Commentary

USA-Guyana: Men's Gold Cup Player Ratings

USA-GUYANA EXPRESS
June 18 in St. Paul, Minnesota
USA 4 Guyana 0. Goals: Arriola 28, Boyd 51, 81, Zardes 55.
Att.: 19,418.

The USA opened its Gold Cup campaign with a 4-0 win over Guyana, the lowest rated team (177th in the FIFA World Ranking) in the 16-team tournament. Although a U.S. win never seemed in doubt -- Guyana's first shot on goal came with the USA up 3-0 -- Coach Gregg Berhalter's team was more often scrappy than smooth. Tyler Boyd, who recently switched from New Zealand to the USA, scored twice for the USA. He and Paul Arriola delivered the evening's standout performances.

USA PLAYER RATINGS
(1=low; 5=middle; 10=high.)

GOALKEEPER

Keanu Marsh-Brown's shot from 18 yards was batted away by Zack Steffen in the 69th minute, leading to one of only two corner kicks for the Golden Jaguars.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
5 Zack Steffen (Columbus Crew) 11/0 (24)

DEFENDERS

Nick Lima combined well with Tyler Boyd on the right flank, starting the third minute with the first of many crosses sent in by Lima and Boyd. One of Lima's crosses presented Christian Pulisic with a close-range header he struck poorly. Lima's 44th-minute shot forced a save that bounced to Boyd for close-range chance not finished. Central defenders Aaron Long and Walker Zimmerman get credit for making Steffen's night so easy and hit good cross-field balls to wingers. Tim Ream, who played with poise as usual, got the left wing foray going on the first goal.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
7 Nick Lima (San Jose Earthquakes) 4/0 (24)
6 Aaron Long (New York Red Bulls) 7/0 (26)
6 Walker Zimmerman (LAFC) 8/2 (26)
6 Tim Ream (Fulham/ENG) 31/1 (31)

MIDFIELDERS

Michael Bradley's sideways and backward passes were fine. His forward ones not so much -- until the 51st minute when he delivered a perfectly weighted cross-field ball to Tyler Boyd on the 2-0 goal, a sharp low strike inside the far post 14 yards. Wingers Paul Arriola, who scored the first goal, and Boyd, who also made it 4-0, provided most of the U.S. offense. Arriola's opening goal impressed for its crisp narrow angle finish and the distance he ran to get on the end of the give-and-go with Weston McKennie, who passed back perfectly. Arriola assisted on Boyd's second goal. (The blemish on Boyd's performance: three clear shots on goal squandered.) Arriola's 55th-minute shot led to the third goal. Christian Pulisic dazzled on the dribble early in the game but passed poorly. He shot the ball into goalkeeper Akel Clark's chest on his best scoring chance, and went for long stretches without seeing the ball. In fact, Pulisic, Bradley and McKennie -- in their first start together -- hardly combined. The attack worked nonetheless with its emphasis on wing play, but against more formidable foes a more cohesive central midfield will be needed. McKennie, who committed five fouls but escaped a persistent infringement yellow card, was subbed with an injury in 74th minute.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
8
Paul Arriola (D.C. United) 24/4 (24)
4 Christian Pulisic (Chelsea/ENG) 26/10 (20)
6 Michael Bradley (Toronto FC/CAN) 146/17 (31)
6 Weston McKennie (Schalke/GER) 10/1 (20)
8 Tyler Boyd (Vitoria Guimares/POR) 2/2 (24)

FORWARDS

Gyasi Zardes scored a blooper goal when Arriola's shot banged off defender Terence Vancooten into Zardes' face and into the net. It wasn't the only time Zardes was accidentally effective. He slipped while shooting in the 27th minute and his blocked shot provided Pulisic a close-range chance. A more coordinated effort would have seen Zardes finish an 11th-minute header and the ball that Pulisic failed to head on goal in first-half stoppage time. Zardes also scored a 20th-minute goal called back because he was offside by a foot.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
6 Gyasi Zardes (Columbus Crew) 46/8 (27)

SUBSTITUTES

Wil Trapp lofted the long pass to Arriola on the fourth goal. Cristian Roldan shot wide after entering in the 63rd minute.

Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
5 Cristian Roldan (Seattle Sounders) 12/0 (24)
6 Wil Trapp (Columbus Crew SC) 18/0 (26)
nr Djordje Mihailovic (Chicago Fire) 4/1 (20)

TRIVIA. Tyler Boyd's goal was the 1,000th goal in U.S. national team history.

June 18 in St. Paul, Minnesota
USA 4 Guyana 0. Goals: Arriola 28, Boyd 51, 81, Zardes 55.
USA -- Steffen; Lima, Zimmerman, Long, Ream; Boyd, Pulisic (Roldan, 63), Bradley (Trapp, 62), McKennie (Mihailovic, 74), Arriola; Zardes.
Guyana -- Clarke; Dover, Vancooten, Briggs, Gordon; Bonds, Danns (Holder, 85), Marsh-Brown (Jeffrey, 73), Beresford (Cox, 58), Harriott; Welshman.
Yellow cards: none. Red cards: none.
Referee: Ivan Arcides Barton (El Salvador).
Att.: 19,418.

Stats:
USA/Guyana
Shots: 20/4
Shots on Goal: 6/1
Saves: 1/2
Corner Kicks: 3/4
Fouls: 18/7
Offside: 1/2
Possession: 60%/40%

55 comments about "USA-Guyana: Men's Gold Cup Player Ratings".
  1. Christopher Osmond, June 19, 2019 at 8:48 a.m.

    What is loss with Bradley ("Michael Bradley's sideways and backward passes were fine") and Trapp is that they pass backwards way too much:  They do not receive on the back foot and open-up enough to see more forward options.  Against better teams, they (Bradley and Trapp) will be pressed both to guarantee the back pass, which then in turn, will be a signal to press our defenders as unit; we will then get caught in possession.  It's coming.  

  2. Wooden Ships replied, June 19, 2019 at 10:24 a.m.

    Quit it, you’re making too much sense.

  3. Sam Bellin, June 19, 2019 at 10:33 a.m.

    Exactly right Christopher.  ESPN Soccer rated Bradley a "4" on the night which is what I would have given.  He passes back so much because he can't pass forward any more -- he was probably under 50% on forward passes against a very weak midfield defense.  His lack of defensive range is also a huge problem -- to me he was winning about a quarter of winnable balls in his area.  I'm not a Bradley hater.  I thought he was a really good D Mid in 2010 and still pretty good in 14, but he can no longer keep up.  The international game keeps getting faster and he keeps getting slower.  He deserves a proper send-off -- some type of Tribute Game -- for all of his years of good service to the USA, but I think he needs to be retired from the National Team after the Gold Cup.  

