Top Stories

Italy uses late game-winner to defeat USMNT

1 Shares

Just as the U.S. Men’s National Team thought it was leaving Genk, Belgium with a scoreless tie with Italy, the Azzurri struck for a stoppage-time game-winner.

Matteo Politano finished off an Italian move inside the penalty area with a shot that flew past Ethan Horvath in the 94th minute to hand the host side a deserved victory.

The Americans were dominated throughout the contest with the Azzurri, but they were bailed out by Horvath’s play in net.

Horvath turned away five shots and was in the right position on countless occasions in his third-career appearance for the USMNT.

Italy took over the contest from the start, as Roberto Mancini’s side took advantage of the gaps in the 3-5-2 system utilized by interim manager Dave Sarachan, who was likely coaching his last game before a permanent manager is hired.

The 3-5-2, which looked more like a five-man back line for the majority of the opening 45 minutes, appeared disjointed with the Azzurri poking holes in the formation, especially on the flanks against an out-of-position Shaq Moore and Reggie Cannon.

Fortunately for the Americans, they made it to halftime in a scoreless tie with the host side, but they didn’t improve much in the second stanza.

As Horvath continued to shine in goal, the USMNT attack looked lifeless, even with Christian Pulisic paired alongside Josh Sargent.

Walker Zimmerman produced the most promising scoring opportunity of the second 45 with a wide header off a set piece, but nothing else of significance came out of the Americans, who enter 2019 on a 241-minute scoreless streak.

Seconds before the final whistle blew, the USMNT’s 2018 schedule came to a disappointing and fitting end as Politano scored his first-career international goal.

Next up for the Americans should be an announcement in the near future about who the new head coach will be, while the next scheduled game is February 2 against Costa Rica, which will mark the conclusion of the January camp.

Comments

  1. I liked Long, Cannon, Moore, Adams, Pulisic, and Sargent. Gall and Lletget looked ok off the bench. Horvath had a nice night but playing naively in a way better teams would expose.

    Blah: CCV, Villafana, Zimmerman, Trapp, Delgado, Acosta, Wood.

    To me these games should be less about results than who shows well and who does not. The more players show well the more likely you get your W anyway. I don’t feel like we were set up to make it easy for very many players at all to look any good. That defeats the talent evaluation part and also fails as tactics.

    Reply
  2. Trapp is overrated. Subtle thing on Trapp is I have detected a really bad habit for a supposed Mr. Soccer IQ. If you watched earlier games you may have seen him take a “square line” across to “try” to cut off an attacking player. In other words, caught somewhat across the field from a man coming at us, he tries to be sneaky and run straight across, rather than diagonal back to try and get back goal side. I can see the thought process, he’s trying to kind of creep up on them. I can also see it looked to me on a couple plays in recent games like he really ended up chasing the player instead. What a football DB would call “took the wrong angle.” If you watch closely on the goal, he tries to sneak over and double in similar fashion and the passer sees the two men he left open behind him, passes across, ball goes back into the middle, goal.

    Reply
  3. Horvath looked stellar. Going to give Zach Steffan good competition for the number one keeper job. But, in part, because his position on the field was one where fouls played little or no part, he shone more brightly than say Sargent, Pulisic, Wood, McKennie or Adams. As usual, the US gave the ball away too cheaply, far too often, with errant passes, and hurried long balls. The US played a version of the old Bob Bradley, bunker and counter style. They had the speed and attacking talent on the field to do so effectively if the team had a few more weeks in camp to develop familiarity and some intuitive feel for each other. Note though, how many times Pulisic (over 6 times) and Sargent (at least 4-5 times), et al, were HAULED DOWN, cynically, with relative impunity, in the middle 3rd of the field, when revving up to a gallop. Clearly Mancini instructed his Azurri to thwart any US counters with direct fouling, shirt tugs, judo throws, rough tackles, and deliberate tripping from behind. Granted Pulisic for example, could have done better at “hold up” play, and bringing other players into the attack, he often tried to dribble through 3-4 players and either lost the ball, or got hauled down. The Italians knew that in a friendly the ref would be less forthcoming with cards, and thus they would be able to get away with hauling down US players to slow the attack. And they did. They also engaged in some of their usual operatic antics. I.e. “Oops I lost the ball to an American, better throw myself into throes of agony, writhe on the ground, and clutch some part of my body to draw a whistle for a foul from the gullible ref, and retain possession.”

    Reply
    • No, he didn’t. Horvath made a few nice reaction saves. He also on a basic level failed to anticipate through balls or dominate his area on crosses. People would get the pass or cross and then he’d be there in no man’s land making a reaction save. It looked good and for most of the night was effective, but personally I think he’s second rate. I want someone who on the throughball either intercepts it or meets the ball, ditto crosses. And if he doesn’t win the ball he needs to literally have it timed where he gets to player when ball arrives. If you are a beat late you are in no man’s land and better players score goals.

