Network News

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

Poll: American Hopes

By Steve Goff  |  December 4, 2009; 1:28 PM ET
Categories:  2010 World Cup , Poll , U.S. men's national team  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: 2010 World Cup Draw
Next: Sunday Kickaround

Comments

On behalf of the Socceroo's, I'm outraged!

Posted by: JkR- | December 4, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

If the US can't advance out of this group, it's a step back for the program.

Posted by: Louise9 | December 4, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Need to get a flat panel TV by June. Yes, I still have the 36" CRT that I bought for the 2002 Cup.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 4, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Agree with Louise9. We need to beat Algeria and Slovenia, get away from the underdog, overachiever thing. We beat Portugal in 2002 and tied Italy in 2006, but we were inconsistent and not mature in our approach. This is the time to change that.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | December 4, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I think this is a doable group for the US.

Posted by: dogboy | December 4, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

G, followed by A are toughest. Sub Swiss miss for Portugal in H and it would be pretty even. Ivory Coast; best African team last time. Perhaps Mexico is poochie the dog, or France when the refs clamp down in the retaliatory pay back. Can see 7 pts. for USA.

Posted by: Realness1 | December 4, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Boy, will the French luck ever run out?

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 4, 2009 1:21 PM

Only after Platini and Blatter are gone.

Posted by: Realness1 | December 4, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

@Louise9,

I agree with your sentiment and I agree based on the fact that this is a good result for the USA. There were far many more terrible scenarios playing out in my head after those jerks to the south got put in Group A.

However, in all due respect, our most talented defender is facing a serious rehab before June and our achilles heel is defense.

But, with a focused and determined, unafraid effort - the USA can advance and could win the group.

And nothing says winning 2018 bid like thumping the colonial lords in part of the former Kingdom!

Posted by: VirginiaBlueBlood | December 4, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Wow, totally exciting. Definitely do-able. Love the Donovan/Beckham story line. If we don't get through this group, it would be seriously depressing.

Posted by: EssEff | December 4, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Who will play Jozy in "The Game of Their Lives II"?

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 4, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

And nothing says winning 2018 bid like thumping the colonial lords in part of the former Kingdom!

Posted by: VirginiaBlueBlood | December 4, 2009 1:54 PM

Word. project 2010 is still on track!

Posted by: Realness1 | December 4, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

If they don't get their heads filled with the idea that Algeria and Slovenia are pushovers, just as they did with Ghana and Czech Republic, than they can possibly go through.

Posted by: RedDevil1 | December 4, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

With Cheating Bob as our coach the US can lose to anyone.

Posted by: Dancy1 | December 4, 2009 2:02 PM | Report abuse

This is a good draw. I agree with the early posts. We can and should go through if we are the footballing team we think we are.

I see the most interesting dynamic coming out of the USA, England game is what will USA do with Donovan? Donovan currently plays on the left, but Glen Johnson is a big powerful full back who likes to get forward. (He is the kind of defender that ran us ragged in the Confederations Cup -thanks Maicon.) Therefore, does Bob look to move Donovan up top to aid his backline, or does Bob go positive and keep Donovan on the left hoping that scares Glen Johnson from going forward?

I honestly say we draw against England and win the other two matches, but get second due to England's superior goal difference. Then we shock the world and beat Germany, getting revenge for 2002.

Posted by: grubbsbl | December 4, 2009 2:02 PM | Report abuse

What an epic opening match...I can't wait. Even better, it's on a Saturday.

Posted by: Reignking | December 4, 2009 2:02 PM | Report abuse

I don't really remember anyone thinking Ghana and Czech Republic were push overs. In fact, I remember thinking we were screwed in that one.

Posted by: grubbsbl | December 4, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Cheating Bob?

Posted by: DadRyan | December 4, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want to join me in a petition to cancel all local youth soccer games that Saturday? Just kidding - sort of...

Posted by: assocfoot | December 4, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

If they don't get their heads filled with the idea that Algeria and Slovenia are pushovers, just as they did with Ghana and Czech Republic, than they can possibly go through.

Posted by: RedDevil1 | December 4, 2009 2:00 PM

True, but Ghana was the fix special to get one African team to next round in 2006, on the last day of the group stage. Ivory Coast got screwed in the last Grupo de muerte, and now they get another. Shameful.

Posted by: Realness1 | December 4, 2009 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Bob Bradley is definitely happy...

Alexi busting on Adu...

Posted by: Reignking | December 4, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

If we had the team that beat Spain and almost beat Brazil, I think we might even be co-favorites with England.

But now we're down to one good forward -- and good teams can defend against a team with only one good forward. Davies' absence really hurts up top.

And both our central defenders in those games -- De Merit and Onyewu -- are now out. I don't know if either will be back. But if not, then our defense is pretty shaky as well.

Yes, I think we can make it out of this weak group, with a bit of luck, but we aren't the team we were against Spain by a country mile. I really hate to say that...

Posted by: tgrahame1 | December 4, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

I agree US should make it through and that Group G looks like the toughest.

Spain and Brazil could meet in the semis, but not the finals? Is that right?

Posted by: teamn | December 4, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

US can beat Ghana w/o ref asst.(like 2006) Rather play them than Germany in 2nd round.

Posted by: Realness1 | December 4, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Did anyone else just see Domenech interrupt Javier Aguirre giving a interview to Jeremy Schapp? Yet another reason to hate the French, proof of more rudeness!

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 4, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

We can't be overconfident, but this is not so bad a draw for us. We can do the business in this group and advance. Come to think of it I say every other group seems balanced here, besides G which is as close to a group of death I've seen in this edition.

Then again, playing European teams outside of Europe is also a good thing.

I really like our chances.

Posted by: Kosh2 | December 4, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Is Davies out for the copa?

Posted by: Realness1 | December 4, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

That was incredibly strange and awkward, JacobfromAtlanta-ish.

Posted by: sitruc | December 4, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

US can beat Ghana w/o ref asst.(like 2006) Rather play them than Germany in 2nd round.

Posted by: Realness1

Or Claudio Reyna collapsing.

Posted by: Reignking | December 4, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Did anyone else just see Domenech interrupt Javier Aguirre giving a interview to Jeremy Schapp? Yet another reason to hate the French, proof of more rudeness!

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish

What an idiot. Schaap handled it quite well.

Posted by: Reignking | December 4, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Oh when the Yanks!
Oh when the Yanks!
Go marching in!
Go marching in!
Oh Lord I want to be in that number!
Oh when the Yanks take down Eng-land!

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 4, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

On behalf of the Socceroo's, I'm outraged!

Posted by: JkR- | December 4, 2009 1:35 PM

Is this the 4 or 5th outrage today or has it been one constant outrage since the Irish were robbed?

Posted by: rockotodd | December 4, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

It's 1950 all over again baby!

Posted by: PabloChicago | December 4, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Where did espn get that 1950 footage?

Posted by: sitruc | December 4, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Wow! 1950 US-England footage!

Posted by: Reignking | December 4, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

yeah, if i end up getting invited to some insipid wedding or or briss or anything else except my own funeral on June 12th, i am to have to laugh at the notion. and even if i'm dead, i think i have to find a way to re-animate myself just for those 2 hours.

