Mexico 4-2 United States: Mexico go 2-0 down but recover to win a brilliant final
The starting line-ups
Mexico retained the Gold Cup after an open, attack-minded game.
Jose Manuel de la Torre kept faith with the side that overcame Honduras in the semi-final. Andres Guardado and Carlos Salcido were declared fit to start.
Bob Bradley sprung a huge surprise by picking Freddy Adu from the start, after his key contribution against Panama in the semi-final. Landon Donovan also returned to the side, with Clint Dempsey moving upfront.
This was one of the best international finals of modern times – six goals, some of them superb, plus countless other chances that should have been converted. Both sides had plenty of attempts, but Mexico created more throughout the game, and eventually took advantage of their opportunities.
Similar shapes
The two formations were broadly similar – both sides defended with two banks of four without the ball, then allowed their wide players inside quickly when they won possession, creating fluid quartets on both sides. In turn, the full-backs had plenty of space to exploit when getting forward, and the result of each wide player coming inside into the middle of the pitch was that they often weren’t in a good position to track the opposition full-back.
The main tactical difference between the teams was their attitude without the ball. The US stood off and let Gerardo Torrado and Israel Castro play passes, whilst Mexico looked to press quickly, epitomised by Torrado nicking the ball from Dempsey and playing in Giovani dos Santos for a chance he flashed wide of the far post.
Dempsey was most frequently found on the left of midfield but took it in turns with Donovan to become the highest player up the pitch, meaning both tended to move towards the ball, whereas Javier Hernandez generally looked to sprint into space over the top. Mexico had clearly identified the lack of pace at the heart of the US defence as a main weakness, and balls were continually chipped over centre-backs or slid into channels for Hernandez and dos Santos to run onto.
Goals
In truth, both US goals were completely against the run of play, and came when Mexico were arguably playing their best football in the game. Their opening goal came from the first US attack – Steve Cherundolo forced a corner that Adu sent to the near post, where Michael Bradley powered home a header.
The second goal also originated from the right-back zone, where Eric Lichaj was now playing. Some tremendous combination play saw Dempsey pick up the ball between the lines – he slipped a great pass to Donovan who rounded off a tremendous move with a confident finish.
At this point, Bradley was in a difficult situation. He found himself 2-0 up despite his team having been completely outplayed in the opening 25 minutes. A change in tactics to beef up he midfield would have been the sensible option, but with the players he had available, it’s difficult to see what he could have done without looking to his substitutes. With one change already made through injury, his options from the bench were limited. Bradley is no stranger to a radical change of tactics midway through a game (often with great results) and as much as a tactical switch after 30 minutes would have been an extremely bold move, he must have considered bringing on another midfielder to try and preserve the lead.
Mexico got back into the game with two quick goals, both coming because they brought their wide players inside to become goal threats. Hernandez, having spent the first quarter of the game playing on the shoulder of the last man, then dropped deep and found space in the hole, knocking a good pass over the top for Pablo Barrera, who finished at the near post. The second goal was more scrappy but owed to the same feature – wide players coming into the middle. Guardado squeezed the ball in after good work from Barrera.
Amongst all this, Mexico had two make two substitutions because of injuries to their defenders. Jorge Torres Nilo replaced Salcido, and then Hector Reynoso came on for his debut for Rafael Marquez. This should have destabilized their defence but seemed to actually make it more solid – Salcido was a big injury doubt before the game and may well not have been fit from the start.
Second half
In the second period, Dempsey and Donovan came towards the ball quickly, which meant the US had a couple of decent spells of possession, but also meant they were playing in front of Mexico rather than penetrating the back four, and there was a feeling that Mexico were probably more vulnerable to direct breaks (when their wingers were high up the pitch, and to exploit the lack of mobility of their central midfielders.) Jermaine Jones was slightly more of a force in the game, but still relatively quiet – with Bradley sitting deeper, Jones should have been providing the driving runs from midfield that were so effective against Jamaica, but there was a lack of inspiration from that zone.
Mexico took the lead for the first time with a familiar combination – Guardado came into a central zone to play in Barrera, whose finish again took Tim Howard by surprise.
Then, the game changed. Mexico were so relieved to be finally in the lead (and no doubt exhausted too) that they retreated to a counter-attacking system, dropping the wingers back and becoming 4-4-1-1. The wingers were much less of a threat – Barrera, having been the most dangerous attacking player, faded to such an extent that he was replaced.
