Ching was a warrior. His usual game of battle, move, knock balls/down over to teammates, and have a couple modest scoring chances. His early header off the post was nice. I don't want him starting a World Cup match, but I do expect him to be a valuable bench/role player next summer. Arnaud isn't international level and probably won't get called back after this tournament. But how can anyone not appreciate the effort and occasional smart plays he makes. Justified the start and I agree with Imoran and Ghost that either Pause or Rogers should have come off for Cooper and Arnaud should have moved to a wide midfield spot. Cooper hit the PK well and his second header was also pretty good. But aside from those two touches, his other touches were weak and he had two decent shooting chances that didn't impress, especially late when Ching slipped the simple through ball into space. Not good for a guy whose reputation includes a powerful shot. I agree with S.J.Jim that Cooper's speed of thought, or speed of play, seems too slow. Either his legs don't move quickly enough or his brain is too slow. Ching's speed of play is better. I'd use Cooper as a 2nd half sub the rest of the tournament. Beckerman and Holden were good quality all night and deserve callups during qualifiers. Each one has hit a scorching shot into the upper 90 in the last two games. Holden is very tidy with the ball and seems to create a couple of good scoring chances each game. Poor Beckerman is simply in the wrong position at the wrong time, especially now that Jones has declared for the US. Without Jones, Beckerman might have a shot as a 5th CM next summer, but as long as the big 5 (Bradley, Jones, Edu, Feilhaber, and Clark) are healthy and assuming that a versatile mid like Holden or Kljestan make the Cup roster, this guy is out of luck. Rogers and Pause were OK at best. Rogers' 1v1 moves need work, because he must have dribbled directly into an opponent 6-8 times this game, getting stripped every time. Pause is OK, maybe along the lines of a Zavagnin a few years ago. But that's far from good enough for the US these days.
I don't question Ching's will to win, his effort, or his smarts. The guy is a good soccer player. I rated him lowly in my ratings, though, for two reasons: 1) In a 1v1 against a Panamanian defender, he couldn't get a shot on goal. Yes, his finishing remains problematic. 2) Archundia took him, and to a lesser extent Arnaud, out of the game with questionable calls. Those calls weren't just bad because they were wrong. They were bad because they gave Panamanians license to pound the shit out of Ching's head and upper body all game long. As long as they weren't taking out Ching's legs, Panamanian defenders were free to jump into Ching elbows first. It was pathetic. That isn't a knock against Ching, but he wasn't effective last night. He's a better player than he showed in that one game.
Apparently I put this in the wrong thread (US-Panama postgame) I was more impressed by Arnaud than either Ching or Cooper. Arnaud had good first touches and was instrumental in turning a bad cross into a premium scoring op (our first goal). Unfortunately, I don't think he has the size or the speed (he just needs one ) to play at a high international level. Cooper did three things well. 1) Convert the penalty 2) Be on the field so that Ching didn't have to take the penalty 3) Be in the penalty to take the boot to the midriff ( I believe that kick was _above_ the groin - so no boot to the nads) I'm sorry, but what does Ching do well again? His scoring rate per opportunity is pathetic and his first touch is bad. I understand he has a "high soccer IQ." He does so many things that I don't see. Unfortunately, he also does so many things that I do see - like bad first touches, giving away possession (usually the same thing) and choking on scoring opportunities. A lot of people here watched the game with Red White and Blue colored glasses and heard Bretos disparage the refereeing all game long. To be honest, the calls were pretty even. It should have been a red card on the PK call, but we got the Penalty - so I was happy.
I agree 100%. Ching can often be the silent hero of a game, but I just didn't see that last night. The fouls limited his ability to win and hold balls, which was especially detrimental to the long ball game we were playing in the first half. Another aspect of Chings game that I really didn't see last night was his ability to create space for his strike partner. This wasn't really Ching's fault either, since he wasn't paired with a pure goal scorer. Arnaud played well and all, but I don't understand how the Arnaud Ching pairing is supposed to work. They both seem like support guys to me.
I don't expect anything out of Arnaud and Ching sometimes starts for the first team. One played much better than expected one continues on a downward trend. How is this confusing? Evans turned the ball over 4 or 5 times when he came in. He's inferior to Quaranta who, even with his faults, can complete a pass to his teammates and maintain possession. How do you think we should kill off a game?