Posted by: dimesmakedollars | December 4, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Is this the 4 or 5th outrage today or has it been one constant outrage since the Irish were robbed?

Posted by: rockotodd | December 4, 2009 2:16 PM

========================

This is outrageous!

Posted by: JkR- | December 4, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

I'm pretty sure Ruud Gullit was one of the stars of the premiere of Jersey Shore last night.

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 4, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Ruud is a big dude.

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I think we have as good a chance as we could have. But 93% voting yes? Algeria is the only team in the group that we're clearly better than. Slovenia *won their group* in Euro qualifying; and a Slovenian team half made up of reserves manhandled a US team half made up of reserves just a few weeks ago.

I think the US Confederations Cup team would advance easily; but with both first-choice central defenders questionable, with Davies questionable at best, and no one picking up the defending or scoring slack in recent matches, I don't know how to be so confident.

Posted by: christopher_a_metzler | December 4, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Donovan vs Beckham!

Posted by: WorldCup | December 4, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

After that interview, I very much think I'm gonna like him as an analyst.

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 4, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Oh when the Yanks!
Oh when the Yanks!
Go marching in!
Go marching in!
Oh Lord I want to be in that number!
Oh when the Yanks take down Eng-land!

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 4, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Great post, Jacob!

Posted by: WorldCup | December 4, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Excellent draw!

Posted by: Barracudas | December 4, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

@christopher_a_metzler: Slovenia is not Slovakia.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 4, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

The English will be under enormous pressure. I see a choke coming and a win for us in the first match just like 2002.

Posted by: fedssocr | December 4, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Rogaine, the official sponsor (to be) of Landon Donovan.

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

I like Efan as an analyst. Calm demeanor and very thoughtful. Alexi is unnecessary.

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

It's a bad draw for the U.S. They do well against Latin teams by making up for the lack of talent by using strength and speed, Portugal '02, colombia'94, Italy 'o6, Spain and almost Brazil '09 Confederations Cup. Even if they come out of the group, it is Germany and Germany at the WC is the toughest out.

Posted by: vjohn72 | December 4, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Great draw for America. The English over-rate their team. And they under-rate us yanks. It will be a dangerous combination for them. We cannot wait!

Posted by: PremSoccerShop | December 4, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

But vjohn72, didn't the Roman Empire have colonies in Algeria? So can't we call them a Latin team too?

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 4, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

@ vjohn72

Is Itlee considered a "latin" team or Portugal? And didn't we lose to Itlee anyway?

Posted by: rockotodd | December 4, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

LD is on his way to being a US keeper.

Great coverage by ESPN.

Posted by: Reignking | December 4, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

I-270Exit1: Ugh, nice catch. I absolutely hate it when I brainf*rt like that. I still don't think it'll be easy as all that -- not given who we'll be missing, or will just barely be back. But that makes me feel a little better.

Posted by: christopher_a_metzler | December 4, 2009 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Hey christopher....

That was Slovakia who beat us last month. This is the former Yugoslav republic in our group. Should play similar attacking style.

Posted by: inzzo79 | December 4, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

hehe,
look at yesterday's comments I posted. I predicted Eng, USA, and slovenia in same group. I think Algeria & Slovenia are strong in their own regions where they are very aware of the certain style of play of their rivals. Outside of that, I think they are weak. According to FIFA rankings, USA is 2nd strongest in this group and should advance.

Posted by: alespar415 | December 4, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

back from the bar and a touch woozy, but I catch myself smiling...thus, a good group.

sure hope we do better against England than we did at Wembley last year. I attended that match and our boys did a great imitation of traffic cones.

Posted by: troy6 | December 4, 2009 3:17 PM | Report abuse

How could the US ever go into the World f'n Cup feeling ueber confident about their chances in moving through? I have no clue where people are getting the idea that we 'looked past' Ghana and Czech Rep. in '06!?

This is the most favorable draw for the US ever ON PAPER. That said, Algeria is extremely dangerous playing on what is essentially home soil. Any African team will have an advantage. Slovenia just won a (weakish) European qualifying group so that should say enough about their organization.

I can see the stadiums having a similar atmosphere to some of the CONCACAF venues our boys are used to helping a bit. Hard to admit but the European stage made many of our players flounder.

Now all we need is a few hyperbaric chambers to bring back a few key guys and I'm all about this being a coming-out party!

Posted by: inzzo79 | December 4, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Lil' Bradley with an assist in the first half against Bayern Munich.

Posted by: BooThisMan | December 4, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

"I think Mr Capello will be absolutely delighted, deep down. I said beforehand that I don't think we would be too worried about USA. I would see them doing well in all those games."

~Alan Shearer

Posted by: spikeman | December 4, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

South Africa is certainly not home soil for Algeria. It probably will be for the sub saharan teams but not the north africans. should be a good 1st round for us (as long as some of them get healthy in time and we don't look past algeria and slovenia).

[quietly noticing that nike and espn should be very very happy with our draw]

Posted by: PindarPushkin | December 4, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

yo deadskin: 9pm tonight on FSC.

Posted by: troy6 | December 4, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Neither the Algerians nor the Slovenes are mugs, but the US should squeak through. They won't be scraping any draws with England this time, though. England will be fielding its strongest team in decades.

England have a history of getting lame 1-1 draws against weak opposition in their first group game. But that was then, this is now. England qualified in style, and have been scoring freely in their friendlies, something they don't normally do pre-World Cup. One early goal in the game vs the US, and watch the floodgates open.

Nevertheless, I applaud American efforts to move beyond baseball, the world's dullest team sport.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 4, 2009 3:44 PM | Report abuse

@troy6: Son, it's your boss. Can you come in to my office for a moment?

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 3:53 PM | Report abuse

@assocfoot: Youth soccer will probably wrap up the weekend before, if the past is any guide.

Posted by: dccal | December 4, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

England will be fielding its strongest team in decades.

===

I've heard this before...

Posted by: mason08 | December 4, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Our matches are at altitude, so I hope the US training site is some place other than SoCal or Bradenton. Colorado, perhaps?

Also, I wouldn't overlook Slovenia. It's a tiny country with tremendous participation in athletics. Everybody skis, kayaks, plays soccer, and climbs mountains.

Posted by: b18bolo | December 4, 2009 3:57 PM | Report abuse

joedoc:

Agreed on Ekoku. When you see Lalas trying very hard to make the big headline rather than say reasonable things and McManaman mostly focused on light ribbing rather than actual analysis, Ekoku really stood out.

Inzzo79:

I don't buy the idea that all African teams are home teams at all. I think it's ludicrous. If the World Cup was in Colombia or Ecuador, would we see ourselves as a de facto home team? It's roughly the same distance, and the cultures are radically different in both cases. In fact, Algeria will struggle with the language difference more than us.

Also, Slovenia didn't win their group. They came through the playoff against Russia.

***

This group is fortunate to be sure, but a good draw in the World Cup simply means you avoided the group of death. It doesn't mean we're sitting with a bunch of pushovers. Algeria qualified ahead of Egypt, and came through the most high-pressure qualifying situation (a one-game playoff) conceivable. Slovenia beat a Russian team that would give us problems. England qualified with relative ease.

