Tokyo Olympics SF: USWNT vs Canada, August 2, pre/pbp/post

Dfwsoccer01 · Aug 2, 2021

Curious to hear thoughts on this perspective-
Becky has played for Vlatko for many years, in a recent article I read that “he used to give and give and give to his players, and now he continues to give but expects something in return”. Clearly, this a normal expectation of a coach, but I wonder if over his tenure, he’s been for the most part a “players coach” and now during the Olympics he’s changed. He’s been described as “mechanical”. After the first loss and the questionable tactics in the Australia game, did he become hyper focused on simply tactics and lose the room in terms of the mental/positivity perspective? Granted, these are all professional athletes and they shouldn’t need to get hyped for a do or die game, but there are clearly different types of players now days - how they operate, how they discuss things with media, how they want to be treated, etc.

We’ve seen managers that operate a certain way and then when pressure is turned up, things change. Expectations are higher, demands are made, and some people are slower to adjust than others…..and some just can’t/don’t perform the same.

MRAD12 · Aug 2, 2021

I am now officially rooting for Canada to win the Gold.

soccernutter · Aug 2, 2021

fire123 said: ↑

If Wagner said that, she was wrong.
Looking at the players, how they played, how they want to play told me they wanted to win. They just couldn't perform.
Click to expand...

But was the desire to win really there every match? I'm looking at the team and wondering that a lot of them might have just not had that motivation to go over the top. 6 of them have both an Oly gold and a WC winner's trophy. On top of that, of the 22 selected, 17 were returning form WC19. The other 5:
Lynn Williams 16+57 (start)+60
Casey Krueger 6
Catarina Macario 6
Kristie Mewis 10+23+3
Jane Campbell

Unsurprisingly, and a good thing, Campbell didn't get any minutes (meaning no injuries to both Naeher and Franch).
Take out the New Zeland match, and we scored 2 goals, one by a new player - Williams. Of the non GK new players, they totaled 181 minutes between all 4 of them, in 5 matches. The other 17 were where? Against, Sweden, the team was lethargic. Against Australia, the team was lethargic (a winning team wins, doesn't play for the draw). And today? No, this is a team that didn't show the desire to win. They didn't rise to the occasion which winners do. And I'm guessing some of it because they are already winners, and they lacked that extra motivation.

(Side note, there have been a lot of comments about Lloyd running wind sprints after the match. To me, that is her dealing with the anger of losing, not just because she can. She's play until she's 70. It is her taking care of her mental health. Good on her.)

MRAD12 · Aug 2, 2021

AndyMead said: ↑

I'll go slow and speak up so those in the back of the class can hear.

It's not politics. It's economics.

And people (not just me) have been pointing out all the source and evidence you could want for the last decade or so.

Not all player unions are created equal.

The USNTPA (Men) and USWNTPA (Women) unions are a case in point. Getting into the men's union involves suiting up for a game. Getting into the women's union involves getting into a lot of games over a set amount of time (I don't have it in front of me).

This matters - a lot.

Why? Because union priorities are set by the members of a union. If you have a union with, say, 70-80 members - where only 18-25 of them are likely to be called on at any given time, your priorities are going to differ than if you have a union of say 28 members with the same caveat.

As such, the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that each union has crafted with U.S. Soccer (USSF) is more narrowly tailored for the needs of that membership. And those agreements also tend to reflect the needs at the time in which the basis of the current agreement was reached.

The men's union (actually not currently under an active CBA, but operating under the dictates of an expired one) is made of mostly working men's professional soccer players in an era where it's now possible to make a very good living as an American man playing soccer. They all, generally, have good jobs and playing for the national team is a bonus, not an expectation. As such their agreement basically pays the more when they show up and pretty much bupkis the rest of the time.

