Jump to content

USA World Cup Match 4: Netherlands


The Earl of Texas

Recommended Posts

For years the USMNT played a counter attack strategy when facing teams that they perceived as better than them and were good at it. Still I think it is a strategy that may get you success in the group stage or CONCACAF but as you move on in the World Cup you can't allow teams with good strikers and killer instinct to hang around your side of the field for most the game. I hope to see a strategy tomorrow that tries to at least split possession of the ball to help with fitness and reduce risk.  I still think the best opportunities will come on counter attacks because this team has been good at it. The other thing that historically has been great is hustling till the end and seeking opportunity until the last attempt. Gregg calling for possession over opportunity in the England game is so out of character and was so disappointing.

Nervous but I would love to see this team move on to the next round. The further they go on this one as a young team the better it will be for the next one here at home. Pulling a South Korea or better performance is in the cards when it is held here at home for this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

I hope to see a strategy tomorrow that tries to at least split possession of the ball to help with fitness and reduce risk.

 

17 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

Gregg calling for possession over opportunity in the England game is so out of character and was so disappointing.

Huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ztejas said:

 

Huh?

I only watch international soccer during major tournaments and friendlies of interest. I have done it for years and that is my extent of knowledge. So my opinions are based on what I have observed without having studied different strategies. Also, my opinions are probably tinged with historical perception because I have watched teams play in games through many tournaments.

I perceive teams like Argentina and Italy as the masters of hunkering down and protecting a one goal lead. I view Argentina, Netherlands and Italy as the best at making you pay for the slightest mistake on your side on the field so allow them to hang around on ones side of the field is bad news. Spain, Brazil and England have always been more forgiving and can get beat by a counter attack strategy. Germany well until lately they are the team with the biggest killer instinct and it does not matter how you play them they will put you away.

With all that said in my experience teams that sit back expend lots of energy pursuing the ball making sure they don't give up any shooting windows. In the end they tire and start getting beat by strikers or giving up silly fouls in dangerous areas because the legs have given out and they are out of position or substitute with lesser talent.

Over the years the USMNT has pulled out several victories close to the end of regulation and in extra time because they keep fighting till the end and many teams don't play that way and I see it as part of the American team character. Pulisic was setting up for a free kick at the end of the England game and Gregg was seen asking him to slow it down when it was clear that the free kick would probably be the last play of any risk and I have seen it happen enough that I was very hopeful for a last second goal.

 

 

Edited by DanTheHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's beat Holland's ass.

Seems like a good strategy against the US is just wait until players such as McKennie, Dest, and Musah tire themselves out and then Gregg subs in a Shaq Moore for some reason then become aggressive. 

Need someone to look at me the way Gregg looks at Haji Wright and Shaq.

Edited by Loch Ness Monster
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

I only watch international soccer during major tournaments and friendlies of interest. I have done it for years and that is my extent of knowledge. So my opinions are based on what I have observed without having studied different strategies. Also, my opinions are probably tinged with historical perception because I have watched teams play in games through many tournaments.

I perceive teams like Argentina and Italy as the masters of hunkering down and protecting a one goal lead. I view Argentina, Netherlands and Italy as the best at making you pay for the slightest mistake on your side on the field so allow them to hang around on ones side of the field is bad news. Spain, Brazil and England have always been more forgiving and can get beat by a counter attack strategy. Germany well until lately they are the team with the biggest killer instinct and it does not matter how you play them they will put you away.

With all that said in my experience teams that sit back expend lots of energy pursuing the ball making sure they don't give up any shooting windows. In the end they tire and start getting beat by strikers or giving up silly fouls in dangerous areas because the legs have given out and they are out of position or substitute with lesser talent.

Over the years the USMNT has pulled out several victories close to the end of regulation and in extra time because they keep fighting till the end and many teams don't play that way and I see it as part of the American team character. Pulisic was setting up for a free kick at the end of the England game and Gregg was seen asking him to slow it down when it was clear that the free kick would probably be the last play of any risk and I have seen it happen enough that I was very hopeful for a last second goal.

 

 

Ignoring history - England has been more clinical this tournament and objectively has a much more dangerous attack than the Netherlands does. Whether it's countering or breaking down a defense that's in position. I don't agree that sitting back against England and playing the counter would have been the right move - or overextending in the hope of generating fluke chances. I think that's a recipe for disaster. I also don't think it's the right move against The Netherlands, although I think the Dutch CDs are a bit more difficult to break down. It's why your statements seemed contradictory to me.

Part of that has less to do with who we are playing and more to do with us having one of the best defensive mids in the world right now who is flanked by some legitimately European-quality midfielders. Pulisic also controls possession well and typically only gives the ball up when it's a contested pass or he's directly attacking in the opponent's third. Even Sargent who isn't a great target man is a decent hold up 9 and is physical on the ball. 

There's no reason to be content with any side we play dominating possession. It's why most of us didn't love Gergg's move to roll the ball to Iran and dare them to score against us. 

