Soccer Thread 2015-16

[ISiddiqui]

So, the 2002 formation (in the knockout rounds anyway) was a 3-5-2, where the players were:

Sanneh-Pope-Berhalter
Hejduk-Reyna-Mastroeni-O'Brien-Lewis
McBride-Donovan

Diskerud is better than O'Brient. Fabian Johnson and Bedoya are better than Lewis. Yedlin is more dangerous than Hejduk. Bradley and Reyna are about equal. Masteroni and Beckerman are fairly equal. Dempsey and McBride are equal. Pope may be better than anyone than USMNT has now, but Omar Gonzales and Tim Ream are better than Sanneh and Berkhalter.

Donovan is, of course, the outlier. The current USMNT has no one close to as talented as him.

However, in just about every other position, the current squad is just as talented if not more than the team that made it to the Quarterfinals of the World Cup and outplayed the Germans, even as they lost 1-0.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So, the 2002 formation (in the knockout rounds anyway) was a 3-5-2, where the players were:

Sanneh-Pope-Berhalter
Hejduk-Reyna-Mastroeni-O'Brien-Lewis
McBride-Donovan

Diskerud is better than O'Brient. Fabian Johnson and Bedoya are better than Lewis. Yedlin is more dangerous than Hejduk. Bradley and Reyna are about equal. Masteroni and Beckerman are fairly equal. Dempsey and McBride are equal. Pope may be better than anyone than USMNT has now, but Omar Gonzales and Tim Ream are better than Sanneh and Berkhalter.

Donovan is, of course, the outlier. The current USMNT has no one close to as talented as him.

However, in just about every other position, the current squad is just as talented if not more than the team that made it to the Quarterfinals of the World Cup and outplayed the Germans, even as they lost 1-0.

Reyna and Bradley aren't really even close if both are playing an offensive midfield position. Bradley in a defensive mid position works -- him in an offensive position doesn't.

[Grover]

Darmian looks like he's going to be fantastic.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by rowech

Reyna and Bradley aren't really even close if both are playing an offensive midfield position. Bradley in a defensive mid position works -- him in an offensive position doesn't.

Remember in the 3-5-2, Reyna played more of a box to box midfielder - which is Bradley's natural position.

[kingfc22]

Chelsea rolling the dice starting Courtois who received treatment during warmups on his knee and of course Costa is always a question mark.

[ISiddiqui]

Whoa.... an Courtois denying an obvious goal scoring chance and gets sent off with Chelsea up 2-1, with Swansea having a penalty coming up.

[SirFozzie]

Looks like the decision to sell Cech just turned around and bit Chelski right in the ass. Courtois sent off (straight red+penalty), 2-2 with 10 minutes to play. Oh, and the guaranteed game Courois misses? Man City next week.

Oops.

[ISiddiqui]

Though it looks as if the backup GK was more than equal to the task. They may not miss Courtois too much. I was impressed by the backup.

[bhlloy]

Begovic is a brilliant keeper - I can't believe he'd willingly go and be the backup at Chelsea to be honest. Although I imagine they are throwing some insane amount of money at him which probably helps.

United situation is more interesting to me. Think Romero will cost them some points sooner or later

[Katon]

Begovic is a starter-quality keeper, and in an argument with Ospina and the Man U keeper pile for the title of best backup in the league. Even now that he has to play against City, the downgrade from Cech is still a much better idea than forcing an unhappy legend to stick around.

I'm dreading reading Jose's post-match comments - a ton of tight big calls in that one, and most of them went against Chelsea, so here's another brick for the conspiracy wall. The thing is, most of those tight calls were right. I'd argue Gomis was going too far wide for the penalty to be a red given that Cahill was in position to get back, and I'm not sure how Williams got away with shoving Costa in the back when Costa was in behind late on, but Swansea's penalty was a penalty, Chelsea's claim was an excellent tackle, and Swansea were plenty good value for their point.

[whomario]

Begovic has not only started 160 PL games for Stoke, he was an absolute rock for them and is a a legitimate Top10 goalie in the PL. Believe you me, there is zero need to worry for Chelsea on that front. Heck, if Courtois were to miss the whole season, i am not sure this would really diminish Chelseas chances all that much more than it would with Cech instead of Begovic (and in either case not very much)

[sovereignstar v2]

Some showing their lack of Epl knowledge. That backup is the best backup in the league.