  4. Wooden Ships replied, June 19, 2019 at 11:05 a.m.

    Agreed.

  5. Bob Ashpole, June 19, 2019 at 11:33 a.m.

    I watched the same game but I don't see the problem as Bradley. Perhaps it would be clearer to say that I don't see the problem solved by replacing Bradley. The problem I saw was poor execution of a poor system by technically deficient players who essentially pass with only one side of one foot and don't move. 

    Ghana left tons of open space, but most of our players didn't move into the spaces off the ball.

    I cannot get past the lack of imagination in the idea that our "best" strikers are Altidore and Zardes. Neither one is effective in the box. They don't turn with the ball well enough and are not quick enough, physically or mentally. 

    Dempsey was a big guy, but he was still quick and could turn a marker out of his socks. So being tall is not an excuse for being slow. 

    Coaches need to remember that strikers are "forwards" and that there is no inherent advantage in a striker being tall. Being tall does not make a target forward good. Being good on the ball under pressure does.

  6. Seth Vieux replied, June 19, 2019 at 2:54 p.m.

    Agree with pretty much everything here, with the exception that I am not as hard on Altidore. As of right now, if Berhalter insists on playing this wonky tactical system I'm not sure who could play the 6 better than Bradley in the pool, save for Adams, who of course if he were fit GB would play in the silly RB position that is so key to this silly system. He's significantly better than Trapp, and to be quite honest I don't think Adams would necessarily be much better for what the 6 needs to do for GB. I just cannot for the life of me understand why GB insists on playing this way when the player pool clearly does not support it. And of course if the player pool did support it why not just play the proven 4-3-3? 

    If GB won't commit to developing Sargent I don't see how any other striker in the pool is ahead of Altidore for whatever single central striker system you want to play. Zardes is the same absolute technical joke he's always been, and expecting him to be effective anywhere in the middle of the pitch is delusional. He's only capable of being mildly effective out wide where he can put his athleticism and work rate to some good defensive use and where he may occasionally be able to 'fix' those awful first touches with the additional space. I would be completely dissatisfied with Zardes's technical level if he were playing on a U16 team, and he's going to have 50 caps by the end of GC!!!

    While we're on sub-standard technical levels for international play, Arriola and Roldan are pretty fringy for attacking players there too. Not saying I can't imagine them being on the roster considering our pool, but if we want to become remotely relevant again there are U20s that at least have a technical level you can build off of going forward.

    As weak as the backline is we'll be absolutely punished by any marginally decent team if GB doesn't have 4 traditional backs with 2 DCMs to give them actual cover. Last night did nothing to increase my optimism that GB is steering this ship in the right direction, but at least they didn't continue to embarrass even the casual fan by failing to get results against awful competition.

  7. frank schoon, June 19, 2019 at 11:43 a.m.

    I watched the 1st half and the first 30 minutes of it again this morning. My overal impression is that we don't have the right coach if we want to make some important changes to the style of play, and how we view the game. NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN OUR MANNER OR STYLE OF PLAY. It is same old ,same old, hard work, counterattacking soccer wtiht lots of foam on the mouth.
    We have nothing but runners and hard workers, and perhaps little talent with Pulisic. GB was a simple centerback/defender type as player who basicly spend his career chasing and looking at the heels of attackers. This description should tell you enough of what to expect as far as creative and smart soccer.  Our players can be more easily judged by the amount of sweat and mileage they make on the field, not by the brains or creative play.
    All our players are "reaction' oriented not anticipation oriented and that can be seeing in their reaction to the opponent with the ball. I'm not surprised by GB selection of Boyd the player from NZ  or like Lima behind  him ,for example, are very similar players, they hustle ,work hard, and are very industrious. But you'll never see them ,for instance, as they approach an opponent with the ball , at the same time in all their fervor look behing to see they if can block a passing lane behind them. Instead they act like a bull going after a red flag. Boyd  the wing is all over the place, on defense in his own third than up front. If Messi played like that he wouldn't last 20min.
    What I'm saying is that the US men's lack a sense of good positional play allowing the ball do the running instead of the legs. This is one of the problems the US has which will not solved by coach like GB for that's above his head to teach that.This is why you hear the players from Atlanta talk about how they are being taught by Frank de Boer the positional game.





  8. Seth Vieux replied, June 19, 2019 at 2:59 p.m.

    No doubt. The tactical understanding of all but a precious few in this roster is honestly a step back from USMNT going back even 20 years.

  9. Bob Ashpole replied, June 19, 2019 at 8:46 p.m.

    We haven't really mentioned the most troubling consideration--Guyana is essentially an amateur team.

  10. frank schoon, June 19, 2019 at 12:18 p.m.

    The positional game is part of MB's problem as well as the team as a whole. When you build up an attack from the back and the passes end up either going square or backwards. That shoud tell you that team is not positioned correctly upfield. It's that simple. Now realize we basicly play with 3 in the back with #6 MB playing about 5 meter ahead. That means we have 6 passing options  furher downfield . The opponents playing high pressure usually had 4 or 5 players facing our 4 . And behind those 4/5 opponents we have 6 of our players . In other words we outnumber the opponents 10 v 4 or 5. You have to look at it as a circle of 10 players surrounding 4/5 players.
    Now there are certain principle that have to be followed in building up, which we don't carry out.
    Principle one, the first pass out of the back from the goalie is not to a centerback or defender which is usually ends up as the square ball which accomplishes NOTHING. The first pass should be vertical NOT HORIZONTAL. Two, the first pass should beat an opponent ,in other words, you don't pass  to the first line (defensive line) but further upfield, a line or two further up. All passes in your own half is with purpose of beating an opponent.
    Four, the reason for the building up is to create an open-man, a free man around midfield. THAT IS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE BUILD UP. By creating a freeman , you force the opponent to choose, stay with my man or pick the free man up.
    Five,  bypassing the first line you create automatically the free men from the line the pass bypasses. In other word ,the third man will receive a one-touch pass from the second man further down field who has his back facing downfield. In this manner you keep the tempo of the ball movement fast without having to run fast. That is not happening. MB either receives the ball from the goallie with his back facing downfield, then turns and looks and usually passes to his open defender backwards or sideways.  It all takes way too long. Not only that none of the players further up think of the 3rd man if he becomes the second man receiving the pass. Instead we have the guys upfield, stomping, ready to make a run. Guys , these is not soccer (smart soccer) is played. Even Pulisic at midfield as soon as he receives the ball, it is off to the races ,all of them do the same thing. There is no balance between the rest of the players upfileld. They all want to run and go, they are so similar, which is not what you want.


