official 2010 world cup thread

[Douglas]

Originally Posted by Canal Directo

Actually the US seemed to suffer a lot physically near the end of the match. At times, they were literally besieged in their penalty box by the English.

+1. US looked beat at the end.

That sub they brought in for Alitore looked in way over his head.

Disagree with people who said it wasn't a good game. I thought the US looked really good. Had most of the possession through a lot of the middle of the game.

Our defense really looked **** though.

 

[Lusitano]

Originally Posted by Canal Directo

Yeah I was really impressed by the US. Donovan is clearly a world class player. Strong match
of Dempsety and Bradley too. and

to Onyewu.

+1

 

[Neo_Version 7]

England outplayed the US in every aspect of the game. If you didn't see that, we weren't watching the same match. The Americans were disorganized defensively and offered little in terms of offensive play. If not for a few key players (I.E. Howard, Dempsey), England's control would have been even more evident. I kind of felt bad for Donovan as no one on his own team seemed to to be able to keep up with him. That's not to say England played a flawless game -- far from it.

I just hope England can get past Slovenia and Algeria without much difficulty though it looks unlikely at this point. Gerrard as captain was probably one of Capello's better decisions in recent memory.

 

[Canal Directo]

Originally Posted by paraiso

You didn't watch Donovan play his spell in England. You just didn't. Otherwise you'd know how big of a hit he was for the toffees.
Perhaps you are right but he was for me the best player on the field today with Rooney.

Originally Posted by paraiso

What the U.S lacks is a proper playmaker. If Bradley were to put a decent playmaker next to his son, the U.S. midfield wouldn't be half bad. Maybe against Slovenia and Algeria he should play Failhaber.
You might be surprised, I think the US will go pretty far in this competition. Don't forget they played against England which is a big favourite and they hold up pretty well! If they play like this, they will easily beat Algeria. Don't know much about Slovenia though.

 

[odoreater]

Originally Posted by Neo_Version 7

England outplayed the US in every aspect of the game. If you didn't see that, we weren't watching the same match. The Americans were disorganized defensively and offered little in terms of offensive play. If not for a few key players (I.E. Howard, Dempsey), England's control would have been even more evident. I kind of felt bad for Donovan as no one on his own team seemed to to be able to keep up with him. That's not to say England played a flawless game -- far from it.

I just hope England can get past Slovenia and Algeria without much difficulty though it looks unlikely at this point. Gerrard as captain was probably one of Capello's better decisions in recent memory.

Maybe, but the only thing that counts at the end of the day is how many times you put the ball in the back of the net.

 

[rdawson808]

Originally Posted by Neo_Version 7

England outplayed the US in every aspect of the game.

This is just patently false. The US controlled the game for stretches, were able to break up the English in the mid-field, and were making attempts on the goal (not all of them great). Furthermore, Wayne Rooney was kept out of most of the game--he didn't become dangerous until the last 10 or so minutes.

Now, I'm off for ice cream and root beer.

b

 

[*Tee*]

Originally Posted by paraiso

You didn't watch Donovan play his spell in England. You just didn't. Otherwise you'd know how big of a hit he was for the toffees.

I did. I even saw three games ( against Arsenal, Man U and Tottenham ) live...

 

[paraiso]

Originally Posted by Canal Directo

Perhaps you are right but he was for me the best player on the field today with Rooney.

I agree totally. I watched him at Everton this season and was surprised at how good he was.

You might be surprised, I think the US will go pretty far in this competition. Don't forget they played against England which is a big favourite and they hold up pretty well!
If they play like this, they will easily beat Algeria. Don't know much about Slovenia though.

I wouldn't be surprised at all actually. If the U.S. get into a groove and become more cohesive I think they can easily make it to the QF's. I think they have a pretty decent defense and they have a few players up top, like Dempsey, Donovan and Altidore, who can knock anyone off their perch on their day. What I would like to see, however, is someone who can receive the ball and distribute it more precisely. Personally, I would take off Finnley and play Donovan as a support striker for Altidore, with Dempsey on the opposite side. Then I'd add a decent playmaker right infront of Bradley and Clark.

 

[Neo_Version 7]

Originally Posted by odoreater

Maybe, but the only thing that counts at the end of the day is how many times you put the ball in the back of the net.
This is definitely one of the those matches where the final score doesn't tell the whole story.