The women's union current agreement was basically formulated in the dead zone between death of the WUSA and birth five years later of the WPS. It was then re-worked when it became apparent that the WPS's business model wasn't strong enough to keep the league afloat. In order to keep a pool of players working and playing soccer full-time, USSF basically turned the USWNT into a club team. This is pretty much the same thing it did a decade earlier with the MNT before World Cup '94. This was a stopgap measure that was beneficial to US Soccer - allowing it to keep a core group of players ready to play and the players - salary, healthcare, benefits. The trade-off was that the fees they received for actually playing (and winning) games were much lower than what the men earn.

This was also an era where the USWNT was playing to non-sellout crowds at the Virginia Sportsplex and the like. After the WUSA folded, and the "Founders" retired after the Athens Olympics, attendance and ratings for a very good WNT plummeted. These guarantees helped keep the lights on.

The other factor at play is revenue. When you don't sell tickets, and your broadcasts don't get ratings, it's hard to get sponsors and advertisers to give you money. And that's doubly hard for easy to understand historical reasons for women's athletics. (Hold this thought, I'm coming back to it).

U.S. Soccer is a small organization run mostly by volunteers, for which the national team program is a very small slice. It actually has to offload a large amount of actually getting shit done, and it's rarely been in a situation to take financial risks. One thing it does with domestic friendlies of both genders (and SheBelieves are friendlies) is it puts games out to bid for promoters to host. U.S. Soccer is looking for financial guarantees with the local (or national) promoter assuming the risk of nobody showing up. Ticket prices are absurd these days because the system pushes them that way. Many games (both MNT and WNT) are actually a loss for the game operator, seen more as a loss-leader for general venue/market interest). Lamar Hunt famously guaranteed USSF the revenue of 30,000 tickets to win the hosting rights for the USA/CRC World Cup Qualifier in 2001. Lucky for him, 37,000 showed up to Arrowhead Stadium. But then in 2004 during the WNT Farewell/Victory Tour, I think only about 15k showed up for a WNT/MLS doubleheader.

To offset the risk, promoters expect a minimum number of "name" players that they can market. A Pulisic here, Rapinoe there, sort of thing. One benefit the men have with a large player pool is a large number of "known" players, plus the men's team laundry has a certain appeal as well - but there are limits and we've seen plenty of poorly attended men's games after 2017 and a house-cleaning of oldtimers. Holding onto Lloyd and friends is very promoter and sponsor friendly. (This is the point I told you hold). If the sponsors record a bunch of commercials with Alex Morgan or Christen Press, they really want those players on the bench. There's a reason why during 2019's "Victory Tour" the roster was limited to only the members of the WWC19 team (and emergency alternates to fill out a roster). It was in the contract. It was in the contract with the promoters. It was in the contract with the women's union - the WWC19 players were going to get paid for those games regardless of who showed up.

And that's a second pressure. When you're on the book to pay 25-28 players under Federation "club" Contract regardless of whether they're called in to the national team, you're going to lean towards calling those players in - to the exclusion of almost everyone else.

I haven't seen as much recently, but over the last decade there was an odd situation where WNT camps were almost completely union members and college players. What's special about a 20 year-old college player than a 26 year-old experienced peak of her career professional? Not only do you not have to pay them, you can't - if they want to keep playing college soccer. Sure, they get some nice swag and clothes, and they get a per diem, but your saving coin.

It's not politics "keeping the band together" (though some Tom Sermanni fans might disagree), it's economics.

As long as the USWNTPA/USSF has player contracts and turns the USWNT into more club than national team, this pressure will exist.

And as long as the WNT union is 70-90% made of players who are likely to be on the next tournament roster, those players are going to vote for the status pro: maternity leave, retirement funds, salaries over game fees and win bonuses. Tom Sermanni wasn't fired because he lost the Algarve Cup (I'm pretty sure Tony DiCicco went 0-6 at the Algarve Cup, not always making the final). He was fired, in part, because of the economic (and yes political) pressure. He was consistently calling in untried and untested players that were either U20/U23 stars or had started making a name for themselves professionally. (Kristie Mewis anyone?). He was doing it regularly enough that promoters didn't know whether Abby Wambach was even going to be present - that hurt sponsorships and promoter guarantees. He was doing it regularly enough that a fair number of these players were building up enough caps to almost merit membership in the USWNTPA. And that threatened the status quo and most importantly the majority needs of the union. You double the size of the WNT union, and suddenly salaries are a big issue - because most of the players know they don't apply to them.

