Why isn't EJ playing more minutes?

[TimB4Last]

People, people, people. Allow me to be the voice of clarity.

Bruce's gameplan for this cup was to hopefully draw both the Czech Republic and Italy, and then go for the win vs. Ghana.

That would leave the US with 2 points going into the Ghana game and both the Czechs & Italians forced to play for a win to avoid being eliminated on 5 points with a bad GD, regardless of their results against Ghana, which I'm sure he hoped to have seen eliminated by this game.

[skip]

I'll buy the five-point strategy pre-WC, but after you have dug a deep 0-3 hole in Game 1?

At least BA knew he needed 3 points v. Italy, and we might have gotten them with a card fewer and/or an additional bit of luck. [Then he got turned around and lost his way.]

And if Italy had dominated us for 90 minutes, I would (almost) agree that we should have grabbed our point and run.

Again, I have to ask, did you see the game? Have you ever played soccer? Italy was there for the taking, even in the second half when we were down a man. Sub EJ in, please(!); give me 5 or 10 minutes if you won't 'risk' more.

And, oh, by the way, where are the 5 points you promised me going to come from now?

[John_Harkes_6]

BA recognized this when he primed his team to beat Italy. Why he gave up as time wound down, to preserve his precious point, only he really knows.
Maybe, just maybe Bruce knew if he lost to Italy there was no chance to advance. It would have taken a miracle if we had lost. But holding onto that one point was crucial.

You make that third sub, already down a man, and someone pulls up hurt you are screwed. You act like there is NO reason not to make that sub - I just made one that you can not refute. I was yelling at the TV for Bruce to get EJ in but looking back Bruce had a very good reason for not doing so.

You talk a big game about how no one listens to you but until you start acknowledging other people's arguments you will be labeled the town jester.

[John_Harkes_6]

Again, I have to ask, did you see the game? Have you ever played soccer? Italy was there for the taking, even in the second half when we were down a man. Sub EJ in, please(!); give me 5 or 10 minutes if you won't 'risk' more.

So you are willing to take the risk of playing 8 vs 10 for 10 minutes in a tied game against a powerful Italian side - yeah, you are right - lets sign you up to be the next coach right now.

[Elninho]

Take a look at where McBride actually was in the second half vs. Italy. He wasn't really playing up top. He dropped back into Mastroeni's d-mid role (which he has played for the Columbus Crew before), occasionally making runs forward on the counter. It was really mostly Donovan and Beasley that were being used as attacking players.

[TimB4Last]

Hey - he torched the powerhouse that is Panama. If he scored on Panama he can clearly score on Italy :rolleyes:

Nothing against you, John, but since we're back on thread ...

We're entering Game 3 with an offense that hasn't even been creating scoring chances, let alone goals.

Now, presumably, you want EJ, Ching and/or Wolff to find their goal-scoring touch.

An obvious positive by-product of bringing EJ on for BMB at the end of the Italy game would have been a little extra rest for BMB and a few extra touches (and big-game experience) for EJ. Of course that's not why you make that move, but it's an added benefit.

Anyway, is EJ in your starting lineup v. Ghana? Why or why not?

[John_Harkes_6]

Anyway, is EJ in your starting lineup v. Ghana? Why or why not?

To me thats a very tough call. Ghana's strength will come from the midfield with players like Essien and Appiah - therefore shutting down the midfield is crucial to success. That is where Pablo's red card hurts so much.

Reyna can't hold down that position by himself and will need help which means either O'Brien (who is supposively hurt) or Olsen will need to fill in that second DM role. That leaves Donovan at AM, Convey at LM, and Dempsey at RM.

So with five midfielders do you run 4 defenders/1 forward or 3/2. My personal approach is to go 4-5-1 to start the game and look to introduce EJ in the second half.

Personally a 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 against Ghana is a mistake and underestimates the skill they have in midfield.

[TimB4Last]

So you are willing to take the risk of playing 8 vs 10 for 10 minutes in a tied game against a powerful Italian side - yeah, you are right - lets sign you up to be the next coach right now.*

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

YES!!! I am willing to risk playing 8 on 10 v. that particular Italian side on that particular day.

I need(ed) those three points, not just one. No guts, no glory, and in this particular case, no guts. Well, the players played their guts out but BA failed them at the very end. I can't understand it ...

*It's pretty tempting to apply, actually. There's about to be an opening, and timing is everything. Do me a favor and post the USSF's address, will you? Thanks! Anyone out there know anyone in the USSF HR department?

[John_Harkes_6]

YES!!! I am willing to risk playing 8 on 10 v. that particular Italian side on that particular day.

Anyone who wants to take you seriously needs only to read this post to see you have no clue what you are talking about.

