By Graig Carbino - ALBANY, NY (Nov 19, 2009) USSoccerPlayers -- As someone watching a soccer game from the perspective of “analyst," it would be nice to always come up with spellbinding ideas of what worked and what didn’t. We’d all like to have our own unique take on what just happened, why and why not, and all that. Sometimes though, the game just doesn’t give you that freedom.
Take yesterday in Aarhus for example. I saw a game of two sides playing at less than full strength. A Danish team with a bit more continuity, playing at home, kept the ball a ton and created almost all of the chances. The US profited off of a bad defensive mistake and it's 1-nil to the visitors at halftime.
Fast forward to the second-half and we get a semi-repeat of the Gold Cup Final... although under a lot less meaningful circumstances and with a few more first team regulars in the mix. Three goals in seven minutes from the Danes and that was all she wrote. When the fat lady sings before the 60th minute, you know you’ve had a tough day.
What other groundbreaking conclusions can we really take away from the occasion? Sometimes it just doesn’t go your way. That’s not about excuses or reservation or anything other than it didn’t work yesterday with the group on the field. Assemble a set that hasn’t played together regularly and that’s what you are bound to get. Exclude Donovan and Onyewu... and Davies... and Howard... and Cherundolo... and Dempsey and things get worse.
I suppose you could say the same thing about the Danish group. They were also missing a few key cogs, but they did have the more experienced team available. They bossed possession, as was to be expected, and pretty much had this one under control from the start. Who among us felt confident at the interval that the US would ultimately hold on for a 1-0 final?
Beyond the issues on display Wednesday was the bigger question of comparison between the Slovakia and Denmark matches. Sure, we know that not having your true first team in is never going to look as good as when all the number-ones are present. We also know that any US team going to Europe and looking for results will find trouble. It’s been like that forever and hasn’t really changed a ton recently. We also know that assembling a piecemeal group for a week of training and two games doesn’t exactly lend itself to a situation layered with continuity.
Everyone has made those points, over and over again. Here is the thing that I looked at over these past two games. What does a United States team do when it comes across an equal or even superior opponent that works the same way they do? What I mean is, what happens when a team like Slovakia gets a goal and then sits back, stays organized and looks to hit them on the counter?
This tactic sounds familiar, right? It should because it is basically how the United States plays against equal or better teams. Denmark actually did what the US expected, and probably wanted them to do. They passed and possessed while the US sat, tried (unsuccessfully) to stay compact, and looked for a chance on the break. Slovakia presented a whole different issue because they made the US actually play.
That’s right. They made the United States pass it and keep it and move it for themselves. That’s where the problem seems to come in with this team. It happens against decent CONCACAF teams all the time. When the US should be the better team, and should be able to take the game to their opponents, they tend to lack for ideas. That’s where we get the penalty kick goals and the corner kick goals and the free kick goals.
Whether this is a player problem or a coaching/tactical problem I’m not sure. I would assume it might be a bit of both, but I tend to put tactics on the coach for the most part. They set the ideas and then the players need to execute.
On Saturday, it looked like the US came out thinking Slovakia would act one way, but then got something else. They looked like they expected the home team to come out like most home teams do against the States in Europe. They wanted to cede possession and hit back on the counter. When that didn’t happen, everything went a bit sideways.
Come next Summer, we aren’t going to see a United States team that bosses the ball and creates things on their own. Those ideas and strategies would need to have been put in long before now. What we will see is what we are accustomed to watching. We’ll see defend and counter and set pieces all day. Don’t expect some grand game plan of attack at all costs with space to play. Unless things turn out like Italy-US from 06, it’s going to be tight and rough and low scoring, and that’s fine.
I am certainly not saying one style is better than another and I am not comparing the US to late-80’s Wimbledon. This team has talent. It has dynamic players and can compete at the highest level. What I am saying is that if you want attacking soccer like the Brazilians or the Argentineans or the Spanish you just aren’t going to get it. Quite honestly, you aren’t right to expect it either.
Ultimately, the US should hope for the Denmark scenario (besides the result) over what went down it Bratislava. That is what they know and that is what got them to this point. It's what got them to the Confederations Cup Final and what might get them to knockout stages in South Africa.
Graig Carbino covers American Abroad and writes a weekly column for USSoccerPlayers. Contact him at graiger11@yahoo.com
