Belgium vs USA 9pm / Tue 1st

Nuri Sahin

RedemptionZ wrote: »

Well popularity and as a result revenues have increased in the MLS each year I believe, 5 of the starting 11 are MLS players so who knows the success of the USMNT could draw in some potential fans. I personally find the MLS very entertaining, albeit not the highest standard out there.

Yup, that's about the sum of it. If you like a game/league containing a fair few goals per a game, worth tuning into the MLS.

Panthro

I'm Whitecaps till I die!

BoarHunter

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Belgium obviously were the far superior side and deserved to go through on the night.

But **** me, what an effort from the States!! Gotta take that chance at the end of normal time...:mad: I can't think of a previous example of a side looking completely out of it 14 minutes into extra time down by two and coming back to grab the game by the horns like they did. No give in them, never know when they're beat.

Another great game of a wonderful tournament.

Germany against France in 82 springs to mind. 3-1 for France during extra time and Germany to equalize in the dying minutes to win it on penalties.

LuckyLloyd

BoarHunter wrote: »

Germany against France in 82 springs to mind. 3-1 for France during extra time and Germany to equalize in the dying minutes to win it on penalties.

Cheers! That was the infamous Schumacher game I believe?

briany

Probably the narrowest round of 16 that I can remember seeing. So many finely poised games, and on another day, the other sides could have done it, it's just they hadn't got the composure to take the chances they made, and every side in pretty much every game had opportunities to swing the final result in their favour, it's just that some hadn't that bit extra it took to finish them.

Some display from the USA in the end, and I hope their showing does something to take the popularity of the game in the states to the next level

Idbatterim

what the "lesser" teams rally lack is a quality forward, you can see how it cost Switzerland, USA, Algeria, given some of the chances they had...

Some display from the USA in the end, and I hope their showing does something to take the popularity of the game in the states to the next level

I would have loved to have seen the reaction in the states and from the team etc if they took their last second of normal time chance, I was so disappointed that they didn't...

RGM

Idbatterim wrote: »

I would have loved to have seen the reaction in the states and from the team etc if they took their last second of normal time chance, I was so disappointed that they didn't...

I would have loved to have seen it too. The pub I was in was fairly quiet for most of the game, but the tension was soaring by the end of regulation and the roof would have come off if US took the lead there. I could. not. handle. that. miss.

From the US goal on, the atmosphere was electric. I'm an American and a soccer fan, but the main reason I wanted the US to advance was to keep the ride going rather than for any type of sporting accomplishment. Americans love sports and they love to wave the flag, and I promise you the scenes for a deep World Cup run would be breathtaking.

It was expected that we would lose, but the way we lost was crushing. Slipped through our fingers.

petronius

Howard was immense - it was a great game exciting, fair play to the Yanks.
Belgium have great potential but they were scared. Klinsman should take a lot of credit for it
The way the USA (and indeed Australia) fight with supposed limited quality resources, shows the way for other nations Ireland, and indeed England and how they can improve performances in future tournament s

FatherTed

Someone changed the US Secretary of Defense Wiki page:

FatherTed

petronius wrote: »

Howard was immense - it was a great game exciting, fair play to the Yanks.
Belgium have great potential but they were scared. Klinsman should take a lot of credit for it
The way the USA (and indeed Australia) fight with supposed limited quality resources, shows the way for other nations Ireland, and indeed England and how they can improve performances in future tournament s

That's great and all that, but at what point does "heart" and "ra-ra USA USA" and tremendous physical play become that same old story for the US team? I'm a closer follower of the US team here in the US. It was the same story in 2002/06/10. Great heart, tough to crack, superb goalkeeping(remember Friedel saving 2 penos in 2002?) and a bit of luck(Portugal losing 4-0 against Germany this year, Green letting in Dempsey's weak shot in 2010 and South Korea coming back late against the same team in 2002).

I'm always of the belief that international managers should only stay in for 1 4-year cycle and this is no different. After a while, their style, tactics and talks become stale with the players and they end up playing the same players they are comfortable with. Look at Bruce Arena in 2006, even Spain this year. Klinsmann in 2018 will be no different. They should get in a more tactically astute coach.
But don't dispense with Klinsmann. I think his ideas for reforming the game in the US are spot on and he needs to be given a "higher up" role at USSF, maybe a director of soccer to be in charge of putting in youth academies with quality coaching around the country or providing a good structure to help improve youth coaching. But that requires change for USSF and getting rid of the jobs for the boys etc. And money of course. But if they don't make changes like this, the US team will forever a team of "tough physical big hearted" players relying on players who grew up learning the game in other countries, e.g. Jones and Johnson and in the older days Thomas Dooley and Ernie Stewart. The emphasis in the US needs to be at improving youth technical skills in the US coaching setup.

RGM

The idea that you'd want to get rid of Klinsmann before the next World Cup blows my mind. You want a more tactically astute coach? Are you crazy?

FatherTed

RGM wrote: »

The idea that you'd want to get rid of Klinsmann before the next World Cup blows my mind. You want a more tactically astute coach? Are you crazy?

Off the top of my head...

- Donovan left home when he's had the most assists and second most goals for the US in the 12 months leading up the WC
- Altidore, Besler and Johnson all go down with hamstring injuries, indication of over training
- He said last night he played Cameron to watch Fellaini, I guess he didn't watch him for Man Utd last season
- The other teams Belgium faced pressed them higher limiting them to counter attacks and late goals, last night the formation allowed Belgium to attack at will
- Waiting until the last 15 minutes of the final game to move Bradley his best player to his best position i.e. holding mid, suddenly the team plays better

trashcan

FatherTed wrote: »

That's great and all that, but at what point does "heart" and "ra-ra USA USA" and tremendous physical play become that same old story for the US team? I'm a closer follower of the US team here in the US. It was the same story in 2002/06/10. Great heart, tough to crack, superb goalkeeping(remember Friedel saving 2 penos in 2002?) and a bit of luck(Portugal losing 4-0 against Germany this year, Green letting in Dempsey's weak shot in 2010 and South Korea coming back late against the same team in 2002).

I'm always of the belief that international managers should only stay in for 1 4-year cycle and this is no different. After a while, their style, tactics and talks become stale with the players and they end up playing the same players they are comfortable with. Look at Bruce Arena in 2006, even Spain this year. Klinsmann in 2018 will be no different. They should get in a more tactically astute coach.
But don't dispense with Klinsmann. I think his ideas for reforming the game in the US are spot on and he needs to be given a "higher up" role at USSF, maybe a director of soccer to be in charge of putting in youth academies with quality coaching around the country or providing a good structure to help improve youth coaching. But that requires change for USSF and getting rid of the jobs for the boys etc. And money of course. But if they don't make changes like this, the US team will forever a team of "tough physical big hearted" players relying on players who grew up learning the game in other countries, e.g. Jones and Johnson and in the older days Thomas Dooley and Ernie Stewart. The emphasis in the US needs to be at improving youth technical skills in the US coaching setup.

But how much better do you think the US should be doing ? You're undoubtedly right about improving and breeding your own players, but that won't happen overnight. MLS is still in it's infancy relatively, you have to walk before you can run. I thought the USA were superb last night, and played good football too in spells. They were ultimately beaten by a team with better quality, but there's no shame in that.

Jelle1880

petronius wrote: »

Howard was immense - it was a great game exciting, fair play to the Yanks.
Belgium have great potential but they were scared. Klinsman should take a lot of credit for it
The way the USA (and indeed Australia) fight with supposed limited quality resources, shows the way for other nations Ireland, and indeed England and how they can improve performances in future tournament s

For about 15 minutes maybe ?