are you kidding me? have you seen their record? of course in this game miller and hucles with osbourne in the middle was a dead give away from the start. without lloyd or wagner in the middle this team can't make the killer passes, and even the defenders started trying to do the amid's job and couldn't do it! i was not surprised at the outcome in regular time. it could have been worse. but that's not the fault of the 4-3-3, but the fault of the players flanking osbourne in it.
Besides the fact that you don't understand how precedents are used (do you think there are no screwball judicial rulings?? do you think EVERY legal decision sets a precedent??), you're saying that referees are too dumb to remember how the rules are applied while they're working a game. I agree THIS ref was. This was a call that most officials don't make, at that point in the match. Soccer continues to be a sport with history and tradition, where you can understand and predict how the rules (generally) are going to apply. This decision went against that. It was wrong. Good referees have seen enough soccer at high levels to intuitively understand how the rules are applied at game speed and in real match situations. MOST CONCACAF (including US youth and this one) referees have not, and it shows.
Since I have practiced law with a reasonable degree of success for over 35 years, I would put my understanding of legal precedent up against yours. Let me be gentle: you don't know what you are talking about. Yes, every decision, IS a precedent. So now you are saying this ref hasn't "seen enough soccer." OK. That's a factual statement. Exactly how many games has she seen? You, of course, know the answer to that or you would never have asserted that as a fact, right?
evidently some precedents carry more weight than others (cough, Plessy, cough). try again. res ipsa loquitor
Please explain why you can find fans whining about some call after virtually every closely fought match at every level of the game if soccer is a sport where you can consistently predict how the rules are applied. The LOTG aren't some rigid framework that can be applied with mathematical precision. They have to be interpreted for the situation at hand, and sometimes you can make a case for multiple interpretations.
Thank you! I think a lot of people haven't been following this team very closely since the "Great Ones" retired, and don't know how well they've done. After every match, there's always a post like "I haven't been following the team, but based on this performance they're totally SCREWED unless they bring back <insert poster's favorite semi-legendary but now over the hill player>!! Why didn't Ryan give <insert semi-legendary player who Ryan actually did look at several months ago> a chance?!!" Personally, I go by results, and I think this team has played extremely well these last two years. There's always room for improvement but I have confidence this team will continue to grow.
In class the referee trainers specifically said that soccer had LAWS instead of RULES because laws are flexible and subject to interpretation by the official whereas rules were rigid and immutable. There will always be someone to dispute your calls, all you can do is apply the LOTG to your best ability in the milliseconds you have to make the correct call.
Was anyone else surprised by the lack of talent on the field? I'm not trying to compare this game with the men's game. I am comparing this game to games being played at the time of the 2003 world cup. Speaking just of the US team. -- The first touch is almost non-existant. No one regularly controls the ball when it comes to them. -- A large number of scoring chances come from a defensive miscue rather than true play making ability. -- The decision making was very poor. ie: One of the players (Kai??? Not sure) showed some nice individual skill beating three defenders down the left wing. She then decides to take an impossible shot from the endline rather than play it back to her teammates in the center of the penalty area. Players are taught from a very early age to cut the balll back. This was just one of the many examples of very poor dsecision making. -- I'm tired of seeing everyone trying to place the ball under the crossbar rather than hit a shot with authority. How many times did the US land the ball on top of the Canadian goal? 15? 16? You add this to some very poor AR work and you get an ugly game. Speaking of that, everyone in CONCACAF hates the US - how is the US going to get a fair shake with a ref from Mexico; a AR from Costa Rica and another from Panama? The long and short of it is that the US was not as smooth, skillful or quick thinking as they were 2-3 years ago. I think the reason is lack of playing opportunities. We need the women's league back. Right now, the USWNT is like the USMNT from late 80's- early 90's - It's very tough to compete (and stay sharp and skillful) when you do not play regularly against top competition.
There are some valid points here. Kai is young and made some questionable decisions but show a lot o f promise. And some credit has to be given to Canada. They play a very disruptive brand of soccer (less so with Hooper at home). The challenge when playing them is not to let them dictate play which is tough. It wasn't pretty but give them credit for gutting out an ugly win.
I didn't see a whole lot of creativity, nor many times they managed to link more than three passes. Canada did put a good deal pf pressure on the ball, but as others have noted, the US lost the ball too many times due to poor first touches or the failure to make/recognize the run. Maybe Kai will mature into a great player, but for now my nitpick with her is that she's waaaaaaaaay too far on the individual side of the spectrum rather than being team oriented. Her one centering attempt aside (after carrying the ball into the 6-yard-box on the left post and then trying to find Abby in the middle), I'm getting a strong me-me-me vibe that her playing level doesn't come close to justifying yet. It was capped by her reaction after Lilly converted the penalty, with the other players mobbing Lil while Kai took off on a solo celebratory run along the endline, and again at the final whistle, when the bulk of the players came together but Kai took off for the sideline, playing to the crowd before congratulating her teammates. Ay, she's a child, and she'll grow up, but for now she annoys the snot out of me.
This will be Natasha's first World Cup. If you just found out you'd be going to the World Cup, what would you do? It's not necessary to be like everyone else to be a good steady contributing player. It's what she does on the field during games that counts. Those criticisms are valid, and it's pretty true that she is still rather unpolished. Still, she has great potential, doesn't she?
