Alert: Klinsmann announces roster for May/June camp on Thursday (announcement included in this thread)

Technically this would be Dolo's one time passed over.

And you guys look desperate or ill- informed or blinded by hatred whenever you bring Dolo into the LD conversation. There is a difference in a coach having to accept you have made a decision to take some time off , and all he can do is dock your pay or release you (not going to happen) in the case of LD, and in the coach asking you take the summer off and rest up to get the knee back to 100% percent. I get the argument he played 90 before seasons end but that does not mean he came out of that ninety with no swelling and everything back to pre-injury status.

 

Really? So we'll see him at the Gold Cup?

And why wouldn't Feb or March have been Donovan's one time passed over, technically speaking?

 

I don't think this standard exists except in the minds of people desperately trying to rationalize the erratic and petty nature of Klinsmann's decision making.

The underlying logic of it is that Donovan and Cherundolo don't really take this whole professional soccer thing seriously until they've been slighted by the great Jurgen Klinsmann, after which they train twice as hard. Either that or the "chemistry" concerns magically go away once a player has spent a camp in time out, like it's a kindergarten class or something.

He could have been more upfront and honest about why he left Donovan out, but that would have involved him admitting it has nothing to with soccer and everything to do with either an arbitrary "one time passed over" standard as you guys want to believe exists OR making some passive-aggressive point about professionalism to a 31-year-old man who's accomplished far more with this national team than Klinsmann has.

 

LOL.....okay then carry on.

 

Again, you try to generalize this into some grand unified theory of coaching. I meant for Donovan, in this instance.

And seriously? "Nothing to do with soccer"? Talk about desperate. I think it is far more desperate to cherry pick quotes and try to somehow argue that a guy, who has lived and breathed soccer for longer than most here have been alive, and lobbied to coach the U.S. team for something like 4 years after leaving his Germany coaching gig, decided to put it all on the line for non-soccer reasons? Even with time to think and reflect on the decision?

I'm sorry, but Occam's razor says it makes much more sense to at least assume he has *bad* soccer reasons than to claim he has completely non-soccer reasons for such a significant soccer decision. But, to be clear here: Just because it cannot be summed up by some "assists" or SOG statistic does not mean it is "non-soccer". Klinsmann has made it clear he considers the whole package part of the "soccer" reasons.

 

Cool, you accept that in Klinsi's mind the decision is totally justifiable.

Human beings justify marginal choices all the time. D@mm!t man, that's what drives the freaking lottery and Lost Wages, NV. That doesn't make the choice logical or appropriate for producing the optimal outcome.

That doesn't prevent posters from looking at the decision and (I admit I'm 1000% in agreement) believing that the decision seems to put important WCQ qualifying results unnecessarily at risk.

Occam's razor also says if the most obvious explanation for excluding Donovan is because Klinsi is making a point that has nothing to do with the best possible result in the next 3 WCQs it's because he is.

Com'on computer guy, analyze the data.

Possibility <> Probability

 

Occam's razor is not about how "obvious" something is. It says "do not needlessly multiply entities". IOW, the more assumptions that have to be made, e.g. the more non-visible entities which need to be introduced to support an explanation, the more skepticism you should have of that explanation.

Supposing Klinsmann has the soccer reasons my "contingent" has listed here, and that those are rational reasons requires us only to assume that Klinsmann values commitment, hard work, playing "week in, week out", etc. And furthermore we have to assume he will make decisions based on that. Wait. We don't have to assume that. He has stated as much. We only have to actually believe he *sometimes* tells the truth. Not much assuming required for that.

Supposing Klinsmann made the decisions based on "non-soccer" reasons requires us to make a number of assumptions about his inner thoughts which are not supported by *any* evidence. Those hypothetical inner thoughts are the "entities" referred to by Occam.

Again, whether that is the *right* decision is another debate, and one I find much more reasonable. But these constant bizarre statements trying to insinuate Klinsmann is some tortured secretly vindictive guy and/or completely incompetent, or even a moron, are just - well, bizarre.

Edit: BTW, on this point:

The 2 parts of this sentence are not mutually exclusive. Klinsmann could well believe the best possible result can be had *by* making that point. Again, there is this assumption that Klinsmann wants to make a point... pointlessly. Assuming he wants to make the point without any soccer objective in mind is needlessly introducing entities.

 

But for many posters the "right" decision is defined as, "What is most likely to earn the US a spot in the WC14 Finals asap?".

That is not the choice Klinsi has made, therefore it is seen as the incompetent, moronic choice of a tortured secretly vindictive guy.

Agreed. Klinsi may very well be making a "big picture" point.

Pragmatic American sports experience says, "Winning isn't everything. It's the only thing.".

Klinsi's mindgames with Landon may or may not produce whatever result Klinsi expects but it appears to put the immediate of max points in the next 3 WCQs at risk.

 

Which is a perfect demonstration of needlessly introducing entities. You can conclude he made the wrong choice without any of those assumptions, thus the explanation is unnecessarily complex.

