I'm as big a Clint Mathis fan as there is out there. I watched him score a tremendous goal against Brasil at the Rose Bowl; watched him deliver the brilliant pass to Wolff that put us up 1-0 against Mexico in Columbus. Over the last two years, he has almost disappeared from the USMNT landscape, scratching out an appearance here and there, but certainly not a lineup fixture. My observations of Clint haven't really changed over that time. He doesn't like to work particularly hard -- he won't close someone down unless it's convenient for him. He still has an attacking attitude. In the first ES game, I wasn't happy seeing him blast shot after shot into the stands, but I was glad someone was shooting. Most importantly, I think Clint still has "The Gift." He has the ability to see attacking possibilities where few can, and as a result, he winds up spraying a lot of balls away, but every once in a while that pass winds up in the back of the net, ala Wolff against Mexico. Maybe it's harder to see this on TV -- watching games in person can give you a better appreciation for someone's vision. But now that I look for it, I can see it on TV, too. The problem with The Gift, however, is that if one doesn't play enough with one's teammates, then The Gift isn't a particularly valuable asset. For example, Zidane grew up playing a lot of games with his generation in France, and all of the games those guys played together made it possible for Zidane to successfully use his Gift in 1998. But as Zidane slowed down and the next generation entered the picture, his effectiveness was limited. There's a reason why Clint often plays better with Wolff -- they grew up playing together, and Wolff knows how to make the runs that Clint can imagine. Clint's problems, in my opinion, are a direct result of The Gift. I think Clint has been seduced by The Gift. He knows that he can see and do things that others can't. And so he's content to sit back and do those things, whether they work or not. I'm frustrated by Clint, because I think he can be a solid, every game contributor for the national team. But to do that, he needs to realize that The Gift isn't something that you rely on -- it's the special gear you use when you're on the same page with your teammates. For an attacking midfielder, 95% of the game is hard work, making the high percentage pass, shooting on goal when you're open. Maybe 5% (or less) is that brilliant pass that no one else could have imagined. So Clint -- Simplify, work hard on offense and defense, and learn to play with those teammates. I want to see you play more. You have a lot more to give the USMNT.
If Clint still has the gift, it's time to start showing it ... he hasn't scored a goal in his last 18 caps.
not only that but he used to make goals out of free kicks, and excelent passes. On Saturday he was our worst player. I never thought i would say this but Zavagnin was better then him, even.
I'm a Mathis fan, but he had a very poor game this weekend. Usually, even if his stuff from the run of play falters, you can count on dangerous balls from set pieces, but even those were off. Most of them were floated too high or long in the game. He's got skills and good vision, especially when on a better night than the El Sal game, but if he doesn't gell with the team, his value will be limited. He really needs a good game for the States and soon.
I agree with the "Gift" comments. Another thing I feel with Clint is that he plays to the level of the competition and the stage, and obviously that hurts him in the long term. He looks bad against bad teams in these WCQ games, but has the "potential" to be great against world class teams on the world stage. The problem is the "potential" part and will the team and Bruce lose confidence in him as they watch these rough performances? I hate the inference I am making here that WCQ games are less than the WC itself, when in fact away WCQ games against middling opponents can be tougher then games at neutral locations with awesome fields at the actual WC.
He did on good thing on Saturday: He stood up for Donovan after the Sally bozo kicked the ball in LD's face. Other than that he did SWEET FA.
I'm sounding like a broken record here, but Mathis' work rate has been improving since he's been in germany.
Hardly. And, that's the problem. Everyone would forgive Mathis a lot of things if he made even a half-assed attempt to increase his workrate. The whole team would look and be better. I can't wait for Gaven to replace him. Someone who's effort, vitality and contribution to the game matches that of LD.
I think it was Eddie Pope, not LD, who had the ball kicked into his face by the El Sal #3. Which brings me to a point that I wanted to make: why was Clint the only person on our team who got in someone's face when that happened? If an El Sal. player had the ball deliberately kicked into his face by an opponent, his teammates would go crazy. Some would get at the player who kicked the ball, some would get after other players and some would get after the ref. Other than Clint, it seemed no one on the US reacted. I recognize that we don't want to get into a position, especially on the road, where the ref can toss one of our players our. But, we still should be more vocal in defending ourselves from the crap that the El Sal players dished out these past 2 games.
