USA vs. Antigua & Barbuda: the coaching

I'm sorry; as much as I like love to criticize Jurgi, I think this is bull hockey for all the obvious reasons.

 

Torres got hurt because the guy from A&B came in over top of the ball. Could have happened anywhere on the field from any position. Ref failed to clamp down on brutal tackles and it was almost predictable that somebody was going to get hurt.

 

Torres did just fine...injury could have happened anywhere. Onyewu seems overwhelmed, too many soft touch passes on attack in front of and in the box, somebody MUST take a shot to keep the bunker open........at times being selfish is necessary.

 

The idea that Torres got hurt because he was playing LB doesn't make any logical sense at all.

And putting in Onyewu, our most experienced defender, instead of Cameron (own goal and red card in last two starts), or Parkhurst (unproven in qualifiers) is hardly a blunder. Yes, Gooch made a dumb play, but going with your most experienced players in a WCQ is a mistake 9/10 managers would make. I think your criticism smacks of Monday morning quarterbacking.

The only real criticism I have is the 3 man CM, but JK returned to the setup that looked so good against Scotland, he couldn't do it completely since Johnson was hurt. Going back to the setup that gave us a 5-0 win is hardly poor management. Gomez has looked the best of our forwards, no issue with him starting.

The real issue I have is with the roster selection, and the lack of attacking mids (central or wide) on the roster. But that didn't really impact us too badly this game, as we had a 2-0 lead.

 

I'm surprised to see how long it took to start this thread. The specific coaching analysis threads were always a regular feature in the past.

Mediocre first Qualifier performance from JK.

His roster selection was short on experienced outside backs/mids (something many fans noticed from day 1), and with the injuries that got even worse, so more square-pegs round-holes. His bench is very thin, as he doesn't seem to trust Cameron, Parkhurst, Wondo, Corona, or even Beckerman at this point, and Boyd is still too raw to play a key role for the senior team. He has no offensive spark or "joker" available off the bench.

Bringing on Onyewu, with his recent knee injuries, under those poor weather conditions was dumb. Error aside, Gooch is still not back to 100% from his latest knee surgery and has had very little match time since the Fall. An unnecessary risk that reveals JK's lack of trust in his other defensive subs.

His XI was a bit too defensive for a home game vs a bunkering minnow. This match was calling for a 4th true attacker, and his name is Jozy Altidore.

Boca, Donovan, Bradley and Jones are being worn down and over-used in games, especially in light of the many double-sessions at practice. What will they have left in the tank for the Guatemala battle, the game everyone knew was the most important of the 5-game series?

In the end, JK survived his first-ever WC qualifier. He has shown an ability to learn and adapt since his fumbling start in the friendlies last year, so I'm hopeful Klinsi will choose a better roster and not wear down the team when the September and October qualifiers take place. At the very least, he won't have a month prior to over-train the squad.

Grade: C-

 

Vasquez won't last the cycle. That defense looks thunderstruck on quick counters and completely undisciplined on cut back crosses. Forget composure under pressure. Jk needs to
as ruthless with his coaches as he is with the teams training.

 

Torres at LB was a poor choice because....

1) Obviously it would have been nice to have Lichaj at LB, and that's on JK from Day 1. Poor player evaluation and poor roster construction.

2) Were Johnson's and Castillo's injuries due in part to being run down from all these 2-a-days? I have to think it was a contributor. Poor camp/training schedule.

3) Torres cannot play the wing. It's not his game. And it seemed JK's strategy was still to have the offense come through him out there. Not only was that not effective for Torres, it seemed to keep Bradley from going forward out of fear of being exposed on a counter. Poor in game Strategy.

 

(5+3+3+4)/4=6? Really? If it was Bradley the overall would be a 2 (if he were lucky) from you.

I get 3.75 BTW

 

Personally, I think JK wanted to flood the midfield, by essentially having a 3-6-1. Boca was often sliding left....

 

On the no-sub issue: is Klinsmann doing this on purpose because he either thinks players can handle it (3 and 4 day breaks between games), or because he wants to see how the starters react to it? And either way, thinks they can get the needed results even if tired?

This "tournament" schedule looks like it has more rest than the Gold Cup, less than a World Cup.

 

Klinsmann's excessive training makes the players as tired as his excessive rhetoric and meta-game make me.

 

the players werent tired. they looked fine. we had possession the entire game.
Just because we couldnt finish didnt mean we didnt boss the game.

usually when we play a team that plays that compact we score one goal.

 

The good:

1. I liked the "out of the box" idea of starting Torres at LB. I thought it was the perfect opportunity to check this option out.

2. I liked Hercules Gomez being rewarded with the start given the effort I observed him putting in vs Scotland and Brazil.

3. A couple of media outlets listed the lineup as a 4-4-2 with Dempsey as a second striker. At first, I was pleased with this, but soon realized we were in a 4-2-3-1.

4. Still unsure about Boyd but pleased he is now captied.

Not so good.

1. Taking shots, possession seems to be the order of the day.

2. Finishing, two of the goals were off a corner kick and a pk.

3. Having an edge, being sharp, match ready for qualifying . . not sure why we were not. I want to attribute this to being tired.

4. If we were tired, why on earth? These qualifiers are critical. Why burn players and particularly starters out.

5. Could this be why both of our left back primary options were injured?

6. After the Canada match, I suggested that there would need to be effort put into attacking bunkering defenses. Typically, this is done by drawing out defenses and utilizing wing play.
90% of what we did was go route 1, down the middle. Props to our man, Bocanegra, for immediately attacking as soon as he was switched to lb.

