2009 FIFA Confederation Cup
Jun 29, 2009 at 9:35 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 14

Audiofiler

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Posts
3,285
Likes
19
Did anyone watch this this series? There was some really great games along the way. The US team almost pulled it off against Brazil yesterday. I thought after the execution and discipline that was used to beat Spain that the US team had a chance. The final was a story of two halves, with the US owning the first half and Brazil dominating the second half.
 
Jun 29, 2009 at 9:38 PM Post #2 of 14

logwed

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Posts
4,066
Likes
81
I was out of town for the final, and recorded it. Unfortunately, some A**hole ruined the whole game for me, telling me the score at half and the final. Still, great game to watch, a shame that US soccer just couldn't quite pull it through. Still a very legitimizing series for our team!
 
Jun 30, 2009 at 3:14 AM Post #3 of 14

alphapig

New Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Posts
37
Likes
0
I only watched that last game, and I was very impressed with how the U.S. team did. No one even expected them to get there, and there they were beating the Brazilians 70 minutes into the game! Even though they lost, they should be very proud of the performance they put in.
 
Jun 30, 2009 at 4:04 AM Post #4 of 14

tintin47

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Posts
2,007
Likes
13
Great performance by the US, especially against spain. If they play anywhere near that well in the cup next year, they will go far.
 
Jun 30, 2009 at 7:19 AM Post #6 of 14

moonboy403

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Posts
3,107
Likes
15
The US's strategy will only work if

1) they score first
2) the team that they play against has a attacking mentality

What the US did against Spain and Brazil was sit back and defend with 9 people and play on counter attack with only the speed of Donovan and Charlie Davies. It might work in a game or two, but it's not gonna work very well long terms. The US needs to improve its passing game and their ability to retain possession if they intend to go far in World Cup. They gave up possessions far too easily. The US can't expect to win many games if they just sit back deep and play only on counter attacks.
 
Jun 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM Post #7 of 14

Arjisme

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Posts
703
Likes
13
Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The US's strategy will only work if

1) they score first
2) the team that they play against has a attacking mentality

What the US did against Spain and Brazil was sit back and defend with 9 people and play on counter attack with only the speed of Donovan and Charlie Davies.



That's a little excessive. You've overlooked the fact that Dempsey scored 3 goals in their run to and in the final. And those were not off speedy counters by Davies & Donovan. Part of their success came from applying pressure all over the field. However I agree that they do still spend too much time defending in their final 3rd. And that is because they do a poor job of retaining possession. They need confident, strong midfielders and at least one reliable possession striker. We are mostly in agreement here. I just think they did better than sit back and wait for a speedy counterattack.
 
Jun 30, 2009 at 11:28 PM Post #8 of 14

moonboy403

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Posts
3,107
Likes
15
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arjisme /img/forum/go_quote.gif
That's a little excessive. You've overlooked the fact that Dempsey scored 3 goals in their run to and in the final. And those were not off speedy counters by Davies & Donovan. Part of their success came from applying pressure all over the field. However I agree that they do still spend too much time defending in their final 3rd. And that is because they do a poor job of retaining possession. They need confident, strong midfielders and at least one reliable possession striker. We are mostly in agreement here. I just think they did better than sit back and wait for a speedy counterattack.


My initial post sounded harsh because I only mentioned their flaws. However, they're more like constructive criticism really.

Here are the positives I see in them. The US was very discipline and defended very well. Potentially speaking, the US can become a good team given that they're very physical and athletic in general.

Davies got some potential as he's quick and strong but he especially needs to improve on his ability to retain possession.
 
Jun 30, 2009 at 11:53 PM Post #9 of 14

tintin47

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Posts
2,007
Likes
13
Quote:

Originally Posted by virometal /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What was the constant, low humming sound the South African fans made? It was kind of surreal.

Yeah, good job by the U.S. They had a hold of something for a stretch.



Almost everyone in the stadium had those one note, plastic horns. And they all used them. It was very strange sounding.
 
Jul 1, 2009 at 12:35 AM Post #11 of 14

spahn_ranch

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Posts
329
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The US's strategy will only work if

1) they score first
2) the team that they play against has a attacking mentality

What the US did against Spain and Brazil was sit back and defend with 9 people and play on counter attack with only the speed of Donovan and Charlie Davies. It might work in a game or two, but it's not gonna work very well long terms. The US needs to improve its passing game and their ability to retain possession if they intend to go far in World Cup. They gave up possessions far too easily. The US can't expect to win many games if they just sit back deep and play only on counter attacks.



