The U.S. Under-23 Men’s National Team was stuck in a deep hole with seemingly no way out, but a second-half penalty kick gave the Americans a sorely-needed lifeline.
They still weren’t able to climb all the way out.
A 10-man Brazil side held on to defeat the U.S., 2-1, at Ilha do Retiro Stadium in Recife. The Brazilians were cruising with a 2-0 lead in the second half, but a clumsy 57th-minute challenge from Doria on Jerome Kiesewetter saw the centerback sent off and gave the U.S. a penalty kick that Kiesewetter converted with authority.
While the goal provided a spark for the Americans and allowed them to improve from the run of play, clear chances for an equalizer were hard to come by. Andi Herzog’s side had its best opportunity to pull level in the third minute of stoppage time, but Maki Talli’s off-balance header went over the frame.
Brazil may have won by a slim margin, but was the much better team during the opening 60 minutes. O Canarinho overwhelmed the Americans in the possession battle up until Doria received his second yellow card, and was relentless in the attack.
It took Brazil until the 42nd minute, however, to find the opener. A silky pass was played down the middle between U.S. centerbacks John Brooks and Cameron Carter-Vickers, and Gabriel got on the end of it and rounded goalkeeper Charlie Horton before slotting into an empty net.
The U.S. created its first shot on goal a minute after halftime, but seconds later was picking the ball out its own net. A gorgeous throw from Brazil goalkeeper Ederson sprung a quick counterattack that ended with Luan curling a gorgeous shot to the far corner past American substitute goalkeeper Jon Kempin.
Making things worse for the U.S. was the loss of starting right back Boyd Okwuonu midway through the first half because of an injury. Okwuonu was replaced by Oscar Sorto.
A pair of Doria gaffes opened the door for the U.S. to try and grab a result. Doria took a bad touch on the ball deep in Brazil’s end, and could only knock over the alert Kiesewetter in the box while trying to clear it.
Kiesewetter stepped up for the 60th-minute penalty kick and made no mistake with his effort, smashing it high and into the top right corner.
The U.S. looked better after Kiesewetter’s strike, pushing its defensive line higher up and making use of the extra space it had to work with. An equalizer never came, though, and Carter-Vickers’ looping nodded pass was headed too high by Tall in the waning moments.
The Americans almost did not even have a chance to find a leveler, as Brazilian midfielder Fred hit a soaring shot in the 88th minute that smashed off the crossbar.
Fred also came close to opening the scoring 20 minutes in with a long-range blast that Horton stopped at full-stretch. Horton also had to deny another effort from distance in the 27th minute to keep Brazil temporarily off the board.
The U.S., which is preparing for a 2016 Olympic playoff series vs. Colombia in March, will meet Brazil again on Sunday in another friendly at Mangueirao Stadium in Belem.
What do you think of the U.S. U-23s’ 2-1 loss vs. Brazil? Which players impressed/disappointed you? Concerned with the overall performance? What needs to change for Sunday’s rematch?
Share your thoughts below.
Brasil players made frequent 20-30 yard runs right down center of pitch, sometimes without one challenge. I don’t know who was at fault, but the frequency makes it the coach’s fault. Some commenters said Green played well. I thought he was horrible, with many 5 yard first touches. I can never see him at the first team in Munich, never.
On the first goal for Brazil didn’t the Brazilian run fron an offside position to an onside to receive the pass that led to his goal? I would characterize that as offsides and no goal.
people can make all the excuses they want but the fact is that all our teams look the same now. Mostly bad. This is not an accident.
Remember the old saying…. “A fish rots from the head down.” USA needs to clean house and hire an American coach
One thing similar is deep defending and never challenging the ball until almost inside the box, very strange indeed.
I can’t tell if the US players have enough talent to press Brazil. They tried so seldom (though the one goal did come from pressing higher up), looked unable to hold possession in the face of any pressure and the US looked slow to recover on the few instances they did get forward in numbers.
Still I would like to see the US pressure more, they might lose by more than 1 goal, but at least we would be able to see players do more than drop back and drop back and … until there were 4 backs in a neat, compact line at the 18 with 5 or 6 more players only 5 yards further froward. It is no wonder Brazil took so many shots from 30 yards that were essentially unchallenged.