  11. Seth Vieux replied, June 19, 2019 at 3:07 p.m.

    It's as if we don't have a midfielder on the team that understands how to make a half turn. I've seen so many times in the last several games that a CM receives the ball with tons of space behind them to make a half turn into and force the D make a decision to open up another MF or F further up the pitch. Yet they either do not understand how to check their shoulders, or if they do they cannot understand the space available, and simply one touch it off to the LB/RB or even worse right back to the CB/GK the pass came from! Why bother to play the ball in to your CMs at all if not to eventually get it to them in space where they can force the D to make decisions they don't want to make?

  12. Right Winger replied, June 19, 2019 at 3:44 p.m.

    Frank, how long do you think this team will last in WC competition?

  13. frank schoon replied, June 19, 2019 at 4:52 p.m.

    RW, ..not long.  We need a big, big change in our soccer and it ain't going to come from GB, sorry to say. 

  14. frank schoon replied, June 19, 2019 at 5:16 p.m.

    Seth, if you notice MB having his back facing downfield to receive the ball, look at the rest of our players further many ,likewise , are position facing with their back downfield...A well positioned team should be facing downfield for this way you can what's going on and you waste less time moving the ball. 
    When you play positional soccer you have to take into account 4 things. One, how you are positioned to receive the ball, meaning your body stance as related to your next move; two, where you are positioned to receive the ball; how is your immediate opponent positioned as related to you and ;fourth where are your teammates positioned. This are four important aspects each player has to deal with off the ball. And HOW many of our boys are actually aware of all 4 of those aspects.
    This is what I'm talking about seeking position. Zardes never makes a CONTRA-RUN, in other words if our attack is coming from the right flank, you don't see Zardes make a diagonal run away from the right flank, thereby taking defenders away and creating space for himself as well forcing his opponent to choose to either look at the ball or Zardes but he can't do both. Or for example, when Pulisic has the ball on the flank ,the first thing you see is his teammates coming towards him to help out when instead you get away him giving a chance to for a 1v1; instead they come towards him bringing  opponents with them.
    When MB gets the ball from the leftback he should receive it with his right and pass with his left , vice versa on the otherside.....but this doesn't happen, and as result he plays to predictable.


  15. Seth Vieux replied, June 19, 2019 at 6:52 p.m.

    Frank, perhaps we're jsut not speaking the exact same language WRT MB, we both described what I've always called a half-turn :-) though I'm not certain an entire team facing down field will result in creative play or any type of possession and build up, though I'm sure I'm just not understanding you there.

    As to your 4 aspects of positional play, I would only add a 5th understanding of how quickly you can apply pressure or fill defensive gaps from where you are/are going should your team lose possession. How many of our players understand all 4/5? I would say at absolute best 3 in Pulisic, Adams, and McKinnie and probably not any of them perfectly or 'almost always' as a truly world class player does.

    Zardes has probably never made a truly deft run from central striker in his life. He quite simply lacks the vision to see what a great run can accomplish for himself, let alone his teammates through the space he could create. How many of our players understand how to make a threatening run, at the right time, to drag a defender away from the space we want to attack? If we had one that did understand would we have another player on the team that could recognize it and exploit it?

    Yes it is exhausting to see uninspired drifting towards our best-ever 1v1 player, but then again every other player they play with needs help when they are isolated in space 1v1 :-), we apparently cannot grasp that we want to expand the field while in possession to force the defense to cover more space. Instead we help them compress space.


  16. frank schoon replied, June 19, 2019 at 9:42 p.m.

    Seth, Good question about what I stated about teams facing downfield intead of with their back facing downfield. Ofcourse you will agree that it is better for players to receive a ball positioned facing downfield than with their backs. Tactically it is more efficient for you can your fieldview is much better in seeing what your next attacking options are, besides you don't have turn to first look which means slowing the tempo of attack.
    This is why Rinus Michels when he coached the great Ajax team with Cruyff made a rule that a back is not allowed to make a pass to the wing for the wing would have to receive the ball with his back facing downfield, meaning no field view, the attack will be slowed down or stopped because the wing is basically blocked in and worse he'll receive with the foot nearest to the opponent. 
    As a result you stifle or stop the attack because of your own doing ,and as result the back will sitting on the bench the rest of the game. The only time you pass to a player with his back facing downfield is for him to one-touch it or lay it off to an upcoming player ,the 3rd man on the move. And of course the 3rd man on the move would be useless if he likewise has his back facing downfield. 
    Next, it has also to do with diagonal passes. In other words the wing in my example is not allowed to receive the ball from a back but only a midfielder. The reason for that is that the midfielder is a ble to pass either to the feet of the Wing facing his attacker or pass the ball behind the opponent for the wing to run onto.All of this is possible when the wing is facing downfield able to see and anticipate the run of play vis a vis his opponent. Again ,if that midfielder has his back facing downfield ,he wouldn't be able to see wing nor able to pass to him. This is why it is so important to face downfield for the run is so much better and efficient.
    I disagree with you on Pulisic ,McKenna and Adams on knowing this. All 3 tend to be runners not the types who see the game from a positional sense . Germans only recently began to see soccer more with a positional sense and that has been much watered down since Guardiola left Bayern.
    Next post....

  17. frank schoon replied, June 19, 2019 at 9:53 p.m.

    Seth on your assessment of good 1v1 players , I agree. That is why you stay away from players who are good 1v1 like a Pulisic, becuase your not helping him by coming near him for you're bringing with you an extra defender. Other players who aren't good 1v1, is only served well with combinational passing, in other word coming to him. 
    As good as Pulisic is (relatively speaking) he should not be receiving the ball with his back facing downfield for it can only restrict his forward movement and run of play and worse it is easier for the opponent who is a lesser player to defend him. He is quick, a decent 1v1 players, and has played at a higher level than the players he faced from Guyana( like Bob states Amateurs) than why ,may I ask , did Pulisic so often in the game positioned himself with his back facing downfield at midfield to recieve a ball when he would have so many better options facing downfield. This is why disagree with you that he knows all the aspects  I enumerated on positioning.

