Video of the Week: Jon Stewart tackles "futbol"

CLICK HERE for the Video of the Week!

This week's Video is 10 times as long as our typical clips, and infinitely funnier. On June 30, Jon Stewart broadcast a "special futbol edition" of The Daily Show, and thanks to his background as a winger for William & Mary, Stewart certainly had enough expertise to fill a great half-hour.

The first segment, "You're Welcome", is some of the Daily Show's more absurd humor, but focuses more on political jokes with a World Cup background. If you're looking for more soccer-related humor, skip to the second segment, the latest in the show's "Vuvuzealots" reports. The piece is a hilarious look at soccer fanatics, drinking and hooliganism, so any American soccer will definitely laugh out loud.

However, the best segment is saved for last: Stewart's interview with Landon Donovan and Bob Bradley. The interview is an incredibly interesting take on not only U.S. Soccer, but also the perspectives of Donovan and Bradley.

I'll leave most of the video for you to judge, but am I the only one worried that Landon et al are acting like we accomplished something great? True, the World Cup was a milestone for America's soccer attention, but the team led for 3 minutes and struggled mightily to advance from a fairly weak group. Landon's gotta do the talk show circuit after the USA's (and his personal) epic World Cup, but I'd be reassured of the team's ambitions if he seemed disappointed at least once.

Oh, and if you haven't realized it yet, you're crazy if you think I'm not gonna write about the Algeria and Ghana games. More to come.

When referees play karma

After the USA-Slovenia rollercoaster ended Friday afternoon, our entire nation seethed at one man alone. Koman Coulibaly's phantom call was inexplicable at the time, and it still remains mystifying no matter how many times you replay the free-kick itself: no offsides, no fouls (aside from the slew of Slovenian ones), nothing at all. It was, easily, one of the worst calls in World Cup history.

Most media sources have largely chalked this one up to gross incompetence, but some have started to realize that we've been robbed much worse than we knew. I noticed this via a revelatory tweet, as Twitter user paddytim wrote to WhitlockJason:

"bs call was a make up call for a bad call on awarding free kick to US. Ref blew whistle before play even started. US guy dove"

Upon further review, this is exactly what Coulibaly was thinking. Here's how the play happened by his reasoning. (Click link for full video.) Jozy falls under contact to the neck from a Slovenian defender. Coulibaly blows his whistle for the free kick. He quickly doubts his decision, and this doubt is reinforced when he notices the linesman doesn't raise his flag. When the free-kick is struck, Coulibaly already has his whistle in his mouth and blows the play dead, without hesitation or any particular reaction to what's in front of him. In other words, he was resigned to whistling a makeup call from the moment he doubted his original call.

I barely even know where to begin with this logic. I guess let's start from the beginning: the play leading to the free kick was absolutely a foul. Jozy certainly embellished the contact, but it doesn't change the fact that the Slovenian defender put a hand to his neck. That's a foul and a free kick in any circumstance. It's comparable to Nigeria's red card against Greece: Torosidis rolled around like he was shot, but Kaita had still tried to spike a dude in the thigh. That's a red card no matter what, and a hand to Jozy's neck is a foul, no matter what.

Into the real issue: the make-up call. Let's even put aside that make-up calls are explicitly outlawed by FIFA. Simply put, it is still an unacceptable justification. Think about it, where does that thinking lead to? If he thinks he mistakenly awarded a penalty, does he give another one later? (What if that guy misses, how do those mistakes cancel out?) If he didn't realize he was giving a second yellow to a player, does he send off someone from the other team? A referee should never play karma by retrospectively evening out his own mistakes, because these decisions have ripple effects.

This human interference is even worse than getting unluckily screwed by human error. At least poor officiating is an honest mistake, something we've long understood and forgiven as a part of sport. (Just ask Jim Joyce.) The U.S. fought back deservedly, and the game was decided by the players on the field, until Coulibaly decided that it wasn't. Such revision is absolutely intolerable from someone who is only supposed to enforce the rules of the game, and whatever punishment FIFA hands out is warranted.

As for the U.S., Algeria's draw with England means that the U.S. controls its own destiny, advancing with a win over Algeria on Wednesday morning (10 AM, ESPN). A draw can also put them through if England fails to win, yet without Coulibaly's input, that draw would have sufficed no matter what. The resolute Algerians make such a specter haunting, yet the U.S. proved its toughness against Slovenia, and this squad is ready for the fight. Bottom line, the USA showed that it's capable of advancing, but nobody will benefit if more than 11 men stand in their way.

Examining the past, to fix the future

By now you've all seen the reports and headlines from USA-England, from both neutral observers and American homers (and British ones too). Some say the Americans' point was deserved, and some say it was simply lucky, but neither side can argue against the fact that Robert Green's mishap changed the face of the whole game. Earned or undeserved, the point now puts the U.S. in a great position to advance past the group stages.

In order move forward, the U.S. must learn from its past, examining both successes and weaknesses. The squad played exceptionally in many areas of the field, notably its resolute defending, but they were certainly exposed in predictable areas. England couldn't produce anything out of this exposure, but eventually someone will exploit these weaknesses if they aren't addressed. Essentially, the U.S. is playing very well, and it still has the precious opportunity to go from good to great.

Three things the U.S. needs do:

Sit Ricardo Clark...

Plain and simple, England's goal is the epitome of why Ricardo Clark is ineffective as a holding mid. Clark was inexplicably ball-watching as his man Steven Gerrard, only one of the best players in England's history, sped past him to score the opening goal. I gave Clark the benefit of the doubt in my USA preview, since he often unglamorously plays ball-denial by blocking passing lanes. Nevertheless, he showed against England that not only does he doze off at times, he doesn't have enough impact when focused to shut off a higher calibre of player. Too often he disappears like this, failing to stall offenses like a holding mid should, and as such he should lose his claim to this role to Jermaine Jones after the World Cup.

...in favor of an aggressive holding mid.

In the meantime, the U.S. needs a more aggressive holding mid anyway, since Slovenia plays a slower passing-oriented offense than England. As a result, look for Bob Bradley to start Jose Torres at holding mid on Friday. While he could opt for Maurice Edu instead, the U.S. may need Torres' creative passing to break down the resolute Slovenian defense. The combination of these two strengths makes me think Bradley will call on Torres.

Offense is a great form of defense...

Thanks to the U.S. speed up front and on the wings, England could never fully commit forward to attack Tim Howard's goal until the very end. In one of the few instances where England ignored the threat, Jozy was on hand to break forward and rattle the post, a reminder of the consequences to pouring forward. This threat of counter-attack is one of the most viable ways for the U.S. to restrict a superior team's offensive might, reinforcing that Robbie Findley's speed is needed from the opening whistle in this scenario.

...but tailor it to the opposition.

This counter-attack works best against clear favorites, who typically take the fight to the Americans. However, Slovenia is an underdog, more likely to control the ball and expose the U.S. when it goes too far forward. In other words, the roles are somewhat reversed from the England match, so the U.S. offense must shift away from speed and athleticism, and towards passing and ball skills. Edson Buddle should therefore replace Findley, since he distributes the ball better and shoots more clinically.

The defensive spine is solid...

