I'm wrong about what a lot of the things I wrote today about soccer, tactically just wrong. I get it. I understand now why that is - sorry for being so difficult and annoying to teach the error of my ways, for you boneyarder soccer experts. I've talked to some real people, gotten some first hand accounts, and looked at some film. The USA did crumble in many ways mentally after scoring the second goal, I wasn't wrong about that, but my interpretation as to how that happened was wrong.

Get it - I was wrong folks, very wrong about what I interpretating happening physically on the field, as far as playing the game and how it should be played. You are all correct, playing to the corners is a smart thing to do, and it does not concede that you are no longer being aggressive in the attack. I AM WRONG, about that.

I am not wrong about my interpretation of what happened mentally though - we began to make lots of mental mistakes with the pressure on to win the game. It's as simple it seems, that our players simply didn't handle the pressure well, of being in that close out position, against a desperate team, and didn't handle it well. Great learning situation. There is one, mental mistake, that will be clear as more analysis is done by writers.

Here's what I got - the same player who's physical ability got us the play started that scored the goal to go up 2-1, is the same player that made the mental mistake that led to the game ending play that finished the game at a 2-2 tie. Yedlin his last name is - #2. The kid can flat out run faster than anybody else out there, and is probably our best prospect as a national player for the future. He's got ball skills, can play the game at the highest levels, has the pre-requisite skills, but he made a bad mental mistake. He could have let the ball roll out in the opposing team offensive corner, with less than 30 seconds to play, and had the U.S. maintain possession with the clock running ,and really that is the only situation where you can actually run the clock out without playing. Just stand there an dhold the ball for 20-30 seconds and throw it in. The game tying play came of the Portugal throw in, and involved physical mistakes, not mental ones, and Jurgen Klinsmann did indeed want his team forward, and attacking, and not back in the last minutes of that game after the goal.

We have a very young team in this world cup that is going to learn under fire, and Yedlin's play at the end, is one of those mental examples, as is the physical mistake of the defender's play at the end for not "marking their men".

I will continue to watch soccer for as long as the USA team plays - hopefully that's longer than Thursday.

How the world soccer teams respond to my choices to watch or not, we'll see.

 

[whaler11]

Ok soccer folks - sooner or later, there will be a clip that shows it all to put up, with quotes from somebody that actually can't be refuted, about what I'm about to write, and you don't have to deal with old me.

I'm wrong about what a lot of the things I wrote today about soccer, tactically just wrong. I get it. I understand now why that is - sorry for being so difficult and annoying to teach the error of my ways, for you boneyarder soccer experts. I've talked to some real people, gotten some first hand accounts, and looked at some film. The USA did crumble in many ways mentally after scoring the second goal, I wasn't wrong about that, but my interpretation as to how that happened was wrong.

Get it - I was wrong folks, very wrong about what I interpretating happening physically on the field, as far as playing the game and how it should be played. You are all correct, playing to the corners is a smart thing to do, and it does not concede that you are no longer being aggressive in the attack. I AM WRONG, about that.

I am not wrong about my interpretation of what happened mentally though - we began to make lots of mental mistakes with the pressure on to win the game. It's as simple it seems, that our players simply didn't handle the pressure well, of being in that close out position, against a desperate team, and didn't handle it well. Great learning situation. There is one, mental mistake, that will be clear as more analysis is done by writers.

Here's what I got - the same player who's physical ability got us the play started that scored the goal to go up 2-1, is the same player that made the mental mistake that led to the game ending play that finished the game at a 2-2 tie. Yedlin his last name is - #2. The kid can flat out run faster than anybody else out there, and is probably our best prospect as a national player for the future. He's got ball skills, can play the game at the highest levels, has the pre-requisite skills, but he made a bad mental mistake. He could have let the ball roll out in the opposing team offensive corner, with less than 30 seconds to play, and had the U.S. maintain possession with the clock running ,and really that is the only situation where you can actually run the clock out without playing. Just stand there an dhold the ball for 20-30 seconds and throw it in. The game tying play came of the Portugal throw in, and involved physical mistakes, not mental ones, and Jurgen Klinsmann did indeed want his team forward, and attacking, and not back in the last minutes of that game after the goal.

We have a very young team in this world cup that is going to learn under fire, and Yedlin's play at the end, is one of those mental examples, as is the physical mistake of the defender's play at the end for not "marking their men".

I will continue to watch soccer for as long as the USA team plays - hopefully that's longer than Thursday.

How the world soccer teams respond to my choices to watch or not, we'll see.

If anyone was looking for a silver lining when the US is eliminated here is a good candidate.

 

[BlueMAB]

So many words. So many what-ifs about attacking, strategy, and throw-ins. So many things could have prevented the run up to the header. But none of that matters if the 3 white jerseys in the box found the 1 red jersey.

 

[Gurleyman]

Ok - I'm wrong. I concede. We did absolutely everything right, Landon Donovan in the studio in LA instead of the field in the Amazon knows best, and my impression of what happened is totally incorrect.

Landon Donovan has played this sport at the highest levels for 15 years - internationally in World Cups, Confederation Cups, etc., and in the Bundesliga and Premier League. He didn't make this particular team in the twilight of his career, yes, but that hardly means that he doesn't know what he's talking about. And you certainly don't know more than he does after watching a couple games on TV.

 

[Carl Spackler]

So many words. So many what-ifs about attacking, strategy, and throw-ins. So many things could have prevented the run up to the header. But none of that matters if the 3 white jerseys in the box found the 1 red jersey.

That's a physical mistake that simply can't happen, and should really be not that hard to correct.

There is a fundamental thread to every single thing I've written around here on this discussion, and usually, in general when it comes to sports, and I did mention it before. My fundamental concept is that elite performance - in this case sport competition - is primarily a mental and cognitive exercise that is manifested in physical performance. The competiton level, has to do with skill and talent, and physical traits - but the actual performance, winning at an elite level - is the mental aspect of performance.

it gest much more interesting - to me -when you go from individual performance, to team performance - but I'm digressing again. The U.S.A team, had worked to put itself in position, to close out with a win, and advance in the tournament and were facing a desperate team with the clock winding down, and we did not handle that situation well mentally.

I do not understand that aspects of the game itself that well, but I knew there would be a mental error somewhere, and a big one, that led to losing the game. I found it. There were plenty other mental errors in the final 10 minutes of play.

learning experience for the team.

 

[Jimdish255]

CONCACAF strikes again!

Mexico 1 - 0 Croatia
72nd min

OOPS! Make it 2 - 0 See ya!

 

[Jimdish255]

I know a guy who's wall is littered, no literally papered with plays US could use.

 

[Jimdish255]

Should Mexico go for the jugular here or kill the clock?

 

[rich1122]

Should Mexico go for the jugular here or kill the clock?

They went for the jugular.