Monday 3/26/2012, the US Men's National team played El Salvador needing a win to advance in the CONCACAF London Olympics qualifying tournament (all U23 teams).

Having previously lost 2-0 to Canada, the US needed a win over El Salvador to advance in the tournament.

Joe Corona scored a goal for the US in the 68th minute to put the US up 3-2. That score stood going into the added 5 Minutes of injury time. Starting Goalkeeper, Bill Hamid was injured in the 39th minute (apparently twisted his ankle) and was replaced by a nervous backup Sean Johnson after the second Salvadoran goal. After the half, the Salvadorans changed tactics, taking more shots to put more pressure on the backup keeper.

With less than minute left, Jaime Alas struck a shot at Johnson from 25 yards out. The shot was not particularly hard. Johnson parried the ball with his hands but unfortunately the ball bounded over his head and directly into the net.

Neither team was able to do much in the last minute and the 3-3 Draw stood. This placed Salvador in first place of their Group (A) and sent the US squad home.

Needless to say, Johnson was disconsolate after the game.

After the game,
U.S. coach Caleb Porter said:

[COLOR="Blue"][INDENT]"He feels like he's let every one down, his teammates down," Porter said referring to Johnson. "I didn't [think he did]. The kid's got a great future."[/INDENT][/COLOR]

Salvadoran coach Mauricio Alfaro was gracious but did say:
[COLOR="DarkBlue"][INDENT]"I noticed on the first shot that the keeper was a little bit nervous," Alfaro said. "So in the second half I told my players to shoot a little bit more on goal, try to have more shots on him. Even though they scored a goal in the last minute of the game, I felt the goal was a mistake from the goalkeeper, letting the bounce go because the shot really didn't have that much power."[/INDENT][/COLOR]

The US will miss the Olympics for only the third time.

On Saturday, (3:00 p.m. Pacific) Salvador will face Honduras (2nd in Group B) and (6:00 p.m. Pacific) Canada (2nd in Group A) will face Mexico (first Group B) in the semifinals.

Both Semi-Final winners will advance to London.

that the US soccer program is a disaster. When the current crop of "stars" (or what passes for stars here) such as Donovan, Dempsey, Howard, are gone, the team is likely in for a long stretch of "mediocre at best" results. At this point, I doubt we make the 2014 WC and 2018 is probably a longshot as well.

Sad, I was looking forward to seeing the U-23s in London. Rats.

Canada blew it too. After the big win over the US, they gave up the tying goal to Cuba in injury time, costing them first place in the group and meaning a much harder semifinal opponent (Mexico instead of Honduras). The two semifinal winners qualify for the Olympics.

UrsaMajor;731059 said:

---

that the US soccer program is a disaster. When the current crop of "stars" (or what passes for stars here) such as Donovan, Dempsey, Howard, are gone, the team is likely in for a long stretch of "mediocre at best" results. At this point, I doubt we make the 2014 WC and 2018 is probably a longshot as well.

---

Actually, even though the Olympic tournament is under 23 only, the best under 23s don't usually play, esp those abroad and definitely not those in the regular USMNT. So it's basically your backups. Teams that do well in the under 23s don't always win at the higher level if they have a good under 23 team since this is basically a test of how good you're second string players are who are aged 21-~24. Spain has Messi who is 24? and might be eligible (some players are often 24 years old in the tournament due to when the tournament starts and when their bday is).

Anyways, tough loss since it would have been a good learning experience.

Mexico is the clear top program in the region once again. First the U.S. U-20's lose to Guatemala and miss the U-20 World Cup and now this.

Just goes to show that there is a lot more parity in CONCACAF than people believe and other countries are stepping up their youth training.

Hmmm. Not quite sure I agree with calling the US Side a "disaster".

I still am still hopeful Klinsmann will end up making a huge difference not only on the Senior Nats team but on the US development program as a whole.

He insisted on having control over the development teams as a condition of his employment and he has made that a top priority.

I doubt Klinsmann's philosophies have completely filtered down to the U2x levels yet.
However, based on the Senior Team's development under his tutelage, I think the younger squads will eventually start playing more in the Klinsmann mode and start generating some top talent.

UrsaMajor;731059 said:

---

that the US soccer program is a disaster. When the current crop of "stars" (or what passes for stars here) such as Donovan, Dempsey, Howard, are gone, the team is likely in for a long stretch of "mediocre at best" results. At this point, I doubt we make the 2014 WC and 2018 is probably a longshot as well.

