- The Yanks wowed with a dominant display
vs Scotland and then struggled in subsequent matches vs Brazil and Canada. We
compare and contrast the three performances based on four important factors.
Playing from the Back
The most promising difference between the regimes
of Jurgen Klinsmann and Bob Bradley has been the insistence on keeping the ball
on the floor. This philosophy was on display in a beautiful manner against
Scotland. It must be noted that the Scots dropped deep and applied little
pressure to the Yanks back four which made it easy for the defense to find Michael
Bradley, Maurice Edu and Jermaine Jones to advance the ball up the pitch. This
ball retention philosophy allowed the US to dominate the run of play and also
pin Scotland back and make them unable to counter attack because they could
only recover the ball deep inside their half.
However, the Brazil match was a different
story. The Samba Boys applied higher pressure to the US back four and the
American defense was rushed and uncomfortable. This resulted in long balls into
Herculez Gomez through the center or out wide to Donovan or Torres. These low
percentage punts upfield allowed Brazil to easily win the ball back.
In the first half against Canada, the US
followed a similar course. With Canada dropping all eleven players to midfield
or deeper, the Yanks became frustrated. As a result, they sent long balls
towards the front three which played into the Canadian’s strategy. As the game
went on, Clint Dempsey became more frustrated and started to drop deeper to
look for the ball which was good and bad. The good is that it gave the US a
central numbers advantage and helped them move the ball towards goal. The bad
was that Dempsey was often too far from goal to create chances in the final
third. If the Klinsmann stylistic revolution is going to have a lasting impact,
the US will have to play a more patient game in defense to try and break down
opponents via player and ball movement like we saw against Scotland.
Midfield Shape & Setup
In the three matches, we saw three
different midfield setups and two different formations. This experimentation is
what friendlies are for. However, only one of the setups was effective. Against
Scotland, the Yanks played Edu as the holding midfielder with Jones and Bradley
as box to box players. This setup allowed Jones and Bradley to spring forward
using their pace and support the front three.
Also, this shape allowed Michael Bradley
to shine. Since moving to Chievo, he has developed from a player who relied on
athleticism and effort to a player who still possess those attributes but also
has tactical awareness and creative skill to craft scoring chances. For
example, he slipped in Donovan for a second half goal against Scotland.
However, Bradley and Edu swapped roles
against Brazil. @BrianStraus of the Sporting News explained the move on
twitter, “JK said MB deep v Brazil b/c of pressure, needed someone who could
make good passes to feet. Canada yielding MF, so why not push MB higher?”
Logically, playing Bradley deeper in the Brazil
match made sense but the move neutralized the best attributes of Edu and
Bradley. Edu’s best position is the holding role because he is not great as a
distributor or a creator. He excels on stopping attacks through the middle
which protects the back four. Bradley could have provided more of an attacking
spark playing closer to goal. Also, Bradley at times struggles in his tactical
positioning as seen in the goal by Marcelo. Brazil attacked from the middle to
the left and Marcelo’s run into the box was not tracked by Bradley resulting in
an easy goal.
Against Canada, the US went with a 4-4-1-1
or a 4-4-2 look. Jones and Bradley partnered without a designated holding
player. Often times they were fulfilling the same duties which made their roles
redundant. They frequently dropped deep in tandem to collect the ball from
defense which left a gap in the center.
Creating Chances
After creating chances in multiple ways
against Scotland, the US suffered from not having a plan b in the other two
matches. The main difference was the lack of high pressure from the front men. The
first goal in the Scotland match was a result of Torres winning the ball deep
in Scotland’s half and striking on the counter. In the other two matches, Gomez
was eager to work to win the ball back, but as a unit the front six did not
press aggressively. This allowed the Brazil fullbacks, Marcelo and Danilo, time
to gallop forward. Canada was allowed time to relieve pressure by simply
playing the ball across the back four.
The other issue was playing with two narrow
wide players. Torres and Donovan are not natural wide players so they
instinctively cut in to receive the ball. While this allowed the fullbacks to
overlap to provide width, the fullbacks were isolated. This meant their only
option was to cross. This tactic was fairly effective but too predictable. When
the US scored v Brazil, Fabian Johnson was able to interchange and play a
one-two to get in the box and cross from a better position. The lack of
interplay or cutting inside from the flanks made the fullbacks role easy to
combat.
Finally, the US never tested the Canada
defense by moving the ball from one side to the other. By switching the point
of attack, the defense has to completely shift and the possibility of a
rotational breakdown elevates. The only time the Yanks did the against Canada
was in the second half when Dempsey started it on the left and it swung to
Donovan on the right who crossed to Jones at the back post but his header was
clear. This horizontal movement enabled a better crossing angle for Donovan.
Defensive Performance
Since Klinsmann has taken charge, the US
defense has been pretty reliable. However, the Brazil match exposed some flaws.
Three of the four defenders, Cherundolo, Bocanegra and Onyewu, lack pace. This
was troublesome especially against Neymar and Hulk.
Furthermore, the three friendlies did not
address whether Bocanegra and Cherundolo are in the World Cup 2014 plans. Being
in the starting eleven suggests that Klinsmann is high on them, but the pair
will be 35 in 2014. Marcelo and Neymar marauded down the left flank all night,
making Cherundolo look like a traffic cone. They are two excellent players but
the US needs to at least experiment with other options. I wish Klinsmann would
have tinkered with a Goodson/Parkhurst or Goodson/Cameron pairing just to see
what it could bring to the side.
At right back, Cherundolo is holding
his place due to a lack of competiton.
With Timmy Chandler failing to fully commit to playing for the US and Eric
Lichaj not playing often for Aston Villa, there are no viable replacements.
Hopefully Lichaj can accumulate more starts next season for Villa or another
club because he has the potential to be an attacking threat down the right. In
limited minutes we can tell that Michael Parkhurst is not a right back. He was
too timid to take on the Canadian defense in one v one situations and was
exposed in the buildup to Simeon Jackson’s late chance in the match. The good
news is Fabian Johnson has played very well and looks to be the right back of
the future for the US.
Overall, we have learned a lot about the
squad from the past two weeks and that Klinsmann is still experimenting on how
to incorporate Dempsey into the lineup. While a few question marks remain, the
upcoming match against Antigua & Barbuda should allow the team more time to
figure out the minor issues.
We want to hear your thoughts from the three friendlies.
Tweet us @kpngacleansheet
Or post on our Facebook Wall.
No comments:
Post a Comment