RSS
ATOM
advertisement
Counterattack: What Does The Spain Win Mean For The USA In 2010
Mexico editor Luis Bueno and associate editor Zac Lee Rigg hash out what the USA's Spain win means for its World Cup chances next summer.
Jun 24, 2009 9:08:20 PM
Does the USA's 2-0 win over Spain in the Confederations Cup mean the U.S. will make it out of the group stages in the 2010 World Cup?
Luis Bueno: The United States' victory over Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinal not only gives the Americans an unexpected ticket in the final but it also bodes well for next summer. Unlike last time around when the Americans' hopes evaporated in the first five minutes against Czech Republic, the U.S. has more than just a legitimate chance now to get out of the first round; they will get into the Round of 16. That's how massive the U.S. win was - it changed the United States' course in history, at least for 2010.
Zac Lee Rigg: In general, the Confederations Cup has no correlation with performances in the World Cup. Remember Germany about four years ago? Jurgen Klinsmann was getting all sorts of slack for a limp Confeds performance. He then went on to lead Germany to third place in the '06 World Cup. If the USA thinks it can lose its opening two matches in the World Cup in 2010 and still progress on three points, it's got another thing coming.
Bueno: True, the U.S. cannot afford to lose twice in the group stage of any tournament and expect to get out, whether it's the Gold Cup next month, the U-17 World Cup, whatever. That much is true. However, after seeing this team fight back against Egypt and beat Spain (!) I find myself believing that things have changed. I've been a perennial pessimist in the U.S. in international tournaments mostly because they haven't shown up much since 2002 (outside of the Gold Cup), but to beat a team like Egypt - whether it was a miracle or not - and then come out and knock out Spain, that will give them confidence next summer.
Rigg: Let's not detract from how big this Spain win was. It was beyond what even the most avid fan allowed herself to imagine. But I think the biggest effect the win will have is on media expectation heading into the World Cup. The USA is still far behind the top nations in terms of talent and tactics. Now it will be expected that the Americans make it into the knockout rounds, when really, that should be an optimistic outside possibility.
Bueno: I think the U.S. has always fallen short of expectations particularly after the 2002 World Cup. Confederations Cup 03, World Cup 06 and Copa America 07 failures were hard to stomach for U.S. fans. But now, the American players have something to fall back on. No matter what the expectations are (fans expected/hoped Bob Bradley would lose his job, players would get run off the squad, etc.), the U.S. can overcome those expectations, high or low.
Rigg: I disagree. One good result in a meaningless competition is just one good result. We've seen two international examples of similarly unfancied teams going on to win trophies in Greece (2004 Euros) and Iraq (2007 Asian Cup). Neither has managed to come close to replicating that success. The USA may very well press on and progress as a team, but if it does, it will because the team got better, not because there was some phantom past victory to draw from. The World Cup is notorious for weeding out upstart nations who might succeed in other competitions. If the USA doesn't play like one of the big boys in 2010, it will go home as one of the small boys.
Bueno: I don't think this is a meaningless competition at all. Spain, Italy, Brazil . . . they all sent their big guns to this tournament. You don't send your top players to play in meaningless competitions. This win could very well vault the U.S. towards a World Cup seed, particularly if the U.S. wins the Gold Cup next month. If the Americans get seeded, no possibly way you get teams like Brazil AND Italy in your group. And if they don't get a seed, there's still no chance of getting two teams that have combined for nine World Cup titles in their group. If the U.S. can survive this group, they can survive whatever group stands in their way next summer.
Rigg: If the U.S. plays as well as it did against Spain next summer, I'd agree. But there's no guarantee that the team we saw "playing" against Brazil and Italy in the opening two games won't show up. I won't count the U.S. out of the knockout stages obviously, but I'm certainly not considering it a lock.
Counterattack runs every Thursday on Goal.com
Luis Bueno: The United States' victory over Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinal not only gives the Americans an unexpected ticket in the final but it also bodes well for next summer. Unlike last time around when the Americans' hopes evaporated in the first five minutes against Czech Republic, the U.S. has more than just a legitimate chance now to get out of the first round; they will get into the Round of 16. That's how massive the U.S. win was - it changed the United States' course in history, at least for 2010.