We are going to need to play really, really well on defense tomorrow morning and either have a moment of brilliance or a counter where we catch them napping to get on the score sheet. None of those things are out of the realm of possibility - and part of the reason why is because we can look them in the eye at midfield and play their game. 

Edited by ztejas
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Ignoring history - England has been more clinical this tournament and objectively has a much more dangerous attack than the Netherlands does. Whether it's countering or breaking down a defense that's in position. I don't agree that sitting back against England and playing the counter would have been the right move - or overextending in the hope of generating fluke chances. I think that's a recipe for disaster. I also don't think it's the right move against The Netherlands, although I think the Dutch CDs are a bit more difficult to break down. It's why your statements seemed contradictory to me.

Part of that has less to do with who we are playing and more to do with us having one of the best defensive mids in the world right now who is flanked by some legitimately European-quality midfielders. Pulisic also controls possession well and typically only gives the ball up when it's a contested pass or he's directly attacking in the opponent's third. Even Sargent who isn't a great target man is a decent hold up 9 and is physical on the ball. 

There's no reason to be content with any side we play dominating possession. It's why most of us didn't love Gergg's move to roll the ball to Iran and dare them to score against us. 

We are going to need to play really, really well on defense tomorrow morning and either have a moment of brilliance or a counter where we catch them napping to get on the score sheet. None of those things are out of the realm of possibility - and part of the reason why is because we can look them in the eye at midfield and play their game. 

I think we are saying the same thing, that sitting back is a bad idea. We have a few different reasons as to why plus historically the US had to based on talent but no longer has to play that way as a primary strategy. You just stated what I have been trying to say way more eloquently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Ignoring history - England has been more clinical this tournament and objectively has a much more dangerous attack than the Netherlands does. Whether it's countering or breaking down a defense that's in position. I don't agree that sitting back against England and playing the counter would have been the right move - or overextending in the hope of generating fluke chances. I think that's a recipe for disaster. I also don't think it's the right move against The Netherlands, although I think the Dutch CDs are a bit more difficult to break down. It's why your statements seemed contradictory to me.

Part of that has less to do with who we are playing and more to do with us having one of the best defensive mids in the world right now who is flanked by some legitimately European-quality midfielders. Pulisic also controls possession well and typically only gives the ball up when it's a contested pass or he's directly attacking in the opponent's third. Even Sargent who isn't a great target man is a decent hold up 9 and is physical on the ball. 

There's no reason to be content with any side we play dominating possession. It's why most of us didn't love Gergg's move to roll the ball to Iran and dare them to score against us. 

We are going to need to play really, really well on defense tomorrow morning and either have a moment of brilliance or a counter where we catch them napping to get on the score sheet. None of those things are out of the realm of possibility - and part of the reason why is because we can look them in the eye at midfield and play their game. 

Or, win on Pk’s. Can we do that 4 times in a row?  Sure, why not. 
And then watch the world burn/howl in indignation. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

We got $17.76 bet on the US to advance.  I think we are going to do it.  I base that on nothing other than a feeling, but I'm not usually one to get feelings that are overwhelmingly positive.  

go ahead and move that decimal 2 to the right and GO BIG BABY!!!

image.png.4db674c6e976468cca00f1ef0791fc0a.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US will be underdogs in each game from here on out (captain obvious).  That said, advancing to the semifinals isn't completely insane.  The Netherlands have looked beatable during this WC as has Argentina who would likely await us.

  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, hookemATL said:

Is Reyna someone who would replace Pulisic if he had to come out?  I know it was mentioned he might not be able to go the full 90. 

I think Pulisic will go 90.

If he doesn't, Brenden Aaronson is his "backup". 

Reyna is a natural midfielder/attacking midfielder but can play on the wing. I'd imagine he can play some false 9 as well but I'm not sure how much of that he's ever done. 

Our best lineup in theory (in a 3-3-4 - in a perfect world we'd play a 3-5-3 with Aaronson starting) is something like:

Pulisic - Reyna - Weah

McKennie - Adams - Musah *

With Pulisic drifting to the 10 and Antonee playing a wingback down the left like we usually do and there not being a designated 9. Instead you'd have Pulisic and Reyna play off of each other with all 3 forwards potentially crashing the box.

Gregg isn't a good enough manager to implement this. Someone like Pep is. To be fair to Gregg, you typically don't want to complicate things in international football as the tactics and chemistry is much more watered down compared to club football - especially comps like Europa or CL. 

Edited by ztejas
Put McKennie and Musah on the wrong sides
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Already loaded the beer fridge. Friends are coming over. One is Canadian, but his first ex is dutch so he hates em. 

Won't lie. Love holland. From being the First Nation to recognize the US to spending quite a few weeks at different times there, lots of respect. 

Tomorrow. Fuck em. They are canal aggy. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

A win tomorrow would be so incredible to soccer in the US.    

Yeah this is a huge fucking game. Win tomorrow and we've landed and the world better watch their fucking backs. 

I think we can do it. I love this squad. They're young and we have issues at a couple positions but we have a world class CDM and a world class winger and sometimes that's enough to bullshit your way to the semis. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...