USMNT vs. Mexico in Estadio Azteca tonite at 7:30 p.m.

US is 1 point ahead in the CONCACAF group standings above Mexico and would love to have even a draw in Mexico City. A win will almost guarantee the US of finishing ahead of Mexico in group qualifying. The US will likely win or draw out its remaining games so Mexico is facing as close to a must-win situation as possible as they are trailing both the US and group leader Honduras in the standings.

The US is coming off a 1:0 victory over Costa Rica - a game played in the snow.

Mexico is coming off a 2:2 draw with Honduras - a game in which Mex. led 2:0, and played in over 100 degree heat.

Should be a great match tonite.

Any chance FIFA disallows the CR win (CR has protested)?

The protest was denied by FIFA http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-costa-rica-protest-of-snow-bowl-denied-us-win-to-stand-20130326,0,3482385.story.


Go USA!

Go Bears!

Nick

Yeah. Protests are almost always denied except in cases of mis-application of the laws by the Referee. In this case, FIFA stood behind a technicality in order to deny the protest...

It is worth mentioning that the US had NEVER beaten Mexico in Azteca until they did so in a friendly last August.

Even a draw will be hard to come by, but who knows? They are riding a one game winning streak there...

This is one of the few soccer games I will watch this year. I am feeling lucky. The USA will win. If only I knew a bookie around here. Just wait, and see... USA 2 Mexico 1.

Wow, watching the pregame, those USA fans are hecka brave lol...

Refs favoring Mexico early on. It's worse than an SC v Cal game. Despicable.

What do you mean?

Been well officiated so far. US got away with a foul on Hernandez that could have been a penalty kick.

TheBearsHaveWon;842106175 said:

---

What do you mean?

---

There was a dubious yellow card flagged on the US, no? It was early on. I don't watch much soccer (football) but even the European ESPN guys thought so?

Nope. Good call. That was a tactical foul used to break up an attack. The force of the foul was not a consideration.

^ I see, thank you. Though I played soccer in grade school, I have forgot much.

I must revise my earlier score prediction, given the events of the game thus far. There are now four possible outcomes:

USA: 2 Mexico: 1

USA: 1 Mexico: 0

USA: 0 Mexico 1

USA: 0 Mexico: 0

Latino guy on ESPN: "Mexico is not playing well."

What say you? Bear fans?

Halftime. 0-0
US has played the half they wanted. They have disrupted Mexico's passing attack and made a few chances by good passing when they have won the ball. This is all to the advantage of the US. Mexico seems to be getting frustrated in their attack.

^ I agree. I think this is the USA's to lose, especially after veering Costa Rica?! I mean, Mexico lost to Jamaica, right? I don't know, I incessantly scan sports headlines. I think Mexico lost to Jamaica in soccer? I obviously mean no offense to Jamaica.

Meant to say beat Costa Rica and that Mexico lost to Jamaica...

The Mexican pace on left wing is brutal. Amazing attack that withstood the first 20. If we don't tire I like our chances. Maybe 1-1? I have to believe they will score.

TiredBear;842106190 said:

---

^ I agree. I think this is the USA's to lose, especially after veering Costa Rica?! I mean, Mexico lost to Jamaica, right? I don't know, I incessantly scan sports headlines. I think Mexico lost to Jamaica in soccer? I obviously mean no offense to Jamaica.

---

I am sure it felt like a loss to Mexico but it was a 0-0 draw at Azteca. Jamaica is comprised of semi pro players. The top teams in CONCACAF routinely rout Jamaica. Playing at home, Mexico was expected to win easily.

Looks like US was looking for the draw. They clogged the passing lanes and frustrated the Mex attack.
Ends in a zero draw

Nice! I guess?

That was a great game! Mexico is in trouble though, 0-0-3? Wow, not so good. This was a great game, and I am saying goodnight!

Was hoping for a more open and entertaining match. The result is definitely favorable for the US WC chances. So can't really argue with the tactic but as a spectator leaves a bit to be desired.

TiredBear;842106225 said:

---

Nice! I guess?

---

Yup, good "win" for the US, great point.

TheBearsHaveWon;842106229 said:

---

Was hoping for a more open and entertaining match. The result is definitely favorable for the US WC chances. So can't really argue with the tactic but as a spectator leaves a bit to be desired.

---

You seem to lay the blame on the United States of America. I am confused, sure the US played defensively, but wasn't it Mexico's job to play better offensively?

I don't watch soccer often, just wondering. I was very, very disappointed in Mexico's performance! I mean, they already tied Jamaica!

Well the US played nine men in their own half and only ventured forward on counter strikes. The US has proven to have a potent attack since Klinsmann took over so was expecting the US to try to attack more and go for a knockout punch. Can't argue with a draw though. As I said, from a spectator point it could have been much more interesting.

I once lived in South America. Santiago, Chile, to be exact. Needless to say, they could care less about Cal football. They only watched the Super Bowl, if that. Anyways, it feels good to get hyped up about a soccer game, and then tonight happens, and I remember why I will NEVER embrace it in this country...

If only Donavan had been playing?

Teams tend to drop deep on the road, esp if the other team is superior, sometimes even if it is not. Heck, even Manchester United dropped deep against Madrid and took a pounding, and was winning until bad red card. Barcelona and Spain only lose games when other teams drop deep and defend, playing for the counter attack. It's analagous to a team trying to run the ball, play defense and take advantage of any mistakes by the opposition in the NFL.

It was realistically the only strategy that would have worked and it did. Not only did the US get 1 point, but Mexico didn't get three. If the US had lost, they'd be in fourth place and automatically in the WC qualifying spots.

TheBearsHaveWon;842106235 said:

---

Well the US played nine men in their own half and only ventured forward on counter strikes. The US has proven to have a potent attack since Klinsmann took over so was expecting the US to try to attack more and go for a knockout punch. Can't argue with a draw though. As I said, from a spectator point it could have been much more interesting.

---

Sure, Donovan might have helped, but the way they boo him could have fired up the tri-colores arguably, too? Important was the play of the two centerbacks for the US... a good sign.