One Day Away: USA v. England Match Preview, 06.12.10

June 11th, 2010 | by: Ed |

Royal_Bafokeng_Sta_1524628i

Who: United States v. England
What: Group C First Round Match
Where: Royal Bafokeng Stadium, Rustenburg, South Africa
When: Saturday, June 12th (kickoff scheduled for 2:30pm EST)
Why: The World Cup has to really start some time for the WASPs, and what better way to start than with the most hyped international match-up since Ivan Drago killed Apollo Creed. Sadly this time, no James Brown.

It’s been a frustrating task trying to write the preview for this match.

Part of the frustration is that everything, it seems, has been ground to dust—what it means to the US, what it doesn’t mean to England, the lack of manpower in the US squad, England’s collection of stars, Fabio Capello’s tactical genius, Bob Bradley’s 7 heartbeats per minute, etc. etc.

Nonetheless, I’m sure I’ll manage to be long-winded and overwrought. In theory, we could start with the colonization of America, the Boston Tea Party, why Wayne Rooney would have failed as a field commander, the growing friendship between the countries in the post-revolutionary period, why Capello and Bradley are nothing like Churchill and Roosevelt (spoiler: it’s because Capello’s Italian), and how this game is a perfect microcosm of the current transatlantic political relationship between the two countries.

But I fear all of this has already been done and/or is completely false.

And it’s not as though we’ve got a great sample size for the way the teams stack up against one another in international competition. England’s won a handful of friendlies against the US, most recently at Wembley in 2008, but the US has won when it really counted—like that time in the US Cup in 1993! Oh, you were expecting the other one—in case you’re just stepping into the conversation of USA v. England, we’re talking the 1-0 victory in Brazil in the 1950 World Cup. It’s got its own Wikipedia page and everything.

But an ultimately fruitless victory in 1950 (both sides went out after their next matches with 1-0-2 records; the US wouldn’t qualify for another World Cup for 40 years) and a few friendly wins for England don’t do much to inform us as to how tomorrow will unfold. It might be the Irish Coffee talking, but I’d guess both sides have experienced a fair amount of turnover in the last 60 years.

What we’re left with, then, is two relatively different teams that have relatively similar amounts of pressure.

Let’s start with the latter. For England, it’s the weight of expectation that so often accompanies their national team around the time of international competition—they haven’t won anything in far too long, this has to be the year, it’ll be a massive disappointment if they lose, they’re going to lose, maybe they won’t, what if they pull it off, who are we kidding, they’ve failed us all.

For the US it’s a bit different, but I’d argue it’s similar in weight. Maybe it’s a product of my own relative infancy in following the national side, or maybe it’s just my keen observational skills honed by thousands of dollars accrued in government loans. Don’t worry, they’re subsidized. I think the pressure here comes from the “can they win over a nation?” hoopla any time the national side is on the big stage. Eleven men tasked with converting hundreds of millions into world football fans in approximately 270 minutes. Nevermind the football, there’s Nielsen ratings to be had.

And while arguing about which side has more pressure would be a fun and deliciously divisive detour, I think we’d do best to focus on the match. The implications will settle themselves, and despite what you’ve read, both sides have two matches left in group play after Saturday.

So onto the match, then. Earlier I mentioned how different the teams are, and even though six minutes have passed since I typed that sentence, I’m sticking to my guns.

England are undoubtedly the more talented side. Each and every member of the squad has experienced a level of success that has been widely publicized and lauded—whether it’s club or country, in most cases both, England are a conglomeration of stars any way you cut it. Wayne Rooney, Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, John Terry, and Ashley Cole are all, to any world football fan, instantly recognizable names.

But the thing that’s chased England for so many years is their relative lack of cohesion, and I don’t know that it’s entirely disappeared. There’s still questions about the best eleven despite the constellation of talent, and a slew of injuries hasn’t helped much. The ruling out of Rio Ferdinand (long-term) and Gareth Barry (short-term) has cast a cloud over Capello’s first-choice eleven, and combined with a lack of experienced depth beyond the first eleven, you have to figure that there are major questions about this iteration’s ability to chase away the ghost of Bobby Moore.

