There is at least one very important way in which the Antigua and Barbuda game is unlike any other game the USA has ever played. Games like this happen in OFC qualifying with some frequency. Games like this showed up in CONCACAF as recently as the semifinal round of qualifying for the 2002 World Cup (in Group 2). But the USA just hasn't happened to end up in a game quite like this before. This is a game in which the USA must rack up goal differential against an uncertain threshold. Anything can happen in CONCACAF qualifying, but it is entirely plausible for Antigua and Barbuda to lose all of its games in Group A. The USA could well end up tied on points with Jamaica or Guatemala or both, with the loser of the tiebreaker failing to qualify for the hex; goal differential is the first tiebreaker. No one can predict how much goal differential Antigua and Barbuda will concede to Guatemala and Jamaica in future matches, so the USA must set the bar as high as possible. Of course, the most important thing about goal differential is that it be positive in as many individual matches as possible. But in past matches, the USA could sit back with a "big enough" lead, happy enough with any victory. In this match, there is no "big enough" lead; a 3-0 victory won't look very good if Guatemala and Jamaica both beat Antigua and Barbuda by four or more goals in the next two qualifying matches. One advantage for the USA over Guatemala is that Guatemala's last match against Antigua and Barbuda is on the fourth match day, while the USA's last match against Antigua and Barbuda is on the fifth match day. But Jamaica has a similar advantage over the USA, and the USA would prefer to rack up the goal differential at home now rather than having to make up a huge goal differential deficiency in the match in Antigua and Barbuda. Yes, Antigua and Barbuda's roster appears to be improving; it is theoretically possible that they will prove to be a tougher test than anticipated. But they still seem to be the worst CONCACAF semifinal-round opponent for the USA in years, perhaps ever. Even Barbados in 2002 World Cup qualifying seems to have been a better team. There have been games before in which goal differential has been somewhat important to the USA, but they've also involved some sort of thresholds for sufficient goal differential. One such game was the Egypt game at the 2009 Confederations Cup. But there, the USA had target goal-differential thresholds of +3, +4, +5, and +6; +3 ended up being enough. The most similar such game is probably the first Barbados match in 2002 World Cup qualifying. However, Barbados had already stunned Costa Rica by that point, and Guatemala had set something of a threshold of +2 GD, which the USA achieved well before it ended up with +7 GD in the first Barbados match. The USA also had the advantage at the time of looking forward to a Barbados fixture on the last match day. So on Friday, if the outcome of the game is somehow in doubt late, we can imagine the USA playing conservatively so as to preserve the win. But that is the only situation in which the USA should play conservatively; otherwise, the USA should be aggressively trying to score more and more goals.
i don't see the usa ending up tied on points in the grand scheme how many matches has JAMAICA won against usa and GUATEMALA plas at USA match day 6 think CONCACAF will let USA be eliminated from the tourney think ITALY, and you know how corrupt the game is i wanta tough semis, tough so game 6 means something but i trust the lords of soccer will fix thematches if needed, they always have
Here is one example scenario in which goal differential may prove important. USA 3-0 Antigua and Barbuda Jamaica 1-0 Guatemala Antigua and Barbuda 0-5 Jamaica Guatemala 1-0 USA Jamaica 1-0 USA Guatemala 5-0 Antigua and Barbuda Antigua and Barbuda 0-3 Guatemala USA 1-0 Jamaica Antigua and Barbuda 0-2 USA Guatemala 1-0 Jamaica Heading into the last match day: Guatemala 12 points, +9 GD Jamaica 9 points, +5 GD USA 9 points, +4 GD Antigua and Barbuda 0 points, -18 GD Now the USA hosts Guatemala on the last match day, while Jamaica hosts Antigua and Barbuda. In this scenario, the USA can only ensure advancement to the hex by defeating Guatemala by 3 or more goals. In contrast, change USA 3-0 Antigua and Barbuda to USA 7-0 Antigua and Barbuda. Then it's: Guatemala 12 points, +9 GD USA 9 points, +8 GD Jamaica 9 points, +5 GD Antigua and Barbuda 0 points, -22 GD In this scenario, any USA victory over Guatemala ensures advancement to the hex.
Glad you're not one of the players, this is the WORST possible attitude. Jamaica is going to be a major test for us, so is Guatemala in Guatemala.
