A Second Beginning

Its been awhile ( OK, a long while) since The Soccer Yoda has written a post. But recently some major events have occurred in the world of soccer, especially in the United States. A number of soccer fans surprised the Soccer Yoda by asking what were his views on the change in national coach and the events which led to that change. Frankly, I was somewhat surprised and flattered that there were those out there in the soccer world who remembered this blog, so I dusted off the computer and relearned to hunt and peck with more than just my thumbs. It’s a second beginning for our new ( sort of) national coach and a second beginning for the Soccer Yoda and this blog. So……lets take a look at the recent national team results and their effect on our national coach position.

On November 8 of this year the USA played Mexico in Columbus, Ohio in the first game of the “Hexagonal”. This is the final qualifying round of matches to decide who goes to Russia in 2018 to represent our region in the World Cup. There are 6 nations left , hence the name. There are 42 countries with teams in the Confederation of North,Central American and Caribbean Association Football or CONCACAF, so it would seem that it is an accomplishment just to get through the several preliminary rounds to reach the final six. And if our region was like Europe or South America it would be exactly that. But, given that the majority of those 42 nations have a population about the size of New Haven, Connecticut, the USA is absolutely expected to make the top six . As a matter of fact, finishing in the top two (along with Mexico) has become absolutely expected ever since the soccer boom in this country started producing decent  players in greater numbers than somebody like say… Bermuda. In order to make it to the World Cup without an additional playoff game, we need to finish in the top three of the six. In light of our international results in this century, this should not be a challenge.

Although playing Mexico in the first game would seem a tough task, the fact that the game was a home match for the USA created an expectation of victory and not just by any score either. The last 4 matches against Mexico in Columbus, Ohio had all been 2-0 wins for the Americans, so cheers of “Dos a Cero” rang throughout the stadium before the start of the game.Then the USA came out in a 3-5-2 formation and the game took on a tone very different from those notable American victories.

One of the knocks on Jurgen Klinsmann during his tenure as our national coach had been that he tended to put players in positions for which they are unsuited. One rational for this is that he had a formation that works best and into which he must fit his players. During the 2014 World Cup cycle he used a 4-2-3-1 system very effectively and although all players were not the best fit for the formation, they grew familiar with it – they learned to play it – they knew who was where and how their teammates would react to the game in that formation. But since then Klinsmann had tinkered with several different formations and didn’t settle on anything in particular. The 3-5-2 was very different from anything the team had played before and they had only practiced it for a few days prior to the Mexico match.

3-5-2-formation-tactics

It has been said that the wing-backs are the key to the 3-5-2. When advancing the ball in possession from the back line the wing-backs must get wide and be available for outlet passes that start the attack. When the team gets the ball near the opposing goal the wing-backs must be in advanced wing positions, ready to provide width to the attack and both supply and receive crosses. On defense the wing-backs must cover the deep wide spaces to prevent the opposition from exploiting the narrow positioning of the centerbacks, in effect providing 5 back defenders at that moment. The American wing-backs vs Mexico were Tim Chandler on the right and Fabian Johnson on the left. These guys are decent players when positioned correctly ( especially Johnson), but against Mexico, in this formation, they were lost. They didn’t provide for outlet passes which forced the USA centerbacks into central passes and long balls which lost possession. They were not in wide offensive areas very often and when they were the balls they played in were mostly misplaced. And they disappeared in those wide deep defensive spaces which allowed the Mexicans to play from those spaces without pressure. Mexico grabbed the momentum from the start and it was only a matter of time before they scored and not that much time either…..like 20 minutes. At the 26 minute mark Michael Bradley and Jermaine Jones , the American central midfielders, took advantage of a break in the play and asked Klinsmann to change the formation. He did and the US got back into the game playing a much more familiar 4-4-2. The score was equal late in the game when another tactical mistake cost the USA a chance to gain at least a draw.