At this point, the US came into the game and could have made it 3-3 when Dempsey hit the bar, but Mexico were still a huge threat on the break. Alfredo Talavera’s quick distribution set dos Santos off on solo runs, and he and Hernandez’s pace always looked likely to get a fourth. That clinching goal eventually came when dos Santos retreated from a couple of challenges in the area, before clipping a wonderful ball into the far top corner. It was a fitting goal to end a remarkable final.
Conclusion
Despite the US taking a two-goal lead, Mexico always seemed to be winning the tactical battle – more possession, more chances – and eventually, more goals. They were more proactive without the ball early on and more dangerous in the final third with the wingers coming in – it’s amazing they managed to score four goals, and yet tournament top scorer and MVP Hernandez didn’t manage to find the net, but that is to their credit – they had plenty of goalscoring options.
Bradley’s main decision, to pick Adu, was broadly a success. He was probably the brightest attacking player for the US, finding space between the lines and drifting wide to get more time on the ball. The back four was constantly overwhelmed by the pace and directness of the Mexico attacking quartet, however, and Mexico were superior for the majority of the game.
Mexico 4-2 United States: Mexico go 2-0 down but recover to win a brilliant final
Good fight!
The Cherundolo injury seemed key to me. The US back line was already looking shaky before he went off, and replacing him with Bornstein (who was clearly out of his depth) made it even worse. It’s pretty clear that one of the biggest problems for Bob Bradley going forward is a lack of defensive depth.
Yeah, all of the goals came from problems on the left side of USA’s defense. Bornstein got caught up the pitch way too often, and failed to show dos Santos to his weaker right foot.
Plus Chrundolo looked more dangerous going forward, giving the US a better outlet on the right side.
This really was a terrific game, a fantastic advert for football in the Concacaf region.
Check out my blog @ http://www.inforthehattrick.blogspot.com
dude just shut up. seriously. every page. this isn’t your blog
I think you should be paying ZM to put this link in the advertising spots. Trolling on fora makes me want to avoid blogs, not flock to them.
Apologies guys, I didn’t mean to cause any offense and will try to improve my comments.
Cheers, David
Brilliant tactical approach by MEX. When Bornstein was brought in, my friend complained. I said there wasn’t much difference between him and Spector, them both having issues. And that Bornstein was most vulnerable to being overpowered by physical, direct team and MEX played more of a build-up style. Instead, MEX tore us apart with balls over the top, which is very much unlike them. Kudos to their manager for having a plan B so radically different from what they usually do and for pulling it off spectacularly.
How did Guardado play throughout the match? Surely too good for Segunda?
He played quite well, will be transferred in the next few weeks.
Good match. Mexico usually creates more, but this time they were able to convert in style. The backline did seem to suffer when Cherundolo went out, but the middle wasn’t exactly being dominated by Jones and Bradley. Mexico look really good; good luck to them in the Confed Cup in 2013, they should represent the region well.
The US has some work to do, but with Altidore and Holden healthy, and Chandler providing midfield and defensive depth, this is already a better team. Effectively mixing aging veterans and young blood is always tricky but it will remain a core issue for this US side throughout this cup cycle.
As always, thanks for the analysis ZM!
When I saw that Bornstein was being brought on, I knew that was trouble. Sure enough, all four goals came from initially beating him. The US lack of depth at the back four is really painful to watch. Mexico capitalized on that weakness time and again, and it led to the US conceding four goals, the lob by dos Santos arguably the goal of the tournament.
While it’s comforting to see Adu look like a bit of a threat on the wings, frequently drawing double teams, it comes as the US still has no consistent, dependable striker. Altidore looks like he wants to play out on the wing, and Agudelo doesn’t strike me as being physical enough to be a lone striker. Not sure what’s up with Davies at this point, aside from becoming a noteworthy diver.
The US defense is wafer thin, the striker position makes it difficult to play the lone striker formation Bradley seems to want, and it’s only in midfield that I feel like we have enough depth to afford an injury without having to completely change the shape of the team. World Cup qualifying should be interesting.
Interesting, I thought Agudelo seemed happy to mix it up a bit, but the Panamanian central defenders were monsters and overpowered him. He is still just 18.
