I can't see how this is a great half unless us is just hoping for 0-0 draw. Mex def had a few solid chances whereas we had nada. Mex are flopping like crazy.
The [Horribly Unpopular] Soccer Thread
- Thread starter Reno_eNVy
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
mizzourah2006
Well-Known Member
I would be ecstatic with a draw here. We are getting worked.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
Haha Chicharito just cost them a goal.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
Huge draw.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
Draw in Azteca is huge.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
This.
Big point gained on the road. I can finally relax now... it's been a stressful evening.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
From the US Soccer facebook
"1997 was the last time the U.S. left Azetca with a point in World Cup Qualifying"
Kinda crazy.
And aside from the lack of shots on goal (some deadly chances just not the finishing) and some defensive lapses, I think overall the team was better than Mexico. US looked more calm in possession against a top opponent then I've ever seen. Mexico wound up winning the possession battle cause they were clearly better in the second half, but they also were clearly pushing as hard as possible for a point and our makeshift back line held their ground.
Think about it, aside from Gonzalez everyone was new or out of position. That's impressive especially adding that we had a new central midfielder and our normal starting goalie didn't play.
"1997 was the last time the U.S. left Azetca with a point in World Cup Qualifying"
Kinda crazy.
And aside from the lack of shots on goal (some deadly chances just not the finishing) and some defensive lapses, I think overall the team was better than Mexico. US looked more calm in possession against a top opponent then I've ever seen. Mexico wound up winning the possession battle cause they were clearly better in the second half, but they also were clearly pushing as hard as possible for a point and our makeshift back line held their ground.
Think about it, aside from Gonzalez everyone was new or out of position. That's impressive especially adding that we had a new central midfielder and our normal starting goalie didn't play.
Grannyknot
Well-Known Member
I thought we were lucky to get out of that game with a point.
The tackle Edu put on aquino in the box was very very suspect.
Also, can any of you rules experts weigh in on what the proper call was for the Bradley "shove" on hernandez?
I was thinking that since the pass never made it in to him (deflected), the ref should have shown bradley a yellow card during the next stoppage of play. I didn't think a penalty could be awarded for something that happened off the ball, regardless of if it was in the box. Very possible that I am dead wrong on that.
The tackle Edu put on aquino in the box was very very suspect.
Also, can any of you rules experts weigh in on what the proper call was for the Bradley "shove" on hernandez?
I was thinking that since the pass never made it in to him (deflected), the ref should have shown bradley a yellow card during the next stoppage of play. I didn't think a penalty could be awarded for something that happened off the ball, regardless of if it was in the box. Very possible that I am dead wrong on that.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
After reviewing the play from multiple angles over and over, I have determined that the ref made made the correct call. Edu actually gets the ball first with his right boot in between Aquinos legs. No penalty.
That's a very good question... our roommate had the same one. If it was called it would have been a penalty kick. Because neither player was part of the play, it's a no-call. Off-ball physicality in the box is generally allowed to a point.
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
Did I hear this correctly? The Americans were out-shot 19-1?
aygov
Well-Known Member
Yep...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
Did they assassinate that referee yet?
Yeah I like the so called non-calls but I think that could def have been a PK there, lol. Its a miracle US tied that game but I'm glad at least they physically went after Mehico, almost reminded me of a bruising NBA team. Can't beat'em, then just beat'em.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
Or we could keep all of our young talent in the states and make MLS one of the top leagues that everybody wants to come to. It's already happening to a small extent. We have tons of talent from Central and South America, as well as plenty from Europe (several killer Italians), Africa, and Asia. But as far as growing the soccer community in America I think it would really help if we held onto our homegrown heroes.
Couldn't agree more.
BrewKnurd
Well-Known Member
I think that this is the long term goal. But as it is now, its not really an option, within the confines of the salary cap structure and the current pecking order of soccer leagues. Many of these young players that we would love to keep around want to play at the highest level, and the MLS is not there right now. Its making consistent, steady progress, no doubt. But we're kidding ourselves that if the MLS would just try real hard, we can keep all the young talent around. Other leagues simply offer an experience/challenge/and yes, money, that the MLS cannot right now.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
Agreed. But there's no reason to work towards it. And hey, if our talent is looking for greener pastures then so be it. We just need to be able to offer more. The salary cap has been increasing yearly, ending in 2015. Hopefully then the players association can push for a bigger jump.
BrewKnurd
Well-Known Member
Yup. I think MLS is right to try to stay conservative on growth rate. I mean, I'd rather see them grow a little slower but stay viable rather than go nuts with the spending in hopes that the revenue will follow and end up shooting themselves in the foot.
I think it will be great for the national team if/when the MLS has the quality across the board that the majority of our national players play in the league. Would help with familiarity, cohesive playing style, etc.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
MLS is going to grow better now with teams starting (or expanding) their academies will get talented kids in MLS younger. I think long term the bringing in of Klinsmann will be a massive net gain for the US. Even if the 2014 WC isn't a better result than 2010, I think that we'll have better young kids which lead to a better senior squad which will lead to better kids and so on and so forth.
hatedheretic
Well-Known Member
Except they're the old talent.
