USA 3-0 Colombia

droque says on Mar 10, 2005, 08:14:

How much of the Colombian team was from their A team? I know the US had mostly B team players.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kikiortiz11 says on Mar 10, 2005, 09:53:

Colombia's team was mostly a younger based team, including several players from the sub-20 team. Though there were a few veterans put in to give it a little mix, but for the most part none of them are from the A team.. Some of the veterans on the field were Juan Carlos Ramirez(Santa Fe), John Viafara (Once Caldas), and Juan Carlos Henao (Santos de Brasil) ... I dont think there is nothing to worry about.. If we put our real team out on the field with US's team I think it would have been another story!

Kiki Ortiz-Matallana

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Mar 10, 2005, 11:10:

Congratulations USA.

Now what the heck was the coach thinking by putting Rodallega in fifteen minutes into the second half?


CX

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 10, 2005, 14:51:

CX, he was likely just preserving him from possible injury. Colombia needs him for the matches that count. This was a friendly and as most football followers know doesn't mean much. Just a kick around for the lads.

The problem with qualifiers is that you have to wait until your internationals return from their overseas obligations to let them play together as a team.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Antonio_4 says on Mar 10, 2005, 15:26:

USA B 3-0 Colombia B
Mexico B 1-1 Argentina B

With a busy midweek cup schedule (Champions League & Copa Libertadores)in Europe and South America, its ridiculous they had these 2 games planned for yesterday. I think i saw half the Argentina national team players play for their teams in the Champions League round.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 10, 2005, 16:57:

kikiortiz11 your dreaming Colombia's A team would not beat the US A team.

Same result as in 1994 World Cup. US 2-1.

The US continually is getting stronger, and Colombia is at this point, stuck in mediocrity. The US were quarterfinalists in 2002 World Cup that Colombia did not qualify for.

Colombia still has a chance to qualify for this World Cup, but they can't allow themselves anymore weak performances. Right now, they are up against the wall, and any bad games will have them watching the World Cup again.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Mar 10, 2005, 17:19:

"Colombia's A team would not beat the US A team.

Same result as in 1994 World Cup. US 2-1."

gregshav,

I beg to differ! Colombia's A team is made up by players who play in some of the world's best leagues (Italy, England, Spain, Argentina, France, etc.). It's a completely different team than the rookies who played this friendly.

I remember when Colombia's and the USA's A team faced off in the third-place game of the Copa America '95. The result was Colombia 4 USA 1 !!


CX

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 10, 2005, 17:51:

Colombia's football team Will probably not qualify for the World Cup this time, as last time. They obviously have talent, but aren't able to get the job done. In the latest FIFA world rankings US is 11th and Colombia 26th. US is slowly but surely becoming a top power, whether football old school purists like it or not. What league individual players play in means nothing, only the results they can attain.

My wife is from Cali, and I would love to see Colombia make it to the World Cup, so I can root for two teams, but unless they start playing much better, they will be watching the Cup at home.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juanalejo says on Mar 10, 2005, 18:30:

Classifying Undoubtedly the US is getting better at football, but what is not fare is while Southamerican teams have to go through a rigourous qualification process, the US and Mexico have their right into world cups virtually ensured as they have no world class teams to compete against for the qualifying. They should make an Americas qualifier and the things would be at a different price. I think the US would even get better having to play Argentina or Brazil on a constant basis and the share of having better teams at the world cup would be ensured.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kikiortiz11 says on Mar 10, 2005, 18:49:

gregshav JAJAJ! you are hilarious! thanks for the laugh! But soory , I am confident Colombia is still way stronger then the US. please. Man, Put the USA to qualify with the South American teams, in the CONMEBOL and we will see if they can qualify to a world cup! jaja Colombia didnot qualify bc of some corruption deal between Argentina and Uruguay..(not to make excuses , but its the truth!) Colombia has a team full of world class players, including Calero, Ivan Cordoba, Mario Yepes, Amaranto Perea, J.P Angel(although lately has benn playing bad! ) Jairo Castillo, and this is to only mention a few! Who does US have? I believe the only one who is doing anything good in Europe is Beasley and friedel... But damn comeon! you guys will never get us in soccer! the '94 match was luck ! for gods sake bc of an autogol! By the way! those FIFA rankings are horrilby inaccurate! USA belongs in the high 20s and Colombia belongs in the top 15 at least! Although USA has gotten better, you still cannot compare the two teams! especially bc of some friendly!

Kiki Ortiz-Matallana

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 10, 2005, 19:15:

FIFA's rankings are weighted by area, but it is severely flawed.