Originally Posted by rdawson808

This is just patently false. The US controlled the game for stretches, were able to break up the English in the mid-field, and were making attempts on the goal (not all of them great). Furthermore, Wayne Rooney was kept out of most of the game--he didn't become dangerous until the last 10 or so minutes. b
I can think of one -- maybe two -- American attempts at goal that posed somewhat of a threat. England, on the other hand, were constantly on the offensive with the likes of Lampard, Lennon, and Heskey. And how many times was Lennon able to get past both wings? It can't be argued that Rooney was shut out for the majority of the match though. It was also disappointing but I did enjoy Crouch's appearance.

 

[StephenHero]

The U.S. needs John O'Brien circa 2002 and Clint Mathis circa 2000.

 

[paraiso]

Originally Posted by *Tee*

I did. I even saw three games ( against Arsenal, Man U and Tottenham ) live...

You do know he was voted Everton's player of the month for January and David Moyes was trying to lure him away from the Galaxy, right?

 

[MetroStyles]

Originally Posted by Neo_Version 7

This is definitely one of the those matches where the final score doesn't tell the whole story.

I can think of one -- maybe two -- American attempts at goal that posed somewhat of a threat. England, on the other hand, were constantly on the offensive with the likes of Lampard, Lennon, and Heskey. And how many times was Lennon able to get past the both wings? It can't be argued that Rooney was shut out for the majority of the match though. It was also disappointing but I did enjoy Crouch's appearance.

A fairer result would have been 2-1 England, but 1-1 was about right as well.

Look, your team has a **** goalkeeper. Deal with it. That counts as part of your team - in fact it's the most important position.

Secondly, creating chances means nothing if you can't finish. See Mexico from the first game.

Lastly, as someone mentioned before - in the WC it's only the result that matters. And with so few games played, it is much better to be lucky than good.

 

[paraiso]

Originally Posted by Neo_Version 7

England outplayed the US in every aspect of the game. If you didn't see that, we weren't watching the same match. The Americans were disorganized defensively and offered little in terms of offensive play. If not for a few key players (I.E. Howard, Dempsey), England's control would have been even more evident. I kind of felt bad for Donovan as no one on his own team seemed to to be able to keep up with him. That's not to say England played a flawless game -- far from it.

I just hope England can get past Slovenia and Algeria without much difficulty though it looks unlikely at this point. Gerrard as captain was probably one of Capello's better decisions in recent memory.

England had a very quiet game by their standards.

If the US had such a disorganized defense how come Rooney had one or two shots on target?

Originally Posted by Neo_Version 7

This is definitely one of the those matches where the final score doesn't tell the whole story.

I can think of one -- maybe two -- American attempts at goal that posed somewhat of a threat. England, on the other hand, were constantly on the offensive with the likes of Lampard, Lennon, and Heskey. And how many times was Lennon able to get past both wings? It can't be argued that Rooney was shut out for the majority of the match though. It was also disappointing but I did enjoy Crouch's appearance.

I think the final score was indicative of how the game went. England relied heavily on lumping it forward to Heskey and got no change from it. They played like Bolton or Blackburn despite the fact that most of their players come from teams that play it on the ground.

 

[*Tee*]

Originally Posted by paraiso

You do know he was voted Everton's player of the month for January and David Moyes was trying to lure him away from the Galaxy, right?
Yep. He helped Everton to a nice run of form since the day he joined the club in the winter transfer window, scored 2-3 goals ( If I remember correctly ) and played pretty well. I didn't argue the converse. Nonetheless, I don't deem it as his international breakthrough and would never label him as a world-class player... would you ?

 

[Neo_Version 7]

Originally Posted by MetroStyles

A fairer result would have been 2-1 England, but 1-1 was about right as well.

Look, your team has a **** goalkeeper. Deal with it. That counts as part of your team - in fact it's the most important position.

Secondly, creating chances means nothing if you can't finish. See Mexico from the first game.

Lastly, as someone mentioned before - in the WC it's only the result that matters. And with so few games played, it is much better to be lucky than good.

Perhaps I should have rephrased my earlier post. England outplayed the US in every aspect of the game except for goalkeeping.

And I'm not arguing with the validity of the final score. It was a draw. I've accepted that. But it just seems like a shame to disregard the entire match and focus solely on the final tally.