E-Mail This Article to a Friend The US versus England: What did we learn? BY MITCH KRPATA

Last Saturday’s friendly soccer match between the US and England went a long way toward illuminating the strengths and weaknesses of the American side as it prepares to take on Costa Rica and Panama in World Cup qualifiers. Though England prevailed, 2-1, the biggest difference between the teams was their respective abilities to finish. The US did a good job of controlling the tempo of the game and maintained possession to a laudable degree, but tended to come up short (or wide, as the case may be) when putting a shot on goal. By comparison, England took almost half as many shots but converted twice, most notably on Kieran Richardson’s gorgeous free kick that bent over the wall of US defenders and dropped in right under the crossbar.

According to the most recent FIFA rankings, England fields the sixth best team in the world, and the US has the 10th best. At stake is whether that gap between the two puts the US at the top of the second tier of national teams or at the bottom of the first. After Saturday’s match, the jury is still out. But a few individual performances warrant focus, and could provide insight into the US side’s chances in World Cup 2006. Here are some of the more important lessons we learned about our players.

Landon Donovan is the Chris Webber of US soccer. You just never know what you’re going to get with this guy. His struggles in the German Bundesliga are well documented — if you don’t know, the short version is that he’s twice retreated to the shallows of Major League Soccer after aborted efforts in the tougher European league — but on any given day, he has the ability to be the best player on the field. So why isn’t he when it matters most?

Donovan is a force to be reckoned with in MLS (big deal, right?), but more and more, his coming-out party at World Cup 2002 seems like the anomaly. On the biggest stages, under the brightest lights, Donovan seems to wilt. His shaky performance against Mexico on Easter Sunday, coupled with his missed shots against England, lead one to wonder how he’ll perform on soccer’s biggest stage next year. This we know for sure: he’s good for at least one goal over the next two qualifiers against the relatively weak competition of Costa Rica and Panama.

Clint Dempsey is going to be a world soccer superstar. Sure, I’m a homer. And, sure, Dempsey’s astonishing performance for the Revolution this season has garnered him national attention, including a feature in Sports Illustrated. But with all the attention paid recently to Freddy Adu, the real savior of US soccer may have slipped in under the radar. Dempsey’s visible improvement just during the course of Saturday’s game was nothing short of revelatory. He seemed at first unprepared for the rigors of international play. England was clearly targeting him, hoping to exploit his inexperience, and it showed when the camera repeatedly cut to Dempsey picking himself up off the ground (as ESPN color man Marcelo Balboa said ad nauseam, "There’s no such thing anymore as a ‘friendly’!").

England’s physical style of play was just what Dempsey needed. The competition in MLS is hardly competitive for a player of his caliber, and the Clint Dempsey we saw in the second half was one of the five best players on the field. The proof came when he converted a gutsy header in a crowded box for the US’s lone goal. I expect Dempsey to make a big impact in World Cup 2006. The only drawback is that his days playing for Major League Soccer are surely numbered ("Mr. Dempsey, Malcom Glazer on line two ...").

Kasey Keller could push this team deeper into World Cup competition than it’s ever gone. I can’t believe I’m parroting a broadcast color commentator, but goalkeeper Kasey Keller gives the US a chance to win every game. Richardson’s free kick early in the game was literally unblockable, and Keller was hung out to dry when several England attackers blew past a dazed Eddie Pope for Richardson’s second goal of the day, but he turned in more than his share of brilliant saves. And if it could be reasonably said that the US, with its scoring chances, ought at least to have fought to a draw, then it could also be said that with a lesser keeper in goal, the US could have lost by three.

Can Keller match Brad Friedel’s heroic performance in World Cup 2002? The short answer is yes. Skill-wise, the two aren’t terribly far apart. And with the improved team the US will field next year, Keller likely will not be asked to do as much (Friedel, you will recall, blocked not one but two penalty kicks in the US’s draw against South Korea, and was instrumental in advancing the US to the quarterfinals).

Though fans on both sides bemoaned the lack of marquee English players like David Beckham and Michael Owen, it’s important to remember that the US lacked several of its stars as well. Missing Eddie Johnson up front hurt the US side greatly, as England’s defenders did an excellent job of keeping the ball away from Brian McBride — Josh Wolff, despite his chances, simply was not up to the task. And although the US midfielders played a solid game, DaMarcus Beasley would have been a step up from any of them.

The real story of this game was the US defense. Steve Cherundolo was awesome in the backfield, getting a foot on the ball nearly every time it crossed into US territory. Save for a few uncharacteristic lapses by Eddie Pope, we could be talking about an entirely different result today. In many ways, the US outplayed England, particularly in the second half. Time of possession favored the American side, and its aggression — especially after falling behind — demonstrated a killer instinct that the US national team has historically lacked. Then again, the team’s inability to convert more than once while taking 14 shots is cause for concern.

But that’s why England is among the world’s elite teams, and the US, so far, is merely very good. Stay tuned.

"Sporting Eye" runs Mondays and Fridays on BostonPhoenix.com. Mitch Krpata can be reached at mkrpata[a]phx.com