Commentary

France-USA Men's International Friendly Player Ratings

FRANCE-USA EXPRESS
June 9 in Lyon, France
France 1 USA 1. Goals: Mbappe (Pavard, 78); Green 44.
Att.:  58,241

Starting only one player with more than 10 caps, a young USA team -- average age 22 years -- struck first and led World Cup-bound 2016 European Championship runner-up France for 34 minutes before giving up the equalizer in a 1-1 tie on Saturday.

USA Player Ratings:
Starters
Player (Club) GP/G
7 Zack Steffen (Columbus Crew) 3/0
His seven saves included three big ones: on Nabil Fekir's 80th-minute free kick, Fekir's long-range stoppage-time effort and the ensuing close-range shot from Ousmane Dembele on the rebound. (Lucky not to be called for a penalty kick when his two-fisted punch, while going for a corner kick, sent Olivier Giroud off the field with a bloody head.)

6 Shaq Moore (Levante/ESP) 2/0
Right back struggled defensively -- fouled on four occasions -- but made up for it with his attacks down the wing, including one that helped set up the USA's goal.

4 Cameron Carter-Vickers (Ipswich Town/ENG) 4/0
One of USA's three central defenders broke up attacks but stumbled to the ground as Benjamin Pavard's pass rolled to Kylian Mbappe to score equalizer.

7 Matt Miazga (Vitesse/NED) 7/1
Marshaled the crowded U.S. central defense until he was sidelined -- and would need 15 stitches -- by Steffen's punch in the 60th minute that also downed Giroud.

6 Tim Parker (New York Red Bulls) 2/0
Part of the American defensive barrier that stifled the French for most of the game. Blocked Mbappe's 26th minute shot.

5 Antonee Robinson (Bolton/ENG) 2/0
Played solidly at left back. Struggled with his passing.

6 Tyler Adams (New York Red Bulls) 5/0
Toiled for 90 minutes to disturb France's midfield. One of the few Americans who got close to the French goal -- and should have done better with his ball through the goal area late in the game.

6 Wil Trapp (Columbus Crew SC) 6/0
Captaining USA for fourth time, buzzed around with his crew of defensive midfielders to frustrate the French.

6 Weston McKennie (Schalke 04/GER) 4/1
Midfield workhorse helped make sure most of France's shots were from long range. A admirable performance from the 19-year-old, but showed propensity for the reckless when yellow-carded for throwing an elbow.

6 Bobby Wood (Hamburg/GER) 39/12
Helped bring the ball down field in buildup to the USA's goal. Caught offside in first two hopeful U.S. attacks -- and offside in 48th minute when he poked Moore's pass into the net. Fought tenaciously while usually surrounded by several Frenchmen.

7 Julian Green (Greuther Fuerth/GER) 10/4
Pounced on ball misplayed by Djibril Sidibe to strike a fierce shot on the turn inside the near post to give USA 1-0 lead. An excellent finish from the 23-year-old.

Substitutes
6 Erik Palmer-Brown (KV Kortrijk/BEL) 2/0
Replaced Miazga capably when he entered in the 60th minute.

5 Joe Corona (Club America/MEX) 23/3
The 70th-minute sub managed the USA's only other shot (although off target) besides Green's.

5 DeAndre Yedlin (Newcastle United/ENG; 52/0)
Replaced Moore in the 73rd minute.

NR Josh Sargent (Werder Bremen/GER) 3/1
Late forward sub gave notice only with a foul.

NR Jorge Villafaña (Santos Laguna/MEX) 19/0
Replaced Robinson in 82nd minute.

(Ratings: 1=low; 5=middle; 10=high.)