  18. Seth Vieux replied, June 20, 2019 at 4:43 p.m.

    Frank, thank you for the clarification, I think we probably see the game fairly similarly, maybe because I was infatuated by the great Dutch national and club teams growing up. As a central mid for most of my playing days I found it is imperative for them to play at least occassionally with back downfield when their own backs are on the ball. They have to find the space and passing lanes between the lines to provide options, though of course you should always be endeavoring to do this in the best possible way, by priority: A) facing upfield - most difficult but best of course; B) on the half-turn - back facing a touchline and opening up so you can easily turn upfield if there is space / if the opposing marker has over-played, or more frequently to play a 1 or 2 touch to a wide player or your partner CM; C) last resort but often necessary, with your back downfield and checking directly to your CB on the ball. If you can create space for this check-to with a false run before checking back into your own space you can sometimes still make a turn and keep the ball moving in a positive direction.

    So I think we likely agree with that priority of positioning, though maybe disagree that it is often the case that even the best CMs in the world must check directly to against an opponent with a strong midfield. You can still relieve some pressure for your back line like this, even if you only have the time/space to shield your marker and lay the ball off to another back. It's certainly the least preferred, but still common at even the highest levels of play. What frustrates me is the lack of awareness of the space available when I see CMs check back to ball with acres of space to turn into, yet they still just play the negative one touch pass back even though there is little to no pressure. They should be turning into that space (and with that much space already positioning themselves for a half turn) and threatening the second line of defense to force them to make decisions that create passing lanes to play forward into, whether that be wide to wings moving forward, centrally to other MFs moving forward, a central striker checking to that can one touch forward to wings or lay off to another on-rushing CM, or best having the vision and quality to play all the way through to a striker running behind the backs. (Next)

  19. Seth Vieux replied, June 20, 2019 at 4:44 p.m.

    Pulisic did this shortly before getting subbed off against GY. He received the ball pretty deep on the half turn and IMMEDIATELY attacked the acres of space ahead of him on the dribble. This puts massive pressure on not only the GY midfielders, but also the backline as they know Pulisic can beat them 1v1 with that much room to run at them so they must decide whether to stick with their marks and drop or step up to provide cover for their vulnerable midfield. Pulisic played a nice ball through the left channel to Arriola who, if he understood the tactical advantage and passing lane being created by the dribble, should have easily run onto it and play a simple centering ball behind the center backs for Zardes/McKinnie/Boyd to finish. Unfortunately Arriola's recognition was late and he didn't commit to the run until the ball was well off Pulisic's foot, so had to settle for running the ball down after the defense had consolidated in the 18. 


    As to which players understand positional play, I listed those 3 with the qualifier that didn't understand perfectly or consistently, just that they clearly understand better than any others on the squad, which should be expected due to the far better competitions they play in and coaching they receive. Certainly not good enough yet, but they are all quite young still and are expected to shoulder the weight of the entire team as there are no veterans who seem to understand it at all.


     


    To your point on Pulisic facing back to our goal too often, I do not disagree, but point back to the priority I listed above. If he only, or even mostly, positions himself facing upfield and trying to show for more positive passes he would almost never see the ball at his feet due to the lack of ability in the players in our defense and midfield. The fact that our squad couldn't do this far more often against a truly amateur GY squad is very disheartening, regardless of the score line. Honestly even if they'd finished far more of their easy chances and finished 8-0 or better I would still be disappointed in the performance as we'd still be showing that we can't play modern soccer even against amateurs :-(

  20. frank schoon replied, June 20, 2019 at 5:22 p.m.

    Seth, watch Ajax of the early 70's play when Cruyff was playing on Youtube, you will notice that rarely the CM or centerhalf or #6 whatever you call rarely comes back to get the ball from the defenders, for he doesn't have to. You will also notice all of their passes go forwards ,rarely backwards.  The defenders took the ball up themselves. I mean why waste a midfielder having to go back having to turn and receive a ball....It's that simple. 
    Ajax had former attackers who were made into defender for they were a shade not good enough to start as wingers or centerforward. Case in point, the right fullback or back was Suurbier a former winger who played with Cruyff on the all-city team. Ruud Krol the left back who later became a libero was a former winger for Ajax, the centerfullback was former centerforward and their libero was a former midfield attacker.  Beckenbauer was former winger, Puyol was former winger, Danny Alves was a winger at one time...I can go on and on.
    Today ,coaches don't understand this simple aspect but Ajax had it right over 50years ago. 

  21. frank schoon replied, June 20, 2019 at 5:35 p.m.

    Seth, as far as the CM having his back facing downfield when receiving, I explained in the comment when I talked about building up. The CM if he's to receive the ball with his back facing then he does that further upfield like around 30meters up or so. But he must one-touch instead of receiving it and turn, let us say.  I stated that the initial pass out of the backfield needs to be vertical and must not go to a defender but to an attacker or Midfielder like a CM. When the CM receives it with his back facing downfield he one-touches or lays it off to an open player ,the 3rd man, running forwards facing downfield. This way, you don't slow the game, the 3rd man sees all the options downfield. It's that simple. THe object of the build up in your own half is to pass the ball in a manner that it beats or bypasses an opponent, for that means one less to deal with.
    When a CM receives the ball from a back, if right back he wil receive it with his left and vice versa for this way he's turned open forwards...

  22. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 2:28 p.m.

    More great discussion Frank. Those Dutch teams were the absolute masters of Gegenpressing though, and we are talking about building out of the back. Those great Ajax and KNVB teams played when the majority of their opponents did not have particularly technically accomplished backs, which made their pressing even more effective. Teams must now be far more cautious with their pressing than in the 70s. That is not to say that pressing isn't a huge part of the game, but you won't see teams hunting the ball with the kind of ferocity those teams did. Of course when your backs are winning the ball well into the middle 3rd off of a press it is much easier to find MFs and Fs facing upfield!

  23. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 2:34 p.m.

    One of my favorite videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfqTy2bJzmU

    GOOD LORD that is pressing! I do not think any team can play this way anymore Frank. Though it might be fun to see USMNT run this against CONCACAF minnows Mexico would destroy us as would almost any team that makes it to Qatar. Heck might even get a team out of group play but certainly not through a knock out round. And for the record, I am a HUGE fan of pressing, just don't think you can press in the same way as the teams you highlight.

