http://www.mlsnet.com/content/03/90min0930u20s.html I can't find this listed anywhere. It's not on USSoccer.com. It's not listed by the HDC website. It's not on ticketmaster. And so I ask if this isn't just a closed door scrimmage? I'll be disappointed if it is because I'd really like to see the match.
That's what I figured. I was about to call the Soccer House tomorrow to find out for sure. I wish they hadn't had the press release calling it a friendly. To me that means it's a public event. But all this really is, is a closed door scrimmage. It does suck.
What is the point in having a closed-door match with these young guys? I could understand if it is because they won't be playing a full game...but if they are, why then close it to the public??
It's on the center training field and closed to the public.. They say because the number of fans would have exceeded the sites ability to host them.
If the number of fans was going to exceed the site's ability to handle it, I know another field close by that could quite easily handle the numbers and has a very nice pitch. I guess the number of fans is too high for the practice field, and too low for that other field.
That's ridiculous. I bet there are economic reasons for them not wanting to use the main stadium. If it was too much money then they should have gone out to Fullerton or someplace like that. It's just a shame that folks can't see this match for apparently stupid reasons.
Game The game is not being held at HDC because they are repairing (or preparing) the pitch for the World Cup game this weekend. The "private" nature of the game is because the practice field to be used can only accomodate a small crowd. As to "why" they are not using another stadium/complex - your guess is as good as mine.
Come on it's not like the U20s will be playing their first closed door scrimmage. They played one against LA Galaxy in early 2002 IIRC. The games they've played in Chula Vista haven't really been "open" either; or a better way to put it - not publicized. The Senior Nats (both men and women) have also played scrimmages that have been closed to the general public. Now the "Freddy Factor" is valid. I'm not saying this is not the case since the kid is 14 and he is now training (who says he will play, though I think he might with 15 or 16 players in camp) with 18-20 year-olds. That is big. But it doesn't change the fact that USNTs (including the 2003 U17s) have played behind closed doors in the past. Why should it be any different because Adu is in camp? I'm one that believes Adu can play in MLS now as a key sub. But you know what? So can most - if not all - of the players in the U20 player pool. Adu is not the story with this TEAM, especially considering he might only be an alternate at best. If he is part of the final 23 for the UAE, then it's a big deal.
This game was announced as a friendly in various newspapers. The expectation that it was open to the public, I think, was consequently warranted. Had they announced this originally as a closed door scrimmage I doubt anyone would be up in arms - Adu or no Adu.
Yes, agreed (though I've not seen newspaper accounts - note I'm not saying they don't exist) that it could be construed this way. But are newspapers always accurate, on the up-and-up, or even intelligent in the way they report the news? Blame U.S. Soccer for not announcing that it was a closed door friendly/scrimmage.