Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

United Rewind

By the time D.C. United returns to Kansas City for the regular season finale in 5 1/2 months, do you think anyone is going to remember the 1-1 tie between the clubs Wednesday night? Not a chance. Okay, maybe Rodney Wallace will recall his second career goal and Avery John will have fond memories of his United debut. That's about it. Most of the 9,000-plus in attendance lost interest -- kids were running up and down the aisles, youth groups were chatting, the BBQ booths were busy. The Cauldron was engaged, but most spectators acted as if they were at a baseball park on a pleasant spring evening. (Well, the Wizards do play at a baseball park and it was a pleasant spring evening.) The whole night had a casual feel to it. Five total shots on goal. Two saves (both by Crayton). Ho-hum.

United (3-1-4) was satisfied with the point on the road, which stretched its unbeaten streak to four and set up an early-season showdown with Toronto (3-2-3, 12) on Saturday night at RFK. There was some early promise -- Pontius's shot off the post and Wallace's goal, set up nicely by Quaranta and Moreno -- but United couldn't sustain possession, created little in the second half and inevitably turned its attention to securing the tie.

The match report.

PLAYER RATINGS
Crayton 6; Namoff 6, JakovicJanicki 7, John 6; Pontius 6, Simms 6, Jacobson 6, Barklage 6, Wallace 7; Moreno 7, Quaranta 6. Subs: Emilio 5, Gomez 6, Khumalo 5.

By Steve Goff  |  May 7, 2009; 1:33 AM ET
Categories:  D.C. United  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Matchnight #8: United-Wizards
Next: Thursday Kickaround

Comments

Yeah, Jakovic was stupendous.

Oh, wait.... Damn you, similar J names, Damn You!!!

(nutshell, Janicki, not Jakovic)

I think KC play a really ugly brand of football. DC were fielding a very irregular team, and the score line showed it. I'll take it, though; all KC seems to do is inject themselves with adrenaline for a maximum of twenty minutes and actually Do something. Onalfo should be pleased, cuz he isn't going to be canned.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | May 7, 2009 1:48 AM | Report abuse

"I think KC play a really ugly brand of football."

Agreed. I feel for those kids in the aisles.

Posted by: tpm26 | May 7, 2009 2:18 AM | Report abuse

How can there be five shots on goal, but only two goals and two saves? Does the post count as a shot on goal?

Reasonable result from United on the road, especially given the youth in the lineup.

Posted by: bennyf118 | May 7, 2009 2:24 AM | Report abuse

There was a game last night? Who's going to watch soccer when the NHL playoffs are going on? Hopefully that won't be a problem for the next match.

[Insert TOS Violation Here]

Posted by: sitruc | May 7, 2009 2:55 AM | Report abuse

KC need to get into their new stadium ASAP. That tiny field made me think I was watching a high school game.

It's also wholly disconcerting when you can hear what the players are saying on the pitch.

Posted by: DonDraper | May 7, 2009 5:47 AM | Report abuse

Curious about the actual dimensions of that pitch in KC. Being so congested, it seemed that there was hardly any room out there, as a result the ball was pinging back and forth with little real posession from either team. It looked like they do a better job covering the infield with turf at that park than they did at RFK during the baseball days.

Posted by: sbg1 | May 7, 2009 7:09 AM | Report abuse

I don't really want to finger point at Wallace since he scored the goal and got the point, otherwise his sloppy clearance lead to the tied goal. If you can't dribble you must clear as fast as possible at near post.
That game was specially painful to watch right after watching Barca v Chelsea game. A point is great but me may regret later in the season. of course we are on top of the table right now and specially if we beat Toronto that would be class.

Posted by: DCUnitedFootball | May 7, 2009 8:01 AM | Report abuse

Wallace for goal of the week?

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | May 7, 2009 8:05 AM | Report abuse

So Goff, you're saying they had us at 6's and 7's the entire night?! ;)

Posted by: cste | May 7, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Was it just me or did John turn the ball over more than the entire DCU team combined?

Posted by: no_recess | May 7, 2009 8:21 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like the crowd wasn't the only one not paying attention...
Jakovic?

Posted by: DadRyan | May 7, 2009 8:21 AM | Report abuse

I fell asleep watching the match. Thanks for letting me know I didn't miss much.

Posted by: granadoskerry | May 7, 2009 8:23 AM | Report abuse

bennyf, Party Boy had a shot hit the post.

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | May 7, 2009 8:27 AM | Report abuse

You could also technically get a shot on goal if it is cleared by a defender off the line. Just saying.