Despite those long range shots, the US never moved out to cover them. Some would call it discipline, I have other less attractive descriptors.
I firmly believe the coaches are at fault for not letting the players play!
Practicing a bunker defense over 4 months ahead of time with a group of players you might not have for the playoffs is hardly a good justification. Even the centerbacks will be different, probably Miazga and Brooks, so I can’t see any justification.
The US has never had the talent at any level to press Brazil. We can press them at certain times and certain circumstances, but to try and press them a whole game would be suicidal.
Since when is it the point to try and get a result in a youth game, especially a friendly? The players should be challenged to try and pressure rather than bunker. The point is for them to learn something about playing against some of the best youth players, not to learn to sit on the 18 and not challenge as far out as 25 yards. I mean really surrendering space for the opponents to wind up and take un-pressured shots from 30 yards is not trying to play, it is simply trying not to lose and hoping the keeper isn’t beaten by a deflection. The players will not get much from that.
I would rather they lose 6-0 and learn something about their own personal weaknesses rather than sit back and say we weren’t quite organized enough.
Mexico does just that with great success.
I had to miss the game after the pk and the red card, so I didn’t see it when the US was a man up. That’s not important, since the whole point was to give the US a stern test against a good SA opponent in their home. In that regard, it was not helpful that Brazil had the man sent off. If you think about it, most of these players would have been with club teams over the weekend, then had a long flight to Brazil, maybe not arriving until morning of last Sunday. The coaches would want to spend a certain amount of time in conference with the players, so that meant at most maybe two days of practice and with a number of players who hadn’t played together. So, the result was not surprising. The main concerns I had was a lack of intensity at times by the US (maybe jet lag) and their passing just was not crisp. A much better barometer will be the next game. As far as these games and the future, remember, this is preparation for Colombia. Any realistic appraisal is that we need to keep it close in Colombia. A 0-0 draw would be good, a 1-1 draw would be ideal. Even a 1-0 loss in Colombia would be okay. Given that, learning how to stifle the opponent attack on the road is important preparation. I don’t see this style of play under these circumstances as detrimental. People complain about tactics, but when you have a home and home playoff, playing defensively on the road is what makes sense. The tactics most of you are complaining about is what makes sense for the upcoming playoff. You want to draw on the road and then win at home.
So, this game was used to practice our bunker for the Colombia game? LOL
….and then our players will learn how to attack between the first and second game?
This has to be the mos inane thing I’ve ever read here.
Let’s cal it what it is: It’s not that we didn’t want to attack, we were just not good enough to take the game to them .
Also, their players have even less time playing together since they didn’t have to play qualifiers.
The match vs. Colombia isn’t until March–that’s 4 months away, so yes, there is plenty of time to hone other aspects of the game. Also, have you considered the logistical aspects involved? I didn’t think so. Let’s assume that all of the US players played no later than last Saturday. Then you had to get them to Recife, Brazil from places as disparate as Berlin, Los Angeles and I think even Cyprus. How many flights are there from Holland (Payne), or Switzerland (Tall), say, to Recife, Brazil? So, you probably have to do one of two things, depending on flight schedules. Either have everyone fly to Miami and them gather together and then fly a charter to Recife, or, have everyone fly to Rio and gather together and then fly a charter to Recife. At the very best, you probably wouldn’t get the whole team into Recife until Sunday night. So, maybe you have a team meeting Sunday night, then have a couple of good, long practices on Monday, then Tuesday, the day before the game you don’t want to push them too hard, so you have some light practice and some more meetings. So, you have a bunch of guys who have spent maybe 12 hours flying in the previous couple of days, flying across numerous time zones, with one real day of practice together facing one of the best youth teams in the world. And you have 7 players who are on the team who didn’t play with the team during qualifying. And now you expect them to go out and offensively challenge Brazil?. Who is inane?
I agree with you that we are not good enough to take the game to them, so what is your alternative? This game was also about acclimating the team to a difficult game in South America. Anyone who lives in the real world shouldn’t have expected a different result than what we saw. And the second game will be a much better barometer anyway because of the logistical issues.