[sovereignstar v2]

Mancini wanted to bring begovic in to challenge Hart. But he was fired and that was that.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Although I imagine they are throwing some insane amount of money at him which probably helps.

Around $4m pounds a year according to this

Chelsea transfer news: Why Chelsea are right to pay the £8million transfer fee for Stoke City's Asmir Begovic | Metro News

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Katon

Begovic is a starter-quality keeper, and in an argument with Ospina and the Man U keeper pile for the title of best backup in the league. Even now that he has to play against City, the downgrade from Cech is still a much better idea than forcing an unhappy legend to stick around.

I'm dreading reading Jose's post-match comments - a ton of tight big calls in that one, and most of them went against Chelsea, so here's another brick for the conspiracy wall. The thing is, most of those tight calls were right. I'd argue Gomis was going too far wide for the penalty to be a red given that Cahill was in position to get back, and I'm not sure how Williams got away with shoving Costa in the back when Costa was in behind late on, but Swansea's penalty was a penalty, Chelsea's claim was an excellent tackle, and Swansea were plenty good value for their point.

OK, so I need some serious help regarding the red.

Nobody seems to be arguing the penalty. But with the red, I have heard two things:

1) he was going away from goal

and

2) There was another guy who was there.

So two serious questions from an American who still has a lot to learn about the game:

If the only reason you kicked the ball to the left (trying to 'round the keeper) was because the keeper was headed straight for your mid section, spike up, does that really count as going away from goal? (I know this wasn't intentional, but in the mind of the Swansea player going at full speed, he had to fear for is safety)


And Ok, there was another Chelsea player who was chasing after the ball. When the original contact hit, he was in front of the goalkeeper and striker. With the slowdown of the play he raced to equal them. Let's say he WAS equal from the start. If we swap the two parties and a defender hits the striker at the edge of the box on a one on one, it is counted as a goal scoring opportunity, even with the keeper back there. I remember an Arsenal player get sent off a year or two ago on a foul 45 yards from the box for taking away a goal scoring chance.

Why would the 1 v 1 with the keeper be different than a 1 v 1 with a defender who can't use his hands?

Do the rules account for this?

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So, the 2002 formation (in the knockout rounds anyway) was a 3-5-2, where the players were:

Sanneh-Pope-Berhalter
Hejduk-Reyna-Mastroeni-O'Brien-Lewis
McBride-Donovan

Diskerud is better than O'Brient. Fabian Johnson and Bedoya are better than Lewis. Yedlin is more dangerous than Hejduk. Bradley and Reyna are about equal. Masteroni and Beckerman are fairly equal. Dempsey and McBride are equal. Pope may be better than anyone than USMNT has now, but Omar Gonzales and Tim Ream are better than Sanneh and Berkhalter.

Donovan is, of course, the outlier. The current USMNT has no one close to as talented as him.

However, in just about every other position, the current squad is just as talented if not more than the team that made it to the Quarterfinals of the World Cup and outplayed the Germans, even as they lost 1-0.

\

What about the other teams? Was Jamaica clearly superior to us athletically and technically that year? Did we look overmatched from an athletic AND technical standpoint every single time we went onto the pitch? Maybe my memory is deceiving me, but I don't remember too many teams that were that superior to us in size, speed and physicality.

Every Gold Cup game I watched this year, save Cuba, we looked outgunned and overwhelmed. I keep hearing about these wonderful players and how fast some of them are. I must be watching a different team than everyone else, because I don't see it.

[Katon]

Following up on the Chelsea-Swansea penalty conversation,

First question: Gomis had to go round Courtois one way or the other regardless of the foul - running the ball straight into the keeper does Swansea no good whatsoever. On this particular play, I don't think trying to minimize contact and trying to beat the keeper were mutually exclusive enough to separate them out. When you can separate the two, the sensible way to handle it seems to be looking at how good the chance was when the player had to go into self-defence mode, but I don't know for certain what the relevant rule would be.