Welcome back, Zebro. Was wondering if that was you. Line by line posts. Conspiracy theory. You go cold turkey on the ellipses... ?
While I find it hard to believe that we will have too much trouble with this group (although anything can happen . . .), I think running up the score on Antigua is good practice of the kind of "nasty" that Jurgen is seeking. Germany goes to San Marino and wins 10-0. We should try to do the same here. By the way, this team is no where near as bad as the Granada team we played in 2004. Yes, they had Joseph, but I believe that a few of their players were amateurs.
that example scenario is possible, but admittedly it involves the US not picking up any points from their trips to Guatemala or Jamaica. (and it involves Antigua & Barbuda not getting any results. This is crazy Concacaf WCQ, when is the last time a team in the semifinal stage obtained no points in their six games?) I'd say the mission for the US to get 1 or 3 points in one or both of those games -- at Guatemala and at Jamaica -- is a much more important (and attainable) mission than trying to pound in 6 or 8 or 10 goals in this first WCQ. (if the US is not going to finish in the top 2 of this semifinal group of 4, it will be because it dropped points in matches it should not have, not because they didn't create a significant enough Goal Differential -- against the group's supposed minnow -- to win a tie-breaker in the group table.)
2004 (WCQs for 2006): Mexico 18 Trinidad and Tobago 12 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 6 St. Kitts and Nevis 0
You really rate Jamaica as having that much more firepower than the U.S.? They just lost home and away matches to Panama, and their best striker (arguably) was kicked off their team for their first 2 qualifiers. Hard to imagine them outperforming us the way you have it in that scenario.
So here's some of the (occasionally disappointing) history of teams in situations where it might have been useful for them to rack up goal differential. 2010 World Cup, Group G: Brazil got things off to a stuttering start, earning only +1 GD against North Korea (but, after a Portugal-Côte d'Ivoire draw, Brazil went on to defeat Côte d'Ivoire, making goal differential meaningless for themselves.) Portugal then exemplified the best approach to these sorts of games, racking up +7 GD against North Korea. Côte d'Ivoire just couldn't match that result, eliminating themselves by only earning +3 GD against North Korea (meanwhile, Portugal was holding on for a goalless draw against Brazil that made the whole exercise academic.) 2002 CONCACAF World Cup qualifying, semifinal round, Group 2: Jamaica only managed +1 GD in their trip to St. Vincent and the Grenadines. El Salvador surpassed them on the next match day with a +6 GD home victory over St. Vincent and the Grenadines. But it all ended up being meaningless when Honduras swept El Salvador, Honduras split with Jamaica, and Jamaica split with El Salvador. 2002 OFC World Cup qualifying, first round, Group 1: Australia and Fiji tried to outdo each other in earning goal differential before their meeting on the next-to-last match day (although Australia was also apparently trying to make a point about the absurdity of the qualifying structure.) Fiji 13-0 American Samoa. Australia 22-0 Tonga. Fiji 6-1 Samoa. Australia 31-0 American Samoa. So Australia was far enough ahead of Fiji, +53 GD to +18 GD, that a draw with Fiji would almost clinch advancement for Australia fair, barring disaster on the last match day against Samoa. Australia in fact defeated Fiji 2-0 before defeating Samoa 11-0.
Here's perhaps a more plausible example scenario in which goal differential may prove important (although the likelihood of any single scenario is less important than the general advantages of a large goal differential): USA 3-0 Antigua and Barbuda Jamaica 1-1 Guatemala Antigua and Barbuda 0-5 Jamaica Guatemala 1-1 USA Jamaica 1-1 USA Guatemala 5-0 Antigua and Barbuda Antigua and Barbuda 0-3 Guatemala USA 1-1 Jamaica Antigua and Barbuda 0-2 USA Guatemala 1-1 Jamaica Heading into the last match day: Guatemala 9 points, +8 GD USA 9 points, +5 GD Jamaica 7 points, +5 GD Antigua and Barbuda 0 points, -18 GD Now the USA hosts Guatemala on the last match day, while Jamaica hosts Antigua and Barbuda. In this scenario, the USA can only ensure advancement to the hex by defeating Guatemala. In contrast, change USA 3-0 Antigua and Barbuda to USA 7-0 Antigua and Barbuda. Then it's: USA 9 points, +9 GD Guatemala 9 points, +8 GD Jamaica 7 points, +5 GD Antigua and Barbuda 0 points, -22 GD In this scenario, even a USA draw with Guatemala ensures advancement to the hex.