Questions about the defensive spine were resoundingly addressed against England. Oguchi Onyewu looked completely healthy both in his tackles and in the air, and DeMerit bottled Wayne Rooney as well as anyone can expect. Emile Heskey occasionally got free when defensive resources were focused elsewhere, but as I rationalized before the game, he's still Emile Heskey. This squad is well-equipped to handle threats through the middle.

...but the wings must work together defensively.

However, Aaron Lennon and Shaun Wright-Phillips put in dangerous crosses far too often, predictably exposing the wingbacks as our remaining big weakness. Simply put, no wingback has both the speed and skill to keep up with speedy wingers like Slovenia's Valter Birsa. As such, other players must help compensate for the team's personnel weakness. Primarily, the wing-mids must track back to impede runs down the sideline, since then the pressure of stopping opposing wingers doesn't fall solely on the backline. Dempsey and Landon are still needed offensively, but they must help defensively to solve the team's biggest weakness.

In my opinion, the U.S.-England game was an extraordinary display by both teams, marred by one stupid mistake by one player on each side. That said, the U.S. did not play perfectly, but after all, it was the opening game against a vaunted opponent. Going forward from here, the U.S. has a great chance to retain its pole position, making a couple minor tweaks along the way. Things are looking up from here.

(Thanks to Bleacher Report for scouting Slovenia.)

Video of the Week: A Nation's Expectation

Our Video of the Week is this awesome segment on the USA, part of ESPN's "32 Teams, 1 Dream" series summarizing each country at South Africa 2010. The piece shows just how far we've come as a footballing nation: not only do we hope for the U.S. to advance, we are expecting it. What a tribute to the USMNT. (To see segments for the other 31 nations, search "32 teams, 1 dream" on ESPN's YouTube page.)

Say what you will about ESPN's journalistic practices, but they are absolutely the single biggest factor in promoting American enthusiasm for the game. Check out the huge difference between the USSF's World Cup commercial and ESPN's two build-up commercials, all aired during the warm-up match against the Czech Republic. ESPN's are just flat out funnier, and their TV expertise makes them second to none at getting an audience's attention. For soccer to continue its growth in America, the game needs the continued support and reach of the ESPN family of networks.

The point of no return

As I intimated last week, if you're not excited for the World Cup yet, you're either soulless or Shakira. Personally, the World Cup's arrival really dawned on me as I watched the U.S. squad round into form over the last two weeks. The squad looked downright poor in the 4-2 loss to the Czech Republic, but really found their stride three days later in the second half of the 2-1 over Turkey, saying goodbye to America in style. The last game, a 3-1 demolition of Australia in South Africa, proved that they'd adjusted and shaken off the rust for good.

These types of games are usually tune-ups for the main squad to jell before The Big Show, but they took an even greater significance for a USA squad still struggling to define its identity and starting XI. The absence of Charlie Davies prompted questions about the structure of the 4-4-2 lineup, as many wondered if we'd be less effective without his speed up front. Coupled with legitimate debates over the starters at multiple positions, the team came into to the Send-Off Series collectively more undefined than it was a year ago. Not a great place to be two weeks before playing the 3rd best team in the world.

Yet experimentation is sometimes why these matches are scheduled in the first place. By testing many different players and lineups under the pressure preceding a World Cup, Bob Bradley saw how much more dangerous the team was by the end of the warm-up slate, ending a brief attempt at a 4-4-1-1 and settling all debates over who plays where in the 4-4-2. Thanks to these matches, we've got a solid idea of the team's best options. And even if we didn't, the countdown is already on until England on June 12. For better or worse, the line-up has likely been decided. World Cup 2010 is here.

Judging by what we've seen over the last year, here are my picks for the 2010 USA World Cup starting XI:

Goalie: Tim Howard

Least shocking pick of the whole team. The USA's best player will need to be at the top of his game, and at this point, we expect and receive nothing less from him.

Center-backs: Oguchi Onyewu, Jay DeMerit

These two have easily been the most solid defenders for the U.S. over the last year. DeMerit's positioning is nothing short of superb, and while he started slow against quick teams like Turkey, he picked up the pace and showed against the Turks that his shot-blocking ability simply keeps the team in games. His constant presence in the squad shows how reliable he's been in this capacity for Bob Bradley.

On the other hand, Onyewu's absence is what hammered home his value to the team. Finally back from injury, Gooch showed his near-full fitness with multiple great sliding tackles in all three warm-ups, so for the most part, we have our stud defender back. Sivok's opening goal for the Czechs did raise doubts about Oguchi's aerial ability, so if strikers like Peter Crouch could be too big an issue for the backline, Clarence Goodson has been more than impressive enough (and tall enough) to fill the spot.

Left-back: Carlos Bocanegra

He's often played center-back in Onyewu's absence, but Bocanegra's veteran presence is sorely needed at the weak left-back slot. Jonathan Bornstein's performances there are consistently riddled by positional mistakes, and he has been burned too often by skilled players like the Czech Republic's Martin Fenin. (Nevertheless, Bradley bafflingly continues to use Bornstein as an offensive-minded sub, despite losing the ball frequently against poor teams like Australia.) As a result, Bocanegra's positional instinct makes him the only reliable player at the position, short of emergency backup DaMarcus Beasley. Bocanegra showed last summer that he can shut down the world's best, and the team needs that form out of its captain again to plug its biggest gap.

Right-back: Steve Cherundolo

Just like his counterpart on the left, 'Dolo is needed as a experienced hand. Jonathan Spector doesn't commit atrocities like Bornstein does, but Arda Turan outran him multiple times against Turkey, hinting that he may not be capable of stopping England's speedy Aaron Lennon. Cherundolo is better than Spector positionally but not athletically, making this a question of trade-offs. It's a tough call, but the American defense relies on its defenders to back each other up, and positioning is a huge part of that. Since the differences aren't too pronounced, I'd rather have Cherundolo as the starter and see Spector come off the bench late in the game.

Holding midfielder: Maurice Edu

The U.S. has three quality choices at holding mid, and Bob Bradley's choice will say a lot about how he wants his team to play. Traditionally, Ricardo Clark has manned the back of the midfield diamond, but every time he has played lately I ask myself "Wait, Ricardo Clark is playing?" He never has any visible impact on the game, since instead he's passively blocking opponents' passing lanes.

Using Clark like this isn't the worst thing in the world, except that opponents then have so much time on the ball. A more aggressive holding mid like Maurice Edu would be a better choice, since he's stronger, faster, and more disruptive to attacking offenses. Clark is better against patient teams like Spain who unlock defenses, but since the teams in Group B are more likely to pressure with athletic dribblers, Bradley should select Edu based on his impressive tackling performances of late.

It's also worth mentioning, Jose Torres might be the best choice in our system. Torres proved himself to be an exceptional tackler in the second half against Turkey, yet he sets himself apart with his passing ability after the tackle, since he distributes excellently from the back once he's disrupted the opponent. This is exactly how Xabi Alonso ran the dynamic Liverpool offense a year ago, and it makes the team as a whole incredibly dangerous, since the defense is actively launching counter-attacks more quickly and more frequently.

