This game played out just about how I expect them to when we go up against a top 5 team in the world. Sometimes we do a bit better and pull off a result; sometimes we do a bit worse and lose by several goals; and once in a blue moon we actually play toe to toe with sides like this. But on average, I hate to say, this is about what I'd expect. A couple decent opportunities in an otherwise toothless attack, generally solid defending with a major lapse or two in between; a midfield that can maintain possession for good spells but will look overrun for stretches as well; and at least one or two really special moments from the opposition that you sort of just have to tip your hat to. I think maybe the thing that is throwing everyone off is that usually (historically at least) Colombia isn't in that range of teams you'd expect those sort of games from. But in recent years they certainly are one of those teams. (They've been ranked top 5 in the world by Elo for a couple years now. The 4 teams currently ranked above them are the other 4 that I normally expect this from as well.) That sounds like an excuse I'm sure, so let me just say, if we play the same way in our next two matches and don't get results I certainly won't find that to be excusable. Paraguay and Costa Rica are not Colombia.
It was a weird game. We deserved the loss, but didn't look that bad. And Colombia didn't really look that great aside from the well-taken volley. Wasn't really much urgency for either side. Almost felt like a friendly more so than a tournament.
Win or lose, the manager should be ensuring that the most effective team is on the field. 1. Jones: hasn't been a top-class box-to-box mid since 2014. Should be played at the 10 or the 6. 2. Bedoya: hasn't been a box-to-box mid since at the most recent his Sweden days. 3. Maybe creativity could have come from the wings. But JK started 2 strikers there. Colombia's ranking is not really relevant here. The US have just been uninspiring garbage since the Mundial.
I agree with your second sentence, but I do think Colombia's quality is at least somewhat relevant to how we played in this specific match. We haven't been playing well the past couple years, so our poor performance could just be a continuation of that trend. However, we were also playing a quality team on Friday and the game may very well have gone the same way even if we were in good form. It's hard to say at this point. (If we had been completely dominated the whole game, I would be leaning strongly toward the former option. However, that wasn't really the case.) The next two games should be a lot more clarifying.
While certainly excellent execution on Colombia's part, much depended on Cameron not being there and he was literally flat-footed on the play which caused him to be late. Maybe quibbling,but I would call ot 50-50
If you rewatch it, Cameron slows down and is caught ball-watching. If he doesn't hesitate, the player never gets that shot off.
This tournament's final results for both the US and Colombia should provide greater clarification on the merits of each team in that first match. For example, Brasil blasted the US the group stages of the 2009 Confederations. Bob turned the team around to make the tournament Finale. But there, Brasil won again, though not by the gaudy margin of that first match. There was plenty room for improvement, but Brasil were still the better team. Maybe Colombia are that talented, but they probably aren't. The current US team, however, likely has plenty of room for improvement. Can JK turn this around to partially salvage his legacy?
Not to be pedantic, but he was caught 'man-watching'. As he was shifting over to follow his man he looked up and saw the ball coming in at the perfect spot. You could see he was surprised the ball was already there. He then lunged knowing what was coming next, but was too late to block the shot.
From my post: "Cam got caught flat-footed and was about two seconds slow to follow his man." So yeah, I get it he was late, that means he bears some blame, but as I also said, this wasn't that egregious on the list of defensive errors: "he wasn't completely out of position or totally flummoxed. He nearly managed to block the shot, too." I.e., this wasn't a situation where his error was a major mental or physical mistake--it was pretty marginal. Nothing like, for example, Cam's shanked clearance that gifted Nani possession in the Portugal WC14 game. I have re-watched this goal many many times. Hence my detailed opinion as expressed above including the above observation that "Cam got caught flat-footed and was about two seconds slow." Give credit to to the Colombian player for running a clever pick move that made him hard to track. The point of my post is that almost all goals involve some identifiable defensive mistake, and that focusing on that alone misses something major: the skill that the offensive player uses to score a goal, which in this case was substantial, and IMO proportionally much greater than Cam's clear but relatively smaller error. Merely because causation is shared does not mean it is equally shared.