QFT I hate drawing Panama in any competition for 2 reason. One, they are a bunch of hacks. Two, Penedo is a beast. I'm just glad he wasn't wearing those stupid Goalie Pants that he usually wears. Those bother me as much as an adult with braces.
If you don't understand what Ching did well with yesterday, you're just never going to get it. He does the dirty work that other guys aren't willing to do as a forward. He battled all game long, won a ton of balls and won quite a few fouls. His job is to win the ball and hold/distribute to the other guys to makes the plays and run off him. Why is it so hard for some to understand this?
I completely understand this. Too bad he fails at his job more often than he succeeds. I also know he has other jobs which include putting the ball in the net - not off the post, not over the crossbar. The "great goaltender" he was facing was irrelevant because he never had a shot on net. "the dirty work that other guys aren't willing to do as a forward" is rubbish. Watch games in other leagues and you'll see tons of guys doing that work - with better touch and better ball control. "He won quite a few fouls" Do we have match stats? Would you wager on whether he committed twice as many fouls as free kicks that he won? How about 3 times the number? I think it's probably closer to 5 or 6.
What exactly do you define Ching's job as? Name one single forward in the U.S. player pool that does the dirty work better than Ching. It seems as though you are upset that Ching isn't Didier Drogba. If those are your expectations, you will be bitterly dissappointed as a U.S. Soccer fan for a long time to come. I'll take that bet. Because Ching would have certainly gotten a yellow card for persistent fouling had he committed somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 fouls all by himself. Let alone 15. You either are borderline retarded when it comes to math, or you are suggesting that Ching drew fewer than 5 fouls all game long. edit: The U.S. were whistled for a total of 20 fouls. Assuming that Ching committed every single one of those fouls...for your wage of 5-6 times FC vs. FS to be true, Ching would have only drawn 3 or 4 fouls all night long. It's one thing to not rate a player and make a rational argument against said player. It's another thing to come off like a complete and total idiot. Welcome to category 2.
Thanks for mentioning this, Nancy. Clearly he has some limitations as a player both technically and athletically. His will to win, his ability to create space for his teammates and his warrior spirit make him an asset for our team. It is an amusing mystery why he is so undervalued here on Big Soccer. By all accounts, he should be a hero, here.
Ching drew 2 fouls the entire game. I'm really good at math, your ad hominem attacks withstanding. He doesn't do what he's supposed to do well at all. And the primary job of any striker is put the ball in the net. Am I disappointed he's not Drogba? No. Do I think he needs to be a better player to help the US to a quality World Cup. Absolutely. He is what he is - and that's not very good.
I'll defer to the in-person viewing. On TV, he didn't look great, but his position is one where you're not going to see all he brings. Like I said, I think he's a better player than he showed against Panama. I think he starts with Jozy in Azteca, and I think there's a strong possibility he starts at least one game in the WC, all of which is fine by me.
He is what he is. He's not getting any better. But the guy has been a real asset to US soccer for, what, eight years now. Does anybody remember the goal he scored on the road against Jamaica in WCQ? Helped us secure a crucial point. And that was not an aberration. He is not a prolific scorer, but he's helped our team for a long time. That doesn't mean he should start for our A team now, but he's much better than many HERE give him credit for.
Ching's problem is he doesn't score much. He is a forward for god's sake; you must score. All the "dirty work" talk is empty. If you play up top you score or you sit. And Brian doesn't score much. Talking about a forward doing the "other things" is like talking about a goal keeper's distribution. Tim Howard starts because of his saves. The forwards will start because they score. Brian may go to SA because he can come off the bench and help preserve a lead. But he is on the bubble due to his not scoring.
Every player that has ever played alongside Brian Ching remarks on how much easier he makes the game for them. Ching may not score bags of goals but he creates a shit-ton of goals with the work he does, battling defenders and creating space for the more skilled players on our team to operate in. To say a strikers job is to score goals above all else is straight out of Coaching Soccer for Dummies. Brian Ching has a rare skill set in the U.S. player pool. That skill set creates goals. The fact that he doesn't score the goals doesn't change the fact that he creates goals. The fact that he lines up closer to the 18 doesn't define his role with the team. The tactics and system that the U.S. employs dictate Ching's role. Plain and simple. When Ching is on the field in Bob Bradley's system, his job IS NOT scoring goals.
meh. Strikers who don't strike. Battling defenders blah, blah, blah. It really occupies defenders attention when they think you may score. There is a reason he is in this Gold Cup roster, and fighting for a WC spot. That reason is he needs to prove himself as a goal scorer. Which he has not done. I think the guy is going to SA. I also think he is really suspect up top as a forward. He will be situational at best. As someone mentioned earlier, I think away in Mexico City is a great situation for him. Make or break if you ask me. He is on the bubble.
