Wednesday, October 28, 2009
That's Not A Real #9, It's A False One
Jonathan Wilson is at it again over at the Guardian Sport Blog. This time he addresses the question of the center-forward who drops deep into midfield or wide. Despite success, the teams who've experimented with the system have mostly returned to more traditional ways of playing.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Dempsey, Redeemed, Recycled
(This post is recycled from my comments in response to a post at The Shin Guardian.)
The Clint Dempsey saga continues. Did you happen to see big Clint running like mad and defending for Fulham this week-end? I wonder what changes when he suits up for the US. Maybe a manager that has the respect of the players and actually gives them clear tactical instructions? Or is it that the other Fulham players movement off the ball is that much better? We saw some more profligate finishing but he was definitely one of the best players on the pitch for the full 90 minutes.
The asymmetric system Fulham played against Everton was interesting. Duff switched to the right wing to try and exploit space left from Baines’ runs forward and make him defend on his weaker side when he cut inside (Baines is similarly one-sided). Pantsil stayed at home a little more than he often does. Dempsey played deeper and came inside from the left and tried to get into the far post to try to get on crosses with Konchesky on the overlap for width. Those are effective tactics from Hodgson that used his players strengths to exploit his opponents weaknesses. Looks to me like Dempsey can be very effective playing deeper in midfield and tracks back very effectively if when asked by his manager.
Fulham’s tactics were much more clearly articulated than the USMNT where its often hard to say what they were after any given match. I think Dempsey’s actually a bit more dangerous in the spot he played on the left given when he can cut inside to find a runner in the channel, shoot from distance or arrive late at the far post – he never gets up the wing to cross the ball anyway. On that performance, is there any doubt that Dempsey can play at a high level more centrally in midfield either?
When stationed out on the left Donovan also has the sort of reverse ball that Frank Lampard played for Drogba’s goal this week-end (unfortunately it isn't available on youtube due to copyright claims). So Donovan and Dempsey are both more dangerous on the left. Sometimes I’d like to see Donovan try to get around the fullback but he usually stops around the 18 and starts playing quarterback instead. I guess that’s just not his game. I feel Dempsey's poor performances for the USMNT are partly because he needs more similarly skilled players around him in support. So how to we transform USMNT Dempsey into Fulham Dempsey?
Given that they’re both better on the left, it would be interesting to sacrifice one of Davies or Altidore for Holden as a pure winger on the right, giving Dempsey and Donovan freedom to interchange between left midfield and a deeper attacking behind the lone striker. Holden would be asked to track back to help Spector while Donovan and Dempsey could share defensive responsibility with whoever was in better position to track back when the ball was lost. With a wing-back like Castillo now in the mix, he could overlap on the left, making for a 4-5-1 (4-2-3-1) that quickly becomes a very attacking 3-4-3 (3-2-2-3) in attack which is still better able to defend once possession is lost.
This allows our two most gifted players to play off one another instead of being stationed on opposite sides of the pitch. This should mean we’re more coherent in possession despite playing with two destroyers in central midfield. Clark and Bradley (or Edu but it seems like J.Jones is getting more doubtful by the day) must play as conservative holding players with one ready to cover the fullback’s space on the left when Castillo advances and the other protecting in front of the back four when possession is lost. In possession they should provide the easy option in support of Donovan or Dempsey to switch the ball quickly to the right for Holden to get beyond the fullback and put in crosses.
Attacking with 5 players is plenty given that attacking with 6 creates the defensive problems we have when possession is lost, when we often leave the back four completely exposed. It’s much easier to defend against the counterattack with 3 defenders and 2 midfielders rather than just a single defensive line that our central midfielders leave unprotected. That’s why almost everyone gives the fullbacks license to attack while the defensive midfielders stay in position to be able to defend in the center when the ball is lost. That’s why it doesn’t matter so much how well Castillo can defend, as whether Bradley figures out that his central midfielders need to be on a shorter leash. The attack lacks midfield support, not numbers.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
One, Oh and Away!
It wasn't pretty but the US went down to T&T and grabbed three points on a Ricardo Clark strike from 20 yards. Bob Bradley dressed for the occasion, the atmosphere was electrocuted, Bornstein started, our defending was atrocious, Onyewu looked rusty, play through midfield nonexistent, Jr had a stinker, Davies had worn himself out perfecting his stanky leg, Donovan was stuck on "counterattack" and Dempsey was indifferent. However, none of that matters because, with two games left in the hexagonal, we're a home draw away from the World Cup. In that spirit, I'm only going to write about positive things from last night:
I think the problem with our team defending is actually deceptively simple. Our back 4 just need to play a bit narrower. Against Spain we held a narrower shape to good effect simply because they tend to play through the middle. Brazil under Dunga have a more expansive style with overlapping wing play spreading our defense and opening space to exploit. Both Mexico goals at Azteca came when we overcommitted to wing instead of worrying about the dangerous areas in and at the top of the box.
The solution is that the opposite side fullback should be tucked in much closer to the central defenders so it's 1 fullback on the wing and 3 in the middle. Think of two chains which run across the back four - one connects the two fullbacks but slides through the line of the central defenders, while the second connects the two central defenders. The fullbacks move together - if the left back is out on the wing, that should pull the right back into towards the back post and vice versa. The central defenders also move together but indepedently of the fullbacks, shading towards the wing with possession within roughly the width of the 6 yard box plus a yard or two. In the last two games our centre-backs have been getting pulled further out towards the wing to try to help the fullbacks do their job out there.
The chain between our fullbacks tends to run the roughly the width of the box (44 yards), a spacing of roughly 10 yards between our 4 defenders. However since the two central defenders, tend to play closer together than 10 yards, this leaves more space between the fullback and central defender. This channel is the most dangerous area on the pitch. We're leaving far too much space in this area when the ball is central.
Instead, both fullbacks should be tucked in more to shut down these inside channels. Our chain should be 10-15 yards shorter, with a spacing of 7 or 8 yards. We'll concede more space and possession on the wing where the defensive philosophy will be not get beat on the dribble and try to block the cross. If a cross does get through, there aren't too many strikers in international football that will trouble our central defenders in the air. The space left on the opposite wing makes a switch with one-pass tempting but that requires a risky 50-60 yard ball - conceding that ball can often win back possession with an unforced error. Both Bornstein and Spector are plenty quick enough to get out to the wing on a switch, but Boca might need help from a midfielder. With a shorter chain, many of the goals we've conceded could have been prevented, including both goals at Azteca.
I really think we need a third player in central midfield - our current system verges on the 4-2-4 of the 1958 Brazilians, without the unparalleled Pelé to pile in the goals. Instead of overlapping fullbacks, our suicidal central midfielders get very high up the pitch. That means when we lose possession we're vulnerable to the counterattack and our midfield is constantly over-run when they do get back. When we win possession it's like the 100m dash - no one ever shows to the ball. Where are Clark and Bradley going?
It would be nice to see Donovan actually show short more like he did a couple times in the second half and boss the game by setting the tempo in possession but it's like he's permanently stuck on "counterattack" setting. How many times were one of our back 4 left with plenty of time on the ball trying to find someone to play it to before deciding to hoof it long? That is the fault of our midfielders, not distribution out of the back. We have 2 up front with some quality in attack now but our midfielders are still playing like Ching is up there on his own.
I see the counterattacking merits of our 4-2-2-2, but I think that until our central midfielders mature we should really be a 4-3-3 (4-3-1-2 or 4-3-2-1) side with 3 of Davies, Altidore, Donovan & Dempsey up top and one more body in central midfield. In last night's second half, Clark, Bradley, Feilhaber did far more to control the tempo of the game and stop T&T's attacks looking quite so dangerous. Except for one moment of panic around 85 minutes, I felt a second goal was far more likely than an equalizer in the second half.
And ending on a final positive note, it seems that both Clark and Bradley have learned an important lesson in the Confederations Cup. Neither are going to ground to make hard, cardable tackles quite so easily these days, even with the generous CONCACAF referees around.
