The Official US Soccer thread

[cardfaninfl]

Alejandro Bedoya, John Brooks, Fabian Johnson, Michael Bradley, Jermaine Jones, and Bobby Wood are on Yellow Cards. Any additional cautions during the Quarter Finals and those players accumulating a total of two are out of the (potential) Semi-Final. Assuming that match will be against Messi's Argentina, I can't see a USMNT squad depleted of a few of it's big names due to Yellow Card accumulation combined with it's starters playing a 5th game in 18 days - winning that match.

Look for a remarkably different line-up against Ecuador.

1. Seattle will be loud and the youngster will feed off that.
2. After three games, the Starting XI could use the week off and might be too drained physically to defeat Ecuador. The "B" team might have the best shot at winning the match.
3. Jurgen loves to show he has a pair of brass ones. After Sunil Gulati's "short term goals and long term goals" vote of no confidence, I see JK using those words as a mocking explanation to take the risk of sitting his starters in a Quarter Final and reach for the brass ring.
4. After a full week of rest, the starters will be able to give Argentina their best.
5. If it fails, he has an easy justification combined with the security of winning the Group. Fans will not be too unkind.
6. If it works, and the US advances to possibly win the Copa America, Klinsmann-mania gets turned to 11.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Alejandro Bedoya, John Brooks, Fabian Johnson, Michael Bradley, Jermaine Jones, and Bobby Wood are on Yellow Cards. Any additional cautions during the Quarter Finals and those players accumulating a total of two are out of the (potential) Semi-Final. Assuming that match will be against Messi's Argentina, I can't see a USMNT squad depleted of a few of it's big names due to Yellow Card accumulation combined with it's starters playing a 5th game in 18 days - winning that match.

Look for a remarkably different line-up against Ecuador.

1. Seattle will be loud and the youngster will feed off that.
2. After three games, the Starting XI could use the week off and might be too drained physically to defeat Ecuador. The "B" team might have the best shot at winning the match.
3. Jurgen loves to show he has a pair of brass ones. After Sunil Gulati's "short term goals and long term goals" vote of no confidence, I see JK using those words as a mocking explanation to take the risk of sitting his starters in a Quarter Final and reach for the brass ring.
4. After a full week of rest, the starters will be able to give Argentina their best.
5. If it fails, he has an easy justification combined with the security of winning the Group. Fans will not be too unkind.
6. If it works, and the US advances to possibly win the Copa America, Klinsmann-mania gets turned to 11.

I don't see it. This team isn't good enough or deep enough to look past an opponent because of possible yellow card accumulation. 2 yellow cards in 5 games for a suspension is silly. 3 yellow cards should be the rule.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I want to see Cameron moved over to RB to replace Cameron and then maybe have Besler come in alongside Brooks.

 

[Stout]

It's a tournament. Unless you're Argentina, you don't play for tomorrow, you play for today. The only possible change I'd look at is Pulisic for Zardes.

 

[Stout]

I want to see Cameron moved over to RB to replace Cameron and then maybe have Besler come in alongside Brooks.

Why would you change your central defensive pairing in the middle of a major tournament, in the knockout stages, when it has gelled perfectly? This would be a terrible idea. No tinkering, thank you

 

[Zeno]

It's a tournament. Unless you're Argentina, you don't play for tomorrow, you play for today. The only possible change I'd look at is Pulisic for Zardes.

Or Nagbe for either Zardes or Bedoya--he is capable of playing on the wing and in the middle, regularly plays on the wing for Portland.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Why would you change your central defensive pairing in the middle of a major tournament, in the knockout stages, when it has gelled perfectly? This would be a terrible idea. No tinkering, thank you

Because Yedlin left us with a huge hole and Orozco is the worst player listed on this roster. (yes even over Wondo) We will most likely have a huge hole on the right hand side now.

 

[Stout]

Because Yedlin left us with a huge hole and Orozco is the worst player listed on this roster. (yes even over Wondo) We will most likely have a huge hole on the right hand side now.

I'd rather have a weakness there rather than break up our central defensive pairing, to be honest. I'd be more comfortable bringing Castillo in and moving Johnson to the right.

Then again, we have to realize that we already had a huge hole on the right hand side, with how bad Yedlin has been most of the time--easily our worst player. Maybe using Orozco so we don't break up the Brooks-Cameron pairing would be okay.

 

[Zeno]

I'd rather have a weakness there rather than break up our central defensive pairing, to be honest. I'd be more comfortable bringing Castillo in and moving Johnson to the right.

I saw that mentioned elsewhere too...Johnson moving over and Castillo coming on and I think that is the way I would go. Most of the attack from Ecuador is going to come at the right back, might as well lock Johnson up on that side...Castillo is pretty good going forward (probably better at that than he is defending, sort of like Beasley was).

But I think ultimately the staff will have Orozco starting at right back, I think he is better than Yedlin defending and in the air but a HUGE drop off going forward.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I'd rather have a weakness there rather than break up our central defensive pairing, to be honest. I'd be more comfortable bringing Castillo in and moving Johnson to the right.

Then again, we have to realize that we already had a huge hole on the right hand side, with how bad Yedlin has been most of the time--easily our worst player. Maybe using Orozco so we don't break up the Brooks-Cameron pairing would be okay.

Bradley, as big of a proponent of his I have been in the past, has easily been our worst player. Disagree again.

 

[SO91]

I saw that mentioned elsewhere too...Johnson moving over and Castillo coming on and I think that is the way I would go. Most of the attack from Ecuador is going to come at the right back, might as well lock Johnson up on that side...Castillo is pretty good going forward (probably better at that than he is defending, sort of like Beasley was).