It's a favorable group, sure, but any thoughts of it being easy are naive. I expect us to get through, but I also expect to be absolutely as stressed out as possible during all three games. Let's not forget that the times we got out of the group were all by the skin of our teeth. In 1994, we had only 4 points and got through as a 3rd place team in the old 24 team format; in 2002, we also only had 4 points, and needed Korea to keep their lead against a desperate Portugal. We have a tough team to beat, but winning 2 group games would be new territory for us.

Posted by: Chest_Rockwell | December 4, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Come on, curmudgeons. Don't act like injuries makes this a Worse draw somehow. And don't even hint that playing Cameroon or Ivory Coast, or Denmark or most of the other choices weren't worse.

That said... France and Argentina couldn't have been given a easier way out.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | December 4, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

England 3-0-0 (9pts)
Algeria 1-1-1 (4pts)
Slovenia 0-2-1 (2pts)
USA 0-1-2 (1pt)

In the last four World Cups the USA had 4, 0, 4, and 1 points. In the Confed Cup, the USA got 3 points. The US has never won two games in group play and has never had a positive goal differential.

I really don't understand the hysteria here that the US will beat Algeria and Slovenia (getting at least 6 pts) and possibly tie England. You can't underrate teams (Slovenia, Algeria) who have already played in a tense playoff to get there.

Posted by: prokaryote | December 4, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

We need to beat Algeria and Slovenia, get away from the underdog, overachiever thing. We beat Portugal in 2002 and tied Italy in 2006, but we were inconsistent and not mature in our approach. This is the time to change that.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | December 4, 2009 1:43 PM
------------------------------------------------------

I don't even understand what any of that means. Not to be a richard about it, but that just sounds like the stuff soccer announcers say when they're trying to fill airtime and sound sophisticated.

For all the doomsayers above -- you need to get up on the latest news. Jay DeMerit ia back training with his team and will probably play before the end of the year. Edu is back with his team, but his return to the pitch will wait until January. Both of these guys will be fit and should be in great form when the Cup comes around. It's never certain for a player coming back from an injury like his, but I feel Edu should be fine. The same can be said for Jermaine Jones, who seems to be past his troubles. Davies and Onyewu will not be in peak condition, but there's reason to think both might be available to play. If not, we're going to be deeper than we have been recently. Demerit, Jones, Edu, Bocanegra, Marshall, Cunningham, Findley. The team we bring to South Africa may not be quite as good as the one we brought this past summer, but I think there's a chance it might even be better.

@grubbsl -- there was a post on Ives' site yesterday speculating that the US might go with a 4-3-1-2. I think that could make a lot of sense, especially against England. A midfield with Bradley, Jones and Edu (or maybe Clark or Feilhaber, with Edu on the back line): and Donovan playing behind a front pair, probably Dempsey and Altidore. I would expect Bradley to at least experiment with something like that in next year's friendlies.

As for how we'll do -- my sense is that the USA does pretty well, except that we get beat by the most talented players: the Del Pieros, Fabianos, Rooneys of the world. The good news is that Algeria and Slovenia don't have players with that kind of talent. This draw was phenomenal. The only seed that wouldn't have terrified me was South Africa, so drawing England isn't really much worse than any of the top 7. In the other slots, I think the USA drew the weakest team in each pot. We'll need to win both of those games to secure 2nd place, but I think the team is totally capable of that.

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

This is the first and maybe only World Cup for most of our life times that will be in Africa. Might have been stretching the home field advantage idea, but I think it's fair to say that African teams will be pulled for by fans from the home continent more than others.

Posted by: inzzo79 | December 4, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

I really don't understand the hysteria here that the US will beat Algeria and Slovenia (getting at least 6 pts) and possibly tie England. You can't underrate teams (Slovenia, Algeria) who have already played in a tense playoff to get there.

Posted by: prokaryote | December 4, 2009 4:11 PM
=====================

How does my 401(k) guy put it? "Past performance does not indicate future results." Or prohibit results, for that matter.

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want to join me in a petition to cancel all local youth soccer games that Saturday? Just kidding - sort of...

Posted by: assocfoot | December 4, 2009 2:06 PM
_________________________________________

I think it is even more important to try to prevent anyone from scheduling meetings at work the other two matchdays.

Posted by: universityandpark | December 4, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I-270, the prices on tv's are gonna be excellent heading into christmas. We finally bought a reasonably sized flat screen on black friday and the wife really loves the HD. It can't be beat.

Posted by: DadRyan | December 4, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Anyone going to the DCU team sale tomorrow?

Posted by: DadRyan | December 4, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

comcast is airing a tribute to Olsen tonight at 630pm. You can also just watch it here:
http://www.csnwashington.com/pages/landing_09/?blockID=98997&feedID=2992

Posted by: DadRyan | December 4, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I wrote: "England will be fielding its strongest team in decades."

mason08 replied: "I've heard this before..."

Really? Because I grew up in England and I've never seen them optimistic about their team going into a World Cup. In fact the team usually turns in a run of horrible friendly performances in the previous 12 months that crush any optimism going.

For nearly 20 years after English club teams were kicked out of Euro club competition (following the Heysel stadium disaster), they suffered a chronic inferiority complex vis-a-vis Continental play, while the classiest play all came from Holland, France, Italy etc.

But all of that has changed, primarily because EU work rules allowed vast numbers of foreigners into the British league, where their higher level of play rubbed off on the brutish Brits.

In last year's European cup, three of four semi-finalists were English teams. Sure, these teams had foreign players, but (except for Arsenal) they were no longer teams in which all the best players were foreign. Carrick and Ferdinand are key players for Man U, Lampard and Terry for Chelsea, Gerard for Liverpool. England still lacks a world-class striker, but it has an embarrassment of riches at the back, and for the first time in my life, a clutch of great playmaking, goalscoring midfielders who can match any in the world.

The simple fact is that England has improved more since their last meeting than the US has.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 4, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

fischy, let the hatred go.

It makes perfect sense. The US comes in every year, not as an established, respected soccer nation, but as a spoiler, a team that can overcome a giant like Portugal or Spain, and tie a world champion, but then stumble against organized, middling teams like Poland in 2002 or get trounced by Czech Republic. In order to be respected, we need to be consistent. We need to show that we are no longer just one of the top two teams in Concacaf.

We can't draw Algeria, or fricking lose either. And we need a result against Slovenia.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | December 4, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

So, is anyone else as impressed as I am by the 1800 votes in the poll here?

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

How does my 401(k) guy put it?
*****************

Mine says, you don't need to worry about where the 2018 World Cup is held because you will still be chained to your desk thanks to the wonderful advice I gave you when you were in your mid-fifties.

Posted by: BlackandRedRedDevil | December 4, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Fischy. I like that formation. I have been ponder that one myself. The one weakness I see in that formation is that you concede space on the flanks. Not necessarily the deep flanks, but still in range of serving crosses into our box. Rooney is no predator in the air, but England is very good at this method of attack. To run this formation I think we need either a healthly DeMerit or Gooch. DeMerit looks to be on his back which is good. ( I like Spector, but he seems to be a more on a European center back who is good as reading the game and positioning himself well. Gooch and DeMerit are more of the bruising defenders needed for this game.)