---

It might be a disaster, but Olympic qualifying doesn't really prove it one way or the other. Most of the top soccer countries don't take the Olympics seriously; they treat it like a D-League.

sycasey;731186 said:

---

It might be a disaster, but Olympic qualifying doesn't really prove it one way or the other. Most of the top soccer countries don't take the Olympics seriously; they treat it like a D-League.

---

Oops, sorry, disagree. It's serious for the players, and we deserve to have the best represent the country. It's an event of great magnitude. (3 over 23's can play btw.) "ODP" programs are cronyism IMO. Soccer player analysis is too subjective, which allows the mediocre to gain more respect than deserved. With U.S. 313 million people, El Salvador 7.2 million, and YEARS of practice for both, you mean we can't find the talent level (coaches also) to compete more effectively? [No slight on El Salvador - they always produce top players.] Hope Klin$mann can rescue, but he does need to do as he said and take complete control of the so-called "development" mechanisms here.

:rant :headbang :horse

There's a level of disrespect that the youth programs of the US and Mexico have towards the Central American and Caribbean Nations.

Last Olympic qualifying it was widely reported that the Mexican players were parading around L.A. as if they were already in the tourney. Many of them being professionals in Europe already even renting BMW's and partying it up as if they were on vacay. They then get dominated and eliminated by a hungry Guatemalan side filled with a bunch of guys who weren't even full professionals yet.

Same thing happened to the U.S. during U-20 World Cup Qualifying last summer. A US starting defender, already playing professionally in Portugal actually gave an interview stating that the U.S. reserve team that they face in practice would be the toughest team they play during qualifying. They then get eliminated by Guatemala led by a kid playing in Brazil's 3rd division.

I was watching a behind the scenes clip on youtube where the U.S. coach Caleb Porter tells the team "You're all big time players" the day before their match against El Salvador. There's no mention of "hey guys, this game is gonna be tough" or anything like that.

How much did the U.S. overlook El Salvador? They even frickin had their plane tickets purchased to the next round.



What has kept Mexico from becoming an elite futbol nation has always been their hubris. It has been their achilles heal and has stagnated their potential. I fear that the U.S. may be going the same route and I hope things get rectified before it becomes embedded into the program.

WildBear;731121 said:

---

Spain has Messi who is 24

---

Messi is an Argentine who plays for a Spanish team-Barcelona.

SoCalBear323;731235 said:

---

What has kept Mexico from becoming an elite futbol nation has always been their hubris. It has been their achilles heal and has stagnated their potential. I fear that the U.S. may be going the same route and I hope things get rectified before it becomes embedded into the program.

---

I wonder where this hubris comes from? Just from being decent in CONCACAF? That's hardly something to crow about. Europe and South America consider CONCACAF pretty much a joke.

I do like the direction Klinsi is taking the USMNT. Speaking of hubris, that's what Italy had when they took the USMNT lightly. Don't tell me they wanted to lose a friendly a few months away from Euro 2012 -- you're supposed to be playing good ball right about now if you're gonna be a contender.

kiddynamite;731315 said:

---

Messi is an Argentine who plays for a Spanish team-Barcelona.

---

Brain fart. He is obviously Argentine and that's what I meant, thanks for the correction. But the point was that the best players typically don't play in the olympics, let alone the qualifiers.

WildBear;731331 said:

---

Brain fart. He is obviously Argentine and that's what I meant, thanks for the correction. But the point was that the best players typically don't play in the olympics, let alone the qualifiers.

---

They all play by the same rules. We should be able to find/have identified enough talent to compete more effectively.

:rant

I really don't mean to quarrel with you. However, I just don't see where your impressions lead to your conclusions....

The Caribbean teams (e.g. Haiti/Trinidad) have semi-pro players that have full time jobs first and play soccer second. The US and Mex should (and do) routinely trounce these teams. I don't believe either Mex or US take the Central American teams lightly. Panama, Honduras, Costa Rica, Salvador and Guatemala have all shown they can play equal with the US and Mex on many occasions. Playing these teams on their home venues is also extremely challenging.

The US (as almost every team) will book refundable hotel/plane tix in anticipation of making the next round of any tourney. Nothing worse than progressing further in a tourney than expected and then not having a plane ride to the next venue or a hotel in that city.

Also, I also don't see anything wrong with a Coach talking up a team's potential a day before the game. I would not call this hubris, I would call this building confidence so as to go out with a positive mindset. Talking up the opposition works great in the papers but a good coach knows his team's psyche and will tell his players what they need to hear at the time. Maybe he sensed the team was "tight" and was trying to loosen them up? Who really knows?

Having said all that, hubris is a natural part of the game. Especially for the star players - defenders and strikers alike. They need to have that mentality in order to believe they can make incredibly difficult shots or go one-on-one with the other team's best player. Think WR in football. You need to believe you are good enough to make a seemingly impossible play.