It’s not as if they’ll immediately retreat to the corner flags and commence thumb-sucking, though. Steven Gerrard is an able-bodied deputy in the role of captain, and on the whole this England side is well-seasoned. There are questions about the back line, though, partially due to the swashbuckling (thank you, Derek Rae) nature of Glen Johnson and Ashley Cole, but also confounded by the injury to Ferdinand. It’s likely that we’ll see Ledley King partner John Terry in central defense, buttressed by Jamie Carragher, Matthew Upson, and Michael Dawson on the bench.

The aforementioned Gerrard will no doubt feature in the midfield, but there’s no certainty as to where. The injury to Barry makes central midfield an area of great concern for England, as Lampard is a box-to-box midfielder while Barry was to be more of the holding type. His injury means that (gasp!) Gerrard, preferentially an attacking midfielder and typically on the left under Capello, could partner Lampard in midfield with one of them tasked with holding back and dictating play a bit more. Not an impossibility, and as I mentioned the other day, Capello is nonplussed about the proposition.

Any way you cut it in the midfield, England have to be encouraged about their pace and skill in the forward areas. There’s going to be some combination of Aaron Lennon, Joe Cole, James Milner, or Shaun Wright-Phillips on the flanks, ideally providing plenty of width and service for Wayne Rooney and Emile Heskey or Peter Crouch. Whichever way Capello decides to go, the US defense is going to have their hands full, particularly if Rooney continues to ply his trade whilst walking on water.

Which, in a clever bit of literary transitioning, brings us to the scrappier, less flashy US squad, and most importantly, its defense. Tim Howard’s the leader—seasoned, skilled, and internationally tested, he’s going to be, along with captain Carlos Bocanegra, responsible for organizing a defense that is yet to be determined.

The verdict on Oguchi Onyewu’s return to full fitness is still uncertain, which has implications beyond the scope of the partnership in central defense. If he’s match-fit, it’s likely going to be him and Jay DeMerit, which pushes Bocanegra to left back with Steve Cherundolo at right back. This is, in my opinion, the strongest back line for the US. The two Jonathans (Spector and Bornstein) have been average at best in the run-in, and with the pace in the wide areas for England, experience is going to be pivotal. The US don’t need much in the way of attack from the fullbacks, and Cherundolo and Bocanegra are a good balance of defensive acumen and experience. There’s a good possibility, however, that we’ll see any or all of the above names in addition to Clarence Goodson if Onyewu’s not fit. At this point, fitness trumps sentimentality.

And while there’s some questions in the midfield, it’s arguably the strongest part of the US squad, mostly due to the wing play of Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan. They’re widely lauded as the best players in the side, and they’re going to be responsible for pushing the US forward. Much has been made of the potential gaps left by Glen Johnson and Ashley Cole, and it’s going to be Dempsey and Donovan who are responsible for exploiting it.

Central midfield has been a point of much consternation, at least here on the US World Cup blog. General consensus seems to be that Michael Bradley is a given and that he’d do best to partner with Jose Torres. The thought is this—Bradley will start and does well enough to break up play. Partnering him with Ricardo Clark, another defensive-minded midfielder, basically puts the US at major disadvantage regarding possession. And given the fact that possession has been (and will continue to be) crucial for the US, the distribution and direction of Torres would be a major asset.

Up top, you have to figure that a fully-fit Jozy Altidore will be the focus of attack. As for who he’ll partner with…the jury’s still out. In my ideal world, he’ll partner the pace of Robbie Findley. It’s certainly not for Findley’s finishing—he’s been poor at best in his appearances during the run-in. But an Altidore partnership with Edson Buddle would be the first of its kind, and the similarities between the two might be more problematic than it is beneficial. Buddle is surely on top form, but Altidore is the first choice. You have to think that some sort of contrasting approach in attack is the best bet—space is needed for Altidore, and Findley is the man to provide it.

