By Jared Launius
Recently, my roommate tracked down a few of his old burnt DVDs full of international soccer matches (is it legal for me to say that?), which included each United States match from the 2009 Confederations Cup. Feeling nostalgic – and nursing a strong desire to relive the Charlie Davies glory days – we spent one afternoon re-watching the tournament semifinal against Spain.
As you undoubtedly know, Jozy Altidore and Clint Dempsey scored goals on each side of halftime as the US pulled off one of the more surprising international cup upsets of the last five years.
Re-watching the match nearly two years later gave me an interesting perspective, as, for one, I already knew what the outcome would be and, for another, I was divorced from the emotion I rode through the match when watching it live. Indeed, after finishing the game, my roommate and I took the same outlook – the United States stole that result.
That's not a slight to the Yanks, of course, as both goals were opportunistic – if not a touch fortuitous – and the defense, particularly Jay DeMerit, came up with crucial tackle upon crucial tackle. Plus, Tim Howard went all Tim Howard on La Furia Roja.
But, still, while the Yank fan in me was instilled with a bit of the old pride, the analytical soccer fan in me couldn't help but feel Spain failed to earn a fair result. They dominated possession – and it wasn't really close. They created the better of the opportunities – and that wasn't particularly close either. More than anything else, I chalk that match up to the better team unluckily failing to convert an average percent of its chances as much as anything else. It happens.
Yes, the US deserves credit for it's unrelenting effort and for staying focused enough to put away the few chances it had, but, in most instances, the team with six shots on goal – as Spain had – will (and should) defeat the team with two, as the US had.
This can all, of course, primarily be attributed up to the randomness of sport and – more specifically – this wonderful game, as the slightest tip of fortune can make any team (within reason, of course) a champion. In instances like the US-Spain game, you don't fault Spain – they played their game, they executed and, unluckily for them, they ran into a plucky defense, a hot keeper and a touch of bad luck. You congratulate the US, sure, but you don't make any sort of grand assumptions based on it. It was just, as we say, one of those days. The US will certainly take it, as it was a landmark day for the side.
After re-watching and reviewing the US's surprising loss Saturday night to Panama, I couldn't escape the same notion – except the US was on the other side this time. I'd invite you to do the same and let us know if you agree.
First, of course, it bears noting all respect is due to Panama, as the small Central American nation put forth the requisite effort to put itself in position for such a result.
But, well, Panama scored one of its goals in the ruckus following a blocked set piece, and it came against the run of play. It's second goal came on a penalty kick following – to put it politely – an unintelligible, botched tackle by Tim Ream on a player with no support running away from goal at the corner of the 18-yard box. Again – it's not like either goal came on an impressive build up or perfectly-executed counterattack.
Just like the US scored two goals against Spain by pouncing on broken plays against the run of play (the ball that put Altidore through took a lucky bounce on the first goal and Ramos took an uncharacteristically bad touch in the six-yard box on Dempsey's goal), Panama scored on two chances of similar ilk Saturday, I think. Like the US was able to a few years ago, Panama still created a few more decent chances, but nothing with great menace beyond the goals.
Meanwhile, the US – like Spain before it – created plenty of chances to score – Dempsey's volley that just missed the near post, Agudelo's run at goal, Dempsey's dipping shot from 25 yards, Dempsey's first unmarked header, Donovan's volley, Goodon's goal, Wondolowski's sitter, Dempsey's second unmarked header, Bradley's chance near the penalty spot and Donovan's volley, to be specific – and, perhaps a touch unluckily, only capitalized on one.
It's frustrating, to be sure, but how often do those chances go begging? – particularly Dempsey's, Wondolowski's and Bradley's? More often than not, all three are put away.
Trust me when I say I shared the popular sentiment for quite some time following the Panama match. I watched the game at Johnny's Tavern – Kansas City's soccer bar – and, with the help of a few Boulevard IPAs, joined the fray in blasting the Yank performance post-match.
The re-watch just made me feel somewhat differently.
None of this is to try to make excuses for the US. Bradley and Dempsey are Premier League players and Chris Wondolowski is the best finisher in Major League Soccer. They usually put those chances away. But they're also humans, and thus prone to the occasional mistake.
Nor is this to take anything away from Panama – again, they were opportunistic, unrelenting and Felipe Baloy was excellent in the Jay DeMerit role, gumming up many US attacks.
This is all to say these types of days happen – we have years and years of proof at every level that tells us as much. It's also to say this isn't reason to fire Bob or scrap the entire player pool as some of the fan reaction would have you think. More than anything else, it should serve as a reminder to the Yanks that sometimes simply being the better team isn't enough, that fortune can show up as a 12th man for your opponent's side on any given day and, thus, it may take more than your usual effort to earn a result.
Sometimes it favors you, as it did against Spain two years ago, and sometimes it defeats you, as it did Saturday. If it took this loss for the US to remember as much – and if that aids the Yanks going forward (as it should), it may all prove to be worth it.