  24. Bob Ryan, June 19, 2019 at 12:33 p.m.

    I saw a lazy Bradley similiar to the Bradley when we played T & T in WC qualifing. He waits on the ball when passed to him putting himself under pressure as soon as he touches the ball. Instead of coming toward the pass creating space when receiving pass. Our U-20 center mids know that much. Thats a common problem with most of the team. Constructive movement is lacking making passes look poor. Sad considering the level they are supposed to be at.

  25. R2 Dad, June 19, 2019 at 6:10 p.m.

    If I hear "Verticality" one more time...

    Seth was talking about a proper 4-2 back line with 2 DMs, but in GB's mind there is no need to do this because he wants the forwards to have enough space to run in behind our opponent's back line. With a 4-2-3-1 we could get the ball to the centerline on the ground, but then there is no space for our running runners to get in behind. Because of course we can't play through the middle--that's only for fancy teams with stars on their jerseys above the crest.

    What we have now is idiot-ball. The USMNT will do OK-ish in the Gold Cup. OK in qualification. Get out of the group stage in Qatar, then get squished by any top 20 team. There--I've just described the next 3 years of USMNT "development". GB will get fired, then presumably Tab will finally step up. Why are we wasting the next 3 years, when the U20's already play a more sophisticated game? 

    If we had McKinnie and Addams as the dmids, we could use these warm-up Gold Cup matches to try out different 10s to see who can manage the plentiful service. 

    When will USSF learn to not hire defenders and keepers as head coaches in the Nats silo? Gaaaaa!

  26. Seth Vieux replied, June 19, 2019 at 6:37 p.m.

    R2 agreed on all counts except I'm already losing faith that GB can get us out the group in Qatar. I believe 4-2-3-1 is by far the best alignment for our player pool, and agree that McKinnie and Adams are possibly the two best choices to fill the DCM spots in the history of our team save probably John Harkes. Perhaps I'm forgetting someone that could play these postions better in 4-2-3-1? I do not know what the answer is for a 10. I'm withholding judgment on Pulisic for this role until he's given the opportunity to play it many times with a legitimate center forward. I think even if he succeeds he's better suited on either of the wings (I like inverted wingers so I'd try left first...especially if he ends up playing there with Chelsea) where he can more often put his 1v1 talent to work, a 1v1 talent completely unrivalled by any previous American player IMHO. But if not him then who can play a 10 for us? Younger players from the U20 pool that have the technical ability to at least have achance must be given the opportunity, and soon. Perhaps Dwayne Holmes with more experience? 

    What is funny is that we need a young Tab Ramos or Claudio Reyna for that spot! If only one of them were doing very well as a coach?!?!? Perhaps he could help to groom a real 10 and teach the entire team how to actually play a creative style that attempts to pressure the center of a defense? Oh forget it, let's just keep letting GB try to prove he's some tortured tactical genius that can pioneer a silly tactical system into success even when selecting technically inferior players :-)

  27. frank schoon replied, June 19, 2019 at 7:19 p.m.

    R2,   When will USSF learn to not hire defenders and keepers as head coaches....EXACTLY!!!!

  28. R2 Dad replied, June 19, 2019 at 8:43 p.m.

    Seth, here is my crazy pitch: We should try Zelalem as the 10. He's slower, but you can't get the ball off him and as long as he isn't hacked down by all the CONCACAF opposition he's the guy who only needs a little time and space to thread a ball no one else can see much less execute. This is not news to anyone who has seen him play, it's just that the international game is fast and top clubs have been moving away from the playmaker 10 who doesn't defend (how has Ozil done recently?). We do have 2 good DMids, so that gives us a good spine to work with. But GB seems to be conceding we don't have any 10s so just focus on this slow, backpassing playmaker 6. So we get worse playmaking, in our defending half instead of the attacking half. And little creativity. You press Bradley/Trapp a little and any creative forward balls turn into rote backpassing with no resultant opponent movement (as Frank has explained). As a defender, GB values defensive solidiity at the expense of creativity/possession in the attacking half. Hence Verticality. He should just call them Long Balls, but he knows how bad that sounds so he had to pull out the thersaurus and find a synonym that didn't sound so lame and kickball-y. 

  29. Seth Vieux replied, June 20, 2019 at 3:14 p.m.

    R2, I had nearly forgotten Zelalem after being similarly impressed with his abililty when he first came on the scene...but that is several years ago now and is he even making appearances as a sub for a worse-than-usual Sporting KC? I'd already written him off down the Freddy Adu path. Hopefully I'm wrong and he's salvaging a career. Again fully agreed on GB - he's bringing back the American Long Ball style I'd hoped we would eventually leave to the dust bin, just trying to convince us he's not.

  30. R2 Dad, June 19, 2019 at 6:21 p.m.

    Mike, Please find one instance where a CONCACAF ref carded for persistent infringement in the last 10 years? You're right to acknowledge the logical and proper infraction, but CONCACAF never gives it so it's not really a law. All hell would break loose if they started calling it.

    This is just like the keeper coming off their line on a PK. PG has been complaining about this non-infraction for years, and the minute they start inforcing the 0-steps-off-keepers-line (even though it's not really written that way and has never been enforced as such), the Women's World Cup is on the verge of farce as a result.

  31. Bob Ashpole replied, June 19, 2019 at 6:59 p.m.

    This isn't just a problem with CONCACAF referees. The problem is widespread and has been "persistent" for decades.

  32. Kent James, June 20, 2019 at 12:13 p.m.

    Not to rain on the criticism parade, but let me sum up the comments; Zardes, Bradley and Altidore all suck, and should never play for the national team (and probably never should have).  Berhalter, like every coach before him, doesn't know what he's doing, but what he should do is so obvious that pretty much every critic on SA knows better than he does. Oh, and no American player has any touch, any ability to be creative, or to be able to read the game, because our youth system only produces big fast players that don't appreciate the game.  


    Yes, some players will have bad games, but that doesn't make them bad players.  All players will occasionally have a bad touch, but that doesn't mean they have no touch.  No team will always be creative and attacking without ever conceding opportunities to their opponents.  


    This was the first round game of the Gold Cup, against a weak (but not incompetent) opponent.  We won 4-0.  My biggest concerns are potential injuries (McKinnie and Boyd) and using up all of our luck when we don't need it (two goals off of deflections; I'd rather save those for close games!).  We did not play our best, but I would argue you don't want to play your best in the first round against a weak opponent.  You need to get the result, and build a foundation for the rest of the tournament.  Sometimes a game is just a game....