7. We used to be good on corners. What happened?

8. I thought that when Torres went down and we were up 3-0, this would have been a great opportunity to blood a young defender. JK did not and the result was awful.

9. We have provided Guatemala and Jamaica with the blueprint for playing the United States.

10. I believe JJ is a better 6 than Maurice Edu. This is, unfortunately, the third match in a row that his performance has been suspect.

11. I remain hopeful that things will click and that we will see "attractive, free flowing attacking soccer". I am beginning to have some doubts.

 

once again klinsmann asks his lplayers to shoot more often and from outside all the time. he has begged for it.

 

Put me in the camp of not seeing how Torres getting hurt made him a bad choice at LB. I thought he played fine there for this game.

The Gooch over Parkhurst sub looked bad, but validated the choice to start Goodson, which was not unanimously praised pregame.


Lack of a "bunkerbreaker" CM in the game, or on the roster, being an error is something I'll agree with.

 

You don't just need a CM bunkerbreaker to do this. There are many ways.

1. First thing is to recognize there is a bunker possibility. This should be identified early, ordinarily even prior to the opening whistle.

2. Patience is required by the entire team on the field.

3. Quality back four who have the requisite technical skill can move the ball quickly are important. It is easiest and safest to switch the point of attack from the back.

4. It helps to have at least two visionaries who can see the field and quickly change the point of attack.

5. Quick, easy to read, movement off the ball is a must. Several players making diagonal runs (and these can be difficult to teach and to learn) are necessary.

6. Outside shooting will pull the defense out of the box.

7. Spreading the field and using the wings and outside spaces to attack is where the room to attack will primarily be available.

Here is a link from Sigi Schmid entitled: Beating a packed defense
http://www.nscaa.com/education/library/323-beating-a-packed-defense-by-sigi-schmid

Here is a link on training wingers and wide midfielders:
http://the-soccer-essentials.com/2010/05/soccer-positions-wide-midfielder-winger/

I would offer that having one player to beat the bunker is nice, although rare on the International level.

Better off having a team commitment from the coaching staff right on down through every player.

 

If this is the case, perhaps, you might offer insight as to "why" the players might be resisting his coaching?

 

I agree that this complaint is nonsensical. The Torres experiment at LB was fine under the circumstances. Certainly not much different than past coaches testing Beasley or Convey at LB. And Torres played fine there, at least against a bunkering, largely minor league opponent. And his injury (partially his own fault for the slide tackle) has nothing to do with which position he started in.

Hopefully Johnson will be OK for Guatemala.

 

I saw this game differently than most of you.

in million dollar baby, when karate kid 4 has her nose broken and clint says: she's younger, stronger and faster, what are you going to do about it?

With all of the extreme training I think JK is manufacturing that moment: you're exhausted, you cant move, you have to win, you have 90minutes, what are you going to do about it?
I love this performance. Use as little energy possible to beat a team that was brutal in spells.

My only problem, much like the dutch yesterday, you become predictable, the other team counters, your defense has had zero acclimation to the match as the other team has no possession. They catch you napping twice on the counter. Meanwhile you predictably weave pretty passes 25 feet from danger against 8 disciplined defenders. If you dont score first and score early, they will eventually wear you down and beat you on the break.

I would have let A+B possess the ball more, spread their team out, let our defense defend a set table and then counter.

 

years of being coached differently.

 

I liked the move of Torres to LB inasmuch as I interpreted it as a commitment to attack.

But I strongly objected to the inclusion of Edu in the starting 11 against this opponent -- essentially reducing our ability to attack. I do understand the tactical principle that a dedicated 6 lets us get more offense from our 2-way mids, but this principle is mis-applied in this game.

Further, I am incensed that several of our (admittedly flawed) promising attack-minded midfielders have never been given their due under this regime. Kljestan he used once and out of position, Feilhaber I don't believe he has ever even called into camp (even now when he is fully recovered from injury), Bedoya has been persona non grata after emerging as one (somewhat) bright point of Bob's final GC campaign, and Adu was seen as surplus to requirements from camp I guess. The u23s I guess I will allow him a pass on since he was trying to get the Olympic squad to gel....

I fear I am about to become a ranting anti-Klinsmann poster. Heaven help me.

The Gooch move was not bad, the circumstances were. There is always a risk when you have three injuries in one part of the field that something might go wrong.

(Lastly, to fully ensure my transformation as a ranter, I would like to call into question a coaching decision from a previous match: not having Landon switch sides v. Brazil after it was clear that they were using Marcelo to take him out of the attack. In a friendly before WCQs, we don't need him learning how to mark elite players, we need Landon tuning up his game as the biggest weapon in our attack. I guess LD answered anyway against A&B so no harm done I suppose, but still it pissed me off.)

 

I think we are doing ok offensively. I think we are doing even better defensively.

we scored 12 this year and gave up 6 in 7 matches.
Last year we scored 11 and gave up 13 in 10 matches.

( just comparing the first half of last season to the first half of this season)

we played easy and tough teams in both halfs of the season.

I think scoring one more goal in 3 less matches is pretty good. we shall see how the next three matches pans out for giving up goals.

but so far we have given up a lot less goals and have scored more than usual.​

 

I cannot believe I am going to defend Klinsmann, but here goes.

Get real. Besides Klestan, you are advocating for two mediocre-form MLS midfielders and a guy that rarely got off the bench at Rangers. It isn't 2000 any longer. Form and playing time (and to a lesser extent, where you are playing club ball) matters.