“Altidore looks like he wants to play out on the wing”
This is not what I have observed from his body of work – do you mean that he’s not physical enough, he tries to dribble too much, or that he pulls wide in search of space?
@ZM I’m surprised you took such a positive approach to this game when Jonathan Wilson seemed incredibly bitter about the lack of quality in CONCACAF. Having said that, the biggest problem for the US is depth. Credit must be given to Mexico for winning even with the five suspended players. If The US lost any of their starters prior to the tournament then they would have had a much harder time dealing with it. Moving forward Bradley’s biggest decision is going to be starting Altidore or Adu. I would imagine Dempsey, Donovan, and Holden will be undroppable in their front 4 when everyone is healthy but that last man changes a lot depending on whether Dempsey is the striker or left winger. I imagine he will start Altidore most of the time because he generally finds it difficult to try unconventional things. Even at the world cup the lack of depth at striker should have convinced him to play Dempsey with Altidore more often but he tried second rate players just to play a system he wanted. Perhaps against weaker opposition his son can be dropped and holden can play deeper with jones as the full time holding midfielder.
Of the five suspended Mexican players, only the keeper was a starter, if I remember correctly. It is unlikely that any of the other four would have seen much if any game time.
Actually, Ochoa (GK) and “Maza” Rodriguez (CB) were both starters. In fact, Maza is considered by many to be our first-choice CB.
The CONCACAF region has historically been devoid of good finishers (whether strikers or wingers). Mexico now finds itself with one of the most coveted, young strikers and three very capable goal-scoring auxillary forwards/wingers/wide midfielders in Gio, Guardado, and Barrera.
With any luck, Spurs will sell Gio, Deportivo will sell Guardado, and West Ham will sell Barrera. These players are all relatively young and need regular playing time on first-division, European clubs if Mexico is to advance past the 2nd round in the next World Cup.
Speaking of young Mexican attacking players, what ever became of Carlos Vela? A few years back I thought he would turn out to be the best amongst that group: he seemed to have great technique, composure and vision.
He’s still at Arsenal. Went on a mundane loan spell for the second half of this past season. Arsene Wenger kept him from joining the Mexico squad for this competition. Presumably he’s ready to break into the Arsenal first team.
Check Wilson’s piece in Sports Illustrated on this game.
thanks. I should have posted a link to this earlier.
I’m not sure where you see the big discrepancy between the two reviews. Wilson clearly acknowledges it was a great game to watch. Considering he usually takes a much broader view regarding context and timescale in his pieces than ZM’s purely tactical analysis, a few remarks about the state of CONCACAF football are to be expected. These being not overly enthusiastic shouldn’t come as a surprise either…
well, I’ve always had a soft spot for Adu, personally. However, it seems to me that with those 5 players plus Aguadelo the US has the ability to change up its attacking style mid-game. Given the predilection that the US coach has shown for tactical changes at halftime, these options should prove useful.
I’d start with Dempsey leading the line and have Donovan, Holden and Adu behind, with Altidore being the first man off the bench.
This game helps us forget the farcical nature of CONCACAF’s administrative woes, and realize that there is quality and a growing tradition throughout the region. Mexico simply deserved it because of their ability to diagnose the US weaknesses. Mexico looked weakest when sitting back, because their defense isn’t spectacular in the air. When the US sat back, the lines weren’t tight enough.
The US will likely move on without Bradley Sr. and it is because he is by nature a reactive coach. As wonderful as it was to see the US look more fluid, it came at the cost of the defensive compactness that is required to deal with the better teams in the World. Having found success in the tournament by adopting a more ‘modern’ attacking approach, he stuck with it when hind-sight (and history) would indicate his more usual approach might have been preferable.
USA were a bit unlucky in some regards (hitting the bar, the first Mexican goal was a fluke shot, etc.) although Mexico still deserved the win in my view.
Adu is a bright spot, a talented, energetic player but he often showed more potential than polish. I think in a few years he may prove a cornerstone for the team.
Agudelo did basically nothing, though I keep hope he will grow. I think Altidore is still the team’s best striker, though he has yet to really convince me..
Like some have commented, this team’s lack of depth in defense and forwards is what keeps them from being a really good team. Altidore is inconsistent, Agudelo is too young, Davies is injury prone, and playing Dempsey or LD upfront doesn’t strike me as the solution.
