I was at the game right behind the U.S. bench, and you are right. The crowd did suck. There were a few people sitting around me who knew what was going on and the team in general, but it seemed that it was mostly moms and dads just tagging along with their little girls. In fact after hearing me yell and try to encourage the players (I felt like I was the only one being loud) several people turned to me and were asking questions like who is number such and such. One even asked me who was the girl with "Welch" on the back of her jersey. Welch warmed up but never got into the game.
I believe the operative phrase is "when used correctly." A corner kick will score a goal when kicked correctly. A header in the goal box will score a goal when headed correctly. A slide tackle will take the ball away from the opponent when done correctly. A GK will block a penalty kick is she guesses correctly. John Kerry will win the Presidency if the voters vote correctly. You will win the lottery if you pick the numbers correctly. Smarty Jones will win the Triple Crown if he runs the Belmont Stakes correctly. William Hung would have been the American Idol if the judges voted correctly. Basically if something is done correctly then the hoped for result will be more likely to happen than if that thing is done wrong. You will be able to see this if I post this correctly.
Does anyone have a compelling reason why Parlow has not yet lost her roster spot? There's been so much debate over whether or not MacMillan deserves to be in Athens, but if the question is What Have You Done For Me Lately (or ever, for that matter), shouldn't Parlow be the one who gets the boot? Mac plays with more heart than almost any of the other forwards in the US pool, and while heart isn't enough to secure a roster spot, I haven't heard a valid argument as to why Parlow's skill's are superior to Mac's. I've always thought a great front line to try in the 4-3-3 would be Hamm, Wambach and MacMillan.
CP is on the roster because she....just is. She'll never be left off a major tourney roster. I donno why, thats just how it is. She does have great dribbling skill and finishing ability, but she is slow and lazy (usually). That's why she doesn't start anymore and I wouldn't be surprised if she has a role similar to the 2000 Olympics. Where she came off the bench with 10-20 minutes left in the game. If someone would just tell her "Cindy, play all out for 50 minutes--then you can have a sub" she could be really effective, like the Germany game in the WWC. But when she starts, she always seems to be saving her energy for playing a full 90, which she never does anyway. CP can also play the right mid position, where we are a bit thin. So since she is "versitile", Ape's key word, she'll be on the roster no question.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think the reason it would seem that C.P. is beating Mac out for a spot on the roster right now is that while C.P. may be slow and certainly not a forward. her foot skills are superior to mac's. Mac also has a tendency to telegraph her runs playing out of the right flank Mid. position. making her easier to defend. and I think C.P.'s passing is a notch above. if C.P. is played correctly (out of the right flank Mid.) i think she is an assett. C.P. also has height and so can go into the box on set peices adding to our height advantage. She supposedly has a 27 inch verticle and that is a big reason why she can often out jump defenders to the ball. All in all I think atleast at the moment she is showing a little more then Mac is. That said one could argue that mac has not really had much of an oppertunity to show herself well either. and when she got her 20 min. I think she was out there with players she does not neccessarily work with very well. perhaps more would have been seen from mac if she had been out there with Mia. But; she had 20 min. and left the field with not much to show for it. C.P got a goal. C.P. is a cherry picker extrordinare....she knows how to create space for herself in the box. and cherry pickers have their place.
Parlow is a real deal in a real competition. She scored during '99 WC and so was the last WC against Sweden, she looks slow at times but thats because she is tall, no tall player run fast like Hamm.
There is exactly the problem. you nailed it. "when used correctly" unfourtunatly it hasn't happened. Be it April's fault or the player.
I think Parlow looks slow not because she is tall, but because...she is slow. Let's also not forget how on fire Mac was prior to her injury (2002 Chevy player of the year), even becoming a sometime starter on the USWNT that year. True, she probably had not rehabbed enough to make a real contribution to the 2003 WWC team, but in the time she's been healthy I don't feel like she gotten enough playing time where people can begin with the "she's lost a step" speculation. As far as versatility goes, Mac did play in the midfield several times under DiCicco. I can't imagine that Parlow would be anymore effective in the MF than she is at forward. Other young forwards like Tarpley and O'Reilly look promising, but they're not very game-tested...and I think leaving a healthy Mac off the Olympic roster to bring one of them instead would be a huge mistake.
