Post-match: USA vs. Peru

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by ussoccer97531, Oct 16, 2018.

  1. nobody

    nobody Member+

    Jun 20, 2000
    #101 nobody, Oct 17, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2018
    Overall a shaky first half, but the team stayed organized and fought it out. Then, they came out and played some good ball early in the second, got a goal and started playing a bit. So, it was a disappointment to give up the late goal and settle for a tie. I don't think Peru is that much below Columbia that the two games should be such a striking difference so I think we have to give some credit to the defense, both team wide and the back four (well, three of them at least).

    Guzan did well back there and you could see him communicating with the youngsters. I see lots of talk about experience and veterans but that was the first time I've seen a US veteran actually look like he as providing leadership and guidance. I'm not 100% sure that if I had to win a game tomorrow Guzan wouldn't be in the net.

    The back line was mostly solid. CCV did well, although still looks a step slow at times. His clean touches are welcome back there. Long had a very good game for a debut, barely did a thing wrong. Cannon wasn't a threat going forward, but his side was on lock down until Yedlin came in and took a nap. That kind of lackadaisical approach should not set well with the new coach, hopefully. Sweat actually played some good defense and was physically up for the battle, but he's a deer in headlights with the ball and the obvious weakness across the four.

    Trapp played the Bradley role better than Bradley can these days, but he was still pushed off the ball too often and didn't do anything productive with the ball enough. If you're not physical and a hard worker, you need to be skilled or you're gonna be mediocre. Delgado coughed the ball up too often, but at least made a handful of productive passes. Acosta had a mixed game for me. In the first half, he had a hard tackle that put down one of the Peruvians and in the next few minutes, they tried to hit back but he played strong and physical and those little things make a difference out there and I was really glad to see a guy in the center for the US unafraid to mix it up a bit. He also had the nicely planned free-kick. But, he was spotty in possession. One of the more mixed games I saw out there.

    Weah was a monster in the first half and vanished in the second. I do think a lot of it was due to his having to cover back more on defense and no one really able to get him the ball in better spots, but he has to figure out how to impact the game in multiple circumstances and I want some production. Amon showed some strength on the ball and looked like he has some tools, but he was a black hole out there as almost every ball that came his way disappeared. He'll need to do better or he's going to kill us. Sargent, of course, was the biggest attacking bright spot. The goal was nicely taken and his touch in the box is about as good as I've seen out of a center forward for the US, nice movement as well and always looking to link with others while still presenting direct danger. He's a keeper.

    I like Green's skill on the ball and because he's skilled he is a good outlet to retain possession, but he's too pondering to make dangerous plays going forward. Bobby Wood showed once again that if you want someone to work hard by running in a straight line until they can shoot or lose the ball, he's your guy. Bradley came in and changed the midfield shape in a bad way. If we need a Bradley type (which I don't think we do) just play Trapp. At least he still has some wheels left and works hard out there. And Yedlin, for my money sits on the bench after coming in with only a few minutes left and not being able to hustle for less than 10 minutes. I've had him penciled in for a while, but he's nowhere near good enough to half ass it out there and be anything but a problem. Needs to get his shit together.

    Sarachan? Thanks for the memories. At least you played a lot more new than old players and were there to take charge when no one else would or could. I appreciate your time and efforts. Good luck in your next assistant coaching role.
     
    QuakeAttack, juveeer, TimB4Last and 3 others repped this.
  2. jlarosa

    jlarosa Member

    Jan 14, 2009
    Miami Springs, FL
    Club:
    Alianza Lima
    Nat'l Team:
    Peru
    I liked Sargent, he played futbol. gave many passes and set up his teammates. Scored the US goal, bright future, but make sure y'all teach them futbol, not soccer. case and point, Bradley plays soccer, lalas played soccer... pulisic and donovan plays futbol. It was overall an entertaining game with a different strategy that we had to deal with unlike our game against chile.

    Peru on the other hand, played well for having a completely different lineup. These 6 changes definitely changed how the team plays, but one thing Gareca (head coach) said was "the team should play the same, regardless of who's on the field," which is true.

    The 6 players that started this game as opposed to chile, were

    Nelson Loyola (not my favorite --> Our started Trauco took a seat this game)
    Alex Callens (he's ok, but not our starter --> Anderson Santamaria is an aggressive center mid)
    Sergio Peña (He's ok, but not Yotun who is the creator in the midfield)

    Our attacking trio is usually Carrillo (beast), Cueva ( our 10 ) and Flores

    against the USA, we played with Polo (eh.., although he did a good game) Hurtado (he's alright, got hit early on) and Flores.

