Quarter finals, have at it....but not yet. But don't forget to read the Mod Warning. And don't forget, there will be results discussed, so if you want to watch the match later, but maintain the suspense, please don't read this thread until later.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand how the scheduling works. Germany will get a full week of rest between their round of 16 match (June 22) and their next match in the quarters against Sweden (June 29). While England, USA, and the 2 winners from today get only 4 days rest.
Since the Brazil WC I have gotten used to the fact that FIFA sees more factors than just dates. If you look at the travel schedule of Germany then you will notice that they started in cool and rainy Rennes in the North East to then play games in the hot South in Montpellier and Grenoble. Now, they had to travel all the way back to Rennes which in itself already eats up a day. I also wouldnt be surprised if half the squad has a flu by now. If Germany make it past Sweden then it's back to just 4 days (traveling back South to Lyon) and in a possible final they will have 1 day less rest than the other bracket. Not that it would make up for the difference but I guess that is how FIFA is thinking.
Well, unless China or Japan pull off an upset today, quarter finals will be Europe vs USA. Coming into this World Cup I wasn't foreseeing such an European dominance: it was a lot of time it wasn't happening, I guess...
This is unfortunate, but I suspect this might not be the case starting in 2023. There are good talents on SA, Cameroon, Nigeria, Argentina, and Jamaica, not including 'keepers. I am expecting one or more of them to advance in 2023 (Jamaica is my favorite for this due to their youth).
Norway have travelled North-South for every game so far: Reims (vs NGA) - Nice (vs FRA) - Reims again (vs KOR) - Nice again (vs AUS) and up to Le Havre for the QF with England.
Eh, I wouldn't put too much weight on up-and-comers. The "problem" with this WWC is that the non-UEFA teams in the top 8 have been stumbling, while the UEFA teams in the next 8 have taken advantage, i.e. 9 over 5 and 12 over 6. And it's highly unlikely that the up-and-comers are going to crack the top 16, much less challenge the top 8. Even if they do grow, the only way the crack the top 16 is if those 16 stall and fall themselves. Now, can those up-and-comers advance to the R16? Definitely; we've seen that happen several times in the past two WWC already. But if we're looking for diversity in the QFs onward, it'll depend more on the likes of USA/CAN/BRA/JPN/AUS not slipping up than it depends on growth in the lower tier.
And remeber that there are also a growing number of UEFA teams closing in the 9 currently in this WWC.
Hard watching Japan go out after their 2nd half performance... But here's the estimated performance ratings for the teams in the quarterfinals (for games since 1/1/2018, so the last year-and-a-half): USA 2109 (official 2101) GER 2108 (2072) FRA 2088 (2043) NED (!!!) 2027 (1967) ENG 2025 (2049) SWE 1987 (1962) NOR 1951 (1915) ITA 1927 (1868)
Probably worth putting the !!! by ITA as well, since they are also at essentially +60 performance over official. So, based on these, you'd expect a SF of USA/ENG and GER/NED. And even if the other three remain the same, I'm guessing that the winner of USA/FRA has their perf rating bump up all the more.
People seem to be overthinking this whole UEFA domination thing. It's actually a quite predictable shift in the women's game. In the early days, European sides, with the exception of Germany and the Nordics (always a leader in gender equality across the board), didn't focus on or invest in their women's programs. This allowed non-traditional footballing countries like the US, China, Japan, etc. to dominate or at least do well. As the footballing culture of Europe has slowly started to translate over to the women's game, we are simply seeing it start to more closely resemble the men's game with the traditional centers of the game beginning to assert dominance or at least parity with some of the overachievers of previous eras. CONMEBOL obviously wasn't as impressive this WWC, but I see glimpses of hope there as well. I wouldn't sleep on them if they ever really start taking their women's programs seriously. Is the women's game ever going to exactly replicate the men's side in terms of WC winners and so on? Probably not. But it will get closer and closer to that for sure. The US will probably still be around, albeit not nearly as dominant as before, maybe Canada and a couple of the very best AFC sides as well, but the overall landscape will in all likelihood be UEFA, eventually UEFA/CONMEBOL domination.
Well, you should get informed a little better: CONMEBOL is as far as it gets from "domination" in women's football. It's not happening "soon", it's not happening "in all likelihood" and it's very doubtful that it will ever happen "eventually", even on the very long term. There is no trend that currently allows this kind of theory.
This is incorrect, as least afar the US goes. One of the things we have seen across a lot of sports in the domination by US Women because of Title IX. In particular, it made women's basketball unbeatable, and in terms of options and development, women's soccer. For many, many years, women in the US had 2, maybe 3, sporting options (if they were not gifted sprinters) - basketball, soccer and tennis. Tennis was already present, and basketball has specific requirements, but soccer filled a void for suburban girls to play with others. And we know the women's game is somewhat different than the men's game, so the talent and coaching and tactics developed in the US early. The trick in the early days was finding the talent. Now that women's soccer has become more widespread, it is easier not just to find the talent, but to develop it as well. But another aspect which put the US in the lead as opposed to many traditional European countries was heroes. Nacib as said that her hero was Zinidane. The women on the US 2011/2015 squads speak of their heros being the 1999 women's team. That is something which no country really has - female soccer heroes for young girls to look up to and emulate...until now. We are in the second generation of players based on birth (and a generation being 20 years or so). China could have done much better, but they didn't seem to want to build on the success they had. Japan, though, probably has the same situation as the US (what sports will they play?). Europe is different, with multiple sports available to women, so it is not surprising that it has taken the funding to get European countries towards the top. But we should not be surprised if we see another Marta. Or a female Messi. Yet, the talent in Africa is surely there if it can be harnessed. Europe will dominate, surely, but in the long term I expect the US, Japan, and Canada to be major players.