In defense, honestly it is the US’s major weakness. Bocanegra and Cherundolo are perhaps the two best players and they are getting up there in age. Depth is still a major issue.
What do you see as the problem with Dempsey or Donovan up front? Especially Dempsey, as he has a lot of experience there at Fulham, or at least as a second striker. Just curious, not arguing. I think until a US striker proves himself as legitimate and consistent, playing one of Donovan or Dempsey as sort of a false 9 is better than essentially wasting a player and putting somebody not up to par on the field in any position.
Donovan prefers a wider role to start, no? Dempsey, not sure. He doesn’t strike me (hah!) as a striker, more that withdrawn forward, meaning you need Altidore or Agudelo to lead the line.
The US have so many attacking midfielder/withdrawn forward type players that I prefer Dempsey up front though. In a 4231/433 (which they need to continue with) Dempsey, Donovan, and Holden are guaranteed starters in the attacking 4. The choice for the last spot, for me, is between Altidore and Adu. Who would you prefer? for me it is Adu every time. Playing Donovan up front was a mistake however. Dempsey and Donovan should have switched starting positions and not switched back at all. If Barcelona proved anything this year, it is that a striker can be successful with intelligent movement just as he can with classic striker qualities. Obviously Dempsey is nowhere near Messi’s level but he is certainly more of an out and out striker than Barça’s number 10. If Rooney can lead the line for Manchester and England then Dempsey can for the US. ‘False 9′ seems to be the future anyways. Adu and Donovan playing as inverted wingers supported by 2 holding midfielders and a deep playmaker in holden seems to be the best way to get the most out of the US’s best players. Now they just need to find some depth at the back.
I like your idea, especially playing Holden deep. I’ve said this before on here, but I’d like to see him in a central regista role, with two other CM’s flanking him. Like a Pirlo who tackles. This would provide more cover for the fullbacks when they get forward, as well as a deep midfielder who passes with a higher tempo.
This was the USA last good chance at defeating Mexico in a worthwhile match for the next 6-8 years. Mexico has successfully transitioned to a new generation of players, many of whom are in credible European leagues, and they will be the favorite for the next two world cup cycles for sure. For the US, it’s scary to think that a 29, 32, and 33 year old started every game fo their back four this tournament. There’d are no good replacements in sight, especially in the center (Chandler and lichaj are capable FBs), so an already suspect defense might become much worse in the coming years….
The one posititve the US can take from this tournament is that they finally seemed to figure out how to use the 4-2-3-1 to their attacking advantage…previously, lone striker formations have seen us boot long balls to no avail, but the pas. Few games have seen some good movement, and even switching of positions. With Holden in he side, th attack might become better than it’s ever been. But until the US can defend tactcally and postionally, and play out of the back better, they will continue to remain mid-tier….good enough to compete for concacaf, certainly. But, sisceptble to thre Ghanas of this world
Tim Ream? Perry Kitchen? They have players, it’s just a matter of getting them international experience and regular playing time for their clubs…
Kitchen’s a rookie, unproven even in the MLS. Bit much to say the US has depth at defence because he’s played a dozen games for DC.
Mexico ranked 7th on Elo (i.e. real) rankings. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings
I wonder if that’s their highest ever. Amazing since they only have one marquee European player.
The highest Mexico has ever ranked was #6 in June 2005.
http://www.eloratings.net/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings#All-time_highest_ratings
Mexico is one of only a few countries that has made it into the 2nd round of every World Cup since 1994. I think only Brazil, Germany, and the Netherlands have done the same. Mexico appears to be a slowly simmering soup that is on the verge of boiling over into greatness (though not necessarily a World Cup winner).
Those rankings are dubious when comparing sides from different confederations- even though matches are somewhat weighted depending on opponent, Mexico benefits from playing in CONCACAF. Fact is, the majority of competitive matches Mexico play are vs weak opponents.
The Netherlands missed the 2002 World Cup at the expense of Ireland. Definitely weren’t in the second round
Actually their highest Elo ranking was #6 a few years ago and their highest FIFA ranking was #4
I think Edu could become a permanent option at center back for the US seeing as he is unlikely to feature in midfield now that Jones is playing for the US. 6′ 0” isn’t that small for a center back and he would be a natural as spreading and distributing.