Whenever the MLS/MLSPA CBA comes up for renegotiation, so many people go on and on about how the players should want more DPs, to do away with the Salary Cap and Maximum Salary. And then the CBA gets agreed to and it's all about raising the minimum salary, about year-round health benefits and moving expenses. It's about stuff that benefits the large majority of the union, not the 1%ers at the top. Most MLS players know they're not going to be DPs. Most MNT union members know that they'll have to be fit and playing well at exactly the right time to make the next World Cup team, they'll never be offered a salary (as it were).

I don't think there's anyone sending a memo to Vlatko saying "you have to take these players to Tokyo". But he's a smart man, just like Jill Ellis is a smart woman. They understand what keeps the gravy train moving.

Yes, it'd be great to have a team as young as Canada's (only 4 of 22 players were in London in 2022, and two of those were originally among the 4 alternates), but the economics that make the USWNT work make the risks involved not deemed worth taking until - usually - it's after we've lost a tournament.
Click to expand...

Perfect!

CookieRules · Aug 2, 2021

Sweden deserves to win they played well the entire tournament and their coach is actually competent.

McSkillz · Aug 2, 2021

CookieRules said: ↑

Sweden deserves to win they played well the entire tournament and their coach is actually competent.
Click to expand...

I said it from the first match against the US, this Swedish team is scary good in this particular tournament. They have always given strong performances in tournaments in the past but now they have exceptional goal scorers in addition to having a well disciplined defense system.

A lot of people seem to want to root for their northern neighbors to win Gold but I haven't seen anything exceptional from Canada that warrants a Gold Medal. I suppose playing defense for 90-120 minutes or another dive in the box might get them another PK opportunity but I certainly hope Sweden does what the USWNT couldn't do and concludes the match with a couple of goals. Would have wanted Brazil to at least medal because from what I watched, they were better than what I've seen from them in the last 5 years or so.

Our bronze medal match isn't going to be fun but I'll watch if only to see Lloyd, Broon, Heath, O'Hara, Rapinoe, possibly Morgan in probably their last important game in a US jersey. Afterwards, I would like to see the coach immediately fired and Harvey or another competent coach hired to start a new cycle for the 2023 WWC.

Kevin625 · Aug 2, 2021

FUN FACT - Carli Lloyd has earned more CAPs than everyone on the team since OG16 (starting with 1st game after OG16).

Yes, more than Dunn, Press, Naeher, Mewis, Horan, Morgan, Heath, Ertz, Sauerbrunn... more than everyone.

Ethan Frank · Aug 2, 2021

soccernutter said: ↑

But was the desire to win really there every match? I'm looking at the team and wondering that a lot of them might have just not had that motivation to go over the top. 6 of them have both an Oly gold and a WC winner's trophy. On top of that, of the 22 selected, 17 were returning form WC19. The other 5:
Lynn Williams 16+57 (start)+60
Casey Krueger 6
Catarina Macario 6
Kristie Mewis 10+23+3
Jane Campbell

Unsurprisingly, and a good thing, Campbell didn't get any minutes (meaning no injuries to both Naeher and Franch).
Take out the New Zeland match, and we scored 2 goals, one by a new player - Williams. Of the non GK new players, they totaled 181 minutes between all 4 of them, in 5 matches. The other 17 were where? Against, Sweden, the team was lethargic. Against Australia, the team was lethargic (a winning team wins, doesn't play for the draw). And today? No, this is a team that didn't show the desire to win. They didn't rise to the occasion which winners do. And I'm guessing some of it because they are already winners, and they lacked that extra motivation.

(Side note, there have been a lot of comments about Lloyd running wind sprints after the match. To me, that is her dealing with the anger of losing, not just because she can. She's play until she's 70. It is her taking care of her mental health. Good on her.)
Click to expand...