In the end, Bob Bradley is most likely to pick Edu or Clark since they've both played often and admirably in the role, while Torres has only had a couple appearances. However, since he played so well when given the chance, don't be surprised if we see him at some point during the Cup.

Attacking midfielder: Michael Bradley

No surprise here, since by now Bradley is no longer "the coach's son", but rather one of the most consistent performers in the squad. As my friend George put it, he's a very American center-mid, since he'll win a ton of challenges and out-hustle everyone else on both sides of the ball. He's our starter here for the long haul.

Left wing: Landon Donovan

Little new can be said here, but Landon has been incredible for the national team on either wing. He's played as a striker for most of his career, but by putting him here, Bob Bradley takes advantage of Landon's speed and passing skill, without preventing him from shooting the ball himself. He displayed his pace and trickery with a couple awe-inspiring runs against Australia, and for the U.S. to operate at its best, Landon will need to have more impact than he did in '06.

Right wing: Clint Dempsey

Where can the U.S. best utilize Dempsey? It's been a major question for quite awhile, but if the Confederations Cup didn't answer it, the last three games certainly have: Dempsey needs to be a winger.

Here's the logic behind the pick: as a team, the USA's strengths are its athleticism, speed, and power, while its largest weakness is its technical skill on the ball. Therefore as a team, the U.S. wants to maximize its strengths by directing play to the wings, where athleticism is most useful and the team is less likely to be outclassed by superior ball-handlers. The U.S. will then want its most complete players on the wings, and that clearly nominates Dempsey and Donovan, both of whom have the speed and skill to control play once it's been directed to them. (As their backup, the slower Stuart Holden has filled the role at times, though much less effectively when tracking back.)

For proof, witness the team's play during the Turkey game. The U.S. played miserably in the first half, and Dempsey looked unable to get going without room to run. Yet once they moved Dempsey back from forward to the wing opposite Landon, the team dominated play and fought back to win. Part of this was from switching back to the familiar 4-4-2, but moreso this was thanks to a more athletic player filling the wing spot. I understand (though I personally disagree with) people saying that Dempsey's the team's second-best forward, but for the sake of the team's playing style, he's needed more on the wing.

Forward #1: Jozy Altidore

In the current 23-man squad, Jozy is irreplaceable as the team's only possession forward. No other striker can play particularly well with their backs to goal, to the point that it may have been a mistake to take Gomez or Buddle instead of Brian Ching. Not to mention that Jozy is easily the best finisher of the four strikers, or that he makes the best runs at goal with the ball. As long as he's healthy, Jozy has to play as many minutes as possible.

Forward #2: Robbie Findley

Possibly the most controversial pick, but as with Dempsey, Findley is needed to facilitate the team's goals. As a counter-attacking team, the U.S. needs a forward with enough speed to keep defenses honest, since runs from the wing aren't too threatening if defenders aren't worried about being outrun to a through-ball. Neither Buddle nor Gomez presents that threat, as they've mostly scored by popping up well to poach goals, a la Michael Owen.

Not that Findley is being picked for his blazing speed alone. The 24-year-old has incredible passing vision beyond his years, shown when he set up the tying goal against Turkey with a brilliant chip over the defense. Moreover against Australia, he similarly created the third goal with a great flick back to Landon, and his electric run down the sideline in the 58' should have resulted in a Buddle finish. His finishing has been suspect, but as Martin Tyler put it during the Australia game, he's created so many chances for himself and others that the goals will come. Buddle or Gomez may replace him in the later stages of games, but Findley needs to start so that the U.S. is a threat from the opening whistle.

There's some room for personal choice, but in all likelihood, Bob Bradley will start this XI against England. He's tested everybody, and thankfully he found the team's rhythm... just in time too, since we've reached the point of no return. Everybody put your game faces on, it's time to make waves.

Video of the Week: Glory

Simply put, if you don't like our Video of the Week then you have no soul. In 10 days, England-USA. 1:30 PM. World Cup 2010. It's gonna be a hell of a show.

Article to follow this week.

The more things change...

Wednesday was just an all-around depressing day for U.S. soccer. The bad news started before kickoff, as most of us abruptly discovered that half of America couldn’t even watch the game. Thanks to Telemundo’s refusal to sell the TV rights to ESPN at any reasonable price, CONCACAF’s biggest World Cup qualifier was broadcast on some monstrosity called “Mun2”, Spanish television’s equivalent of ESPN 8 the Ocho. A soccer-skeptical friend of mine best summarized the result: “The U.S.-Mexico match had me excited for soccer for the first time ever. I eagerly turned on the TV to watch it, only to find out that it wasn't on TV. My opinion stands-- soccer blows a big one.” Score another one for TV politics.

Sitting in the middle of Kentucky, I was in the half of America that didn’t receive everyone’s favorite Telemundo spinoff channel. As such, I turned to the Internet to pirate miserable Spanish-language feeds, changing every 10 minutes as each one was shut down in succession for copyright violation. In short, just watching the damn game was an adventure, and I’m sure that between the terrible broadcast quality and frequent stalling and switching, I missed some important observations. And yet, what I could see made it abundantly clear that nothing has changed lately in the U.S. camp.

Oguchi Onyewu embodied the positives in the American defense, strong in positioning and athleticism. The level of practice he gets in Milan is already lifting his game, and he leads the team naturally

now. Aside from his unlucky reaction that allowed the second goal, he turned in a stellar performance.

The rest of the defense followed his lead, but with more mistakes. The American backline’s work rate is unmatched, but Jay DeMerit and Carlos Bocanegra continued the propensity for occasionally awful tackles. Furthermore, Bocanegra gave Israel Castro all the room in the world to unleash his marvelous first goal. Is somebody going to step up and tell them that these mistakes are inexcusable at this level?

Also, a good portion of the team remains largely invisible at times. Brian Ching, Clint Dempsey, Michael Bradley, Ricardo Clark: I’m looking at you here. Only Bob Bradley knows why Jozy and Jonathan Spector started on the bench, but unless it was a reaction to the conditions at Azteca, we could have used their offensive threat.

Charlie Davies, however, continues to prove that he is the perfect striker for the USA’s counterattack strategy. Landon Donovan gave him a great through ball on the American goal, and he received it brilliantly. With his speed, he’s going to put those away every time, and he was unlucky to be called offsides on a potential winner in the 71st.

On another note, the U.S. continues to suffer from an obvious double standard in yellow cards. Apparently, even commentators noted that directly after DeMerit and Bocanegra earned yellows for bad tackles, the Mexicans got away unpunished for similar ones. I can only assume that bad tackling is a stereotype that referees have of American soccer, since we saw a similar trend in the Confederations Cup. We’re certainly contributing to the perception, but it’s unfair and frustrating that it hurts us in such key matches.

For their part, Mexico continues to epitomize exactly why most Americans hate soccer. On the day, they started a stupid fight, they writhed in pain at every foul as soon as they got the lead, and they delayed play at the end of the game, petulantly dribbling away from Tim Howard. Yes, as an American I’m biased, but I’ve seen enough games on television and in person to objectively decide that this isn’t an isolated incident, it’s a plague. (I’ll leave the swine flu jokes to you.) Watch any SuperLiga game for proof: it always happens, and it’s obnoxious. (Apologies to any offended Mexico fans. For what it’s worth, you also play a more attractive brand of soccer than us.)

