Q&A with the SA Editors: Oct. 25, 1997

Keith Mattson

Honolulu, Hawaii

Would you agree that the U.S. national team forwards are not working as hard as they should on defense? Consider that Jamaica’s goal in the Oct. 3 game was the result of their forwards pressing U.S. defenders. Hermosillo’s goal came from pressing Keller in the tie with Mexico. I recall Lassiter scoring against Costa Rica by pressing their defenders. Is this just a coincidence, or is this an overlooked aspect of the U.S. game?

Ridge Mahoney: No, it’s not overlooked, and it is not simply a question of effort. It’s a matter of scheme as well as execution. To press successfully takes coordination from the forwards and midfielders. Sampson pushed Stewart up front against Jamaica to harass Jamaica’s back line because of his quickness, but a player can’t outrun the ball. Remember against Costa Rica in Portland, Wegerle and Lassiter did a fairly good job of pressing the opposing defenders, partially because Costa Rica’s best attackers weren’t there, but also because the U.S. midfielders were covering spaces and taking up passing lanes. This didn’t happen against Jamaica, which played the ball quickly and smoothly out of the back. Wynalda wasn’t fit enough to chase aggressively all 90 minutes, and although Stewart worked hard, he didn’t always take up the correct angle and had only sporadic support behind him from Reyna, Sorber, and Ramos. Also, Jones is weak defensively, despite his speed. He doesn’t tuck in when the ball is on the other side, and he simply doesn’t take up a good position quickly enough when the U.S. loses the ball. With a flank midfield option often open, one of the central midfielders must cover that space, which leaves more room in the middle. Also, pressing takes intensity and determination, qualities the U.S. was sorely lacking at RFK. A team mentally flat will not persevere against a team passing the ball well. Hermosillo’s goal was a fluke, as he was the only Mexican player really pressing, but he was in the area at the right time. Some coaches, frankly, demand too much chasing from their forwards, rendering them less effective on the attack. But it is a vital aspect of play that requires a concentrated, cohesive effort from all the players on the field, not just the forwards. Your point is a very good one, Keith. These are nuances the U.S. must improve upon to compete at this level.

Commanche, Wyoming

I’m curious about a couple of young Americans playing in Europe. First, Jovan Kirovski. It’s obvious that playing time for him will be very scarce at Borussia Dortmund and obviously they are willing to part with him. With the Sunderland deal falling through, wouldn’t Kirovski be better off going to a less prestigous club in the Bundesliga or even a Second Division team or perhaps go to a league like Holland or Belgium where it would be easier to crack the lineup (and get a work permit)? Kirovski is past the point where simply training will aid his development; he needs games. Is there a move for him in the near future? I’m also curious about John O’Brien. For the second straight season he’s on Ajax’ reserve team. What is the average amount of time a player spends with a reserve team before making the top team? Is O’Brien close to making Ajax’s full side and if not, how long does he wait before moving to a team where playing with the first team is more plausible?

Duncan Irving: Kirovski won’t get much playing time with Dortmund, given the strength and depth the squad has. In Portland, before he left for whatever reason, he was extremely fit although not match-ready, according to Steve Sampson. He does have the benefit of training and making lots of money, but he won’t get the time. He has EEA eligibility in Germany, which doesn’t translate to England but may mean something to another club. But ask yourself this: You’re making tons of money at the European champion, you think you only need one break to crack the starting lineup and you’re convinced of your own abilities. Would you leave for a smaller club? Conversely, would a club want to shell out a six-figure transfer on a player that has yet to prove himself, either domestically or internationally? O’Brien is a different story. The Ajax youth system is very regimented and he has made it to the ‘A’ squad, which is the reserve pool. Co Adriaanse is satisfied enough with his progress and it is a question of when not if he plays soccer. But there’s a catch. Ajax emerged empty-handed at the end of last season, the team looked jaded and the cracks had begun to appear in the system — you market something worldwide, then sooner or later, someone is going to suss you out. Morten Olsen has his way of doing things and 10 wins out of 10 is hard to argue with. That may have impeded O’Brien’s progress slightly. But if he’s good enough, he has an excellent chance of success.

Arlington, Virginia

I understand that MLS went to weekend games to increase stadium attendance. To do this, however, it seems that MLS had to give up its regular Thursday night slot on ESPN2. If that was the trade off, then I’m not sure it was worth it. From what I can tell, there is dead programming time on ESPN and ESPN2 on weeknights (witness their willingness to show Premier League games on Monday nights). Wouldn’t it make sense to plan one or two regular weeknight games — even if stadium attendance is low — in order to get the national TV time?

Pete Bailey: You make a good point. Although ESPN2 generally showed Saturday night games for a good portion of the season, they didn’t truly have a set night — sometimes the games were on Thursday, sometimes Sunday. ESPN executives hope to revive the Thursday night slot next year. It will work for much of the season except June, when ESPN is considering putting some World Cup matches on delay in prime time on ESPN2. Your suggestion also has merit in that it would provide more rest time for teams, so that Sunday games would have a higher quality of play. I’ll bet a lot of the league’s players would prefer playing Thursday-Sunday over Friday-Sunday.