ACL injuries are one of the most damaging to a player and their confidence. Even if they are "fully recovered", they'll probably never have the explosive speed they once did. What's unfortunate with Mac is that she was at the top of her career when the injury occured. She led the US in scoring for a while and was pretty much a full time starter. Remember her 9 goals was it at the Algarve Cup a few years back?! She was on a hot streak for sure. Now, they say she is full recovered, but she doesn't look as comfortable out there as she once did. In the Japan game, to her credit, she didn't have very much support up there. Hopefully she'll rebound from an off game, and come on strong, because like Hokies said, she is a huge asset when playing well. But with all the new talent at forward, her days on the national team may be numbered.
Parlow's forehead is hot during the tournament but warm during friendly, but her long legs always look beautiful everytime.
CP got a goal? If you are talking about the Japan friendly, Abby got the lone US goal in the 1-1 tie. Regarding position, I think Parlow is best at forward; "cherry picker extrodinare" as you say. I think Mac could do well (as she has in the past) as a mid; left or right, or even central--the "playmaker". Her passing is good, accurate most of the time. At least that's my impression.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry i did not clearify my position very well. when I was talking about C.P. scoring I meant in the run of friendlies to this point. Do not know why you would think C.P. is best out of the forward position. Watch the Japan tape again. watch what happened to C.P. when she got the ball in our attacking third. The Japanese overtook her and smothered not only any shot she may have had but also cut her off from any potential pass to another forward. She is a cherry picker. excellent for set peices in the box, but; that cherry picking is not going to do any good in the run of play. As for mac out of the Attacking mid position as possible playmaker. it is not a role she has played in and she has no experience from it. Nothing she has done would indicate to me that she should be tried at that position. Right flank mid. fine. she has experience there. as a forward?..ok. But in my opinion at this time, I think C.P. out of the right flank just makes good sense. I am affraid that (whether fair or not) mac did not do anything on the field against Japan to solidify a spot for herself. She did a whole bunch of running but there was rarely anything on the end of it in the way of oppertunities for her self or others. If she gets another outing in the next three friendlies. i hope it is with players she can work with. Players who know how to find her. but; frankly it is not looking very good for her at this point. And I would be willing to bet that the players we see in the next friendly will more then likely be our Olympic squad. with maybe the exception of one or two players.
Re: nats 4-3-3- formation I guess this is a bit of a dead horse, but i keep trying to figure out the theory or logic behind the us' 4-3-3- formation against Japan, especially with the personnel we played. Could somebody please explain this to me? Some of the things that I don't understand are the following: 1) if the other team is playing a 4-4-2 and we are playing a 4-3-3, that looks like we are playing 6 v. 8 in the attacking two-thirds. so where's the advantage? even if we bring a flanker up, that's still at best 7 v. 8, but since we would probably drop a mid back, it returns to 6 v. 8. 2) it seems to put the burden of playmaking on Boxx or whoever is playing center (defensive) mid. that doesn't make much sense to me, especially with Mia and Tarp as potential playmakers. the net here would seem to be that nothing can develop up the middle with the personnel we were using. 3) the only way i can see the offense developing is with long balls over the top or advances by the flankers. the first didn't seem to work against Japan and the second both pulled our forwards over to the sideline to try to help advance the ball and, thus, out of position as a target and made whoever had the ball vulnerable to double and triple teaming. So, what was the formation supposed to do? What were the plays that they hoped to open up? will someone please explain all this to me? thanks!
enough about Parlow, at least she has good positioning and header, let's get back to Mitts bashing.......
