Watch World Cup qualifiers live here.

Round 6 of CONCACAF 2010 World Cup Qualifying is fast approaching with three intriguing fixtures, including the highly-anticipated United States v. Mexico.

Honduras v. Costa Rica

Squad News: Costa Rica will be returning a majority of the Gold Cup squad that lost to Mexico on penalties in the semi-finals, including midfielder Celso Borges and captain Walter Centeno. Honduras’s first teammers, including captain Amado Guevara, replace the Gold Cup ‘B’ squad that went down 2-0 to the Americans in the semi-finals.

Previous Meeting: Last time these teams met in San Jose in May, Costa Rica won 2-0 in a cagey match, Andy Furtado grabbing a brace.

Verdict: With Los Ticos atop the qualifying group after trouncing the US 3-1 in San Jose and T&T 3-2 back in June, expect Costa Rica to produce an inspired performance to defeat Honduras in Tegucigalpa. Despite the hostile atmosphere, Costa Rica has shown they are capable of playing well in such conditions, dominating Mexico for long stretches in Dallas during the Gold Cup.

Still, head coach Rodrigo Kenton will not underestimate Los Catrachos, who have been inconsistent throughout the qualifying campaign, losing to Costa Rica 2-0 while beating Mexico 3-1. Expect the inconsistency to continue here. 1-0 Costa Rica.

US v. Mexico

Squad News: American coach Bob Bradley will have a full squad to choose from, including top goal scorer in the competition and new Hull City signing Jozy Altidore and new AC Milan signing Oguchi Onyewu. Only Stuart Holden and Brian Ching remain from the Gold Cup squad. Mexico, however, will be missing captain Rafa Marquez through a torn calf muscle. Apart from that, El Tri will have a full strength squad.

Previous Meeting: The United States eased to a 2-0 victory in an ill-tempered match in the first round of fixtures back in February. Michael Bradley scored both goals.

Verdict: Far and away the pick of the round. The US have had the upper hand over Mexico on American soil excepting the 5-0 Gold Cup trouncing, but playing in the vaunted Azteca Stadium has been a formidable challenge for the Americans, who are 0-22-1 in Mexico City in World Cup qualifying. The late afternoon heat and altitude will almost benefit the Mexicans, who are used to playing in the stifling conditions. El Tri coach Javier Aguirre will be hoping the 5-0 defeat of the Americans in July will buoy and mentally strengthen his squad, Bob Bradley will be hoping to revenge the ignominious Gold Cup defeat. 1-1 draw.

T&T v. El Salvador

Squad news: T&T will be boosted by the arrival of Bobby Zamora of Fulham and Lloyd Samuel of Bolton, who received their Trinidadian passports over the weekend. Zamora will be inserted directly into the squad and will form a powerful strike force with fellow Premier League forward Kenwyne Jones. El Salvador will be well-rested after having failed to qualify for the Gold Cup. La Azul coach Carlos de Los Cobos will have a mainly domestic-based squad to choose from, but will call on foreign-based players such as fullback Alfredo Pacheco (New York Red Bulls) and midfielder Elisio Quintanilla (Ernis Aradippou – Cyprus) to boost the team.

Previous Meeting: Last time these two sides met in San Salvador in February, the match ended in an entertaining 2-2 draw with Osael Romero grabbing a 90th minute equalizer for the home side.

Verdict: This is a must-win for the Socca Warriors as they lie four points adrift of the fourth place playoff spot. The arrival of Samuel will be welcomed by head coach Russel Latapy, who has seen his side concede 11 goals in 5 qualifying matches. El Salvador started the qualifying campaign brightly but saw a 1-0 defeat to Honduras in June cast the team out of the qualifying spots. This is a match between two evenly match teams; Trinidad, with their backs against the wall, will squeak by. 2-1 T&T.

From Soccerlens.com - Football News

If Barcelona lose to Chelsea on Wednesday, it will be a monumental injustice. This game, for once, is as important as the pundits make it out to be: it is the battle between everything that is wrong with football (Chelsea) and the few remaining glimmers of hope for the sport (Barcelona).

Chelsea, as we all know, are the archetypical villains of the modern football world. They are ruled by an oligarch and fueled by the petrodollar. In this season’s Champions League competition, they, along with the other English teams, have played well enough, running riot over lesser teams and playing anti-football when they come up against teams that match their might (there are, of course, notable exceptions, such as the Blue’s thrilling 4-4 draw with Liverpool). In this manner, they have backed their way into the semi-finals without breaking much of a sweat.

