World

North America

USA

Player Ratings vs Venezuela

May 26th, 2006 | By: Daryl | 30 Comments »

As always, player ratings are up for debate:

Howard: 7 -apart from when he was lobbed and Gooch rescued him, Howard looked rock solid. great acrobatic save from the free kick, and looked very comfortable taking crosses and corners (which is often pinpointed as his weakness)

Albright: 6 -looked comfortable in possession, putting a couple of good crosses but not always in position defensively. red shirts went past him once or twice and he failed to get out with the other 3 defenders for one off-side trap.

Bocanegra: 7 -very very unlucky with the red card, so much so that i’m prepared to ignore it (FIFA may feel otherwise, so he’ll miss the Latvia game). The speedy Gonzalez exposed Boca’s relative lack of pace, but still only went by him once thanks to some well timed, well executed tackles. while he didn’t get forward as often as lewis would, he did provide a solid base for Convey to dribble up the left wing. with Gibbs out, I’m happy for Boca to be the reserve left back.

Conrad 6 not terrible, but could have cost us a goal when his man got away from him on that corner kick. wore the armband and stepped up to be the defensive organiser. on the other hand the defence didn’t look all that well organised, and his distriburion was poor.

Onyewu 8 made some very noticeable interceptions, blocks, headers etc. i’m always amazed how mobile he is for such a massive guy, he was always on hand to decisively deal with any trouble. he already leads by example but i’d like to see Gooch step and be the organizer.

Dempsey: 7 -aggressive start, setting the tempo for the game, but then he slowly disappeared until that excellent late run into the box for another headed goal. liked his dance too. failed to get the better of his man down the right, but put in his share of tackles.

Convey: 8- weaved between Venezuelan defenders like a slalom skier all night, and it was his cross from the left that provided Ching’s goal. it’s pretty rare to see someone get into a crossing position with such regularity but his final ball was random, veering between lethal and lame. also put in some defensive work, which i hope Arena noticed.

Olsen: 5 -i can sympathise. with Wolff pushing on to joing the forwards Beninho was esentially alone in central midfield. but his distribution was below standard, he didn’t stem enough Venezualen counter attacks, and when he received the ball from Onyewu or Conrad he usually played it right back to them, instead of taking the ball and being positive. would do better alongside another midfielder (Reyna, O’Brien, Mastro) and is essentially the fourth choice central mid.

Wolff: 6- not as anonymous as tuesday night, and showed his good first touch. but even when he did something impressive (like when he beat two men, then nutmegged another) the end result was still him getting muscled out of possession.

Johnson: 7 -good speed, composure and cross for Dempsey’s header. sometimes looked very dangerous with the ball at his feet, but only when facing the right way. still not great with his back to a defender. also spent too much time on the floor for such a big guy, though a lot of them were genuine fouls so credit him for winning plenty free kicks. after arena called him out for a lack of aggression i’m concerned that this is the most aggressive performance he can produce.

Ching: 8 -yes, that’s a high rating but given the pressure on him personally (some not very positive press), and on US strikers in general (espcially after the Morocco game) his determined performance was exactly what was needed. he had that extra bit of selfishness (like when he went for goal instead of looking for Johnson) and worked hard to win some free kicks. apart from the goal he got across the front of the Venezualen defenders twice more for similar chances, drawing saves from the keeper. will never look classy, but if he can keep getting shots on goal i’m happy.

Subs:

DaMarcus Beasley:5 -disappointing. good effort again, but he just lacks that spark and confidence to beat a man we used to take for granted.

Landon Donovan: 6 -not sure how intentional that pass to Johnson was for Dempsey’s goal, but lets give him the benefit of the doubt, especially given how quickly he reacted, charging in ready for the return pass. surprisingly poor on set pieces. still, good to see him get a quick 25 minute run out, keep him sharp.

Eddie Lewis: not enough time to rate but one the ball well in our corner.

Michael Bradley: only had around 3 minutes but looked confident taking the ball down the right. the future looks bright.

Tags: USA

USA World Cup RSS Feed

Comments

Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 30 comments.

Read the rest of the comments

By Kapcro | May 27th, 2006 at 7:31 am

I have to agree with you Chuck. I said after Jamaica that the team doesn’t have cohesion. The team play is lacking. You have players stepping up and the rest of the team standing still throughout the games. Playmaking was better but then it was Venezuela. Second half they started to let down defensively against a team that isn’t sure what a net is for, can’t do that against the big dogs. Convey has shown his stuff and will come through with spirited play against Latvia, you can’t deny him a spot. Donovan-the great bald hope- hasn’t shown a thing and seems to be sleepwalking in games. Gooch is a bright surprise. He has size, talent and plays with good poise. Overall still mid-level ratings.