As always Gary Page is the voice of reason in a sea of panic and lunacy. This game is all about getting them ready to play in Colombia and not giving up three goals and be completely out of it before getting the home leg in the US. Also is key to get Brooks and CCV time together as a centerback pairing so these gaffs happen in a friendly and not in Colombia. Of course as all long time US fans know we are always gaff prone and snake bite.
See I actually wasn’t all that down by the result, or the performance. This brazil team is flat out good, and clearly favorites to win the olympics next summer, and we were playing down there. This team is full of top flight players in big leagues all across europe, doria, anderson, wendell, fabinho, lucas silva, the talent was oozing out of everywhere. Our senior team would really struggle to get a result down there against this team. We’re never going to go at brazil and get a result, only very few, special sides can do that. So we had to be more defensive in order to give ourselves a chance on set pieces and counterattacks. The only thing I wasn’t a fan of was the lack of driving attack in the last 10-15 minutes. I thought zelalem looked special, as an 18 year old doing the things he did out there against that team, was impressive and promising. I thought both brooks and CCV looked solid, but our wide defenders were weak and slow to close down. Shelton really struggled to hold up play, not quite sure why kiesewetter was forced out wide, would have rather those two switched. Polster looked solid in the tackle and green and serna provided some good touches on the wing. All in all, anyone expecting us to go down to brazil and take the game to them is irrational, and of course will be disappointed with this result.
“All in all, anyone expecting us to go down to brazil and take the game to them is irrational, and of course will be disappointed with this result.” Unfortunately, there are a lot of non-rational people who post on the internet. Analytical thinking is rather rare.
At this point, no one should expect to beat Brazil in Brazil (or even in the US really) at any level but it’s the performances and tactics that are upsetting to people. Plus, this US team couldn’t even beat Honduras. If they’d qualified for the Olympics against Concacaf competition and then played this way against Brazil I think generally people would be a lot more understanding about yesterday’s result (not everyone but all fan bases have people with unrealistic expectations).
I can’t believe (or maybe I just don’t want to believe) that these are the best U-23 players we have. I know a few U-23 guys like Morris, Yedlin and Miazga are with the senior team but seriously – Boyd Okwuonu? Oscar Sorto? Dudes are USL players. CCV is a good prospect but he’s 17 – he’ll still be eligible for the next U-20WC and next Olympics. Maki Tall is a bench warmer for FC Sion II in the Swiss third flight.
The concacaf qualifying is unbelievably flawed in that one game really costs you a lot. Apart from the Honduras game, this team was pretty good in qualifying. And all the way down the line our outside backs are weak, which is why I see yedlin as the rb for the playoff, and possibly a winger in seen a on the other side
The most interesting part of the game was watching Brazil change their tactical setup after the red card without missing a beat
Having good technical skills multiplies your tactical options.
The US looked like a team with a lot of guys who hadn’t played together, and especially seemed confused as to what to do once they had a man advantage. They had a look of wait do want us to hang back and counter with a man advantage. That being said Brazil certainly became a little cynical with substitutions after going a man down. Any time there was a whistle two guys would be replaced and would waste a good minute or two each time. Hard to really use the man advantage when the entire defense has fresh legs.
Does anyone know what the keeper was yellow carded for on advice of the fourth official?
Amazingly, he subbed in at the half without telling anybody. He just walked out onto the field with the team when they came on for the second half and didn’t tell the 4th official that a substitution occured.
even with 10v11 they looked useless.. in their defense I bet this group has only been together for a couple of days now.. looking forward to the next game but tired of watching lame ugly soccer out of the national teams lately..
Ok. I was one of the guys that wanted Jurgen Klinsmann as the US coach, but seeing how are teams are playing lately, my faith is almost gone. Is it a tactic for us to not pressure the other team when they have the ball?
The announcer Brad Friedel talked about it, saying the US needs to pressure Brazil. Everybody else seems to see it. Why do Herzog and Klinsmann not see it? That was the type of style we wanted to go into under Klinsmann anyways (take the game to the other team, and pressure them), but it seems like the style we have gone in to is the exact opposite. And no matter how organized you are defensively, if you don’t put pressure on the other team when they have the ball, they will break you down.