    Also, our goalie was not the starter, our starter is Gallese, we had Carvallo in goal... he's eh... not my favorite by a long shot.
     
    MPNumber9, juveeer, russ and 6 others repped this.
  3. goussoccer

    goussoccer Member+

    May 23, 2001
    Avon, CT
    Was at the game - great atmosphere, but probably 70-30 pro-Peru. Wow! I was behind the goal opposite Sam's Army/American Outlaws and barely heard them all game. I was VERY surprised by the lineup -- so many newbies. It was interesting to me that Sarachan would roll out such a new lineup, three debutants and others making their first start. I was happy to see him trying out new guys.

    Now, as others have said, if you want to see new players and guys, then you have to accept that they aren't going to be a well-oiled machine. Frankly, we looked very well-oiled in our defensive shape, but certainly ugly with the ball. We did a LOT of defending, so I am not surprised that we had to sub late in the game. I was disappointed, frankly, to see Michael Bradley enter the game. I'm not a hater and I don't think he cost us the game, but if you want your younger players to learn how to finish a game, leave them in to finish the game. Not sure if Sarachan's desire to win his last game overcame him at that point.

    With all the possession that Peru had, not very much of it was dangerous at all until late in the second half. We had more quality chances IMHO until that point. What seems to get overlooked in some of this analysis is that Peru made some changes to their lineup too. Once they did, they become more urgent and more dangerous.

    Frankly, overall, I was impressed with how the team did given their inexperience. A strategy of defending first and counterattacking is often called for and they did a great job of it.

    Count me as someone who sees friendlies at this stage of the cycle as a chance to blood some more players and see what they can do. In the next year or so we need to begin to make sure we have a core that have played together and know each other well on the pitch. Not to mention a coach who is actually the coach that will take them to the next World Cup.
     
    QuakeAttack, MPNumber9, juveeer and 6 others repped this.
  4. jlarosa

    jlarosa Member

    Jan 14, 2009
    Miami Springs, FL
    Club:
    Alianza Lima
    Nat'l Team:
    Peru
    Peru had 6 changes compared to the game vs. Chile. The team that played vs. Chile is close to our starting first team, minus guerrero, farfan. The team vs. USA was very much different, with only a handful of true starters. 2 in defense, one in midfield, and 2 in attacking.
     
  5. nobody

    nobody Member+

    Jun 20, 2000
    Totally agree that letting the youngsters finish the game by closing out a win against a good opponent would have been a great boost both in the experience of doing so and the confidence of walking off the field winners against a good team. Instead, they learned the coach doesn't really trust them, lost the experience and the feeling of success; and things went screwy at the end even with the old timers coming on. Poor coaching move there.
     
    TimB4Last and chad repped this.
  6. Editor In Chimp

    Editor In Chimp Member+

    Sep 7, 2008
    Why do US coaches not name Bob Bradley persist with only playing 3 attacking players? And we wonder why we can't generate chances or control the flow of the game.

    Its been true for like a decade; if we have 4 attacking players on the field at a time, we play significantly better. If we have 3 or less, we simply invite constant pressure on our midfield since the opponent knows they don't really have to stay at home.
     
    juveeer, Tom Collingsworth and chad repped this.
  7. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Everyone is wired differently...but there are 2 types of people who would be very excited.

    1. People who just love to compete.
    2. People who never get tired of playing for their national team.

    If he isn't in one of those two categories, it's not a deal breaker. But in the context of this forum, it's obviously a negative.
     
    tomásbernal, largegarlic and TrueCrew repped this.
  8. TheKraken

    TheKraken Member

    United States
    Jun 21, 2017
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You got that right. I honestly thought he had been subbed out at some point early in the 2nd half and I had just missed it. Then I see him later in the half and couldn't believe my eyes. Where was he for all that time?
     
  9. Pegasus

    Pegasus Member+

    Apr 20, 1999
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    They may have learned they are better than the old timers and that are ready to shove them aside.
     
    Deep Wilcox repped this.
  10. goussoccer

    goussoccer Member+

    May 23, 2001
    Avon, CT
    Thanks..for the update on Peru's starting folks...I asked a fan in the stands and he said 4 were starters. What is interesting to me is that I'm not sure that any of the US starting 11 last night are our 'first team' starters as of right now.
     
