2002 FIFA World Cup Technical Report

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by MartSkin, Sep 20, 2002.

  1. MartSkin

    MartSkin Member

    Oct 8, 2001
    Right Back
  2. Nutmeg

    Nutmeg Member+

    Aug 24, 1999
    Interesting. Not a really in-depth section on the US, but a different perspective. Some points I liked:

    Strengths:
    Solid and well organised defence; balanced
    team line-up; disciplined in adhering to tactical
    roles; good heading in attack and defence;
    counter-attacking play; team spirit and physical
    commitment.

    Weaknesses:
    Central defenders had difficulties against quick
    strikers; encountered problems changing the
    pace of the game (always played a high tempo
    game, leading to fatigue towards the end of matches).

    Outstanding players:
    1-Brad Friedel; 5-John O’Brien; 10-Claudio Reyna;
    21-Landon Donovan; 20-Brian McBride.
     
  3. MartSkin

    MartSkin Member

    Oct 8, 2001
    Right Back
    There's no mention of Friedel in the Goalkeeping analysis. What an outrage!
     
  4. isaac101

    isaac101 New Member

    Mar 1, 2001
    Bethesda, MD
    This was interesting in the "Confederations Analysis":

    "The Americans played with a lot of selfconfidence
    and used a number of formations.
    They were also powerful, full of energy and
    good on the counter-attack. However, they
    were unfortunate to lose to Germany in the
    quarter-finals, missing a golden opportunity
    to reach the semi-finals. The new young generation, with players such as Donovan, Beasley
    and McBride, has breathed new life into
    the American team, and they can now look
    forward to the future with confidence."

    Which was then followed with this!:

    "Mexico employed a tactical formation that
    was tailored to the team’s abilities, a decision
    that bore fruit as it led to victories over
    fancied Italy and Croatia in the group stages.
    However, despite dominating (??) neighbours USA
    in their round of 16 duel, they could not take
    advantage of their many chances and ultimately
    paid the price."
     
  5. Playable Back

    Playable Back New Member

    Apr 26, 2002
    Hey. Let the Mexicans take pride in something from the outcome of that match. I'll still take the 2-0 score line and be happy.
     
  6. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    I was at that game, and I watched the replay on Korean TV, and have since watched a tape of the US feed.

    I agree with that assessment. We clinically finished on two of the very few opportunities we had, they should have had one PK. They pretty much controlled the run of play, much as we did against Germany. The biggest mistake was the substitution in the 28th minute. Not necessarily in bring El Cuspidor on, but the kid they took off was abusing Reyna on the right side of our defence.

    The Mexico game was a glorious result, but let's not get too wrapped up in it. We accomplished what we needed to do, but we didn't exactly run them off the pitch. That game could easily have been 2-0 the other way.
     
  7. jotadia

    jotadia New Member

    Jun 21, 2001
    Miami
    Club:
    Atletico Madrid
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    THe interesting part is the well organized defense. Remember the angst on this board leading up to WC02 regarding the state of US defense. Questions like Regis on left, slow central defence (Agoos), no visible replacement for injuries to defensive midfield.
     
  8. Martin Fischer

    Martin Fischer Member+

    Feb 23, 1999
    Kampala. Uganda
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, no, no. The Mexicans had more possession. But supposedly a Big Soccer expert knows that possession does not equal dominance. Mexico had only a few half chances except for the botched penalty kick call, while the US had two goals plus the next best chance on a cross that Donovan blew. The Mexican advantage in possession was tactical, not the result of dominance.
     
  9. BrianJames

    BrianJames Member

    Jul 30, 2000
    Chicago
    Still, to this day and after viewing this game a few times, I can't figure out what was going through Aguirre's head when he made that subsitition. That guy, Morales?, was very dangerous. Him coming off the field was probably a hell of a relief to Reyna too, as he could head into the attack more freely.
     
  10. empennage

    empennage Member

    Jan 4, 2001
    Phoenix, AZ
    I don't know what game you watched, but I thought that Mexico could've easily won that game. They had 2/3 of the possesion and were in our half most of the time. IMHO the only thing they lacked in that game was finishing. Had they been able to put one in the net, the momentum probably would've went in their direction.
     
  11. FootyMundo

    FootyMundo New Member

    Mar 1, 2001
    Minneapolis
    Two thoughts:

    McBride is part of the youth generation?

    Mexico played well enough to beat us but for an ability to finish on all their strong possession.
     
  12. Serie Zed

    Serie Zed Member

    Jul 14, 2000
    Arlington
    Easy to have all the possession when you're down in the 8th minute.
     
  13. NASL Fan

    NASL Fan Member

    Nov 23, 1999
    Los Angeles, USA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I found it interesting Landonovan was named to the best 23 (one of the 7 players added to the 16 man All Star team). And at least one of the 7 added players was from Japan, which means the "subs," unlike the first 16, were not all from Quarter Finalists...