If the US could develop a striker like Chicharito or Messi, he could have all the hubris in the world and that would still bode well for the Nats. In fact, Donovan is well known in MLS for sporting a very healthy ego. And yet, he has done pretty well for the Nats if I recall correctly.

As far as Mexico and the 2008 Olympic qualifying, I will note only that after two games in group stage, Canada and Mex were tied for second, each with one point and a -1 goal differential. In the final game of group play, Mexico was playing against Haiti/Canada vs. Guatemala.
Guatemala was assured of advancing regardless of results.

Mexico beat Haiti handily 5-1, an expected result.
Canada beat Guatemala 5-0. A result no one saw coming. 4 of the goals were scored after halftime. Guatemala also rested SIX starters for that contest.

Canada advanced by having a final +4 pt differential vs. a +3 pt. differential for Mex.

So yeah, you could say Guatemala knocked Mex out of the tourney, but it wasn't their victory over Mex that did it, it was taking a dive to allow Canada to advance (by precisely the needed goal differential).

Finally, it is not hubris that has stopped Mexico from being an elite team.
They have qualified for the WC 14 times. Of those, they were knocked out by eventual champs or 2-4th place team 9 times.

They have been in the same group (not advanced) with the eventual champion or 2nd place team 5 times.
Once they were in the same group as both the Champ AND 2nd place team (Brazil/Czech)- and beat Czech 3-1 in group.

They have been knocked out in the QF by the eventual 2nd place team twice (Italy/WGermany).
They have been knocked out in the R16 by eventual 3rd place team (Brazil) once.
They have been knocked out in the R16 by eventual 4th place team (Bulgaria) once.
Their other 5 losses have been: Argentina (2x), Germany (2x), US (1x)

Their Achilles heel is not hubris, it is facing and being knocked out of the WC by the traditional soccer powers especially Brazil (3x)/Germany(3x)/Argentina (3x) and to a lesser extent Italy (1x) and England (1x).

These results are nothing to be ashamed of. Brazil/Germany and Argentina are 3 of the premier world powers - together they own 10 of the 19 WC championships. Throw in Italy and England and you have 15 of the 19 WCs covered.

OK, but saying you are not embarrassed to always get beat by the real world powers is the same as saying you aren't one. They seem to think they are. Thus, hubris. As in, if they were in South America or Europe they would struggle to qualify and would have missed many of those world cups. They got a chance to play in them because they have a weak qualifying group. Evidence? US is #1 or 2 typically. Dandy Don said, "if you can do it it ain't braggin'." Problem for tris is the sequence here.

KoreAmBear;731323 said:

---

I wonder where this hubris comes from? Just from being decent in CONCACAF? That's hardly something to crow about. Europe and South America consider CONCACAF pretty much a joke.

I do like the direction Klinsi is taking the USMNT. Speaking of hubris, that's what Italy had when they took the USMNT lightly. Don't tell me they wanted to lose a friendly a few months away from Euro 2012 -- you're supposed to be playing good ball right about now if you're gonna be a contender.

---

That's why their cockiness is utterly ridiculous, their WC record is very unimpressive for a national team that is so hyped on the global stage. Their system breeds cocky players like Rafa Marquez, Cuatemoc Blanco, Nery Castillo and Jorge Campos whose unprofessionalism limited their ceiling. It's what happens when you're a rockstar in your country and all the attention is on you.

The U.S. players don't have that, so for them to get cocky and underestimate their opponents in a way is even more ridiculous. And like most systematic problems, they start at the top:

Quote:

---

“Our coach pretty much said even our B team is going to be the best team we are going to play,” Gale Agbossoumonde said after training on Monday afternoon.

---

http://usa10kit.com/2011/04/06/gale-agbossoumonde-our-b-team-is-going-to-be-the-best-team-we-are-going-to-play/

There's a difference between playing with over-confidence and playing with heart. El Salvador played with heart and that's why they got the result. This will continue to happen unless the U.S. Soccer federation shapes up and doesn't coddle these kids as if they're the next big thing, they have to earn it.

Biely -

Don't see where we are in disagreement. I never made the assertion that Mex (or US for that matter) is an elite team. My own thoughts are, you ain't elite until you hoist that ugly yellow trophy. By this standard, there are only 8 teams that can make that claim, and even for a few of them, it has been a while since they have been relevant.

I was countering the assertion that Mex has so much hubris that it has become their Achilles heel. Their WC results do not bear that out. They have usually advanced when playing against equal or lesser competition and struggled when playing against the true elites in the game.

