Good result for Iran. Encouraging performance by the US, although I thought half the credit goes to England being poor and somewhat lethargic in trying their build ups.
yep, that was the problem. They just sat there for 90 minutes, defending like their playing Brazil. This is why I never trust english managers
USA was the better team. Pundits blaming Southgate for wrong subs and for playing for a draw. They cite the Euro final stating that England should have gone for it after being up 1-0 and should have won. What game did they watch through those rosey colored glasses? Did they miss that they did go for it for about 15 minutes after they got the goal and started to look very vulnerable? After Italy took control of the midfield game, they were forced back. Same thing here. USA was more the aggressor and dictated the English bunker.
With this draw, all 4 teams could advance. I haven't looked at the possibilities, but I think the US could advance with a draw v. Iran and a Wales loss. But I also don't know the advancement criteria (matches won v. goal difference v. head to head or what ever the tiebreakers are).
So, I really think Berhalter out matched Southgate today. England were definitely not playing on the front foot, but the US were all over them in the middle which cut off their attack. That said, there was a lot of stagnation in England where as the US were very lively, and a few players were really up for the match: Pulisic, Adams, McKennie, and even Zimmerman and Ream played much better than v. Wales. I can't speak in comparisons for England as I didn't see the match v. Iran, but knowing the players from the EPL, they were not where they should have been. Kane was actually quite good, holding, passing, defending, but had no service, so wasn't all that dangerous. The best move of the night, though, was England bringing on Henderson. IOM, he settled the team which quashed the excitement the US were playing with, and thus the tiredness set in. But it was an exciting 0-0 match, that is for sure.
That would suit Iran fine. Iran would have 4p, USA 3p, and Wales 1p. If Iran loses to the US, Iran is out and the US advances for sure. Conversely, if Iran beat the US, the US is out and Iran advances for sure. In case of a draw between Iran/US, Iran advances unless Wales beat England in which case Iran will be eliminated with England/Wales advancing.
Looks like a match fixed game. Must be under investigation Both teams took a long time to put the ball back into play, few shots, few "real" tackles, no pressure, low xG (0.54 x 0.61). Shame.
I think this is the second worst/best result for Iran. Right now it is 4 - England 3 - Iran 2 - US 1 - Wales. Best set up - England had won today and the US is forced to beat Iran in the final match day to advance (with points) Second best set up - This draw allows the US to draw v Iran to advance (on goal difference) Worst set up - US had won, which would mean that Iran would need to win v. the US to advance (because no matter the result of the England v. Wales match, goal difference is the second criteria, and Iran and Wales have the same at this point. So if Wales win and Iran draws, both have 4 points, but Wales have a smaller goal difference). BTW, the criteria are: 1. Greatest number of points from three group matches (each team gets three points for a win and one for a draw). 2. Goal difference in all group matches. 3. Goals scored in all group matches. And if two or more teams still are tied after that? We go to: 1. Greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned. 2. Goal difference from the group matches between the teams concerned. 3. Goals scored in the group matches between the teams concerned. 4. Greater number of points obtained regarding fair play conduct (yellow cards = minus-1; indirect red card, as a result of a second yellow card = minus-3, direct red card = minus-4, yellow card and direct red = minus-5, with only one of the deductions applied to a player in a single game). https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/2744a0a5e3ded185/original/FIFA-World-Cup-Qatar-2022-Regulations_EN.pdf We are up and down. We can play shit at times, and can play well enough to make others look poor. Today, I think the latter occurred. England were not great, but the energy we had, the quick ball movement, were harassing in midfield, and made England look bad as opposed as to their lack of emphasis on winning...not that I'm posting with any bias.
England have a lot of young attackers who are good in possession, but otherwise unwilling to put in the effort and do the dirty work. The US midfield dominated the England midfield because of this. Bellingham, Rice, Saka, Mount, and Sterling were all pretty much invisible, since they never got much possession. Whereas Tyler Adams, Musah, and McKennie were all over the place for the U, breaking up England attacks before they could even get started, winning second balls, and regaining possession.
This has been a hallmark for us going back to 2002. We have often had good pressing and lively midfielders. When not...well, see 2018.
True....but I've never seen our midfielders play this well against this level of opponent. Jude Bellingham is likely to be sold for upwards of $100 million next summer....we made him invisible.