i still don't think the guy is that good, but take heart. here's bruce's take on him (ussoccer.com)after the us-canada game. --------------------------------------------------------------------- On the play of Steve Ralston, also a first-time goal scorer: “Steve is a good player. He had a real good camp this week. We had five injuries this week, and he was one of them. I’ve been very impressed with him over the last two weeks. He’s a quality player, and I think we need to give him a stronger look than we have in the past.”
he is a very good player. His biggest problem is that if we play a bunch of little guys like Landon, Beas and Convey, Arena will have a need to get some bigger horses in the line-up to defend set-pices and crosses, and just provide a bit more physical presence. Ralston is very skilled but not exactly a physical force. Klein is also good and he is a horse.
In Truth. I would say there's a secondary problem that he's got Ben Olsen to compete with. Ben is clearly a Bruce fave, Ralston is clearly not.
Just checked...pulse is strong. Sorry to disappoint. Besides, heart disease doesn't run in the family. Meanwhile, have I been like a HUGE Ralston detractor? I think his odds are long to make the '06 roster, but you can say that about a lot of guys. Good for Steve that he impressed in camp; that's what you need to do. Certain guys are intriguing to Arena...Ralston, Jeff Cunningham for example. Heck, I have been WAY more a Cunningham detractor than perhaps any other player. But I can understand why such players would be intriguing to BA. But does that mean they are somehow going to elevate their games to such a consistent level. and with a certain kind of game necessary, that they just HAVE to be on the '06 WC roster? Maybe, but I doubt it. Right now, I'd say that Bobby Convey has a better shot of making the roster than either of those guys. But it's early. Lots can happen.
I guess you don't understand the purpose of The Ralston Line. It has to do with a certain level of ability that is typified by Steve (a good level, BTW) the the relationship of that level of play to our National team. Steve scoring a goal vs Canada doesn't change the fact that Steve is Steve and I am sure that Revs fans are happy about that too.
I think the biggest thing about this is that it must kill the Arena Bashers who think he has unmoved opinions and just hates some guys. Must kill them to realize that not only did he show them last summer that he can coach, but now he's proving to them that he has an open mind.
After the Agoos incident, I don't think he had much choice. But his ability to learn from his mistakes was the main reason that I wanted him around for a second go.
I think this post nails why Bruce has been so successful at every level that he has coached. When I first saw a Bruce Arena coached team in 1979, and I cannot emphasize this point strongly enough, they looked like they were coached by a lacross coach. When asked during his run of 4 consecutive NCAA championships what the difference was between his teams now and his teams of the late '80s that always flopped in the NCAAs, he first gave credit to his players, but then added that, in all fairness, these guys are better coached than those guys were. I stopped being surprised by Bruce's ability to grow during his successful run with DC United. People that are surprised by Ralston's emergence in the USNT simply don't understand Arena. He will always have his shortcomings with player selection (believe me, there is a long list of inexplicable "favorites" at UVa long before Agoos ever played for him), yet he will continue to learn, get better, and improve the program as long as he is associated with it. All of this will be done in a disciplined atmosphere of high expectations and, believe it or not, a surprisingly "hands off" tactical environment.(Some of his assistant coaches are much more "hands on" tactically, but Bruce, the former lacross guy, is much less involved in what is going on tactically than a lot of people realize. As it turns out, players love this freedom that they are given to make decisions for themselves and often florish (if Bruce can get them on the field in the right role, which as we know, can sometimes be a struggle). All in all, I think that Bruce Arena is probably the best thing that has happened to the USNT, at least from a coaching perspective. As I say that, I'm not in denial about his shortcomings. I just think that a guy who is that disciplined, ambitious and that willing to grow and learn from his mistakes is the type of guy that you want heading an emerging program such as ours. As for Steve Ralston, congratulations to him. I hope that it is the start of many successful appearances. I know most of us have wondered if he would get the chance.
Almost everyone has biases and Arena has most definitely not been an exception. I think he's getting better at this, though. The sad thing is that he could be the best coach on the planet in 2006 and probably not top 2002 in terms of results.
We have to think about qualifying first. We're looking at next year, not just 2006. For the record, I don't think Ralston should start (though I wouldn't totally rule it out) and definitely would be against Cunningham starting, but I do like Arena giving these guys minutes and injuries will require guys like this to step forward. I think Ralston should be on the roster, though I'm not sure about Cunningham (I'd rank him behind Mathis, Wolff, McBride, Buddle, and probably Razov + likely/possibly behind several others including Twellman) I am wondering if Arena thinks MLS has reached the point where he is taking MLS performance a lot more seriously. That isn't to say he ignored it before; just that maybe he's valuing it higher now.
Let's see where Ralston is where qualifying starts. On the roster, probably. Playing significant minutes with Olsen and Klein also available and BA possibly decdiing to use Reyna on the right or play with only central midfielders. It's still a long haul for Ralston.
The good news is that he's at least in the mix. Whether he'll get a lot of time in big games is another question. Given the number of injuries we'll likely to see over the next few years, being in the mix is really significant. Everybody on the roster is very important. The nightmare of this: http://www.sams-army.com/index.php?Mlist=match&Mid=756 should never be repeated. My philosophy is that everyone who is great at the MLS level needs to be thoroughly examined. I'm thrilled to see that Arena is rewarding stellar MLS play, especially at this time. I can't wait to see Buddle in USA shirt.
I think your philosophy and Bruce's philosophy are the same...but there are lots of ways to do "thorough" examinations -- watch and re-watch club games, evaluate camp performances, and THEN actual game play. Actual game play is just ONE method of examination. Too often some assume that since "so and so" didn't get game time, or some arbitrary number of games, then that player didn't get a "fair" shake. I think this is the wrong way to think about it. BA won't be perfect, and he certainly will make personnel mistakes in this cycle, as he did in the last, but I do think, as the hardworking guy he is, he will be "thorough" in his evaluations.
I think that BA is preparing to qualify for 2006 by getting as many domestic league players ready as he can. He may be anticipating sparring sessions with Euro club coaches over the release of some players, and wants to have a plan B ready. That plan B likely calls for Ralston to come off the bench. That plan B also may mean that Bobby Convey plays left back some, see. And it may call for LD to run the team, like against Canada....
BA is doing the same as he did last time. Giving lots of guys shots and rewarding those who play well in camps and games more time. I too hope that the USMNT pool becomes so deep that BA never feels that due to an abysmal run of injuries that his only option is to play an ultra-defensive lineup in a place like San Jose, Costa Rica. But, the result in San Jose would not have been any better if BA had called up MLS "stars" like Ralston, Chung and Henderson.
Wait a second, Martin. What is your Crystal Ball make and model? I have the HypoCrystal XP, which on the box advertises that it is the one model that lets you see hypothetical events in the past as well as the future. I plugged in Ralston, Chug, and Henderson and the US wins 3-2. Of course, after the game there was a riot and the entire US team was killed off, except for Jovan Kirovski. Apparently the molecular structure of his hair gel helps cure and even ward off the oft-fatal bite of Costa Rica's notorious fer-de-lance. In the HypoCrystal XP, Jovan becomes the enslaved god of Costa Rica.
Just opining. In my book, trying to use more offensive players like Chung, Ralston & Henderson would have resulted in a higher score against US and less chance of taking a point than Arena's dire strategy did. Of course, I could be wrong.