      Reply
    • The rest of it, it’s hard to evaluate players handed such junk tactics. It was not merely a bunker but one where I question what his offensive strategy was. How were we going to advance the ball? Like Alexi said, if you’re going to play like that, put out some fast players on the wings and up top to counter. Or you need a true target man capable of the necessary holdup play to allow the rest to get forward in support.

      Reply
  4. The sky is not falling. Sarachan saw his job as exposing as many new, young players to international play, and he capped 25 new USMNT pool youngsters. Check. Managed to even beat Mexico, albeit in a meaningless friendly, and were able to pull out a tie with France right before the WCup, the eventual champions. So, some glimmers of hope for the future. Sarachan was never about finding the pool of 20-30 players who will be the core regulars going forward, nor about establishing a firm style of play, an identifiable system going forward that would allow the team to shine to its strengths in qualifying, or in legitimate FIFA tournaments. That is the job of the person that Earnie Stewart will soon name as head coach. So, we saw a lot of nervous youngsters, 17-24 year-olds with some 1/4 decent Euro or MLS academy formation under their belts, a lot of raw, young, and often nervous, skittish, horses, who had little or no familiarity with playing together as a team. Yet, as the Hispanic commentators on the game last night mentioned in their surgical analysis of the game; a) tired of seeing the US play small, and timid soccer. They (we) have the talent to play much more intelligent. possession oriented, attacking football, even if we lose by 2 or 3 goals. Now is the time to experiment with a bolder style of play and develop that going forward. b) With the youth talent pool that the US has now, led by stars like Horvath, Pulisic, Steffan, Weah, Tyler Adams, Sargent, and the strong core of young center backs, AND the current success of the U20 team in CONCACAF U20 World Cup qualifying, etc. – this full USMNT is currently an 8 YEAR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, with the Qatar World Cup in the middle of that arc. Be patient. There are very good players in the pool. The team that will emerge over the next several years will be a very different (and dangerous) animal than what we have seen this year.

    Reply
  5. Awful. I believe the USSF has wasted an entire year playing these meaningless games. They played them to hype up soccer enthusiasm after missing the WC. Hopefully a new coach will be named before the January camp. Hopefully the new coach will have a clue and get the most out of the players he chooses. I also hoped after watching my first World Cup game,in person, in 1994 that we would eventually become a better football nation, I’m not sure we have.

    Reply
    • my conspiracy theory is they know who the choice is but earnie was with the team in europe and then it’s thanksgiving. so something would be announced either friday or next week. that’s roughly wahl’s timeframe. both berhalter and ramos would be free by then, not that i like either choice.

      Reply
  6. I thought that of the backs, Long had the best game though he may have been lucky to avoid getting called for a penalty; Zimmerman was not bad, I just thought Long was better, CCV seems to draw the ire of referees and always looks like he is likely to commit a foul when he shouldn’t.
    Outside mids (or outside backs in the 5-man back line) need some work and I thought they were a bit confused as to what their role was (Moore did look the better).
    Adams was the best in midfield.
    Pulisic and Sargent, I thought did well with the limited service they got, but still I expected more. Pulisic really does need to learn how to bring other players into the attack, something I think Sargent does better Pulisic too often simply tries to take on multiple defenders.

    Horvath did very well in goal, he might have been lucky a few times, but he made all the stops you would expect and 2 or 3 great saves.

    Reply
    • from a defender’s perspective, i agree that long was the best of the CBs, generally solid except a gaffe where he had a ball skip by him. he’s done it 2 games straight which is another thing i want to see. personally i’d start long and parker because they actually can play defense. CCV the fouling doesn’t so much bother me as where he does it (final third), and that it felt like he was struggling to keep up with his mark. Zimmerman didn’t impress and he was someone I wanted them to try. The goal goes literally straight up the middle.

      To be fair to the “losing contestants,” Brooks and Miazga aren’t great either. I am curious how it all shakes out and if the new coach is willing to stick with Long and/or pivot towards defenders who ahem defend.

      I thought the fullback play was much improved until Villafana went in, at which point the guy starts turning him in circles.

      Reply
    • We have wing mids but Sarachan didn’t call many and then basically used fullbacks instead in a 532 the second game. I considered that a tactical mistake rather than the overwhelmed fullbacks failing at offense.

      Reply
  7. I actually don’t feel that bad about this game. The US was disciplined on defense and made life difficult for the Italian players. We had a fast, athletic squad that fought and gave the US a chance to beat a technically superior team. This was more of a defend and counter approach that reminded of the 2009-2011 US NATs team that had great success. At times we applied more pressure further up the field (a la Liverpool) in the second half and we came close to winning the ball in dangerous positions. We very nearly scored toward the end on a set piece and if we could have been more dangerous on the counterattack (better through passing) then it might have turned out differently. Realistically, this is how we should play against top 20 teams in the world. Let’s not pretend that we can trot out a possession based, latin influenced style and be successful. There’s no evidence of that. Go back to our core strengths of the past with a little more skill going forward, better passing out of the back, and a more tactical acumen (knowing when to press). I actually think a Jose Mourinho type would be the ideal coach for this squad. In reality, a David Moyes or Bob Bradley would be the actual options to consider.

