I also think Jozy did a lot of the "heavy lifting" when needed in the midfield, unfortunately, forwards are mostly gauged by shots on goal and in that department he was weak.
I think this is a slight misunderstanding of how flexible a 4-3-3 is on the attack. Both central mids can theoretically be free to attack but the it relies on productive wing play which we didn't have against Russia. That is 5 players not 3. It's somewhat rare but if you pay attention to some of the better teams that play the 4-3-3 you will see them sometimes with 7 players forward. That's not to say we are capable of playing a 4-3-3 that well but it demonstrates the flexibility the formation has on attack. I'm not at all against trying other partners with Bradley as I've stated in other posts. If someone steps up and proves to be a better choice over Jones then great. We all win. What I don't want to see is any formation involving a central playmaker because at this moment we simply don't have one. It's just too easy for good teams to mark a single "average" central playmaker out of the game.
My second viewing only revealed two things not already fully discussed here: 1. Josh Gatt got popped pretty hard in the box. I half expected him to hand the referee a bloody tooth after that shot. 2. Mix's hair looked good. REAL good. With hair like that, he could play for anybody.
I started the meme after seeing how much better the US moved the ball without him and against a high quality foe too. That he was but hasn't been as effective lately either with Spurs or the US. Heck, he started as a right side mid in Arena's 4-4-2 and was quite competent there. Can he do this now, as he's approaching 30? Maybe, if the US can conjure up Hogdson's era type of movement, where two wingers and the central mid are capable of dribbling the ball into the offensive third. All the US needs for that is a couple of dribbling wingers. And a mid.
Jozy played more like David VIlla than he ever has. GOing deep into the corners. With AZ he tends to be central and tends to go only as far wide as the corners of the 18 (tends to) this game I saw him hitting the channels and spreading the defense out wide. great stuff.
can you describe how you envision the 4 attackers to play? formation wise and tactically? are you thinking a Y in midfield like: ------------altidore----gomez dempsey------------------------donovan -------------------bradley ------------------williams ?
Zusi, not Gomez, would be my preferred fourth attacker. I like Gomez off the bench. I like Zusi and Donovan wide, Altidore up top, with Dempsey in the hole.
Or, maybe I understand a 4-3-3 pretty well. Maybe I understand that a formation is as flexible as the players in it, and by itself doesn't define how a team plays.
You have already established based on the nonsense you posted earlier that you do not understand any 4-3-3 or even the USMNT's version:
If you think Klinsmann expects his defensive midfielder to abandon the space in front of the CBs to cover fullback runs, you aren't paying attention. And we've already established your superfandom of Jones makes discussion between you and me on the topic pointless. So do me a favor and ignore me. I'll do the same for you from here on. Thanks.
It is fascinating that on my year on this site I have been called: A super fan of Beckerman when I had objectively defended his play in the first 10 matches. A super fan of Edu when I had objectively defended his play in the first 10 matches. A super fan of Altidore when I had objectively defended his play in the first 10 matches. A super fan of Zusi when I had objectively defended his roster inclusion over Benny and Adu. A super fan of Klinsmann for... Now a super fan of Jones. Who is next? In any event your post on the 4-3-3 is still nonsense.
You can superfan LD, he seems to be down on himself lately. On second viewing what creativity did we get from our 3 most forward players, Gomez, Jozy or Gatt? Jozy laid a good ball off for Jones in the second half. Gatt supplied zero crosses and had zero chances on goal. Gomez the same. Compare them to Kokorin, Kershakov, Smolov and its night and day as far as seeing dangerous forwards making some things happen. That being said, we were pretty good for good stretches of play with some nice quick 3 man combination one touch interchanges springing players (temporarily) down the flanks, and working through the middle third. Bradley is developing into a world class player, IMO. He's eliminated those yellow card tackles he was prone to making a couple of seasons ago (yes, he did get one in the first half, but it wasn't a reckless foul). I think we got a bit _____ (i won't say lucky) on both headers dropped back for goals, in that Bradley's goal was a one in a thousand strike, and Diskerud's took that deflection en route to goal. Still, Russia did not score from the run of play due to Howard's saves, but they had four good chances in the second half inside the penalty area that were created by super fast transition, numbers up passing and the type of ball movement we never matched, particularly down the center of the pitch.
What stands out to me the most... we are still not scoring from our forwards, this has gone way too long. MB yellow was reckless, he took someone down from behind, but who is counting in friendlies.