[Owen Gohl]

For those who care, EJ's scoring in 19 caps (USA 11-4-4):

Q - Qualifier
F - Friendly

[1] 10/09/04 El Salvador Q
[3] 10/14/04 Panama Q
[1] 11/17/04 Jamaica Q
[1] 02/09/05 Trinidad Q
[1] 02/19/05 Honduras F
[1] 03/30/05 Guatemala Q
[1] 02/19/06 Guatemala F

After scoring against GUA in the qualifier he made only one NT appearance in the next 10 months, 33 minutes in the return match in Guatemala City. The injury pretty much kept him out of the NT picture for close to a year. This clearly set back his development, as reflected in his play in both MLS and internationals. Since coming back into the NT picture in 2006 he has scored one goal in 10 appearances.

Given that record, can you realistically expect EJ to enter a match against a world power, with the US down to 8 field players, and expect him to score the winner?

I think he should play against Ghana, but I'm glad he stayed on the bench against Italy.

[TimB4Last]

To me thats a very tough call. Ghana's strength will come from the midfield with players like Essien and Appiah - therefore shutting down the midfield is crucial to success. That is where Pablo's red card hurts so much.

Reyna can't hold down that position by himself and will need help which means either O'Brien (who is supposively hurt) or Olsen will need to fill in that second DM role. That leaves Donovan at AM, Convey at LM, and Dempsey at RM.

So with five midfielders do you run 4 defenders/1 forward or 3/2. My personal approach is to go 4-5-1 to start the game and look to introduce EJ in the second half.

Personally a 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 against Ghana is a mistake and underestimates the skill they have in midfield.

Well, since I would have started EJ in Games 1 and 2, I'm clearly starting him in Game 3. BMB has lost me, somewhere, so I'll pair EJ with Ching up front.

Are we all agreed that we are forgetting about GD, planning on simply beating Ghana and hoping that Italy beats CZE? Or are we going to go for the gusto?

[toomanywords]

I'm back. Poor strategy, but excellent execution of said strategy, I have to admit. Ghana beware!

Isn't it possible that instead of TRYING to get only 1 point out of Czech/Italy, what Arena meant was that his strategy didn't REQUIRE more than 1 point out of those games? Obviously if we could already be on 4 or 6 points, Arena wouldn't be saying, oh gee, that plan was foiled. You disingenuously read his earlier comments to mean he played for a tie in the Italy game because a win didn't fit the strategy, as opposed to because that was a conservative option against a world power that would still preserve a chance to qualify.

Obviously a lot of us are disappointed we didn't win on Saturday, and I understand that. And I've read through this whole thread, so I'm not sure why I'm bothering to argue, since we clearly see this differently. But do you really think it was more likely that the U.S. would score in the last 10 minutes of the game than Italy would, even if we used that third sub AND no one got hurt? Italy had even more incentive to lock down defensively than we did by that late stage of the game, since they could afford to throw an additional player back with no serious offensive penalty, being up a man.

[Shaster]

I am agreeing to not pull McBride, but should put EJ in and not DeMacus "Do-Nothing" Beasley.

I would wonder what EJ will do at 63 minutes when Landon passed a good ball. McBride shanked it because he was too tired to catch it.

[luftmensch]

Anyone who wants to take you seriously needs only to read this post to see you have no clue what you are talking about.
I take it he's never had to play 8 on 10 before. Or 9 on 10, 10 on 11...hell, probably not even 11 on 11.

[TimB4Last]

Anyone who wants to take you seriously needs only to read this post to see you have no clue what you are talking about.

Life involves risk-taking. I'm risking a point - which wasn't a sure thing even with 9 players and BMB in the lineup - to win 3. I needed those 3 points. You didn't, BA (finally) decided he didn't.

John, if we end v. Ghana playing 9 on 10, are we going for the win? Oh, so Ghana is no Italy? Really? Well, Italy was no Italy on Saturday, they were a shadow of themeselves. Very beatable, in fact, and we should have kept on trying to beat them until the final whistle.

We'll have more information on Thursday ...

[::::::]

I'll buy the five-point strategy pre-WC, but after you have dug a deep 0-3 hole in Game 1?

Arena, if anything, is a slave to his plans. I'm not defending them in the least.

At least BA knew he needed 3 points v. Italy, and we might have gotten them with a card fewer and/or an additional bit of luck. [Then he got turned around and lost his way.]

And if Italy had dominated us for 90 minutes, I would (almost) agree that we should have grabbed our point and run.


Arena = Inflexible. It may be his greatest coaching defiency. It has been exploited many times.