TRIVIA: Julian Green's goal was the first ever by the USA against France. Previous results:
USA 0 France 6 (1979 in New Jersey)
France 3 USA 0 (1979 in Paris)
France 1 USA 0 (2011 in Saint-Denis)

June 9 in Lyon, France
France 1 USA 1. Goals: Goals: Mbappe (Pavard, 78); Green 44.
France -- Lloris; Sidibe (Pavard, 74), Varane, Umtiti, Mendy (Hernandez, 66); Pogba, Kante, Matuidi (Tolisso, 58); Mbappe (Lemar, 88), Griezmann (Feker, 69), Giroud (Dembele, 58).
USA -- Steffen; Moore (Yedlin, 73), Carter-Vickers, Miazga (Palmer-Brown, 60), Parker, Robinson (Villafana, 82); Adams, Trapp, McKennie; Green (Corona, 70), Wood (Sargent, 74).
Referee: William Collum (Scotland).
Att.: 58,241

Stats: France/USA
Shots: 19/2
Shots on target: 8/1
Saves: 7/0
Corner Kicks: 9/2
Fouls: 4/14
Offside: 0/4
Possession: 69%/31%
Yellow cards: France -- none; USA -- Moore 68, McKennie 79.
Red cards: none.

39 comments about "France-USA Men's International Friendly Player Ratings".
  1. Joseph Pratt, June 9, 2018 at 8:58 p.m.

    Time to outlaw punching by keepers. Only open-hand touches allowed. Fewer injuries (many of which are serious), more goals. Don't see a downside.

  2. Wooden Ships replied, June 9, 2018 at 10:34 p.m.

    I can’t go there Joseph. Did the punch cause both lacerations? I didn’t feel that Steffen was reckless. I know on occasion (personally speaking too) attacking players are on the receiving end and it’s unfortunate. Does it mean that change is forbidden, no. It is a Keeper tradition and they would argue a necessity. I have over the years wondered about excluding attacking players from the goal box on a corner, the initial restart that is. Sort of like being in the crease in hockey. I’ve never appreciated the technique of crowding and picking the Keeper. I’ve had stitches in soccer matches and like in hockey, stitched back up and put back on the ice-pitch. They followed the concus protocol I believe. 

  3. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 7:49 a.m.

    Joseph, I hope you don’t work for a regulatory agency. Only in this country, I see healthy 4year olds on tricycles wearing helmets or on those little step scooters that go about as fast as I walk.  My advice to you is to take up duck pin bowling and please stay away  from soccer  for it is “well-meaning “people like you who if they ever get their hands on soccer could ruin this game...

  4. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 8:08 a.m.

    Concussions are a big problem at any age, but in particular for young kids. Parents are smart enough to know this. There is overwhelming  research on this and I commend  the new rules in youth soccer.  For adults, referees just need to enforce rules of the game. If a keeper levels opposing players while punching a ball it should be a pk.

  5. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 9:55 a.m.

    I would seriously recommend, homeowners with stairs to make kids wear helmets as they go downstairs. For you know how rambunctious and unattentive young kids are.

  6. Ben Myers replied, June 10, 2018 at 11:22 a.m.

    You can't outlaw punching the ball, no way no how.  In a training session with U12s this week, I pretended to be a keeper.  One of the kids hit a hard shot, which I easily punched away with both fists.  One of my boys looked up and asked me why I did not hurt my hands.  I showed him the fisting technique.  If a keeper could not fist the ball, there would be a lot more broken and bent fingers, broken by balls traveling 70 mph or more.

    The real question should be whether fisting the ball is a foul.  The answer, of course, is maybe.  If the the keeper's follow-though from fisting hammers an opponent to the ground, maybe.  Otherwise, no.  More current members of the referee community can chime in on what constitutes a foul caused from fisting.

    Fisting of the ball by a keeper has long been part of the game, and it is part of the early training for anyone aspiring to be a keeper.

  7. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 12:23 p.m.

    Using the example of scooters parents could be worried of kids entering the street.  So many drivers looking at phones now a days. Or perhaps just having kids learn good habits at early age. I don't think improving safety ruins the game.  Over 40 prohibits the slide tackle, with no negative impact on enjoyment. Futsal is basically no contact and still very enjoyable.  We learn and adjust all the time just like smoking and seat belts.

  8. Wooden Ships, June 9, 2018 at 10:22 p.m.

    For their age and experience I thought they acquitted themselves well. Steffen was unfazed in his requirements. Would like to have seen Sargent at the start of the 2nd and to have gamed more possession. Obviously France is quick and technical, but it’s asking too much to defend, defend. Weah didn’t enter, why. Not criticizing Sarachan, everyone has different tweaks. I was pleasantly surprised with 3 center backs. My goodness I was hopeing to give up less than 5 and we allowed 1. Bravo.