Zac Lee Rigg: In general, the Confederations Cup has no correlation with performances in the World Cup. Remember Germany about four years ago? Jurgen Klinsmann was getting all sorts of slack for a limp Confeds performance. He then went on to lead Germany to third place in the '06 World Cup. If the USA thinks it can lose its opening two matches in the World Cup in 2010 and still progress on three points, it's got another thing coming.
Bueno: True, the U.S. cannot afford to lose twice in the group stage of any tournament and expect to get out, whether it's the Gold Cup next month, the U-17 World Cup, whatever. That much is true. However, after seeing this team fight back against Egypt and beat Spain (!) I find myself believing that things have changed. I've been a perennial pessimist in the U.S. in international tournaments mostly because they haven't shown up much since 2002 (outside of the Gold Cup), but to beat a team like Egypt - whether it was a miracle or not - and then come out and knock out Spain, that will give them confidence next summer.
Rigg: Let's not detract from how big this Spain win was. It was beyond what even the most avid fan allowed herself to imagine. But I think the biggest effect the win will have is on media expectation heading into the World Cup. The USA is still far behind the top nations in terms of talent and tactics. Now it will be expected that the Americans make it into the knockout rounds, when really, that should be an optimistic outside possibility.
Bueno: I think the U.S. has always fallen short of expectations particularly after the 2002 World Cup. Confederations Cup 03, World Cup 06 and Copa America 07 failures were hard to stomach for U.S. fans. But now, the American players have something to fall back on. No matter what the expectations are (fans expected/hoped Bob Bradley would lose his job, players would get run off the squad, etc.), the U.S. can overcome those expectations, high or low.
Rigg: I disagree. One good result in a meaningless competition is just one good result. We've seen two international examples of similarly unfancied teams going on to win trophies in Greece (2004 Euros) and Iraq (2007 Asian Cup). Neither has managed to come close to replicating that success. The USA may very well press on and progress as a team, but if it does, it will because the team got better, not because there was some phantom past victory to draw from. The World Cup is notorious for weeding out upstart nations who might succeed in other competitions. If the USA doesn't play like one of the big boys in 2010, it will go home as one of the small boys.
Bueno: I don't think this is a meaningless competition at all. Spain, Italy, Brazil . . . they all sent their big guns to this tournament. You don't send your top players to play in meaningless competitions. This win could very well vault the U.S. towards a World Cup seed, particularly if the U.S. wins the Gold Cup next month. If the Americans get seeded, no possibly way you get teams like Brazil AND Italy in your group. And if they don't get a seed, there's still no chance of getting two teams that have combined for nine World Cup titles in their group. If the U.S. can survive this group, they can survive whatever group stands in their way next summer.
Rigg: If the U.S. plays as well as it did against Spain next summer, I'd agree. But there's no guarantee that the team we saw "playing" against Brazil and Italy in the opening two games won't show up. I won't count the U.S. out of the knockout stages obviously, but I'm certainly not considering it a lock.
Counterattack runs every Thursday on Goal.com
Thank you for your comment!
Please enter your name
Please enter your location
Please share your comment!
38 Comments
Advertisement
Inside Goal.Com
-
DEMPSEY'S DIARY: Playing in the World Cup was the ultimate dream
In his latest diary entry for Goal.com, the U.S. international and Fulham midfielder talks about playing in his first World Cup despite a back injury and what it meant to score.
-
ROGERS: Capello resigns as coach, but the villain is FA chairman Bernstein
Capello and John Terry are far from blameless in the England saga, but the real culprit is the FA chairman.
-
LABIDOU: Is MLS falling behind? The league's new younger direction
With high-profile players like Nicolas Anelka and Luca Toni rejecting MLS for other developing leagues, is the league falling behind its competition?
-
ROSANO: Mexican soccer needs to address referee treatment
Nick Rosano argues that Mexico's continued officiating problems may have less to do with referees themselves and more to do with how they are treated by the federation.
-
VERTELNEY: MLS owners take to Twitter to spread their team's word
"Any time you tweet, it's a mini press conference," says Portland Timbers owner Merritt Paulson.
Advertisement
Advertisement