I don't see how that translates into hubris causing their downfall. I could see it if they routinely lost to "inferior" competition, but that simply is not the case. They struggle against the elites, as do approx 200 other teams....

SoCalBear323;731451 said:

---

That's why their cockiness is utterly ridiculous, their WC record is very unimpressive for a national team that is so hyped on the global stage. Their system breeds cocky players .....

There's a difference between playing with over-confidence and playing with heart. El Salvador played with heart and that's why they got the result. This will continue to happen unless the U.S. Soccer federation shapes up and doesn't coddle these kids as if they're the next big thing, they have to earn it.

---

Can agree with the heart comment. Let's not forget however you need to play smart, with the best players you can truly find and develop. That is where the U.S., particularly, falls down. Then, you can choose who plays despite the conditions, and plays to win.

TheBearsHaveWon;731375 said:

---

As far as Mexico and the 2008 Olympic qualifying, I will note only that after two games in group stage, Canada and Mex were tied for second, each with one point and a -1 goal differential. In the final game of group play, Mexico was playing against Haiti/Canada vs. Guatemala.
Guatemala was assured of advancing regardless of results.

Mexico beat Haiti handily 5-1, an expected result.
Canada beat Guatemala 5-0. A result no one saw coming. 4 of the goals were scored after halftime. Guatemala also rested SIX starters for that contest.

Canada advanced by having a final +4 pt differential vs. a +3 pt. differential for Mex.

So yeah, you could say Guatemala knocked Mex out of the tourney, but it wasn't their victory over Mex that did it, it was taking a dive to allow Canada to advance (by precisely the needed goal differential).

---

The Canada-Guatemala game was before the Mexico-Haiti game. So its not like Guatemala lost by precisely the needed goal differential on purpose. At the time of the game neither Guatemala nor Canada knew the differential that would be needed for Canada to beat Mexico for the last semifinal spot. Guatemala, understandably, rested starters in a game that was meaningless for them, and Canada took advantage and won 5-0. If that consitutes taking a dive, then many teams take dives in qualifying and group stage play in soccer (and hockey, and undoubtedly many other sports) events all over the world.

You are absolutely correct. The Guatemala - Canada game was played prior to the Mex - Haiti game.
Let me put it this way. During that tourney Canada was such a scoring machine that outside of the Guatemala game they scored a total of TWO goals and lost to HAITI 2-1.
Guatemala absolutely threw that game and did it to the extent that they thought Mex could not overcome. A five goal differential is incredibly difficult to overcome and ultimately they were proved right.
The reason I thought the games had run concurrently is that in actual WC group stages the rules were changed so that the final two games are always now played concurrently.

The WC rules were changed precisely because of the sort of chicanery Guatemala displayed.

Ultimately the ploy was not enough as Gutemala were eliminated and did not make the Olympics.

TheBearsHaveWon;731663 said:

---

You are absolutely correct. The Guatemala - Canada game was played prior to the Mex - Haiti game.
Let me put it this way. During that tourney Canada was such a scoring machine that outside of the Guatemala game they scored a total of TWO goals and lost to HAITI 2-1.
Guatemala absolutely threw that game and did it to the extent that they thought Mex could not overcome. A five goal differential is incredibly difficult to overcome and ultimately they were proved right.
The reason I thought the games had run concurrently is that in actual WC group stages the rules were changed so that the final two games are always now played concurrently.

The WC rules were changed precisely because of the sort of chicanery Guatemala displayed.

Ultimately the ploy was not enough as Gutemala were eliminated and did not make the Olympics.

---

Threw the game to the extent they thought Mex could not overcome? Yes, a 5 goal differential is incredibly difficult to overcome, but a 6-goal differential is even harder. Why not make it 7?

Guatemala clearly did not care about the outcome of their game with Canada, but I don't think they made sure they lost by enough to screw Mexico, they just didn't care either way.

Why would it help them if the other semifinalist out of their group was Canada instead of Mexico? The semis were crossover, and both semifinalist winners qualified, so it wouldn't affect Guatemala either way whether it was Mex or Canada who also came out of the group.

Re the change to make games simultaneous, it would have been easier for Guatemala to screw Mexico if the games were simultaenous - with real time updates on Mex-Haiti, they would have known how many goals to allow Canada to score in order to screw Mexico.

The rules were changed to make game simultaneous to cut down on another kind of chicanery - intentionally losing to improve your own chances in the next round by trying to line up an easier opponent. Such a situation was not present re Gua-Can because their opponent in the next round was not determined by the outcome of their game.