With that said I am a huge fan on the 4-3-2-1 formation because it allows for the quickest counter attack. Plus is keeps Dempsey's lack of work ethic at bay (he works had to Fulham but not so much for USA. Though he still demands a starting 11 with his finishing capabilities. Who else do we have who is a consistent score in the EPL?). Also a midfield of Jones, Bradley, and Edu (or Clark) will be extremely tough to break down. All are physically gifted predators. England would not enjoy going against that brick wall. If Davies returns fit, then this formation will scare any team (Especially England, with a slow John Terry and a struggling Rio.)

PS. glad someone responded to my tactic inquire.

Any grammatical errors? Just deal with them.

Posted by: grubbsbl | December 4, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Play for a draw against England and then go all out against Slovenia and Algeria and we should be fine.

Posted by: SkinsDiesel | December 4, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

So, is anyone else as impressed as I am by the 1800 votes in the poll here?

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 4:48 PM

Yes, but there were 1799 votes from Florida. Sorry, fischy -couldn't resist. JoeDoc, you're welcome.

Posted by: BlackandRedRedDevil | December 4, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

LETS GO USSSSS, LETS GO USSSSS, LETS GO USSSSS, LETS GO US

Posted by: Norteno4life | December 4, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

what would be nice is if we could have a place here in the DC area with a jumbotron to watch the game, getting 6k US fans would be great, beating England would make it even better.

Posted by: Norteno4life | December 4, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Any grammatical errors? Just deal with them.

Posted by: grubbsbl | December 4, 2009 4:51 PM

Irregardless of the grammatical errors?

Well in, BaRRD. But it was a chad bit harsh on our SI colleague!

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

How does my 401(k) guy put it? "Past performance does not indicate future results." Or prohibit results, for that matter.

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 4:17 PM

That quote is actually used to depress optimism, not inflate it.. Or is your advisor encouraging you to invest in duds when he says that?

I just don't see much of a difference between the US and Slovenia and Algeria except that the US gets to play in CONCACAF and has an easier time of qualifying than in Europe (Slovenia had to beat Russia) and Africa (Algeria had to avoid thrown stones).

Don't misunderstand my pessimism. I will cheer for the US and hope they do well, but sometimes hope is not enough.

Posted by: prokaryote | December 4, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

"... but sometimes hope is not enough."

Posted by: prokaryote | December 4, 2009 5:01 PM
=========================

Indeed.

Posted by: joedoc1 | December 4, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Ooops. I mean 2,000+ votes.

@UnitedDemon -- sure, the USA needs to get wins in those games. 3rd place doesn't cut it to advance any more. If we get 4 points, that almost surely means a tie for 2nd, and then it's unpredictable tiebreakers. So, we have to figure on needing 2 wins, or a win and 2 ties. What I meant is that I think it's meaningless cliches to talk about team's attitudes and mature approaches. The team -- each team -- is the sum of its abilities and what it does to make best use of those abilities. That's true of every team in every Cup. I expect the USA to try and win -- which I suppose is different than our '90s efforts, where we tried not to lose (which is probably the approach we'll take against England, and it won't work). The USA doesn't play scared the way we did 20 years ago. If that's what you mean by mature, we're already there.

@kenonwenu -- You don't think England has a world-class striker? If you limit world-class to Kaka, Ronaldo, Messi, Ibrahimovic and Eto'o, then you're right. I think at least two-thirds of the World Cup teams would be thrilled to have a striker as good as Rooney.

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

@inzzo79 wrote "Algeria is extremely dangerous playing on what is essentially home soil."

Ha ha... that's hilarious. Algiers is 200 miles closer to St. Louis than it is to Johannesburg! In fact, there's almost no way to fly from Algiers to South Africa without going through Europe (I think there's one connection through Cairo, maybe). I don't see the whole "continental advantage" thing really applying to Algeria.

Posted by: edgeonyou | December 4, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

sometimes hope is not enough.
Posted by: prokaryote
============

But Hope with Leslie Osborne and Heather Mitts... Oh. You meant something else. Nevermind.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 4, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

fischy, Rooney doesn't actually produce all that many goals. Jermaine Defoe is in top form right now (he scored four goals against Wigan last weekend). If he keeps that up, I wouldn't be surprised to see him leading the line with Rooney in a slightly withdrawn role. England's strikers certainly don't match their outstanding defence and midfield. Keeper is also a traditional weak spot for England (though a strong point of the US).

A lot of England's goalscoring threat in 2010 will come from Gerard and Lampard, perhaps with help from Joe Cole or Aaron Lennon.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 4, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Sunil Gulati must have paid millions for this draw. Straight cash homey.

Posted by: ddd001 | December 4, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

I think the English will bend under the pressure of their fans and the media - not just to win, but to boost their chances for hosting WC18. Not to mention Gerrard and Lampard who will be under pressure for their non-performances in 2006. Oh, don't get me wrong, they'll advance. But I think we can get at least a draw from them.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 4, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

@troy6: Son, it's your boss. Can you come in to my office for a moment?

Posted by: joedoc1
----------------------
should I bring the bottle? we've got a Glenmorangie Quinta Ruban open at the moment....

270: as always, well in. Osbourne and Mitts are always welcome additions to the conversation (Tarpley too).

Posted by: troy6 | December 4, 2009 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Green

Johnson Ferdinand Terry Cole


Lampard Barry

Gerrard
J.Cole
Rooney


You Yanks....Try Stoping This!

Posted by: DCUHitMan10 | December 4, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

"Try Stoping This"???

I don't even know what "stoping" is, but I'm not above stooping low for the funny.

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 5:59 PM | Report abuse

The Stanford gals have their hands full with UCLA.

Anyone know where to find a link to watch the Terps and Cavs tussle?

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

An Englishman, who can't even spell proper English? Effin' Hilarious!

Posted by: DadRyan | December 4, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

US will not advance..People are underestimating slovenia and off course England has had an edge over the US. And without Charlie Davies...it ain't hapenning.

Posted by: godpere | December 4, 2009 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Yo TROY!
Check yer, fb messages brah!

Posted by: DadRyan | December 4, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

@godpere -- USA has other options that you are seriously underestimating: Findley, Cunningham and Jeremiah White. Also, Davies is saying he'll be ready. I won't underestimate Slovenia or Algeria, but only a jackarse proclaims the USA has no chance. A couple of weeks ago there were huge concerns about our health and depth There have been encouraging reports on several fronts this week -- including Jones, Edu and DeMerit about to return, and Davies' optimistic projection, plus Cunningham's training abroad. The Yanks are taking this very seriously, and I have a lot of confidence they'll come through.