  33. Seth Vieux replied, June 20, 2019 at 4:16 p.m.

    Kent I think you are attributing things you've read in other comments to this one. Your strawman is blowing over. Who on here has said Altidore or Bradley should never have made USMNT in the first place? Both have been successful at the international level, probably both among our best players ever. I think they are both clearly still capable of contributing to this team. Altidore's technical level is certainly near the top of US strikers in our history, and Bradley is clearly one the most well-rounded and effective CMs in our history as well. Altidore at 29 is physically in his prime and MB at 31 is only slightly beyond it. Again, I don't think either one have a long line of players in their positions that are better than them. They both are players that have ups and downs in their form, just like 99% of professional footballers.

    If you don't think that Guayana team is incompetent....The best club any of their players belong to is Reading, which finished 20 of 24 in the English Championship. That player has made 29 appearances for Reading since 2016. Next best club is Bolton, which was just relegated to League One. The 18 year old midfielder has yet to make a senior appearance for Bolton and has 2 caps. Their most experienced international has 24 caps and 1 goal as a striker. Any MLS club should beat Guayana by a few goals.

    If you (and USSF) continue to focus only on results, and not the quality of play, we will never move forward and become a team (and country) that can compete at the highest levels. We have a long way to go, and it's disappointing when you hope we are actually starting to grow. Would be far more happy to see us improving our style of play, especially as there seem to be more and more youngsters with the quality to play. 

  34. Kent James replied, June 21, 2019 at 12:38 a.m.

    Seth, you are right that I am conflating the comments here with other comments (but to be fair, by mostly the same people) from other articles.  I just got frustrated with all the negative comments (I couldn't even get through them all).  In friendlies, I don't care about results.  But in competive games, results matter.  


    I am certainly in favor of a skill-based, attacking team, but it is easy to be a critic.  Sometimes I think we need to appreciate the efforts and the talents our players do have.  Back in the 1990s, it was easier to be the national team coach in one sense, because the talent pool was shallower, so it was easier to select the team (the choices were more obvious).  As an armchair National Team coach, I rarely disagreed with Bradley or Arena.  Times have changed.  There are many more options, and I think the differences in skill have narrowed. We have many more options at pretty much every position, so I have less solid opinions on who should start (other than maybe Puliisic, and ironically, he did not play well agaisnt Guyana).  I don't think we're in a state of decline.  I think we have some very good veterans, and a tremendous group of young players that need a few years.  We're not there yet, but I think we're on the right track (though I do think GB should have taken Josh Sargent to the GC; not sure the reasoning there).  I do understand that a comment thread on a soccer website will have people criticizing the players and the coach, I just thought it was a little much so I needed to vent....

  35. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 8:29 a.m.

    Ah, we are in a lot of agreement then. No doubt the criticism of some of USMNT’s best players over the last decade(?) have been overly harsh, especially with regard to Bradley and Altodure IMO. Are they world class players? No, but they’ve been among the best Americans at their positions for a long time. The failure to qualify for the WC understandably caused serious disappointment, and that bad taste isn’t going anywhere until things are obviously improved. I have no problem with MB or JA in this roster and don’t think it’s crazy to think they’ll both still be options for Qatar. They’re not that old yet and no one behind them is kicking the door to force them out of a 22 man pool yet. But Zardes, god bless him, will only slow our rebuild. He’s impossible to play off of, which makes everyone around him worse. 

  36. Philip Carragher, June 20, 2019 at 2:49 p.m.

    Wow! Thank you all for taking the time to share your erudite comments. I'm learning and will have to re-read these. Keep them coming! On another but previously mentioned item, I'm frustrated too about the dearth of great finishers. At the youth level, I've witnessed players, maybe one out of 100 or so, that have the requisite horsepower, desire, and instincts to be a great goal scorer at not just this level but at a higher level or two as well. Unfortunately most coaches don't know how to either handle these unique players, or, somehow, someway, this unique set of talents gets mismanaged and the potential great goal-scorer leaves the game. One sure fire way to upend this talent is to yell at it. Many coaches do. And, logically, as time goes on the talent shrinks, the kid isn't having fun, and it's goodbye. Others might find themselves victim of politics. I witnessed a kid who was a better goal-scorer than the established CF on a new, higher level team he was placed on get moved to another position, on defense, get frustrated, and switch sports. Not surprisingly the player he should have displaced was the coach's son. It would be helpful to have more coaches with goal-scoring backgrounds but I've seen very few in the youth coaching ranks. 

  37. frank schoon replied, June 20, 2019 at 4:10 p.m.

    Philip," would be helpful to have more coaches with goal-scoring backgrounds". This is difficult to do but  the next best thing is not to hire coaches who were former defenders at the youth level. It would love to see how many coaches involved in youth soccer were former defenders. I'm willing to bet the organizational, structured types"cough cough' ,I meant defender types far outnumber the offensive player types. I've noticed that years ago.
     Now I'm not against coaches who were former defender types. But the youth in the beginning, need to have creative inputs which defender type coaches are not known for their ethos is more of team oriented, structure, organizational, all of which are more important when youth hit the age of about 16

  38. Seth Vieux replied, June 20, 2019 at 4:54 p.m.

    A small sample size as I've only coached at a few smaller clubs, but I haven't seen a particular trend among the other youth coaches I've worked with. There is no doubt in my mind it's important to help kids develop their creativity with and comfort on the ball from the very start, and by 9 or 10 years old most of the kids that want to play competitively should be very familiar with a minimum of a dozen feints/turns/ball-mastery skills. Give them the tools and demonstrate the 'how to' execute a Cruyff turn, Maradona turn, scissor, step-over, elastico, etc. They don't have to do it perfectly, they just need to see it and trust themselves to keep trying it in training as well as during matches. Is it maybe more difficult for a defensive player who rarely executed these to teach them to kids? Sure, but pop open you tube and have fun learning something new for your beer league :-)

  39. Bob Ashpole replied, June 20, 2019 at 6:28 p.m.

    Seth, this is where I diverge from you and Frank. I happen to think that former forwards and midfield players should be hired over former backs and keepers as head coaches for professional senior teams or to lead player development. I think you have to judge them as an individual and you have to consider who they will bring as assistants.

    I agree that former attacking players can be very valuable as trainers and also in developing game plans, but they don't have to be the head coach to do that. Guardiola for instance was not an attacking player and his potential was recognized early by Cruyff.

    I think Franck has a point, but it is the attacking attitude that he wants, not necessarily a former attacking player.

