By J Hutcherson - WASHINGTON, DC (Nov 16, 2011) US Soccer Players -- So what about that offense? The United States National Team put on a first-half show on Tuesday at Stozice Stadium, scoring from distance, from a close-range header, and converting from the penalty spot. The timing of the goals was also important, going up within 10 minutes and retaking the lead for good just before halftime.
It's an obvious point, but one worth repeating: unlike in some of the earlier outings, the US scored enough goals to win. That overwhelmed Tim Matavz's two-goal performance for Slovenia and seeing off the kind of regrouped attack that requires friendly rules for substitutions. Slovenia made five before the 80th minute, with the US reverting to the kind of defensive shell that's drawn significant criticism since August. It's one thing to play that way for 90 minutes, quite another to use it as a tool to see out a friendly win late on a foggy night in Europe.
What this does is shift the storyline. It's not just about seeing off game-by-game criticism, something US coach Jurgen Klinsmann has made clear. It's about steps in a process.
“The concerns that you have when you are in a phase like we are now is how to build the concentration level throughout the whole 90 minutes," Klinsmann said. "We are doing well in certain periods, really shifting well and being compact and not allowing many opportunities, even against France. When the tempo is that high and a team like Slovenia has very, very good individual players that can always create something out of nothing, you always have to be very alert."
Criticism can and should continue. That too is part of the process, but it's drastically different to be criticizing the entire project rather than focusing on a subset of problems. Klinsmann is first in line in pointing out faults over 90 minutes. There's no hedging here from the coach. Instead, there's the push towards something better than what we've seen. Again, this is game-by-game and opens itself up to disagreeing with what Klinsmann calls 'phases.' Fair enough, but that doesn't have to be the same thing as disagreeing with the whole.
As distinctions go, that's one that isn't being clearly made by some of the most vocal critics. Part of that is the ideal of 90 minutes. Very few teams pull off what Klinsmann is demanding. It's that blend of fitness and concentration that turns a soccer game into a disciplined exercise where mistakes are minimal and ideas presented in training work in game situations that's the hallmark of the game's elite teams club and country. It's also what any coach should want from a group of players. There's no deep insightful moment here. The demand for better is basic. That doesn't discount the need for the pressure within the squad to raise their game-by-game performance.
"We have a three-month break until our next game, so to get the win tonight was the biggest thing for us," US captain Carlos Bocanegra said. "It wasn’t the prettiest game we’ve played, but the result was what we were looking for. We got some good goals from the guys, and some good attacking sequences. We’ve got to clean it up a little bit better in the back, but we got the win, and I think everybody’s pretty happy about that."
Stressing the result on a Tuesday night in Ljubljana against a team they drew with in the last World Cup is a clear goal. It was also achievable, moving the target from the general to the specific.
After the France game, Klinsmann talked about the goal as the missing piece, but that's bordering on coach speak. We don't know what happens had the US gone ahead against France in front of 70,000 French fans. France's response and how the US might have dealt with it remains in theory.
You can't draw a line through the parts of the game that didn't work for your team and focus on what did and expect it to have much meaning. That's not how soccer works at this level, and it's a big reason Klinsmann has faced so much criticism with his positive thinking approach.
Whether or not he's wrong is a separate question. Just because dissecting games and extrapolating out from your team's best effort might not mean all that much in the big picture sense, as a motivational tool it can be extremely useful. Here's Clint Dempsey after the France game:
“He instills confidence in his players and pushes us to go out and express ourselves and have that self-belief that we can compete in big games. We enjoy having him as a coach and we want to do better for him."
And after Tuesday's win against Slovenia:
“It’s great for us. We’re in a rebuilding stage, and we’re trying to figure out what our best XI is going to be for World Cup qualifying. It’s good to get a win, especially on European soil. I think it’s been three years since we’ve done that. So we’re excited about the win.”
For a coach, if your motivational method is working for one of your most lethal attacking players - someone who can change a game on his own - you'd probably take the public pressure that comes with stressing the positive.
Comments, questions, solutions to problems that have yet to present themselves. Please, tell me all about it.