I have to disagree with a lot of the posts above. I think Clint did a fairly good job vs. ES. Now, let me also say that I didn't expect him to play too much defense or to work particularly hard. But, I would also say that he isn't put on the field to do such things. With a player like KZ out there or Armas, Clint doesn't have to do that much. Especially if we play with 5 middies. Clint showed for the ball and made at least 3 dangerous plays out of nothing. If the first goal wasn't disallowed (as it shouldn't have been), then we'd be talking about his great through ball. His free kick had some good bite on it, but the goalie didn't assume (as most would) that he was shooting for the opposite upper corner. The only thing that pissed me off about Clint was when he would refuse to rundown a pass that didn't go directly to his feet. He's not good enough to do that. Especially, when KZ is doing his defensive work for him. By the way, how good was KZ? He worked continuously for 90 minutes.
I wonder why it is that a Bundesliga side signed him and plays him, and he continues to get call ups from a coach who clearly values hardwork while his "workrate" is so abysmal. Hayzeus duck and Kreiss. When the hell are people going to get off of this??? Clint isn't going to be there in 2006 if he can't score, but his work rate isn't a problem.
Agreed. Cletus isn't on the field to track back and defend. Creative players are at a premium in the US, and Mathis' vision and ability make him so valuable in that regard. I love his attitude on the field as well...the US can be too timid and passive as a squad. Clint does need to create some goals soon, but he offers an element that this squad desperately needs and it would take a lot for me to take him out of the squad if I were Arena.
We're obviously seeing different things in his Bund performance. I'm seeing a hard working midfielder, who does make a difference defensively (his last goal was created by a nice defensive play and first rate hustle). BTW, I agree completely with tristeza. He is a rare talent for the US, and one we can't afford to waste. Maybe Gaven can do the same things, but Mathis is still performing.
Gift or not Mathis seems to be a silly, immature, arrogant boy who is in danger of shooting himself in the foot. At his current quality level there is no place for him on the USMNT.
Two ways to judge a player. One, watch every move he makes. Two, compare the way the team plays with him and without him. Sometimes a player affects a game by being a focus for the opponent's defense. His personal game is shut down but others on his team have more space and his team plays better. It seems to me, and I admit being prejudiced, that the US is better with Mathis than without him. Even on his off days, which are many, his presence in the middle opens space on the wings. And the threat of his offense in the middle helps his team's defense. The US has very little threat thru the center channel without Mathis. Without Mathis, the US just seems to attack down the wings and as a result the offense struggles against good opponents. Sometimes you have to look at the forest, not just the trees.
And we all know that there is no room on this board for discussion of opinions contrary to those of the infallible Bruce . . .
I guess I deserved that - it was a lazy response to what IMO was a lazy comment, i.e., Mathis is immature and he sucks. I used to hate the Bruce thinks your wrong-type comments, but I've gone from a Bruce basher to believing that Bruce's opinion while not always perfect should carry some weight. He sees the guys in practice and sees many of their games and he has a decent track record in picking players.
I actually agree with you -- Bruce's opinion does deserve some weight. Like you said, he sees the guys in practice and in their games, and he's always come through with the results that are needed. But as we all know, even Bruce makes mistakes.
Fine let's take that as a given. Let's assume that it is okay for one of your midfielders to contribute absolutely nothing on defense (which it absolutely is not but hey what the hell). Clint's attitude on offense is as awful as it is on defense. How many times do you see someone lay a ball into space where they expected to make a run but Clint was just sort of sitting back seeing if the ball was going to come to him so he could try to make the homerun pass? You need to work on offense too. If the ball is laid to a spot where clint happens to be and he gets it, he will put into play that wonderful vision and touch but otherwise he is far too often a disconnect in the offensive machine because of his work rate. What you all are basically trying to say in defending Clint by sayinghe has "an element" that very few players have... is basically: "Clint has a lot of potential to be a great player, if only he would apply himself, get into shape, show some desire and work hard during games." Everyone agrees with that statement, I think, and that is what makes Clint a frustrating guy to cheer for or coach (I am sure).
I strongly disagree with this assessment and think quite the opposite. In fact, for many games now, the only contribution Mathis has made has been a few good passes. However, he has made an equal number of very crummy ones. He, himself, has not attacked down the central part of the field. Donovan has; Beasely has; Zavagnin did in the last game; even Pope, IIRC. I would side with those arguing that Mathis creates expectation of product from a certain part of the midfield that is seldom forthcoming. That means, he is not doing his job either by successfully delivering the ball to others on his team or by being the primary attacker himself. If anything, Clint needs to be more selfish and act as a forward. I think he has proven over and over that he is a totally unsuccessful midfielder. People may argue that he is an "attacking" midfielder and should, therefore, be excused from defensive duties. Well, sorry, but the US cannot afford to have a place-holding, non-defensive midfielder along with 2 attackers. Something's got to give. We need another more defensive midfielder simply to hold the ball more and build the play better from the back.
Unless of course, the coach lines him up at AM and says "I don't want you playing forward." I know that's definitely what Mexico thinks. And Arena, and Hannover.