twballgame9 {l Wrote}:EagleDave {l Wrote}:Yeah, agreed on creating more chances. They're still looking for a decent compliment for Jozy Altidore who is their best striker by a mile. I don't understand the fascination with Findley though. I realize he's fast, but I'm fairly sure (and video evidence against Australia backs me up) that the guy couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat on the international level. It should have been Buddle out there today or Torres with Findley as a late sub. They played very compacted today trying to avoid giving up another goal after the first few minutes. You'll see them open it up a great deal against the next 2 teams who can't really compete with them physically. There will be chances aplenty, and like I said before, they'd better bury both of these teams.
Torres is a midfielder, no? I thought the 4th forward was Hercules Gomez, who was set to come on when the game ended. If Torres starts, you move Dempsey up front or go to a 4-5-1 set?
I think they should go with Altidore and Buddle and bring on Gomez late. Gomez is a figgin scoring machine.
Gomez not Torres, my bad. I can't understand what Bradley has against the guy. He's done nothing but pump in goals for the squad yet gets benched in favor inferior players with more speed. Though Torres should be seeing some action as well...
branchinator {l Wrote}:England threatened on the offensive end a lot more but the US could have won the game. However, the only reason why they got a draw was because they got incredibly lucky on that Dempsey goal. I think both England and the US should handle Algeria and Slovenia pretty easily and advance.
Obviously it was a fluke goal, but at the same time, the unquestioned weakness for the English was the keeper. So, while a goal THAT soft was a surprise, a soft goal was not. Stuff like that happens and it's a part of the game.