Question the second: Basically, it's an issue of how much time do you have to shoot and how much control do you have over where the shot is taken. When someone gets sent off 45 yards from goal, the other defenders are usually far enough off that the striker can approach the keeper from whichever angle he prefers, taking the shot whenever he thinks gives him the best chance to score. In the Gomis case, if he'd caught up with the ball he'd have been well off to the side, with a bad angle and a blocking defender, and he'd have needed to do something quickly before Courtois got back in position. The angle, in particular, makes the defender a lot more troublesome because he doesn't need nearly as much horizontal reach to block most of the goal. It was still clearly a good chance, just tricky enough that a Chelsea fan like me can be unsure whether it was an "obvious goalscoring opportunity".

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Katon

Following up on the Chelsea-Swansea penalty conversation,

First question: Gomis had to go round Courtois one way or the other regardless of the foul - running the ball straight into the keeper does Swansea no good whatsoever. On this particular play, I don't think trying to minimize contact and trying to beat the keeper were mutually exclusive enough to separate them out. When you can separate the two, the sensible way to handle it seems to be looking at how good the chance was when the player had to go into self-defence mode, but I don't know for certain what the relevant rule would be.

Question the second: Basically, it's an issue of how much time do you have to shoot and how much control do you have over where the shot is taken. When someone gets sent off 45 yards from goal, the other defenders are usually far enough off that the striker can approach the keeper from whichever angle he prefers, taking the shot whenever he thinks gives him the best chance to score. In the Gomis case, if he'd caught up with the ball he'd have been well off to the side, with a bad angle and a blocking defender, and he'd have needed to do something quickly before Courtois got back in position. The angle, in particular, makes the defender a lot more troublesome because he doesn't need nearly as much horizontal reach to block most of the goal. It was still clearly a good chance, just tricky enough that a Chelsea fan like me can be unsure whether it was an "obvious goalscoring opportunity".

Your second point expects a lot out of a ref trying to make a judgement call at real speed. I don't know what percentage you have in your head that it was a clear chance. Is it 15%? 50%? As long as your consistent, Chelsea or no Chelsea, I can respect that.

I personally feel that the double punishment is too much and that there should never be a red in a situation like that.

In this case I think it could have been a red for the high spikes without any of the other considerations, but I am fascinated by the debate.

Either way, I'm happy Chelsea dropped points and hope for many more dropped points from your boys

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by TroyF

What about the other teams? Was Jamaica clearly superior to us athletically and technically that year? Did we look overmatched from an athletic AND technical standpoint every single time we went onto the pitch? Maybe my memory is deceiving me, but I don't remember too many teams that were that superior to us in size, speed and physicality.

Every Gold Cup game I watched this year, save Cuba, we looked outgunned and overwhelmed. I keep hearing about these wonderful players and how fast some of them are. I must be watching a different team than everyone else, because I don't see it.

Those teams, especially in CONCACAF are NOT superior to US players athletically and technically. Take for example, Jamaica. The two goalscorers are their best players - both are MLS players (Darren Mattocks for the Vancouver Whitecaps and Giles Barnes for the Houston Dynamo). They are, obviously, two very good MLS players and starters for their teams, but they aren't the best players in the league and plenty of American players are far better than them. IIRC, neither have made an MLS Best XI team.

Bad coaching can definitely hide the talents of your players. Or good coaching can make players seem better than their talent level is (see: Swansea vs. Chelsea today)

Watch some MLS matches - Mattocks and Barnes can be very good, but players like Zardes and Dempsey are definitely more impressive. (and Alejandro Bedoya is an excellent player in the French Ligue 1, the only player on the pitch in that game who starts for a European first level club - though Aron Johannson is next as Werder Bremen just bought him).

Of course there have been more than a few complaints that Klinsmann left behind quite a few good players for no reason.

[Katon]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Your second point expects a lot out of a ref trying to make a judgement call at real speed. I don't know what percentage you have in your head that it was a clear chance. Is it 15%? 50%? As long as your consistent, Chelsea or no Chelsea, I can respect that.

Yeah, that's definitely a problem, but I don't see how to avoid it. If Gomis had caught up with the ball one step past Courtois, it's obviously a clear goalscoring opportunity. If he catches up with the ball near the touchline after it's run right through the area and Cahill's blocking any possible shot, it's not a direct opportunity at all. So there is a point where it stops being a red, and the ref basically has to guess how hard a shot Gomis would have had in order to figure out which side of the line it falls.

