Just going to leave this piece of OCD research here. Note the length of time McLeod possessed the ball before the official called an indirect free kick and then after the call was made. Also note Hope Solo's time of possession in comparison to McLeod. The official obviously had had enough of McLeod's time wasting as she made the free kick call right as McLeod exceeded the six count. Push the limits of the law, eventually you get busted. Note: Times with (+) are minimum possession times. Cameras occasionally cut away from keeper making it difficult to determine the exact length of that particular possession. These times note only what was shown. Keeper possessions: (not counting time on ground or time unable to safely release ball) min keeper time in poss match time 4 mcleod 18 seconds 3:12-3:30 6 mcleod 16 seconds 5:42-5:58 17 solo 5 seconds 16:20-16:25 21 solo 9 seconds 20:28-20:37 27 solo 3 seconds 26:08-26:11 27 mcleod 16 seconds 26:44-27:00 29 solo 2+ seconds 28:59-29:01+ 39 mcleod 8+ seconds 38:42-38:50+ 40 solo 5+ seconds 39:50-39:55+ 41 mcleod 7 seconds 40:50-40:57 Half (mcleod warned about delaying kicks) 53 solo 7 seconds 52:09-52:16 57 (official signaling to mcleod to take free kick) 58 mcleod 17 seconds 57:48-58:05 59 mcleod 12 seconds 58:39-58:51 61 mcleod 16 seconds 60:14-60:30 69 mcleod 3+ seconds 68:02-68:05+ 77* mcleod 7+ seconds 76:40-76:47+ *(mcleod called for delay; ifk) 83 solo 6 seconds 82:41-82:47 86 mcleod 3 seconds 85:28-85:31 87 mcleod 5 seconds 86:57-87:02 95 solo 7+ seconds 94:58-95:05+ 100 mcleod 4+ seconds 99:39-99:43+ 105 mcleod 6 seconds 104:51-104:57 106 solo 7 seconds 105:06-105:13 108 mcleod 4 seconds 107:36-107:40 114 mcleod 10 seconds 113:02-113:12
There's not a lot of meat to address here, dude. The argument is "I want Pia to start ____ instead of ____ - or in this case, the even less logical - she's starting Morgan now, but she's an idiot for not starting her last year or even in 2008 (or even when she was in the womb and Pia wasn't the coach, idk, when does this kick in?). Therefore I'm glad we'll get a new coach soon. Cause 'I feel it.'" No one is threatening your right to post nonsense. But don't resent when you get called on it - it's pretty insipid stuff. If you want to get into a Pia identifying talent thing, how about converting O'Hara to outside back a la Brandi? That's looked pretty smart. If you were actually posting, "you know, I wish Pia had started Morgan sooner, but she's got the US playing great and in yet another world final, Morgan's been superb under her, and A-Rod is doing a lot of positive stuff coming off the bench" do you think you'd have gotten the same response. If you think Jill Ellis will be an improvement over Pia - well, you'll get your wish, along with the all of our opponents, who know darn well who's more dangerous (so you better enjoy the final, our next coach may not be capable of leading us back to this point). I'm sick of the level of criticism of Pia - it's WAY beyond what's warranted and frankly we'll miss her when she's gone. Anyone who understands sports ought to recognize when you've got someone who's really at the top of her game . . . and Pia is right now with this group. So do I trust her "feeling" over yours . . . well, yeah. And other than your free speech rights, how about addressing my argument that the nit-picking about Pia's selections (like any coach could avoid that) is really bizarre given her level of success. Or do we get some more "feelings?"
Just to be clear, are all of these punts or were some restarts (note the item bolded)? There's no six second rule on restarts.
Any one who doesn't agree with you are posting "blah blah", nonsense, and insipid stuff? Very mature response there. The idea of O'Hara to LB was forced down the throat of Pia by the people at USSF. Pia's idea of LB and RB replacement are putting old has been like Heather Mitts or clumsy, brutish CBs with no foot skills like LeBeilbet and Buehlers there. Nice straw man there, no one here wanted Jillian Ellis as the next USWNT coach. There are tens of coaches out there who are capable of bringing the USWNT to the next level after Pia. You don't want the USWNT program to get stale like the USMNT after 2 terms by Bruce Arena and Bob Bradley. Time for a new coach. Pia's no Guardiola, Wenger, or Ferguson. They all make mistakes and they all get criticised from time to time. Why is Pia immune to criticisms, especially when she makes glaring mistakes. Not all of us are mindless pompom wavers.
