Ever since I saw him play I wondered why no one ever tried Scally at DM. He has a good defensive mind, is big, aggressive and strong and good at sticking in. He is a decent passer and has decent speed, but is t elite at either. If most coaches want blazing speed in their FBs he will always be doubted by coaches.
Jedi's an ATTACKING left back, who's best asset is speed. Did you want him to sit back and just defend? Garbage take.
The system doesn't help but often our CF's aren't even an option in possession. If goes further than finishing a chance.
One side was clinical, the other wasn’t. The clinical side planned to sit in, and were able to get away with doing so because they were clinical. We have a good side. Theirs is a bit better. Management didn’t have a whole lot to do with that. When Gio came on, he was… average.
Right - we had to go all out in all 90 minutes of every group game (more like all 105 minutes, with the crazy stoppage time additions). That makes for a very entertaining group stage, but leaves a team depleted if they're lacking depth.
I guess what's a little disappointed is that I feel like our team a decade or two ago gave the powerful Germans and Italians a much better fight. Not to mention bringing the golden generation of Belgium into overtime. Now just watch this Dutch team get destroyed by Argentina in the next round.
The key point is this game was lost when we tied Wales. Beat Wales and we can rest players in the group stage. But then we had to play the same starters every game. edit - sorry looks like every other poster has made the same point.
Couldn’t disagree more. Works absolutely fine with attacking fullbacks (we have those) and a front three that score. Our issue all tournament long was not having a dangerous striker (until Wright today, he was running behind the defense, won headers, pressed, and had a solid outing) and no real production from the wide attackers (2 goals in 4 games combined) Pulisic, Reyna, Weah, Aaronson are all worthy starters but none are goal scorers at this level. So we either need a striker that gets goals or we need Pulisic, Reyna, Weah, and Aaronson to become much more clinical. If we don’t…we need McKennie or Musah to sit with Tyler and go with a 4-2-3-1. I do think the 4-2-3-1 suits all 4 of our wide attackers better (putting Reyna central) and gives us overall better depth. If we can get Musah and McKennie to play better deeper. Your idea of the diamond with Reyna on top and then we get two from Pulisic, Weah, and a striker fits our talent in midfield but positions Weah and Pulisic where they are not as effective. The biggest question will be who has gotten better by 2026 out of Musah, McKennie, Adams, Aaronson, Weah, Pulisic, and Reyna. If I had to guess today I’d guess that Pulisic loses his place and Reyna, Adams, Aaronson, Musah, and Weah are first choice.
No. Some World Cup finalists were heavy on the subs and rotation. France comes to mind there. Others, like Spain 2010, stuck to a pretty steady lineup through the first 4 matches.
It’s odd because you were so outspoken against anyone laying any criticism on GB or his game management. Now we see a physical limited match and it’s “even on our best day we might lost” which is a complete deflection. It’s not so much being clever as throwing your own asinine bias right back at you. And making suggestions to others about how being a “fan” should be a certain way is over the line.
I see a team like Japan do what they did and I hate this...'oh well the other side was just better mindset.'.
I think it's likely the other way around. You see the strikers aren't good ... so you adjust. In MLS, Berhalter was considered a striker whisperer -- he took a bunch of mediocre guys and go 18-20 goal seasons out of them. This is kind of like how he played a 4231 for years because he had Pippa Higuain but then dropped it when he didn't. Striker wasn't our only issue, but Sargent would have helped.
having tracked USMNT closely since 79 - our perpetual issue has been strikers. We need a pool of lethal strikers playing around the world. We may be clinical when it comes to football and baseball and basketball - but we aren’t (yet) in soccer. When you bury your chances it changes the whole narrative.
Or GGG could've realized it was counterproductive to high-press an opponent who was both deadly on the finish and not looking to dominate possession.
Yes. Although Turner was screaming at him for about five seconds to cover. It happened in slow motion.
I said "generally the ones" to hedge my bets . Spain 2010 is the definition of a team that lets the ball do most of the work. USA 2022, not so much.
I disagree. Wright is right up their with the Turkish league strikers that did decently this world cup. Our system does create chances for a striker as it playa a MMA midfield and has all creativity come from the wings.
Many of those problems are already addressed….though untimely injuries killed it this cycle (though I’m not entirely confident if guys like Robinson and Richards were fully healthy they would have seen time under Berhalter) I fear this team will still be ride or die with Adams in four years. The first goal was why that is dangerous. No way that happens in match day one or two. By match day four….not enough left in the tank.
We have a better side than what we even saw here. Feel free to disagree but I don’t think you do deep down.