I think to be a clear chance, the attacker needs a one-on-one and either a good angle to shoot from (which doesn't have to be as good against a non-keeper with their limited horizontal reach), or the time to get to a significantly better angle. Gomis didn't have too much time before Courtois recovered, so we wind up guessing how wide the ball would have run and I get a chance to talk myself into thinking the call was Wrong To Chelsea's Detriment!!!

Even if the call was genuinely wrong - and I'm not particularly convinced of the purity of my analysis - Swansea would've been at 2-2 and good value for a point, so this is interesting much more as food for thought about where the line gets drawn than as a tight decision which wound up leading to a fair result.

[bhlloy]

Just saw it - in my opinion that's not a red, Cahill covering and the angle makes it not a clear goalscoring opportunity. Glad I didn't have to make the call in real time, however.

[SirFozzie]

Reading the BigSoccer Referee forum, they seem to think it was a red, especially at the angle the ref had to view it (looks like a straight leg kick). But yeah, I don't know why anyone would be a ref at the highest level. No matter what decision they make it will be endlessly argued.

oh, and while I mentioned BigSoccer, I mod two of the forums there (one for the local side, the New England Revolution, and the TV/Satellite forum), and bringing something over from there)

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/07/sp...ks-lineup.html

Key notes on the upcoming contract
1) the EPL would prefer a single network host, so a joint ESPN/FOX bid does not look like a winner
2) Three and Six years options: The six year option is at the behest of the networks, who want a long term option like most other sports packages, but the EPL will need to be blown away to take a 6 year bid over a 3 year bid (they prefer rolling the dice that rates will continue to skyrocket)
3) Bids are in, winner could be announced this week (However, if the top two bids are within 15% of each other, a second round of bids will likely be necessary)
4) EPL rights in the US are expected to cost at LEAST double of the current package. (3 years, 250 Million to NBC)

And USA network has added an additional game each week or so Saturdays at 10 AM (same time as the NBCSN game), so between NBC, NBCSN and now USA, we are getting 5 or so games a week

[rowech]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Reading the BigSoccer Referee forum, they seem to think it was a red, especially at the angle the ref had to view it (looks like a straight leg kick). But yeah, I don't know why anyone would be a ref at the highest level. No matter what decision they make it will be endlessly argued.

oh, and while I mentioned BigSoccer, I mod two of the forums there (one for the local side, the New England Revolution, and the TV/Satellite forum), and bringing something over from there)

Log In - The New York Times

Key notes on the upcoming contract
1) the EPL would prefer a single network host, so a joint ESPN/FOX bid does not look like a winner
2) Three and Six years options: The six year option is at the behest of the networks, who want a long term option like most other sports packages, but the EPL will need to be blown away to take a 6 year bid over a 3 year bid (they prefer rolling the dice that rates will continue to skyrocket)
3) Bids are in, winner could be announced this week (However, if the top two bids are within 15% of each other, a second round of bids will likely be necessary)
4) EPL rights in the US are expected to cost at LEAST double of the current package. (3 years, 250 Million to NBC)

And USA network has added an additional game each week or so Saturdays at 10 AM (same time as the NBCSN game), so between NBC, NBCSN and now USA, we are getting 5 or so games a week

Fox and ESPN have never approached the excellence that NBC has acheived in broadcasting the EPL. I will be surpremely disappointed for this to go back to ESPN and/or FOX.

[Grover]

West Ham starting 'wonderkid' Reece Oxford in midfield against Arsenal. At 16 years, 237 days Oxford becomes West Ham's youngest ever starter in the Premier League.

[Grover]

Wow.

[rowech]

Jose and Cech have pulled off a modern day Trojan Horse.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Grover

West Ham starting 'wonderkid' Reece Oxford in midfield against Arsenal. At 16 years, 237 days Oxford becomes West Ham's youngest ever starter in the Premier League.

Now that Allardyce is gone, I can at least have a neutral opinion on West Ham.

I must admit, I was fooled once again by Arsenal.

[miami_fan]

I guess the good news for the Gunners is that they are only a point behind Chelsea after one week. That is not a bad position, right?

[The Jackal]

I am disgusted

[kingfc22]

Oh Wegner...Giroud over Walcott? And then Cech...that was afwul.

[Grover]

I am chuffed

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by TroyF

In this case I think it could have been a red for the high spikes without any of the other considerations, but I am fascinated by the debate.