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 7:35 am

IMHO:

Brian Ching displayed the attitude that the US has been lacking recently. When he turns to goal, he’s thinking about scoring, not finding somebody to pass to.

I’ll admit that his touch was off a couple of times, but that he was pushing too hard to impress Bruce with Eddie Johnson on the field at the same time.

We can lament about whether or not Twellman should be part of the 23, but the fact is that he’s not. So, let’s take a look at who will be going to Germany.

If I’ve got to decide between Eddie Johnson or Josh Wolff or Brian Ching as a sub for McBride late in the game, I’ll take Ching. We’ve got guys who can run fast at defenders and try a pass. I want someone who’ll put himself in the middle of the box and try to score.

Posted from United States

By Kapcro | May 27th, 2006 at 7:38 am

I also agree with Daryl’s assessment of Howard. Like his size and showed he can take up a good part of the net. Acrobatic save was highlight material. He also showed he can direct the show when neccessary. I would go with that rating Daryl gave him.

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 7:42 am

At this point, if I had to pick one field player to build the next American team, it’d be Gooch.

Last night, Convey showed why he deserves the starting spot on the left. He even managed some defense, which we’ll need against Czech Rep. in the first match.

Daryl, your comments about each player were, once again, well done. Not much for me to argue there. I do have to say that numerical ratings are hard. I can’t see giving anyone less than a 5 or 6, but then that makes a 1-10 system useless.

Posted from United States

By Kapcro | May 27th, 2006 at 7:48 am

Cajun I was going to post that Ching looks like good sub material because of this game and his effort. He had the goal Johnson had the assist. Johnson has speed and potential but doesn’t seem to be able to tap into it. Maybe Latvia game will show something more definite.

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 8:19 am

As for the Latvia game, it’s time to put our starting XI on the field. None of this resting people to protect them from injury. Our guys need to work together at full-speed before the outcome matters.

I like Chuck’s line-up, with one exception - substitute DMB for Mastroeni.

I’d put Convey in on the left side; put DMB on the right; take out Pablo and drop Reyna back; and move Landon to the middle.

Also, I’d move Gooch over to the left, because he’s got more speed to cover for Lewis when he makes runs forward.

————McBride————
Convey-(J.O’B/Reyna/L.D.)-DMB
—–Lewis-Gooch–Pope-Dolo—–

Posted from United States

By Kelly | May 27th, 2006 at 8:30 am

I dunno about Gooch on the wings. Morocco gave him some shaky moments when he started out there in the second half - one was a precursor to the ball ‘Dolo coughed up. And he doesn’t have the touch to overlap and deliver consistent service or be a genuine threat runing at the goal with the ball on his feet a’la Lewis. Gooch is a center back, the best the team has. Ask yourself this: If Gooch is on the wing, who’s in the middle? Berhalter?

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 8:41 am

Kelly,

Chuck and I both placed Gooch at centerback. In Chuck’s formation, he was at right centerback; in my formation, he was at left centerback.

Knowing that Lewis will be a threat to go forward and that Pope has lost a step or two, I thought that it would be better to have Gooch covering his runs forward.

Posted from United States

By TJ | May 27th, 2006 at 11:38 am

Josh Wolfe is useless.
He would not be a good all block team player much less a National Team player.

Posted from United States

By TJ | May 27th, 2006 at 11:54 am

Landon Mcbride up front
Convey Puablo Renya Dempsey
Boco Gouch Pope Cher
Keller
Berhalter can translate or carry luggage.

Posted from United States

By Steve C | May 27th, 2006 at 2:20 pm

I keep wondering why everyone is so hyped on Gooch???

I watched the games a few times and to be honest, this is not football or at least not the American kind and so- saying his size is amazing means NOTHING except on corners which happen maybe 15 times a game if lucky… I mean you could make the claim that in the run of play he wins headers but again, thats a limited amount of times… his skill is CRUCIALLY lacking and his distribution- in my opinion is sketchy at best.

Did anyone else ever watch a truly good defender like Maldini? Thats a player you want to build a team around- not some linebacker turned center-back “because he has amazing size”… watch how many times he simply clears the ball instead of being calm under pressure and distributing to build an attack… that type of pounding the ball out of bounds wont due against powerhouses- it will only get us off our heels for a min and then, right back we go… also, his fouls often appall me and are dangerous usually, esp the one against Morrocco!

sorry- I just am NOT a fan at all. Pope is MUCH better defender and can actually touch the ball and defend 1v1..