Does this suggest the US weren't lethargic against the Netherlands? Because if Martens had tucked away that penalty like she (or maybe someone else like Janssen) should have, we'd be talking about how lethargic the US were in the second half (and they also weren't all that active after taking the lead in the first half in my opinion).

Ethan Frank · Aug 2, 2021

McSkillz said: ↑

I said it from the first match against the US, this Swedish team is scary good in this particular tournament. They have always given strong performances in tournaments in the past but now they have exceptional goal scorers in addition to having a well disciplined defense system.

A lot of people seem to want to root for their northern neighbors to win Gold but I haven't seen anything exceptional from Canada that warrants a Gold Medal. I suppose playing defense for 90-120 minutes or another dive in the box might get them another PK opportunity but I certainly hope Sweden does what the USWNT couldn't do and concludes the match with a couple of goals. Would have wanted Brazil to at least medal because from what I watched, they were better than what I've seen from them in the last 5 years or so.

Our bronze medal match isn't going to be fun but I'll watch if only to see Lloyd, Broon, Heath, O'Hara, Rapinoe, possibly Morgan in probably their last important game in a US jersey. Afterwards, I would like to see the coach immediately fired and Harvey or another competent coach hired to start a new cycle for the 2023 WWC.
Click to expand...

I didn't catch Sweden vs Australia, but I've read Sweden weren't particularly scary good in that match. I do hope they win gold though if Canada are going to put in another performance like they did today in the final.

taosjohn · Aug 2, 2021

Kevin625 said: ↑

FUN FACT - Carli Lloyd has earned more CAPs than everyone on the team since OG16 (starting with 1st game after OG16).

Yes, more than Dunn, Press, Naeher, Mewis, Horan, Morgan, Heath, Ertz, Sauerbrunn... more than everyone.
Click to expand...

Been healthier than all of them, hasn't she?

FanOfFutbol · Aug 2, 2021

McSkillz said: ↑

..

A lot of people seem to want to root for their northern neighbors to win Gold but I haven't seen anything exceptional from Canada that warrants a Gold Medal. I suppose playing defense for 90-120 minutes or another dive in the box might get them another PK opportunity but I certainly hope Sweden does what the USWNT couldn't do and concludes the match with a couple of goals. Would have wanted Brazil to at least medal because from what I watched, they were better than what I've seen from them in the last 5 years or so.

Our bronze medal match isn't going to be fun but I'll watch if only to see Lloyd, Broon, Heath, O'Hara, Rapinoe, possibly Morgan in probably their last important game in a US jersey. Afterwards, I would like to see the coach immediately fired and Harvey or another competent coach hired to start a new cycle for the 2023 WWC.
Click to expand...

I will watch the bronze metal match but I doubt i will watch it live.
I also will watch the gold metal match but also, most likely, not live. There is no reason for me to inconvenience myself for, in the case of the bronze match, to watch a meaningless exercise in frustration or, for the gold metal match, there is no reason to watch as I expect the quality of soccer displayed to be quite poor. Canada will try their best to make sure that the soccer is poor to bad. That is the only way they can win but, probably, not even then.

The only piece of excitement I hope to see in the losers bowl is that the USSF fires Vlatko Andonovski on live TV and confiscates his return ticket and he has to make his way back all alone. I do not wish him to further pollute the ladies with his delusional views of how soccer should be coached/played. Of course I am sure, if he is fired, that he will make the claim that the whole process is rigged and he really remains the head coach for life.

I also would like the TV announcers to be fired and forced to watch reruns of "My Mother the Car" for all eternity. But I cannot get everything I want.

fire123 · Aug 2, 2021

You have gone beyond soccer. You sounded like someone whose mother or girlfriend was dumped by Vlatko. !!!

taosjohn · Aug 2, 2021

fire123 said: ↑

You have gone beyond soccer. You sounded like someone whose mother or girlfriend was dumped by Vlatko. !!!
Click to expand...

??? Who???