Calm down man! Okay, I'll qualify my statement. I absolutely stand by the UEFA part. That definitely IS happening in all likelihood. I probably should have added a maybe for the "UEFA/CONMEBOL" part. Of course I don't mean anytime soon, nor do I mean that Argentina is going to be contending for the WWC even in a few decades. What I mean is something more like, "Argentina might be better than China in 20 years." None of the non-UEFA confederations performed particularly well this WWC, I agree. And CAF actually performed slightly better than CONMEBOL, especially when you take out Brazil. I should have phrased my comment better. What I should have said is "UEFA will probably increasingly dominate the women's game in the coming years and decades, and CONMEBOL shows the most promise of the rest and may become a secondary force at some future point." Basically, what I mean is, outside the US/Canada/AFC Big 4 (I'm including NK, which isn't in France), who is really showing any real promise in the other confederations? Nigeria has qualified for every WWC and still struggles to get out of the group 28 years later. How much of a gap is there, really, between them and, say, Argentina with all the advantages the former have had (e.g. always qualifying for WWCs because of poor regional competition)? And we all saw how Thailand, South Korea, Jamaica, etc. played in this WWC. China has been declining for some time now. It's not crazy to me to think that CONMEBOL sides could at least be solid second-tier sides at some point in the coming several decades.
I'm aware of Title IX and the other points you made in your post, and don't really disagree. In fact, I was about to mention Title IX in my post as well, but deemed it unnecessary. My post was focused on why European domination took until now to really be apparent and their problems, not so much on the reverse re the strengths of the non-traditional footballing countries mentioned in the women's game. I mean, I basically said the same. Will the US win 3 out of the next 7 WWCs, like they did in the first 7? No, but they will still be right up there, always a contender and occasionally winning a title. Canada and Japan will probably be there as well at least in that next group of teams. China doesn't inspire confidence. And I don't really see any new sides emerging from AFC or CONCACAF on the evidence we have available.
Yes, although from a probability standpoint, the rating differences are close enough that we should expect one upset. And I'm ignoring the theoretical homefield advantage for France. I'm not sure who I'm trying to avoid jinxing (tee-hee!) I think, from what I've seen of the teams, I'd be most surprised by Italy upsetting Netherlands, but it's far from out of the question. Italy, even with a two-goal lead, looked like they hanging on to dear life for most of the 2nd half against China. I suppose, based on history, I should also be terribly surprised by Sweden advancing past Germany. That and because Germany's performance rating since they fired Steffi Jones is in the stratospheres of 2200 territory. I'm trying to not be too nervous about that.
American perceptions (at least, the perceptions of those old enough to remember 1999 and certainly 1991) of the women's game are perhaps distorted by their longer historical views. In the first four WWC's, the following teams (all of which have men's teams that have won or been in finals of the men's WC) had no impact on the WWC: France, England, Argentina, Uruguay, Spain, Italy, Holland. Four of those teams are quarterfinalists now. One gave the defending WWC champions a tough game. Those four quarterfinalists, France, England, Italy and Holland, have top-flight men's leagues and probably have several teams willing to promote women's teams. Similarly, look at some of the top Spanish women's club teams. That bastion of growing investment is all from UEFA. So, the current results are not surprising.
PS: Someone should start making predictions. So, here goes: USA over France (hope slightly more than heart) England over Norway Germany over Sweden Netherlands over Italy (probably will be the best game of the quarters, other than possibly USA v France)
Ok, you somehow correct you statement, but basically I am not seeing that happen. As you correctly noticed, "big ones" from CONCACAF and AFC are likely to remain ahead of CONMEBOL teams, and what's reamining? OFC (that doesn't count) and CAF (that, in my opinion, keeps being marginally better than CONCACAF and has more hope for the future; after all Nigeria was finalist in a U-20 WWC 5 years ago). You rephrased your statement better, but I keep not agreeing with you: I don't see CONMEBOL happening anytime soon, and most probably not even later.
That's my prediction too: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/wwc-2019-predictor.2103694/#post-37898704
well once again, whoever keeps saying 'the world is catching up' is an idiot. All top 4 ranked teams made it the quarters. Only 1 out of the next 4 ranked teams made it Holland), but the others got replaced by 3 teams that were in the quarters for the inaugural, 1991 WC. couple of ironic things; Germany went into the last WC at #1, but had a very hard palyoff route(facing Sweden, then France, then US by the semis). This time the shoe is on the other foot; this time #1 US having the way tougher route. Norway reminds of England(from last WC) as they were te worst performing squad at 2017 Euros, just like the English were at 2013 Euros will history repeat itself? Stay tuned to find out
I could have. But I did not consult them, and instead I chose to draw my own conclusions. The fact that their play to date justifies my predictions should not also result in anyone being surprised that their performance correlates with their rankings.