- Points. Three of them. It's entirely in our hands. An away win at Honduras or a draw with Costa Rica and we're in.
- Dressed for success, Bob Bradley used his substitutions well. Even Ching. And they all positively effected the game.
- We're set up to compete with the big boys, not to dominate mediocrity. I think we've learned some lessons this summer and Bob Bradley may be football's answer to Forest Gump.
- Plucky little El Salvador. Their 1-0 win over Costa Rica means they drop as much as a point and we're in.
- Just watching Wilson Palacios. What a beast - he's what you'd get if NFL inside linebackers played soccer. Was great watching him organize the midfield so effectively. Honduras put on a team defending clinic for about 75 minutes at Azteca and were the victim of a softish penalty call. I wish we had that kind of player in our central midfield - we'd shut up shop. Honduras away should be a tough nut to crack but they'll have to come out of the shell more at home needing 3 points and expose the spaces that opened against Mexico as they searched for a late equalizer.
- Bornstein was our best player in the first half. That's really not saying much, i know, but this game was played at his level. Maybe I'm grading on a curve? Jozy had a couple of bright moments including his shot from distance and the two-man game with Davies but Bornstein made a couple important headers at the back post to keep things level and generally did an acceptable job, even covering up for his centrebacks who looked pretty suspect in the first half. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bornstein is actually any good. If we had any talent at that position he wouldn't be in the program. I'd like to see Castillo given a shot to push him out of the mix.
- I thought Clark had a good game. He gives us what Bradley Sr. needs from Bradley Jr. when he's paired with Feilhaber - a more conservative defensive midfield player to cover in front of the back four. If you don't have Wilson Palacios, you want a quietly effective game from your defensive midfield player which was what he delivered last night, capped off with the winning goal. Was less panicked in possession last night - hopefully someone in Italy will teach him how to set the tempo by playing short and simple.
- We were so much better once Feilhaber came on. I would like to see a Clark/Feilhaber midfield but we all know why that will never happen.
- On the right, I thought Spector had a really solid game and now owns that spot.
- For once, last night, Harkes was right. I've been defending Dempsey a lot lately and I thought he was quite good against El Salvador. It drives me nuts when Harkes harps on his every mistake before excusing Donovan's every bad touch and poor decision. In fact, I've turned it into i like tuesday's official USMNT drinking game. However, Harkes was right. Dempsey had a really poor game.
I think the problem with our team defending is actually deceptively simple. Our back 4 just need to play a bit narrower. Against Spain we held a narrower shape to good effect simply because they tend to play through the middle. Brazil under Dunga have a more expansive style with overlapping wing play spreading our defense and opening space to exploit. Both Mexico goals at Azteca came when we overcommitted to wing instead of worrying about the dangerous areas in and at the top of the box.
The solution is that the opposite side fullback should be tucked in much closer to the central defenders so it's 1 fullback on the wing and 3 in the middle. Think of two chains which run across the back four - one connects the two fullbacks but slides through the line of the central defenders, while the second connects the two central defenders. The fullbacks move together - if the left back is out on the wing, that should pull the right back into towards the back post and vice versa. The central defenders also move together but indepedently of the fullbacks, shading towards the wing with possession within roughly the width of the 6 yard box plus a yard or two. In the last two games our centre-backs have been getting pulled further out towards the wing to try to help the fullbacks do their job out there.
The chain between our fullbacks tends to run the roughly the width of the box (44 yards), a spacing of roughly 10 yards between our 4 defenders. However since the two central defenders, tend to play closer together than 10 yards, this leaves more space between the fullback and central defender. This channel is the most dangerous area on the pitch. We're leaving far too much space in this area when the ball is central.
Instead, both fullbacks should be tucked in more to shut down these inside channels. Our chain should be 10-15 yards shorter, with a spacing of 7 or 8 yards. We'll concede more space and possession on the wing where the defensive philosophy will be not get beat on the dribble and try to block the cross. If a cross does get through, there aren't too many strikers in international football that will trouble our central defenders in the air. The space left on the opposite wing makes a switch with one-pass tempting but that requires a risky 50-60 yard ball - conceding that ball can often win back possession with an unforced error. Both Bornstein and Spector are plenty quick enough to get out to the wing on a switch, but Boca might need help from a midfielder. With a shorter chain, many of the goals we've conceded could have been prevented, including both goals at Azteca.
I really think we need a third player in central midfield - our current system verges on the 4-2-4 of the 1958 Brazilians, without the unparalleled Pelé to pile in the goals. Instead of overlapping fullbacks, our suicidal central midfielders get very high up the pitch. That means when we lose possession we're vulnerable to the counterattack and our midfield is constantly over-run when they do get back. When we win possession it's like the 100m dash - no one ever shows to the ball. Where are Clark and Bradley going?
It would be nice to see Donovan actually show short more like he did a couple times in the second half and boss the game by setting the tempo in possession but it's like he's permanently stuck on "counterattack" setting. How many times were one of our back 4 left with plenty of time on the ball trying to find someone to play it to before deciding to hoof it long? That is the fault of our midfielders, not distribution out of the back. We have 2 up front with some quality in attack now but our midfielders are still playing like Ching is up there on his own.
I see the counterattacking merits of our 4-2-2-2, but I think that until our central midfielders mature we should really be a 4-3-3 (4-3-1-2 or 4-3-2-1) side with 3 of Davies, Altidore, Donovan & Dempsey up top and one more body in central midfield. In last night's second half, Clark, Bradley, Feilhaber did far more to control the tempo of the game and stop T&T's attacks looking quite so dangerous. Except for one moment of panic around 85 minutes, I felt a second goal was far more likely than an equalizer in the second half.
And ending on a final positive note, it seems that both Clark and Bradley have learned an important lesson in the Confederations Cup. Neither are going to ground to make hard, cardable tackles quite so easily these days, even with the generous CONCACAF referees around.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
El Salvadore Post
Been very busy lately, but here are my half-formed thoughts on the US vs. El Salvadore match.
Positives:
Positives:
- With all deference to the McBride's years of yeoman's work, Charlie Davies is going to be our first true star striker. Scores goals, makes goals, speed, turn, vision, awareness, a poachers opportunistic streak and just enough selfishness. He's improved a lot even since the Confederations Cup, getting better with his back to goal, involving other players into play, and gaining the confidence to take players on and beat them with a change of speed. Can make a chance out of nothing. Davies will set a new record transfer for an American in the next season or two, mark my words.
- Altidore. We shouldn't forget how young Jozy is. He has all the potential in the world but is very much the unfinished product but a couple seasons in England and could be right there with Davies. Needs to show the same work-ethic that his strike-partner clearly has.
- Feilhaber didn't do anything obviously spectacular but was our only midfield player able to effectively set the tempo. His impact will not be fully appreciated. Though it wasn't likely to be any specific tactical instruction from Bradley, he ended up coming deep and playing in the type of deep-lying playmaker role that Ancelotti/Pirlo invented. He does small things to create space, relieve pressure and make other players better. If Donovan and Dempsey had solid matches, he deserves some of the credit. His skills are more subtle than Reyna's were but a good run in the side could yield just as substantial an impact. Things fell apart with his substitution.
- Dempsey. It is easy to get frustrated with him at times, but he's still one of our best players with a scoring record that speaks for itself. He drifted inside frequently to find the game and had a larger overall impact than in recent matches. His first two chances were tougher than they looked with his shot off Davies cutback under good defensive pressure and his header over the bar took the slightest deflection off Bradley's head. Third time was the charm with a strong, decisive header into the corner. Should've done better 1 v 1 with the keeper to ice the game and should've added an assist on the goal inexplicably called back. Dempsey was recognized as one of the best players at his club which qualified for Europe last season - would his detractors show me another American player of that stature? For critics of his defending, Big Clint can track back more when asked. I assume Bradley has told him not to so he can get into the box with more frequency.