    Regarding dribbling, I don't believe in teaching "moves" to kids. That isn't how I learned. I don't see "moves" as the building blocks. I see the classic ball mastery exercises as the building blocks. I taught dribbling by putting players in situations where they needed to solve problems by dribbling. Like getting the ball from point A to B while avoiding cones or opponents to take a shot or pass. Various cone drills and mostly free flowing small sided games.

    After I got involved as a youth coach, I had to learn about "moves" and their names so that I could understand what the other coaches were talking about--and many of the males had never played the game themselves, but they knew the proper names for all the acceptable "moves".

    Cruyff didn't teach himself the "Cruyff Trun" in anticipation of someday using it during a match.
    Past a certain point, coaching just gets in the way of learning.   

  40. Bob Ashpole replied, June 20, 2019 at 6:30 p.m.

    Sigh. I left the "don't think" out of the second sentence somehow. Sorry for the confusion. 

  41. frank schoon replied, June 20, 2019 at 7:34 p.m.

    Bob, Guardiola was an offensive midfielder, who grew up  in an environment of great attacking soccer and attacking players. Cruyff once stated Mourinho will never be hired as coach of Barcelona for he is too defensive.
    Nothing is written stone, like for instance a great Brazilian back who has good skills and besides he would grew up in an offensive technical environment and ethos, which you don’t have in the US.
    And your wrong about not teaching kids skill moves..,that what I did for over 30 years in private lessons and team practices. Remember I grew up in the street soccer days where you learn from better, older more sophisticated players. Since you don’t have street soccer today where are these kids suppose to learn new moves
    . My father took me to watch Ajax play on sundays and I would  learn a new move and try it out the next.
    Young kids live for that, a move that could beat an opponent...where is he going to learn this?
    I’m a substitute for pick up soccer , although perhaps a poor one,for these kids who have ever seen Garrincha, Pele, dzajic, Cruyff,etc play. Who is going to show them. You know who Cruyff modeled himself after..DiStefano, Faas Wilkes the great Dutch player who was chosen over DiStefano one year as the best of Spain.
    This is how all kids learn by emulating the better players, and if you are able to demonstrate a move associated by one of these greats ,It can help to inspire them.
     I would teach a kid various moves in beating an opponent one on one and out of the 4 or 5 moves , one two would be used by him.

  42. Bob Ashpole replied, June 21, 2019 at 12:23 a.m.

    Frank maybe if I had a coach like you, I would have taught moves too. But I didn't. There weren't any soccer coaches, or even older soccer players because there was no organized soccer and almost no unorganized soccer. I was coached in other sports (baseball, football, and basketball) and taught myself to play soccer in the hopes of someday moving to an area with soccer. That happened when I was in my 30s. 

    The problem with being self taught is that you don't have role models. You have to invent the wheel yourself. Did the kids I coached use "moves"? Yes but I didn't drill "moves" and didn't tell the players which turns or moves to use to solve tactical problems. Did they play pickup and also emulate better players. Yes. I just ensured that they used both feet during the exercises and SSGs. I had a group of mixed ability levels, which made the primary coaching issue ensuring that everyone was appropriately challenged by the training.

  43. Bob Ashpole replied, June 21, 2019 at 12:50 a.m.

    Thought that I might be giving you the wrong impression. I incorporated "moves" as a routine part of my own training and warmups. I just rebell at the idea of telling a player to "give me" 5 Cruyff turns outside of a game-like context. What I would see is that the Cruyff turns would not fool anyone. Many of the youth coaches and players I saw didn't even realise it was a fake cross, so they completely overlooked selling the fake. Heck I have seen Youtube video demonstrations that had no fake.

  44. frank schoon replied, June 21, 2019 at 9:42 a.m.

    Bob,  Whatever you did you have done in soccer, considering your backround, I have a lot of respect for you.  You have been on the right path all along. As a matter of fact ,I'm amazed how knowledgeable and the feel you have considering what should be done.

  45. Philip Carragher replied, June 21, 2019 at 9:47 a.m.

    I do teach my players (5th-8th grade boys/girls) moves using Coerver or fast-footwork drills and do so for a few reasons. First and foremost is because almost all my players have never been shown a pathway that doesn't vear off in a direction that will eventually obstruct their development. I want them on a "clean" pathway. Specifically, most of my players (usually not athletic) don't play travel soccer and their footspeed is slow and that is the main reason my players lose most of their 1v1's against opponents. They just can't get their legs and feet moving fast enough. Admittedly, most never develop adequate footspeed to counteract overtly aggressive opponents but at least they've been handed a formula that, should they become inspired, can practice on their own. (I tell them that they should practice this in their house and if their parents get upset that we can blame the Athletic Director.) But there is always one player who does improve his/her footspeed and use at least one learned-move to beat opponents and this allows all to recognize how that player's (usually obsessive) effort payed off. This same player has probably also worked hard on ball juggling, and so by season's end all agree that this player is the most improved and that the hard work on specific skills can translate into improved match performance. (Which, of course, means that we encourage risk-taking and making mistakes or "pushing the technical edge" during practices and match play.) So, even if they don't try hard, they learn a bit about progressive learning. And we do use the names, Cruyff, nutmeg, and even named one "the Busher" after a player I coached years ago that smoked everyone with that one move; during games the kids will yell it out when someone does a learned-move. Although, in some respects, this seems like overcoaching, but I can't seem to get them to watch quality soccer (watch and imitate) so we throw-in lessons on progressive learning and mind-body unification. Youth soccer coaching here in the suburbs needs some customization.

  46. frank schoon replied, June 21, 2019 at 10:39 a.m.

    Bob, you mention lack of role models which is one of the problems here. This is why I would to havethe USSF coaching school teach a history course that deals with the great players, what they did, the anecdotes, the history. So many have not heard of a Garrincha, how good he was, DiStefano ,what he contributed to the game, a George Best....I could go on and on, but players/youth need not only to learn  the moves, but also  need to have some experience the color ,the pageantry of what these players contributed to the game. someone with a real love for the game should make a beautiful 
    We need a DVD for coaches and youth to watch so after watching they can relate more to the game.
    Remember that story on Puskas ,I had send you, a beautiful anecdote. 
    It is like when I go out to the Southwest, I appreciate it more for I know the history of all the Old West gunfighters and characters that made the history of the Southwest. It is the color that we aren not teaching our players that would make them appreciate the  game better and as a result we would have less "burnout' of youth.
     For those who haven't read the anecdote (color) on PUSKAS....Yypu'll enjoy what George Best said..
    PUSKAS QUOTES
    https://www.goal.com/en/news/19252/legends-world-cup/2016/03/31/5875091/he-belongs-to-the-realm-of-dreams-the-best-quotes-about

  47. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 1:57 p.m.