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

The London Times likes the draw from England's perspective. Here are a couple of quotes:

"A semi-final against Brazil in Cape Town on July 6. How does that sound? Arrogant, for one thing, dangerous for another, but that will suddenly be the least that England expects. Such will be the optimism generated by the gift last night of a group that contains the United States, Algeria and Slovenia — and the promise of an onward journey, if that group is won, that might involve nothing more terrifying than Serbia or Ghana in the last 16 and an eminently beatable France in the quarter-finals.
.
.
.
Within half an hour of the draw’s conclusion, a press release arrived from Ladbrokes, the bookmakers, stating that England’s odds had been “slashed” from 6-1 to 5-1 and they are now second favourites — behind Spain, ahead of Brazil, incredibly — to win the tournament.
.
.
.
No longer an unknown quantity, the US, with players such as Tim Howard, Michael Bradley and Landon Donovan, are an increasingly well-regarded team — No 14 in the Fifa world rankings and impressive conquerors of Spain in last summer’s Confederations Cup — but not a team whom any of the top seeds would have feared. Being drawn with the US was not, in itself, a blessing; there were far weaker teams, such as New Zealand, in the second seeding pot. It was when Algeria, rather than Ivory Coast or Ghana, were drawn from the third pot and Slovenia, rather than France or Portugal, from the fourth that this really began to feel like England’s night."

Seems everyone is happy!

Posted by: Curious99 | December 4, 2009 6:45 PM | Report abuse

The draw was about as good as we could have hoped. There really are no bad teams at this level (even NZ will come to play in June).

Discussing players is a bit premature. We have at least half a European season to play and the start of MLS next year before a roster is picked. Will Gooch be ready? Maybe, maybe not. Injuries to someone else? Lets hope not. Maybe there is a kid playing tonight in the college cup that will turn out to be the next scoring sensation at the international level.

With all that said, I think if we come to play like we did in 2002 we'll shock everyone and take the group. 8 years ago we had the heart and limited talent. We're a better team now and just need to show it.

Posted by: SoccerVA | December 4, 2009 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Folks, don't let your patriotism and bias rule this prediction. Unfortunately, the US will NOT advance beyond the group. Get real. They'd have to beat England and that isn't going to happen.

Posted by: topwriter | December 4, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Folks, don't let your patriotism and bias rule this prediction. Unfortunately, the US will NOT advance beyond the group. Get real. They'd have to beat England and that isn't going to happen.

Posted by: topwriter | December 4, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Why do they have to beat England to advance?

Posted by: Southeasterner | December 4, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

They don't have to ebat England. They don't even have to get any points from that game. Top 2 teams advance.

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

They don't have to beat England, but they do have to keep the ebats at bay.

Dyslexic typist.

Golden goal!! Stanford Cardinal win!!!

Posted by: fischy | December 4, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

"Try Stoping This"??? I don't even know what "stoping" is . .

The Red Coats are nothing but a bunch of panty wastes. We'll dispense with them with the ease of mere farmers in Massachusetts.

""On the night of April 18, 1775, General Gage sent 700 men to seize munitions stored by the colonial militia . .

. . . The British moved on to Concord, where a detachment of three companies was engaged and routed at the North Bridge by a force of 500 minutemen. As the British retreated back to Boston, thousands of militiamen attacked them along the roads, inflicting great damage before timely British reinforcements prevented a total disaster. With the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the war had begun.""

Posted by: delantero | December 4, 2009 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Join us in this song
Together we shall Sing
Stand Up and Be Counted
Sing a Song for Liberty

DropKick Murphy's.

Posted by: delantero | December 4, 2009 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Goff, what is with former Post Sports Editor Emilio Garcia-Ruiz? He goes on BBC International at 8 PM DC time on Friday night and concurs with the interviewer's provocative question 'isn't the USA side rubbish?', volunteering that the Yanks aren't very good. He then goes on to refer only to failures of years past rather than to, um, well, for example, that little tourney in South Africa this past summer. He was completely dimissive of the American side. Not even one balancing remark, or comment on the quality of the American side's best players. Really disappointing simplistic and unfair review for a global audience after having been called on to the network to 'represent' an American commentator's view no less. Much more sensible assessment in the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/teams/england/6730786/World-Cup-2010-draw-England-must-hit-ground-running-against-United-States.html

Posted by: bartapest1 | December 4, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

What scares me most about England is Capello. I see him having his team ready to beat us down. I'm not a Bradley hater, but he is not on Capello's level. That said, we have a puncher's chance against anyone. We will have a tougher time coming back if we fall behind as we did too often in qualifying, so it will be important to control pace and get some early chances in each game.

I like the 4-3-1-2 idea.

Posted by: dimesmakedollars | December 4, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Did that last one percent vote for Sarah Palin?

Posted by: billq1 | December 4, 2009 8:36 PM | Report abuse

*England and the US will be through.

*UNC/Notre Dame women scoreless at the half. Pretty entertaining game.

Posted by: OWNTF | December 4, 2009 9:35 PM | Report abuse

delantero, I probably shouldn't say this, but George Washington would be the first to admit that the US didn't win the Revolutionary War by having better soldiers. Redcoats were generally more than a match for US regulars or militiamen in a stand-up battle - rather like the Americans always beat their Vietnamese enemies in open battle but still lost the war.

dimesmakedollars says: "What scares me most about England is Capello."

I forgot to mention him above, but I agree with this completely. Capello is the best there is, and since he took over, England have been unstoppable. No bad games, not one. That's unheard of for England.
No Capello team is going to choke under pressure. And if they get an early goal - which they often do these days - then look out.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 4, 2009 9:38 PM | Report abuse

1. This is a very good draw for the USA. It's not the weakest group out there but it's definitely not a group with 2 or even 3 really mighty teams.

2. That said, right now, I don't think our odds of making the knock-out rounds are even 50%. I rate our chances of making the next stage as maybe 35%. Algeria and Slovenia aren't giants. But they're tough teams to play against. We just lost to Slovenia (granted, our reserves against their reserves). But the USA seems to have done the best in the WC when we've played teams where we were the underdogs and the other side (be it Portugal in 2002 or Italy in 2006) underestimated us.

3. The post by someone earlier about the USA mostly getting by with 4 points got it spot on. If the USA were to win 2 matches in the first round, I'd be flabbergasted, stunned--we pretty much don't do that except at sometimes the U17 level--sometimes. We're mostly a side that in our best tournaments gets a tie and finds a way to get a win somehow.

4. Could we advance? Of course we could. And this draw gives us a very good chance. When we play a Brazil or Argentina or Spain, we pretty much not only have to play well but hope they don't bring their "A" game. Not so with this draw. That said, the USA will have to be substantially better than how we've played this year to make the next round. Don't forget--if we match our first round Confed Cup performance in the WC, we would be going home. For the USA to advance we might have to do something we haven't done in modern times: 2 wins in the 1st round.

Posted by: JoeW1 | December 4, 2009 9:49 PM | Report abuse

PS play 4-3-1-2 and I bet Capello puts Peter Crouch up front, goes past you on both wings, and piles in the crosses, with Gerrard and Lampard following in from midfield to slam in any loose balls.

If the US plans on putting less than four men across midfield, they'd better have fast defenders and midfielders who like chasing back ... in a hurry.

England has lots of fast and tricky wingers, though I admit none can hit a cross like Beckham does.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 4, 2009 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Algeria and Slovenia aren't giants. But they're tough teams to play against. We just lost to Slovenia (granted, our reserves against their reserves).

