If after the first two games, the US has 6 points, Ghana 2 and the other two teams 1 each, would it be ethically acceptable for the US to let Ghana win?
"Letting" them win as a strategy? No. Resting your starters so they're ready for the knockout rounds? Absolutely. This goes for ANY team in the competition, not just the US.
Completely agree. If we are guaranteed a place after 2 games (as Berg said, very unlikely), I would look for Bruce to rest anybody that needs it (from either knocks or cards) and/or make lineup changes to test something he may want to use later.
As a matter of ethics, of course not. Resting key or slightly injured players is one thing, and any team would do that. But not playing to win clearly crosses a line. And, if you can't see that line, there are two other reasons why not to: 1) After the 1982 Algerian debacle, FIFA would not be hesitant to take severe action if it was patently obvious that the USA (or any other team) intentionally laid down it it's final game. 2) What is the benefit to the US? If the US were through as group winners, and have already proven they can beat both European teams, wouldn't you want the runners-up to be the best possible team, in order to give Brazil the toughest test in the 2nd round? Laying down to eliminate the Europeans would only (theoretically, since the premise is that Ghana would need us to intentionally lose) clear an easy path for the Brazilians.
I honestly doubt that would be the situation. Lets go for a tie vs the czechs and try to build off of that with a win vs a weaker italy. That would place us in good position for 1st place which would help us in that we'd be able to avoid brazil in the knockout 1st stage. what a double FU to the US by FIFA:2 very solid opponents in the group and should they survive it and take 2nd place, you get good ole brazil in the knockout stage
Out of respect for Ghana, the sport and the event no. Such an approach fails to understand what it means to compete.
Heck no. Unless you like the US playing Brazil in the second round. No thanks. I'd take Croatia/Japan/Australia any day. I'd rather make the round of 8 again. Even if by some bizarre reason that Brazil is eliminated at that time, the USA can rest some players (Some that may have taken knocks, which will undoubtebly happen when playing the Czechs and Italy) but above all the US should play to WIN. It defeats the purpose of the World Cup and the honor of competition. Portugal did not understand that in 2002.
In the scenario originally put forward, the US would have been guaranteed the E1 position going into the second round -- a loss against Ghana would have no effect whatsoever on their opponent in the second round. Or am I not understanding your comment? On the ethics question, as long as the players on the field play to win, all is well (imho). One of the benefits of securing the top spot early in the group stage is that the manager is then at liberty to sit certain players for the third match. Whether it is done to allow players to rest and/or recover, or merely to protect them against yellow cards, it is perfectly reasonable for the manager -- once the second round is assured -- to field a "weaker-than-full-strength" squad if he perceives that it will allow him the greatest chance of success in their second round match, even when there is a group stage match yet to go. Of course the original question had to do with another matter altogether: "letting" Ghana win -- which I take to mean that the US somehow or another seeks to influence the outcome of the game in the favor of the Ghana squad. This would most certainly be unethical.
I guess the idea here is that Italy and the Czech Republic would be eliminated and Ghana would than finish second in the group right? Well, the second team in the group will probably have to play Brazil. So I guess my point is that it doesn't really matter who finishes second in the group because they will probably lose to Brazil, even if it is the United States.
It is a good assumption. Nevertheless, I believe Brazil will love to play any other team but Ghana. Both Brazil and Ghana have been playing at the youth level since 1991, and the results have been mixed. While Ghana have been in the final 4 times(won 2), Brazil have been in the final 5 times(won 3). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_U-17_World_Championship In the under 20 the exchange has been beautiful. Ghana has been in the final twice(did not win). However, they beat Brazil in the quarter finals 2001. They had lost to Brazil in 1993 in the final. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Youth_Championship Ghana seem not to have the fear most teams accord Brazil, and this make their meetings very interesting. Let us hope this translate into the senior world cup. For once we have all the palyers who played through 1991 to 2001 winning team palying against each other. It is going to be interesting.
as I know both czech and italian soccer and a bit american soccer, I would say that Czech and Italy would be not so hard game for Czechs as the game against USA. First it is their first game and they don´t know USA team so much. But as I know Karel Bruckner he is studying USA games very properly now. Anyway I think it will be hard game for Czechs and USA. I think USA might win or maybe it will be draw. I think Czechs will win against Ghana and Italy will win against Ghana as well. I think USA will end as second in the group. First will be Czechs or maybe Italy. Of course we can see big surprise and Ghana can advance. But from that I have read and games I wached I would say more that USA and Czechs will andvance in the group. Bltleo GERMANY
the biggest surprise would be if Italy and Czechs would not advance in the group and go home. This would be probably the biggest surprise. I don´t think it happens. Just I´m thinking what will happen and what will write newspapers if it happens. On the paper are favorites ITALY and CZECHS. But real I would say USA and one of Italy or Czechs. I would say Czechs more. If they play as they played in the last European Cup. Czech coach Bruckner is mostly afriad of Ghana and USA - both "unknown" for him. About Italy-Czech games czech press don´t write so much, they mostly mention USA and Ghana. and the best news is if USA advance, they will not meet us Germany until semi-finale ....will we miss famous Germany-USA game?...maybe not.. it depends how advance both Germany and USA.. but it will happens, maybe we should send Frings to this game again Bltleo GERMANY
Those two teams could draw against Ghana but a scenario after two rounds of the USA getting six points, followed by Ghana on two, then Italy and the Czech Republic one point each can only occur in someone's fantasy.
Rudi Völler, the former national coach of german team and current sport director or Bayer Leverkusen told after WC draw that in the group E he sees two favorites Italy and Czechs. He has given analysis for every group. Reported asked him about USA. He told that USA improved significantly but his favorites were czechs and Italy. Well I think he is not right. I think USA can make it and advance in the group. bltleo GERMANY
A better question would be, if two teams (USA and Ghana, for example) have 4 points and the others have 1 point, then do they play a boring 0-0 draw to guarantee advancement at 5 points apiece. For example, after 2 games, it is USA 4 pts, Ghana 4 points, Italy 1 point, Czechs 1 point. The problem is that the 2nd place team meets Brazil.
If a draw assures advancement and your opponent isn't interested in attacking, why would you possibly want to take unnecessary risks by attacking them and opening yourself up for the counter and possible elimination?
To win the group and avoid Brazil. Nobody would advocate throwing everyone forward just so Brazil can be avoided. But many would say there must be an "in between" strategy that gives you an honest chance at scoring but that also emphasizes the value of a draw and not taking unnecessary risks.