    Phillip it sounds like you and I coach similarly, though I have the advantage of at least coaching in competitive clubs rather than recreational leagues. Still have to train many kids who aren't overly talented or physically gifted, but if they are joining the club either they or at least just their parents are willing to put in extra time (and yes a little $) to try to develop as best they can. I of course also get to work with many talented (and a handful of pretty special) athletes with goals of playing at the highest level they can


    This has been a great conversation, and I too sometimes worry about 'over coaching,' but for the great majority of US kids, they don't have enough exposure (or really immersion) to our game to be creative until we give them some skills as a baseline. Bob you mentioned trying to tell kids exactly which feint or turn to execute, and I think you're maybe not fully understanding me. My first 30 minutes of every practice is a progressive battery of ball mastery touches that build on each other into more complex skills. Early in a season it is in fact 'just work X or Y turn with both feet' for 1-3 minutes before moving to the next. I need to do this because each season there is at least one new player who does not understand the terminology, and honestly they are very intimidated because they cannot even begin to perform a Maradona turn if they knew what it was, let alone 'play with the exit angle.'

  48. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 1:58 p.m.

    So we start slow learning how to use every surface of both feet and build. For the players I've had for a season or more the repeated execution of a skill they know re-inforces muscle memory and they can focus on executing  the feint or turn more and more dynamically. As Phillip said, we push past the speed and dynamic limits we know they do perform at and encourage making mistakes to get better and better. But we always finish the last 5 minutes or so just being creative as we can stacking turns and feints on top of each other in what I call a 'fish pond' so while there are no defenders, there are bodies and balls to turn away from and feint past. Sharks can swim mostly in the deep water (middle of the area) and if you only play on the fringes where there is less pressure / more space coach might ask you whether you are minnow or a shark! As the season progresses and I feel good about the overall technical level this first 30 minutes is much less me telling them what to work on and instead asking, 'who has the next skill?' Once we go frm 2-4 different turns I want to see mixed to 'total free play' I will frequently yell out turns, but the kids do not have to perform those turns, it only reminds them there are so many more we 'know' so they must think and move while negotiating the many other players thinking and moving independantly of each other. This also helps them see gaps that are not only open to attack through, but the gaps that are about to open, which I hope helps them develop as playmakers that can deliver penetrating passes as well.

  49. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 2:04 p.m.

    I am also a huge believer in playing Rondo, and our teams have a mantra: "We take PRIDE in our Rondo." Rondo is of course great for improving first touch and weighting your passes, but also trains players to understand supporting passing angles and passing lanes once you go to 2 defenders in the middle. It helps develop a sense of shape and spacing, anticipating more than one pass ahead, and again once you go to 2 defenders is a great activity to understand proper pressure / cover. A 90 minute practice that is roughly 30m technical work, 30 minutes Rondo or other games that require the ball to move quickly and everyone to work and move together, and a final 30 minutes of small sided games is my sweet spot. Once we get the hang of doing these three things well we'll start spending more time on finishing or full-sided scrimmages.

  50. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 2:18 p.m.

    Lastly, I 100% agree with Frank about the importance of talking to kids about the history of the game and the legends that can inspire them. Frank in fact it was Cruyff who inspired me most as a boy and I always wore (and still wear) either 9 or 14 in his honor. I'm even guilty of stealing his punch the sky goal celebration :-)

    So that technical training using the names of players opens that window and in the internet age the kids can go home and youtube the viseos of Cruyff, Maradona, Garrincha, Puskas, etc. Teaching the Maradona turn is a personal favorite not only because the kids love it, but because almost all of them will jump on top of the ball and spin like a ballerina so we stop them and talk about how I want them to perform this turn low and powerfully. I get to talk to them about how the great Maradona, so short and powerful made the turn famous, but then I can segue into how a tall and long player like Zidane made the turn even more effective with his better ability to shield. So when the most industrious kids go home and watch both players inevitably one will come back and proclaim that 'Zidane did it better!' and insist on only calling it the Zidane turn. 

    Back to Bob's comment that so many didn't realize the Cruyff turn was for crosses. First off, an effective coach will talk about the different situations in which one turn or feint is more effective than others. Is a Maradona/Zidane turn a great choice to beat the center back and break free to goal? Probably not as it will invariably slow you down and allow that CB's mates to cover for him even if it does work. But can a midfielder or ten perform this move to create the space he needs to deliver the through ball that unlocks the D? While the Cruyff turn can certainly be effective shake an outside back as a fake cross, it also takes time and allows the CBs and DCMs to cover out the space in front of goal we hope that cross can exploit. So if we do a Cruyff from there we're probably going to be going into some possession in the attacking 3rd. The 'so what' for me? If you can play that cross play it! If you know he has the cross covered maybe it's a great way to buy a second and maintain possession. So where does Cruyff work great? As a fake SHOT, especially around the top of the box! 

  51. frank schoon, June 21, 2019 at 2:55 p.m.

    SETH. Enjoy Piet Keizer, Cruyff's mentor

    Piet Keizer - The Legend -
    YouTubePiet Keizer | Best moments | RIP | 1943-2017 -
    YouTubeThe Artistry of Piet Keizer - YouTube
    ▶ Forgotten Footballers ~ Dragan Dzajic - YouTube

    GARRINCHA !!!!!!!!enjoy seth

  52. Seth Vieux replied, June 21, 2019 at 3:59 p.m.

    Great videos, had not thought of Piet Kaiser in a long time! 

  53. frank schoon replied, June 21, 2019 at 4:25 p.m.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roSeqoSdaHQ  The kids should all watch this Gerald Vanenburg he was 18

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWe9ntoWvTc  Jimmy johnstone

  54. frank schoon replied, June 21, 2019 at 4:41 p.m.

    Seth  
    Here are some more
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RB8FqlcQag....
    Watch his move he uses all the time and it works

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T7JanWxINM 
    Watch Rivelino. perform

  55. Nick Gabris, June 22, 2019 at 11:24 a.m.

    Answer to all of the above GB coaching issues.......Tab Ramos? Does anyone know if he was ever seriously considered for the MNT coaching position?

Next story loading loading..

Discover Our Publications