The only assumption you need to make to conclude JK chose wrong is: He is miscalculating the negative effects of LD's exclusion vs. the positive effects. That only requires the introduction of one entity: JK's fallibility. A much easier to swallow proposition.

There you go again. The term "mindgames" assumes he is just trying to mess with LD. That's ridiculous. Period.

 

I'd rephrase that slightly and say a 31 year-old man who has proven all he really needs to prove to be taken seriously by any manager who'd manage us, no matter who he is. But you can't unequivocally say that he's achieved more with his national team that Klinsmann. I mean there is that whole World Cup trophy and UEFA Championship trophy he's hoisted... But that's beside the point.

 

I think his phrasing was carefully chosen to say Donovan has done more for the U.S. than Klinsmann has done for the U.S.

Of course that's silly to even argue. By that criterion, every player on any given team has done more than a new coach no matter WHAT that coach's other experiences are. Following that logic to its conclusion would mean new coaches have no place to tell the players what to do

 

Well the difference is Landon has carried all of his teams on his back.

 

No, mindgames indicates a psychological approach.

mind games: noun, A series of deliberate actions or responses planned for psychological effect on another.

Klini excluded Landon (in order of likelihood - my opinion):

1) To make a statement that no one is bigger than the team (psychological).
2) To motivate Donovan to achieve his maximum playing level (psychological).
3) To punish Donovan for declining the March callup (psychological).
4) because Donovan cannot make a greater positive contribution to the team's effectiveness in winning games than the least capable player on the roster who performs a similar role for the team (physical).

If Klinsi genuinely believes that the team will be more effective on the field over the course of 2 friendlies and 3 WCQs due to Landon's physical abilities compared to other player's on the squad, then I feel it is reasonable and appropriate to question Klinsi's competence as a soccer manager.

 

Mindgames is a little harsh... I would say more 'mental motiviation' but depends on how you look at what he is doing...and your opinion of it overall.

 

What part of the provided definite (not mine) do you disagree with?

Mind Games: noun, a series of deliberate actions or responses planned for psychological effect on another.

 

The imperative word here is "has".

 

Just one nit-picky thing from me. Donovan did not decline a March callup. Jurgen did not call him up and told him he wasn't going to call him up, back in December I believe.

 

^ This. I'm not sure where you got the definition from; it seems to tick some of the boxes, but leaves out the usual connotation. Merriam-Webster says:
a psychological tactic used to manipulate or intimidate
I think that comes closer to the meaning.

This is a good list, but incomplete. And you only count the physical aspect of Donovan's potential impact on the upcoming 3 WCQ's. Donovan is a distraction at this point. The people who discount "chemistry" or toss off the problem of re-integrating him onto the team are being naive IMO.

I will see if I can find the time to add to your list myself before the game, but work is piling up and I'm already wasting too much time browsing these threads and waiting for the game!

 

And the people who prioritize the "psychological" concerns about "chemistry" and "re-integrating him onto the team" above the "physical priorities" of getting "the best" players on the field (or even as a used sub) to give the team "the best" chance "to win" the game(s), are being even more naive, IMO.

At some point Donovan (assuming he does get called back in this cycle to the "first choice team/roster") will have to stop being a "distraction" and will have to be "re-integrated onto the team."

It's a wasted opportunity, imo, for the coach to not use these BEL and GER friendlies, and the camp preceding them, as the times to accomplish those tasks -- again if JK is indeed interested in calling-in and utilizing LD on the USMNT within this cycle.

 

Don't discount the possibility that there's a chemistry problem between players and coach because coach has left off a teamate they know can help them. And how much chemistry do you see out there on the field right now anyway?

 

Not much at the moment, that's true. I'm sure we could have used Donovan against Belgium... assuming we really needed to get points against Belgium. We will see how WCQs pan out.

Like I said, I was on the fence about the actual decision. But I certainly won't be swayed much in either direction by these 2 friendlies. Anyway, this makes more sense in the LD thread, no?

 

I think there is the potential for additional adjustments to JK's roster that was initially announced ahead of the May/June camp and June WCQs. (June hasn't even kicked off yet, and the US will still have to slog through a friendly and then 3 matches all by June 18, so I'd imagine this thread will maintain some relevant utility for 3 more weeks or so.)

Certainly, having more guys back and available by June 2's friendly (relative to what we saw on May 29) will or could give viewers a clearer picture of the status of the team.

Is there any word on if an "official list of players" was submitted to FIFA/Concacaf for the June WCQs, and how big that list was, and what if anything it would take (injuries or whatnot) to get those not on that list (at this point) available to represent the US during the June WCQs?

 

Makes sense in both places, but obviously that is a more focused thread. In any case I didn't bring up the subject.

 

Considering how many injured players he called up, the decision not to include Donovan looks even more spiteful and less reason-based. The foreseeable event of Zusi getting a yellow now leaves us in a particularly silly situation.

 

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...nn-not-worried-about-injury-bug-were-covered-