American soccer doesn’t treasure its history the way baseball and other sports do. But this country’s traditional national pastime can barely match a quirk of history that will be at stake when the U.S. men’s soccer team plays England at the World Cup on Black Friday (2 p.m. ET, Fox, Telemundo, Peacock).
This country and its old colonial parent have met four times in World Cups: 1950 and 2010 on the men’s side, and 2003 and 2019 on the women’s side. England, the country that invented and claims to still rule the game, went winless in all four.
It’s been 72 years since the first contest, won by the U.S. when Philadelphia’s Walter Bahr assisted Joe Gaetjens to score in the 1-0 upset. That span of time is so long that just one city’s active World Series title drought is longer: Cleveland’s 74-year wait dating back to 1948.
Boston, both sides of Chicago, Washington and Philadelphia all had longer droughts in the past, but they’ve been extinguished. The Phillies have won the World Series twice since Bahr’s assist — which is also twice since what some people still think is the most famous year in team history, 1964.
In fact, the Phillies have made the World Series more times over the years than the U.S. has played England in World Cups, by a score of 7-4. That’s a proper baseball score, unlike, say, England’s 6-2 win over Iran in the Three Lions’ group stage opener.
Certainly more than the 1-0 scoreline that’s treasured by pitching purists, right?
OK, enough snark. This England team is really good. The Iran game was just the fourth time that an English men’s team has scored four or more goals in a World Cup game, after 1954 (4-4 vs. Belgium), 1966 (4-2 vs. West Germany in the final), and 2018 (6-1 vs. Panama). And the six goals game from five different players, all of whom are elite: Jude Bellingham, Bukayo Saka, Raheem Sterling, Marcus Rashford and Jack Grealish.
I don’t think England will score six against the United States. I can’t imagine Bellingham and company expect it either, even as the nation’s hype meter flies off the charts again.
I actually think the U.S. attack can run with England, in a literal and mostly figurative sense — especially if Brenden Aaronson and Gio Reyna play. The Americans aren’t built to score six goals in a game, but there’s a lot of skill and energy in the midfield. And we know they’ll be up for this opponent like almost no other there could be.
I’m more worried about the U.S. defense, and that was the case before Walker Zimmerman ended what had been a good game by tripping Gareth Bale.
Are you ready to watch Sergiño Dest try to defend Sterling? Or Weston McKennie vs. Bellingham? If not, you have to hope U.S. manager Gregg Berhalter pulls both out of the starting lineup for players that might not fit in attack as well, but are better at defending and possession.
I’d start DeAndre Yedlin over Dest at right back and Aaronson over McKennie in central midfield. I’d likely start Reyna over Tim Weah at right wing too. McKennie and Weah can be second-half subs if the game is close.
It could be close by then, because this U.S. team has the talent to keep the game close. But even if they play the game of their lives, it might not be enough.
— Prediction: England 2, United States 1.
