post

Preview: USA vs. Uruguay Last Chance Qualification (2nd Leg)

 

Newcomer, Greg Inahara, helped spark Team USA to a 25-21 in the first leg.  Up next:  The return leg in Uruguay.

Newcomer, Greg Inahara, helped spark Team USA to a 25-21 in the first leg. Up next: The return leg in Uruguay.

The 2nd legs of the Last Chance Qualification series between the USA and Uruguay will take place this Saturday in Canelones, Uruguay. The Women’s match starts at 6:30 PM (Local) and the Men’s match starts at 8:30 PM (Local). Uruguay is currently GMT-3 or 1 hour ahead of U.S. East Coast Time.

Livestream site: Link

Results of the First Leg and What Each Team Needs in Order to Qualify for the PANAM Games

These matches are the second matches of a two match playoff. If a team wins both matches they, of course, win the playoff, 2 wins to 0. If, however, there is a split with both teams winning one match, the winner will be determined by overall aggregate goal differential for both matches. Then, in the event that the goal differential is equal, the total number of away goals is the next tiebreaker. Finally, in the unlikely event that the score of the 2nd match is identical to the 1st match a coin flip will determine the overall winner.

Women’s Numbers: Uruguay won the first leg at Auburn by a score of 30-25.  Here’s the practical breakdown of what the U.S. Women need to do in order to qualify for the PANAM Games:

  • Win by 6 goals or more
  • Win by 5 goals and score at least 31 goals in the match on Saturday

Here’s the breakdown of what Uruguay needs to do in order to qualify for the PANAM Games:

  • Lose by 4 goals or less
  • Lose by 5 goals and don’t let the U.S. score more than 29 goals on Saturday

If the U.S. wins by the score (30-25) there will be a coin flip to determine the overall winner.

Men’s Numbers: The U.S. Men won the first leg in Auburn by a score of 25-21.  Here’s the practical breakdown of what the U.S. Men need to do in order to qualify for the PANAM Games:

  • Lose by 3 goals or less
  • Lose by 4 goals and score at least 22 goals in the match on Saturday

Here’s the breakdown of what Uruguay needs to do in order to qualify for the PANAM Games:

  • Win by 5 goals or more
  • Win by 4 goals and don’t let the U.S. score more than 20 goals on Saturday

If Uruguay wins by the score (25-21) there will be a coin flip to determine the overall winner.

Women’s Game: Can the USA nibble away at Uruguay’s 5 goal lead?

Last Saturday’s match was pretty much an even affair until midway through the second half at which point Uruguay took control of the game enroute to a 5 goal victory.  One could summarily conclude that it’s pretty unlikely that the U.S. can return the favor with a 5 or 6 goal in Uruguay. However, the U.S. can take some comfort in that several of their players pulled off a similar turnaround just 4 years ago against Canada. In that 2 match series to qualify for the 2011 PANAM Games the U.S. lost it’s first match in Lake Placid by 5 only to beat Canada on the road in Montreal by 5 goals a few days later. And, the U.S. scored more away goals to win the tiebreaker.

Also, working in the U.S.’s favor is that they can undoubtedly play better than they did last Saturday. The U.S. failed to finish many prime scoring opportunities, had far too many turnovers and allowed way more goals (30) than they normally do against teams of Uruguay’s level.

Working against the U.S. however will be the long road trip and a vocal crowd in Uruguay. On top of that, the U.S. style of play is more methodical and they are less likely to rattle off a string of quick goals to change the game in just a few minutes. Instead, if they are to pull off the turnaround it’s more likely that it will be done by nibbling away at Uruguay’s lead over the course of 60 minutes. So, a doable task, but the U.S. will have to shoot a higher percentage and really avoid the turnovers.

Men’s Match: Can the USA hold on to its 4 goal lead and can Uruguay handle the defensive pressure?

For about 3/4 of the match last Saturday, Uruguay had a slight edge, but then Team USA applied some aggressive pressure defense that rattled Uruguay leading to turnovers and fast breaks. In the end, the U.S. won 25-21 to give them a 4 goal lead heading into the return leg. (See video of open defense compiled by Mundo Handball: Link)

All due credit to Coach Javier Cuesta and the U.S. side for applying this aggressive strategy successfully, but one has to truly wonder how Uruguay was seemingly unprepared for this tactic. This is because the USA had already used a similar tactic against Uruguay last June after falling behind 15-5 in a pivotal Group match.   Uruguay struggled and the U.S. came within striking distance of a miraculous comeback only to fall short. To be surprised once is somewhat understandable, but to be unprepared twice is unconscionable.

Further defining the extent of this failure is the reality that such a defense can generally be easily defeated with simple preparation. There’s a reason why you only see this type of defense used by high level professional clubs and national teams towards the end of a match. It’s a high risk defense that more often then not leads to further disaster with a goal scoring barrage.

It will be interesting to see, if and when the U.S. applies this defensive tactic again. I suspect that the U.S. will try and hold on to its 4 goal lead with standard play. After all, the two sides were relatively even for much of the game in Auburn. Should this aggregate lead start to slip, however, it surely will be applied and then we will find out whether Uruguay will get rattled again or whether they have prepared and are ready to learn from their mistakes.

But, to be honest, it’s the U.S. that could be in more danger of getting rattled. 3 relative newcomers (Greg Inahara, Chris Morgan and Carson Chun) made significant contributions in the friendly confines of Auburn, but this will be the first big road match wearing a U.S. uniform. They’ll need to play well again and the U.S. will also likely need big games in the backcourt from veterans Gary Hines and Martin Clemons Axelsson, who was a non-factor in the first match.