Jones is 5 years older than Edu. He’s already past his prime, and his prime wasn’t that great. If Jones is still playing for the US in a couple of years we’re in deep, deep trouble.
It was a terrible decision even bringing him into camp. There’s no reason to bring in a 30-year-old mid-level player when you have a 25-year-old who played well at the World Cup and is arguably better right now.
Jones is the best passer on the US, by far. He makes several passes every single game that no other American would hit. Edu is not better right now, nor particularly close to being better. Jones’ prime wasn’t that great? He started 37 games in 07-08 and 08-09 for a Schalke team that finished 3rd and 8th in the BL in those two years, including starting 8 UCL games his first year at Schalke. How many American players have been regular starters for teams that challenge for UCL places in top European leagues? Then, after a year of injuries and then getting demoted to the reserves under the disastrous Magath reign, Jones is able to walk into a starting spot on an EPL team. But why bring him to camp? The US has so many regular PL starters, and so many creative passers of the ball, that fuck him let’s just go with YOUTHFUL ENERGY in the midfield.
A lot of talk about lack of depth in our (US) back line. I don’t think it’s even a question of depth. Our *starters* aren’t that great. Dolo is sweet, but he’s like 73. Bocanegra is fairly productive for a slow, short man with no athletic ability. Lichaj had a nice tourney but I’m still not persuaded he’s the real deal (and he was terrible when flipped to right back for this one) Goodson at this level is adequate at best. Sometimes.
Depth is great, but I’d settle for a complete set of quality starters.
Chepo de la Torre proved his tactical worth. I can’t help but think how silly Aguirre’s tactics were in South Africa. Guardado, Barrera, Castro and Javier Hernandez were relegated to the bench.
Perhaps they are hitting their groove just now. It’s also hard to fathom how Guardado, and Barrera are headed to the 2nd division (Depor La Coruna and West Ham) while Juarez and Dos Santos can’t even make the bench with Celtic and Tottenham. Sheer and utter madness.
I actually thought Aguirre’s tactics in the world cup worked very well, it was, as you say, his player selection that was the problem.
Using Marquez to step up into midfield or drop back into defense as he saw fit allowed the fullbacks almost total freedom, which they used very well, and allowed the 3 forwards to play narrow without losing the sides width.
Using Marquez in the same way with the current side would get more out of the wide forwards I think. It does raise the issue of where to use Gio most effectively, but it shouldn’t be that hard to work out.
Great point. Your correct. Player selection doomed Aguirre and Mexico.
Totally agree. I blame Harry Redknapp. But then I blame him for anything.
Depor are probably big enough to keep Guardado while they’re down, but maybe he’ll want better football. Barrera I have no idea. Juarez should find a real place to play football. And Dos Santos surely, surely has earned himself either a move to a club that will play him or a place in the Tottenham first team.
Edit: and just as I wrote that, 101greatgoals tweeted that Tottenham are demanding 5m euro from Sevilla for Dos Santos. Good club for him, but I wonder about the price.
Gio has earned a place at Tottenham many times before, but he will not play as long as Arry is in charge
Having seen just about every Spurs match , I can tell that Gio wasn’t playing much because he was poor whenever he was given a chance- selfish and wasteful are 2 words that come to mind. There was also the problem with partying and his weight….
Like someone mentioned earlier, it was down to his player selection. The 4-3-3 system where the DM would drop between the centerbacks worked wonderfully, I recall the preparation games against england and italy where the granted the score wasnt as important, it gave positive signs for the world cup. Problem was Aguirre had been “out” of Mexican football for about 10 years, and went for men whom he trusted in the stages where it mattered most and to him were more experienced. (perez in goal,blanco,franco,bautista vs. argentina?, etc)
The US needs to do something to be able to posses the ball more often, I think it starts with sticking with Dempsey as the first choice striker; as successful as the interchange between him and Donovan is, it might have to be slightly sacrificed for more solidity.
Essentially Bob Bradley seems to always play with at least one flair player who is not up to International standards, and this leaves the midfield without proper support or outlets.
Agudelo is simply not ready, let alone necessary; Bedoya is not an inherently bad player, and Adu turned out to be capable and even good this tournament, but having more than 1 of them on the park at one time is trouble.