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 2:40 pm

Steve C,

I’ll agree that Pope is a better defender than Gooch. However, let me explain why I said that if I had to pick one field player to build the next American team, it’d be Gooch.

If I’m building the next American team, it’s for the next World Cup. Pope won’t figure into those plans, probably. So, why build around him?

Well, one might counter, why build around a defender, at all? Good question. Midfielders would make more sense; however, even though, like everyone else, I like to see offensive fireworks, I think that defense - mixed with potent counter-attacking - win championships. See Maldini’s Italy.

Also, it’s not Gooch’s size and athleticism that impress me as much as his development into exactly what you wrote about.

I think that Gooch’s play is improving with every game, and last night v. Venezuela is a perfect example. Go back and watch it. He was calm under pressure; he did have pretty good distribution; we even saw him working into the attacking third of the field.

At this point, I think that of all the American players, he’s not only got the biggest potential, but also that he’s the best suited to capitalize on his potential.

Posted from United States

By Razzle | May 27th, 2006 at 2:42 pm

USA has serious issues going in to group stages. It was challenged to keep possession session and lost it more often than not. I’d like to see them score goals that result from build ups through the mid-field. A team is as likely to score goals using headers from crosses as it is not. Nothing special there. I don’t think this performance was anything to write home about. 2-0 is a good result but the match was no better than the one against Morocco.

Reyna and Donovan - neither has been able to control the midfield which is what they are supposed to do.

Is this how USA played during the qualifiers as well? I hope not.

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 2:54 pm

Razzle,

I agree with you, which is why I propose swapping John O’Brien and Claudio Reyna’s roles, relative to where they played against Morocco.

I know that this sounds a litte crazy, given how truly important Claudio has been/continues to be for the Yanks; but, right now, I’d take Claudio playing more defensively (yes, he can do it) and having JOB be the midfield creative wizard.

Posted from United States

By Razzle | May 27th, 2006 at 5:17 pm

Cajun - I’d agree with that. Reyna should be pulled back and JOB given the midfield.

Its too much to expect from Reyna to pop back into the thick of things during a WC and expect him to do a great job. JOB takes the lead here. But then hes often injured. I’m not too confident watching this squad go in.

Did anyone watch the qualification games? I’m wondering what USA played like in those.

Posted from United States

By Jeff | May 27th, 2006 at 5:58 pm

I’m from Canada and our country sucks at Soccer, help me decide who to cheer for.

Posted from Canada

By mirarchi | May 27th, 2006 at 6:03 pm

I agree with Steve C — our play was, on the whole, quite disappointing. There were still an embarassing number of turnovers due to sloppy passes and just poor decision-making.

I also agree with Steve C that people are overrating Gooch. He has done well, but he still makes bad mistakes every game — like the foul in dangerous territory against Morocco, the failure to mark the Moroccan striker on a header (Koeller will bury that header), and getting caught upfield on Morocco’s goal.

Razzle, as far as how the U.S. played in qualifying, it was a lot like the Venezuela game, in my opinion — we’d beat up on minnows with efficiency, but not play particularly impressive ball.

Posted from United States

By daryl | May 27th, 2006 at 6:38 pm

Jeff,

Adopt your Southern neighbour!

Posted from United States

By Karl | May 27th, 2006 at 8:38 pm

Jeff,
the US also has a long tradition of mediocre soccer. However, our fortunes have recently begun to turn along with the rise of major league soccer. Now MLS has expanded into Canada with Toronto FC which will begin play in 2007, so I think there’s no doubt that our nations soccer fortunes will be linked and you know who you should cheer for.

Posted from United States

By Cajun Nick | May 27th, 2006 at 8:49 pm

Razzle,

re: US Qualifying Form

Mirarchi said it well.

As a whole, I’d say that the US is sound technically, but lacks any true creativity, any spark of genius. We’ve got a good group of very fit athletes who don’t quit.

However, we have a tendency to do one of two things with our passes: 1) give them away easily [which leads to another problem: counter-attacks]; or 2) hit them into empty space with nobody running onto them.

Also, we can be very susceptible to the counter-attack. Of course, this goes back in history (see the Iran match in the ‘98 Cup).

With the US, though, we’re always improving. And, unfortunately we weren’t seeded in this World Cup. I think that if we’d been placed in Group D, we’d have a good chance of advancing.

As it is, however, we’re drawn into a pretty tough group. There is a silver lining to that cloud: Part of the reason that our group is so tough is due to our presence.

As an aside, I want to say that this is a wonderful blog. Everyone here is ready to offer his opinion, and when we don’t see eye-to-eye, we don’t get nasty. We defend our positions with (sometimes misguided) reason.

And Bob, Daryl, and the gang have a great sense of humor.