We lost to Slovakia, the eastern half of the former Czechoslovakia. Slovenia, who is in our group, is the far northern part of the former Yugoslavia.

This ends today's European geography lesson. :)

Posted by: SportzNut21 | December 4, 2009 10:02 PM | Report abuse

USA 1 - 2 England
USA 2 - 1 Algeria
USA 1 - 0 Slovenia

England 4 - 1 Slovenia
England 3 - 0 Algeria

Slovenia 2 - 0 Algeria

England 7 pts
USA 6 pts
Slovenia 3 pts
Algeria 0 pts

Posted by: horace1 | December 4, 2009 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Oops, meant England 9 pts

Posted by: horace1 | December 4, 2009 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Folks, I've seen Algeria play, and the US _should_ beat them easily. Something like 2-0 or 3-1. Yes, they beat Egypt 3-1 at home, only lost 2-0 on a goal in crazy late injury time, and then held on to win that crazy playoff in Khartoum (on a wonder goal volley) -- but they're still not that good (and I think Egypt is quite good). I really think that the long and ugly history of Algeria v. Egypt in football came into play, and the Algerians, as underdogs, just rose to the occasion. I think if it had been any other different "African Giant" in their group (like Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, etc.), they wouldn't have advanced. As much as I wish Algeria was a good team, they aren't -- but they played with a ton of heart when they had to.

Posted by: edgeonyou | December 4, 2009 10:45 PM | Report abuse

Goff, what is with former Post Sports Editor Emilio Garcia-Ruiz? He goes on BBC International at 8 PM DC time on Friday night and concurs with the interviewer's provocative question 'isn't the USA side rubbish?', volunteering that the Yanks aren't very good. He then goes on to refer only to failures of years past rather than to, um, well, for example, that little tourney in South Africa this past summer. He was completely dimissive of the American side. Not even one balancing remark, or comment on the quality of the American side's best players. Really disappointing simplistic and unfair review for a global audience after having been called on to the network to 'represent' an American commentator's view no less. Much more sensible assessment in the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/teams/england/6730786/World-Cup-2010-draw-England-must-hit-ground-running-against-United-States.html

Posted by: bartapest1 | December 4, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

----------------

Just saw this. Is this joker (Garcia-Ruiz) your boss? What a twit--and not just because he wouldn't be a USA homer. Awful TV presence. He provided very little insight ("England should sail through"). Keep him off the "telly."

Total USMNT hater. It seems odd that we need to look to the English press for balance.

Posted by: PrinceBuster21 | December 4, 2009 10:54 PM | Report abuse

delantero, I probably shouldn't say this, but George Washington would be the first to admit that the US didn't win the Revolutionary War by having better soldiers.
Posted by: kenonwenu

And, clearly, if the US beats England, we will have done it with FAR inferior players.

Posted by: delantero | December 4, 2009 10:58 PM | Report abuse

""The spirit of St Louis will lift America’s wings when they attempt a famous reprise in Rustenburg. "" By Henry Winter in Cape Town

The BBC is pretty much rubbish. "Spirit of St. Louis" is the best they can come up with?

Posted by: delantero | December 4, 2009 11:02 PM | Report abuse

And we wouldn't be attempting a "famous reprise," you would. See, we won our last World Cup meeting.

Posted by: delantero | December 4, 2009 11:04 PM | Report abuse

HOW BOUT THEM WAHOOS!

Posted by: the_slammer | December 5, 2009 12:46 AM | Report abuse

Hey, Cirovski is available now...muhahaha.

This shutout streak is nuts...

Posted by: Reignking | December 5, 2009 12:58 AM | Report abuse

Awesome game in Cville tonight. Wacky deflection to give UVa the lead, followed by lots of Maryland possession but not many chances. Virginia's defense has been outstanding, as was underscored by the saved PK

Posted by: carmines757 | December 5, 2009 1:51 AM | Report abuse

delantero, I probably shouldn't say this, but George Washington would be the first to admit that the US didn't win the Revolutionary War by having better soldiers.

===

You sound like a Mexican. Excuses already?

Posted by: mason08 | December 5, 2009 3:06 AM | Report abuse

Anyone going to the team sale at RFK?

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

RFK? Today? Negative. This global warming weather is keeping me in today. Arsenal on the tube right now.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | December 5, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

You could probably get a DCU rain jacket on the cheap JD...

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Random OT observation -- you can see the new Philly stadium from the Amtraks but there is no Amtrak stop in Chester, current or planned. I think it may be possible to take Amtrak to Wilmington and switch to a SEPTA train that would stop a mile from the field.

Since I personally would like to take the train to Philly MLS and WPS games, I would appreciate it if the taxpayers of Southeastern Pennsylvania and/or the USA would build me an Amtrak train station. In time for the 2010 opening. Thanks.

Posted by: OWNTF | December 5, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Unless we play much better than we did in qualifying or even in the Fed Cup, England are going to blow our doors off. A 3 or 4 goal margin is not unlikely. Our big wins in big competitions have come against overconfident opponents - Spain being the latest sterling example - and I just don't see that happening here.

That isn't, in itself, all that worrisome to me because I don't think the US would carry that result into winnable games against Algeria and Slovenia.

If England rack up big wins against all three opponents it's a wash. But if they get overconfident, or rest players after two big wins and hand 3 points to Slovenia in the third match, then we could find ourselves in third place on goal difference even if we manage 6 points.

Posted by: Ragnarok1 | December 5, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Whoever the opposition, intensity, mental toughness, consistency and creativity is a must for a successful first round. To underestimate any team is wishful thinking. The next friendlies before the start of WC 2010 will determine if the USMNT has the metal to advance. Mediocre performances in the friendlies cannot be tolerated and need to be played with some new faces in order to have better options in player rotation.

Posted by: juke2 | December 5, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

OWNTF, there's always the China Town Bus. They even let you throw your bike underneath, so you can ride to the stadium when you get off the thing...

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Early on someone posted that local youth games need to be cancelled on June 12.
The time change is +7 I believe. So if the game is in the evening live in South Africa, it will be about 3am here, Sunday morning.

As for our chances against England, the odds will be with England. That said, I would rather be the US in this match than England. We know we have potential to beat giants in tournament play (ask Spain), and they know they need to be worried.

I wish we didn't play them first.

Posted by: dsheon1 | December 5, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

dsheaon, i think you've got it backwards; SA is 7 hours AHEAD of us, so the game is going to start at 2.30 PM EST. also, perhaps it's a good thing to get the "difficult" game out of the way right off the bat (a la 2002 vs portugal)?

Posted by: birdynumnum | December 5, 2009 11:35 AM | Report abuse

'The BBC is pretty much rubbish.... we wouldn't be attempting a "famous reprise," you would. See, we won our last World Cup meeting.'

No, you're confusing 'reprise' with 'revenge'. To reprise something means to repeat it.
The English are still better than Americans at two things:
a) speaking English, and
b) playing football

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 5, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

delantero, I probably shouldn't say this, but George Washington would be the first to admit that the US didn't win the Revolutionary War by having better soldiers.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 4, 2009 9:38 PM

===

You sound like a Mexican. Excuses already?