Finally, lots of fuss is always made over the Azteca’s smog, heat, altitude, and hatred from the Mexican crowd. But the smog was allegedly not bad on the day, the heat was mild for a summer afternoon, and the players are professionally prepared for the altitude and crowd. We were ready to face all of these problems, and yet the deciding factors weren’t a result of the atmosphere, but of our same stupid tendencies. In other words, let’s stop pretending like it’s a given that “no U.S. teams win in Mexico”, because that excuse is becoming a crutch. We’re better than that.

I feel like I’m writing about the same strengths and flaws over and over again, just replacing the specific instances of each individual game. It really shouldn’t be that hard to correct our problems, and frankly, I’m sick of writing the same thing without seeing change. Let’s fix this already and get to 2010.

The wealth of soccer on Sunday proved American interest. Sort of.

Soccer featured prominently on U.S. television on Sunday afternoon, as a high-profile tripleheader was shown over two channels. At 3:00, a second-string U.S. national team battled Mexico in the Gold Cup final on Fox Soccer Channel, while ESPN then showed the last two games of the inaugural World Football Challenge, featuring the Milan derby at 5:00 and Chelsea-Club America at 7:00. I probably wouldn't have moved from my couch once all afternoon, except I had scored sweet tickets to the AC-Inter game a couple months ago, planning to watch the others afterwards. While your final opinion of the games probably depends on your loyalties, the coverage afforded to each game clearly shows the priorities of American viewers, and it shows some worrying trends for the immediate future of American interest.

By now, you've undoubtedly read about the drubbing the USA got at the hands of Mexico in the Gold Cup final, and the media reports pretty much tell you the whole story. With young prospects like these, it's often pretty simple. Up until the final, their superior talent had sufficed for winning games, albeit often while getting their act together at the last opportunity. But of course, when you face strong competition like Mexico, you can't simply rest on a good pedigree, 

you also have to play cohesively and incisively. As the USA practically refused to take the chances offered, Mexico finally converted a 57' penalty to blow the gates of U.S. inexperience wide open. As they say, the rest is history.

The media absolutely should be this critical anytime the USA loses, and especially so when they lose this comprehensively, but not everything is as bad as this Gold Cup indicates. Most obviously, the final showcased the future stars of such superclubs as Arsenal, Tottenham, and Villareal... playing for Mexico, against the "finest" of the New England Revolution and Columbus Crew. This was our second-string squad, did we really expect anything different? Giovani dos Santos grew up at Barcelona, what the hell is Jay Heaps supposed to do to him?

A win (or not losing by 5 goals, for that matter) would have been nice, but the USA did what it intended in this tournament: evaluated the prospects of the team's future leaders. Stuart Holden's dynamic play and Troy Perkins' solid positioning indicate their bright futures, and judging by Holden's post-game tears, these guys are now committed to working even harder for the cause. Kyle Beckerman continues to imitate Xavi, able at this level to totally control a game's pace and unlock defenses. Meanwhile, Logan Pause hasn't demonstrated any reason to be on the field, while Robbie Rogers knows that he may want to find some sort of killer instinct or, you know, crossing ability whatsoever. We may have lost humiliatingly, and this blowout certainly restokes the rivalry, but it's not like the U.S. National Team suddenly took a giant step backwards.

At 5:00 was the Inter Milan - AC Milan clash, where I sat with 3 of my buddies in some great second tier seats. Even though the game and its crowd got strangely stale occasionally, the game was still amazing to attend, since these teams are so much more skilled and exciting than the only live alternative for Americans, the error-prone MLS. Plus, a fairly standard result was made more intriguing by signs of how each team has dealt with major departures.

Inter's ability to replace Zlatan Ibrahimovic was much clearer on the day, since new signing Diego Milito scored both goals in the 2-0 win. Despite losing two of their best strikers in Ibrahimovic and Hernan Crespo, Inter have pulled off two swap deals to maintain a stellar offensive presence through Milito, Thiago Motta, and the missing Samuel Eto'o. As opposed to an attack that looked static last year whenever Ibra had a bad day, Inter's multi-faceted offense looks positively dynamic this year. Moreover, they even made money out of all of this, mostly due to the ice-cold €45 million that came with Eto'o for Ibrahimovic. Inter have been shrewd players in this summer's market, selling high and buying low to maintain a strong squad.

AC Milan took a different approach to Kaka's departure, relying on a previous buy to rediscover his genius. Much has been written about Ronaldinho's inability to play with Kaka for Milan, and so now that Kaka belongs to both Jesus and Real Madrid, we're starting to see signs of the bucktoothed one's reemergence. With a couple of brilliant balls through, he showed that his singular vision has not left him, but whether his body can keep up is another question. He lost possession much more often than he did three years ago, and as my friend George remarked during the game, "I love watching him, but I'd be a nervous wreck if he was on my team." Then again, such things are

much easier to fix than mental lapses, and after all, it is still their preseason. He probably won't reach the dizzying heights of his world-dominating peak, but Milan is hoping that we could yet see those trademark free-kicks on a regular basis once again.

It's also worth mentioning briefly, I don't currently see anyone nearly as effective for Milan as Paolo Maldini was. Status as a club legend aside, he was a top-notch defender to his last minute for them, and nobody that they've bought seems good enough to take his place in the back. To the certain dismay of most Americans, Oguchi Onyewu looks out of his depth at the moment, getting burned on the first goal by Diego Milito, and Thiago Silva hasn't yet proved his ability to adjust to the pace of Europe either. While Inter seems to have already found offensive flow with their replacements, Milan's plan to recover from their departures is riskier at both ends of the pitch.

Chelsea and Club America concluded the tripleheader at 7:00. It was the deciding match of the World Football Classic, though judging by Chelsea's lineup, Carlo Ancelotti wasn't informed. Their starting lineup was partially comprised of young players such as Michael Mancienne and Sam Hutchinson, combined with some experienced steel such as Michael Essien, most of whom needed the extra games after spells on the sidelines last year. Fortunately for us viewers, the absence of some key Chelsea stars actually made this a more entertaining, balanced matchup.

Still, even the backups demonstrated eventually why its the entire team's mentality that makes Chelsea a feared squad. Their defining characteristic is often their power, a blend of size and speed that just wears down opponents, and this characterstic was evident in their victory. Defensively, Chelsea's defenders knocked the Club America attackers down often, as if just to prove that nobody would get by them untouched. It's a tactic often criticized by those such as Barcelona, but one that is inarguably effective. Offensively, constant set pieces proved their superior strength in the first half, and both goals in the second half showed that they frequently shrug off defenders to continue flowing moves, despite confrontation. Chelsea's mentality is why they won this preseason tournament.

 

So ended the World Football Challenge, part of an exciting Sunday tripleheader. Interestingly enough, did you notice how much coverage each event has gotten over the last week? The Gold Cup crowns the champion of our region, awarding bragging rights in our fiercest rivalry as a soccer nation, and yet America paid much more attention to the European preseason. Even I almost forgot that the final was on Sunday, so sparse was the coverage! All of this indicates that most of us prefer to follow European soccer, even over our own national team. This certainly makes some sense, given that people typically watch the highest quality entertainment available.