Posted by: joshuaostevens | May 7, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

I think KC play a really ugly brand of football.

Posted by: UnitedDemon |

That's why they fired all of the coaches, brought in a new front office, and traded for a new QB.

The worst part about that field is that they can't get good camera placement -- the main (only?) one is sitting so far from the pitch.

Posted by: Reignking | May 7, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Oh Geez,

I endured this game on television and only this morning have my eyes and ears stopped hurting. If this is "the beautiful game," I want no part of it and when did Johnson and Rongen become idiotic motor mouths. Goff, you are right about this game being best forgotten.

Posted by: Ruthie1 | May 7, 2009 9:18 AM | Report abuse

I think that game must have induced a few comas. The posts to this thread are especially unenlightening. Looks as if folks aren't even reading the comments they respond to. I fell asleep watching the blog. I give everyone about a 5.

In order: Yes, hitting the post counts as a shot on goal. No one slipped on the basepaths, but that pitcher's mound? Hopefully, there will be a better goal than that to cheer. I'd say they had us at 5s and 6s. It's just you -- besides Wallace had the most devastating turnover (How does he get a 7, with that black mark?). Yes, Pontius hit the post -- that was implicit in the question.

Let's hope Saturday's game will be more inspiring and enervating.

Posted by: fischy | May 7, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

I think Simms gave it away as much as John. It seemed Simms would just hoof it up-field any time the ball came near him in the defensive third. Then again if Wallace took that approach we might have sneaked out of there with a win.

Posted by: ahelms10 | May 7, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

My feed froze at halftime, so I stopped watching. And Lost was on.

Posted by: Reignking | May 7, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

You know it's bad when you can hear crickets chirping,

Plus, I could clearly hear Onalfo barking out instructions . .

. . the fans at KC really need to step it up . . but then again, they are 30 yards from the field . .

Posted by: delantero | May 7, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

The crowd wasn't too huge or energetic but think how it would have looked and sounded in giant Arrowhead Mausoleum.

Posted by: Joel_M_Lane | May 7, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

I don;t understand complaints about Community American Ballpark, (1) we've been there - playing in a baseball field and (2) they're getting a new one - are we?

"The posts to this thread are especially unenlightening."

And your point is?

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | May 7, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

I just realized what I did with my answer. I feel stupid.

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | May 7, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Can't really blame the fans too much though . . it's clear the pinball game they were watching through binoculars was on a tight field that lends itself to bad soccer. (NYRB v KC played there was far worse)

Posted by: delantero | May 7, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Also kinda pathetic for the guys to have to sidestep around the pitcher's mound on the edge of the field... you think they could have at least covered it with a tarp or something!

Posted by: Dynaformer | May 7, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Well....

Technically speaking, RFK was built for baseball and football. It accommodates a full soccer pitch, and the Wizards' stadium does not...which is the point. At RFK, they had an innovative way to remove the pitcher's mound. It looks funny to see Lopez have to evade the mound, but the real problem is the grade-school width of the field. As delantero noted, it kills the game and that has to affect the fans. RFK is a dump, but the pitch is probably the best in the league. That's not my opinion -- it comes from players. As for KC's new stadium -- they still haven't demolished the mall that stands on the site -- and I'm still not convinced that the city has enough MLS fans to support a team, but the MLS is committed to it, so I hope it succeeds.

Posted by: fischy | May 7, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I was joking. Most of the posts here, are unenlightening. Mine even go as far as endarkening.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | May 7, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

to me all the midwestern MLS franchises' attendance is suspect. you see more bleachers than grass on the games from chicago and columbus. a tiny baseball stadium that's full is better, telegenics-wise, than a soccer-specific one that's not.

Posted by: unitedunited | May 7, 2009 11:57 AM | Report abuse

DCUnitedFootball:

Amen. Yes it's harsh to single anyone out, but Wallace has got to stop coughing up the ball. He does it all over the field.

(For John to cough it up more than the entire team combined is mathematically impossible. he is a member of the team. ;-) )

I think because of the horrible picture quality in that coverage, it was hard to tell the players apart -- Rodney is the turnover machine par excellence, and personally I'm sick of seeing it every single game.

Nobody should be forced to watch THAT soccer while listening to THOSE commentators! It's not baseball guys; talk about the game or STFU. Stop talking about how awesome all the players are while we can clearly (well, sort of) see them playing like sh*t.

Posted by: Godfather_of_Goals | May 7, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse

My understanding is that a shot that hits the post is not a "Shot on Goal". By definition a Shot on Goal must be either saved or result in a score.