On the other side of the equation we have Barcelona. I’ll be honest: for many years, I wasn’t a Barca fan. I stayed on the sideline as everyone jumped on the Ronaldinho bandwagon from two years ago and rooted for Arsenal in the 2006 Champions League final. Recently, though, I’ve been practically mesmerized watching them play. I’ve started watching them whenever they’re on GolTV. Their football is a sheer joy to behold. My first exposure to this football revolution was watching them systematically dismantl and embarrass Bayern Munich, a perennial European powerhouse, in the Champions League knockout, going 4-0 up in 45 minutes.

And what about this past weekend! Real Madrid made a feeble attempt at stealing the show in the first fifteen minutes, but I always knew Barca would storm to victory. And storm they did. The goal that epitomized the team’s beautiful attacking play was the fifth goal: Eto’s cool one-two with Messi, who, clean through on goal, had the poise to dummy Casillas before calmly slotting the ball in the corner.

Barcelona deserves to win on Wednesday because of their sheer exuberance for the game. Obviously, the players on both teams are lavishly paid, but Pep Guardiola has succeeded in instilling a simple love of the game that is so rare among professionals these days. For Gus and Co., every game is a job. For Barcelona, every game is a game.
Every time Barca attacks, the viewer sits up in his chair, holding his breath in anticipation, not sure whether to sigh in disappointment as a defender happens to break up a masterful move or laugh in glee as Messi or Eto or Henry skips around defender after defender before calmly leaving the goalkeeper for dead and slipping the ball into the net.

These movements appear so simple and that is the joy of watching it: the crisp passes, the prescient knowledge of where every other teammate on the pitch is going to be, the cool-headed finishing. This is how football should be played (and once was played, or so I’ve been told).

So Wednesday is an important day: it can perpetuate the money-grubbing, business-like side of the game or it can champion the poetry-in-motion, play-for-the-sake-of-playing style of play.

No offence Chelsea, but you deserve to lose: you deserve to roll over and let Barca hit 5 past you. Anything else would be an indication of just how low our modern game has sunk. For once, the Utterly Important need to swallow their pride and know when they’ve been defeated.

Chelsea v Barcelona – Live Blog – Champions League Semifinal 2nd Leg

From Soccerlens.com - Football News

I’ll be brutally honest: this was probably one of the worst NYRB performances I’ve ever seen. No heart and no real interest from the first whistle. Three-nil was a flattering scoreline – it should probably have been four or five.

It’s going to be a very long and humiliating season if this is the way the boys are going to play. I’d like to hope it was opening-game jitters, but something tells me this will only be the beginning.

So what went so wrong? Everyone’s been talking about the master tactician that Juan Carlos Osorio (JCO) is, but he clearly got it wrong last night. Here’s a quick and dirty list to explain why the Bulls had the crap beaten out of them:

1. 4-5-1 formation. Opening with a defensive formation sets the wrong tone from the beginning. You’re playing against an expansion team for Christ sakes and you come out with one forward? It’s never a heathly situation when the coach makes it clear he’s playing for the draw from the first whistle. The long balls to Richards and Kandji on the wings were completely ineffective and easily taken out of the air by the Seattle fullbacks. There was no enforcing presence in the middle of the park. Only in the second half, when the Bulls switched to a more attacking formation did they even begin to sniff Seattle’s goal.

2. Defensive/goalkeeping woes. Nothing new here – we all know this has been a long-standing New York problem but it looked particularly bad last night. I felt like I was watching my high school JV soccer team.

Boyens and Petke were running into each other (until Boyens was hauled off in the 26th minute for his poor performance) and the first goal came from poor (or rather, lack of) marking. Montero was left edge of the box with five yards of space around him, and Cepero was in poor position to deal with the shot.

On the second goal, Cepero was again at fault for letting the ball go through his legs. And then the third goal: I couldn’t help but laugh when the hard-working but ineffective Petke had the ball stolen off his boot by Montero. Cepero failed at Montero’s fake allowing the Colombian to easily slot home and complete the rout.

3. Personnel. I really don’t know what JCO was thinking when he sent out this team. Now, I love Juan Pablo Angel, but he just can’t play up top by himself: he’s too slow and has a bad habit of disappearing for much of the game. Richards would lose the ball every single time he got the ball in an advanced position. Kandji, 6″6, was reguarly out jumped by the 5″10 Seattle fullback.