However, all of that changes once money becomes a factor, and soccer isn't yet popular enough for most people to subscribe to Fox Soccer Channel. All of that media coverage of the WFC was because ESPN was broadcasting the games, and as a popularly subscribed channel, people watched. The Champions League on ESPN has received similar advertising in recent years, and as such received similarly improved ratings. But, now that it's moving to FSC, how many people are going to pay the extra money to watch? My bet: not many that haven't subscribed already, and people are naturally going to veer away from the sport as the quality offered declines. Yes, ESPN softened the blow by picking up La Liga, but people are much more likely to watch if two world-class teams are playing, rather than just one. If you're skeptical about that, consider how likely you are to tune in to Real Madrid v. Sporting Gijon for 90 minutes.

Sunday showed that there is plenty of great soccer on American TV, and that there are plenty of people willing to watch it. But as with most things, money often divides those two truths, and television money is threatening to drive a wedge into soccer's growing popularity in America.

From the stands, the USA's inexperience seemed to impede their potential against Haiti

Last night I had the priviledge of sitting in Row 12 of Gillette Stadium in Foxboro, MA, for the USA's 2-2 draw with Haiti to conclude the group stage. Part of a tripleheader including the Revolution-Wizards MLS game and Honduras-Grenada Gold Cup tie, an absorbing match intimated a bright future for a few young stars, but showed that this U.S. second team needs more experience in matches such as these to be steadier and ready for more quality opponents.

After a miserable scoreless draw between the Revolution and Wizards of MLS that almost exclusively featured unsuccessful balls sent over-the-top, the national teams took the field. At just over 24,000, the crowd was somewhat disappointing, possibly due to being split fairly evenly between Americans, Haitians, and Hondurans. The biggest cheer during the introductions was reserved for Jay Heaps, a native of nearby Longmeadow, MA, and ironically enough, scattered boos were heard for Stuart Holden, longtime nemesis of the hometown Revolution as a key member of the Houston Dynamo. But by the final whistle, his contributions would prove vital, while Heaps would epitomize most of the rest of the U.S. squad in struggling with inexperience throughout the night.

From the opening kick, the U.S. looked dominant in possession, and good build-up play led to a perfect opening goal. Holden played an incisive ball through to Davy Arnaud, who finished expertly just past Haitian keeper Jean Dominique Zephirin into the left corner. Though he didn't receive any clear-cut chances the rest of the night, Arnaud played well overall, threatening the Haitian defense effectively in addition to scoring his first goal for the national team.

The U.S. showed a clear superiority in talent for the remainder of the first half, but they often got in their own way with mistakes that created unnecessary chances for Haiti. Holden represented the pick of the Americans' first-half offense, highlighted by a wonderful long-range volley in the 25th that dipped and struck the bottom of the crossbar, dropping in front of the goal line by inches. Numerous other chances in front of goal narrowly missed the frame, as the American offense was rarely in doubt.

However, the side's inexperience manifested mostly in defense. Defenders often looked unsure of themselves when dealing with men pressing forward, evident in Parkhurst's foul and subsequent yellow card in the 30th minute. Luis Robles showed the same lack of confidence, as his tentative parry of a saveable Fabrice Noel shot continued goalbound before he scrambled back to knock it away just in time.

Haiti punished this tentative approach swiftly after the second-half restart. Flying down the wing, Leonel Saint-Preux made an absolute mockery of defender Jay Heaps before firing a cross to the far post for Vaniel Sirin to finish with a stooping header. While Heaps looked totally lost trying to defend the deceptive winger, some of the blame undoubtedly falls on Parkhurst for uncharacteristically drifting from his mark during the play.

Further mistakes by inexperienced internationals led to the second goal, as Robles came out late and failed to effectively call off Jay Heaps. The native New Englander cleared the ball poorly to Mones Chery, who unleashed a thunderbolt into the left corner as Robles rushed back fruitlessly. While the shot would have been unstoppable even with perfect positioning, the chance itself was created by Robles' defensive temerity in hesitating to come out, along with Heaps' unfortunate clearance. Indeed, most of the Americans' problems came from players' inexperience with the national team, as the game's chief offenders were Parkhurst in his 7th national team appearance, along with Robles and Heaps in their debuts.

However, it is telling that the fightback was also led by a player with little international experience. Though Charlie Davies and Brian Ching brought experienced pressure and finishing ability when they were introduced as subs, they simply provided the threat of a conclusion to Stuart Holden's wonderful playmaking ability. Holden never missed a tackle, rarely lost possession with his masterful ball control, and created numerous chances for the entire team, aided by pinpoint passing from the ever-improving sub Kyle Beckerman.

For the rest of a scintillating second half, the teams went back and forth creating chances, but each team succesfully countered the other's blows. The USA had improved drastically at defending the runs from Saint-Preux and James Marcelin since the beginning of the half, no longer looking shockingly out of their depth. Meanwhile, the Haitian defense held strong, turning away numerous American chances, including one bold and selfless dive to block Davies' skilled chest trap and volley. Though the back-and-forth nature of play slowly gave way to desperate U.S. pressure, their unbeaten record in Gold Cup group play looked legitimately threatened as time dwindled away.

Yet Holden had been the sole player the USA could count on all game to give the team what it needed, whether it was a defensive stop or a controlling presence, and his 30-yard rocket did not disappoint the Americans' need for an equalizer. His strike in the second minute of injury time was both beautiful and powerful, taking his tally to 2 goals for the tournament, and indeed for his fledgling international career. Given his total control over the match and importance to this Gold Cup squad, he will certainly not lack more opportunities in the near future.

Holden's assurance and dominance were rarely found in the rest of this relatively novice team, but the good news is that such nervousness is the result of a collective lack of experience, which disappears more and more with every important contest like this. Their skill was evident in most of the USA's offensive play, and since mistakes are natural while adjusting to the international pace, nobody should believe that this was the best that this group has to offer. As Holden proves, the future is somewhat distant but brilliantly positive.

So close, and getting closer

For a tournament where the United States played the best soccer in its history and got more people to care about the national team than ever before, there are surely millions of Americans disappointed at the conclusion of the 2009 Confederations Cup. The closer you come to winning, the harder it is emotionally to lose, and this is a heart-wrenching loss for the entire nation. However, “no pain no gain” is a favorite saying of many fitness gurus, and the pain of this loss can be the beginning of an extraordinary period of development for the US National Team.

The Americans surely heard every doubter’s claim that their performance against Spain was a fluke, and the first half against Brazil was their response. The USA bossed play from the beginning, and the first goal by Clint Dempsey was deserved, his deceitful redirection fooling Julio Cesar in the 9th minute. Thereafter, the Americans kept possession and worried Brazil with high-octane offense, and any minimal Brazilian pressure was masterfully dealt with by the American defense, marshaled by Tim Howard in one of his best ever displays. The second goal was a reward for their continued aggression, as beautiful play between Davies and Donovan demonstrated how their pace troubled the Brazilians all night, and resulted in a wonderful 26th minute finish by the captain. A third goal would’ve put the night away when a cross floated in for Jozy Altidore shortly afterwards, but the 19-year-old inexplicably failed to continue his run towards goal. Some late Brazilian pressure ended the half, but the Americans were still dominant overall.

