Your outlook on the whole situation is awful. Of course Charlie put himself in harm's way. Not only was he out past curfew, he and everyone in the vehicle had been drinking (which also lead to one of the passengers being killed - mind you). If that isn't putting yourself in harm's way, then I don't know what that means. Surviving the accident was a miracle all on its own. When you also supplement the incredible recovery time and his renewed sense of appreciation then you have a truly remarkable series of events that is still to this day unfolding. Of course we're all bummed Charlie wasn't cleared to play. We all know what he can do for The National Team. But I honestly believe that all personnel involved to include: The Sochax Medical Staff/President, Bob Bradley/Sunil Gulati, and The National Team medical staff all had Charlie's future on their minds when making this difficult decision. Charlie needs to understand that he has a massive upside for his future career. There is no need to rush back to playing, even if it is The World Cup.
See.... the thing was, charlie was something special we never seen before from a forward in the US. He knew how to body people HARD to not lose the ball, tevez like, his speed was lightening, his ability to take plaers on the dribble was nothing seen out of an american player before, as he cuold do step overs like any brasilian and then burn you. Nery is different, because yes, he came frmo a crazy good resume with olympiacos and then played excellent for mexico....but mexico have many great talents that are better, or equal to him like chicharito, vela, dos santos. For the US Charlie left a BIG hole, but now with the rise of buddle and gomez most US fans arent worried about that hole so much. US isnt as deep at forward like mexico... but we'll see with these new guys in buddle and gomez (new as in their form, not new to a USMNT fan )
Seriously, Who ever thinks CD9 is game fit and deserving of a spot on the 23 going to South Africa after not playing in a competitive match in 8 months raise your hands.
You're correct that Davies leaves a big hole. As for Buddle and Gomez, we'll see. My guess is that Buddle's hot streak is a fluke and he'll crash, Findley-like, in international competition, not having played against anyone better than CBs on MLS teams. Gomez is slightly more promising, given his success in Mexico and his determination. But I wouldn't be surprised if neither of them pan out.
Exactly. People are getting WAY too buried in the middle of this thing, and can no longer see the forest for the trees. Use Occam's razor, people. Sheez.
[FONT="]This is a classic "question mal-pos[/FONT][FONT="]ée." The better question is whether he deserved a spot on the 30. If that's the question, then my hand is raised. It's too soon to judge the 23. We all still need to get a look at Beasley, Bedoya, Clark, etc. before making that call, and we would have had to have made the same decision for CD. As for not playing for 8 months, Gooch is in the same position. Beasley basically is, too. [/FONT]
What forest? What trees? Occam's razor (which, by the way, I shaved with this morning) should be flipped around. The simplest explanation is usually the least compelling--especially when dealing with the messy world of human society.
Bobby Zamora steps up: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8679361.stm "I knew I wouldn't have done myself or England justice had I gone," he said. "It was a joint decision between myself, Capello, Fulham's medical team and England's medical team. The World Cup is a massive tournament. It's not about myself, it's about England. "Capello wished me all the best, hoped that I get fit and would be available next season. It's one of those things, it has come at a bad time and the last five weeks have been terrible for me. "It's been an up and down season because it's been so good on the pitch and I've scored some important goals. To now pick up this injury has kicked me in the teeth. It's come during the last couple of weeks and when there was the possibility of going to the World Cup with England. "That's football, it's a cruel game."
I was hoping to leave the office, but this post requires a response. First of all, if there's an implied parallel here with CD9, then you're wide of the target. Since Fulham didn't prevent him from playing with England, there's no real parallel. Second, Zamora is far less integral to England than Davies is to the US. We don't have a Rooney and a Crouch. If we did, then I'd be happy to leave Davies at home to recover. As it is, we need him.
Sochaux refused to give BBradley a green light to call Charlie in. The only thing that surprises me a bit is the failure to bring Charlie into camp in addition to the 30 in order for the staff to see for themselves, up close and personal, how CD is doing. That failure means to me that it wasn't even a close decision. Yes, it went down to the wire time-wise, but in the end, there must be enough data to say that CD is not ready and will not be ready to be a contributing team player offering better options than Ching, Buddle, Johnson or Gomez.
The fact that it was a close decision necessarily means that was the wrong decision? No matter your opinion on the matter, there exists a point where a given player does or does not deserve a spot on the roster. The fact that certain players approach the point of getting a spot but do not quite meet the threshold does not merit finding the decision to exclude the player incorrect; that's why the minimum standard exists in the first place. Your argument is that he is so close to the point of deserving a spot on the team, that he should be on the team despite not meeting the designated threshold. What you really should be saying is that you disagree with the threshhold we are holding players up to for health and fitness, that you want to lower the standard, not that you disagree with how the standard was applied.