Vine

As a former keeper and Jacks fan, I thought high spikes in the box was an obvious reason for the red card. Then again, that was the call Swansea never got last season as I think they had 2 PKs.

[ISiddiqui]

Hey, Newcastle actually didn't do that bad... and maybe should have won. Against Southampton. Well, that's a good start!

[AlexB]

Continuing the end of last season where we were the most successful team in Europe over the last 9 matches, it's only natural Leicester sit on top of the league

[miami_fan]

In New Jersey and immediately encounter crowd trouble ahead of the New York derby (Red Bulls-City). Video: pic.twitter.com/slY3hYn5aM

— Rob Harris (@RobHarris) August 9, 2015

[Landshark44]

Red Bulls uniforms are awful... WTF are they wearing?

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Landshark44

Red Bulls uniforms are awful... WTF are they wearing?

Glad I wasn't the only one to notice. Makes it 10x worse when NYC's jerseys are pretty nice in contrast.

[Glengoyne]

I just watched the Tivo of Liverpool and Stoke.

I'm definitely not sold on Liverpool's attack. Aside from being saved by Coutinho, they looked hard pressed to crack through Stoke's well organized defense. While Coutinho saved the day with his strike, it seemed to me that LFC ran their offense through him almost exclusively, and he didn't seem any more capable of orchestrating a breakthrough today than he did during the lambasting last season.


Stoke looked far more impressive at both ends in my book. But it might have been Liverpool's lack of polish that made that impression.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

I am disgusted

Beyond disgusted. There was simply no reason for that. None.

The only solace, and I mean the ONLY solace I have is that the last time I was this stunned after an opening day, Arsenal went on a tear and led the league for most of the season before collapsing at the end. I think it was Aston Villa the last time.

One of the single most disappointing games I have ever watched one of the sports teams I cheer for have. Horrible.

[law90026]

Wenger trying to be clever again, similar to last season when he insisted on the 4-1-4-1 formation at the start.

If the Caz-Coq midfield pairing worked last season, why start to tinker with it ai order to shoehorn one of his favourite players into his preferred position, i.e. Ramsey? Especially Ramsey is still showing serious tactical ill-discipline?

[Grover]

Arsenal supporters, what's it like to have the midfield dominated by a 16 year old?

20-21 on passing, 3 tackles, 3 interceptions, won 5 of 7 challenges and only lost possession once.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Landshark44

Red Bulls uniforms are awful... WTF are they wearing?

Wasn't that their normal unis?

[Landshark44]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Wasn't that their normal unis?

I don't watch much MLS, so I've never really seen them.mthey just seemed very amateurish to me, especially the backs...

They look like stuff they wear in the local men's league..

[ISiddiqui]

Are you talking about the numbers on the back or the design on the back? The numbers are a fan-thing the MLS is doing for all teams in the league - its actually an amalgam of fan selfies digitally combined.

As for the rest of the design, I think that's the basic Red Bull team design - I think RB Salzburg has it similar, at the least (I think there are 3 RB teams in the world at current).

[Grover]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

As for the rest of the design, I think that's the basic Red Bull team design - I think RB Salzburg has it similar, at the least (I think there are 3 RB teams in the world at current).

Yup. Salzburg, New York and Leipzig, though due to German ownership laws, the Leipzig team is RasenBallsport Leipzig and not Red Bull Leipzig.

[ISiddiqui]

There is always that desire that someone buys the team from Red Bull and gives them a more normal name. I remember the old Metrostars and hopefully they wouldn't go back to that .

[SirFozzie]

NBC keeps the English Premier League rights for six years. Link later as I'm out

[miami_fan]

I can help out

NBC Sports agrees to 6-year extension exclusive home of Premier League | ProSoccerTalk

[ISiddiqui]

Ugh... horrible news for cord cutters. ESPN, at least, can be procured through Sling TV ($20 a month). At least I've have NBC's one game a Saturday (well for most weekends of the season).

[Grover]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Ugh... horrible news for cord cutters. ESPN, at least, can be procured through Sling TV ($20 a month). At least I've have NBC's one game a Saturday (well for most weekends of the season).

This has been my worry too. Luckily I have a friend with Dish (yikes), willing to give up his user/pass so I can abuse it for extra time.