Having watched several games in this mini tournament, including USA's semi- and final, it's great to see team USA getting stronger. Scoring not just one lucky strike, but some pretty nice goals against these teams is a notable achievement; as is beating Spain.

I wouldn't say this team USA is quite there to be an outside contender for the World Cup. It isn't by acccident that only 7 nations have ever won the cup, and one quality required to do so is certainly having each position on the field well covered, not 5 or 8; and not once but twice; no 11 or 14 players can be expected to last a WC, what with cards, injuries, or just a plain bad day.

I heard reports that US folks gathered at screen in airports etc to watch the last games, and that can't be a bad sign for future achievements. Don't let the spirit break by mentioning WC gold; I reckon for most nations the gold is sort of a mirage. You fight to make it through the first round, regroup and shoot for quarter finals. You'll always see some sparkling team making it that far will be wounded and decimated enough for Germany or Argentina to run them over like freight train. It's a beaut, the cup.
 
Jul 1, 2009 at 6:33 AM Post #12 of 14

bonkon

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Posts
198
Likes
10
Not to minimize the US team achievements and I do think they have improved but did any of the major teams took the confedarations cup seriously? I am sure the players took it seriously while playing the actual match but you win a competition by preparing a team months ahead which I believe none of the major teams did.

For the US it is the only competition and official matches besides the World Cup that has any true value for them. The CONCACAF WC qualifying and cup is a joke, the asian zone is much more challenging even more with Australia joining.

The US team have a lot of potential but as long as they have no high quality opponents other than Mexico to play on a regular basis, they will not improve as fast as they should.
 
Jul 1, 2009 at 1:46 PM Post #13 of 14

Arjisme

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Posts
703
Likes
13
Quote:

Originally Posted by bonkon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Not to minimize the US team achievements and I do think they have improved but did any of the major teams took the confedarations cup seriously? I am sure the players took it seriously while playing the actual match but you win a competition by preparing a team months ahead which I believe none of the major teams did.

For the US it is the only competition and official matches besides the World Cup that has any true value for them. The CONCACAF WC qualifying and cup is a joke, the asian zone is much more challenging even more with Australia joining.

The US team have a lot of potential but as long as they have no high quality opponents other than Mexico to play on a regular basis, they will not improve as fast as they should.



Well the top tier teams that were there brought their best players. Spain was about as good a team as they are able to field, as was Brazil. I think all the teams that were there, including the U.S., viewed it as a preliminary test prior to next year's World Cup. Most teams are still qualifying for the World Cup, so they have indeed been preparing their national squads for international competition. Besides confederation play, WC qualifiers and friendlies what other real venues are there for senior national teams to compete?

Until the U.S. has a top quality soccer league, it will struggle to field a world beating team. Once money in the U.S. starts pouring into soccer, the talent will be there. But, as it stands, football, basketball and baseball draw the best athletes, leaving soccer struggling.
 
Jul 1, 2009 at 11:40 PM Post #14 of 14

bonkon

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Posts
198
Likes
10
As mentioned before, It isn't by acccident that only 7 nations have ever won the cup. I do not doubt the major teams motivation by bringing their best player and by fielding them. What I am saying is that a WC preparation for the major teams has nothing to do with a confederations cup one. You can see that once we enter a WC year everything is done for the players to be at their peak both mentally and physically when the WC starts. As soon as the qualifiers are over and the draw for each group known, tactics and players are in place. Of course there are injuries or final adjustments but if you plan on winning the WC you come ready and prepared.

The top leagues always has a different flavour during WC years. Starting 2010 few months before the WC kick off, all the talk will be about the WC. The audience, commentators and the players feel it. Most players live for the WC and winning it is their Holy Grail.

You are absolutely correct in pointing out that the US needs a high quality soccer league but they also need serious opposition in the international level. Other nations have the Euro, Copa America, Asian Cup and African Cup all them which are of a higher level than the CONCACAF golden cup and some requires serious qualifying matches to even enter the respective competitions. Apart from Mexico the US team are never challenged in the WC qualifiers nor the golden cup. Friendlies are to be taken literally, a yellow card is a rare sight, no intensity what so ever and everyone gets to play by bringing in 5-7 substitutes.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top