I’m aware of that. I’m saying I think he made poor substitutions.
I mean, situationally this didn’t exactly call for Reyna, but the fact that he’s seen < 10 minutes of action in three games is absurd. I actually think they should have started him in this one precisely because he’s not necessarily the guy you want to sub on in the 60th-70th minute protecting a 1-0 or 2-0 lead, but he’s the guy who can help you get it. Someone like McKennie or Weah coming in fresh later in the game could have made a lot of sense, even though you wouldn’t be maximizing their minutes quantitatively.
Going with Zimmerman and a 5-man backline was the right move, yah. On Dest, he already had a yellow from an earlier match and I think Gregg was trying to protect some of the players with a yellow b/c if they picked up another yellow in this match, they’d be suspended vs. Netherland. If you notice, he also subbed off McKennie who had a yellow. The key is basically Reyna. If he was fit, I would have used him, and I think him and Aaronson probably could’ve linked up for a goal. Otherwise, the options were too limited and I think the strategy was fine for the personnel that was left after injuries/subs.
I’m not one of those Americans who literally only watches the WC, I know we’re big underdogs against the Netherlands. Barring getting very lucky on the draw we were probably going to be underdogs against anyone in the knockout stage, but obviously the Netherlands is even tougher.
I’m just curious what their style of play is, and how we match up strategically.
I would say the only teams I’d rather play the Netherlands over would be Brazil, Belgium, Germany, Spain, and France. Probably close between them and Argentina? I assume coming in England was considered better than the Netherlands but we’ve always punched above our weight against England.
That’s the balancing act that managers have to do. Managers probably aren’t going to take the risk of starting a sub standard eleven in a vital match because if it goes wrong and the subs don’t rescue it it’s egg on face time and possibly the end of their time, whereas as played if Iran had equalised he could just tell the USAFA (?) the players weren’t good enough, with some justification.
Not what I wanted to hear given that we struggle to finish. Are they going to try to hold possession a ton but be less aggressive with their possession like England played against us, or are they going to be more aggressive and push the issue and put us under more pressure but possibly concede some counters?
I agree, and it seems like he’s fit. I mean he says he is, his father leaked that he is, there’s some drama behind the scenes over him not playing. I mean if he isn’t fit and doesn’t play significantly on Saturday, especially if Pulisic and/or Sargent or out, why the hell was he brought to Qatar?
Netherlands will probably be joint weakest group winner with Croatia. I think Argentina is significantly better. The Saudi loss was a massive fluke and they pretty much dismantled Mexico (who finished ahead of USA in CONCACAF qualifying). Their xG for the tourney is like 2.8-0.3 or something ridiculous. The Saudis binked 2 miracles, but on the balance Argentina have been very tough.
Last cup I watched really closely (was on uni holidays) and that whole cup, especially the knockout rounds, was horrendous. I swear the average goals/game in knockouts was under 2.
I believe it’s USSF (US Soccer Federation), but I could be wrong.
Ehh would have been tough to sell after the way they played the first 45 against Wales and Iran and all 90 against England. I guess he could try to make an argument about depth, but everyone knows Reyna should be playing.
Come on, They only drew with Wales, a team that didn’t manage a single goal in open play all tournament., and struggled to beat Iran. They were solid against England, true , but the latter were poor that day.
USA’s main, perhaps only, strength is being solid. They have some chances against Holland as all teams do in the KO stages but are dogs because they lack quality throughout.
They are not as expansive and attractive as previous dutch teams but they still have talent spread everywhere but as Jalfrezi pointed out out van Gaal is gonna van Gaal. Looking at the groups assuming you were always gonna be second and who was gonna be top was always gonna be top it is what is it. Defo easier than a lot of the other group winners. Can you win? Sure. Will you be on the back foot for most of the game? Yes. Don’t score to early is my advice.
He wasn’t their manager in 2010 right? But sounds like the same style? Slow build up, lots of possession?
I specified the first half in both, did you watch the matches? I assume not today for obvious reasons. The first half demonstrated what their talent is capable of.
That’s fine but they outplayed one of the top 5-7 teams in the world, so regardless of whether England played their C game, it would be hard for Berhalter to argue that the talent is not good enough for this team to beat Wales and Iran. Their second half performances are on him IMO.
I’d argue our possession, passing, and offensive creativity are light years ahead of where they have ever been before. Not on an elite level on the world stage, and often overshadowed by our lack of a high level striker to finish, but I’d call it a strength relative to the bottom two-thirds of the field. Obviously it’s not going to compare favorably to the Brazils of the world.
One big concern is that the USA looked exhausted in the 2nd half and could barely string together any passes. Most of those guys have played big minutes in tight matches. The Dutch basically had a scrimmage vs. Qatar and will be a lot fresher.
The Dutch have the same coach as 2010. The difference is that their 3 best players then were attackers (rvp, sneijder, robben) now it’s 2 Cb and a mf (vvd, de ligt, de jong)