Unfortunately, the end of the first half was all too indicative of how the second would go. 40 seconds from the whistle, Luis Fabiano received a pass at the top of the box, and despite Jay DeMerit’s good positioning, the ball found its way through his legs and past Tim Howard. Constant Brazilian attacks would have found the equalizer shortly thereafter, if not for the unflinching Howard, who showed that he is world-class with save after brilliant save. He can even be credited for preventing the would-be (should-be?) goal by Kaka in the 60th minute, as he never gave up on the ball and punched it out before the linesman could see that it had crossed the line. The U.S. couldn’t ride Tim Howard forever though, and Luis Fabiano’s headed goal in the 73rd was followed by one in the 84th minute by Maicon. The winner came off the 9th Brazilian corner after an entire half of offensive pressure, showing that while the U.S. put in a fantastic defensive display in the first half, it takes a full 90 minutes to win against the best.

In some ways, there are positives to losing the final. A win would have papered over the cracks of a less than flawless tournament, a misleading conclusion to inflate American egos. The destination ahead, World Cup 2010, is more important, and victory over Brazil would have convinced many that we are ready to win next year. Team USA and its fans would have preferred a championship here, of course, but when the team's strengths are gloriously prominent and the weaknesses painfully obvious, the entire nation knows where the team must improve in the coming year. Rest assured: despite ultimate disappointment, America has learned much that can finally solve the 20-year riddle of the US National Team.

Our four-pronged attack causes opposing defenses fits
The best decision that Bob Bradley made this tournament was to insert Charlie Davies into the lineup and shift Dempsey and Donovan out wide. When the three of them are on the pitch with Jozy, opposing teams have great difficulty in containing the athleticism and pace of all four players. The dam always busts somewhere, and the team has benefitted from multiple goals in all three games where this strategy is employed. Conor Casey isn’t 

good enough in possession to be considered our first sub when Brian Ching is healthy, and his return will aid the team in closing out games with a lead.

The midfield is crowded, but basically settled
The wings are mostly decided, as playing Donovan and Dempsey essentially as wingers causes the most problems offensively. It’s also worth mentioning that as long as we aren’t in desperate need of wing players, DaMarcus Beasley shouldn’t be selected until he proves his talent again at club level. The middle is where things get crowded. Ricardo Clark is usually selected as an incredible defensive presence, with Sacha Kljestan as his immediate backup. Michael Bradley and Benny Feilhaber are both playmakers who can change the game with one brilliant pass, and both are easily good enough for inclusion. Bradley has been the choice mostly on his superior defensive play, but he showed a propensity for bad tackles against Spain, so Feilhaber should always be in the squad.

Our back four is set
If the resolute display against Spain didn’t prove it, the dominant first half against Brazil should: Bocanegra, DeMerit, Onyewu, and Spector are the best back four that the USA has. On the wings, Bocanegra and Spector have pace that they can exploit while remaining defensively responsible, and both can whip crosses into the attacking third. In the middle, Onyweu and DeMerit proved that they win every ball in the air, and their positioning while man-marking is impeccable. Their fitness needs to improve, as that was the major factor behind a disastrous second half against Brazil,

but when they have wind, the back line proved nearly impenetrable.

We rely too much on Tim Howard
As amazing as he was throughout 180 minutes against Spain and Brazil, nobody should expect any keeper to sustain that type of form over an entire tournament. The point isn’t that Tim Howard isn’t capable of playing at his best for that long, it’s that by approaching a game expecting such brilliance, the team is just begging to leak goals. Opposing teams can’t be allowed as many shots on goal as they’ve gotten in the last two games.

The U.S. has the talent to win a major championship
The USA beat the former best team in the world, and nearly beat the new one. Moreover, neither was a fluke, and the “nearly” would have been removed if not for an exhausted team. This team had the talent to win the Confederations Cup, they just didn’t have the energy. A World Cup run is more exhausting indeed, but it is much easier to get players in shape than it is to develop their talent. The USA just proved itself capable of going toe-to-toe with the two favorites for 2010, and with this nucleus of talent, the USA can definitely challenge for major honors, starting next year.

The U.S. isn't consistent enough mentally to win a major championship
The USA was mentally sharp for 225 minutes of Confederations Cup play, from the opening whistle against Egypt to the halftime whistle against Brazil. While these are proud results to cherish for Americans, if the team wants anything more than occasional results, the players need to stay aware for the other 225 minutes, instead of just going through the motions when they get tired at the ends of games. Key moments include not closing down Giuseppe Rossi on his equalizer, not marking Maicon on his opener in the group stage, DaMarcus Beasley’s horrendous missed touch that led to Brazil’s second goal in the group stage, and poorly marking Lucio on his winner in the final. These opposing players are good, but the USA has proved that as a team, they are just as good. There are no more excuses.

Bob Bradley isn’t exempt from the above criticism
If a team isn’t disciplined, it’s most likely due to their coach not instilling discipline. This is a vague criticism without much proof, but it’s nobody else’s responsibility but Bob Bradley’s to ensure that his team doesn’t make those 

mistakes consistently. More troubling is the occasionally terrible game management that Bradley showed during the tournament. The biggest mistakes, in chronological order: sticking with Beasley for way too long despite his miserable showing against Costa Rica, taking off Jozy against Egypt when we still needed a goal, and most importantly, putting on Bornstein and Kljestan in the final. Feilhaber and Jozy were gassed, but putting on a 5th defender and a guy who got a red card the last time he played this team were not solutions at all. To clarify, Bob Bradley is absolutely the right coach for this team and he should not be fired, but he has to manage the team better in pressure situations.

This team isn't content with anything less than total success
Second place is the best that the U.S. has ever done in a FIFA tournament. No American gave a shit about that at the end of the final. From the heartbroken faces at the whistle, to Dempsey crying after receiving his runner-up medal and Bronze Ball, it’s clear that nobody is satisfied with anything less than winning. Donovan articulated it best, saying that "We're at the point where we don't

want respect, we want to win.” This team wants everything it can get its hands on, and now it knows that such success is achievable.

Americans will care about soccer if the national team performs like this
Though it's hardly scientific, if you took a look at your Facebook before, during, or after the final, you’d see countless friends of yours who don’t usually care about soccer, saying “Go USA!” or something similar. It’s about more than just soccer: Americans are proud of their country, and the patriotism shown towards the national team is something that MLS can never replicate. The Confederations Cup put soccer all over ESPN, CNN, any news outlet you can think of. Generations of young Americans are affected by all of that coverage: it affects their choices of sport, their opinions on sport, their desires for sport. The growth of soccer as a recognized sport in America starts with success like this.