Posted by: mason08 | December 5, 2009 3:06 AM

===

mason08, You're missing kenonwenu's point. I'm pretty sure he's saying that the US can still win despite not having better players than England.

Posted by: PrinceBuster21 | December 5, 2009 12:01 PM | Report abuse

he English are still better than Americans at two things:
a) speaking English, and
b) playing football

Posted by: kenonwenu

Whoop Dee Doo! We have nicer teeth and smell better than you.

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Whoop Dee Doo! We have nicer teeth and smell better than you.

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 12:17 PM

=====================================

And better stadia!!! USA 2018!!!

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 5, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Hmm. I think the Anglosphere should stick together, and both countries advance out of the group. Consider it a victory for civil rights, the common law, market economies and representative government.

Posted by: OWNTF | December 5, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

The English are still better than Americans at two things:
a) speaking English, and
b) playing football
Posted by: kenonwenu
==============

I refer you to the Fox Fan zone show, in which two fans, one from each team, call the match of the week. Watch 20 minutes of that and then revisit your statement that the English speak better that we do.

We fired our guns and the British kept a-coming.
There wasn't as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and they began a-running
Down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.
HO!

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 5, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Consider it a victory for civil rights, the common law, market economies and representative government.
Posted by: OWNTF
============

And whiskey.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 5, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Shouldn't you kids be out playing in the snow?

As for me, I'm gonna do some bumper skiing via Metro Bus.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | December 5, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Emilio Garcia-Ruiz wouldn't dare do that on US TV. fischy would bring the torches, Joe Doc the pitchforks, and we'd all form an angry mob at the Starbucks nearest to the Post offices and send e-mails to Marcus Brauchli and Katharine Weymouth.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 5, 2009 1:08 PM | Report abuse

I was born on a Dublin street where the royal drums did beat
And the loving English feet walked all over us,
And every single night when me father'd come home tight
He'd invite the neighbors outside with this chorus:

Oh, come out you black and tans, Come out and fight me like a man
Show your wife how you won medals down in Flanders
Tell her how the IRA made you run like hel away,
From the green and lovely lanes in Killeshandra

Come tell us how you slew
Them ol' Arabs two by two
Like the Zulus they had spears and bows and arrows,
How you bravely faced each one
With your sixteen pounder gun
And you frightened them poor natives to their marrow.

Posted by: delantero | December 5, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

World Cup games should be televised at 7:30 a.m., 10 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. on the East Coast.

Plan accordingly.

Posted by: Cerealman | December 5, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

PS play 4-3-1-2 and I bet Capello puts Peter Crouch up front,

Please put Crouch up front. Please, especially if Gooch is back there. Crouch would be broken in half.

And before ya start off with the 2-0 friendly loss . . here was the US roster for that game . . . much has changed and four of those players (Beasley, Wolff, Pearce, and Johnson) won't even make the squad for South Africa.

United States

1 Tim Howard
6 Steve Cherundolo
22 Oguchi Onyewu
3 Carlos Bocanegra
12 Heath Pearce
7 DaMarcus Beasley
4 Michael Bradley
13 Ricardo Clark
16 Josh Wolff
9 Eddie Johnson
8 Clint Dempsey

Posted by: delantero | December 5, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Anyone going to the team sale at RFK?

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 9:17 AM
__________________________________________

When I read this, my first question was whether Chang was auctioning off the team.

Posted by: universityandpark | December 5, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Just a reminder that they will be kicking off in Akron in about an hour, and in Winston-Salem this evening. There appears to be an audio stream for the first game; link here:

http://www.ncaa.com/brackets/2009/ncaa_bracket_DI_soccer_men.html

Posted by: universityandpark | December 5, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I can't remember whether anyone has already posted a link to this Freedom-oriented Steinbog piece:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/02/AR2009120203786.html

Posted by: universityandpark | December 5, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Aye, you're gonna get me riled up delantero.

Perhaps its well that the Irish didn't make it, or we'd have to consider whether they rightly belonged with us in the Angloshpere or, on the other hand, grouped with Algeria among the "Wretched of the Earth" (ref. Frantz Fanon) or with Slovenia among Communists or Nazi collaborators.

Posted by: OWNTF | December 5, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Thanks UandP! I saw that but didn't read it, having no interest in the Redskins.

Lohman should get the job! How can she be any worse than the guy who's in there now?

I hope she doesn't have to work for this owner though.

Posted by: OWNTF | December 5, 2009 3:38 PM | Report abuse

I stupidly made the kids' next dental appointment for the same date as US-SLV. Thank goodness I have 6 months to change it. Need to get one of those interworldwide phones to check my calendar.

Weird piece by Steinberg on so many fronts: 1. Lohman is interviewed about her fantasy job, not her real one, 2. 90% of Redskins fans think they're qualified to be the GM, 3. does anyone care about that - other than the woman-who-wants-to-be-an-NFL-GM stretch?

The Battle of Algiers is a fine film.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 5, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

You made a dental appointment for your kids? Clearly you're not from England.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | December 5, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

I finally got around to looking at the wood-based version of the Post. Goff filed articles on both the WC draw and Klockner. In addition, the entire back page (D10) is taken up with thumbnail sketches of the eight groups. You should be able to find them all via the links at the top of this thread, or by searching under "goff".

Posted by: universityandpark | December 5, 2009 4:19 PM | Report abuse

2. 90% of Redskins fans think they're qualified to be the GM

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 5, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

No, thats 90% of Redskins fans CAN do better than the current GM.

Posted by: spikeman | December 5, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Goff's made some interesting picks in his draw analysis: Ghana (haven't been impressive for my money) over Serbia and the Aussies); then he goes with the opposite logic, taking highly organized Denmark over the athletic Indomitable Lions of Cameroon; and Ivory Coast over Portugal. I might change my mind over the next 7 months, but right now I'd go the other way in each game (though I was impressed with the Danish organization against the USA).

Posted by: fischy | December 5, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Messiah men and women win the Division III national championships today in San Antonio. Great stuff.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | December 5, 2009 8:13 PM | Report abuse

We fired our guns and the British kept a-coming.
There wasn't as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and they began a-running
Down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.
HO!

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 5, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

-----

In 1814 we took a little trip
Along with Col. Jackson down the mighty Mississip'
We took a little bacon and we took a little beans
And we caught the bloody British in the town of New Orleans

Chorus:
We fired our guns and the British kept a-comin'
There wasn't as many as there was a while ago
We fired once more and they began to runnin'
On down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico

We looked down the river and we see'd the British come
And there must have been a hundred of 'em beatin' on the drums
They stepped so high and they made the bugles ring
We stood behind our cotton bales and didn't say a thing

(Chorus)

Ol' Hickory said we can take 'em by surprise
If we didn't fire our muskets 'til we look 'em in the eyes
We held our fire till we see'd their faces well
Then we opened up the squirrel guns and really gave 'em...well...

(Chorus)

Well they ran through the briars and they ran through the brambles
And they ran through the bushes where the rabbits wouldn't go
They ran so fast that the hounds couldn't catch 'em
On down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico

We fired our cannon 'til the barrel melted down
So we grabbed an alligator and we fought another round
We filled his head with cannonballs and powdered his behind
And when we touched the powder off, the gator lost his mind!