Re: nats 4-3-3- formation -------------------------------------------------------------------------- jbs01: Every team has it's strengths and weaknesses. it is the coach who decides how best to emphesis those strengths and minimize those weaknesses as much as possible. The unfortunate truth of the matter is we have a coach who does not seem to understand this teams strengths and weaknesses, and constantly tries to do things with this team that emphesis those weaknesses and does not allow it to realize it's full potential other then through a fluke. The 4-3-3 is supposed to be a high preasure offense. but in order for it to work there are key eliments that must be available personel wise. first you must have a strong holding mid-fielder, secondly you must have speed out of the mid-field. In the 4-3-3 all of the preasure and much of the burden falls on the mid-feild. they must get up on the attack, and they must be able to recover on the counter. This is why we fail in this formation. We do not have a strong holding middie. And we lack speed. So what inevitably happens is our Mid-field gets stuck chasing all game long. they are not in a position to aid the offense and a huge gap begins to develope between the mid-field and the forward positions. this forces our forwards to have to back track into the midfield to assist defensively and to try to get the ball and move it forward. Once this breakdown occures we can no longer hold our shape and this high preasure offense falls victim to it's own inadiquicies. Another eliment that is esential for this formation to be successful is that you must have good flank runs by your flank defenders. they must occure frequently as they are appart of the attack. if they do not get up on the attack then this formation fails. But; it is very hard for the attacking backs to do their job when they are constantly on their heels and trying to defend. Thus you end up with the Norway longball. used as a tool the longball is fine, But when it becomes your staple in the attack it makes that attack predictible. this is why norway has kind of fallen off over the past 3 years. Teams are smarter and more sophisticated and they know how to defend against it. We descovered that if we played our back line a little bit deeper with a keeper who knew when to come out, it left no room for the ball to drop behind us. anyway, back to the 4-3-3. Try to imagine this formation like the sliding knobs on your stereos equalizer. the flank defenders are constantly slideing up and back as play dictates, while the mid-feild is supposed to maintain their shape and kind of come in as support once the flank defender slides past the midfield. basically you are talking an offensive surge. This is supposed to help this team utilize the width of the field. If we play this formation against another team also playing the 4-3-3 then perhaps we can hold our own in the mid. but; when the mid is overloaded with the opposition. IE they are playing the 4-4-2 or the 4-5-1 this formation will desintigrate and be completely inaffective for the very simple reason that we are outmaned. and We simply do not have the speed at mid to make this formation work. This teams strength has always been it's defense, chemistry, and ball control. Our offensive oppertunities arise from the fact that we have always defended from our back line all the way up through our forward positions. we play high preasure D. no matter where that ball is, we are on it. But in this formation we are forced into a role reversal. And we spend most of our time just trying to get ahold of the ball. the best formation for this team at present is the 4-4-2 in the diamond. it gives us the speed we need at mid, and this team is comfortable with it and knows how to play it well. there is attacking support and presence and nothing lost defensively. But; april seems compelled to keep banging her head against the same brick wall with the same results time after time. Failure.
Perhaps she is doing that to try and strengthen the weaknesses or to evaluate the extent of the weaknesses with certain combonations of players. Are you saying that anytime the team reaches it's full potential it is only through a fluke? Or are you saying that the team's perceived full potential is actually at a lower level than most people think it is? In the 4-3-3 would there be a holding mid? I would think we would have a center mid and two flank mids. Why do you say that Shannon Boxx is not a strong player? She was picked as the Player of the Game a couple of games ago. If you do not consider Boxx a strong player and she is one of our best players, then perhaps it is a lack of talent and not poor coaching that dooms the WNT to failure. Didn't the US play 4-3-3 when Tony was coaching? I'm pretty sure they played a 4-3-3 when they won the world cup. So is it a bad formation or just lack of talent? Once the Forwards drop back to help in the 4-3-3, doesn't the formation become a de facto 4-4-2 or 4-5-1? In soccer how important is the starting formation? Once the game starts don't the dynamics of the game take over? Players are going to adjust to what is needed at the moment and shift back to their position when they can. Doesn't this quote contridict what you are saying in the previous quote about the Forwards having to backtrack to assist defensively? If we "defended from our back line all the way up through our forward positions" then Forwards having to back track to mid field to assist defensively would seem to be part of the plan. How does the formation increase the team speed? I thought the team had a pretty good record this year - how many games have they lost? How far did the team fall in the latest FIFA rankings? Sounds like a plan.