Always Believe, or Why I Fear Being a Journalist

At the kickoff of the USA-Egypt game, you know what I wanted to write? I was going to call out Bob Bradley for playing almost all of the starters in the "last" game against Egypt, instead of giving younger players like Freddy Adu a chance to prove themselves on a grand stage. I was going to make a case that Bob Bradley grossly mishandled multiple aspects of this tournament, continuing in the opportunity-squandering tradition of Copa America 2007. In short, like many Americans, I wanted some kind of change, in coach, players, and tactics.

I wasn't trying to condemn us as a soccer playing nation. I honestly thought that this was the best move going forward, that the team from the first two games was too far away from succeeding in a major tournament. I assumed that our best chance of developing as a national team was to focus on the next generation. I gave up.

 

Want to know where I was during the first half of the Spain game? Working. 

Understandable, I couldn't get off from work on short notice, so I taped the game and ignored all updates. What baffles me is why I decided to then go to a museum, instead of rushing home to watch the game as soon as possible.

I guess I was in no rush because while I was eager to see my team play the world's best, in no way did I ever think we had a chance at actually beating them. I just wanted to analyze how we played against such quality opposition, almost as an academic exercise. I gave up.

You hate my attitude by this point, right? Think I refused to have faith? Well, you're right, and about more than you think too. You couldn't find an article before Egypt-USA that didn't mention opinions such as how our "slim hopes" had "likely ended" and how the team was "regressing before our eyes". You could barely find anyone who, however bullishly or misguidedly, had confidence that the United States would find a way to win against Spain. Sure, we hoped. I hoped against all hope that we could pull one out, dreaming of the greatest result anybody has ever seen by the Stars and Stripes. But nobody even gave their own hopes credibility or possibility, "knowing" by common sense that we dreamt foolishly.

 

The rest of the media and the nation gave up on our team. I was wrongfully more critical of the past out of sheer exasperation, but our expectations for the future were all the same: the U.S. has no shot. It wasn't just me: we all gave up.

Except for the nationals themselves, of course. You won't find a quote from one of them that even hints at any lack of self-belief. Of course, they're trained not to give anything but positive indications, but before the game you could even hear the resolution in their voices and words. They believed that their efforts were worth something, not only morally but practically, giving them the ability to succeed. Witness Landon Donovan: "Good team, big challenge, looking forward to it... We're gonna go for it."

As journalists, it's our job to analyze the big picture, to see every aspect of an issue and come to a conclusion. In this case, the correct conclusion was that Spain were heavy favorites. It is, however, a shame that the very job description makes few allowances for that confident, brash, human emotion of self-belief. Objectively, there is no way in journalism to justify such a fanatic outlook in the face of such an immense task. But

undoubtably, it is that very attitude that propelled the USA to its shining hour.

If Michael Bradley seemed like he was a bit unthankful for the result handed down by Brazil when speaking after the Egypt game, we should forgive him. "All the fucking experts in America, everybody who thinks they know about soccer, they can all look at the score tonight and let's see what they have to say now," he said at the time. "Nobody has any respect for what we do, for what goes on on the inside, so let them all talk now."

He couldn't have known that his statement was premature. He couldn't have known that it would have been the perfect response to the world media after a victory over Spain that will give everyone pause before writing off the U.S. again, a victory that could be the first step towards world recognition and respect. No, the U.S. didn't know that at the time. They just believed it.

Maybe as fans, we should all put aside probabilities and analysis, and just start believing. After all, that's what the U.S. team did, and look where they are now.

Wow. Go USA!

Well, go ahead and call me an idiot for assuming that the "nearly impossible" meant "impossible". I plan on writing a full retrospective about the team once the tournament is over, but let me just say it now for immediate effect: this team has unbelievable heart. The fightback against Egypt definitely ranks as one of the best "I can't believe this is happening, but I love it" moments in recent memory. This spirit doesn't solve all of our problems, but it is almost indescribably beautiful to watch such an intangible quality at work.

I'll leave the team summary to the retrospective, but let me write one sentence each about individual players from this game. In no particular order:

Charlie Davies has the scrappiness needed in front of goal to play at this level.

Clint Dempsey should focus more on simple play than his fancy tricks.

Michael Bradley and Benny Feilhaber are the two best playmakers that the USA has.

Landon Donovan still has the pace and skill to make things happen, but he needs to be more selfish in front of goal.

Conor Casey has no place on this team when Brian Ching is healthy.

Ricardo Clark has proven that he is vital to this team as a holding midfielder.

Freddy Adu needs a chance to prove himself on a bigger stage than underage teams and CONCACAF games, which he'll only get by playing regularly at club level.

The backline has incredible depth, and is capable of competing with the world's best when focused.

More than anything else, the team as a whole needs discipline in order to be a contender.

More to come after the next rounds.

USA-Brazil, Live Diary

The U.S. plays Brazil today in a must-win game, to retain any chance of advancing in the Confederations Cup. Meanwhile, Brazil looks to seal their passage into the next round with a win. Here are my thoughts on the game, updated live in diary form:

0': Brazil has looked so good recently. Aside from one two-minute lapse, they were in great form against Egypt, so this is going to be very difficult for the U.S. to shut them down while creating enough chances for a goal. I have yet to see any American show a defensive display that can stop Kaka, and that might be the key to the game. We can do it, but it's going to take a breakthrough performance.

0': I like the choice of Kljestan in the middle to account for Ricardo Clark's absence. He's creative enough to keep pressure on the offense, but there will be few sacrifices defensively. Great choice.

5': Where's the foul there? If this creates any problems, the U.S. has legitimate complaint.

7' (U.S. 0-1 Brazil, Felipe Melo 7'): And of course, a poor officiating decision makes us pay. Unbelievable that we're already behind, but aside from the initial decision, I'm not blaming the refs. No way somebody of Spector's caliber should ever let Felipe Melo get position on him, even if the delivery was absolutely beautiful.

11': Well, this free kick looks familiar, it's basically the exact same spot. If we keep giving these away in dangerous positions like this, we're in for a long night. Good low cross by Brazil, they're still threatening.

20' (U.S. 0-2 Brazil, Robinho 20'): Woah, what a goal. Terrible missed touch off our corner, but let's give Brazil credit: that counterattack is why they're Brazil, and we're not. Brazil has been rampant the entire game, and the U.S. is playing no part. This game, and the tournament, looks to be already past us.

24': These couple of lost TV signals worry me. One of the biggest pre-tournament worries was that there wouldn't be sufficient power to service all of the television crews, lights, and everything else. Dunno if that's the reason here, but if this keeps happening here with 8 teams, I worry for the 32-team version. We can't have a repeat of Germany-Turkey from Euro 2008, I'm still pissed I didn't see those goals.

25': Alexi Lalas: "DaMarcus Beasley is having a bad game thus far." I could've told you that 30 minutes ago, he doesn't have the stones for big games.

35': Onyewu picks up a yellow card. They just showed the Brazil bench, and I can't see a single player there who wouldn't be starting for us. Brazil is still bossing the game.

42': We're finally seeing some decent offensive play by the U.S., but the final touch is just not threatening on every cross and ball through. And we're still playing way too loose defensively, Beasley is atrocious right now, even JP Dellacamera says so. The U.S. is fortunate that Gilberto Silva and Felipe Melo missed their chances.