- Donovan. I've been his most strident critic since he clearly has so much more to offer. Finally, he's starting to play up to his potential - tracking back to defend, running tirelessly, and putting in dangerous crosses. Still needs to make the opportunities he creates tell with more frequency. The Beckham experiment has been worth it if only for its effect on Donovan. I think it finally got his tail up - seems like he really wants to be top dog and is now willing to work for it - the old Landy-cakes would've floated those balls instead of driving them into the box. With his new found drive to succeed, he could be world class if he finds finally finds success on a badly-needed European move. France/Spain would be a perfect for him.
- Bornstein was APPALLINGLY BAD. It honestly looked like we'd accidentally switched our left back for some age-group player from among the ball boys. His defensive awareness is virtually non-existent. He looked terrified every time he had the ball. If he had any ability on the ball whatsoever, his botched attempt at a blind clearance could have easily been a tap back to Boca for him to clear. Offers nothing going forward but nonetheless manages to get caught up-field frequently. Should go the way of Beasley after this performance.
- Spector looked a bit out of sorts at right back. If Zola and Clark have the confidence to play him at left back while selling a couple defenders, that's a vote of confidence. It's no coincidence that Steve Clarke's departure coincided with Chelsea leaking goals - West Ham is going to keep it tight and Specs is going to be part of that. He should play where he's playing for his club: at left back. Could've done better on the goal when his mark got across him but...
- Marshall was hopelessly adrift on the El Salvadore goal. Why are 3 of our back 4 within 5 yard of the ball out on the wing? It was pure comedy defending. Marshall is a decent tackler, passable in the air and has some confidence on the ball but clearly has acquired the MLS centre-back's tendency to over-commit to the ball. He's made this mistake repeatedly and in MLS it has repeatedly gone unpunished. When will we learn that keeping a clean-sheet comes from a team effort, not individual heroics?
- It's an age-old yarn, Michael Bradley seems to be desperately misunderstood by his own father. Bradley Jr. is a shuttling midfielder of the "box-to-box destroyer" type. In these terms he's a good, solid player. The problem is Bob Bradley's system desperately needs him to be something he is not. He is not a holding player, he is not a creator, he is not an organizer able to set tempo. He's just not disciplined enough to anchor a fulcrum midfield. We will always be fragile until we change our midfield personnel or our system.
- Wear a suit on the touchline. Look the part of an international manager and you might start doing a passable imitation of one.
- Judging by your demeanor and the flatness we perpetually start every game, you must give the most underwhelming team talks ever. Enroll on a public speaking course. Also, get your head examined by a professional and your entire attitude adjusted.
- When we're bossing a game and have the lead, there is nothing wrong with the obvious like-for-like subs instead of changing the shape.
- Percentage possession is a crucial indicator to which you should pay far more attention. If you don't understand percentages, hire someone to multiply it by 90 minutes and think of it as "time spent defending".
- Find a system to best use your players, rather than shoehorning them into something entirely unsuitable like some old cougar. Spend some time getting to know your own son. Worth noting, 4-6 is not a system, it's an unmitigated disaster.
- You must learn that team defending is just as important as the qualities of individual players. Substituting a more defensive player for a more offensive one doesn't necessarily shore up the defense. This mistake has cost much more capable managers their job.
- Your substitutions had a terrible effect on our shape and allowed El Salvadore to commit ever more players going forward instead of staying honest. Your first substitution, Holden for Davies, was forced by injury, but made perfect sense. After that it all went wrong.
- How about Ching for Jozy? As much as I think Ching's ability to win balls and hold up play is vastly exagerrated, he has the strongest defensive qualities of our forwards. So, 60-70 minutes and a 1 goal lead is Ching time.
- How about Torres for Feilhaber? Torres is vastly more deserving of a shot to play in his own position than Beckerman who undistinguished himself in the Mexico 5 - USA 0 Gold Cup Massacre of 2009. There better be a very good reason if any of those losers wear the jersey ever again.
- Brazilian-born Feilhaber and German defector J. Jones might be able to function as the Spanish-style fulcrum midfield that seems to be the only system you understand. That pairing would have to come at the expense of your son. Also worth noting is that with a few exceptions, teams that use that system aren't renowned for being tight at the back.
- A potential tactical masterstroke: midfield 3 of J.Jones (or Clark for now), Bradley, with Feilhaber playmaking from deep, supporting possession and defending positionally at which, judging from the number of interceptions he made, he's actually fairly good. One of Davies/Altidore/Donovan/Dempsey would have to be sacrificed. You can claim it was your idea.
- In my book, untenable conflicts of interest are grounds for resignation. Think on it.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Merry Christmas Tree, Bob Bradley
Bob Bradley's tactics were very effective against Spain and he was given a lot of credit in the Football media. However, those of us who follow the USMNT more regularly know that this is a case of even a stopped clock being right twice a day. Bob Bradley's usual tactics just happened to be highly effective against Spain. Spain want to play through the center of midfield and rely on individual brilliance to tell. They are shut down by pressuring their creative midfield players, denying them time and space to turn, face goal and pick out the pass to create chances, and defending deep so Torres and Villa don't have space to run into behind the back four. This is why Spain are always knocked out of these tournaments unexpectedly - they have trouble breaking down teams they dominate when they force them to defend deep.
This tactic was effective against a team like Spain and has been effective against a team like Mexico that likes to play through the middle. This is one reason why we've had their number in recent years. However, Mexico has gone from playing straight up the middle to playing from wide into the center so I would suggest that they've cracked this tactic now by waiting until our midfield gets pulled out to the flanks and then cutting inside. Bob Bradley needs something new that will work against the better European teams as well as Mexico and Spain.
While USMNT fans wait expectantly for his return from injury, the addition of new boy Jermaine Jones of Schalke to the USMNT set-up just screams for a 4-3-2-1 christmas tree formation. This tactic would dominate the center of midfield where we tend to be a bit soft and concede goals, helping us tighten up defensively and ensuring we are still very dangerous on the counterattack. In this variation on the diamond midfield, the lone striker is supported by two creative players that lie deeper and have freedom to roam the pitch finding space. The 3-player midfield is relatively narrow, anchored by a player that stays deeper in midfield, provides the easy option and changes the point of attack in possession while sitting in front of the back four when defending. The two shuttling players can be can be two box-to-box types or more defensive destroyer types but they must work very hard, which we know they can do.
This scheme is well-suited to our best available players, with Altidore or Davies playing up top, Donovan and Dempsey behind and new-joiner Jones anchoring a narrow midfield three with two of Bradley, Edu, Feilhaber, Torres and Clark shuttling. The shuttling midfielders are free to press high and play box-to-box while Jones sits in front of the back four and is the easy option in possession. Defensively that pushes opposition attacks onto the wings where Donovan and Dempsey's responsibilities are to pressure the opposing fullbacks. Unlike the traditional diamond midfield this scheme doesn't suffer from a lack of width because of a this defensive assignment - one of the attacking players should always be starting out wide. This makes the one of Davies, Altidore not starting a killer sub that could come on in like-for-like or for a midfielder to revert to 4-4-2 or go to a 4-3-1-2 setup, with Donovan or Dempsey dropping back into midfield.
Defensively, the attacking midfield should try to deny service straight up the flanks by putting pressure on the opposing fullbacks, forcing them to play the ball inside, where the two shuttling players are given license to pressure by the sitting player who looks to cut out the through balls and patrol the space in front of the back four in an arc. This allows the midfield to apply high pressure, without worrying about leaving space in front of the back for long-range shooting. If the attacking team beats the pressure, everyone drops back and defends space, with the shuttling midfielders applying pressure centrally when the ball is in their area and supporting inside the fullbacks and further up the pitch when it's on the flank, ready to mark any late runs inside the fullback. The fullback should be ready go with any outside overlapping runner with the midfielder taking the man who played the ball. We have the center backs to deal with aerial crosses so an overlap isn't dangerous unless the player making the pass is left alone to receive a cut-back in an area to shoot.