The common method of defending corner kicks is to place a defender on each post thus reducing the area of the goal that the keeper needs to protect. Some coaches prefer to leave one post or both posts without a defender which adds to the number of players which can cover attackers in front of the goal. Obviously, if an offensive player can still get his head on a corner kick against a goal defended with open posts then the open-post strategy is worthless. This is one of those times so common in sports when an uncommon tactic is a genius idea if it works and a goat idea if it doesn’t. So coach Klinsmann had the USA leave the far post open on a Mexican corner in the 89th minute and Rafael Marquez hit a brilliant shot with the side of his head into the open post area to win the game. So it was another mark against Jurgen’s coaching which cost the US the game and ended an unbeaten-at-home world cup qualifying streak that started in 2001. After the game Jurgen blamed the failure of the 3-5-2 on his midfield, particularly Bradley and Jones. This certainly did not go over well with those two or the team as a whole. It wasn’t very smart on Klinsmanns part, especially considering the caliber of the next opponent and the motivation needed by the team for that game, coming only 4 days after the loss to Mexico.

marquez-corner Mexico scores a corner against an undefended post to beat the USA.

The next game in the Hex was against Costa Rica and in this match our role was reversed when compared to playing Mexico in Ohio. This time the USA was the visitor playing away to a nation that we have not had any success with when playing in their home stadium. Given the loss to Mexico, one would think that the Americans would be sky high to both A) break the Costa Rica away game jinx and B) get our first win in this round so as to put us in a good position going into the rest of the games. Instead the Americans came out slow, again unable to maintain possession and almost lackadaisical on defense even in the preferred 4-4-2 setup. The result was a 4-0 shellacking by a team that, while competitive with the USA, certainly is not four goals better than our team under most any other circumstance. It was very obvious that Klinsmann was not able to motivate this team to play their best AND added to the tactical and psychological mistakes made in and after the Mexico match AND the controversial stances that Jurgen has taken during the last couple years including the Landon Donovan World Cup Drama, his comments about MLS vs European experience, his seeming preference for dual-citizen players trained in Europe over USA developed players ………well..the writing was on the proverbial wall.

With the change of national coach coming in the middle of the Hexagonal round, the job of replacing coach Klinsmann took on some definite prerequisites. The next matches are in March and , to be sure, the new coach has one specific goal……to get the United States into the 2018 World Cup. It would be nice if the USA could also have a decent performance at that World Cup, but first things must be first. Given the short preparation time before March the new coach should    1. Be familiar with our present players and prospective players.   2.Be familiar ( being experienced would be even better) with our competition in CONCACAF and the challenges of playing away in their home stadiums.   3.Have experience coaching a national team with its unique circumstances.   4.(Optional but preferred) Know the soccer culture of our country and its ups and downs.                                   This list narrows the number of candidates down to a very few ( like maybe 3) and one just signed a contract to coach in the English Premier League. So that left former USA coach Bruce Arena as the most obvious and possibly only choice. Bruce was the national coach from 1998 to 2006. His record of 78-28-27 , a quarterfinal finish in the 2002 World Cup and an American #4 FIFA ranking makes him the most successful American national coach ever. Arena has a much more subdued character than Jurgen Klinsmann and is known for his seriousness about his craft. He has had overall success at every coaching position he has pursued , but a poor performance in the 2006 World Cup cost him his spot with the national team. He has until March to gain the confidence of the USA team and to put together enough wins to get us to Russia. Lets hope his 2nd beginning as USA coach is successful in accomplishing his singular goal of an American presence at the World Cup in 2018.

arena

 


3 Comments on “A Second Beginning”

  1. julianfriend3 says:

    Thanks for the summary of the tactical side of the Mexico fiasco, Al. The writing was on the wall indeed. And you can’t keep pushing players in front of the bus. Bradley is very professional n the press, but I imagine privately he was fuming. Perhaps JK should have been fired a year earlier? I reckon that since he was hand-picked by Gulati, he was given a pass. Kudos to Gulati for putting US soccer first when the moment called for it. Another question: is it wise to keep a coach beyond one World Cup cycle? (Arena went from hero to goat…..and the second WC did it.) Why are we still fighting this European bias? Klinsmann feasted on that theme ad nauseum.

    Like

    • socceryoda says:

      Julian, I think the positive results in the Copa tournament extended Jurgen’s time as national coach. And, yes…..he was probably given more time given the investment that was made in picking and supporting him.The World Cup cycle question is a good one….keeping a coach who has gotten results has certainly worked for Germany…..not so well for many others.Sounds like a topic for a future Soccer Yoda post! Thanks for reading!

      Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s