Fair enough. Going around the not-much-of-a-pick he basically just...stops. There's no excuse for that.
I wouldn't call it a relatively small error, personally. I understand the skill it takes to put that shot where he did, though. Definitely wouldn't downplay that. He shouldn't have been able to get it off in the first place.
Once they got a lead, his tactics on countering Bradley contributed mightily to Bradley's pizz poor showing and our demise. Bacca's work on him was immense and it really bottled us up and helped force some serious mistakes by MB, something he is prone to anyway. He played badly, but Colombia's tactics were one of the reasons that happened. I would expect more of the same from other decent managers going forward. Don't know if either of the next 2 fits that description, but if we get out of the group we will definitely see more of this if we stay in the current setup.
Slows down when? Could Cam be quicker to slide past Bradley when Zapata moves - sure, but he's not the quickest guy in the world on a good day. Could he have come harder once he headed to the ball? Maybe by milliseconds, but he is just barely short of the getting there. If you watch the corner, it's taken like a chip-shot, clearly a set piece planned to get into that space and hit beautifully on a 1st time volley. While maybe a fast defender, or a guy that is certain Zapata is going to that spot gets there a half-step quicker, an actual human defender with Cameron's speed and without the ability to foresee things to come HAS to ball watch a little (as Due Time points out - he's man watching at first - and it is pretty hard to do both from that angle) or he doesn't know, you know, where the ball is going. He extends the left leg and just barely comes up short. This one, I think is, is more down to Cams general speed of thought and foot than some "mistake." If Zapata makes that move to the PK mark and the cross is inside Cam and he goes too hard to the player - Zapata comes past him for the header and then everyone's on about his overcommiting. Sometimes a goal is just point-perfect. That one was. Zapata puts that ball a foot left or right, Guzan or Fabio probably get a touch to it (still might go in, but it was hit as well as well as one could hope for a running volley.
I don't know about you but I'm not used to seeing players get a clear shot on goal direct from a corner, inside the penalty spot, down low. That's crazy. Many many players are going to score that, and they should never get the chance.
Okay well that explains one bad performance since the World Cup. What about every other game he has been in?
Overall, I think the big difference was in each team's offense. Colombia put their shots on goal and the US didn't. Even then I think that the score was little generous to Colombia but that always tends to be the case when you get an early goal. Our defense seemed to me quite good and was punished a little too much for what were minimal mistakes. Midfield seems much improved. I was not expecting them too be able to get into Colombia's half after the early goal. Colombia is a pressing machine. This is not a performance to be dismissed. Still not at the level of the top teams but I really liked it. Offense was a bit wasteful but did show fight. Basically, don't panic. I believe that we have enough to make the next round. Maybe even enough to get past a pretty anemic Brazil.
Yep, and with the way Brazil has come out, who knows if they'll even win the group or not. Peru and Ecuador may have something to say about it.
Of course. However, everyone knows that walking away with zero points from your first match is a death wish in tournament play. It's 2016 and we have a thriving (if sub-par) league in MLS. This tournament is being played on our home soil. My expectations are to advance from this group without help from anyone else. A 2-0 loss to start doesn't help at all, but it can still be turned around. It's also worth beating the dead horse again and saying that JK was brought in to take us past "one and done" in the knockout rounds. A terrible start and thus the reactions to it.
Backline was steady but largely untested, as Colombia basically pulled a concacaf to rest for the remaining games and just dropped. That's why stats can be misleading, the majority of our completed passes were exactly what Colombia wanted, side to side or backward. Our offensive 3 actually made lots of runs, but our midfield was too inept or didn't want to try those. So basically JK had them play intk what Colombia wanted, and they never really pressed for an extended period. Just looking at the stats, it looks even, but really watching the game, and then see how Colombia plays, it was much more a friendly tempo.
Colombia's strategy seemed to be to sit back and let us penetrate into their side of the field and then foul us when we got into a dangerous spot.
I'm not defending his performance, but you have to give some credit to the opposition that saw what we were doing over the last few friendlies and took steps to neutralize it