  9. Bob Ashpole replied, June 10, 2018 at 1:45 p.m.

    I think France was surprised too. The system certainly clogged up the area in front of the goal.

  10. s fatschel, June 10, 2018 at 8:23 a.m.

    WS..your spot on. Can't wait to see this group progress. 

  11. Kent James, June 10, 2018 at 9:48 a.m.

    I usually complain about soccer's inability to award the better team, but okay, now I see the merits.  We were thoroughly outplayed by a much better team, as we should have been, since they're one of the teams favored to win the world cup and we were playing a bunch of 20 year olds, at least one of whom (Sargent) has not played a first division professional game.  I thought we played well defensively (especially Parks), and Josh Green's goal was a classic "make the other team pay for a mistake", which is what you need at this level.  We gave the ball away much to easily, but kudos to the guys for not being intimidated, sticking to their task, playing well for each other, and getting a good result.  Watching this group for the last 3 games, I am certainly encouraged for the future...

  12. frank schoon, June 10, 2018 at 10:50 a.m.

    Obviously, the score doesn't reflect the one-sided nature of this game. 6-1 should have been more appropo. The goal we scored was not because of a well-defined play, nice build up, creating space with someone to slot in shoot and score. As I watched the replay, Green never even looked at the goal, his head was down, never even looked and went for broke. The moment he shot it, I thought it was going looking at the sidenet, but somehow it went into the world smallest space allowed between the goalie and first post...
    Regardless of the score, we have to look at the nuts and bolts of the game in order to see what the US players need to work on. Sargent, needed more playing time. Our man to man defense is EXTREMELY poor. The France players had a very unique way of going around our players. As they dribble,electing to go around one side of our player, at walking speed even, they craftilly SHIELD the ball, and there is moment the US player think he can get to it, the france player uses his other leg to extend to ball further and he is gone. This move(ment)was seen so often by so many france players, leading me to believe this move has been thoroughly trained and practiced. It is a great move(ment), very unique not seen often.
    Furthermore, our players do not even SHIELD the ball when they dribble. Your inviting the opponent come closer and saying, "go ahead take it off my foot". SHIELDING, should be second nature. Again, this only makes me question the quality of the DA training programs, nationwide of not teaching the simple, basic techniques that a 14year should be capable of carrying out. There is simply no excuse for this!  Furthermore ,I noticed we totally had no attack down the left flank, neither from our back, nor from our two strikers, Green and Wood who are both center to right of center oriented; concluding the US not only lacked a balanced overall attack but also neither Wood or Green compliment each other for they are both too alike in attack their oriented approach. And they both feel more comfortable looking over their right shoulder than left to receive the ball.
    I thought our goalie did a good job, although I think he should be quicker in putting the ball into play. We played too defensively! In the second half we played 5-4-1. This is not good. Any coach can pack the defense and park the bus, but it takes  more ingenuity to come out and attack. Besides it would have been better to allow these kids too experiment offensively to see what they are capable of....so what if the French score a few goals because of it...this game is meaningless.  Next Post.

  13. frank schoon, June 10, 2018 at 11:14 a.m.

    The French team looked good as individuals, and are good in playing in very small spaces especially in the US third where we parked the bus. 1v1 they just went by us,like a hot knife through butter, they played in small triangles passing the ball around, something our players could only attempt on video games. Notice Pogba's passes were actually unique, especially the ones he employed the outside of foot. Those were 'mouthwatering', beautiful, to see them for its rarety and well executed.... again it is sign of the times why player skills have gone down. Pogba should be play centerback position, spraying passes with either side of the foot, or dribbling past players  through the middle creating a suction resulting in more space down the attacking flanks.
    I'm not impressed with the French build up of attack, it is too slow and faulty for the outside back are always stationary upon receiving the ball...this is not good and it will hurt the French attack against better teams. Also, I'm sick and tired of the square positioned centerbacks which results in so often passes made in the backfield, a la ring around the "rosy", making it too predictable.  We need to go back with a sweeper type resulting in quiker forward movements. Either the centerback or the sweeper should go right up the middle with the ball thereby creating numerical superiority at midfield causing the opponent midfielder having to choose to stay or leave their own man.
    Neither am I impressed with French strikers as far as individual prowess. Yes, Griezeman is a good attacker but he employs space better than individual skills. The French somehow create great midfielder, but players like Fontaine, Kopa, Rocheteau, are rarely created.
    Another thing, someone needs to buyout Taylor Twellman's contract and retire him..He absolutely says nothing or contributes anything worthwhile or insightful to the game...