Posted from United States

By Jodido | May 27th, 2006 at 8:58 pm

This is off topic, but I discovered on the timesonline site that Eddie Johnson underwent the Michael Jackson treatment!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,28804-2156253,00.html

Posted from United States

By Jodido | May 27th, 2006 at 9:09 pm

I don’t want to critique all your ratings, but these things stuck out to me-

1) Ching seemed to be there in chances created, but at the WC level, you have to finish more of those. He was a big disappointment to me.

2) Gooch is starting to get overrated, I think. He’s good and very athletic and strong, but he makes mental mistakes that will be extremely costly against a CR or Italy. In the WC, he could go either way as either a massive failure or a star performer.

3) I predict a stellar performance from Convey. That dude just has the sort of soccer instincts to break out in a pressure packed WC game. Maybe with teams keying on the better-known US players he can wreak some havoc.

Overall, I’m very, very disappointed with our play thus far in the friendlies. I’m crossing my fingers, but I think playing weak teams like Venezuela so poorly is going to kill us…the Czechs will be a shock to our guys. I just hope they can adjust to the level of play quickly enough.

Posted from United States

By Steve A | May 27th, 2006 at 10:07 pm

Razzle: I’m going to have to respectfully disagree about Reyna. Which games are you suggesting he didn’t control the midfield? He played, what, 15 minutes vs Morocco? Obviously didn’t play vs Venezuela. Hasn’t played for the national team for a while. I’m not sure what you’re referring to…?

I have watched several of Man City’s recent matches, and he was controlling the midfield there. The problem with Man City wasn’t Reyna – he does exactly what he is supposed to do: defends, holds the ball, and distributes. In the grand scheme of things, he is remarkably consistent. Reyna can build an attack from the back, and he does it intelligently. He has talent and experience at the highest levels of the game. I’ve said it before here, he is easily the most talented player the U.S. has ever produced. JO’B is also very talented, but I don’t think playing JOB in front of Reyna adds anything; fluidity is the key there. With them healthy, the central midfield looks promising…

Donovan’s strength is not controlling the midfield – period. He ain’t gonna get it done. Doesn’t mean he isn’t valuable, but controlling the midfield is not what should be asked of him. Somebody mentioned a couple of days ago that he always makes the safe pass, which is very true. He is trying to be creative, but he lacks creativity. Seamus mentioned spoke a couple of weeks back about Donovan playing a withdrawn striker, which is exactly, IMO, where he belongs. He needs to be aggressive!

Gooch, I think, will have a good WC. His athletic ability is going to make up for his technical shortcomings, and his technical shortcomings will diminish. Overrated? By who, the people on this board? Who cares what we think…

These games mean nothing right now. They mean a lot to a guy like Convey, who obviously needs to prove something to BA, and is doing his damndest. When the spotlight of the WC shines, our players are going to rise to the occasion. We have a tough friggin’ group, but we aren’t going to wilt like in 1998. I expect a performance similar to 2002. Whether they can make it out this group is the million-dollar question.

By bossimo | May 28th, 2006 at 3:58 pm

Steve,

For the sake of argument: last night FSC replayed the 1993 FA cup tie between Arsenal and Sheffield Wednesday - featuring our own John Harkes That’s the only game I’ve ever seen of Harkes-in-England-in-his-prime (though I did catch a few of his MNT games live and on the tele),but it was enough to convince me that he was every bit as good as Reyna. Plus, he’s noticeably aging and isn’t our best player right now - wouldn’t crack my top 3.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that Reyna isn’t indespensible. My best evidence: Following the 2002 WC campaign, my Mexican friends - having finally exhausted their handball complaints after a month or so - began telling me how great Reyna was and how he was clearly the best player on the pitch. “He was everywhere”, they’d say. For those that don’t know any fans of el Tri, this is the highest of high praise

Posted from United States

By Steve A | May 29th, 2006 at 12:44 pm

Good point bossimo. I noticed that match was on FSC but missed it. Had I realized Harkes was involved, I would have made a point to watch it. He was a good player, no doubt. Can’t say as I remember him enough to make a comparison, but I’ll take your word for it.

While I wouldn’t suggest that Reyna is indispensible (he didn’t play against Portugal in ‘02!), he adds that extra bit of class that we need. I feel the same way about JOB after seeing him in the Latvia match last night. Both he and Reyna’s ability to make the longer, creative, dangerous pass, and make it with accuracy and touch, puts them a notch above. I think their presence also takes pressure off of other players, Donovan in particular.

Interesting about your Mexican friends finally caving in. Mine still refuse to stop bitching about that “handball”!

Comments are closed