I couldn't disagree more with this post, I guess people see what they want, the reason Brasil was limited to only a few clear goal scoring chances, was because of the "sophistication" of our defensive scheme. Brasil has flashier individual players but Abby is actually quite skillful and Rapinoe's cross at the end of the game was the most "skillful" soccer play of the night. Actually if you count clear goal scoring chances I think they were about equal or probably favored us. The US started the game great, passing the ball beautifully and really putting Brazil on it's heels, but after they scored and time passed on, they went into a shell to protect the lead. When they had to score again, even with just 10 women, they looked great again. ( actually better than when they had 11) Brasil USA 16(6) Shots (on Goal) 14(5) 19 Fouls 17 6 Corner Kicks 11 2 Offsides 4 49% Time of Possession 51% 4 Yellow Cards 4 0 Red Cards 1 4 Saves 3 So with one less person for almost half the game, they still out-possessed Brasil just on running hard like a pub team with no skill, with one less person? Wow that is a lot of running! Usually the team that has more of the possession is considered the more skillful side. We also had almost double the amount of corner kicks, which also shows how dominated the US was right? As far as the officiating it was laughably incompetent, but in the end I guess it added to the drama. ( best I can say about that!) If you don't think there was a lot of skill in that last magic run then we have a different definiton of skill. There are only 2 players on Brasil I would say are more skillful, but the rest are pretty even , and I would actually give the US girls the edge. They didn't play pretty all game, although they did when they went a woman down, but sometimes you have to gut out a win.
I've watched the Buehler-Marta replay once. It confirmed my initial impression. 1. I thought Buehler fouled by bending her run in an inside arc through Marta's center-of-mass, to disrupt Marta's run and force her wide. Combined with the shirt-grabbing, it just wasn't clean enough to escape notice. A defender does that only when she's beat and trying to recover. At game speed, and from the ref's angle and distance, it looked bad enough. 2. Marta did a Drunken Monkey two-footed leap entirely on her own. (Those of you who attend big martial arts meets may be enlightened about the Drunken Monkey style.) Neither of them clipped each other's ankles, nor swept each other's legs, on the way up. Marta perforce lands on top of Buehler's right shoulder, which rotates Marta to her back. There is no leg contact between them until Marta's landing. 3. Using Guinho's precious ESPN replay video, within the slo-mo segment from :09 to :12 (Foudy: "-- over the top of Buehler --"), by double-clicking the "play" button, I can squeeze in about 12 still-frames, from both running just above 6-top, up until they're both flat on the ground just inside the 6-top. I see no leg/foot contact between them before Marta's jump. My methodology was to account for all 4 of their feet and shins in each still-frame, and they're all planted on the ground or up in normal running positions. Marta jumps with both legs, and the impressive height she attains indicates she wasn't bumped or swept going into her jump, nor on her way up. The still-frame at the height of Marta's jump shows Buehler lunging her hips down and right foot up at the waist-high ball. Marta's butt is above Buehler's right shoulder, and she's extending her left foot down to the ball. Marta's right foot is visible, already ahead of her center-of-gravity in classic Drunken Monkey style -- hence she has no platform for landing, and cannot possibly land on her feet. (In my research alter ego, we would say: the projection of Marta's butt, through the parabolic trajectory of her jump arc, to the ground plane, lies outside the convex hull of her footprint, which is an unstable posture.) No foot contact. As I said, I thought Buehler's foul came way earlier anyways, from tacking across Marta's bow to collapse her spinnaker.
Oh good, then you, as a good cap'n, will know that a vessel clear astern must yield to a vessel clear ahead, especially when near the mark. It is settled, then. The good ship Marta must do two 360° turns before she can finish.
Opinions vary. Maybe you havent been watching us long enough to have seen us when we really were good. A far different team then we see today
Jeff Carlisle's primary job is NOT to be completely accurate in all of his reporting. His primary job is to sell magazines and make people want to watch the TV channel run by his employer. And for the past 235 years, we Americans have EATEN THIS STUFF UP! 1) The story of the Revolutionary War has been told and retold to us framed in the context of the vastly outclassed colonists overcoming the highly trained and skilled British Army. 2) The Movie "Rudy" (which I would have loved if it was about ANY OTHER SCHOOL but the pompous and holier-than-thou Notre Dame) is so popular because Americans eat up the story of the small, slow, weak kid refusing to give up against incredible odds. 3) Stallone has made millions off the Rocky franchise because, in each movie, he goes up against somebody more skilled than he is, and JUST WON'T stay down on the mat!!! Carlisle is as dumb as a fox when he gives his version of the game, and his take on our chances against France. It actually will increase viewership and intrigue the average man-on-the-street for at least the rest of the week.
Its Cannons. It is his job to point out how deficient anything in a US jersey is compared to the rest of the world. Be happy Bob Bradley isn't the womens coach.