  14. R2 Dad, June 10, 2018 at 11:19 a.m.

    Only saw the highlights, but our back line got caught ball-watching. Even at this level our defenders are making basic mistakes. I think the result helps with confidence, but let's not make excuses for such poor possession due to age. If your good enough, you're old enough. Whether they are 20 or 30, getting outplayed like that shows how far we need to go. Just as well Weah didn't play--wouldn't have been able to showcase attacking ability since woudn't have gotten many touches in the attacking half.

  15. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 12:09 p.m.


    R2 , I forgot all about Weah. I agree he would not have added anything to the game. Good point about the possession game. That element will be added to the new style of soccer we should play...
    I keep hoping that van Gaal is going to become our next coach...he mentioned yesterday he is in big discussion about a good offer and implied he would be working with young talent. If we're going to get a coach let's go for one of the best, for we need new input and I hope Earney's first move as GM would be go in style. 

  16. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 12:50 p.m.

    R2.. the game I saw the defense was under tremendous pressure all game. There was far more good defending than bad. If there was some ball watching I can excuse that as its really hard for anyone to defend that much for 90 minutes. Also for the most part the team played out if the back instead of just clearing the ball.  Just lacked posssion in midfield and the connection from midfield to forward but that will come will time. I  liked is the will and determination the young team showed.  

  17. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 1:40 p.m.

    S.  you must be talking about team defense for individual defense was atrocious. Also on team defense they  failed to cover positionally the gap between the midfielders and the backline  as the defensive line drops back in linear fashion, allowing the attacking French players to fill that open space/gap to shoot on goal. This consistently happened as the backline drops back as a flatback defense  positioning right in front of their goalie.

  18. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 2 p.m.

    Besides the great defensive effort I think Sarachan deserves kodos for his job over the last 3 games. Watching him over the years he quietly and humbly gets the job done and brings out the best in his players. I hope he stays on at least as an assistant to Berhalter.

  19. Bob Ashpole replied, June 10, 2018 at 2:05 p.m.

    Frank, I thought Trap, Parker, and Miagza, followed by sub Palmer-Brown, defended well. I especially noticed Trap and Parker anticipating and making timely plays. Nobody played that well on the attack. Greene's goal resulted from an opponent's bad touch (not an assist) and the shot took a lucky deflection.

  20. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 2:43 p.m.

    Bob, I would like to see those 3 you mentioned play defense when they don't play as a whole team  in a  don't "park the bus" mode. It is a different way of thinking, approach to the game of defense when you come out there knowing that the whole team plays in a 'defensive" mode as compared to  normal play mode. Furthermore as I stated before they likewise consistently left space behind them as they all dropped back towards the goalie even there was noone to cover. These is common disease that so often on defense...wasting manpower and not covering space. Constantly I kept seeing the french be wide open at edge of the penalty box..

  21. Bob Ashpole replied, June 11, 2018 at 3:11 p.m.

    "...the defensive line drops back in linear fashion, allowing the attacking French players to fill that open space/gap to shoot on goal." 

    I just noticed this comment. The 2 CM had a similar problem playing very flat beneath the forwards. Makes me wonder if the 2 problems are related. 

  22. frank schoon replied, June 11, 2018 at 3:44 p.m.