Anyway, I hate to make a mountain of a mole hill, but I think there is a non-trivial difference between 1) resting players because you don't care about the outcome of your game and 2) intentionally losing by just enough goals to screw a third team out of qualifying for the next round, even though it doesn't benefit you because your fate rests on the outcome of your crossover game against a fourth team.

The situation you present is absolutely in play. If both Mex and Guatemala had advanced after their subsequent game they would play again. A situation Guatemala had no desire to see happen. Moreover there is no love lost between guatemala and Mex. advance, assured of not playing Mex again and screwing a detested rival. Yeah Guatemala had no incentive here.

By the way, as far as group play goes, it is not only losing by a certain amount that helps a team. If they are playing a weak team and they know by playing to a draw or by a 1 nil margin and a three way tie results in a hated rival being eliminated, well that is good incentive to not play to potential. There are various other scenarios that happened as well. If the final two teams knew beforehand what particular outcome would have both teams advancing they would collude to have that exact result. Sometimes it was incredibly blatant where three goals would be scored early in the game to assure a 2-1result and the teams would basically rest by kicking the ball back and forth with no real attempt to score by either side for the rest of the game.

No matter what reasoning you try to apply, substituting SIX starters is a rare strategy. You tend to lose cohesiveness. At U23 you want your squads to play together as often as possible.

There was no honor in what Guatemala pulled that day.

It appears you are steadfast in arguing that nothing untoward happened that day. We will have to agree to disagree.

TheBearsHaveWon;731700 said:

---

The situation you present is absolutely in play. If both Mex and Guatemala had advanced after their subsequent game they would play again. A situation Guatemala had no desire to see happen. Moreover there is no love lost between guatemala and Mex. advance, assured of not playing Mex again and screwing a detested rival. Yeah Guatemala had no incentive here.

By the way, as far as group play goes, it is not only losing by a certain amount that helps a team. If they are playing a weak team and they know by playing to a draw or by a 1 nil margin and a three way tie results in a hated rival being eliminated, well that is good incentive to not play to potential. There are various other scenarios that happened as well. If the final two teams knew beforehand what particular outcome would have both teams advancing they would collude to have that exact result. Sometimes it was incredibly blatant where three goals would be scored early in the game to assure a 2-1result and the teams would basically rest by kicking the ball back and forth with no real attempt to score by either side for the rest of the game.

No matter what reasoning you try to apply, substituting SIX starters is a rare strategy. You tend to lose cohesiveness. At U23 you want your squads to play together as often as possible.

There was no honor in what Guatemala pulled that day.

It appears you are steadfast in arguing that nothing untoward happened that day. We will have to agree to disagree.

---

What are you on about? Substituting 6 starters was a great strategy. They ended up playing a 120 minute nail bitter against Honduras for a trip to Beijing that ended in penalties. What would those 6 starters have gotten from playing a meaningless game a few days before?

Also, Mexico calling foul on this situation is just rich considering that Guatemala belonged in the 2006 World Cup in Germany but on the final day of qualifying Mexico bent over and took it like a TJ whore for Trinidad & Tobago and then CONCACAF President Jack A. Warner. All Mexico had to do was TIE Trinidad and Guatemala would be in the playoff for the World Cup. Mexico's coach at the time admitted to throwing the game a few years later.:


The reason for throwing the game? So that Jack Warner could make close to a million dollars selling Trinidad world cup tickets through a firm founded by his son. The poor Trinidad team didn't even get paid for their appearance at the 2006 World Cup.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/sep/19/unpaid-trinidadian-world-cup-fifa

So your argument that Guatemala would not throw the game is that they believed Mexico had done the exact same thing to them a couple of years earlier? With a much more meaningful Guatemala World Cup playoff bid disappearing with the Mexico game outcome?

I don't follow that logic at all...

And, I call pure BS on the "they needed to rest" argument. We are talking U23 (read YOUNG) highly conditioned athletes playing games four days apart. It is not like American football where their body takes an absolute beating and they need a full week to only semi-recover. Four days is more than plenty to recover from a 90 minute game.

You are entitled to your opinion no matter how incredibly wrong I believe you are.

TheBearsHaveWon;732302 said:

---

So your argument that Guatemala would not throw the game is that they believed Mexico had done the exact same thing to them a couple of years earlier? With a much more meaningful Guatemala World Cup playoff bid disappearing with the Mexico game outcome?

I don't follow that logic at all...

---

I never said Guatemala threw the game, I don't believe they did.

Mexico, on the other hand, threw a game that kept Guatemala out of the World Cup, and their coach admitted to doing so. The result of which substantially benefitted the president of CONCACAF financially. Doesn't get more clear cut than that.