So 1500 words in, what do we have?

A final take on a few key points for the US, courtesy of fellow US blogger Denny, parroted by myself:

—Early pressure on their keeper—cause some questions and signal some intent. Back heels early for the US is not ideal.

—Hold the back line. The US will likely be playing bunker defense throughout, definitely if an early goal is in the cards. Composure will be key, and the US will need to handle the pressure collectively and man-to-man.

—Possession in the midfield. Whether it’s Torres, Bradley, Edu, or Clark, the US need to dictate some sort of pace in the midfield area or they’re going to be run over.

—Potential England breakers: Torres, Buddle, and Herculez Gomez. England don’t like to press if they get comfortable, so depending on the pace of the game, the US might have enough space to breathe and think. Buddle, Torres, and Gomez (likely off the bench) need to use their opportunities wisely.

In little more than 24 hours, we’ll know just how much any of this matters. And the USA World Cup Blog will be the place to follow it all—everything from the run-up to the live blog to post-match thoughts and discussion. The World Cup is fully underway now—South Africa and Mexico kicked things off with a 1-1 draw.

It’s going to be a fantastic month.

USA World Cup Team Blog RSS Feed

Taylor Rockwell

Best preview I've read of the match. Great work Ed (and Denny). I really, really, really hope Bradley starts Torres, but I'm pretty sure it'll be Clark out there demonstrating how awesome(ly bad) his first touch is.

We were joking about it on the podcast last week, but I think Gomez may be the least likely super-sub ever. When he comes on, he never quite looks settled and never really makes an immediate impact, but somehow seems to have the skill and wherewithal to get the goals when they're needed…
http://twitter.com/volumeind wadju suite

You may have been frustrated in figuring out how to address this – but this is the best preview I've read as well! Cool picture too! We just want to make some noise for the US! What I'd like to see is massive amounts of people in the stadium holding up their iPhones with our flag on display and a unison of noise that can't be denied. I've got the “All World Noise” app on my phone and hope I'll have some of the crowd with me!! Well written – GO USA
http://usasoccerstud.com/ Blake

Can't. Freakin'. Wait.
Jimbo

LMAO… England 5, USA 0… and team USA will score ZERO goals this whole tournament. 14th ranked team in the world.. what a JOKE .
Ed

Any actual thoughts?
Bense235

I thought the bla bla would never stop. Man, as a journalist, shorten that a bit. That was a fan writing, not a journalist.
James Robert

I think the key points are right on, at the same time they are already USA's top problems.

When is the last time US began a game against a European country with a high pressure offense? honestly I can't remember, and unless Capello quits tonight, he will not let that happen

USA needs to keep composure on defense and keep the formation, they did this well in the confed cup, but the back four always makes mistakes (and NO VUVUZELA causing miscommunication excuses this time – last year that was acceptable, but this year we know the setting)

Possession in the midfield – i like that, but how about – possession leading to an attack on goal via cross or play into the box. USA has had spurts of possession, but it always fizzles out as a lost opportunity because of a miss-pass, or someone holding onto the ball too soon

Anyways…great write up, and I will be cheering through my frustration. We've got some promising talent and some hardworking boys, here's to USMNT 2010!!
James Robert

**holding onto the ball too long
Jimbo

been playing and coaching ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL since i could walk, ed, those WERE my thoughts… what part did you miss?

or just choosing to ignore anything that goes against your own guesses? Saw all these great USA predictions 4 years ago 'n we all know what happened there.

Make that 6-0, i feel a rooney hat-trick coming on.

go back to watching games that americans understand.. like 2 teams of ex-convicts tossing a ball into a laundry basket, erm, i mean, the NBA. Leave the ACTUAL games to the rest of the world. Because you know, and i know, that after england wipes the stadium floor with you tomorrow, american interest in FIFA will plummet to Zero.
James Robert

didn't mean to “like” this, i meant to say americans don't know what fifa is, so interest is already zero – things can only get better –

plus, there is a reason why US has made the world cup. putting aside differences of technique etc. and acceptance of the sport in USA, USA officially qualified as 1 of 32 teams, they won their spot and deserve to be there, so lets cheer on our country and celebrate the chance to play against other top teams
Ed

Appreciate the comment Bense, and you've got me pegged on all counts. The “bla bla” is entirely a result of me being a fan, which is sort of the point of the blog. For fans written by fans.