  11. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    Because we get blown out by having four attackers. We don't have a ball-winning destroyer or a world-class goalie to bolster our defense. In addition, our attackers (other than CP) are not difference makers at the international level.
     
  12. HipsterCholo10

    HipsterCholo10 New Member

    Barcelona
    Peru
    Oct 17, 2018
    Actually Chile did not lose to THIS Peru side. Peru’s had 6 different players in the starting line up against Chile. Cueva Carrillo Yotun Trauco Gallese Santamaria.
     
  13. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    Amen. I liked Cannon and the two CBs. CCV I thought played well. Sweat was more shaky, dove in and missed, and clumsy on the ball. Yedlin, there has been conventional wisdom he was fixed by Sunderland. That underlines, don't believe the hype.
     
    juveeer repped this.
  14. jlarosa

    jlarosa Member

    Jan 14, 2009
    Miami Springs, FL
    Club:
    Alianza Lima
    Nat'l Team:
    Peru
    Cueva Carrillo Yotun Trauco Gallese Santamaria.

    These guys alone make a massive difference in the flow of the game. If they had played from the start, it would have been a very different game.
     
  15. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    After 10 subs, Peru scores an equalizer, whatever. Peru had the ball most of the game but the USA was much more dangerous until the end.

    I think this window has shown that MLS players get heavy legs. Colombia subbed in Quintero at about the time Acosta and Bradley both ran out of gas. They scored three goals from there. Last night, there were small injuries that forced off Cannon and Acosta. It could be that the October window, coming at the end of the MLS season, is a hard one for MLS players to go 90 at International speed especially for 2 games in 5 days. Makes you think back to last October and the mostly MLS lineup that looked very tired down in Couva...

    I think Peru played Chile then showed up for the money. While they made some changes, they have a rotating squad of 15-17 players and this was close to a full strength team. I don't think they had much scouting on the Americans except some quick viewing of the Brazil and/or Colombia game. They tried hard to attack the USA on the left. Which anyone would do watching that tape.

    They were kind of successful even though Saief and his rogue defending were sent to the stands by Sarachan. His replacement, Amon, obviously is not ready to defend a World Cup opponent. He was paired with Ben Sweat who is not really up for this either. However, Acosta did a pretty good impression of Tyler Adams against Mexico and it really helped. When Weah switched over there, he tightened things up more.

    It also helped that the USA was back to the 4-1-4-1 but Peru was so focused on attacking the USA left, they didn't notice all the space around Trapp for awhile. Add in Acosta doing his Adams impression and Delgado and Trapp convincing Dave to just move the midfield to a flat 3, and Peru really did little but pass the ball between the CBs. The USA would win the ball and mostly give it away unnecessarily. But there were a few lightning fast counter attacks that were very good chances.

    Like I said, Amon was not ready defensively. But he is 19. It is a credit to Weah, who is 18, that in two games he has been switched to put out the fire created by Saief and Amon. Weah did a tremendous amount of running and should have been subbed off for fresh legs late. That he doesn't sprint to attack the cross in the 86th minute, is hard to blame him. Injuries probably changed the USA sub pattern but, as usual, Dave had a sub in his pocket and he should have used it to rest Weah.

    Sarachan, as usual, gets antsy about the result and takes off Amon and puts in Green. Why he just didn't have Green play Amon's spot, is a mystery. Why he didn't put Picault in to play Amon's spot, who knows. Instead he switches to a 4-4-2 with Green up top and pulls Delgado out of the midfield. Is this 1998 when Sarachan last coached? Put a guy up top, defend deep, and hit them on a counter?

    All I know is we have seen this time and time again. The USA now has two CMs (Delgado goes to the wing) instead of 3. It takes Peru a little while to figure it out but then it is one way traffic through the midfield (3 v 2 and 4 v 2) towards the USA box. The USA simply cannot play with two CMs against any team of any quality, much less one of the better CONMEBOL teams.
     
  16. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    You apparently don't understand the game that well. WTF90!!!

     
  17. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    Bradley glitched a couple times after he came in but the more telling fact to me was the general anonymity of the performance. There was not a flourish of offense. We didn't suddenly start cleaning up attacks better. That right there is more what his role should be (if anything) and nothing much happened from it. At which point I revisit that "if anything." I want impact subs. I don't remember his impact.
     