I thought the ratings for the team as a whole were too high. I don't know if it was KC or the field or both, but that was a pretty poor game with little to point to as good play on either side.

As someone mentioned before i can't see Wallace getting that high of a score. Yes he scored the goal but his turnover directly led to KCs score. In addition, Wallace had stretches where he gave away a string of passes in dangerous situations.

Wallace is a good player and an excellent pickup for United but he did not have that good of a game.

My other comment was what happened to the vets coming off the bench. The reserves were playing well, but we replace by some of the big guns in the second half. However, you would not have know that based on their uninspiring and go through the motions play.

Posted by: dcufan531 | May 7, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

I'm inclined to give Soehn the benefit of the doubt this season, but next time he fields that lineup, on the road, he should be cautioned for taunting.

Posted by: Godfather_of_Goals | May 7, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

The people saying KC plays ugly soccer must not ever watch them. It's either that, or you're ignoring them and assuming they're still the Gansler Wizards, which is definitely untrue. KC's home games might be ugly because they take place in a phone booth, but a) KC tries to attack home and away, b) Onalfo virtually always goes to a 343 whenever tied or losing in an effort to win, and c) their midfield and forwards tend to be better technically than a lot of other teams.

Give United some credit. KC couldn't get anything going because we defended pretty well as a unit. When you consider that our attack was totally lacking any fluency, this is even more admirable; our giveaways could have put us under a lot of pressure, but we managed to hold KC to 2 chances the entire game (the goal and the Wolff header that went wide thanks in part to the presence of Simms).

For all the complaints about John's giveaways, he made several strong tackles and took care of the defensive part of the position well. Considering that everyone in a back three should be defense first, I'll take it. He could sharpen up his passing, but when our more skilled options at that position have also turned the ball over way too often, I'll take the guy who defends better.

My ratings differ from SG's:
Crayton - 6; Namoff - 6.5, Janicki - 6.5, John - 6.5; Pontius - 5, Simms - 6, Jacobson - 5, Wallace - 5.5; Barklage - 5; Moreno - 5, Quaranta - 5. Subs: Emilio - 5, Gomez - 5, Khumalo - NR

In a game that was fairly unremarkable, the only players that deserved marks in either direction were our defensive players. Wallace gets a bump for the goal, but that bump is cut due to his involvement in the goal against. Considering the team we put out, 1-1 on the road against a team that is not awful is acceptable. If Soehn can figure out how to get us to start the 2nd half well (we've come out poorly in at least half our games: Chicago and the Revs at home, at NY, and last night), we'll be close to having a legit team.

Posted by: Chest_Rockwell | May 7, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

I didn't get to see the game, only the highlight package on MLSnet.com, but from that it looked like Wolff was offsides on the goal he scored.

Is it just me or was he offsides?

Posted by: jermWV | May 7, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

He looked off to me too, but as Crayton commented in the write-up, the ball came in so quickly and was in the net so soon after that - there was no time to read that play correctly either way. Hard to argue with the no-call. Besides, there was no trap, just great hustle by Wolff. He earned it.

Posted by: Godfather_of_Goals | May 7, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Wallace is a potential future star. He can beat a man, has great speed and has a nose for the goal. He plays both ways and he tackles. Of course he is going to make a few mistakes...he is a rookie... eight games of MLS experience. But he is a natural wide mid.
A very good draft for United this year, over all.

Posted by: lemovs | May 7, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Worked an honest man's job today, will do so again tomorrow. Thought I'd find something new here, worth reading. I was mostly wrong.

Hey fischy! If you really think there is something in Eastern Market worth taking the tube back for, I'll have some cold beers to drink, food to grill, and at the very least a hack to sack if you change your mind. I wish there were some bars across the street from our stadium so we can all do something more stimulating, but come on man! We're not so different!

Better yet, grab some sausages at eastern market, bring em on the march and we'll fire up those bad boys once we FINALLY make it to RFK. I might even bring a bicycle that pedals backwards! See Y'all real soon!

Posted by: DadRyan | May 7, 2009 11:48 PM | Report abuse

West Ham United(H) VS Liverpool

Willhill 6.00 3.40 1.50
6.00 4.00 1.53

In those recent matches, Liverpool were playing pretty well, for they need to get 1st position in the league. What's more, with Gerrard's recovery, Liverpool can get 3 points in this matches without much effort.

West Ham need to save their 7th position, but they scored only one goal in the recent matches verses those four top teams.

For more, please visit:

http://www.nowgoal.com/21.shtml

Posted by: nowgoal | May 8, 2009 10:20 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company