If the US could pull someone like Ibra, who's amazing, growing in poplularity in Europe and not washed up; maybe then the U.S. would look more appealing. But no team in the MLS could afford someone like that.
lgilmore
Well-Known Member
"Yup. I think MLS is right to try to stay conservative on growth rate. I mean, I'd rather see them grow a little slower but stay viable rather than go nuts with the spending in hopes that the revenue will follow and end up shooting themselves in the foot"
Yup, I think they learned a lot from the first go round with pro soccer in the states. While it was awesome to see Pele and Georgie Best play even past their prime. It wasn't long before the league folded and there was nobody to watch. While at times I hate the salary cap, I also realize it is a big reason they're still playing so I can hate the salary cap.
Yup, I think they learned a lot from the first go round with pro soccer in the states. While it was awesome to see Pele and Georgie Best play even past their prime. It wasn't long before the league folded and there was nobody to watch. While at times I hate the salary cap, I also realize it is a big reason they're still playing so I can hate the salary cap.
lgilmore
Well-Known Member
If that's the case then yes, the mls are doing well then.
I think if I gets as big and has the talent of brazil - we've made it.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
I don't think the mls can everbe as big as the European leagues, just because we don't have access to the Champions League.
We have ConcacafHaha
???
Just about every confederation has a champions league.
uefa > concacaf
times a million
I've never heard of a player leaving an MLS team so they could go to another one that was in the Concacaf tournament so they could compete against the best. Have you?
Forgot to to include UEFA in my first post
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
uefa > concacaf
times a million
I've never heard of a player leaving an MLS team so they could go to another one that was in the Concacaf tournament so they could compete against the best. Have you?
Forgot to to include UEFA in my first post
Oh I know you were implying UEFA. My issue with putting a huge emphasis on UEFA Champions League is that these European leagues are soooo proud of not having playoffs when that's essentially what CL is.
Yes, MLSers don't change clubs in order to be on a CCL club but you can be darn sure they would change to be on a playoff club. Not only that but the participating CCL and MLS playoffs clubs are constantly shifting. Fun fact: there have been as many if not more different league champions in MLSs 17 year history than the entire history of either Premiere League or La Liga. That just makes it more exciting than the same four clubs winning the league or the same clubs over and over in Champions League.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
MLS can get as big as the US market lets it. Face it if MLS gets big and makes TV deals like the NBA or MLB then they can afford top players either through scouting and signing young guys or sniping a few greats.
It doesn't need a UEFA Champions League, it needs it's own prestige. It has to rely on itself. I think the first step is building up quality American prospects to get noticed on the national level who'll then draw more fans in.
It doesn't need a UEFA Champions League, it needs it's own prestige. It has to rely on itself. I think the first step is building up quality American prospects to get noticed on the national level who'll then draw more fans in.
hoppyhoppyhippo
Well-Known Member
Is anyone else excited for Landon's return? haha
Honestly though, the USMNT is better with him there giving it his all, but if he's gonna be a distraction I don't want him. If he's there giving 100% the US is better for it. If he's there to subvert the coach then let him leave and thanks for the years of effort. Guys who buy into Klinsmann's ways have improved.
Honestly though, the USMNT is better with him there giving it his all, but if he's gonna be a distraction I don't want him. If he's there giving 100% the US is better for it. If he's there to subvert the coach then let him leave and thanks for the years of effort. Guys who buy into Klinsmann's ways have improved.
ScotBrew
Well-Known Member
You said the correct word there - distraction. There's more to the national team than Landon Donovan.
And with more MLS teams expanding their academies, Union are introducing U14's this summer, the only way is up. However, the league needs to allow 'homegrown' players in to their teams. There's a limit on how many a club can include in their squad but I can't remember how many it is.
And with more MLS teams expanding their academies, Union are introducing U14's this summer, the only way is up. However, the league needs to allow 'homegrown' players in to their teams. There's a limit on how many a club can include in their squad but I can't remember how many it is.
BrewKnurd
Well-Known Member
Ok, but the "entire history" of the premier league is all of 20 years. No denying that there's more variety of winners in mls vs premier league, but your wording implies that the premier league has been around for ages.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
Ok, but the "entire history" of the premier league is all of 20 years. No denying that there's more variety of winners in mls vs premier league, but your wording implies that the premier league has been around for ages.
My bad. But after looking at the history of England First Division champions, there really aren't that many considering the lengthy history.
Serie A also seems to have a small champion pool.
Ok, but the "entire history" of the premier league is all of 20 years. No denying that there's more variety of winners in mls vs premier league, but your wording implies that the premier league has been around for ages.
Also the winner is the team with the most points. They don't have a tournament at the end of the regular season.
OP
OP
Reno_eNVy
Well-Known Member
Well sure, but MLS recognizes both. Most points in the season is the Supporters Shield winner. The winner of the playoffs in MLS Cup champion.
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
So what's with the stupid scarves the fans wear? I find it inexcusable.
It makes it a lot easier for the smaller clubs to get hot in the tournament and win the championship. In the European leagues teams can get relegated that adds a whole other level of excitement that no sport in the USA has.