We have won the Olympics in 04 with out Pia. How is the level of criticism of pia beyond warranted? Is Pia really at the top of her game? This is something all managers are quesitoned about, Pep, Sir Alex, Phil Jackson, Doc River, Pat Riley, Wenger for team selections, style of play etc....Pia never transitioned the team to play a more possession oriented game vs the direct play were known for. That was the next evolution of the game, and she wanted to have us in front of that curve. Pia's stated that was her philosophy that was the goal, and we have players in the player pool and some that aren't in the pool that can play this style that aren't used. We've seen how much easier the game can be with this style vs the direct style. Sweden last year during the WWC(yes, they are rebuilding/fell off), France last year(I really hope Bini leaves cuz he forced a team to play direct vs a possesion game which is their strength and the results haven't been the best for them), Japan ( capable of breaking down any team and make that team nervous enough that it take the other team off their game plan). Canada (yesterday when they had the ball were more possesion oriented and was able to control the tempo of the match). juste Over the last 2 years we've seen that we struggle against that style. We've seen in the mens game and women game that playing a possesion style can completely disrupt any team that doesn't play that style. In the women game who really plays this style Japan, France. What has Pia added to the foundation of development of the team for the future to keep us ahead of the curve? That's a fair question.
All punts except for the bolded item. The bolded item about the warning was a free kick that McLeod was taking especially long for. Sorry for the confusion. The referee could be seen waving her on to continue play. Morgan was whistled for a foul at 56:00. McLeod can be seen standing over the ball at 56:18. The referee can be seen signaling for her to take the kick at 56:24. And McLeod finally takes the kick at 56:27. For the punts, only started timing once they were comfortably on their feet and weren't being "harassed" by a defender. Didn't include goal kicks and other free kick restarts. Nor did I track stalling while the opponents were lining up free kicks. There were quite a few examples of time wasting there also, but I didn't have the patience to track it all and wanted to specifically address the holding/punting situation as that was most likely to have led to the indirect free kick. I did track fouls though, and let's just say that Tancredi's performance was disgraceful. I'll probably post it on here soon.
Well . . . you just mentioned 4 national teams - two of which aren't really possession teams (Canada/Sweden), and left off Brazil, so I guess I'll add them for you. And the team that Pia coaches beat/finished ahead of all of these in EVERY major tournament with the exception of losing to Japan on PK's. The US DESTROYED France IN THIS TOURNAMENT, and beat all the other teams you mentioned. Wouldn't that be in Pia's corner, or does the US have to win 10-0? I mean, of course you can nit-pick selections. Some people like Sauerbrunn (sp?) more than Buehler, some people like blue not red, but it doesn't make Pia "horrible at identifying talent." But folks are on here are talking about Bini being a better coach or something, and my answer to that is #givemeabreak. We now return to your regular strawman arguments . . .
USA-Canada Fouls by my count: Canada fouls whistled: 17 (not including Filigno handball in 26th and Tancredi dissent in 79th) USA fouls whistled: 21 Canada fouls no called: 9 USA fouls no called: 7 Tancredi fouls whistled: 7 (min: 1, 24, 30, 35, 86, 105, 106) Tancredi fouls no called: 5 (8, 52*, 55^, 56, 63) Tancredi fouls whistled after yellow card: 3 *occurred in the 18 yard box ^stomp to carli lloyd's head Total fouls and no calls indicate the officials were fair. Total fouls called favored Canada and Canada benefitted from more no calls (and more egregious ones, in my opinion). The official could well have given the US a penalty kick on Tancredi's shove on Wambach in the 52nd minute - made worse by another defender jumping onto Wambach immediately following Tancredi's shove. Both sides escaped sure yellow cards throughout. Tancredi should definitely have been sent off by the time she got her yellow for dissent - it's a disgrace that she didn't get a single yellow due to contact. After reviewing the Rapinoe near handball, you can see that Rapinoe has her left arm tucked tightly against her left side, directly along her torso; she was not "making herself bigger," nor attempting to play the ball with her arm/hand. On the other side, Nault turned and extended her bent right arm during the indirect free kick, blocking the ball downward and away from goal. Fouls whistled by player: Tancredi: 7 (not counting yellow for dissent) Sinclair: 2 Filigno: 2 (not counting handball) Schmidt: 2 Metheson: 1 Sesselmann: 1 Wilkinson: 1 Scott: 1 (yellow) Morgan: 4 Lloyd: 3 Rampone: 1 O'Hara: 2 Wambach: 4 Rapinoe: 2 Cheney: 1 Beuhler: 1 Heath: 2 Sauerbrunn: 1
What stands out it tancredi's seven fouls and no Yellow for persistent infringement.That doesn't include the head stomp in the 75th minute. What does persistent infringement mean?