Again, I have to ask, did you see the game? Have you ever played soccer? Italy was there for the taking, even in the second half when we were down a man. Sub EJ in, please(!); give me 5 or 10 minutes if you won't 'risk' more.

I would have. However, I am not Bruce Arena.

And, oh, by the way, where are the 5 points you promised me going to come from now?

That's where he put himself in a hole, assuming his players wouldn't fold and Eddie Pope wouldn't be the biggest failure since Jeff Agoos.

[TimB4Last]

Isn't it possible that instead of TRYING to get only 1 point out of Czech/Italy, what Arena meant was that his strategy didn't REQUIRE more than 1 point out of those games? Obviously if we could already be on 4 or 6 points, Arena wouldn't be saying, oh gee, that plan was foiled. You disingenuously* read his earlier comments to mean he played for a tie in the Italy game because a win didn't fit the strategy, as opposed to because that was a conservative option against a world power that would still preserve a chance to qualify.

Obviously a lot of us are disappointed we didn't win on Saturday, and I understand that. And I've read through this whole thread, so I'm not sure why I'm bothering to argue, since we clearly see this differently. But do you really think it was more likely that the U.S. would score in the last 10 minutes of the game than Italy would, even if we used that third sub AND no one got hurt? Italy had even more incentive to lock down defensively than we did by that late stage of the game, since they could afford to throw an additional player back with no serious offensive penalty, being up a man.

Welcome to the fray! Your politeness worries me a bit (on your behalf), but if you just keep repeating the line about sticks and stones, you'll do fine here.

And yes, that's exactly my point. I do think inserting EJ at the right moment would have turned the tide in our favor, even 9 on 10. The Italian defenders would have had to give EJ and his fast, fresh legs plenty of respect. Keller's mindless long kicks could have been directed to an intended target. EJ could have scooted around on defense every bit as ably as BMB on his last legs.

The most likely result? Still a draw. But I think a win was more likely than a loss - our 9 were still motivated (if tired), Italy's 10 were in a funk (tired, irritated, confused).

Most importantly, I am trying to win that game because a draw simply doesn't get the job done.

Again, BA agreed with me, prepped the team to win and managed the team to win, up until the last x minutes of the game. And with x minutes left, at the point BA gave up trying to win, that was the time to sub EJ in and go for the win.

-------------------------

*I was not being disingenuous; In my original comments, I was trying to be funny. I keep forgetting to use those stupid ... uh, sorry ... silly smilies.

Reporter: Coach, what are your goals for Games 1 and 2?
BA: AT LEAST a point.

Does that sound ambitious to you?

Let me take a stab at that one.

Reporter: Coach, what are your goals for Games 1 and 2?
TimB4Last: Six points!

For all of you that fell for the whole flying under the radar bit, it's time to come out from your hiding places. We've got one point from Games 1 and 2. You got what you asked for and, dare I say, what you deserved.

One more time, BA?

Reporter: Coach, what are your goals for Games 1 and 2?
BA: Six points! Uh, guys, that's 3 points from Game 1, and 3 points from Game 2. (BA holding up fingers and counting) One two three ... four five six. You guys can't count, cant ya?

[The sad thing is, most of you guys eat this stuff up: the disdain, frankly the disrespect, BA shows for even reasonable questions. Well, tick ... tock ... tick ... tock ...]

[TimB4Last]

Herein lies the problem. Oh but alas, no reporter gives a flying f**k what you say.

When you throw a stone into a pack of curs, the one that yelps is the one that got hit.

[toomanywords]

The most likely result? Still a draw. But I think a win was more likely than a loss - our 9 were still motivated (if tired), Italy's 10 were in a funk (tired, irritated, confused).

Most importantly, I am trying to win that game because a draw simply doesn't get the job done.

Well, if the most likely result is still a draw, I don't see what you (or anyone else) is getting so worked up about. To read most of the comments here, you'd think the U.S. was absolutely guaranteed a victory if only we put Johnson on the field.

[DurlP]

When was the last time any US forward even attempted a long distance shot?I would say, in all seriousness, Clint Mathis versus Ireland in 2002. That shot was awesome.

And before that?

Clint Mathis versus...

[DurlP]

BMB has lost me, somewhere, so I'll pair EJ with Ching up front.BMB wasn't the one who said play me up top, all alone, where I have NEVER been effective.

Why t. f. do only fans know this, but Bruce Arena doesn't (and you as well, who apparently seem to be so much wiser tactically that the sum whole of others)

Are we all agreed that we are forgetting about GD, planning on simply beating Ghana and hoping that Italy beats CZE? Or are we going to go for the gusto?I see that you used 'or', but how is the first of the two not 'going for the gusto'?

I'm not sure what is more confusing, your arguments or the questions that you pose afterwards.