If that is the new plan, then my vote for the new US head soccer coach is Jesse Marsch, The Red Bulls are playing that exact style.
I agree. JK has not lead the US to any great proactive style of play; at the youth level, at least, the opposite has happened. It seems now that players who are tactically disciplined, but creatively limited are preferred and the creative players that remain are having that creativity beat out of them in misguided attempt to get a result. At least Bradley understood the need for young players to be unfettered, even while he demanded a defensive posture from the full MNT.
After all the USMNT job is about getting results, while the youth teams are supposed to be there to help young players progress; the two very different goals require very different approaches. Marsch learned a lot from Bradley, he knows the difference between development and getting results as well as when is preferred over the other.
Watching this game it was extremely clear which players play in Europe and which ones don’t. Brooks, CCV, Zelalem, Green and to a lesser extent Kiesewetter are far better players technically than the other guys on the field. They were far more comfortable on the ball and simply had more ideas when in possession than the others. Green didn’t have a great game, but when he got the ball you felt like he would be able to keep it.
Shelton was really bad. Shelton couldn’t hold the ball, his touch let him down several times and his runs were non-existent. Until we start developing strikers who have more complete games, we’re going to continue to be frustrated with the performances of all of the teams in the program. I’m guessing this is why JK is hurrying Morris through so much. He’s the closest thing we have to a complete striker in the entire pool, speaking of his tools, not necessarily the level of his game.
As somebody said on the other thread, Zelalem has to play deeper. He is not a CAM, he is more of a Xavi type who wants to drop back to pick the ball up and control the tempo, then play penetrating balls through the defense. That was very evident in the second half when he was constantly dropping into deeper positions than Alashe and Polster. I would rather see Green as the CAM if we’re going to play the 4-2-3-1 and let Zelalem play deeper with Alashe. Green isn’t afraid to take people on and with how little defensive work he was putting in, we really needed somebody with a better work rate on the left.
It’s so frustrating to have two center backs who look every bit the part of a dominant pairing and then they get split for a really weak goal. I get that they were tracking back from a set piece, but they were both there. They got caught flat and flat-footed.
It is starting to get tiresome to see the lack of a tactical philosophy. One of the few times we pressed, we created a goal, yet pressing was hardly a consistent focus and the 4-2-3-1 is not a good formation for pressing anyway. It’s a fine formation for countering, but we rarely broke quickly on the counter, which is something that seems to be a them in the whole program. We don’t break with speed. I understand it more at the senior level because with Jozy and Clint we aren’t really well equipped to do it, but even with good pace on the field tonight, you didn’t see it. I don’t understand the rationale behind it (if there is one).
+1000
I agree with most of what you said but Borussia Dortmund would probably disagree with your assessment that the 4-2-3-1 isn’t good for pressing.
Fair enough. I’m not even sure how many teams press consistently in international soccer. I think it’s tough to do with so little time to train together.
Agree with your observations about Brooks, CCV & Zelalem. Tactically they seem ahead of the rest of the players on the field.
Can’t agree with your inclusion of Green in the Brooks, CCV & Zelalem group. Tactically, Green looked lost and was a liability for the USMNT U23’s. His inability to progress and earn meaningful playing time outside of the reserves division is severely limiting his ability to contribute to the USMNT program, even at the U23 level.
On the positive side, Zelalem seems to be progressing nicely. Put in a position where he has had to earn his place and not being rushed or given a spot with the senior USMNT seems to be working well for him.
Actually, I said that group was more advanced technically, and Green imo is at the top of the group technically, but you’re right they’re tactically more advanced as well. Green didn’t have a great game tactically for sure, in addition to the fact that he was a liability defensively for much of the match. I’m not sure if he was being instructed to stay high or was just being lazy.
Green was rubbish, If you saw euro quality from him I’ll go get new lenses.
Zelalem needs help, no movement with midfield . He wasn’t perfect but make runs and get open.
We bunker down and hope for a set piece goal. Sounds familiar?
And people say the US doesn’t have a style of play.