Essentially it all boils down to a central player, be it in a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, or even a 4-3-1-2 needing to be in closer contact with Bradley and Jones (or any other holding/central midfielders). This way you can have 3 players in relatively free roles, essentially Donovan, Dempsey, and whatever other attacking player is in form and a good fit, free to interchange close to goal, without giving up the midfield battle.
Holden would be the ideal choice for the 3rd midfielder, but Feilhaber, Klijestan, or Torres fit the bill as well.
At least one speedier Center Back would be nice as well; Onyewu and Goodson are both very physical but not very pacey, and Bocanegra is sadly starting to age.
The big tactical showing from Mexico, as mentioned by other comments, was how much they attacked Bornstein’s side when he came on. Almost like they set up a triangle there just to set up some one-twos and break the back line’s shape. Brilliant move by Mexico to catch that.
Was it really brilliant, or just incredibly obvious? I’ll go with incredibly obvious.
The Mexican attack worked that side of the field throughout the tournament. Bornstein’s presence made it easier.
Also the lack of players on the left for the US. The right was packed with Adu moving high right to try and receive the ball, Bedoya mostly hugging the touchline, and Dempsey coming into the center. The left was empty.
This wasn’t just a defensive problem for US, but an attack problem as well. Adu often blocked the space that Bedoya and Lichaj would have worked in, and meanwhile there wasn’t a capable fullback to overlap Dempsey on the other side.
Interesting game, which exposed the US’s defenses flaws in certain ways tactical and certain ways that are almost too obvious.
Hard to draw any conclusions re: Bornstein other than Bradley needed a better option at LB (how about Edu as make-shift CB and move Boccanegra to the left???). Smart for Mexico to attack him so directly for 70 minutes, but that was to be expected and I doubt he will see the field again in a US uniform.
Bradley Jr. had a poor game (tired legs??–sitting on the bench for 1/2 a season doesn’t help one’s game-ready conditioning). I did see him live vs Spain, and was impressed by his composure on the ball and his positioning. For me, the real weakness was Jones, who got caught out far too easily, too willing to chase the play. On the Dos Santos goal (I think), he came to triple team someone in the corner, and when the ball popped free there was no one in his space. Not that I love the guy, but Edu might have been a good sub at 2-2 or 3-2.
Finally, I’m not sure what the problem is with Dempsey-Donovan-Adu. Altidore is a good shooter–but nothing more at this point, I’m afraid. And Dempsey looked good up top v. Spain. Given that ADD have hardly played together in 2 or 3 years, that combo-play for the second goal was ridiculous.
Would have preferred for Adu to stay central in the second half–to free space for overlaps and to support Dempsey better–or maybe even switch sides to float into the space Dos Santos was leaving. Perhaps overloading that side of the field might have helped Bornstein a bit??
But like I said, once Bornstein entered, Mexico’s game plan was writ in stone. 4-2 was a fair result.
Hi, this article is not related to this particular game, however it is IMMENSELY interesting in tactics. Its a dossier produced by Andre Villas Boas during his time at Chelsea, for Jose Mourinho before a Newcastle game, discussing tactics…
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01927/art18-1_1927022a.pdf
Enjoy.
Many thanks! I’ve been looking for something to show my partner as an example of why AVB was the right signing for Chelsea. What do you say, ZM? How about a breakdown of his breakdown?
Freddy Adu – I remember when he was wanted by United, Madrid and Chelsea as a 14 year old, and was being touted as a potential best player in the world of the future! Last I heard he was playing in a Greek second division team I believe. What went wrong there !?!
He’s small even for a soccer player, slow, terrible defensively, and lazy in his off-the-ball movement. He’s also prone to whining and unwilling to be coached.
A lot of people saying that Holden will be one of the attacking 4 in a 4-2-3-1 once he is back. I think Holden should play one of the defensive midfield roles and Jones or Bradley should be dropped. We need a player with better technical ability to collect the ball from the back four and distribute. And with Holden’s work rate, I’m not even sure if we lose anything from a defensive standpoint. Someone that can cover a lot of ground and clogs passing lanes would have been more helpful against a team like Mexico than a player that can tackle(Bradley, Jones).