I wouldn't want to offend journalists by pretending that I was one.
Ed

Sorry Jimbo, sometimes I don't catch the subtext of things like “LMAO.” I'm absolutely for the opinions of others, but far too often we get mindless “US SUCKS LOLZ” comments that don't contain any actual thought. So if I mistook yours as such, I apologize.But the “Americans suck at understanding association football” argument is a tired one. Ignorant stereotyping of American sports and its players aside, it just strikes me as lazy to assume that one's country of birth automatically rules them out from understanding a given sport.
abd

It's only fair to mention that a major factor that has helped the USA to qualify to all these world cups is because they are “geographically lucky”. It might sound ridiculous, but I don't see the US making it to 4-5 consecutive world cups if they where in CONMEBOL, CAF or UEFA. Where would US soccer be if the USMNT didn't have a practically guaranteed place in the world cup every 4 years??

And despite all these world cup appearances, Football is nowhere in comparison to Basketball, American Football, Baseball or Hockey. I bet even NASCAR gets more interest !?!
jaderise

I would actually say our region has held us back development wise.

-Americans are competitive people by nature, a tougher group would have forced us to step up our game quicker and adapt better tactics to compete.
- the love of soccer would have grown regardless in the US because of the demographic change in the US over the last 20-30 years and in either scenario, we would still have the money to throw behind the sport. So I would expected our team talent pool would be the same as today (despite seeing success later, by making fewer world cups perhaps).
-Our team would be more battle tested already playing in huge matches against top talent more often. So there would be less of a “deer in headlights mentality” that affected the US MNT in prior years (not this year).
jaderise

I'm so happy England think this. There is zero expectation for us to win- we have nothing to lose.

And if England fails, I'm looking forward to seeing the reaction.
jaderise

Totally agree on the key points of the match- would add a couple tactics

-On the pressure the keeper point: Shoot more often that you would otherwise. Put pressure on their goalies from all angles and any distance. The ball at altitude will put more pressure on their goalies, while I think Howard would be up to the task if England retaliates in a similar manner.

-On the possession in midfield point: Don't fall in the trap of the long ball. Both countries have a bad history with giving up on possession play and just go for the long ball. If England get frusterated and start sending it long, treat it as a compliment. Collect the ball and calmly pass it around until the opening arrives. Also, watch out for England's counter attack. Its fast and decisive. So we cant lose the ball in a bad position (if our Backs come up, they cannot lose the ball without at least crossing it first- we are saying its a weakness of England when their backs come foward- but its also a weakness of our team)

-Total team defense: It starts with the 2 strikers: pressure the England defense into making a poor decision. With plenty of time they are going to make the right pass. But I don't think there defensive players are as good skill wise as England wants to believe. So when the Defense panics and sends the long ball. Our defense needs to have its shape. I don't care who their strikers are (even Crouch). If we get them to play long ball, we will be fine defending it with our players. If they get the ball on the ground to the midfielders we need to force the play sideways with a strong defense across the midfield including Dempsey and Donovan. we must make them frusterated, and then they will try something silly on offense, leaving them exposed. When they get frusterated and push forward directly to far, that when our counter happens!
Jimbo

lol … why in the world would there be a subtext to an acronym? LMAO: Laughing My Ass Off.One would think an accomplished blogger such as yourself would know these things. Apparently you know as much about computers as you know about ” soccer “.. embarrasingly little.

Yeppers, it's called Grass or ” the Pitch “… which, in the abscence of some kind of anti-gravity machine, is usually laid on the stadium FLOOR … nice try though! Don't feel bad about talking above your head , it's a common occurence amongst people with nothing to say and a laptop to say it on.