UEFA x 1.00
CONMEBOL x 0.99
CAF x 0.96
CONCACAF x 0.94
AFC x 0.93
OFC x 0.93

There is no way those weightings reflect the level of competition properly.

I also don't think using friendly matches for rankings should continue. Most folks know that a friendly is a bit of fun and often show a skewed result. On the other hand, teams know that frendly matches do count albeit at a somewhat reduced weighting so this should ensure better football for the audience.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 10, 2005, 19:44:

2002 World Cup US made it to quarterfinals. Mexico made it to the second round and Costa Rica nearly made it.

Argentina- did not advance
3 of the 5 South American teams did. Brazil is obviously the best, but the rest are overrated. They are living off the past strengths, they are no longer the strongest teams anymore. The strength is definitely in Europe, but Africa and Asia are where the new powers are developing. Outside of Brazil, South America has Argentina, although they aren't what they used to be and then some other decent teams, but not the forces they used to be. I would love the US to play the South American teams, but that isn't going to happen.

AND PLEASE, GIMME A HUGE BREAK ON THE CORRUPTION DEAL, That is absolutely the worst excuse I've ever heard for poor, yes poor play.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Mar 10, 2005, 20:06:

"Outside of Brazil, South America has Argentina, although they aren't what they used to be"

What do you mean Argentina isn't what it used to be? They've been playing some great football lately, they won the gold medal at the Olympics and nearly won the Copa America last year.

CX

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 10, 2005, 20:13:

World Cup is what its all about And they performed poorly. The Olympics mens contest was U-23 teams with 3 players above that age limit, so it wasn't true national teams. Also, Copa Americas is just South America's tournament, with a couple extras thrown in. So like I said they played amongst themselves, and my contention is that other than Brazil, South America is overrated. The last time a South American team did anything in the World Cup other than Brazil was in 1990, Argentina. 15 years ago. Those teams are living off past accomplishments. I rest my case.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

santiBOG says on Mar 10, 2005, 21:05:

ColX Since when do you 'know' or care so much about soccer?? I thought you hated it.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Mar 10, 2005, 21:33:

santiBOG, I think you h santiBOG,

I think you have it mixed up. What I hate is the word "soccer", but I love the sport of football!! Yo sí sé de fútbol y especialmente de la Selección Colombia.

CX

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

BlondeJamesBond says on Mar 11, 2005, 02:02:

Honours Even *The last time a South American team did anything in the World Cup other than Brazil was in 1990, Argentina. 15 years ago. Those teams are living off past accomplishments. I rest my case.*

Off the top of my head -

1990 - West Germany beat Argentina
1994 - Brazil beat Italy
1998 - France beat Brazil
2002 - Brazil beat Germany

Honours Even - in all cases Europe v SA, and I wouldn't bet against the trend continuing.

Look forward to an England v Colombia final in 2006! - I can dream can't I?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 11, 2005, 04:32:

Keep dreaming. ;-)

Seems like England always get a tough draw against teams like Argentina and Italy. Although their chances of making it to the final are a bit better than Colombia. Remember how many times England gets stuck in the "Group of Death". England's undoing is their matches that make it to a penalty shootout, they are pitiful at penalty shots.

I can't wait!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

BlondeJamesBond says on Mar 11, 2005, 06:05:

England for 2006 Saddam Hussain is facing the death penalty - luckily for him David Beckham is taking it!

I can't wait either - I actually want to go and spend a summer in Germany! Where. i'm sure, a certain treacherous, fat, scally git will lead us to glory in 2006.

How does this Rodallega compare to Rooney?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Mar 11, 2005, 06:19:

Here's my prediction for next years World Cup final:

COLOMBIA VS. DEUTSCHLAND !!!



CX

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 11, 2005, 07:13:

BlondeJamesBond You are correct and confirmed my earlier statement, since 1990, no South American team other than Brazil has done well in the World Cup.
Brazil is and will be the best team in the world. Other than that, South America is overrated. No SA team has made it past the quarters since 1990. Mexico and the US since then have made it to the quarterfinals, so my opinion is, and I'm sure I'll catch heat for this, is that SA minus Brazil is equal to CONCACAF. Mexico, US and Costa Rica can play with anyone in South America other than Brazil.
The past World Cups since 1990 prove that.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 11, 2005, 08:10:

No that doesn't prove it, it depends on who the competition was leading up to the quarterfinals. Some groups are much easier than others.

The US might play a good match, but Argentina for one is a much better team, using World Cup statistics to prove a point isn't very sound reasoning if the two teams you are comparing didn't meet in the competition.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

BlondeJamesBond says on Mar 11, 2005, 09:05:

gregshav *Those teams are living off past accomplishments*

We're still living off 1966!!