I think we qualify easily from this group, and this shouldn't be as easy as Barbados in '08, but we should be able to get 4-5 past them at home. I'd like a thrashing like the 8-0 win over Barbados, but I'd take 4 or 5-0 and be very happy. Here are their results since 2011 2-2 Grenada 1-0 St. Vincent 2-2 St. Vincent 5-2 Curacao 8-1 US Virgin Islands 1-0 Martinique 1-2 Martinique 1-0 Curacao 10-0 US Virgin Islands 0-0 Guadeloupe 1-0 Haiti 1-2 Haiti 0-4 Trinidad 0-1 St. Kitts 0-1 St. Vincent 2-1 St. Vincent Cuba, Trinidad, Jamaica, and Haiti are the "biggest" nations they've played since 2000.
While obviously possible, I expect the US to get at least a 1 point at both Guatemala and Jamaica. Unless I'm mistaken, neither has beaten us, or at least not at their home. It will be tough, I know that, always is, but I think we get 2 or 4 points from those 2 road games.
Excellent. Thanks. (and in that case, no tie-breakers were needed. obviously this US/JAM/GUAT subset group may be more balanced than that MEX/T&T/SVG subset group was.) So the next question -- when was the last time that a tiebreaker (GD for example) was used to prevent a team from advancing beyond a CONCACAF WCQ semifinal group? Edit: Mexico over Jamaica in 2008 (but was that head-to-head GD tiebreaker, or full group GD tiebreaker?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CONCACAF_Third_Round#Group_2
it was for all group matches. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#Tiebreakers will have to confirm that the 2014 WCQ tiebreaker regulations are similar to 2010 and not 2006.
Full group GD tiebreaker. 2006 World Cup qualifying used head-to-head as the first tiebreaker, but there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth after South Africa, with a match still to play, could no longer qualify (Ghana had clinched the head-to-head tiebreaker and stood 3 points ahead of South Africa.) Whether that event precipitated the decision or not, FIFA reinstated goal differential as the first tiebreaker for 2010 World Cup qualifying.
this thread feels like a harbinger of doom. I understand all the arguments, but I am also superstitious, by actually 'saying' these things you break the cosmic flow of false humility that is needed in such cases.
Everyone is over thinking this. You always want to score as many goals as you can and give up as few as you can. If we play well, we will create a lot of chances. We should focus on playing well. Always. I'm not sure that there are a lot of tactical considerations that impact this central point. If we play well in a 4-5-1 we'll have a lot of chances. If we play well in a 4-4-2, we'll get a lot of chances. If we don't play well, regardless of tactical decisions, we won't get a lot of chances. So its possible to overanalyze this from a points/GD perspective, especially in the first match -- which is exactly what we're doing here. By the way, if we win our home matches and at least pick up points in our road matches (with a win in Antigua), we will qualify easily. If we don't do that, the epic meltdown here and in Chicago won't be about "why in the hell did we not 'try harder to score more goals' in game one back in June?!?!" That much I assure you.
Look, I'm not saying GD couldn't be important, but I think it is very unlikely. The most important thing will be getting 3 points. With a much more difficult match @Guatemala in a couple days, my priorities would be: 1) Get the 3 points; 2) Get out rested and healthy. If we split with both Jamaica and Guatemala, and the only team in this group we get 4 (or 6) points against is A&B, then we don't deserve to qualify. Our qualification will hinge on getting the best of either Jamaica or Guatemala (top 2 teams advance) in our 2 games with them.
This. If it comes down to goal differential in a group with Guatemala and Jamaica we sure as hell aren't making it out of the hex, so does it really matter?
has jamaica EVER beaten the USA in a real match presuming jamaica can do so is a huge leap of faith if usa can;t get a road draw in guatemala or jamaica i'd be surprised mexico won only 3-1 too so stuff happens remember 4th in the hex gets you to play new zealand the tentative hex mex el salvador panama canada but honduras is not dead jamaica whos'never beaten the usa usa unlesss you really believe guat can do the job in that hex, usa will advance, even if 4th they advance