Hope or Pyrite?

Clearly AC Milan couldn't hack it in MLS ;-).

So, I guess the first question to ask is: was it worth losing Barklage (a squad role-player), probably for the season, in order to get our strikers some confidence by having them score against some two-bit Italian hacks? (Cranking the tills and filling the coffers probably didn't hurt either.)

And the second question?

Is it a coincidence that the Morsink + Castillo team (and some might uncharitably add Perkins to that mix) shipped the goals? True, true, they were playing a man down for half of a half, but they were also feeble in attack and starting to concede big chances before Barklage was carried off. Just sayin'.

Wonder what the chances of the first-half team starting against Chivas this weekend are.

Oh wait. I do have one last question. I'll be eager to see whose decision it was not to allow United to bring on a subbed-off player after Barklage went down. Onalfo clearly wanted to make the move but was denied. Was it the organizers? If so...it's a freakin' friendly, fer crapssakes! Or was it Milan? Wouldn't say I'd be shocked to hear it was the later.

Again, just sayin'.


  1. You could hear Onalfo arguing and cussing out the 4th official trying to make the re-entry substitution. During his rant he stated several times that the Milan coach said it was ok and that he didn't care if a player was re-entered. It was the 4th officials decision, or at least the officiateing crew, to not allow it, saying that rules are rules. My real question is why didn't they sub on Adam Cristman? He was listed as on the bench on both the DCU Twitter feed AND the WaPo Soccer Insider blog. If thats the case, why not bring him on? I know there wouldn't have been a position for him but at the very least he could have hustled around midfield breaking up plays and looking to spring a counter. Or they could have dropped Jaime or Castillo into the middle. Anything is better than the 10 men option.

  2. They couldn't bring on Cristman for the same reason they couldn't bring back Najar - they had used all six subs -- and the ref did seem to be the key naysayer.

    What I took away from the first half lineup is that Pontius gave us a pulse on the left side which is a nice change from Christian "he's gonna get better" Castillo. I wouldn't mind seeing Pontius and Najar on the wings, Santino in the witdrawn forward role and Allsopp or Cristman starting up top. Still not so sure about Emilio despite the goal.

  3. Actually, Quaranta was most effective on the wing, Pontius up front, but let that pass. The most consistent way for Pontius to score is for Quaranta to deliver a pinpoint pass. Does it happen every time? No. But it does happen often enough for Onalfo to make it permanent.

    I raised an eyebrow when I saw Khumalo and Barklage getting up, wondering if we had anyone available if someone got injured in the 30 or so minutes left in the game. Thought it would be Moreno, but Barklage ended up injured.

    And I actually think Castillo played with more vigor last night, and went 50-50 on the third goal with his pressure. Why? because he only plays hard in games when the opponent seems worthy. Selfish, extremely selfish.

  4. Anonymous-
    I don't know what you are referring to, but DC had used 10 subs, not 6, when Barklage was injured. The friendly had an unlimited substitutions rule, I can understand the no re-entry rule. DC dressed 22 players and made 10 subs. The man left out was Cristman, who is healthy as far as we know because he was listed as on the bench by DCU and SI. So why wasn't he brought on? And if it's because he wasn't on the unlimited gameday roster, then the questions changes to why not? Disciplinary actons? There has to be a story there...

  5. You know when Milan scored their first goal the first thing out of my mouth was "Morsink" spoken ala the way Seinfield would say "Newman".

  6. Josh,

    My bad. The announcers said the refs were following standard international friendly rules. I took that to mean six subs.