Don't know if it will be different this time since the women and men now wear the same jersey, but the men wore the same jersey for 2010 and 2011.
I honestly hope it will be different from the men or the current new jersey because it looks nothing like a jersey, more towards a casual wear pol0-t outfit.
It won't be different for the men unless US Soccer reverses its recent position of having the men and women wear the same jersey (which just started in 2012). If sales are poor, I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with a new jersey for next year. But it does seem like people are still buying the new ones, so I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't. (BTW, the jersey WPS_Movement posted is Mexico's men's and women's home jersey for 2014-15)
Loving the new US Training gear/apparel, the shorts looks good too, but sadly, it wont be released to the public as usual or that we have to wait for it to be out on ussoccerstore.com
We're getting closer to being one year away. For the biggest Women's tournament in the history of the world. But no one thought this day would get here just a few short decades ago.
Quietly, Australia is building a monster for this upcoming WWC. They're already my insane dark-horse pick to win the tournament. If things fall in to place for them, they will at least get to the Semifinal. But they may need to pull a monster upset in the Quarterfinal. At the 2011 WWC, when Japan beat Germany it was considered an epic upset in the Quarterfinal. If that happens again in 2015, it will be Australia doing the honors. Maybe they knock out France? Brazil? Maybe I just jinxed the USWNT in the Quarterfinal round, lol. Don't ever count out the Matildas.
Attendance for the friendly between US and Canada in Winnipeg, which was at one of the sites to be used for the WWC, was over 28,000. I hope that's foreshadowing some strong attendance numbers next year during the Cup.
I understand what you meant, but, apart from the figure of speech, is there actually a function to bookmark a particular post, on this forum?
The host cities of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Ottawa, Moncton, Edmonton... all are nearby at least one other and generally numerous sizable geographic areas in an easily commutable distance. The interesting thing about Winnipeg, a city of 600k who drummed up almost 30k, is that it is smack dab in the middle of nowhere. Moncton is the other unusual host city, for them it is population: 5.1M Toronto (U20) 3.4M Montreal 2.1M Vancouver 1.0M Edmonton 1.0M Ottawa 0.6M Winnipeg 0.1M Moncton
Sure. You have to find the unique post identifier, which you can find by either clicking the little up arrow next to the identity of the person you are quoting, or by clicking on the actual post number. Both take you directly to the post as a unique URL. For instance, for your question: looks like this ( minus the space before the word "quote") in the edit window. [ quote="blissett, post: 30108502, member: 193219"] When you click on the up arrow it takes you to this URL. https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/2015-world-cup.1884208/page-8#post-30108502 That's what you bookmark Alternately, your question was post #189. Clicking on the number ( next to Quote and Rep in the lower right of the post) also directs to the URL If you click on this post number (191) a pop-up window like this should come up.
Thank you very much for the extensive explanation. I had always wondered about the little arrow (I should have done the simplest thing and click it! ).
Read a post on Equalizer earlier today on field turf with this gem: "[Canada] will enter 2015 with this black cloud [fieldturf] hanging over the tournament. How much it actually factors into the overall equation of the tournament won’t be known until next summer." The Men's U20 was hosted in Canada in 2007. I watched some great games and players. Brazil/USA, Argentina/Mexico... Dos Santos, Aguero, Jo and Pato, Bradley and Altidore. All playing on turf. No issues, no problems, hardly any mention whatsoever. Thomas Rongen actually called it a plus for Americans because of their familiarity on it compared to the rest of the world. There sun was shining and there wasn't a a single cloud in the sky.
Not to mention that the majority of NWSL matches will be played on Turf, putting the USA and Canada at a huge advantage compared to the backwards Europeans and South Americans, who apparently can't afford the stuff for their leagues. The u20 WWC should be a good dry run.
Studies have shown the game does indeed change on an artificial turf surface. It's fact. Whether these changes are that detrimental as people make it out to be is, however, debatable. But the reason people complain is completely unrelated to anything to do with actually playing on it... it's to do with the inequality seen in that the Men's world cup would never be hosted exclusively on artificial turf (at the present time), yet it's acceptable for the women to do so. If Russia were to announce that its WC stadia were to all get artificial turf installed for the 2018 World Cup, what do you expect would happen?
Definitely, the game changes hugely on turf... and in the desert at 40C The economics of the WWC are a small fraction different than the WC. You can get a masters in that with one simple click: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_Women's_World_Cup#Host_selection Canada announced turf was part of their bid before the "vote". U20 men in Canada 2007. Sergio Aguero scored in the final. Similar attendance and economics to the women's tournament. If you're going to use the gender equality argument, this is the comparable tournament. Aguero scored on fieldturf.
How does what Sergio Aguero did have anything to do with this conversation? As I said, the problem is not about how the game is played but the gender inequality. And sure the MWC generates more money than the WWC. But this isn't about that either (it's not like FIFA can't afford to lay down temporary grass pitches for each one of the stadiums or something). It's about gender inequality. You can't compare the premier women's soccer competition to a men's youth competition. If FIFA treats the women's game as 2nd class, then the world will continue to view it as 2nd class. The only way to change the mindset is to treat it exactly as they do the men's game.
Ask 1000 soccer fans around the world if they know who Aguero is, then ask them if they know who Abby Wambach is. That's the way the rest of the world does. You could use that argument in a thousand ways. In many cases, one of which is hosting the World Cup, unfortunately that's economically not reasonable. Read again the bid process. Where are all the people supporting this? The women's game continues to grow. But comparisons and demands to make it on par with the men's World Cup, in the year 2015, are comparing apples and oranges. The U20 is the comparable tournament, and it was played on turf.
All that does is prove gender inequality. Which is my point. Yes, because gender inequality exists, which is my point. They aren't, because gender inequality exists... Which is my point. Yes, due to the advent of competitions like the WWC which have shown women on an equal footing. Yes I agree, it is comparing apples and oranges. Because the MWC has the advantage of male dominance whereas the WWC has a disadvantage due to male dominance. It's only comparable given gender inequality. Which is my point.
Gender inequality exists. I absolutely agree, but from statements I hear coming out of Sepp Blatter's mouth, I really don't think FIFA cares about gender inequality or doing anything about it.