    Mahtzo1 repped this.
  18. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    Twellman/ESPN with that graphic on the coaches with 150 games' experience to me was telling. If you are looking for an experienced MLS coach who wins, Berhalter was bottom of the list.
     
  19. nobody

    nobody Member+

    Jun 20, 2000
    Will Trapp man of the match? The ********?

    I hate the conspiracy theory crap myself, but no way anyone watches that game objectively and decides Will Trapp was the best thing on that field last night. Absurd. He wasn't necessarily horrible, but he certainly wasn't the star of the game.
     
  20. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Who votes on MOTM?

    I'm...puzzled. Very, very, very puzzled.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  21. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    Talent at what? He plays back. He is not a natural defender. A natural defender goes and gets that cross into space, and is aware whether a man is there too. I think the sales pitch on Yedlin is he can get forward. The cold stats are 0G 0A this year, and 1 assist last year. If the sales pitch is someone gets you something at the other end, to offset any failings, there needs to be tangible proof they do it. For example, there are backs who routinely get header goals. Or, Robinson's downside is clear for now, but he does have 2 assists. That I can weigh out, or tactically use when I need something and take a risk.

    Personally I want defenders who can defend first. But if you're going to play this "offset" game I want to see actual production as opposed to people talk like you can create. I feel like we settle at too many positions on the field, CBs who are "composed," wingbacks who "get forward," center mids who are "two way players." In coach speak that's backs who aren't great at defense but might be better for offense, and mids who lack a particularly useful quality but get up and down the field. You make enough compromises like that and to me you usually end up bad or at least flawed. You can sprinkle a hustle player or attacking threat back in there but the core needs to work at its job.
     
    QuakeAttack, juveeer, russ and 2 others repped this.
  22. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    The result is meaningless really. The performances around the field were pretty good. In no particular order:

    Amon: I think we are all spoiled on what a teenager in a first cap should be able to do. I think Amon had some moments to be excited about. He was not ready to defend in Sarachan's scheme. He is raw and naive, but that will get worked out if he stays healthy. Since Denmark is the best Scandinavian league, it probably doesn't argue that Gall and Sabbi need to be rushed in.

    Sargent: This is one of the kids that are spoiling us. He is 18, has barely played club football, but was doing things repeatedly that Wood can't do and Altidore maybe pulls off once a game.

    Weah: We are now disappointed when he doesn't do something extra ordinary. He is also 18, is possibly our best wing defender, and you can feel the whole stadium get a little extra excited when the ball is at his feet. He never seems to hide either.

    Trapp: Can't turn with the ball under pressure. Gold Cup group stage fill in.

    Delgado: If only...If only he had blossomed a little earlier and not signed a new MLS contract. He is good breaking pressure but will take 2-4 extra touches all the time. One year in Germany and you wonder if that internal clock would be shortened. MLS midfielders almost always have the time for all these touches, but he didn't last night. He was 26/35 passing, which is not good enough. Acosta/Sweat/Delgado simply gave the ball away too much. Delgado switched off for the Peru equalizer.

    Acosta: He showed he can be the injury replacement for Adams (not as good but serviceable). Maybe he starts next to Adams even. He was all over the place. But he was 27/36 passing, all these missed passes just add up. Another one that you have to wonder if he would be cleaner in possession if he had moved out of MLS.

    Bradley: Has he ever subbed into a game? He and Yedlin came in for injured players. Bradley was 0/2 passing and Yedlin 0/1 at a time you would hope such veterans would help the USA keep the ball and relieve some pressure. MB didn't demand the armband and actually played Acosta's spot rather than take up his usual spot that Trapp was in.

    Sweat: Chandler level game. Besides the numerous giveaways with his foot, actually threw the ball right to a Peru player in the center of the pitch. If you were at a U7 game, every parent and coach would be yelling, "Don't throw it in the center". Realized he was not at this level, and basically tucked in next to Long and rarely ventured out. Weah basically picked up his defensive position along with his own.

    Cannon: When was the last time a MLS fullback came in and was satisfactory? I can't remember. Maybe Beasley in 2015. Not only was Cannon satisfactory, he was actually very good. I don't think he got forward much, but he was good defensively, battled, concacaf'd some, and was a pleasure to watch.

