With England putting 3 strikers in the second half, why did not the US MNT counterattack more during that time? I know Bob Bradley is conserative as a soccer coach as well, but do you not try to win a game when England is playing down like it did in the second half? The US should have played the ball a little more wider as well considering our speed advantage versus the old and slow defense of Britannia.
I'm sure the combination of being perfectly content with a draw and the fact that England's strikers were giving our defense fits at times was well enough to give the conservative mind a way to make a decision on counterattacking. Maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject will shed some more light.
because we can't put more than 3 direct passes together.
Having Clark in the game and the fact our fullbacks have no pace doesn't help.
Because we don't have a central midfield that can attack.
(06-12-2010 10:41 PM)GrayBeard Wrote: [ -> ]Because we don't have a central midfield that can attack.
I disagree. I think Torres and Feilhaber are perfectly capable of attacking. If Howard can play against Slovenia I bet you see Torres paired with Bradley in the midfield.
(06-12-2010 10:44 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ] (06-12-2010 10:41 PM)GrayBeard Wrote: [ -> ]Because we don't have a central midfield that can attack.
I disagree. I think Torres and Feilhaber are perfectly capable of attacking. If Howard can play against Slovenia I bet you see Torres paired with Bradley in the midfield.
Umm...that's great and you are right about Torres and Feilhaber, but if they aren't on the field (see today) they can't attack. Instead of them, we had two defensive midfielders out there, and one of them was worthless.
We were more conservative and on our heels the second half with midfield play, but Altidore breaking free and coming within a few feet of better placement on his shot would have given us the 2-1 upset. Our style has been to play not to lose (compared to Brazil or Argentina and others). Though it's not as exciting play, we played smart the second half. I like our chances to advance, if for no other reason than because South Africa doesn't want the political security hassle if our president comes. Any time a #16 ranked ties a #8 ranked side, it's a moral victory.
Not Bradley's style. Plain and simple.
Two defensive-minded midfielders did not help either.
Bradley likes to defend, defend, defend, and then counter-attack. The counter-attack is why you see Donovan and Dempsey on the midfield outside with Altidore and Findley up top. When you get the ball in the open to Donovan or Dempsey, they can do magic with the ball and quickly. However, that style doesn't always work as well as some fans would like it. You got to put the ball in the back of the net when you get a chance.
(06-12-2010 10:52 PM)GrayBeard Wrote: [ -> ] (06-12-2010 10:44 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ] (06-12-2010 10:41 PM)GrayBeard Wrote: [ -> ]Because we don't have a central midfield that can attack.
I disagree. I think Torres and Feilhaber are perfectly capable of attacking. If Howard can play against Slovenia I bet you see Torres paired with Bradley in the midfield.
Umm...that's great and you are right about Torres and Feilhaber, but if they aren't on the field (see today) they can't attack. Instead of them, we had two defensive midfielders out there, and one of them was worthless.
Misunderstood your statement. I thought you were saying that we don't have attacking options in central midfield not that we just didn't play them today. Sorry.
(06-12-2010 11:17 PM)TN_Tiger Wrote: [ -> ]Not Bradley's style. Plain and simple.
Two defensive-minded midfielders did not help either.
Bradley likes to defend, defend, defend, and then counter-attack. The counter-attack is why you see Donovan and Dempsey on the midfield outside with Altidore and Findley up top. When you get the ball in the open to Donovan or Dempsey, they can do magic with the ball and quickly. However, that style doesn't always work as well as some fans would like it. You got to put the ball in the back of the net when you get a chance.
this, exactly.