Luckily, our centre-backs no longer trade in comedy defending but Bradley's tactical acumen is entirely geared towards that previous era - our players of a few years ago against the Mexican style of a couple year ago. Defensively, we must shed the "stop the cross to stop the goal mentality" that pulls us out of shape because we have two solid, centrebacks that are good in the air. We should be happy to concede some possession on the flanks and defend against the inside cut-backs and leaving space to shoot in front of the central defenders. How many goals have we conceded from aerial crosses? Not many.
In our attacking play, we need to stop pretending we have a striker that can win the ball in the air and bring others into the play because we just don't have that player at the international level. Brian Ching is clearly not a replacement for Brain McBride. The USMNT is a good counterattacking team, pure and simple, so we need to stop conceding so softly and learn to make two goals tell, even against the world's best, with regularity. So Happy Christmas Bob, these are the tactics that ensure your son can stay in the team and we stand the best chance at the World Cup.
This tactic was effective against a team like Spain and has been effective against a team like Mexico that likes to play through the middle. This is one reason why we've had their number in recent years. However, Mexico has gone from playing straight up the middle to playing from wide into the center so I would suggest that they've cracked this tactic now by waiting until our midfield gets pulled out to the flanks and then cutting inside. Bob Bradley needs something new that will work against the better European teams as well as Mexico and Spain.
While USMNT fans wait expectantly for his return from injury, the addition of new boy Jermaine Jones of Schalke to the USMNT set-up just screams for a 4-3-2-1 christmas tree formation. This tactic would dominate the center of midfield where we tend to be a bit soft and concede goals, helping us tighten up defensively and ensuring we are still very dangerous on the counterattack. In this variation on the diamond midfield, the lone striker is supported by two creative players that lie deeper and have freedom to roam the pitch finding space. The 3-player midfield is relatively narrow, anchored by a player that stays deeper in midfield, provides the easy option and changes the point of attack in possession while sitting in front of the back four when defending. The two shuttling players can be can be two box-to-box types or more defensive destroyer types but they must work very hard, which we know they can do.
This scheme is well-suited to our best available players, with Altidore or Davies playing up top, Donovan and Dempsey behind and new-joiner Jones anchoring a narrow midfield three with two of Bradley, Edu, Feilhaber, Torres and Clark shuttling. The shuttling midfielders are free to press high and play box-to-box while Jones sits in front of the back four and is the easy option in possession. Defensively that pushes opposition attacks onto the wings where Donovan and Dempsey's responsibilities are to pressure the opposing fullbacks. Unlike the traditional diamond midfield this scheme doesn't suffer from a lack of width because of a this defensive assignment - one of the attacking players should always be starting out wide. This makes the one of Davies, Altidore not starting a killer sub that could come on in like-for-like or for a midfielder to revert to 4-4-2 or go to a 4-3-1-2 setup, with Donovan or Dempsey dropping back into midfield.
Defensively, the attacking midfield should try to deny service straight up the flanks by putting pressure on the opposing fullbacks, forcing them to play the ball inside, where the two shuttling players are given license to pressure by the sitting player who looks to cut out the through balls and patrol the space in front of the back four in an arc. This allows the midfield to apply high pressure, without worrying about leaving space in front of the back for long-range shooting. If the attacking team beats the pressure, everyone drops back and defends space, with the shuttling midfielders applying pressure centrally when the ball is in their area and supporting inside the fullbacks and further up the pitch when it's on the flank, ready to mark any late runs inside the fullback. The fullback should be ready go with any outside overlapping runner with the midfielder taking the man who played the ball. We have the center backs to deal with aerial crosses so an overlap isn't dangerous unless the player making the pass is left alone to receive a cut-back in an area to shoot.
Luckily, our centre-backs no longer trade in comedy defending but Bradley's tactical acumen is entirely geared towards that previous era - our players of a few years ago against the Mexican style of a couple year ago. Defensively, we must shed the "stop the cross to stop the goal mentality" that pulls us out of shape because we have two solid, centrebacks that are good in the air. We should be happy to concede some possession on the flanks and defend against the inside cut-backs and leaving space to shoot in front of the central defenders. How many goals have we conceded from aerial crosses? Not many.
In our attacking play, we need to stop pretending we have a striker that can win the ball in the air and bring others into the play because we just don't have that player at the international level. Brian Ching is clearly not a replacement for Brain McBride. The USMNT is a good counterattacking team, pure and simple, so we need to stop conceding so softly and learn to make two goals tell, even against the world's best, with regularity. So Happy Christmas Bob, these are the tactics that ensure your son can stay in the team and we stand the best chance at the World Cup.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Chelsea vs. Sunderland
I didn't watch this match, but I thought I'd comment on it briefly. The Guardian offers an amazing analytical tool called Chalkboards which track every bit of play during premiership matches. These allow you to truly understand tactically, what is happening out on the pitch after the fact, even without watching a match. I created this chalkboard this morning which compares Chelsea's passing during their 3-1 victory over Sunderland to Arsenal's during their 6-1 dismantling of Everton at the week-end.
by Guardian Chalkboards
Arsenal are obviously known for their slick passing movement, while Chelsea have garnered something of a different reputation, since they have often over-utilized the Route 1 approach to exploit Drogba's physical presence. That's what makes this chalkboard surprising - Ancelotti's Chelsea is clearly something different. Chelsea completed 495 of 557 passes (90%) compared to Arsenal's 345 of 415 (83%) again Everton. Compare the two team's passing in the final third, and you'll note the number of red arrows coming into the box in the final third of Chelsea's board. Obviously Chelsea still put in far more crosses than Arsenal, but they're coming in from more advanced areas. However, note the absence of long red arrows which would indicate speculative long passes from deeper areas.
The foundation of Chelsea's dominance, especially in the second half, was the interplay between Essien, at the base of a midfield diamond and the two fullbacks, Bosingwa and A. Cole. Essien completed 79 of 82 passes (96%), Cole completed 55 of 61 (90%) and Bosingwa 61 of 72 (85%). Of Cole and Bosingwa's unsuccessful passes, each had a single unsuccessful pass in the defensive half of the field. 11 of their 17 unsuccessful passes were attempted crosses. Essien played short and kept possession ticking over along with Ballack (49 of 54, 90%) to a lesser degree, relying on Lampard (43 of 55, 78%) and Deco (40 of 52, 77%) for more incisive passing in the final third. Essien and Ballack are certainly capable of playing more incisive passes but in this case, Ancelotti clearly instructed them not to. In this match, the midfield diamond often tilted onto it's side to form a square with Essien and Ballack at it's base, Lampard and Deco in more advanced positions.
I'm trying to put together a chalkboard comparing John Obi Mikel's static first half passing vs. Hull City to Michael Essien's dynamic second half vs. Sunderland. The Guardian's chalkboards seem to be having some trouble with player to player comparisons so I will post if I can get it to work. It shows Essien's wide range of movement and passing across the width of the entire pitch, and the creative use of short passes compared to Obi Mikel's tendency to repeatedly use the same passing routes from a much narrower range of positioning. I really think Ancelotti may be on to something with Essien playing in this position. Premier League, Europe, watch out for this Chelsea side.
The Guardian's match report is here.
by Guardian Chalkboards
Arsenal are obviously known for their slick passing movement, while Chelsea have garnered something of a different reputation, since they have often over-utilized the Route 1 approach to exploit Drogba's physical presence. That's what makes this chalkboard surprising - Ancelotti's Chelsea is clearly something different. Chelsea completed 495 of 557 passes (90%) compared to Arsenal's 345 of 415 (83%) again Everton. Compare the two team's passing in the final third, and you'll note the number of red arrows coming into the box in the final third of Chelsea's board. Obviously Chelsea still put in far more crosses than Arsenal, but they're coming in from more advanced areas. However, note the absence of long red arrows which would indicate speculative long passes from deeper areas.