I don't think Brazil is a possession team. Sweden last year was a possession team now there a counter-attacking team. Canada isn't a possesion team. I pointed that out and I also pointed out when Canada was possesion the ball and building up play in midfeild they were controlling the game better than us. That doesn't answer the question is Pia at the top of her game? Pia statemented she wanted to install a possesion style of football with the team. This is something she hasn't done, there's other weaknesses on the team that haven't been addressed. Wouldn't fixing these problems and applying the possesion philosophy while getting the desired results be closer to being at the top of her game than what she currently is? That's not the subject of discussion here. NO way is Bini a better coach. If anything he's worst. France with the amount of talent they have, and the system/philosophy that they just had to slightly tweak from the last WWC. They should have won the Olympics with ease.
Possession in your own end doesn't mean squat either. Either does mindless tiki taka without purpose. Just how do you define it if not by the numbers? The key figure to my mind is possession in the attacking third. I don't see that anybody is doing any better than we are, even the Japanese or the French, or anybody else you care to name.
Possesion style of play doesn't mean playing in the ones' own 1/3. Man U, Real Madrid, AC Milan have higher percentage of the ball than their oppenents. Arsenal, Swan, Barca, Spurs, Bayern all play a possesin style of soccer. Keeping the ball, being able to play in tight spaces, connect passes in the midle 3rd and final 3rd, Penentration with their possesion, able to unlock defenses with penentration with their passes, being able to controll the tempo of the game faster slower etc....holding the ball in the middle or final 3rds, building up play and being able to rebuild play if x-option isn't there. It's the exact opposite of a direct style of play. I wasn't reffering to this tournament, the every day playing style of a team I was. Japan doesn't look great right now, they play a possesion style. It's not clicking.
This tournament is what every team has been building towards. I submit it is the only thing that counts. Possession means you can do it against the best, and if it takes opening the other team up with direct shots, then that is what you do. Then you get the ball back. But if you aren't doing around their box, it is useless. And if you expose yourself like France does, it proves dangerous.
[Emphasis added.] All credibility just went down the tube. Or, had you been drinking vin all night before you wrote that?
We don't know how others would do in his position. It's possible that he's doing better than anyone else could in his position.
Let's give Pia credit. She created a gritty team with a strong identity. But I don't think there's much of an excuse to not starting Sauerbrunn. Move Buehler out wide, keep LeP as a sub. But if Sauerbrunn had started in the middle against Japan, we would have won the WWC last year. The fact that the back line issues have persisted into this year is not a good thing.
How did all credibility go down the tube? You do understand the game correct? They had the easiest problems to fix, formation and some personal decisions. During the last WWC last out shoot everyone. We outshoot Japan in the final and still lost, with the number of chances we had we should have converted and won. That's the general on conscience that many of us Americans had. So why would it be far fetch for France to have an ease time to win the Olypmics, if they were able to out shoot their oppenents in the last world competition?
I think how you make selections determines what kind of game your team can play. So nit-pick selections are actually major decisions. Sauerbrunn (you got it right) has been outstanding every single time I've seen her play. She is also better at the possession style game that Pia has supposedly been aiming to transition towards.
Nobody wins a major international tournament with ease. As good a team as Spain is, they still had some bumps along the way to the Euro title.