Halftime: U.S. 0-2 Brazil. The announcers discussed a great point at the end of the half. In the tournament, the U.S. ranks 1st by a long shot in long balls played, but well behind the leaders in passes completed. It's really showing here, it seems like the U.S. plays it forward in the air every time they have the ball, and as fast as Donovan and Dempsey are, it's so easy for the Brazil back four to clean that up. Take a little more time on the ball, keep possession, and be patient. It might be the only way to keep players like Kaka off the ball, because they're the ones tearing us apart right now.

46': Conor Casey in for DaMarcus Beasley, thank God. Back underway.

51': The U.S. is already looking better. No more long balls to be found, and the build-up is creating chances on the ground. Conor Casey is still giving the ball away 50% of the time as always (1-for-2, with a poor chest trap), but it's his great ball back that gives Jozy the best chance of the game. Reasons to be optimistic.

56': Dellacamera discussing the Vuvuzela, and... hold on.

56': Kljestan gets a red for that tackle? I have two problems with this. A) Worse tackles have received only a yellow, even within this tournament. It's a dumb challenge, and I understand that it's the referee's discretion, but the U.S. is getting the shaft from officials on every single marginal decision. You can see it from the Onyewu foul that led to the first goal, right down to this red card. It might be the U.S.' reputation for physical play or what, I don't honestly know. Yes, I definitely have some leftover bitterness from the Italy game when saying this, but it was evident in that game, too. Part B of this thought in a little bit.

61': Feilhaber for Altidore? What are you trying to do, stem the bleeding? If you lose, it doesn't matter how much you lose by, you're still out! Just go for the win, bring Feilhaber on for somebody else! Bob Bradley continues to make poor substitutions, and it is positively killing the U.S.' chances. So frustrating.

62' (U.S. 0-3 Brazil, Maicon 62'): Great play in the box by Brazil to create that chance for Maicon, and an excellent finish. Obviously, the red card basically led to this point, but the tactical shift by Bradley to sink back is letting Brazil take back the entire run of play. Nothing but pride left to play for now.

68': OK, part B from that thought on Kljestan in the 56th: I don't know if the official was just attending to Ramires first, but it was such a late red card, he seemed to give it just because Ramires went off injured. Shame that this influenced the decision. Thinking it over, I'm starting to understand that the referee's position is absolutely defensible, but I still think it's harsh on a player who is clearly going for ball, and who hasn't had a bad tackle to that point. This goes for the Clark tackle too: soccer's a quick and rough game, players sometimes mistime their tackles, so you shouldn't send somebody off for an unintentional bad tackle at the first offense.

75': Dempsey plays around with fancy turns way too much. It's pretty to watch, but he nearly always loses the ball when he starts down that road. This is coming from one of his biggest fans: for the sake of possession, he needs to stop.

83': Great rip by Feilhaber off the bottom of the crossbar, this is exactly why he needs to be in the game from the beginning. Still should have come on for someone other than Jozy though.

89': And another one off the crossbar, this one a header from a corner by Casey. At least the U.S. is still going forward, even if nothing's at stake anymore.

90': Meant to say this back in the 56th before the red card, JP Dellacamera was talking about the vuvuzela horns that are omnipresent in the background. Apparently they're giving these away for free in the stadiums? I'll keep saying it, those things drown out all typical chants and noise that you typically associate with great soccer atmospheres. Good to hear that communications companies are getting upset, and they're trying to have them banned from the World Cup.

90'+3: Final whistle, U.S. 0-3 Brazil. The U.S. gets totally outclassed from the opening whistle, and key lapses on defense and in possession lead to goals for the Samba Boys in the first half. Much better play in the second half from the Americans, but the red card to Kljestan leaves them playing a man down for the second consecutive game, ending any hopes.

As I said after the Italy game, it's a matter of discipline. We absolutely must stop making the dumb mistakes we continue to make, which in this case were poor man-marking and missed touches off our own corners. Our tackling decisions are included in that. As much as I will always say that these two red cards in this tournament were harsh, if that's the way the World Cup will be called, we have to stop whining and adjust, myself included. Neither was necessary to prevent a goal, they were simply attempts to make up for lost possession, and that is the biggest indictment on our decision-making.

Right now, the biggest obstacle to our development isn't our physical skill, it's our mental awareness. This tournament is past us, but we need to start correcting this weakness as soon as possible, against a tricky Egypt side.

Questionable calls, occasional errors, and an expatriate doom the U.S. against Italy

My running thoughts on the U.S.-Italy game, not exactly in diary form:

--- First 30 minutes looked dead even, with equal possession and maybe Italy blowing a couple chances they could have had.

--- The red card against Ricardo Clark still baffles me. That was Clark’s only poor challenge, it was unintentional, and Grosso only got a yellow after intentionally elbowing Donovan two minutes later. Hell, Chiellini didn’t get even a scolding on the penalty, and he was the last man! I honestly can’t see a single way this can be justified, and believe me, I’m trying. Horrendous decision.

--- There were plenty of reasons to be optimistic at halftime, but the 1-0 was misleading. The U.S. had been riding their luck before the first goal, notable examples being the early shanked header by Legrottaglie and lucky offsides on the Bornstein own-goal. Italy had the better run of play, and it showed in the second half.

--- Jozy Altidore is the best American chance at developing a world-class striker, but at moments like his early touchback to Donovan in the box, he shows that he’s got a ways to go. More than the missed touch, his choice to give up a goal-scoring chance shows a worrying reluctance to shoot. He’s only 19, but with his increasing national experience, age can’t be an excuse for much longer.

--- Ugh, JP Dellacamera: “Everybody remembers Zambrotta from the World Cup, with the Zidane incident.” Uh, no, that was Materazzi. Maybe I’m the only one who thinks the higher-ups should have their facts straight on one of the single biggest soccer news stories of this decade.

--- Wow, what a strike by Rossi. I have no problem with Rossi playing for Italy, even if I wish he had decided to play for us. If you can come in and score that first wondergoal for Italy in a major tournament, go right on ahead. God knows you have a better chance of winning major tournaments that way, so from a professional standpoint, more power to you.

--- When we’re down a goal in the 72^nd minute, why in HELL are we taking off Feilhaber, both one of our best playmakers and defenders, for Beasley, who got totally emasculated against Costa Rica a couple weeks ago? I’d love to hear Bob Bradley’s explanation for that.

--- I give up. How is it not a penalty to jump on Donovan’s back as he’s going up for a header in the box? This decision infuriates me more than anything else, because there is no doubt in my mind that if that’s called correctly, we stop pressing forward and this ends 2-2. If this game doesn’t deserve to be looked at by FIFA, I don’t know what does.

--- I love Charlie Davies because I watched him in high school, but in that situation, Jozy puts that 90^th minute header away. Unfortunate.

Despite some of my criticisms, the U.S. played a good game overall. Some terrible decisions went against us to kill off most of our chances, and we gave them a couple opportunities ourselves, but we did very well with 10 men for an hour. The main problem is our habit of making a couple of dumb mistakes per game, such as Onyewu’s indecision on the second goal. If we want to beat the best (and this shows that we can), these types of errors must stop, because the best teams will make you pay. The game against Brazil should show us how far we might progress towards that aim.