Burlington, VT

Very early in a scoreless U-12 boys tournament match, an attacker got off a shot which struck a defender on the arm below the elbow. The defender was just inside the 18, and it was clear to all observers that there was nothing intentional about it, but the ball ricocheted out to the defender’s teammate, so it was also clear the attacking team lost advantage. The asst. referee put up his flag to alert the ref, who stopped play to consult with him. I overheard the exchange between them, and the asst. ref said “Handball in the area.” The referee thereupon called a direct kick inside the 18 where the defender was standing wen the ball struck him, NOT a penalty. Was this correct? If the ref isn’t calling a PK, but he’s awarding a free kick in the box, shouldn’t it have been an indirect? I can see how the ref was trying to get out of his dilemma, but I think he should have stuck with “play on,” due to unintentional. By the way, the team scored on the direct free kick, but fortunately went on to win handily.

Mike Woitalla: Two points must be addressed. First of all, there is no such thing as a direct kick in the penalty area that is not a penalty kick. Law XII reads: “Should a player of the defending team commit one of the above ten offences [which includes handling the ball] within the penalty-area, he shall be penalised by a penalty kick.” Secondly, Law XII reads, regarding direct-kick offenses, “handles the ball deliberately, i.e., carries, strikes or propels the ball with his hand or arm (this does not apply to the goalkeeper within his own penalty-area)…” There is no such thing as a punishing a hand-ball with an indirect kick. Note that when FIFA took the word “intentionally” out of its rules, regarding fouls, and replacing it with “a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or involving disproportionate force,” it left the word “deliberately,” in regarding the handball offense. Therefore, the situation you described should not have been punished — unless the referee (or referee’s assistant) believed the player deliberately handled the ball. How can anybody ever know if it was done deliberately? A judgment call, no?

Washington, DC

I have found it very difficult to obtain videotapes of U.S. national team games. Most catalogs don’t include them. Why is this? Specifically, I quite often hear mention of the USA-Argentina match during the 1995 Copa America tournament where the Americans won, 3-0. I’ve read that Coach Sampson showed this video before the World Cup qualifier against Mexico in order to motivate the team. I would love to buy a copy of it, but it seems impossible.

Pete Bailey: You’re right, Lou. It is pretty much impossible to purchase men’s national team games other than World Cup matches. The rights to the USA-Argentina game from the 1995 Copa America are owned by Inter Forever Sports, who were responsible for the TV fiasco of the most recent Gold Cup. I have yet to get an answer as to whether they would ever consider releasing this game for public sale, but you’re welcome to call them at 305-377-2700. The rights to domestic U.S. matches are owned by API Soccer. When I talked to them, they said they’d had discussions about releasing game videos, but due to the limited demand, did not think it would make financial sense (most of the game rights they own are for U.S. Cup matches). However, they are having discussions about possibly releasing a package video for the 1996-97 World Cup qualifiers.

College Park, Maryland

I am fed up with these soaring transfer prices in Europe. For example, Real Madrid has put transfer prices of over $100 million on Roberto Carlos, Davor Suker, and I think Clarence Seedorf. A year ago this club was in debt. Do you think that some of Europe’s big clubs are putting themselves in danger of some sort financial downfall? Will UEFA or FIFA try to put these soaring transfer prices under control?

Duncan Irving: Yes, these figures are obscene, but they’re basically hands-off or deterrent clauses to ward off other clubs who might want to sign a particular player. Does it work? No. Look at the Ronaldo affair. The player was involved in a tug-of-love between Barcelona and Inter Milan all summer, and while FIFA eventually stepped in, the truth of the matter is: you can’t keep a player at one club if he is dying to join another. The passage of the Bosman ruling has meant that once a player is out of contract, he has no remaining value on the transfer market. Hence, they’re signed to very, very long contracts (Raul Gonzalez’s is for 10 years). It assures some measure of financial security for the player and means the club can keep him for quite a while. Then again, contracts are rarely honored in soccer. The Ronaldo case was worrying, but doesn’t carry the same cause for alarm as Real Betis’ signing of Denilson does. A traditionally unsuccessful club trying to compete with the big teams by signing one player — a young one, at that — for heaps of money looks like a disaster waiting to happen. And to buy and pay top players, you have to win trophies and there aren’t too many up for grabs — domestic honors and then a crack at one of three European titles. What you’ll probably see in future is the eventual emergence of a European league, which offers regular big contests in addition to domestic ones, a sort of enlarged Champions’ League. This will guarantee good gates and large TV revenues, otherwise a lot of clubs will go to the wall. And some countries — France and Germany — now insist of solvency as a prequisite for First Division play. The result, in France anyway, is that most of their internationals now play abroad. A good thing? Watch Aime Jacquet as he prepares the tricolores for France ’98 and see how they do next summer. If they flop, the absence of domestic French talent will be somewhere near the top of the excuse list.