Rojas, despite his good ball skills, is clearly not a defensive midfielder and gave up every time he lost the ball. Coincidentally, he was the only Bull to threaten Seattle’s goal with a dipping shot after the game was settled. Pietravallo was out of his league as well as Boyens and Goldthwaite.

Hopefully JCO can pull his squad together and regroup after this disaster. He has already signed Costa Rican defender Carlos Johnson as well as veteran midfielder Alberto Celades. These players should provide much needed help and cover for the current team because otherwise, as was shown last night, the Bulls are facing a long, difficult campaign.

From Soccerlens.com - Football News

Ukraine’s Euro 2012 bid is in jeopardy following serious economic and governmental woes.

It’s something that may not be on the minds of many international soccer fans right now given the organizational headache that is South Africa 2010, but Ukraine, one of the hosts for Euro 2012, is in serious financial and political trouble, according to an article published yesterday in the New York Times.

The Times has reported that “lines are sprouting at banks, the currency is wilting and even a government default seems possible.” On the political side of things, citizens are calling for the resignation of President Viktor Yushchenko, leader of the 2004 Orange Revolution which brought a pro-western government to Kiev.

Clearly, this is not the best environment in which to be hosting an international tournament. Although there are three years until the tournament, Platini and his men in Nyon had better be seeking alternate solutions. Interestingly, Platini thinks Poland may be capable of hosting the tournament on its own. In fact, some think the global economic downturn may actually benefit Poland in its preparation for 2012.

Still, Platini should not place all his faith in Poland, a country with relatively poor infrastructure and stadiums compared to Western European nations. Without Ukraine, Poland would be completely incapable of hosting Euro 2012 on its own. UEFA should invest some serious time and energy in speaking to English, Spanish, and Italian FA officials, although Platini has insisted that there is no “Plan B” for 2012. Perhaps he should admit the impending failure of his joint-host plan and seek other options lest he face the same embarrassment that Sepp Blatter and FIFA have faced in the preparation for South Africa.

From Soccerlens.com - Football News

When Danny Welbeck scored a thirty-yard screamer against Stoke earlier this season (albeit the fifth goal of a 5-0 trouncing), he immediately became my favorite player on Manchester United. The eighteen-year-old English striker piqued my interest not because he is an integral member of the United first team (in fact, he has primarily featured in Carling and FA Cup ties this year), but because of his place of birth: he is a tried and true Mancunian, born in the southern district of Longsight.

In today’s football world, Welbeck, is something of an anomaly. To have a player feature in the first team for his hometown club is very uncommon (although another Mancunian, Paul Scholes, has been a stalwart of the United lineup for the past decade), considering football’s rapid globalization and the influx of foreign stars from all four corners of the globe into the EPL. Although globalization has caused top clubs to become worldwide brand names and reap enormous profits, this sort of commercialism has well and truly killed the regional “flavors” of football that once existed.

In England, for example, in the years of the old First Division, before South American and African players were carted in and the glamor of the Premier League seized everyone’s attention, style of play was primarily decided by geography.

Northern clubs, with their muddy pitches, were known to play the “long ball” game— i.e. a fullback or wide midfielder would play deep crosses to a burly striker who would try to cause enough confusion in the box for someone to prod the ball home. Defenders were known for bone-crunching challenges and referees were oft inclined to ignore anything short of a life-threatening injury. If you need an example of the Northern style, look no farther than Hereford vs. Newcastle in the 1972 FA Cup. Southern teams, enjoying better weather, were known to play more “attractive” football — i.e. keeping the ball on the surface and working through the middle of the field.

Today, at the top level of the game, these styles have ceased to exist, replaced instead by a homogeneous style of play characterized by speed, an emphasis on attack, a play-making midfielder, and wingers pushing up the field to the point where they almost become wide strikers.

Let’s consider the European international game as well. Back in the day, the Italians were known for their clean sheets and strong defense; the Spanish and Portuguese for their attacking flair; the Dutch for their technical and tactical proficiency; the Germans and Eastern Europe for strength and finesse; and the English for their long ball style.

While these stereotypes still exist to some extent in the international game, they have been severely muted by the introduction of the “homogeneous style.” And right now in the United States, the national team is going through its own identity crisis as well. One camp has called for the Americans to inject South American flair and tactics into the national team while the other camp has called for the team to remain true to the more traditional, European style of play it has always employed.

