Something I failed to bring up when I posted that Clint Dempsey will miss Saturday's US qualifier against Honduras due to a shoulder injury is the question of it's affect on both the team and the player. I'm not original in the idea, though I should have mentioned it when it occurred to me, as Steve Davis has beaten me to the punch.
Original or not, it's a question worth asking. Dempsey hasn't exactly burned it up for the Nats the last few times out, and while he may still be an automatic starter for the foreseeable future, there might be something to having him watching someone play his position. Sure, it's for injury and not because Bradley is sitting him down, but anything to light a fire under the guy, right?
There's no question of Dempsey's quality, and I'm still in the camp that says he can be and is the best American player when he wants to be; but Deuce is clearly guilty of taking some time off during games, and disappears for long stretches. When he does attempt to make things happen, he often does too much, leading to bad turnovers and ruined momentum. I realize that I've put Dempsey in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation (just a little), but there is a happy medium that Clint finds more easily while wearing a Fulham than he does when wearing a USA one.
Because of that talent, and because the manager of the US National Team is not in any position to be choosy, Dempsey continues to start without any real sense that his position is under any threat. There aren't many players who can handle that situation without some kind of let up in their play; it's human nature to get complacent when pressure is non-existent. At Fulham, especially as he was forced to re-earn his place in the team after the arrival of Roy Hodgson, Dempsey is constantly playing for his job. With the Americans, that's not the case, and whether Clint is conscious of the problem or not is irrelevant as long as his performances continue to smack of periodic disinterest interspersed with moments of "I'm the best player on the field and I'm going to prove it."
Up to this point, Bob Bradley hasn't had the luxury of sitting Dempsey down. World Cup qualifying, especially with the Americans' inability to win on the road in Central America, is a tense affair fraught with little margin for error and even less opportunity to experiment. Without a proven player to plug into Dempsey's spot, Bradley has done what most managers would; play the best you have, regardless of consistency, and hope that the quality comes through more often than not.
As nice of an idea as it is, I'm skeptical of the affect Dempsey's inability to play will have on him. He's not being benched in favor of someone else, so the impetus to get back in the lineup and prove he should be there won't necessarily be there.. If it was to happen, it would take a masterful performance by his replacement (who I am guessing will be Stuart Holden); in that case, Dempsey may have just a tiny pang of fear that his spot could be lost, at least for the time being while Bradley goes with the "hot hand".
Pity then, that there are only two meaningful games left in 2009 for the US; by the time 2010 rolls around, and the preparations (fingers crossed) for South Africa are in full swing, Clint Dempsey might just step back into this usual spot on the right side of the American midfield, without having really taken anything out of his brief time on the bench.
The question is asked, and I've spent entirely too much time attempting to psycho-analyze Clint Dempsey. Besides, we won't know the answer until at least October 14th, Dempsey's next opportunity to play.
Thoughts? Will Dempsey get anything out of sitting this weekend?