MRAD12 · Aug 2, 2021

FanOfFutbol said: ↑

I will watch the bronze metal match but I doubt i will watch it live.
I also will watch the gold metal match but also, most likely, not live. There is no reason for me to inconvenience myself for, in the case of the bronze match, to watch a meaningless exercise in frustration or, for the gold metal match, there is no reason to watch as I expect the quality of soccer displayed to be quite poor. Canada will try their best to make sure that the soccer is poor to bad. That is the only way they can win but, probably, not even then.

The only piece of excitement I hope to see in the losers bowl is that the USSF fires Vlatko Andonovski on live TV and confiscates his return ticket and he has to make his way back all alone. I do not wish him to further pollute the ladies with his delusional views of how soccer should be coached/played. Of course I am sure, if he is fired, that he will make the claim that the whole process is rigged and he really remains the head coach for life.

I also would like the TV announcers to be fired and forced to watch reruns of "My Mother the Car" for all eternity. But I cannot get everything I want.
Click to expand...

You have issues.

soccernutter · Aug 2, 2021

Ethan Frank said: ↑

Does this suggest the US weren't lethargic against the Netherlands? Because if Martens had tucked away that penalty like she (or maybe someone else like Janssen) should have, we'd be talking about how lethargic the US were in the second half (and they also weren't all that active after taking the lead in the first half in my opinion).
Click to expand...

Didn't see the match, so I can't comment on how they looked.

West Ender · Aug 2, 2021

soccernutter said: ↑

(Side note, there have been a lot of comments about Lloyd running wind sprints after the match. To me, that is her dealing with the anger of losing, not just because she can. She's play until she's 70. It is her taking care of her mental health. Good on her.)
Click to expand...

Funny, I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking this.

BarryfromEastenders · Aug 2, 2021

Naeher looked like she might have made a bad injury much worse. Don’t think it should have been left up to her.

Disapproving Hippo · Aug 2, 2021

Hav

Kevin625 said: ↑

FUN FACT - Carli Lloyd has earned more CAPs than everyone on the team since OG16 (starting with 1st game after OG16).

Yes, more than Dunn, Press, Naeher, Mewis, Horan, Morgan, Heath, Ertz, Sauerbrunn... more than everyone.
Click to expand...

Yet she still looks more fit than all of them. I would not be surprised if she is still on the WC23 roster because why not.

Kevin625 · Aug 2, 2021

Disapproving Hippo said: ↑

Hav

Yet she still looks more fit than all of them. I would not be surprised if she is still on the WC23 roster because why not.
Click to expand...

Because there's plenty of players that don't have a CAP that are better.

Disapproving Hippo · Aug 2, 2021

soccernutter said: ↑

But was the desire to win really there every match? I'm looking at the team and wondering that a lot of them might have just not had that motivation to go over the top. 6 of them have both an Oly gold and a WC winner's trophy. On top of that, of the 22 selected, 17 were returning form WC19. The other 5:
Lynn Williams 16+57 (start)+60
Casey Krueger 6
Catarina Macario 6
Kristie Mewis 10+23+3
Jane Campbell

Unsurprisingly, and a good thing, Campbell didn't get any minutes (meaning no injuries to both Naeher and Franch).
Take out the New Zeland match, and we scored 2 goals, one by a new player - Williams. Of the non GK new players, they totaled 181 minutes between all 4 of them, in 5 matches. The other 17 were where? Against, Sweden, the team was lethargic. Against Australia, the team was lethargic (a winning team wins, doesn't play for the draw). And today? No, this is a team that didn't show the desire to win. They didn't rise to the occasion which winners do. And I'm guessing some of it because they are already winners, and they lacked that extra motivation.

(Side note, there have been a lot of comments about Lloyd running wind sprints after the match. To me, that is her dealing with the anger of losing, not just because she can. She's play until she's 70. It is her taking care of her mental health. Good on her.)
Click to expand...

