Sore perdedores

It has gotten to the point - certainly on US soil, but let's not forget the round of 16 in 2002, either - where it's not a US-Mexico soccer game unless it ends with the US winning and Mexico playing the part of the whiny, sore losers. This came to a particular head under Ricardo La Volpe, who derided the US in 2005 as having played like various female members of his family - this after a game in which the US won 2-0 and clinched a spot in Germany. The Americans took a beating after their "early" exit in '06 - partly deserved, partly gleeful kick-'em-when-they're-down mentality on the part of the foreign press and fans. But while the US were wholly outclassed by the Czech Republic, they were the only team in the tournament not to lose to Italy despite two red cards, at least one of which was pretty questionable (and if not for Brian McBride being in the wrong place at the wrong time, things might have been different), and at least part of the problem with the Ghana game was that the team already had one foot on the plane (which is certainly their own problem, but understandable in its way given how draining the Italy game must have been). None of this should really have changed the fact that the US has become, at worst, a top two team in CONCACAF; excepting the usually competitive Costa Rica and an occasional streaky outlier, the US/Mexico pairing is turning into CONCACAF's Old Firm, and with all the attendant venom.

This time it was another 2-0 win for the US and another series of complaints from Mexico about the US's tactics - never mind how well those tactics may have worked. Mexico dominated possession but couldn't put the ball in the net; the US scored twice with the relatively few chances they carved out. Arrogant soccer teams that fail to finish while dominating possession rarely place blame on themselves or give credit to the opposing defense; they usually suggest that the other team was "lucky" to win. And guess what?

"The result was unjust." The words of coach Hugo Sanchez. "This is a unique game in that you can deserve to win and still lose. We deserved to win and they did not."

So, Hugo, can you explain why you deserved to win? Was it your shots that did not go in or were saved? Your attacks that were snuffed out by the aggressive US defense? The two goals you couldn't keep out of your net? Surely you don't think Mexico should have won solely because they held the ball more.

The US's style involves counterattacking and defense. Is it something that bothers me a bit? Yes, because it gets exposed by some teams (the Czechs, for example) and makes it hard to come back from a deficit. But for some reason the Mexicans seem to feel that this style of play is dishonorable. Never mind that it's a style that has kept Mexico from scoring on US soil since 2000. Never mind that Mexico has seen this style over and over again in that time and yet has never managed to find a way to beat it outside of the huge home field advantage of Azteca. Even with a largely pro-Mexican crowd on hand in Glendale, Mexico couldn't find a way to win.

If Mexico is such a better team than the US - as the Mexican team and most or all of their increasingly obnoxious fans seem to believe - don't you think they could have won one game in the US since 2000? One out of eight? Instead, it's 7-0-1 to the US, and the losing streak appears to bother Mexico so much that they stomped off the field without shaking hands or exchanging jerseys after this game, like little, petulant children.

That's what this team is. A group of spoiled brats who can't believe they can't beat a team they consider inferior. Maybe it's time for Mexico to think about the new order of CONCACAF and realize they can't just coast on their superior talent pool anymore. If they want to be top of the heap, they're going to have to work a lot harder. But in the meantime, maybe they should close their mouths for a minute and check the scoreboard.

USA 2, Mexico 0. Again.