Italy 0, USA 1: Match Highlights

This entry was posted in U.S. Men's National Team. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Italy 0, USA 1: Match Highlights

  1. Indigo Montoya says:

    Classy win. Not much else to say.

  2. PetedeLA says:

    Thanks for posting.

  3. Seedorf says:

    Where is the coverage for the other international friendlies???

  4. Taylor says:

    i can’t help but think how good we could have been with Donovan on the right. Danny Williams put in a great defensive shift, but offers absolutely nothing going forward. Donovan can offer the same defensive cover but won’t lose the ball every time he gets it.

    yea thats pretty obvious i guess, but re-watching the game, we really looked more dangerous than they did at times, just missed that last little bit of class needed to score against a great defense. I know we really had to hold on at the end(very Bradley-esque), but much of the first half we were impressive on offense. Donovan connecting with Dempsey really would have opened things up and i think we could have scored more than one

  5. jmadsen says:

    must have been a lot going on that didn’t make the highlights..

    what I just watched was about 20 Italian attacks & two for the US

  6. GW says:

    True. But Italy’s attacks added up to nothing.

    It’s a matter of taste.

    Italy attacked more but they were poor in execution and if I had paid to watch their offense I’d want my money back.

    The US, on the other hand had a good game plan,were very disciplined and came to get a result. I found watching them execute it more entertaining than watching Italy’s futility.

    It’s like watching a pitcher’s duel in baseball. Some find that more entertaining than an 11 to 9 home run derby.
    The question is why do

  7. Bob Bradley says:

    I think the US would have done better if they had used a box midfield.

  8. Pd says:

    I hope the Altidore haters were watching. Guy continues to get better with each USMNT runout. His work rate was vey high. The most significant moment was Jozy’s assist. The positioning, first touch and quick layoff INTO SPACE show not only technical development but the development of vision. To develop players that see opportunity before it’s there means a style of soccer that is dynamic rather than reactive. That to me marks a tremendous leap forward in his game. I wasn’t too happy with how quick he went to ground, but since he won a great free kick the first time it makes sense he kept trying. He’s clearly in a club situation where he’s continuing to learn and grow and mature and I hope that this progress continues. Fantastic match from everyone in the squad. With the injury scratches I had written the match off, but Italy played well and the US rose to the occasion.

  9. kimo says:

    His improvement has been dramatic…no doubt, but I disagree with his work rate. I still think he takes too much of the game off. Italy was no different. That’s really his one glaring weakness at this point … the ability to be more fit than the defenders he is facing.

  10. Mig22 says:

    I’m not a hater but I am a skeptic about him. I think he was fairly horrible in the first half but improved in the second. He made a nice play to set up the goal, I agree. What I don’t see is that his game has gone anywhere in the last two years although I accept that some (including Ives) will argue that. And his coach at AZ said precisely that he lost his starting spot because he is not progressing.

    That said, he’s ours and probably is the best we got so I’m rooting for him.

  11. Mig22 says:

    It really was. Road win against a world power, nice goal, competitive in the midfield. Good stuff.

  12. Mig22 says:

    that is really funny, JT.

  13. Raymon says:

    Love or hate the new away kit?

  14. marco says:

    Klinsmann was fortunate to win with that strategy, high line and little pressure on Pirlo. I hope he never uses it again. Congratulations to Bradley and others for getting a result from a bad idea, (you know it’s bad as Alexi endorsed it).

  15. Raymon says:

    So, given the available players, and what we know of the opponent, and the away conditions, what in your opinion would have been a better plan?

  16. Mig22 says:

    not so bad. The white sleeves are odd but I got used to them.

    I’ve never really cared much about jerseys as long as they aren’t really horrible colors, etc.

  17. johnnycougar says:

    That’s fair and all, but at this level you’d expect the Italians to have put away at least two or three of those chances. There were a few that were better (not by much) than the chance Dempsey took but they just shot poorly.

    It is hard from highlights to gauge how well a team is doing when the mid-game is going on, just the usual back and forth and the underlying strategy. I assume from the other comments that the US did really well in that regard.

  18. Taylor says:

    re-watch the first half. the US put together a lot of good passing sequences, just couldn’t get that final ball in or the finish. there are a few plays where we work the ball from front to back with 8-15 passes into the box, and the Italian defense shut us down at the perfect moment, which is to be expected from a defense of that for the goal, there were about 8 passes, from the back, to the right, and over to Johnson for the cross to Jozy.

    the overall game may have felt a lot like the Bradley era, but our gameplan is much different than the old bunker and counter. we play a much higher line and are organized from front to back, and press well up the pitch(maybe not at the end, but for the vast majority of the first half).

    it may have seemed like Italy was getting chance after chance, but we were really just playing a good offside trap. we got lucky on one, but Timmy saved it anyway. every other offside call was legitimate. it may have seemed lucky, but i think it was really just a great team performance.

  19. betamale says:

    Fire Klinsmann, we were lucky to win!!1!1 Bob Bradley’s 4 defensive midfielders would have beaten Italy by 5 goals

  20. Luke says:

    If it works, he’s a genius…if it doesn’t he’s a fool. Since it worked and not just a few times but something like 10 times, he’s a genius. Think of how much better the trap will be once Johnson has played at LB more. Let’s also remember that Goodeson was starting in place of Gooch.