It is either a mental breakdown or she doesn't want cramps.

lil_one · Aug 3, 2021

L'orange said: ↑

The U.S. didn't play badly today, by any stretch--and were completely dominant in the 2nd half. People seem to forget that Canada is one of the best defensive teams in the world--and has been for a few years. I expected a 1-0 or 2-0 U.S. win. Canada played a defensive formation and swarmed the ball in the first half, even had some possession in the U.S. end, which came to nothing. In the 2nd half Canada bunkered. I"m not sure if they couldn't get forward or didn't want to--but the entire half, save for one or two brief moments--including the one that resulted in the PK call--was played in the Canadian defensive half. Usually, in games like this the U.S. will pinch a goal or two off headers--and the Americans had some chances but Labbe made a couple of nice saves and Lloyd just missed. The U.S. was rather unfortunate today, IMO.

The U.S. will get younger, and will have plenty of talent on the field going forward. But the competition will be tougher, which should add up to some exciting football. I myself am already looking forward to next summer Euro championship, which promises to be a dogfight among at least half a dozen good/very good teams.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree on the US. The USWNT had stretches of possession and chances on goal, enough to possibly win the game, except for a harsh penalty call (I saw somewhere but can't find it now that expected goals for the US was something like 1.7 and for Canada it would have been 0.19 without the penalty). At a couple of points even in this thread during the game, there were comments like "we feel a goal is coming."

But, overall, imo, the USWNT didn't look dominant, even though they played most of the minutes in the Canadian half. They should have converted on some of their chances, but they also needed to improve the quality of play. I'll give it to Canada that they played well defensively, and as I already said, they did a great job of disrupting play in the midfield, forcing errors. But, a lot of the sloppy play from the US was unforced errors. They also weren't winning many 2nd balls. In large stretches, we seemed to just resort to really hopeful crosses and passes into space where someone should have been, but no one was. And unfortunately, given the large number of CK's in this game, our play off of set pieces is nowhere near where it used to be.

Bob Lamm · Aug 3, 2021

lil_one said: ↑

Agree to disagree on the US. The USWNT had stretches of possession and chances on goal, enough to possibly win the game, except for a harsh penalty call (I saw somewhere but can't find it now that expected goals for the US was something like 1.7 and for Canada it would have been 0.19 without the penalty). At a couple of points even in this thread during the game, there were comments like "we feel a goal is coming."

But, overall, imo, the USWNT didn't look dominant, even though they played most of the minutes in the Canadian half. They should have converted on some of their chances, but they also needed to improve the quality of play. I'll give it to Canada that they played well defensively, and as I already said, they did a great job of disrupting play in the midfield, forcing errors. But, a lot of the sloppy play from the US was unforced errors. They also weren't winning many 2nd balls. In large stretches, we seemed to just resort to really hopeful crosses and passes into space where someone should have been, but no one was. And unfortunately, given the large number of CK's in this game, our play off of set pieces is nowhere near where it used to be.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this. I'm especially struck by your final statement on corner kicks and other set pieces. I hadn't thought clearly about this, it's basically been ignored in our discussions, and I believe you're right on the mark. A crucial part of U.S. dominance over recent years has been a lot of threats and a lot of scoring on set pieces. In these five games in Japan, we saw so few corner kicks and set pieces that were in any way dangerous. Apart from the four-for-four shootout, the U.S. failed miserably in this important part of the game.

CookieRules · Aug 3, 2021

fire123 said: ↑

You have gone beyond soccer. You sounded like someone whose mother or girlfriend was dumped by Vlatko. !!!
Click to expand...

And some of you sound like you are vlatkos mother or girlfriend with how some of you defend his honor.

CookieRules · Aug 3, 2021

MRAD12 said: ↑

You have issues.
Click to expand...

Look who's talking.

Bob Lamm · Aug 3, 2021

Dear Moderator(s)--I urge you to take serious action regarding the intensifying insults here. I come to this section of the message board to read about and discuss the U.S. women's national team. Not to read Person A saying that Person B sounds "like someone whose mother or girlfriend was dumped by Vlatko," thereby provoking the equally offensive statement that Person A sounds like "Vlatko's mother or girlfriend" defending his honor. Can't people like this confine their attacks to private messages directed at each other? Why do the rest of us have to see this?