    Bob, you could be right. When you look at the 4-2-3-1, this system with 2 in front of the backline  also can result in this problem as well. But the overal problem which I stated before in different articles and I also remember you and I also had discussion about it ,the flatback defense. During ball pssession in the build up there is no flatback defense for the two outside back move up a little further but upon ball loss the backline runs backwards and ends up flat/linear for some reason. This scenario happens all the time. How often do you see the opponents that are attacking in the opponent's third, the defense line is scrambling back all the in to the penalty area ,positioned right in front of their own goalie. And what is so rediculous most of them don't even have a man they are covering. They just willy nilly run back like robots. It is obvious in this game how often the french players were wide open right on the edge of the penalty box. You're right there is no connection between our CM and the backline leaving that much space for the french to get into. My view on this is that this flatback/lineard (today's) defense forces the CM to run too much back and forth. That empty space could have been better covered by some of defenders who didn't have a man   but couldn't because they all ran back in a linear fashion. Look at how often when a goal is just scored and see how many more defenders outnumber the attacker. Sometimes one attacker heads or shoots scoring and defenders back covering nobody because play in a linear fashion...I'm not a fan of how defense is played today, for it is most played inefficiently....

  23. Budd Ditchendorf, June 10, 2018 at 2:17 p.m.

    I am weary on the assessment of this result. In the modern era of US Soccer, I think we over relied on quality keeper play to earn results.  A quality keeper who can bail you out is necessarry for any national team.  However, do we know enough about the game to say this was a good result given that we were bailed out by quality keeper play? Perhaps the best results we ever attained in any competion between 1994 and 2014 were due to keepers at the top of their game AND were of higher quality than the field players. The best of whichg was Brad Friedel IMHO. The WC 20018 qualification failure could not be coverd up by the same high level of goalkeeping as in the past. So, we tied a good team and our keeper was the strongest player on the field. This has got me thinking it was a good result, but we must be on guard when measuring progress in the new era of US Soccer.   

  24. Bob Ashpole replied, June 10, 2018 at 2:35 p.m.

    I also am tired too, but I call it confusing results with quality of play. The US bunkered the entire game, had little possession, but was lucky and scored a goal against the run of play capitalizing on an opponent's mistake. I agree that as long as we confuse results with quality of play, the MNT will not make significant improvement in play.

  25. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 2:53 p.m.

    Bob ,so true...Anybody who interprets the results rather than what is presented in our play, obvious lacks the understanding of what is needed. The problem is most of the fans look at the result and judge from there on

  26. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 3:16 p.m.

     SA readers and Sarachan are pretty happy with the defense and I didn't see to much praise about the offense or midfield.  Are you referring to another article? If so please cite.

  27. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 3:39 p.m.

    S. what is Sarachan suppose to say about his "park the bus' strategy, which doesn't take much brains to play, "it failed". He probably feels he has success by playing 1-1 when in fact it should have been 6-1. If he thinks he's succesful due to this score showing than he likewise doesn't understand what is needed. I've said enough about the defense, if you can't see it , I can't help with that...

  28. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 4:29 p.m.

    There are many coaches that play highly defensive counter attack style  against supperior competition. Thats also needed as a tactic, and nothing wrong seeing how these young boys do in that situation. The first two games they played a different tactic.  I'm not looking or needing your help as it's always negative,  just asking who gave the misplaced praise as there is none that I can see.  

  29. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 4:58 p.m.

    S. There is nothing wrong in playing a tactic like that, but it was not by choice but by survival. How else would you play a superior team like that when you have young inexperienced players. It was the right decision to make by Saracen for he didn't want to look bad and perhaps as an ulterior motive that there still could be a chance for him to remain as coach.  There are two reasons why Sarachan didn't elect to play high pressure defense and instead played the way he did. One,  we are extremely weak playing 1v1 ,as evidenced by the number of 1v1 battles we lost against a superior team like France; two, going out in attack mode would create a lot open space and risk against a strong, fast , technical superior, and experienced team.
    And if you find my analysis negative, I would suggest to not bother me with a discussion and  move on to the next person commenting 
     Have a nice day...

  30. Bob Ashpole replied, June 10, 2018 at 6:43 p.m.

    s fatschel, nobody here criticized the coaches game plan. You should distinguish criticism of player's performance from coaching. While sometimes it is difficult to tell if players are making dumb decisions or following the game plan, most of the time the difference is apparent.

    Sometimes coaches share the blame for player's mistakes because they should have corrected it in training. An example from this match, a US fullback was too wide creating a large gap between him and the CB. France punished him by exploiting the inside gap. Classic amateur mistake. The player is to blame but so is the coach for not fixing it during training.