Obviously, the standard of play has increased tremendously as a result of these stylistic changes. But is this necessarily a good thing? In light of the mindless money-making product football has become, I doubt it. Why is the game of football concerned with progress from progress’s sake when it means the death of its very foundations? Simply put, the game has been taken away from the fans, placed in the hands of money-grubbing businessmen, a fact that we’ve all hopefully recognized by now. Of course, the situation will never change and the past is the past. We’ll never reclaim that era of homegrown talent, that era when Celtic won the European Cup with eleven Scotsmen born within thirty miles of Parkhead. Today, there’ll always be a boy in the streets of Rio or Dakar picked up by a roving scout to usurp that Glaswegian.

For the future of football, I hope Danny Welbeck breaks into the United first team and becomes a one-club man. Without him, you could replace the words “Manchester United” with “Chelsea,” “AC Milan,” or “Real Madrid.”

From Soccerlens.com - Football News

Note: for privacy reasons I won’t my high school’s name or any players on my team, but we finished the season ranked in the Top 15 in the country, according to ESPNrise.com

In light of recent posts I’ve read on here discussing player development at elite youth academics in American soccer, I thought I’d offer my somewhat cynical take on the subject from a different, and more personal perspective: high school soccer.

I played (or to be more accurate, watched) for four years on what I would consider an “elite” high school soccer team. During my four years with the program, my team lost only three times, won our county championship four times, our conference three times, and the state championship twice. Not bad for a school with sixty males in each grade.

Maybe I should step back and speak about myself for a moment: I had always considered myself to be a decent soccer player, the kind that could read the game pretty well and would score goals from the left flank every once in a while. Beginning as a freshman, I played on a U-19 club team; in our county league, when we could get eleven players to show up on a given Sunday, we would win, but usually, faced with diminished numbers on our side (often nine or ten players without subs), we would hold down the fort for a good sixty minutes before unceremoniously caving in. (As for practice, it was a success if five players showed up).

This was the world of American soccer I grew up in: an unprofessional, imperfect place where we played not necessarily because we wanted to win, although that was an added bonus, but because we loved to play the game.

Enter the realm of my elite high school soccer program and its die-hard, win-at-all-costs attitude. Suddenly, I was playing with recruited players (three freshmen accepted each year regardless of their academics), players who played intense club soccer (practices four times a week after school before flying off to national tournaments on the weekends), and players in the national team pool.

Every summer, my high school team would jet off to Europe for a week (sophomore year- Czech Republic, junior year- Italy, senior year- Germany) to train and play against top tier European teams. Although billed as optional, anyone who wanted to become somebody on the team attended. I felt out of place and rightly so, both in my mindset and skills. While my teammates were playing with their clubs teams every night during the off-season, I was kicking the ball against my garage door since my club only played from March to June.

I can say with certainty that my coach and the program destroyed my love for the game for the sake of making the team into an impersonal robotic winning machine. I was always under the impression that the purpose of high school soccer — and all sports as a whole — is to go out with your friends and have a good time.

Being forced to pay three hundred dollars for a set of two uniforms that we were required to wear at practice every day regardless of the weather conditions was not “fun,” and being forced to sprint three full-field suicides simply because we gave up a goal in a 9-1 victory is not my idea of a good time. I would’ve traded my socks to be on the losing end of that game because at least at the end, the other team walked off with smiles on their faces and snickered as we ran our suicides.

And isn’t the purpose of all high school sports to promote team unity? Every time I was on the field during the trash time when we were winning by six or seven goals, my teammates, those for whom I was to forced to cheer every second when they were on the field, were off running suicides and not even watching the game. And when they came back from running, they were talking with one another and playing with tape from the medical kit. Talk about a double standard. Not only does this show arrogance, but also a lack of respect for our opponents. And our coach would always eschew the virtues of remaining “classy” regardless of a win or loss during his obligatory and repetitive pre-game speeches.

This season, I played my last game three weeks before the state championship. We were winning by six or seven goals, it was getting dark and threatening rain, all the fans had left and the first team was off running somewhere. When the other team was retrieving the ball to take a goal kick, I stopped and suddenly realized this was what soccer was all about for me. It wasn’t about the big-shot championship games when everyone was watching and cheering; instead, it was about playing for the sake of playing, continuing to play earnestly and trying your hardest, especially when the stands are empty and no one is watching.