(Chorus)

Well they ran through the briars and they ran through the brambles
And they ran through the bushes where the rabbits wouldn't go
They ran so fast that the hounds couldn't catch 'em
On down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico...

(Johnny Horton, "The Battle of New Orleans," 1959)

Posted by: SportzNut21 | December 5, 2009 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Rand-al-Thor, if they ever have a World Cup of Shiny Teeth, I'm quite sure the USA will win it. The World Cup of Football ... not so much.

SportzNut21, your Johnny Horton might not find it all so funny if he'd actually been there. Writing a song in 1959 about how "we" won a battle in 1814 seems pretty cheesy to me.

PS Sorry we burned down Washington when we captured it in that war. That was mean.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 5, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

No sweat about Washington, kenonwenu. Indeed, can you do the same to San Francisco, Chicago, Reno and a few other US cities? They could use the urban renewal.

I'll leave the Brit bashing to DadRyan...

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | December 5, 2009 10:27 PM | Report abuse

So did that interview with Charlie Davies never air?

I can find the preview for it, and plenty of talk about that.

But everyone seems to have forgotten about it supposed to be airing on ESPN during the draw analysis. And to my knowledge and watching the espn draw, then skimming through it again, it never aired.

Did I somehow miss it? If so, how come no one talked about it not airing, literally, anywhere?

Have I gone insane, did the interview never exist?

Are you all in on this?

Posted by: AshburnUnited | December 5, 2009 10:59 PM | Report abuse

Its quite unfortunate that the burning of Washington was in the war of 1812. It's okay we won that one too.

Anyway, if anyone happens to be at home pretending to write a public administration research paper for a class and was watching the USA, Brazil u17 match they will know that we are still a struggling footballing nation. Brazil is just so much better tactically and technically.

Listen, I think we are making great strides but we still have so far to go.

We had some good athletes though...... (something I despise. We focus to much of athleticism and not ball control).

Posted by: grubbsbl | December 5, 2009 11:07 PM | Report abuse

"Writing a song in 1959 about how "we" won a battle in 1814 seems pretty cheesy to me."

"PS Sorry we burned down Washington when we captured it in that war. That was mean."
-------------------------

PS gym bag, you do realize that pairing those two statements makes you look like a retard right?

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 11:24 PM | Report abuse

Haha, yeah to be honest, I did realise that about 10 mins after I wrote it.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 5, 2009 11:37 PM | Report abuse

But the War of 1812 was a draw, according to all the books I've read. Of course, a draw was good enough for the Americans, since their principal war aim was to get Britain to treat them with respect, which it did thereafter. And a draw would be enough for the Americans this time too, but I still don't think they're going to get one.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 5, 2009 11:48 PM | Report abuse

""No, you're confusing 'reprise' with 'revenge'. To reprise something means to repeat it.""

Yeah, realized my error a minute too late. I blame it on Makers.

P.S. You still drive on the wrong side of the road.

Posted by: delantero | December 5, 2009 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Zzzzzzzzzz.

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Not you sir delantero, I was sawin' logs at the bloody tosser.

Posted by: DadRyan | December 5, 2009 11:55 PM | Report abuse

But the War of 1812 was a draw, according to all the books I've read. Of course, a draw was good enough for the Americans, since their principal war aim was to get Britain to treat them with respect, which it did thereafter. And a draw would be enough for the Americans this time too, but I still don't think they're going to get one.

===
Why don't we settle this on the seas? Let's each send out our oldest commissioned naval vessel, and the nation who's ship still floats when the sun sets can have the three points. If both do, we'll call it a draw.

Pitting the HMS Victory versus the USS Constitution seems like a good way to solve this matter, no?

Posted by: mason08 | December 6, 2009 12:57 AM | Report abuse

Pitting the HMS Victory versus the USS Constitution seems like a good way to solve this matter, no?

Posted by: mason08 | December 6, 2009 12:57 AM

=========================================

How the heck have we not nicknamed a goalie "Old Ironsides" yet?!

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | December 6, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

We could really use a "Sunday kickaround" right about now to accompany this everton - spurs match.

Posted by: dimesmakedollars | December 6, 2009 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Dimes: You've got your wish, albeit a bit late for that match. I tuned in just in time to see a penalty snuffed deep into second-half stoppage time. You can fill us in on the intervening two hours, I'm sure.

Posted by: universityandpark | December 6, 2009 1:16 PM | Report abuse

"Pitting the HMS Victory versus the USS Constitution seems like a good way to solve this matter, no?"

The Constitution has a very proud history and all, but it also has 44 guns (I think) vs the Victory's 112 guns. So you'd definitely be keeping your underdog status.

Funnily enough, I'm planning to visit the Victory with my kids in 2 weeks, when I'm back in Blighty (I live in Canada).

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 6, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

The actual naval history of the 1812 war was something like this: The USN was far better than the Brits expected, and scored some notable victories with their heavy and not-so-heavy frigates against matched or slightly lighter vessels. The British then got their "revenge" in the Shannon vs Chesapeake, which they claimed evened the score, though it didn't really.

Meanwhile the Americans were outfighting the Brits on the great lakes. Their land commanders wasted this naval victory, however.

Worse for the US, all this time, the giant British navy was interdicting US commerce, with help from privateers out of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Blockade is all about the number of ships you have, and obviously Britain couldn't be matched on that front. The US govt's revenue, depending largely on trade tariffs, fell away to almost nothing as soon as the war started.
Also, most of the (very successful) US commerce raiders were eventually hunted down and destroyed.

The crushing of US commerce, to which the Americans had no possible answer (they had zero ships of the line) was the main reason why, despite the British defeat at New Orleans, the peace terms declared the status quo ante bellum.

Something the Americans always forget is that the 1812 war was a secondary theatre to Britain, which was locked in a life-or-death struggle with Napoleon at the time. Wellington, for example, was fighting in Spain in 1812. When Napoleon was beaten and exiled to Elba in 1814, the Americans hastened to make terms, before the full weight of British power could be turned against them. Luckily for them, their negotiators were in Britain and knew how war-weary the British public was. The bankrupt Brits were happy to settle for a draw, and it's just as well they didn't commit large forces to press for victory in America, since Napoleon escaped from Elba the following year.

Sorry to bang on about 1812 on a footie blog, but others seem interested.

Posted by: kenonwenu | December 6, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Waterloo - Couldn't be safe if I wanted to
Waterloo - Knowing my fate is to be with you
Waterloo - Finally facing my Waterloo
Waterloo - Knowing my fate is to be with you
Waterloo - Finally facing my Waterloo

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 6, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Just fanning the flames of jingoism with some Schoolhouse Rock:

No More Kings
and
The Shot Heard Round The World

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | December 7, 2009 9:48 AM | Report abuse

The Constitution has a very proud history and all, but it also has 44 guns (I think) vs the Victory's 112 guns. So you'd definitely be keeping your underdog status.

===

The Victory is in drydock. The Constitution still sails.

You fail.

Posted by: mason08 | December 7, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company