The foundation of Chelsea's dominance, especially in the second half, was the interplay between Essien, at the base of a midfield diamond and the two fullbacks, Bosingwa and A. Cole. Essien completed 79 of 82 passes (96%), Cole completed 55 of 61 (90%) and Bosingwa 61 of 72 (85%). Of Cole and Bosingwa's unsuccessful passes, each had a single unsuccessful pass in the defensive half of the field. 11 of their 17 unsuccessful passes were attempted crosses. Essien played short and kept possession ticking over along with Ballack (49 of 54, 90%) to a lesser degree, relying on Lampard (43 of 55, 78%) and Deco (40 of 52, 77%) for more incisive passing in the final third. Essien and Ballack are certainly capable of playing more incisive passes but in this case, Ancelotti clearly instructed them not to. In this match, the midfield diamond often tilted onto it's side to form a square with Essien and Ballack at it's base, Lampard and Deco in more advanced positions.
I'm trying to put together a chalkboard comparing John Obi Mikel's static first half passing vs. Hull City to Michael Essien's dynamic second half vs. Sunderland. The Guardian's chalkboards seem to be having some trouble with player to player comparisons so I will post if I can get it to work. It shows Essien's wide range of movement and passing across the width of the entire pitch, and the creative use of short passes compared to Obi Mikel's tendency to repeatedly use the same passing routes from a much narrower range of positioning. I really think Ancelotti may be on to something with Essien playing in this position. Premier League, Europe, watch out for this Chelsea side.
The Guardian's match report is here.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Post Mortem: US v Mexico at Azteca
The US Men's National team has a dream start to their World Cup Qualifier against Mexico at Azteca (2300m above sea level), taking an early lead at 9 minutes on a cracking goal from Davies. They soon brought crashing back down to high-altitude ground when Mexico to equalized about 10 minutes later through from Castro's shot from distance . The winning goal for Mexico came at 82 minutes when Sabah found himself with time and space after Donovan couldn't match Juárez for pace on his drive to the end line and DeMerit's tackle couldn't clear the danger. The winning goal was not a thing of beauty, rather the result of defenders with tired legs and tired minds.
Let's look at how Bob Bradley's tactics contributed to the goals we conceded. Bradley started with two "destroyers" in central midfield, as he likes to do. It may work to spark counterattacks against inferior opposition, but against any good team with midfielders who are able to play out of pressure, it doesn't work to pressure so aggressively. The first goal clearly illustrated the problem with having two players that share similar instincts playing together in this area. Bradley pressured Blanco, lunged in to tackle and was beaten. Clark saw danger and rushed towards it, before being beaten by Blanco's pass into the space he'd left. Bocanegra stepped toward Castro and made a rather feeble attempt to block the shot. Howard was beaten by a great strike that resulted from the time and space that was given to shoot.
We've conceded a shocking number of goals from this area over the summer. Like Bradley, Clark's instinct is always to pressure the ball, but his instinct was absolutely wrong. His decision would probably not have been punished in MLS, but international midfielders will score when given time and space to shoot at 30 yards. I hope he will learn this lesson in time for the World Cup when he completes his move to Italy. Instead of pressuring the ball when Bradley was beaten, Clark needed to defend positionally - protecting the space in front of the center backs by dropping deeper and more central. It's one of the central defenders that should step out once Bradley is beaten, with Cherundolo tucking into the vacated space.
This either forces Blanco into the central defenders who can deal with the danger, forces him to play a more difficult reverse pass into the space on the wing left by Cherundolo, or leaves Clark in position to deny time and space for a shot when Blanco plays his pass. Instead, Clarke completely overcommited and took himself out of the play, something he and Bradley both do this with a frustrating frequency. Even if Bocanegra had stepped to pressure the shot in time, there's still an easy ball is into the space he's left to the player on the wing. Once Clark over commits, our defensive shape breaks down completely, with all the support coming from the wrong side. The fact is we have very good individual defenders in the center, but they aren't yet working effectively as a team - this is an indictment of their manager.
The second goal looked the result of tired defenders - both mentally and physically. Bocanegra stood still as Juárez drove to the endline, then failed to tuck in and defend the cut-back. DeMerit could have defended the cross, rather than trying to tackle. However, this is the type of goal that sometimes comes from conceding the lion's share of possession at any altitude, let alone 2300 metres. Lack of possessoin is another consequence of Bob Bradley's "two destroyers" tactic. It means there's no player in the centre of midfield to link possession from wing to wing through midfield. This allows Mexico to cheat and press the wing with the ball than they could if we had a player capable of quickly switching the play to the weak side. The way to prevent this is to switch the point of attack frequently so opposing teams worry about open space on their opposite flank. To do this through midfield, you need a good passer, comfortable on the ball under pressure in the center, or the ball can be played across the back four which allows more time for the defense to recover or long from fullback-to-fullback. Bradley is more comfortable on the ball than Clark, but neither of them are capable of effectively playing this role. Instead, we get Dempsey coming inside, which means the fullback must overlap on the wing, or one of our strikers needs to drop back and wide. (This is what Thierry Henri was so found of doing at Arsenal).
I think in terms of timing and tactics, Bob Bradley's substitutions were much better this match, unfortunately the players just didn't have the same impact that Mexico's substitutions did. Our ability to keep possession improved somewhat with the addition of Feilhaber, but his positive impact was negated by the fact that Holden never really settled into the match, despite putting in a dangerous cross that nearly resulted in Davies second. I never thought I'd say this, but I might've gone with Bornstein for Bocanegra to shore up our defense against the speed of the Mexican attack instead of Holden, but I'm not sure he was among Bradley's substitutes. Given his constant threat, I might have left Davies on the pitch (provided he wasn't really injured) and substituted Altidore for Dempsey, given his less than influential performance.
It was really frustrating to lose after starting so well, but we simply bunkered down too early. We've still never won at Azteca, but that's the only place left Mexico can beat us these days, and I think at minimum the comfort level is gone. Mexico are a good team who played well and had some very good young attacking players to bring off the bench. If Aguirre has any sense, most will mostly be starters by World Cup time. Bradley made better use of his substitutes but must soon recognize the shortcomings of "two destroyers" tactic and experiment with putting a creative player in central midfield in the form of Feilhaber or Torres. Jermaine Jones should be called in when he's fit and could threaten his son's spot on this performance. We must call in Castillo and see what he offers at left back over the next few matches. Bradley must improve our team defensive tactics. My general feeling is that Bradley has taken this program as far as he is able, which isn't going to be enough to reach the next level, despite now having the players to do so. The coming World Cup could be an enormously frustrating experience after the Confederations Cup raised the expectation level.
US Player Ratings (1 = Not Worthy of the Jersey, 10 = World Class * = Man of the Match)
Howard - 6: Solid performance from a top goalkeeper. Made a couple of good saves and was not at fault for either goal conceded.
Cherundolo - 5: Was concerned about his inclusion after a middling Gold Cup performance, but defended well, keeping the left side of the Mexican attack fairly quiet.
DeMerit - 5: Not up to the high standards of his Confederations cup performance, but not the source of defensive problems. Might have done better on the 2nd goal.
Onyewu - 6: Solid, more confident defending, perhaps the only player to play better than during the Confederations Cup. His time at AC Milan seems to have had a positive effect on his sense of positioning, and his ability to deal with danger with calm confidence but his play out of the back still needs work.
Bocanegra - 3: Might have done more to prevent the first goal, but the defensive breakdown wasn't his fault. Was left standing on the winning goal, then failed to track behind Donovan to intercept the cut back. Wasn't up to dealing with Mexico's speed in attack. Time to bring Castillo into the side.
Clark - 3: Culpable for the Mexican equalizer and demonstrated the problem with deploying two players with the same instinct in the center of midfield as detailed in my previous post. Otherwise defended passably but did nothing to help retain possession and relieve the pressure.
Bradley - 4: Not his best performance. Seemed uncomfortable with the ball under pressure and gave it away frequently with overly ambitious, rushed passing.