    Long: I watch him for the Red Bulls quite a bit. He is an excellent transistion defender. But you see the best CBs, even when scrambling, will clear the ball 50 yards and right on the chest of a forward. Or will take a step and play to a midfielder. Long just clears. Usually not far and in a random direction. But he does usually clear the ball. Parker also just clears, but where Long's clearance might go 15 yards to an opponent just outside the box, Parker's usually go 50 yards into the seats. He is not young, but a good game.

    CCV: Long was not good on the ball and it fell to CCV to actually try to make some passes. Just like against Mexico, he was incredibly poised and very good with his distribution. He has probably improved the most out of all the defenders since last October. He is reading the plays well, which makes him look quicker. He had quite a few good clearances. Another good game. One thing I noticed with CCV is he is the type of CB that drops with runners. That is ok as long as the defense understands there is no offside trap being played. It was effective against Peru, who tried to mostly go over the top too.
     
    rlrcpa, Midas Mulligan, juveeer and 4 others repped this.
  23. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    Yeah, he had that one nice crunching tackle, the sort of thing I think we've needed to break up opposing possession, but that's it, and then it's like count the giveaways.

    I go back to, part of the problem is, do we need 3 players of that type at one time. None of them was particularly effective at ball winning (the excuse for fielding them all) and the rhetorical question of why can't we possess ourselves goes to the people we put out there in the center. Delgado or Trapp occasionally hits a nice ball. But none of that group is a Stuart Holden or Claudio Reyna who can work like a real CM in tight space. They are grunts who at this level predictably turn the ball over too much. And we put 3 out together.

    I think the problem is 1 forward, I think the problem is 3 DMs. When we could get forward Peru was at sea trying to defend us. But Dave tactically went with an approach that made that less likely to happen much. You can argue we stalemated Peru for 80+ doing this but to me the trend of the more competitive games, ie, this, Ireland, France, Mexico, is we are more dangerous on the attack and tend to blow the result when sit back and try to absorb. Trying to absorb is a standard tactic of many managers. I don't think it plays to a roster strength until we find some 6s and get 4 good backs out there at one time.
     
  24. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    I generally put myself in the camp of USSF is incompetent rather than conspiratorial but things like this make me wonder.

    I'd also add (i) having MB play 90, wear the armband and be the center of USSF's "experience matters" marketing and (ii) WT being captain for 7 out of his 9 games he played for the USMNT.

    I'm officially quite worried.
     
  25. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think most of the takes are too narrow or too knee-jerk. Though I will say Sweat is not an international level LB. and I thought Cannon looks like he could be a keeper.

    As far as CM/CB goes. The two are linked to a degree. Too often we go with the 'name' players rather than the fit.

    Start at CB. Ideally you want big, quick, good in the air, strong, and able to pass out of the back. Most players are not 5/5 so you want your pairing to compliment & compensate for each other.

    Brooks & Miazga check 4 and at least 3 boxes, but neither is exceptionally quick. Both pass well. One thing you cannot have is a traffic cone in front of them (Bradley). Trouble vs good teams. If you start that pairing, you need a better shield in front vs anyone but a minnow. Heck, you might be able to get away with a distributor/cone as at DM, but only if you play double pivot & the other guy is a destroyer type.

    Trapp is not a big a cone as Bradley, but he does have physical limitations. Pair him with a ball winner (or two 8's ahead) and it can work. But he does need some help in CM.

    More mobile CBs (like we saw last night) can cope better with a cone CM, but ours do not pass well. And our more athletic CMs (Acosta, McKennie, Adams) are not great passers (or ball winners) either.

    Further, while I think Adams/McKennie could develop into a 6 pretty easily, I think both have the potential for a lot more. So I get the 4141 with them as double 8's or putting one beside a Trapp/Bradley type.

    Of course, neither are great playmakers (yet) and with Pulisic out, our attacking cupboard is pretty bare.

    Which is why we have struggled to generate pissession/chances. Teams do not fear us (passing, speed, possession, or CM bite) so we have no space & they play confidently on the ball.

    Bottom line, we aren't that good, are in a transition period, and have a lot of younger players who are new-ish to each other & international footy. And are playing top shelf teams. It is gonna be mostly ugly for a while.

    But there have been bright spots. McKennie & Adams will get better. Weah & Big Red have potential and can make plays now. Brooks, Miazga, CCV, & Long have showed well enough individually and at times in pairs. We have two capable keepers. Cannon is a keeper.

    Trapp has been serviceable and even Robinson & Acosta have had flashes.

    Bradley should be done.
     
    DHC1 repped this.

Share This Page