  31. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 6:44 p.m.

    FS.  Commenting is part of the free discussion of this website.  But IMHO constant complaining will not move the soccer conversation forward and puts on the hamster wheel.  Clearly the USMNT and Sarachan must have done some good this week?  Why not instead put that energy into putting a plan together?  If youth street soccer which is your passion, research and share with us your findings, recruit some of your contacts in Holland, maybe famous, and evangelize at all the clubs and schools in your area.  Talk to the DA about free play practices, etc or USYSA about cost reduction ideas so soccer participation increases and becomes part of our culture.  Point is we need plans, practical solutions and soccer minds to take the lead.

  32. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 7:50 p.m.

    S. Like you say, commenting is part of the free discussion of this website. But beyond  that you have no business telling me what I should do and where I should direct my energy because  you look unfavorably of my analysis. I respect everyone one’s opinion on the subject at hand on this website, regardless if I agree or disagree and leave at that. Anything beyond that gets into an area where, I say keep your nose  out of my business...

  33. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 8:34 p.m.

    A response to SA readers like "you must not have played" is hardly respectful.  And those are simply suggestions to help move the conversation forward.  I doubt any SA reader cares about your business.

  34. frank schoon replied, June 10, 2018 at 9:45 p.m.

    S. As I read your comments I found them lacking a certain deeper insight and remained very superficial, and therefore I came to the conclusion that you must not have played or much at all. That is not a sign of disrespect but a conclusion based on how I find your comments to be,  nothing more nothing less. That is my opinion, and if you find that disrespectful that’s your problem. If I had stated your opinions were stupid and  you probably stunk as a player then  would you have had a good case of disrespect.....

  35. s fatschel replied, June 10, 2018 at 10:34 p.m.

    Sorry thats just more nonsense. What readers comment on is based on interest or importatance not knowledge. And IMHO nothing I have seen from your opinions constitutes some "deeper" understanding. Soccer is just not that complicated. Telling readers they have not played or "trouble with americans"  is just way to try to portray oneself as some authority. But readers are smart and see through that.

  36. Bob Ashpole replied, June 11, 2018 at 12:54 a.m.

    s fatschel, your comments surprise me. While the objective of soccer is "simple" accomplishing that objective is not. In chess there are over 288 billion different possible alternatives after both players make 4 moves. Soccer has many times more possible alternatives. In soccer the players are not limited in their movements as chess pieces are, except by touch and end lines, and the game lasts 90 minutes with no "time outs".

    Soccer is as simple as war. "Everything is very simple in war, but the simplest thing is difficult." Carl von Clausewitz. The comparison is appropriate because athletic competition is more or less ritualized combat. I like to describe a soccer team as 11 players sharing one brain. That degree of coordination is of course impossible.

    Just go on kidding yourself that everyone posts here without experience and knowledge to support their comments. 

  37. s fatschel replied, June 11, 2018 at 7:39 a.m.

    BA as usual you purposely misunderstand. Readers post because of interest not as an opportunity portray themselves as an expert. For example just because someone does not respond to  some comment about a teams formation does not mean they are not knowledgeable. It may just be too boring or obvious to respond to.  Telling readers you have a deeper understanding is arrogant and making alot of uninformed  assumptions.

  38. frank schoon replied, June 11, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.

    S. I'm done with you. I will no longer respond to you.

  39. Kent James, June 11, 2018 at 1:25 a.m.

    I am surprised at the general negative tone of the comments on this article.  I think it's a bit unrealistic for a US team that is very young to go out and give the French a clinic.  Did we make mistakes? Clearly.  We gave the ball up way to easily, and very rarely had any attack. But these young players were focused and committed for 90 minutes, and held one of the favorites to win the WC to a draw in their home country.  While they were sometimes beaten 1 v 1 (given the quality of the opposition, that should not be surprising), but they almost always covered for each other so they limited quality of most of of the chances taken by the French.  Our young players need some experience at this level, and they got it.  I say well done, lads.  I don't think anyone who watched the game thinks we are as good as the French right now, so yes, there's a lot of room for improvement.  Give us a few years and maybe we will be able to take it to the French offensively as well.  

Next story loading loading..

Discover Our Publications