As a 'keeper, I strongly disagree. NOTHING the 'keeper could have done to save it (even taking into account the fact that he was off his line). You're new, so I'll go easy. You are incorrect. Archundia was miserable. Ching was being called for being jumped on. Benito is usually a quality ref, but on this occasion, he blew. Correct. He is on the Gold Cup roster because he missed the Confederations Cup due to injury. But that doesn't help your thesis, so we can just ignore that fact, if you want.
You're right. There is a reason he is on the Gold Cup roster. The reason is, he was hurt heading into the Confederations Cup forcing Bob to bring Conor Casey along instead. Ching is battling for his place on the World Cup roster about as much as Jozy Altidore and Charlie Davies are. In other words, barring injury Ching is going to be in South Africa next summer. I'm really not going to continue to try and convince you though. You don't have the first clue what you are talking about and you are convinced that you are picking the World Cup roster instead of Bob Bradley.
Ching certainly battled all night, and had two guys draped on him in the box all the time. But the limitations to his games are pretty evident, and were highlighted by the two "big" forward - no CAM line-up. Neither Ching or Arnaud are good enough/quick enough with the ball at their feet in tight spaces to be really effective with the formation/lineup we had in Philly. Because Panama was so physical, agressive, and to fair, good, in the back, esp. the CD's, and because our creative midfield play was mostly through the wide mids, most of our attack was either crosses into the box - which we set up fairly well, but were of limited effect because Panama has a very good keeper, two strong CD's and were collapsing into the box very quickly (they are a pretty athletic team until they ran out of gas around 75 or so.) What we could not do with Ching, Arnaud or even Cooper was play into the space behind the fullbacks that opened up when they were forced to come out and challenge our wings. Nor could we play quick one-twos to Ching's feet - he does not seem able to play the cute flick or little touch. To be fair, no one seemed to be trying that much. So for my money Ching is fine as a big, hold up/knock down guy. But he needs to be paired with a quick, mobile finisher. Is Ching our best big man? Arnaud looked pretty decent in that spot as well and seemed to have a bit more mobility to me. But I doubt either is going to be more dangerous than Altidore in another year. And Ching will certainly not get quicker by next summer.
Maybe, but perhaps it is not entirely a coincidence that the US flurry of goals from the run of play started in the Confed Cup when Ching was hurt and we started two forwards with pace. The 2 years before when he was starting, not so much.....
Can you point out to us, what plays in particular did he do to create scoring opportunities for other fowards. I didnt see them in the Panama game, I didnt see them in the Haiti Game Didnt see them on the Honduras Game, didnt See them ont the Salvador Game. He did have a good T&T game, but other than that. I just dont see it. I record most of the US games and I go back and try to see those plays you say he creates and I can hardly see any but a couple.
There may not be a lot of NT goals lately where he's had a direct hand in the buildup, but even that's somewhat of a red herring. What he provides is still visible to someone with a slightly above-average knowledge of the game. He sits up high and opens space in front the defense, occupies individual defenders and tires them out, and wins long balls in the air better than any other forward on the NT radar, including Altidore and Dempsey. I've never been sold on his hold-up play, as he loses the ball rather easily under pressure, but he uses his size to make winning the ball from him an easy but taxing endeavor. When Ching loses the ball, it doesn't necessarily mean the other player won it, and lots of loose balls (the type of which Donovan, Dempsey, and Bradley, etc. love to latch on to) are created. Altidore, Donovan, Cooper, Davies, and Dempsey are incaple of that style of play but are strikers that benefit from being lined up behind that type of player immensely.
Ching is great against teams where we are controlling possession and need someone to occupy defenders, draw fouls, and win scrambles for the ball in the "half-court offense." (so to speak). Davies is a much better option when we're going to be winning possession in our own third and countering as fast as possible. They bring totally different things to the table and each is very valuable in a certain type of game. Not sure why this always has to be an either / or discussion.