The Salt Lake Tribune did it right. Full width photo from behind the net of Abby's header with superimposed in white caption: USA Stuns Brazil and the masthead of the newspaper superimposed in white at the bottom of the picture. No mention of Jeter on the front page. To see it, go to http://www.sltrib.com/ and scroll down to EEdition where there is a thumbnail, click on the download a PDF to get a PDF of the front page. They do love their soccer in Utah. Lots of papers around the country had at least a photo and story on their front pages. To see nearly every front page in the country, go to the Newseum site: http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/default.asp
I disagree with you here. I think the women's game has evolved over the past decade or so and that's why you think we don't look as good. Back in 99 when the US won it last there wasn't nearly as many true contenders for the cup as there is now. I mean who would have thought that the final four would be the US, Sweden, France, and Japan. US & Sweden isn't a far cry but seriously BEFORE this WC started would you have picked this final four? Would you have said to me that Germany and Brazil wouldn't be in the semis? Probably not. Why? Because there is so much more parity in the game now! Seriously if you traveled in time and plopped and plopped the 99 team into this tournament right now I think they would struggle as well. Now am I saying that we are the absolute best team tactically and play perfect soccer all the time? No we aren't. But soccer is a crazy game where sometimes the dominating team loses and sometimes you score a goal in stoppage time when down a player. As far as yesterday's game and Brazil being better than the US I completely disagree. Tactically the Brazilians were horrible yesterday. Yes they have some phenomenal individual players and they show spurts of greatness but they can't string it together for 90 minutes. I mean Brazil didn't even show up to play until about 20 minutes into the game and then they failed to control the game when ahead a player. Instead when down a player the US dominated the flow of play and really made Brazil chase. The US outplayed them. They also outsmarted them, out finessed them, and overall showed that they are a higher class of players than Brazil.
uswnt front page full center on miami herald today http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=FL_MH&ref_pge=lst
The Washington Post has a photo of the goal celebration (with Wambach and Rapinoe) on the front page, then a huge version of the AP photo of the goal being scored taking up about half of the front of the sports page, then on the inside another half-page photo of Ali Krieger's shot going in. Of course, Krieger's a local girl, so she gets bigger play than she would other places.
Oh, they probably win. They'll probably be standing there with the trophy while American soccer fans complain about the alleged lack of skill and saying they were outplayed in the final. Pretty much like every other time.
Glad to see coverage of the victory on so many outlets. Here is the sports section of the LA times http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0711-jones-soccer-20110711,0,3531921.column my personal favorite:
I am very proud of the team for the win yesterday and hope that we can make it to the final game and of course win the tournament. I do agree with those who feel that the current edition of the US team does somewhat pale in comparison to the late 90's teams. I was lucky enough to attend the US/China Olympic game in 1996 and have followed the team for many years, though not as closely in recent years. What is disappointing to me is that there are way too many fundamental errors in terms of poor distribution (especially from the back) and failure to execute basic passing consistently. What has happened to US player development recently? The lack of pace on the back line is really concerning and cost us badly in the Sweden match. And of course we do not have a Michelle Akers in midfield anymore so maybe that standard is just unattainable. But the grit and determination of the team as shown yesterday may just win out and I hope that this is the case. Post WC, it will be interesting to see what happens with the coaching and player development over the next few years.
does anyone know of somewhere to watch the game again online other than espn3 ? I've been trawling the web with no luck so far.
Rampinoe's cross was sublime (though I should point out that even '70's era English second-division sides could be counted on to whip in at least one good cross a game). Bigger picture, not much of what you said contradicts what I said. The Americans clearly had better stamina and drive, so they outran and outpossessed the Brazillians late in the game even while down a player, but if you think the USWNT played with more (offensive) sophistication than a lower-level Enlish team of the '70's when they had all 11 players, then all I can say is that you need to watch more soccer. Finally, as for skills, I'm afraid you have blinders on. Most of the Brazilian players (not just 2) could dribble around their American counterparts. The reverse is not true.
On another note, Ian Darke "Oh can you believe it" call for US Soccer goals (same for Donovan last year) does not get old.
She put in a second one that was knocked off the cross bar earlier in the match. I guess '70's second division soccer can go further in the WC than the current England squad. Sorry, but as a defender if I am 3 ft in front of a player not going forward and they want to start doing heal drag backs and showing me what they can do with the ball, let them have at it. They are going nowhere.
The same person who posted that great Youtube video last year of fan reactions following Donovan's goal is planning to do the same today with a plan of releasing it this afternoon. If you start playing his video of last year at http://www.youtube.com/user/robbydkitchel#p/a/f/0/jbn3rOPmR9w, there's a note at the top that says, so keep an eye out for that, as well.