I know I'm coming to this late and I'm sure much of what I'm going to say has already been discussed but tough. I'm also aware that many may disagree with me but c'est la vie. I don't think DMB needs to play again until he gets more time with his club team. He's rusty and just doesn't do anything for us out there. The occasionally good ball is overshadowed by his horribly inaccurate shots and getting the ball taken from him. Klestjan (sp?) had a poor first half. He couldn't pass, had way to many turnovers, and made multiple poor decisions. He improved in the 2nd but still. Sure it was a nice goal, but still think Michael Bradley was too sloppy and indecisive for most of the game. Maybe it's just me, but why are we only playing with one forward against T&T at home? This would have been a great game for Kenny Cooper. He loves to shot from outside the box (virtually the only one it seems), is good at it, and in this game he would have had plenty of opportunities for both shots and goals. To be honest (and I can't believe I'm saying this) I think I would've preferred Hejduk instead of Pearce. He would have given T&T more trouble than Pearce did. Lewis would have been better even. It was a good win at home but I thought BB would have set the team loose more and fired away at them. It still seems too tentative, especially at home. Away games are one thing, but at home... Donovan was on his game last night. He got his confidence earlier and it showed throughout the whole game. A couple of guys seemed tired last night which I can understand when you're just starting your seasons and this is the second game in 5 days. Gooch/Bocanegra/Howard are solid. That's all I've got.
1) If you're going to to tutor someone in English, maybe you should brush up on your spelling. 2) While you're at it, maybe you should review the dictionary as well. Grammatically are, as used here, is a verb conjugated in the second person singular. To say are is a "state of being" is redundant, because it is after all a conjugation of the verb to be. 3) It is generally considered poor form to talk grammar smack on this and many other internet fora. 4) Welcome to BigSoccer. Try not to be a dick.
If you read this guys posts, he uses are instead of our every single time. It drives me crazy. Sorry if I'm being a dick, but really. It's one thing to not spell check, or have a typo. It's another thing to consistently use the wrong word. So off topic here, so...Ching = Blue Collar player. Effective at what he does best but not the complete package that the U.S. needs from this position. Although I'm not sure if the U.S. has a player that is the complete package for a center forward.
i thought our play was decent... i like that dempsey is slowly but surely coming back to what we are used to seeing. EJ deserves to play in the stands...he should from now on be just a spectator of the game...i was hoping he would actually try but thats it he better not get any more call ups until he deserves some... ching was ching...ehhh would like to see jozy and coop in the next game bob... beaz is getting himself back...i think come hexagonal round he will be in great form... i liked the formation it was different and enjoyable...kljestan(spelling) and bradley make a good partnership...kljestan just needs a little more game time and i think he will become very useful for us....defense was pretty good except for the previously mentioned brainfart stevie had...but i was satisfied with the 3-0 win...i called the score correctly!!! lol my reason was because ching is starting....crazy stuff... well hopefully against cuba we can really show what we are all about and what not...ok time for late breakfast...
1) There is an 'ignore' feature that you can use. 2) At this point, we have no player that is the complete package at center forward. That's why everyone is holding out hope for Jozy Altidore.
Maybe you can start a thread that lists all the craptacular grammar and spelling used on BS. Some people might even learn a few things. God knows I've got my own list of pet peeves. Oh, and "Go U.S.A, rah rah rah!"
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet here, I think. I think the crazy amount of time that Bradley had on the ball was partially due to Kljestan's runs forward which opened up the space.
England 4, Croatia 1. And they got it done because they unleashed hell on the road. Or the exact opposite of what McLaren or Bradley would have done in Croatia.
Couple of comments that may be different from having been in the stadium: Beasley's touch has never been good and it still isn't. I doubt he would have looked good on TV (haven't watched tape yet). But he still is a very effctive defensive presence on the wing. His ability to cover ground and win the ball back or at least seriously disrupt T&T was unique. I think soccer has come a long way when a popular BS complaint is how annoying all that constant singing from the fans was. I bet it was annoying; it was annoying to keep singing it! But I think after 80 minutes of trying to do different things, everyone just said "f-- it, we're going with this one til the whistle." Maybe it annoyed T&T as much as it annoyed the homebodies who couldn't turn the sound down. Question for those at home: did the AR on the T&T defensive side the first half seem like he must have been Jack Warner's nephew based on how much he favored T&T with his calls, or was that just the beer?
Relax, dude. It's grammar, not grammer. So, should I now scold you? Enjoy life, it goes by too quickly.
Beasley's touch is extremely annoying. He's fast, makes good runs, and gets in good positions. Then the ball comes to him, and his first touch lets him down. I'd also like to see him actually shot at goal from a little distance. He always looks like he's trying to make his way to within 5 feet from the goal before shooting. I like Beasley as part of the national team set-up but I need to see more from him. Especially if we're going to play a 4-2-3-1. (I realize he was coming back from an injury. But when is he not always coming back from an injury).
Which is no way invalidates what I said that teams play to win at home and HOPE to get a point on the road. If you can get a win on the road, even better.
There's a big difference between results and how you approach the game. If you go on the road and believe that you can take three points from the opponent, you come out and attack them and play for the win. You don't defend and hope to preserve a point, and hopefully with a few lucky bounces you might win the game. What England did was they went on the road and play for the win. They attacked, believing they are better than their opponent. And that's just the opposite of what the US did against Guat and Cuba. Don't they believe that they are superior to these teams? Don't they have any confidence that they can attack and win? The US play for the draw, and they were lucky to get away with the wins.
STFU!!!! You just got owned!!!!!!!!!!! And my 2nd grade GRAMMAR, is getting me a 100% state scholarship, so get outta here noob. If your gonna point out some things, get it right.
All this, and to add to it that Beasley has no right foot at all. It's a prosthesis. I'm positive of it. With Beasley, you just have to take the good and the bad. Good: fast (though it seems to me that he's at least temporarily lost about a half-step), makes good runs, combines well with Donovan and Dempsey, works his butt off tenaciously on the left flank to help out with the defense and thus shields our LB well, and serves in a fairly good left-footed set-piece to the big guys. Draws lots of fouls (useful for a team that's obviously strong on set-pieces). Bad: Poor first touch. Always seems to be coming off an injury. Doesn't finish particularly well, and his right foot is so obviously bad that every opponent we face knows this well and cheats way over to his left.
One other thing: am I the only one who was pleased to hear Hislop's commentary? I was at a very loud soccer bar, but what I did hear was pretty interesting, much more interesting than Harkes ever is.
Play for the draw??? Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we sitting on 9 points right now with a 3-0 record? As far as I can tell, the US players believe they can win no matter where, when and against whom they play.
I disagree, I think his first touch actually comes and goes. I've seen him bring down a 60yard pass and slot it more than once. In fact I think it's gotten better over the years. I think his finishing isn't bad at all, perhaps average for wingers in a top league, but power shots from outside the area are clearly not his thing. His positional play is above average, he's always making himself available and is very hard to mark off the ball but he won't beat anyone off the dribble. His crossing is good, the quality of his free kicks very good and personally I'd like to see him take more of the free kicks in closer to goal. I think he's come on a lot since his move out of Man City and that is mostly due to playing time and confidence. Before the most recent injury he was probably playing the best ball of his career and I think that he must be in the top 4-5 outfield players we have available.