Turkey is dominant in downing U.S. in Confederations Cup opener In a surprisingly loosely played match, the United States produced a half dozen could chances, but were generally outplayed in a 2-1 loss to Turkey to open Group D play in the Confederations Cup this afternoon. Playing before a mostly Turkish crowd of 16,944 at Geoffroy Guichard Stadium in Saint Etienne, a somewhat patchwork U.S. team scored first, but could not capitalize on other opportunities while having had a great deal of trouble with the pace of the Turkish forwards who made frequent runs through the middle. http://www.soccertimes.com/usteams/2003/jun19a.htm
Wagman needs an editor. One can only assume that when he writes: "Arena started a somewhat strange lineup. DaMarcus Beasley was listed as a forward, but he played his usual right midfield spot, so -- as they did in several matches in the 2002 World Cup -- the U.S. essentially played a 4-5-1 with Jovan Kirovski the lone forward." he does so only because it's a typo. Right midfield is DMB's "usual" position? Since when? I agree, fully, that Arena's lineup was "strange." Perhaps the strangest thing about it was wasting Beasley on the right side, where he almost never plays (and it's obvious why) for the Nats. One wonders, too, how badly we'd have to play to get more than one player with a rating of less than 5.0.
I think he consistently has a good level-headed take on US play. When I haven't seen a game, I can usually get a pretty good idea of how we played without all the fly off the handle reactions "XXXXX sucks, XXXXX[R], blah, blah, blah. What exactly did he say that was so far off the mark? Just what Scotty posted from the article is 100% right.
They did not waste Beasley on the right side. He scored a goal playing there. Hardly wasting him there. He seems to have more offense on the right side. Lewis or Convey can easily fill in the left mid. They need to find the central attacking mid and play their regular central defenders.
How about that Eddie Lewis was our best player or that Mathis and Berhalter got the same grade. My favorite play of the game was when Califf and Berhalter both raced up for a header 40 yards from goal and managed to knock each other off the ball, causing it to land at the feet of a Turkish attacker who strolled into the space where most international sides usually put their central defenders.
Not a waste at all... Another reason to work him on the right is so that maybe he can develop more diversity. If we can get him comfortable playing over there it gives DaBruce more opportunities when setting up a line up. What better opportunity to bring some of these guys along than in a relatively high pressure international match against some very good competition in a tourney that means very little in the big scheme of things?
What is your problem with the Wagman?? His coments are right on the NAIL, Bruce Arena lineup was strange for not call it STUPID what in the HELL IS DOING KIRO ON A TURKS GAME? WHAT IS DAMARCUS BEALEY DOING ON THE RIGHT SIDE ??? I am so disapointed and frustrated I better do not said more!!
Re: A turks game is not time for EXPERIMENTS Yes it is. This is a dryrun for WC 2006 and a chance for valuable playing experience for our younger players. Let's not get fixtated on the results. Wins are nice, but evaluation of player talent and having them play in a hostile European environment are much more important. Let's see what happens against Cameroon. Clearly we lose a lot without JOB and Reyna. They as our interior midfielders can sustain the ball and feed the strikers on a consistent basis. We will be much better and someone will step up over the next year or two to help increase the depth chart for the central midfielders. The same will also be the case of the central defenders. Again, as has been stated by many others this tournament with regard to results is meaningless.