Donovan - 6: Provider of an excellent through ball on Davies goal. Fell quiet afterwards. Beaten for speed to the end line on Mexico's winner. Much more comfortable and effective on the right than on the left.
Dempsey - 5: Started fairly well but his influence wained as the match progressed. Defended well. Not influential once he moved up top.
Davies - 8*: A beautiful curling finish after getting behind the Mexican defense - one of the best goals the US has ever scored. Nearly had a second from a diving header which he must want back. Always dangerous. The best performance by a long stretch.
Ching - 1: Justified my displeasure at his starting. Did not have an effective touch of the ball until he won a foul in the 39th minute. Did not win balls in the air, did not hold up play with first touch deserting him when the ball was played to his feet, did not do much of anything. Under any other manager, would have played himself off the team with this performance. Thought he had done so with the Gold Cup.
Holden - 4: Played a dangerous cross to Davies. Still didn't seem to settle and looked like the occasion got to him at times.
Feilhaber - 5: Would've like to see his impact had he started. At minimum, should have come on for Clarke at the half.
Altidore - 4: Promising but didn't make enough of an impact with little possession.
Let's look at how Bob Bradley's tactics contributed to the goals we conceded. Bradley started with two "destroyers" in central midfield, as he likes to do. It may work to spark counterattacks against inferior opposition, but against any good team with midfielders who are able to play out of pressure, it doesn't work to pressure so aggressively. The first goal clearly illustrated the problem with having two players that share similar instincts playing together in this area. Bradley pressured Blanco, lunged in to tackle and was beaten. Clark saw danger and rushed towards it, before being beaten by Blanco's pass into the space he'd left. Bocanegra stepped toward Castro and made a rather feeble attempt to block the shot. Howard was beaten by a great strike that resulted from the time and space that was given to shoot.
We've conceded a shocking number of goals from this area over the summer. Like Bradley, Clark's instinct is always to pressure the ball, but his instinct was absolutely wrong. His decision would probably not have been punished in MLS, but international midfielders will score when given time and space to shoot at 30 yards. I hope he will learn this lesson in time for the World Cup when he completes his move to Italy. Instead of pressuring the ball when Bradley was beaten, Clark needed to defend positionally - protecting the space in front of the center backs by dropping deeper and more central. It's one of the central defenders that should step out once Bradley is beaten, with Cherundolo tucking into the vacated space.
This either forces Blanco into the central defenders who can deal with the danger, forces him to play a more difficult reverse pass into the space on the wing left by Cherundolo, or leaves Clark in position to deny time and space for a shot when Blanco plays his pass. Instead, Clarke completely overcommited and took himself out of the play, something he and Bradley both do this with a frustrating frequency. Even if Bocanegra had stepped to pressure the shot in time, there's still an easy ball is into the space he's left to the player on the wing. Once Clark over commits, our defensive shape breaks down completely, with all the support coming from the wrong side. The fact is we have very good individual defenders in the center, but they aren't yet working effectively as a team - this is an indictment of their manager.
The second goal looked the result of tired defenders - both mentally and physically. Bocanegra stood still as Juárez drove to the endline, then failed to tuck in and defend the cut-back. DeMerit could have defended the cross, rather than trying to tackle. However, this is the type of goal that sometimes comes from conceding the lion's share of possession at any altitude, let alone 2300 metres. Lack of possessoin is another consequence of Bob Bradley's "two destroyers" tactic. It means there's no player in the centre of midfield to link possession from wing to wing through midfield. This allows Mexico to cheat and press the wing with the ball than they could if we had a player capable of quickly switching the play to the weak side. The way to prevent this is to switch the point of attack frequently so opposing teams worry about open space on their opposite flank. To do this through midfield, you need a good passer, comfortable on the ball under pressure in the center, or the ball can be played across the back four which allows more time for the defense to recover or long from fullback-to-fullback. Bradley is more comfortable on the ball than Clark, but neither of them are capable of effectively playing this role. Instead, we get Dempsey coming inside, which means the fullback must overlap on the wing, or one of our strikers needs to drop back and wide. (This is what Thierry Henri was so found of doing at Arsenal).
I think in terms of timing and tactics, Bob Bradley's substitutions were much better this match, unfortunately the players just didn't have the same impact that Mexico's substitutions did. Our ability to keep possession improved somewhat with the addition of Feilhaber, but his positive impact was negated by the fact that Holden never really settled into the match, despite putting in a dangerous cross that nearly resulted in Davies second. I never thought I'd say this, but I might've gone with Bornstein for Bocanegra to shore up our defense against the speed of the Mexican attack instead of Holden, but I'm not sure he was among Bradley's substitutes. Given his constant threat, I might have left Davies on the pitch (provided he wasn't really injured) and substituted Altidore for Dempsey, given his less than influential performance.
It was really frustrating to lose after starting so well, but we simply bunkered down too early. We've still never won at Azteca, but that's the only place left Mexico can beat us these days, and I think at minimum the comfort level is gone. Mexico are a good team who played well and had some very good young attacking players to bring off the bench. If Aguirre has any sense, most will mostly be starters by World Cup time. Bradley made better use of his substitutes but must soon recognize the shortcomings of "two destroyers" tactic and experiment with putting a creative player in central midfield in the form of Feilhaber or Torres. Jermaine Jones should be called in when he's fit and could threaten his son's spot on this performance. We must call in Castillo and see what he offers at left back over the next few matches. Bradley must improve our team defensive tactics. My general feeling is that Bradley has taken this program as far as he is able, which isn't going to be enough to reach the next level, despite now having the players to do so. The coming World Cup could be an enormously frustrating experience after the Confederations Cup raised the expectation level.
US Player Ratings (1 = Not Worthy of the Jersey, 10 = World Class * = Man of the Match)
Howard - 6: Solid performance from a top goalkeeper. Made a couple of good saves and was not at fault for either goal conceded.
Cherundolo - 5: Was concerned about his inclusion after a middling Gold Cup performance, but defended well, keeping the left side of the Mexican attack fairly quiet.
DeMerit - 5: Not up to the high standards of his Confederations cup performance, but not the source of defensive problems. Might have done better on the 2nd goal.
Onyewu - 6: Solid, more confident defending, perhaps the only player to play better than during the Confederations Cup. His time at AC Milan seems to have had a positive effect on his sense of positioning, and his ability to deal with danger with calm confidence but his play out of the back still needs work.
Bocanegra - 3: Might have done more to prevent the first goal, but the defensive breakdown wasn't his fault. Was left standing on the winning goal, then failed to track behind Donovan to intercept the cut back. Wasn't up to dealing with Mexico's speed in attack. Time to bring Castillo into the side.
Clark - 3: Culpable for the Mexican equalizer and demonstrated the problem with deploying two players with the same instinct in the center of midfield as detailed in my previous post. Otherwise defended passably but did nothing to help retain possession and relieve the pressure.
Bradley - 4: Not his best performance. Seemed uncomfortable with the ball under pressure and gave it away frequently with overly ambitious, rushed passing.
Donovan - 6: Provider of an excellent through ball on Davies goal. Fell quiet afterwards. Beaten for speed to the end line on Mexico's winner. Much more comfortable and effective on the right than on the left.
Dempsey - 5: Started fairly well but his influence wained as the match progressed. Defended well. Not influential once he moved up top.
Davies - 8*: A beautiful curling finish after getting behind the Mexican defense - one of the best goals the US has ever scored. Nearly had a second from a diving header which he must want back. Always dangerous. The best performance by a long stretch.
Ching - 1: Justified my displeasure at his starting. Did not have an effective touch of the ball until he won a foul in the 39th minute. Did not win balls in the air, did not hold up play with first touch deserting him when the ball was played to his feet, did not do much of anything. Under any other manager, would have played himself off the team with this performance. Thought he had done so with the Gold Cup.
Holden - 4: Played a dangerous cross to Davies. Still didn't seem to settle and looked like the occasion got to him at times.