This is so over-simplistic. You do realize that it was the MEXICAN referee that called the PK - a PK that many on these boards argue was not appropriate. So, if she hated the US so much because she's from Mexico, why didn't she just swallow her whistle??? (And the AR was just a joke - I really doubt it had anything to do with where she came from and everything to do with the fact that she is just a sub-par official.)
She knew before that game started that she was going to the World Cup. Both finalists are going - that game was just for bragging rights. It was a clear foul - I admire her for calling it. If it's a foul out of the box, it's a foul in the box. Where and when it occurs does not matter. I'm not saying there is deliberate cheating - just an internal bias. Maybe your right, but then she does not belong there. Her offside calls were some of the worst I have seen - she looked biased to me. I still think that for qualifiers, you should have refs from a different region. Even in Europe, don't you think there is going to be some internal bias of say a Spanish ref in a Germany - Turkey game? Or Even worse, an Irish ref in an England - Scotland match?
You mean the World Cup the US didn't win, right? The one where Germany bounced them out? I agree finishing has been off recently, but welcome to the game of soccer. A large number of goals at all levels of play are from defensive miscues. The WNT has won every CONCACAF championship it has participated in. What more do you want? A 15-0 scoreline in every game? Newsflash: Canada is a heck of a lot better than it was six years ago. The one that was in existence when they didn't win the World Cup? Not having the WUSA hurts everyone, not just the US. At the moment, the top competition available in the women's game is in international play. That's true everywhere - even the best European leagues aren't all that great. The US has played almost every top team in the world in the last two years and their only setback was a PSO loss to Germany. I don't think things are quite as disastrous as you make it.
And I remember many other games this year where Kai celebrated goals by running up and giving bear hugs to her teammates. One incident does not a trend make. Try blowing your nose.
re: Kai running off at the end of the game. She was gesturing to her family and support section as there was a large group of them sitting in the section over from me who had their Kai shirts/signs, Hawaiian flags and the whole nine yards. Once the whistle blew, IIRC, she ran over and played up to them.
I agree - the US is the best out there - all I was saying is that the individual skill was lacking. The game was not pretty - Seldom creative, and when they were, they lacked the skill to pull it off.
my impression is that the uswnt is playing with as much skill and creativity now as it ever has. sunday's game was in no way a reflection of how they have been playing - smooth, creative, great, conjuring up numerous chances with touch and good passing. sunday's game was an aberration in two ways. first, ryan took out two players who are the engine of the team in the midfield and who are the most creative players on the team with the exception of maybe lilly, and he put in miller who he likes to play against canada because she's tough against the route one balls canada plays and the second ball slop they like to run down. he also put in hucles who if she has any value to the team certainly didn't show it on sunday. secondly, for the first time on sunday, pellerud distinctly played a different game against the uswnt. he still played a lot of route one balls, but he added a lot of high pressure tactics the likes of which i've never seen him use before against the uswnt. (this was one of the reasons why the canadians were so tired at the end of the game. they're not accustomed to playing that high energy game, and it took a lot out of them.) the us team already didn't have their good passers in the game and that was compounded by the fact that for the first time they had to play against the quick high pressure tactics ot the canadians. they couldn't pass the ball to save their lives. like i said before, i was not surprised at the regular time outcome. it could have been worse.
Exactly. A couple pages ago someone made a point about the 4-3-3 being a mistake. I actually think it is the best formation the USA can employ...as long as they have their starting midfield out there. The combo of Osborne, Hucles, and Miller is not going to amount to a pretty, creative game. It's just not their style. Osborne is servicable and has done a good job in Boxx's absence, but think about when Shannon and any of Lloyd/Wagner/Tarpley are out there (Personally, I think Aly is the weakest of the three), the creativity problems will mostly be solved. Regarding the USA "unrefined" style of play, I think its natural for that to happen when so many inexperienced players are brought onto the team all at once. By the late 90's and even early 00's, Mia, Foudy, Joy, Overbeck, Akers, and the rest of the 91'ers had played together for years and years, so naturally they know the subtle tendancies and what runs the others would be making. This resulted in a more "polished" style. The new players sometimes seem more willing to make the fancy or complicated play rather than playing the way they are facing and possessing the ball. Thats what the Mia-era team did so well; I remember them consitantly getting 10, 15 passes in a row, wearing the other team down that way. I don't see that as much with the current players. Right now, inexperience, unfamiliarity, and the fact that Ryan is bringing in more athletic, less tactical players is the cause that their style of play can look a bit frantic and disorganized at times. I would expect this to improve significantly by next fall.
re: Kai running off at the end of the game. Haters...anyway everytime another player scores a goal she celebrates with them so i don't see the big deal of her running off by herself that one time. If you watched the 1999 WWC Mia Hamm did the exact same thing! everyone ran towards brandi chastain to congratulate her and celebrate the victory and mia took off towards somewhere else, so i don't understand why criticize her for wanting to celebrate by herself that one time with the FANS and family that she might of brough to the game. Heck i'd be stoked if one of the ladies ran towards the stand and celebrated with the fans, at least she acknowledge us and appreciated our presence. as far as the call goes, there's always going to be a controversial call at one point of the game, it happens all the time but i do feel bad that canada lost the game during the last seconds of the game.