    Another honor...
     
  14. empennage

    empennage Member

    Jan 4, 2001
    Phoenix, AZ
    The goal came against the run of play. It was a pretty goal, but let's not kid ourselves. If we had played like we did that day against a team that could actually finish we would not have won.
     
  15. Martin Fischer

    Martin Fischer Member+

    Feb 23, 1999
    Kampala. Uganda
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Wow that is insightful. If Mexico had put one in the net, they would have had a better chance. Thanks, man.

    Seriously, all Mexico had was possession. Finishing is difficult when you do not create real chances. Sure it is possible to rip a screamer from somewhere, but it just is not likely. In the game I watched, that seemed characteristic of Mexicos efforts. Possession or no (and most of their possession was in our half, but pretty far from our goal).
     
  16. Bill Archer

    Bill Archer BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 19, 2002
    Washington, NC
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Agree 100%

    "Finishing" is the gremlin that gets the blame when a team is not technically proficient enough to score.

    And oddly enough, soccer is a game which requires you to score in order to win. Being forced to take a ton of lousy low-percentage shots becuase you either haven't got the skills to get it into the box OR the defense is shutting you down DOES NOT mean that you have "finishing" problems.

    It means that you don't play the game very well.
     
  17. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    He wasn't on the '94 team that advanced. I guess that's their criterion.

    As for the "dominance" debate, I'll come down in the middle. Mexico didn't do much with their possession dominance, but they did something. I won't soon forget that scary sequence that included Brad's sissy punch straight to a Mexie.
     
  18. weasel

    weasel Member

    Oct 31, 2000
    NYC
    So the run of play had been established in the first
    7 minutes of the game? Riiight.

    If Mexico had dominated possession the entire game, and we scored in the final minute, that would be one thing. Instead, we scored early, played solid defense, and humiliated them with a perfect counter attack.
     
  19. strider026

    strider026 New Member

    Aug 7, 2002
    Huh
    Tech report

    I have tried the FIFA site and the report opens to a blank page. Is there another place that I can get it?

    Thanks Bill
     
  20. beineke

    beineke New Member

    Sep 13, 2000


    The Spanish-language version of our weaknesses also talks about lack of movement off the ball.

    (BTW I know that McBride was awesome, but I can't believe that they thought we were generally strong in the air.)
     
  21. Mason16

    Mason16 Member

    Apr 11, 2001
    South Florida
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    USA 2
    Mexico 0

    Biggest stage
    Win or go home
    "A" teams present
    No excuses


    You can get wrapped up in analytical theories of dominance, possession, missed calls and whatever else. The final score is all I care about. And if anyone has been paying attention for the past 2 years, this result was not a shock at all. We've beat Mexico regularly for 2 years now.
     
  22. Preston North End

    Feb 17, 2000
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The U.S. dominated Mexico.

    We let them have the ball until in came into our defensive third of the field. Then we took the ball away from them or forced them into a not to dangerous goal scoring situation.

    This was the same tactical plan used against Korea. The Koreans played against it much better than the Mexicans. We also couldn't shut the game down vs. Korea like we did vs. Portugal and Mexico because of how Korea never let us control the match.

    I don't like this system, but it got the result. I just wished we attacked Mexico like we did against Portugal (in the first half).

    BTW, Germany used the same tactics against us that we used vs. Mexico. We were able to handle it much better - much better - than Mexico did vs. us (or Korea vs. us).
     
  23. empennage

    empennage Member

    Jan 4, 2001
    Phoenix, AZ
    :rolleyes:

    Please. You make it sound like Mexico was far from scoring a goal against us. As mentioned above they had some quality oppertunities that they should have finished (ie. the missed punched save by Friedel). They also didn't get a PK that they should have had. Those are the breaks of the game, but Mexico was very much in the game until Donovan scored the second goal. I remember being very nervous for the entire game, because it seemed like the US didn't ever have the ball.
     
  24. empennage

    empennage Member

    Jan 4, 2001
    Phoenix, AZ
    Don't kid yourself. If we would've played this game 10 times I think we'd split the series down the middle with 3 wins for us, 3 wins for them, and 4 draws. I really think that our national teams are very close. Afterall, these regular wins that you're talking about ALL happened on US soil. When we play in Azteca we have lots of problems. This was neutral ground, but as I said before I think if we played Mexico more times on neutral ground it'd be almost even.
     
  25. russ

    russ Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Canton,NY
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Re: Tech report

    The file is a PDF file.You need Adobe Acrobat reader 4.0 or higher.

    It's free on the Adobe website.Go to
    www.adobe.com
    and click Download Acrobat reader.
     

Share This Page