But I think ultimately the staff will have Orozco starting at right back, I think he is better than Yedlin defending and in the air but a HUGE drop off going forward.

Yep, Ecuador is going to attack through Montero, who's pretty good on the left side.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Yep, Ecuador is going to attack through Montero, who's pretty good on the left side.

Valencia isn't half bad on the right either. Damned if you do.

 

[Stout]

Bradley, as big of a proponent of his I have been in the past, has easily been our worst player. Disagree again.

I won't argue he's been horrific--he has--but Yedlin gave up a penalty and was red carded early in the 2nd half of game three. Were it just a comparison of play, then I might go with Bradley as worse, but Yedlin's mostly stunk AND had all those things happen.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I won't argue he's been horrific--he has--but Yedlin gave up a penalty and was red carded early in the 2nd half of game three. Were it just a comparison of play, then I might go with Bradley as worse, but Yedlin's mostly stunk AND had all those things happen.

Fair enough. The first yellow wasn't even a foul. The second one was complete idiocy.

 

[cardfaninfl]

The first yellow wasn't even a foul.

Yes, it was. American announcers will always go to great lengths to show how completely ignorant they are of the offside rule, and what is/isn't a foul during a tackle. They have gotten a little better about the offside rule and have stopped showing the graphic that displays where the player's feet are when the ball is struck. But still can't wait to use the excuse "the defender got the ball" when justifying their opinion on a tackle.

Offside - the location of a player's feet is irrelevant if any other part of the body is beyond the last defender.

Tackle - touching the ball then turning around and punching the opposing player in the face is a foul. So is touching the ball during a tackle while the trailing leg makes contact the referee believes to be a foul. The player is responsible for their trailing leg.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Yes, it was. American announcers will always go to great lengths to show how completely ignorant they are of the offside rule, and what is/isn't a foul during a tackle. They have gotten a little better about the offside rule and have stopped showing the graphic that displays where the player's feet are when the ball is struck. But still can't wait to use the excuse "the defender got the ball" when justifying their opinion on a tackle.

Offside - the location of a player's feet is irrelevant if any other part of the body is beyond the last defender.

Tackle - touching the ball then turning around and punching the opposing player in the face is a foul. So is touching the ball during a tackle while the trailing leg makes contact the referee believes to be a foul. The player is responsible for their trailing leg.

Give me a break. You talk about the announcers going to extremes about showing tackles and then you use the example about punching people in the face? Really?

The problem is the inconsistency. That is more often than NOT called a foul than it is. Same as the hand ball call against Yedlin the game before.

 

[cardfaninfl]

Give me a break. You talk about the announcers going to extremes about showing tackles and then you use the example about punching people in the face? Really?

The problem is the inconsistency. That is more often than NOT called a foul than it is. Same as the hand ball call against Yedlin the game before.

Give me a break. That is your (unprovable) opinion using hyperbole to bolster your lack of knowledge of the rules. Didn't you mention something about "extremes"?

 

[Stout]

Give me a break. You talk about the announcers going to extremes about showing tackles and then you use the example about punching people in the face? Really?

The problem is the inconsistency. That is more often than NOT called a foul than it is. Same as the hand ball call against Yedlin the game before.

Oh, it's without doubt a foul in this day and age. It's not a yellow, but it's a foul. I didn't think he deserved a yellow there but, like you said, the second one was stupid and inexcusable.

And sorry, but the handball call is perfectly valid, though I agree the refs need to be consistent. Sometimes it's called, sometimes it's not; this is where some consistency would be really nice. If it strikes an arm that's not at your side, it's a penalty--that's the easiest way to deal with it. Yedlin doesn't have a defense there, though. He left his arm out, which you cannot do, and got burned for it.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Oh, it's without doubt a foul in this day and age. It's not a yellow, but it's a foul. I didn't think he deserved a yellow there but, like you said, the second one was stupid and inexcusable.

And sorry, but the handball call is perfectly valid, though I agree the refs need to be consistent. Sometimes it's called, sometimes it's not; this is where some consistency would be really nice. If it strikes an arm that's not at your side, it's a penalty--that's the easiest way to deal with it. Yedlin doesn't have a defense there, though. He left his arm out, which you cannot do, and got burned for it.

I meant more than the first yellow was not a yellow vs a foul, but that was my mistake, I said foul.

The consistency in the hand ball call is absolutely maddening. Look at the Chile/Bolivia game. The player had his hands behind is back, like you are taught to do, and it was STILL called a hand ball.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Give me a break. That is your (unprovable) opinion using hyperbole to bolster your lack of knowledge of the rules. Didn't you mention something about "extremes"?

Yawn.

 

[Stout]

I meant more than the first yellow was not a yellow vs a foul, but that was my mistake, I said foul.

The consistency in the hand ball call is absolutely maddening. Look at the Chile/Bolivia game. The player had his hands behind is back, like you are taught to do, and it was STILL called a hand ball.

 

[Lorenzo]

2-1. I agree with Landon Bedoya should of been brought off now we gave up a goal and he's out if we win.

 

[Lorenzo]

Juergen better make some changes other than backawayerman or this is going to slip away

 

[coyoteshockeyfan]

I don't mind refs giving out cards, but it should be three accumulated yellows being a suspension instead of two if they're all going to hand them out like halloween candy.

 

[Lorenzo]

I don't mind refs giving out cards, but it should be three accumulated yellows being a suspension instead of two if they're all going to hand them out like halloween candy.

Yeah well if we win and that's a big if it's going to be very interesting to see the next roster.