So April should get none of the credit when the team wins and all of the (dis)credit when the team loses. Since the NT has a 12-1-2 record this year, using your logic the players get a lot of credit this year and April gets very little (dis)credit. According to your logic April must be doing a good job. Don't you think it is a good thing that the team is learning to overcome obstacles? They learn to adapt to situations. The team motto should be "We shall overcome." Or are you saying the team is too old and set in their ways that they don't want obstacles/new situations thrown at them. Sort of an "You can't teach an old dog new tricks" situation. I believe you are incorrect concerning the formation used under Tony. I'm not sure why having big Forwards vice small, quick Forwards would not favor the 4-3-3. I thought the problems you said we had were in the midfield? So the increase in team speed is moving Mia to a different position? The logic escapes me. The overall team speed has not changed it just increased at one position but decreased at another position. See first comment above about April getting the blame but not the credit. When players choke in big games they need to look in the mirror to see who is to blame. The coach is not on the field playing. Doesn't Mia have the reputation of choking in big games - and that is with several different coaches.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arcangel I am not playing your game. i have made my comments. I see no reason to repeat my remarks over and over again. You disagree fine. As for your comments regarding Hamm.................................. I do not beleive Hamm choked in the 2000 Olympic final. She assisted on both goals. i do not feel she choked in the 99 WWC final, she was double and sometimes tripple teamed. i don't recall Millie scoreing in the 99 final. if Hamm choked then so did Millie and every other player on the pitch that day for the Red white and Blue, and apparently so did the Chinese team who also failed to put one in the back of the net. it was a defensive game. both team defenses put their stamp on that match from the onset. Hamm made her PK. if she were going to choke under preasure that would have been the time for it to occure. As for the WWC 2003. i do not feel she choked there either. i just think she was restricted for 2 years and played off that flank and expected to service the Box and the other forwards that when she got her shot her natural inclination was to pass. simple as that. I am done.
If you think Mia chokes in big games than you obviously have no clue how the game is played. Only people who believe a forwards only responsibility is to score goals are ignorant enough to say that. So let me enlighten you.... 1996 Oly final-- Mia was playing with a severely sprained ankle. Her presence in the game forced China to change their game plan. Hurt or not she still merits defensive attention. She did her job that day and her team theirs. 1999 WC final- Unless I watched a different game than you did no one else scored either. Big difference concerning Mia was that she was double and triple teamed and she still manage to give the other team a hard time. What about the other players who only had to deal with one defender and still didn't score. If you think Mia choked what can you say about them. 2000 Oly semi's and final--- Again perhaps we saw two different games. Mia scored the goal that put us in the final. She created both scoring opportunities in the final. If it weren’t for her effort there would have been no overtime. 2003 WC semi-- She did what her coached asked her to do and was severely limited. But as I recall she wasn't the only player on the field that day, was she? So tell me what logic do you employ to justify saying she chokes?
I'd like to vote no logic whatsoever. Saying Mia chokes in big game situations is like trying to prove the world is flat. You can say it until you're blue in the face, but if you're actually looking at it you know you're wrong.
Oh.....my.....ga. (Nod to Jessica Simpson) That's it!!!!!!!!!! It's not poor game plan or personnel placement/choices....it's MIA HAMM's fault!!!!!!! Geez...why haven't we noticed this before??? Thank you SO MUCH for pointing out that Mia chokes!!!!!!! My eyes have been opened and I'll certainly be watching for her to trip up in the next match!!! No wonder we have been at the bottom of the "women's soccer" barrel since the 90's. It's all Mia's fault for choking!!! Are you kidding me? Give me a friggin' break....Mia chokes. Hmmm...how appropriate that this is post #199.
Very well said, Hamm-Star. To think a forward chokes if they don't score is ridiculous. In soccer, there's so much that goes on in a game that you can't count with statistics and box scores. Because Mia doesn't score doesn't mean she isn't effective or dangerous to the other team. If she chokes so much, why has she led the team in assists a couple times in the past few years? Because she is such a great passer and has great field vision, thats why she should play the AM midfielder for the US. It allows her to see the whole field, find both forwards, as well as shoot. When she's stuck on the wing where April plays her, she obviously cant shoot from there. This year, she has usually been starting at forward with Abby (and sometimes a third forward), and then when it clicks with Ape that the midfield isn't working, she moves back to AM in the second half. I'd like to see her there for a full 90 and she what happens.