Some stats head to head/aka position per position : -------------------------------------- Denisov - 60 total passes (54+6), 11 turnovers, 4 fouls won/2 conceded, 3 tackles, 3 interceptions. Williams - 28 passes (25+3), 7 TO's, 1 foul won/ 1 conceded, 6 tackles, 2 interceptions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shirokov - 68 passes (57+11), 12 TO's, 1 FW/ 3 FC, 2 key passes. 2 shots on goal Bradley - 62 passes (47+15), 17 TO's, 1 FW/1 FC, 0 key passes, 1 shot on goal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kokorin - 28 passes (22+6), 12 TO's, 6 headers, 1 key pass, 2 fouls won, 2 shots on goal/1 off Altidore - 26 passes (21+5), 8 TO's, 6 headers, 3 key passes, 2 fouls won, 1 shot off target. ----------------------------------- I picked and chose what and whom to include but feel free to add : http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2012-11-14-rus-v-usa/chalkboard
This may not be welcomed discussion on the forum so if so do let me know... I'm out here in Korea and watched the game online and unfortunately do not have access to espn3. does anybody know a way i can rewatch the game? Nothing absolutely necessary but it would be cool! Carry on with the entertaining discussion!
Interesting. If you look at Shirokov's turnovers vs Bradley, not hard to see that Shirokov has far more turnovers in dangerous parts of the pitch than Bradley despite having fewer overall.
Very interesting comparisons. Williams overall lack of participation was most likely due to his botched pass that led to Russia's first goal. It came so early and was punished so quickly, that he probably was a bit shell shocked and reluctant to be caught a second time. Jozy had the "best" missed opportunity when he failed to control Johnson's 2nd half pass at the 18 with enough space to his left to take a first touch and then shoot. I would argue that Bradley's delivery to Boyd that led to Diskerud's goal has to be seen as a key pass. Kokorin was a threat with the ball at his feet going to goal and in the seam above the 18. His card for diving came after pushing the ball into the PK area and being clipped by Howard, although it appeared he was going down before the actual contact. The stats are indicative of Jozy's involvement, and ones that JK will be pleased to note, which, bodes well for Jozy heading into the Hex. Jozy was never in a position with the ball at his feet in which he he might have threatened a shot on goal
These stats have one major flaw, there is no mention where the passing was going, a goal scoring pass has the same weight as a side or back pass.
A goal scoring pass is listed as a key pass or an assist. You can look at every pass each player attempted, their direction, their location, and their length on the chalkboard to get a better understanding of what a player contributed. Yes but ideally the weakside #8 then shifts into the #6 position, against Russia we did not see that happen enough and Russia was able to pull Williams wide and attack the space he just vacated, in fact a couple of times when Twellman or Darke were criticizing Williams for being beaten this is what had happened. Against a more talented attacking side we would have been punished more severely for this lack of cover right in front of our CBs. What I saw was that Jones lingered in a high position while Bradley would come deep, deeper than Williams sometimes, to pick the ball off of the backline. Jones, and sometimes Bradley, also pressed very high like they were the guy in the hole playing behind Jozy. This resulted in multiple 4 on 4 or 4 on 3 situations, it also meant that our forwards were expected to defend deeper than in a typical 4-3-3, this feature I thought was a great total football solution but can't be counted on to fully replace the cover provided by the "weakside" #8. Going forward: 1. If we have Donovan and Dempsey I want them to both play free roles in the hole, Dempsey will play naturally more centrally and Donovan will run into space off of him and the CF. So behind them I want a CM that lets them shine. Jones and Bradley with a dedicated #6 behind them can do that but instead of pressing so high, where D&D should be defending, they're going to need to provide the wide and complimentary central cover I described in the first paragraph of this post. 2. If we have only one or none of them then we need to look at a Diamond or a 4-4-1-1 or something where we can get a fourth attacker or allow Johnson and Chandler to get into the attack.
The team this cycle has moved the ball well against high quality foes without at various times Dempsey, Donovan, Bradley, and Jones. Dempsey has 6 goals and an assist in 755 minutes of action in '12 for the US. Looks pretty effective especially considering the team put its single year record. Not sure about the right mid comment from the Arena era. Dempsey has at various times has played on the right, on the left, in central midfield, up top, and in the hole.
Gatt improved when he moved to the left. His defense was mediocre however. Johnson was excellent going forward, but he was mediocre on defense as well. Bradley was brilliant stitching things together in midfield but needed more help. Jones was weirdly outstanding when he got moved to the left. Chandler got sucked inside to often. I wonder if two deep-lying players and and attacking mid would have been the better way to go. Something like: ---------------------Altidore ------Herc-------------------------Gatt --------------------Bradley --------------Jones------Williams As the Russian had a few too many attacking movements up the middle.
"6 goals and 1 assist" are striker stats, which is why I mentioned that he was the team's top finisher. But can he be effective as a striker against quality sides with a dubious "supporting cast"? That is the question. Vs. Russia, Altidore, Gomez and Gatt had to do their own lifting. If you remember the opening match vs. Czechia, Arena picked Beasley to play on the right flank while Clint was on the bench. Clint started vs. Italy on the right - Beasley was benched for general ineffectiveness - and was subbed out late. Both started vs. Ghana. And then Arena was canned.