Feilhaber - 5: Would've like to see his impact had he started. At minimum, should have come on for Clarke at the half.
Altidore - 4: Promising but didn't make enough of an impact with little possession.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Turning a Corner: US vs. Mexico at Azteca
Despite fresh memories of our Gold Cup embarrassment, I'm actually beginning to think this team has finally turned a corner. Unlike Mexico's roster, excepting 3 players, our side is completely different from that of the Gold Cup final. And I think we've got one hell of a good chance at winning for no other reason than Bob Bradley is a creature of habit - hopefully we'll just get more of what worked so well for 2.5 games in the Confederation Cup.
For the US National Team, from 1990 through the last world cup winning has always been a question of defending like crazy and hoping a goal comes from somewhere. This has changed. Now we have a good combination of speed, power, and creativity in our first team that means we can score against any team in the world. Bradley Sr. really just needs to get the defensive tactics correct - which happened pretty much by accident in the Confederations Cup - and we need to keep possession a bit better (above 45%, minimum, even against the very best opponents). In contrast, the Gold Cup final showed us what can happen when the tactics are wrong.
Let's look at the US attack. Altidore and Davies present a real threat and cause defensive problems with a combination of speed and power. Speed always kills in international football, simply because defenses don't play together enough to deal with it using teamwork as effectively as they often do on the club level. Filling out the roster, Ching isn't an attacking substitute you'd like to see when you're down a goal, but I can see him as a useful substitute when you have the lead with 30 minutes to go, are facing pressure and need more posession. I just don't see Conor Casey as a good option at the international level and hope Cooper excels at his new German club and relieves him of his spot prior to the World Cup.
Luckily, the versatality of our attack-minded midfielders makes the lack of quality off the bench at forward less of a problem. Dempsey has shown for the US and Fulham that he has a gift for finding space and scoring important goals. He easily can slot in at forward in a more conservative starting eleven or to cause problems late in the game. He uses a freer role more effectively than Donovan, getting in position to score himself rather than just setting the table.
Save against Mexico and the CONCACAF minnows, I've always considered Donovan something of an underachiever at the international level. However, he finally impressed me during the Confederation's Cup and began to show he's capable of playing both ways against the best opposition. Hopefully this is a sign that he's developing the footballing intelligence to go with his technical skills, because his tendency to kill promising moves with questionable decisions is enormously frustrating. He seems to do better when given more defensive responsibility in midfield because it puts him in position to better use his speed with the ball in attack. Given the delayed developmental path American players take, these two players are just entering their prime.
His early performances suggest Feilhaber might just be embarking on his break-out season, and could be an option to start or be a killer sub when spaces begin to open in the final 30 minutes of a match. I've not seen Torres play myself, but many rate him highly as the type of player that could help keep more possession. A big plus for Torres is he plays in these conditions every week in the Mexican league. Holden is a decent option off the bench in wide midfield. These are the type of promising young players, which we might see off the bench.
Now let's consider our defense, starting with the back four's cover in central midfield. Bradley and Clark are both combative midfield "destroyers" rather than true holding players. Once suspected to be a beneficiary of nepotism, Michael Bradley has more than proven himself as the best destructive option in central midfield on this roster. Ideally Bradley should partner with a more attacking player that can create and keep possession while he stays at home or a true holding player giving him free reign to play the destroyer role and apply pressure in midfield. When he and Clark play together they have a tendency to over-commit, both pressuring the ball, leaving the sort of space in front of the back four that was exploited by Giuseppe Rossi for Italy in the Confederations Cup.
Bob Bradley, however, seems to like deploying 2 destroyers, even though it restricts our ability to keep possession under pressure, so I wouldn't be surprised to see Clark. Given there's no true holding midfielder in this roster, the only other option seems to make it a choice between Torres and Feilhaber playing in midfield along with Bradley. With the upcoming arrival of Jermaine Jones into the mix as a true holding player and the expected return of Maurice Edu from injury, Bradley has a wealth of tactical options in central midfield, all capable of playing at a high level.
In the back four, the central defensive partnership is set: Onyewu and DeMerit. There is really no need to discuss it - they work well together with Gooch bringing the muscle while DeMerit brings the tactical awareness to sweep up danger. Out on the wings, Bob Bradley has to realize, we no longer need to have fullbacks overlap to score goals and it may be a bad tactical choice against good counterattacking teams with quality up top. Unlike the teams that successfully deploy wing backs, we tend to be erratic in maintaining possession and we don't have a true holding player to fill the exposed gaps. Fullbacks should be instructed to be conservative in their runs and maintain the defensive shape, even if we fall behind. They should rarely venture further forward than the sort of spots where Spector's deep crosses led to a pair of Dempsey goals in the Confederations Cup. The fullbacks sudden urgency to get into advanced positions and get a goal back left our centre backs completely exposed and was the prime reason we conceded 5 goals against Mexico in the Gold Cup final.
On this roster, Bornstein is really the worst offender in this regard. His speed tempts him to be tactically naive, leaving all that space and hoping it won't be used effectively. It's not as if his crosses will be missed and he tends to congest things on the left. When he gets beyond Dempsey, as he does far too frequently, there's no longer any support from the fullback to help maintain possession. Passing options break down, leaving Dempsey to take a defender on, or attempt a difficult pass, often losing possession and putting the left side under pressure. This leaves some fans frustrated with Dempsey when it's more a consequence of Bornstein's ill-advised forward runs. Much better for the left back to simply stay at home and support the midfield in maintaining possession, especially under the conditions at Azteca.
To a large extent, this explains the sudden defensive improvement when Bocanegra took up the left-back position. I think Bradley has a quandary here - Bocanegra will be more conservative, but he's a central back playing on the wing against a speedy Mexican attack. A more disciplined Bornstein with clear instructions on how far forward he's allowed to venture may be the best option here. We won't really know unless one or the other of them is exposed. There is a similar predicament with a toss-up for the other fullback position with Spector and Cherundolo in competition for the spot on the right. Given their respective performances in the Confederations cup and Gold Cup, I'd say that's Spectors spot to lose.
As for defensive options left off this roster, Frankie Hejduk on the right has all the downsides of a Bornstein but his work rate makes it look like less of a problem - it still leaves the centre backs exposed. I'm hoping that Edgar Castillo is a bit more disciplined than Bornstein, can keep possession out of the back more effectively, put in more threatening crosses when he does get forward and becomes the more attacking option at left back.
As for the 3 Houston player on the roster. It may annoy the people who feel Bob is putting loyalty to certain players above fielding the best team, but given the weather we're likely to face at Azteca, these guys do play under the most similar conditions. It even almost makes sense considering the conditions. If we see Bornstein start, this is probably the reason why. He needs clear instructions not to run beyond the left midfielder. I think we may see Torres start as well. I feel like Bradley might want to hold one of his best players back. I would almost (but not quite) like to see Holden start on the left with Dempsey coming on 15 minutes into the second half. Alternatively, we could see Dempsey at forward with Altidore and see Davies for Holden and Ching for Altidore with Dempsey dropping back to midfield. I think it's just as likely we'll see the starting line-up from the Confederation's Cup.
Davies for Holden/Altidore at 60-70 minutes.
Feilhaber for Torres/Holden at 45-60 minutes.
Defensive:
Bocanegra for Bornstein at first sign of trouble.
Ching for Altidore/Holden at 60-75 minutes
Clark for Torres at 75-80 minutes
For the US National Team, from 1990 through the last world cup winning has always been a question of defending like crazy and hoping a goal comes from somewhere. This has changed. Now we have a good combination of speed, power, and creativity in our first team that means we can score against any team in the world. Bradley Sr. really just needs to get the defensive tactics correct - which happened pretty much by accident in the Confederations Cup - and we need to keep possession a bit better (above 45%, minimum, even against the very best opponents). In contrast, the Gold Cup final showed us what can happen when the tactics are wrong.