US vs England all time: goals for: US 8, England 35. Thats ALL-TIME, not world cup, before you point out your fluke 1-0 win in 1950. Congratulations about qualifying tho.. isn't it nice of FIFA to put you in a qualifying group consisting of schoolboy teams ?

Enjoy the ass kicking!!!
Catatonic

What jerseys does US wear today? Are we home or away?
Jimbo

BINGO! try qualifying against some real teams.

and Ed, where in my posts do you see anything resembling ” US SUCKS LOLZ” ???? Are you so insecure that you have to try and criticize me for things i never even said? And as for Americans not understanding ” soccer “… try this: Grab a random US fan at the game…without googling or reading the rule book, see if they can explain the “Offside” rule to you.

Yea, I didn't think so.
Ed

But can you also give lectures on how to read sarcasm?
Pnin

jee, Jimbo, what a gigantic a&^ you are! as for the England team, hmm are you talking about the same England team that didn't even qualify for the Euro in 2008 (ouch!) or the one that was hoping to bring home the Euro Cup in 2004 but was humiliated beyond belief by Portugal who swept the floor (oups lawn) with it …oh, both, I thought so I remember I was in Italy travelling on the Amalfi Coast at the time and everybody was elated there that the English lost since the locals were sick and tired of putting up with the inebriated, gregarious English supporters (umm, hooligans, you got it) … after England lost that night, miraculously all the English supporters vanished, literally, they were nowhere to be seen, they either into withdrawal, or went into hiding, or cralng into a hole, all the shame, you know….but at least the superb Italian resorts on the Amalfi Caost had some peace and quiet for a while, once the English were gone…so, good luck to you and your team tomorrow, a*(&^ hole!
Ed

I believe it's the away strip, Cata.
Ed

“LMAO” and “what a JOKE” are not typically part of the great thinker's lexicon, so excuse my confusion.
pnin

… he needs to pass his GCSE first, I doubt he knows what sarcasm is…
Ed

It's a fair point, abd, but unfortunately there's little to be done about it. The US aren't in a spot like Australia where they can seek reassignment. But I don't think that can be “blamed” on them, it is fact that in a tougher qualifying region they would have had more struggles historically.

As for the popularity of the game in the US, who knows? It's been, and will likely continue to be, a tough sell for lots of folks. Can't be held against those who do follow it intently, though.
Catatonic

Thanks. Will be watching with a bunch of Brits.
Charlie Potts

I'll take that bet! How much?
abd

Be careful what you wish for! I don't think any of the “nouveau” USMNT fans have ever dealt with the anguish that comes from not making it to the WC finals. Would there be more funding, interest, support and development for US soccer if the US only featured in a tournament like the Gold Cup?

You can only imagine if the US where in CAF, and had to play against countries like Malawi, Zambia, Gabon and Guinea. Even Bolivia managed a 6-1 win over Messi's Argentina. The point I am making is that there is more to it then tactics and talent when playing in Africa or South America. Other very important factors, like organization, facilities, environment and crowd support can stifle any big teams aspirations of making it to the world cup.

I agree that now your region is definitely holding you back, but before this, they where the best cradle to raise a sort of “infant” sport in the US. Now that its grown and developed, I hope you do your best to draw against England
pnin

I wonder where is Jimbo now? crowling into a rat hole? well, that's the English supporters for ya, all hot air and noise, the reality is that the England team hasn't done anything remarkable since pretty much the 60s hey, Jimbo how was that again? England-USA 5-0 hahahaha a heck of an 'expert' you are, Sir…or wait a minute you are not that, chav at best …
pnin

hey, Jimbo, where you at, crowling into a rat hole much? well, that's the English supporters for ya, all hot air and no substance, the reality is that the England team hasn't done anything remarkable since pretty much the 60s hey, Jimbo how was that again? England-USA 5-0 only we all saw that it was more like niel hahahaha
http://howtogetmyexbackways.com/ Ex Back

i think that Goals per match – home matches for home club and away matches for away club … Standard Liege last summer but made just one appearance in Serie A!