Speaking in the most subjective terms possible - I would love for England to be drawn in the same WC group as the USA - It would be considered points in the bag.

Any of the South American teams we will inevitably get, will be considered a tough test - we'll do 'em anyway, but they are better than the USA - total flukes in 2002.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 11, 2005, 10:24:

That arrogance is what the up and coming football teams love.

Colombia's arrogance cost them in 1994 against the US, Portugal's arrogance cost them in 2002 against the US. South Korea used that arrogance all the way to the semifinals in 2002, and Japan used that arrogance of the so-called superior football teams all the way to the quarterfinals in 2002, as well as Turkey used it to make the semis in 2002. Cameroon and Nigeria used that football arrogance to their advantage in the 80's and 90's. The new powers are coming up in Asia and Africa, and the dominance of Europe and South America is over. Sure Brazil and Germany will still do well and win, but the tournament won't be dominated by the old school teams. The arrogance of living off past accomplishments continues to hurt them.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 11, 2005, 13:08:

Turkey wasn't a fluke, they are a good team. Some of their local teams are world class.

I agree though, taking these up an coming teams for granted is a mistake. It only takes one goal to win and even if the goal is a fluke a win is a win.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 11, 2005, 13:35:

No doubt Turkey is strong But they are not one of the old, arrogant world powers.

And all this talk about England always being in the group of death. It's the same old arrogant, past great powers having an excuse for not advancing. Their are no easy groups in the world cup. The group of death is just an excuse for the old school teams to feel better about not being able to get past the "so called weaker teams."

The bottom line is the so called weaker countries are actually playing better football than some of the old school past powers.
They don't care if people don't regard them as good as the so called stronger teams, they just keep beating them at the World Cup. Look at what S. Korea, Japan, USA, Turkey did at the last World Cup, so called weak teams filled up half the quarterfinals. I don't believe they are weak, just not highly regarded by the football elitists.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 11, 2005, 14:58:

Rundown 2002Group A. Sene Rundown 2002

Group A. Senegal shocked France that one was an example of what you are talking about.
Group B wasn't much of a surprise Spain went through easily, an easy group.
Group C no surprises, Brazil and Turkey were expected to go through. Group D Portugal was upset by the US, even by just 1 goal this was an upset. US and homeside Korea advance.
Group E. No upsets here, Germany breezed through.
Group F. This was an upset Argentina sent packing by England, a low scoring group no new world powers in this group.
Group G. As expected powerhouse Mexico made it through convincingly Group H. Homeside goes through.

Round 16
England over Denmark 3-0
Brazil over Belgium 2-0
Senegal over Sweden 2-1 golden goal
Turkey over Japan 1 to 0
Germany over Paraguay 1-0
USA over Mexico 1-0
Spain over Ireland in penalty shootout
Korea over Italy 2-1

I see two upsets USA over Mexico, and homeside Korea over Italy. The rest is status quo. OK perhaps Senegal over Sweden.

Quarterfinals here things were getting interesting.

Brazil over England 2-1 (not a bad team to lose to)
Germany over USA 1-0 Good match played by USA, German goalie saved the day.)
Korea knockout of Spain on penalties (homeside)
Turkey over Senegal 1-0

Semifinals
Germay over Korea 1-0 (well good will and all that can only go so far)
Brazil 1-0 over Turkey

Third place
Turkey over Korea 3-2 a (good match to watch)

Finals
Brazil over Germany 2-0

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Mar 11, 2005, 17:42:

Kernow and BlondeJamesbond, this one's for you:


England to face United States and Colombia on U.S. swing
By Associated Press
Friday, March 11, 2005

LONDON - England's national soccer team will play in the United States for the first time since 1993, facing the Americans on May 28 at Soldier Field in Chicago and Colombia on May 31 at Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, N.J.

The United States, likely to have most of its top players available, will be preparing for World Cup qualifiers on June 4 against Costa Rica in Salt Lake City and June 8 at Panama.

``The trip will be an excellent learning experience, as well as a unique chance to increase interest in English football among the American public,'' England coach Sven-Goran Eriksson said Friday.



England captain David Beckham and forward Michael Owen, who play for Real Madrid, are likely to miss the exhibition games. Real Madrid is scheduled to play its final Spanish League game of the season on May 30 at Real Zaragoza.

Other top English players could miss the tour if Liverpool or Chelsea reach the final of the European Champions Cup, scheduled for May 25 in Istanbul, Turkey. England's top midfielder, Steven Gerrard, plays for Liverpool. Defender John Terry and midfielder Frank Lampard are with Chelsea.