Fast forward three weeks to the state championship game. We are winning 3-0 with seven minutes to play. Normally, any coach would dump the bench and give the seniors the chance to say they’ve played in a championship game. Even the other coach threw in his subs. But not my coach. As the time ticked down, and I saw that the subs, especially the seniors who, for four years, had sacrificed and given everything to the program in return for nothing, would again receive nothing, my last ounce of confidence in organized American soccer disappeared. When the final whistle sounded, I felt nothing but disgust for my team and my coach. The pride that my coach had spoken of before the game, the pride of wearing my team’s jersey and carrying home the trophy — all this was nothing but platitudes and baseless words.

While my situation certainly does not apply to every high school program, after observing many top soccer schools over my high school years, I have seen that many of the same problems that exist on my team are prevalent elsewhere. In other words, there is a general malaise. So, in parting, all I ask you is this: Is it really worth sacrificing character, honor, and morals for the sake of player development and victory? Think about it; American youth soccer may be more perverted than we think.

From Soccerlens.com - Football News

Juan Carlos Osorio, coach of the New York Red Bulls, is a lucky, lucky man. This past Saturday, his side pulled off one of the greatest upsets in MLS playoff history, defeating the two-time defending champions Houston Dynamo 3-0 at Robertson Stadium in Houston.

Osorio fielded an unchanged side from the first leg, which ended 1-1, and was rewarded when Dane Richards broke through the Houston defense against the run of play in the 28th minute and finished in the top corner. Minutes later, Houston were shocked as defender Ricardo Clark was deemed to have handled the ball in the box. Juan Pablo Angel stepped up, placed the ball past keeper Pat Onstad, and the result was sealed. Despite heavy second half pressure from the Dynamo, John Wolyniec scored from close range in the 80th minute to ensure the Red Bulls would progress.

For the much maligned Red Bulls franchise, this victory signaled a monumental breakthrough: in their twelve year history, this is only the second time the Red Bulls have progressed to a Conference finals. NYRB are the only remaining original franchise in MLS who have not won the MLS Cup.

So could this finally be the year for the Red Bulls? Despite this remarkable victory, I still think the Red Bulls do not have what it takes to win an MLS Cup.

While Real Salt Lake awaits in the Conference final, the real test, if the Red Bulls progress, will be Chicago, who walked over the Bulls 5-2 in a decisive match earlier this season, or Columbus, the winner of the Supporter’s Shield. Osorio, while a clever man, has clearly had luck on his side during the end of the campaign and the playoffs, but who knows when his luck will run out.

In the first place, the Bulls were fortunate to sneak into the playoffs: the 5-2 drubbing at Chicago looked to have condemned NYRB to an early exit, but D.C. United, with their fate in their own hands, lost their last fixture, propelling the Red Bulls into the playoffs. During the playoffs, Osorio has kept expensive Venezuelan playmaker Jorge Rojas on the bench, instead favoring veteran forward John Wolyniec or rookie Sinisa Ubiparipovic.

At times this year, despite his passionate coaching, his decision making has seemed less than perfect: Osorio, overlooking the US Open Cup, watched the Bulls lose to Second Division USL side Crystal Palace Baltimore. One of his early season signings, Oscar Echeverry, was a travesty in the few games he started. What’s more, in the one live game I saw, against Toronto FC on October 4th, Osorio played a 4-5-1 formation at home. The team, slow and cumbersome on the attack, not surprisingly lost 3-1.

Also, Osorio has adopted a rotation policy of sorts, à la Rafa Benitez. Osorio says of the policy, “There are no automatic choices in this team. Probably there is one or two. . . .. For the time being, my message for everybody is that you need to earn your spot. They also know that I am not afraid to play the guys who I think deserved the chance.” While this is a noble and commendable endeavor, it is not the right policy to adopt for a team hoping to make a deep run into the playoffs. Using untested or marginal players that have simply performed well in the past week of training is a recipe for disaster. At a time like this, everyone expects, and needs continuity for success.

As a Red Bulls fan, I fear that Saturday’s victory may only encourage Osorio to continue his policies that have been ineffective for most of the campaign. After the victory, Osorio said, “Rotating the team is part of my thing that I believe in. Basically what happened on Saturday, it paid off for us.” A 1-1 draw in a game that the team threw away due to poor late-game defending? Hardly a success in my opinion. Osorio needs to reconnect with reality and listen to what the supporters have been telling him the entire season: play the best players who constantly perform week in and week out. Only then can Osorio rely on more than just luck to capture the MLS Cup.

From Soccerlens.com - Football News