    Reply
    • Most of the comments on this site are pure comedy gold.. Sure, let’s evaluate a 1-0 loss under an interim manager by suggesting a return to a bunker/counter style and bring back Bob Bradley to lead the program forward..

      OK

      Reply
      • To be successful you must be able to objectively evaluate yourself to some degree. Player for player… the US is not very good. We still can’t compete individually with maybe 30 teams in the world. Talent-wise in concacaf, Mexico is number one and we are amongst the rest of the pack, but with more youth prospects in the pipelines of various Euro clubs. So you play to your strengths, not what you wish the team could be.

      • Well, I agree with you. This is a lot of excuse making. We have players playing in top 5 leagues, yet they seem to be unable to string more than 2 passes together. If anything we are worse than we were a couple of years ago. Hell, we are not as good as less than a year ago when we drew with Portugal and France. Italy is not that good anymore. If they had a striker who could have finished, this would have been a 3-0 drubbing.This was a pathetic display. I have doubts that this team, given how it is playing now, would qualify out of CONCACAF if the Hex were held now.

      • The bunker idea is dumb because we literally just watched that not work. But I find it difficult to believe this team is anywhere near optimal under Sarachan. That game plan was stupid.

    • Most of the comments on this site are pure comedy gold.. Sure, let’s evaluate a 1-0 loss under an interim manager by suggesting a return to a bunker/counter style and bring back Bob Bradley to lead the program forward..

      OK

      Reply
      • Suggesting that any coach could fix what ails the USMNT (lack of talent st most positions, and of experienced talent at any position) is laughable. Until the present players get better, and more experienced; I am hopeful that they will, the USA will find success only by playing minnows or by bunkering and countering against the opponents who dominate possession.

        With Adams, Pulisic, McKennie, Long, Brooks and Sargent being, I think, the most promising of the lot, that gives the squad some players who simply need to continue the trajectories they are on and gain experience. But it also means there is still plenty of room for players to step up on a consistent basis while a whole raft of quality second-choices need to be found.

        None of that is likely to happen by magic; if it happens at all, in 2 or 3 years maybe. It will call for a lot of players improving, and not just some genius coach with a magic formula.

      • Dennis– Excellent comment. Even our best prospects are simply not ready to go against top European players. We have some great prospects, but they are still prospects if we are honest. Adams needs way more seasoning at a higher level. McKennie is ahead of him, but not at a standard to make a difference against top 15 teams. Sargent hasn’t played a senior club game yet. But 2-3 years from now, we might have something really good on our hands. Left back though… sheesh we are in trouble…
        ***************************************
        I still think the Gold Cup should be a target for the new coach. Whoever it is needs to state that we can win it, and find a way to cobble together the pieces to do so. There are many reasons for this (including the very real possibility that the WC 2022 will be a 48 team tournament, and a seeding will therefore be at a massive premium). But for me, I think this group needs to develop a taste for winning things. Lord knows this year didn’t help.

      • “Fix” is a weasel word. A coach with a half size brain could put better players out there in a system and get better results. Or we’d be hiring Sarachan as the full time. They don’t believe that and are hiring someone else. That’s your hint. I think it’s a rebuilding project and we won’t shoot straight to the top right away. But the game yesterday was winnable. We didn’t play a working or competitive formation. Worse, I think the coach would say the England team is his first choice and it’s pretty obviously somewhere in between, and maybe even closer to the Italy game defense.

    • All due respect but we tied Portugal last November with a lot of similar players, should have beat them but Horvath’s gaffe, and then Italy played Portugal and lost and tied. I threw that around as my expectations hint yesterday and to be blunter we should have gotten a result. I didn’t understand the tactical kid gloves where we bunkered a young experimental team, and he botched the lineup and selection so bad we had no offense if we allowed anything. That they managed about 20 minutes of decent second half soccer was almost a miracle.

      Reply
  8. Good God we’re terrible.

    This situation is unfair to everyone – the fans, the players, even Sarachan, who has been a lame-duck substitute teacher so long I’m amazed he hasn’t grown webbed feet.

    Is there anybody even awake at the USSF right now?

    HIRE A COACH ALREADY.

    Reply
    • I thought the man should be upon return to the States frog marched from the USSF complex today by security with a cardboard box and then have his security pass chopped into 16ths in front of him to ensure he can’t consult with his successor and spread the virus.

      Reply
  9. Man I want to cry can’t believe we lost at the very last minute. Are we gonna miss out on next world cup if play like this continues?

    Reply
    • Are we gonna miss out on next world cup if play like this continues? The short answer is yes. The long answer is to hope that Honduras and Panama get a lot worse in the next couple of years, in which case we could back in.

      Reply

Leave a Comment