The US’s biggest problem maintaing possesion isn’t with the attacking players, its with the back four and our deep playing midfielders. Hopefully Bradley doesn’t give up on Ream.
——-Clint
Landon-Adu-Chandler
—–Edu-Holden
BACK 4 THAT CAN PASS THE BALL
Agreed that Holden is a strong player that could fill either defensive midfielders. Jones was much better this tournament (yet still many sloppy fouls). Bradley Jr. has been a disappointment this tournament. Slow with the ball and poor distribution when he decides to do something with it. Holden is solid defensively and really move the ball well. Michael Bradley’s future with the US is fine as long as his dad is coach. Will be interesting to see how he fairs for whatever club he lands at this year.
As for the back four, the US is going to have to try and grow with some of the younger back line prospects. Bornstein has proven he’s not up to the task. Time to raise the next generation.
I too would like to see Holden in the defensive two. At the highest level we need someone who can distribute the ball better than Bradley or Jones, and not get caught in possession so often by pressing tactics.
I wonder how much damage that terrible loan move to Aston Villa did to Bradley. He played a grand total of 32 minutes of competitive football between the beginning of March and the start of the Gold Cup. That’s got to be a problem for someone who’s still relatively young. I hope he gets a chance at Gladbach again (or moves somewhere where he’ll start regularly).
if you want a back 4 that can pass the ball, maybe Chandler should be at fullback, eh?
I wouldn’t mind Holden in the defensive midfield line (though I also mentioned him as being in the attacking line above) because of the distribution aspect of his game, but having someone who runs hard in the middle of the line of 3 attackers would also be useful because I thought the main problem with the US was epitomized by this passage:
“The main tactical difference between the teams was their attitude without the ball. The US stood off and let Gerardo Torrado and Israel Castro play passes, whilst Mexico looked to press quickly”
The US needs to press. The country is chock full of athletes. The national team should take advantage of this by playing defense like rabid dogs, hounding the opposition at all times. In light of this proposed strategy, Holden could be important pressing behind the striker.
Good point. I think the problem here is that Holden is the best answer to more than one problem.
Edu?!? Jermaine Jones is miles ahead of him. Do you really imagine Edu capable of MOTM performances in the EPL(like Jones has received on 2 occasions since arriving at Blackburn in January)? Considering the comments I’ve read from Rangers supporters, I doubt he’s ever had one in the lowly SPL.
Watching Jones vs Mexico it’s clear that he was exhausted- perhaps Bradley could’ve rested him more in previous games.
Jones is 30. Edu is 25. If Edu is as mediocre as Jones is in 5 years, he shouldn’t be on the pitch just like Jones shouldn’t be on the pitch now.
I don’t dispute Edu being 3rd choice for the midfield 2 for this tournament, but in a tournament with 3 days rest in first round matches, and the final 2 USA matches on 3 days rest, there needed to be some rotation.
A fresh Edu is better than an exhausted Bradley or an exhausted Jones.
And CONCACAF’s scheduling of matches with so little rest time is poorly done. It’s not surprising 3 players had to leave the final with injuries.
Just terrible, terrible goalkeeping throughout the highlights…
Another final, another 2-0 lead, another loss. Sure, Bob Bradley was over-matched against both Brasil and Mexico, but when you take a 2-0 lead in a final…. come on, you have to be able to protect that.
i’d be very interested to hear ZM’s overall assessment of Bob Bradley as a manager, given his somewhat controversial status among U.S.A. fans.
as a sub-question, do you think the U.S. national team would be better off had they acquired, say, Jürgen Klinnsman in his place?
Klinnsman is a poor manager that relied on intelligent people around him to be successful. I don’t see him as much of a solution. Bradley is finally moving in the right direction for the U.S. despite still having his faults. If a better manager is willing to take over then great but I don’t see anyone wanting the job.
The real plus to Klinnsman is how he would transform the USA youth systems (ODP etc.). Right now hustle and athleticism trumps technical skill and touch, so it’s no wonder US teams play like they do.
@ZM
Any chance of any tactical analysis of the Women’s World Cup? Don’t really follow women’s footy myself, but I would be interested to know if there were any tactical observations to talk about in the women’s game.
If you haven’t seen it yet, check out http://www.zonalmarking.net/upcoming/
According to Upcoming, he’ll analyze the Women’s WC final.