I just searched again, and found this and this, both of which show USA with 1.66 xG and Germany with 1.33xG. It would seem that their numbers come from the same source, but I don't know what source that is.
Thanks for linking... Still, does that feel right for you? I can't even remember great chances that would have generated those numbers. I get that 16 shots is a lot -- but so few seemed to be actually very good chances. Unless they are counting that one sequence where we were offside but had three shots, including point blank from Balogun? Maybe the scoresheet isn't registering that as offside before the first shot?
I was thinking about @Reccossu's post while watching the game, and sometime in the 2nd half I said to myself "Ok, I think we must've surpassed 1.5 xG now". So, it does feel right to me, or it did at the time anyway.
I'm rewatching now so I'll see. Early on, we have chances but struggle to even shoot. I wish all these stats weren't going behind paywalls. It used to be easy to get the xG by shot and heat maps and all that reliably on international stuff without paying.
That's a lower xG than the USMNT got against the Netherlands in 2022, and a lot of people think the US played really badly in that match (I don't).
Yeah, maybe it's just 16 shots. Or maybe more came later in the second half and I'm not remembering well? I just find it hard to believe we had an average of a 10% chance to score on each of our 16 shots -- so many were outside the box (8 of them) which are much closer to 2% than 10%. Which means somewhere those other 8 were actually pretty strong chances and I don't remember them. We made too many mistakes against the Dutch, but people like to present it as a blowout and it wasn't.
In fairness, I think it's pretty clear Senegal wasn't taking the game seriously and Germany actually was. In terms of the Belgium game, I didn't watch either game that window, but the sense I had was the whole sale changes completely distorted the rhythm of both games in March, whereas in June, they didn't. Not sure why they didn't, but I definitely felt like I was watching the full USMNT minus a player or two for 60+ minutes, whereas it sounded like we only got that for like 45 against Belgium.
Not that it was the cause of the cramp or anything, but back flip and knee slide goal celebrations just seem to me like they're unnecessary injury risks. Hug your teammates then get off my lawn.
I think the bigger issue against Belgium was the tactical changes to start the game. Those put a lot of pressure on Cardoso and Tessman in terms of rotation and coverage, and neither has played all that much with each other or the team in general. Toss in that Doku is a real problem that required CM help -- and our CM in our defensive structure has not been good and I think they just found an exploitable spot. I know most of the goals were in the second half, but the actual defensive issues were there all game; Belgium just took some time to unlock. The gap in the second half was more individual errors than some complete breakdown from solid to terrible.
Okay, the first good xG chance I really see here is in the 42nd minute. Dest gets inside and has enough room to shoot from pretty close (though he's being bodied). He skies it but in restrospect, give that to a striker and there's a ton of open goal. But not a lot of high value shots in the first half. A large number of dangerous situations that never got to that point.
If we learn one thing from that set piece, I hope we borrow that pick-switch on one of our own set pieces during the WC. It works if the service is pinpoint like that. And it certainly was. Berhalter can drop those in, too.
Also, having watched the Germany goal again ... Freese needs to do better on that. Once that ball is up, he should have gone for that ball. I'm more and more Team Turner. I think Freese has moved from not just "not making the big save" but also being purely subpar. Which he's been in MLS this year from a shot stopping perspective.
Sure if MR is supposed to be marking that player and not the space he stayed in then he could have been “bumping” that player trying to pick Ream. That would have exasperated the obvious offsides and possibly blew up the attempted pick
Thanks, I never watched any of it beyond a couple of highlights. That window was timed to exactly when a family trip we'd been putting together for a year for spring break happened, and it wasn't possible to access overseas, so I just read the breakdowns of what happened. It also helps explain to some extent why Poch might have (to my mind) foolishly moved off of Tessmann (maybe not foolishly, because if like Berhalter in '22, you just won't trust the option to play a single moment, you probably shouldn't bring them even if they are necessary depth)....
It's also a bit alarming because facing Belgium is something that is highly likely if we win the group in the R16's (if we win the R32). I'm kinda surprised they didn't change the friendly.
Puli had at least 3 shots blocked. Dest skied one over from inside the six, he also put one over from the top of the box. Weah skies one from just outside the six. Just off the top of my head. The Puli chances were well defended, the others were on us.
We ditched the fluid 4 to play Weah at RB. I don't know if it was an attempt to get a faster RB or because, at heart, Poch wants to play two attacking RBs, but we played two attacking RBs and asked a CM to slip in between the CBs for form a back three. The CB that fell back was mostly Tanner (Cardoso was the other CM). That version of the 325 really requires a lot more rotation of players physically out of a 442 defensively and even moreso into a 442 defensively. The result was that the help to Weah wasn't there very often and when it was, it tended to be too passive. To Weah's credit, he was largely fast enough to play with Doku, but Doku is built like David Boston or something - he was just constantly creating havoc and breaking our defense. The CBs had to move to cover, creating openings, and again, the CMs just weren't filling the spots well. That continued largely after the substitutes. The gap in actual scores isn't so much that the first half defense was that much better in this respect, but some better finishing and a couple of stupid mistakes for the second half crew. I think at that point Poch realized he has to play Wes or Tillman back there. It's not that certain guys performed there and others didn't; it's that no one in that group could pull off that formation or be trusted at that level. At the end of the day, I don't think he was in contention for the Adams/Roldan role. He's not active defensively enough. And in terms of the other role ... I think there was a level of acceptance that a) McKennie and Tillman are getting most of the minutes b) it's a highly active role with a lot of movement required and that's not Tanner and c) if I take a third option here because I'm likely to start one of my better options at the 10 ... it's going to be someone who plays it like I want. Which is Berhalter. That's my guess anyway. Tanner wasn't good, but I think the question became broader. I.e., he's not the answer so the requirements for the role are changing.
Arena and Berhalter are saying basically the same thing. Guzan put it in more details: we were wrongly expecting a shot so less players in the PB and Guzan on theline. Four men wall looked ugly from the start.
Actually you don’t get goalside till the ball is played, if the opponent is willing to step offsides, you let them and don’t let them back on sides by blocking them getting back BUT everyone has to hold the line, which I guess Weston doesn’t.
The Dest chance that he skied was our best chance of the game, I think. I don't think I realized that in the moment (and certainly the game thread didn't). Almost certainly a .3, maybe more. He had the near post open. I wonder if they counted Dest early on, when he went down and sort of weakly bumped the ball towards goal? The Pulisic chances, between the defense, distance and angles, weren't high percentage. He can make those, but there's no way they are high xG. All shots that would have required some brilliance and/or luck. The stats aren't counting the sequence where he had two blocked and Tillman skies it after an offside; I don't think. That was our best chance but obviously illegally generated.
So, I am watching the game again right now. First: That was a hell of a pick but Tim Ream needs to fight through that if he has to punch the defender to do it, and yes: Freese glued to his line was not good. But that was a hell of a pick.