Following the U.S. tour, the English play World Cup qualifiers at Denmark on Aug. 17 and Wales on Sept. 3.

England and the United States reached the quarterfinals of the 2002 World Cup. England lost to eventual champion Brazil, and the Americans were eliminated by Germany

``It is a very good opportunity for me to be with the players for a week and to take a closer look at some of the newer members of the squad in a different environment,'' Eriksson said.

``Playing the USA in their own country is a big test. They are an excellent team who have made enormous progress over the last ten years or so, and were very unlucky not to make the semifinals at the last World Cup. They have some very good young players like Landon Donovan and DaMarcus Beasley, and we have also seen in the Premiership that they have a choice of top-class goalkeepers.''

Americans Brad Friedel (Blackburn) and Tim Howard (Manchester United) were voted the top goalkeepers in the Premier League in the past two seasons, and Kasey Keller started for Tottenham before transferring this year to Borussia Moenchengladbach in Germany.

The game at Giants Stadium is part of a doubleheader that includes a Major League Soccer match between the MetroStars and Chicago Fire.

In its last U.S. tour in 1993, England lost to the United States 2-0 at Foxboro, Mass., tied Brazil 1-1 at Washington, D.C., and lost to Germany 2-1 at Pontiac, Mich

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Mar 11, 2005, 18:37:

So let me get this straight, England's B side is playing America's A side in America? Sounds like a tough match. I look forward to it, but wish we could have more starters, it will be good practice though for both teams. I wonder if Colombia will be at full strength?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Antonio_4 says on Mar 11, 2005, 18:59:

WC2002... what a chuck of # at &% Sorry...
Worldcup 2002 in Korea/Japan was my 4th worldcup i followed. And it is by far the worst ive ever seen. That tournament was absolutely bogus. Now dont get me wrong, i really like to see small teams do good and beat the stronger ones. But its different when smaller teams go thru because the big ones were completely out of form. Like last year I was really impressed by Once Caldas and DIM in the Copa Libertadores(although Once had a good amount of luck + Henao), and with Greece in Euro2004. This time i was pissed.
USA reached the last 8 only because of they took advantage of the miserable quality of topteams during that tournament. I followed every single game of Portugal that they played untill the worldcup. And if we played like we did in those matches, we'd seriously give USA some ass-whoopin. But as you said, we thought we already owned the cup.
Same counts for Argentina, Portugal, France, Russia, and even Poland, things would be totally different if they played like they normally did.

So gregshav, its not really reliable to say that USA is becoming a toppower now. I think USA is still far away from being one (it is improving though).
USA has nice worldcup stats. But if you look at who you have to play against. Its no surprise at all. Jamaica, Costa Rica, Mexico and thats it. Now compare this with the opponents Colombia has to deal with, and you can see why USA reaches the final easily: Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru and now even Venezuela is becoming strong too. USA wouldnt stand a chance in CONMEBOL.
Also I checked the last official matches USA played. And it doesnt look like a topteam at all
T&T 1-2 USA
USA 6-0 Panama
El Salvador 0-2 USA
Panama 1-1 USA
USA 2-0 El Salvador
Jamaica 1-1 USA
Grenada 2-3 USA

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gregshav says on Mar 11, 2005, 19:04:

OUT OF FORM No such thing. If a team is outplayed, the excuse is not they are out of form, It's that they got whipped. This is exactly what I mean when the old school elitists make excuses for their poor performances.

And my opinion of Bolivia, Peru, Chile and Venezuela is that they are all weak teams.

Maybe all those so called top teams werent really top, they just got outplayed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Antonio_4 says on Mar 11, 2005, 19:24:

Not really... Football isnt a sport where you can just look at the scoreboard and judge the teams by the score.
I remember Portugal 2-3 USA, Portugal 4-0 Poland, Poland 3-1 USA.
Nobody knows what wouldve happen if Portugal was in form for that match in 2002 against USA.
To me when you get whipped you have to be outclassed by the other team. For example, if team A misses 4 penalties, hit 5 balls on the post, 3 on the crossbar and score an own goal in stoppage time and see team B take the 3 points in the end. I really dont think that team A got whipped then. One of the matches that came across my mind is Brazil-France in 98. The Brazil in the semis was a huge difference, compared to what they showed in the matches before the final.
And i think you really underestimate the quality of the "smaller" teams in South-America. Try to beat Bolivia in La Paz while playing in one of the highest situated stadiums on this planet...

0 funny, 0 helpful.