Let's look at the US attack. Altidore and Davies present a real threat and cause defensive problems with a combination of speed and power. Speed always kills in international football, simply because defenses don't play together enough to deal with it using teamwork as effectively as they often do on the club level. Filling out the roster, Ching isn't an attacking substitute you'd like to see when you're down a goal, but I can see him as a useful substitute when you have the lead with 30 minutes to go, are facing pressure and need more posession. I just don't see Conor Casey as a good option at the international level and hope Cooper excels at his new German club and relieves him of his spot prior to the World Cup.
Luckily, the versatality of our attack-minded midfielders makes the lack of quality off the bench at forward less of a problem. Dempsey has shown for the US and Fulham that he has a gift for finding space and scoring important goals. He easily can slot in at forward in a more conservative starting eleven or to cause problems late in the game. He uses a freer role more effectively than Donovan, getting in position to score himself rather than just setting the table.
Save against Mexico and the CONCACAF minnows, I've always considered Donovan something of an underachiever at the international level. However, he finally impressed me during the Confederation's Cup and began to show he's capable of playing both ways against the best opposition. Hopefully this is a sign that he's developing the footballing intelligence to go with his technical skills, because his tendency to kill promising moves with questionable decisions is enormously frustrating. He seems to do better when given more defensive responsibility in midfield because it puts him in position to better use his speed with the ball in attack. Given the delayed developmental path American players take, these two players are just entering their prime.
His early performances suggest Feilhaber might just be embarking on his break-out season, and could be an option to start or be a killer sub when spaces begin to open in the final 30 minutes of a match. I've not seen Torres play myself, but many rate him highly as the type of player that could help keep more possession. A big plus for Torres is he plays in these conditions every week in the Mexican league. Holden is a decent option off the bench in wide midfield. These are the type of promising young players, which we might see off the bench.
Now let's consider our defense, starting with the back four's cover in central midfield. Bradley and Clark are both combative midfield "destroyers" rather than true holding players. Once suspected to be a beneficiary of nepotism, Michael Bradley has more than proven himself as the best destructive option in central midfield on this roster. Ideally Bradley should partner with a more attacking player that can create and keep possession while he stays at home or a true holding player giving him free reign to play the destroyer role and apply pressure in midfield. When he and Clark play together they have a tendency to over-commit, both pressuring the ball, leaving the sort of space in front of the back four that was exploited by Giuseppe Rossi for Italy in the Confederations Cup.
Bob Bradley, however, seems to like deploying 2 destroyers, even though it restricts our ability to keep possession under pressure, so I wouldn't be surprised to see Clark. Given there's no true holding midfielder in this roster, the only other option seems to make it a choice between Torres and Feilhaber playing in midfield along with Bradley. With the upcoming arrival of Jermaine Jones into the mix as a true holding player and the expected return of Maurice Edu from injury, Bradley has a wealth of tactical options in central midfield, all capable of playing at a high level.
In the back four, the central defensive partnership is set: Onyewu and DeMerit. There is really no need to discuss it - they work well together with Gooch bringing the muscle while DeMerit brings the tactical awareness to sweep up danger. Out on the wings, Bob Bradley has to realize, we no longer need to have fullbacks overlap to score goals and it may be a bad tactical choice against good counterattacking teams with quality up top. Unlike the teams that successfully deploy wing backs, we tend to be erratic in maintaining possession and we don't have a true holding player to fill the exposed gaps. Fullbacks should be instructed to be conservative in their runs and maintain the defensive shape, even if we fall behind. They should rarely venture further forward than the sort of spots where Spector's deep crosses led to a pair of Dempsey goals in the Confederations Cup. The fullbacks sudden urgency to get into advanced positions and get a goal back left our centre backs completely exposed and was the prime reason we conceded 5 goals against Mexico in the Gold Cup final.
On this roster, Bornstein is really the worst offender in this regard. His speed tempts him to be tactically naive, leaving all that space and hoping it won't be used effectively. It's not as if his crosses will be missed and he tends to congest things on the left. When he gets beyond Dempsey, as he does far too frequently, there's no longer any support from the fullback to help maintain possession. Passing options break down, leaving Dempsey to take a defender on, or attempt a difficult pass, often losing possession and putting the left side under pressure. This leaves some fans frustrated with Dempsey when it's more a consequence of Bornstein's ill-advised forward runs. Much better for the left back to simply stay at home and support the midfield in maintaining possession, especially under the conditions at Azteca.
To a large extent, this explains the sudden defensive improvement when Bocanegra took up the left-back position. I think Bradley has a quandary here - Bocanegra will be more conservative, but he's a central back playing on the wing against a speedy Mexican attack. A more disciplined Bornstein with clear instructions on how far forward he's allowed to venture may be the best option here. We won't really know unless one or the other of them is exposed. There is a similar predicament with a toss-up for the other fullback position with Spector and Cherundolo in competition for the spot on the right. Given their respective performances in the Confederations cup and Gold Cup, I'd say that's Spectors spot to lose.
As for defensive options left off this roster, Frankie Hejduk on the right has all the downsides of a Bornstein but his work rate makes it look like less of a problem - it still leaves the centre backs exposed. I'm hoping that Edgar Castillo is a bit more disciplined than Bornstein, can keep possession out of the back more effectively, put in more threatening crosses when he does get forward and becomes the more attacking option at left back.
As for the 3 Houston player on the roster. It may annoy the people who feel Bob is putting loyalty to certain players above fielding the best team, but given the weather we're likely to face at Azteca, these guys do play under the most similar conditions. It even almost makes sense considering the conditions. If we see Bornstein start, this is probably the reason why. He needs clear instructions not to run beyond the left midfielder. I think we may see Torres start as well. I feel like Bradley might want to hold one of his best players back. I would almost (but not quite) like to see Holden start on the left with Dempsey coming on 15 minutes into the second half. Alternatively, we could see Dempsey at forward with Altidore and see Davies for Holden and Ching for Altidore with Dempsey dropping back to midfield. I think it's just as likely we'll see the starting line-up from the Confederation's Cup.
Here's my formation, starters and potential substitutes:
| Altidore | |||
| Dempsey | |||
| Holden | Torres | Donovan | |
| Bradley | |||
| Bornstein | Onyewu | DeMerit | Spector |
| Howard | |||
Possible Tactical Substitutes:
Attacking:Davies for Holden/Altidore at 60-70 minutes.
Feilhaber for Torres/Holden at 45-60 minutes.
Defensive:
Bocanegra for Bornstein at first sign of trouble.
Ching for Altidore/Holden at 60-75 minutes
Clark for Torres at 75-80 minutes
Bradley Names 20-Man Roster To Prepare For FIFA World Cup Qualifier in Mexico
GOALKEEPERS (2): Brad Guzan (Aston Villa: 5/3 SO), Tim Howard (Everton FC: 11/7 SO)DEFENDERS (7): Carlos Bocanegra (Rennes: 21/3), Jonathan Bornstein (Chivas USA, 2/0), Steve Cherundolo (Hannover: 18/0), Jay DeMerit (Watford: 2/0), Chad Marshall (Columbus Crew: 1/0), Oguchi Onyewu (AC Milan: 16/1), Jonathan Spector (West Ham: 2/0)
MIDFIELDERS (6): Michael Bradley (Borussia Mönchengladbach: 10/4), Ricardo Clark (Houston Dynamo: 5/0), Clint Dempsey (Fulham FC: 17/4), Benny Feilhaber (AGF Aarhus: 1/0), Stuart Holden (Houston Dynamo: 0/0), José Francisco Torres (Pachuca: 5/0)
FORWARDS (5): Jozy Altidore (Hull City: 8/5), Conor Casey (Colorado Rapids: 5/0), Brian Ching (Houston Dynamo: 15/6), Charlie Davies (FC Sochaux: 2/1), Landon Donovan (Los Angeles Galaxy: 30/11)
*numbers indicate all-time World Cup Qualifying caps/goals
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)