this is a bit longwinded. but read me thru. i'm encouraged because i saw earlier games where they passed and posessed much better than any u.s. team i have seen. but as i've said before, other teams in general routinely have more technical skill and more soccer iq than u.s. teams for whom this is not even close to being our national sport. in addition, (and i've said this before too), korea dpr did indeed have that speed and quickness advantage on the u.s. team. add to that what were probably the two killers in this game for me - that fact that our vaunted fitness advantage was nonexistent (the korean coach can read the kaiser's comments on fifa.com too - he's not dumb), and (possibly because of those comments) the koreans showed much, much more heart and desire throughout the game, and especially towards the end of regular time and onwards when tiredness makes the body a coward. i kept thinking that the difference in systems would stand the korean players in good stead the further the game progressed. toward the end of regular time, i kept thinking jokingly, every time i saw the stern face of the korean coach, that we needed a communist system to get more out of our girls. in short, any team that is has a technical/speed/quickness advantage on you is very likely to make you look like you can't play soccer, even if you showed that you certainly can in previous games. that was the case here. plus, if the other team is more fit and has more heart than you - game over. korea could easily have won by a larger margin. so, on to the u20 wwc. the (women's) soccer world order has absolutely changed. it was always going to change once other countries that actually love soccer and have a soccer culture started paying attention and money to the sport. we were only ahead because we were among the very few who paid attention to girls kicking a ball around. now the other countries who really like soccer and who have a soccer culture do. that beats demographics in producing good soccer players any day. i'm just hoping for some good soccer by our girls in chile.
What a nice surprise - tiny Mana Iwabuchi of Japan got the Golden Ball award - from FIFA - The inaugural FIFA U-17 Women's World Cup will be remembered for many things: big crowds, spectacular goals and a level of play that far exceeded expectations. It will also be remembered as the tournament of the No10, all the more so after the major end-of-tournament awards were dominated by Japan's Mana Iwabuchi and Dzsenifer Marozsan of Germany. adidas Golden, Silver and Bronze Balls adidas Golden Ball : Mana Iwabuchi (JPN) adidas Silver Ball : Dzsenifer Marozsan (GER) adidas Bronze Ball : Kristie Mewis (USA) New Zealand's love affair with Mana Iwabuchi was frustratingly fleeting, with the Japan No10's brilliance on show over just three thrilling matches. However, what the 15-year-old was unable to provide in quantity, she more than made up for in quality, leaving Kiwi crowds with unforgettable memories of a dazzling natural talent. Hailed as a "future star of women's football" by Gerard Sergent after orchestrating Japan's 3-2 win over the eventual runners-up, Iwabuchi went on to justify the France coach's claim by ripping his side to shreds in a sensational 7-1 win. Rested for the Young Nadesiko's final group game, she returned for the quarter-final against England only to depart the stadium in floods of tears after a cruel and undeserved defeat on penalties. The tournament was undoubtedly poorer (exactly the words that BS-er mumf wrote here !!! ) for Iwabuchi's premature exit, but when the time came to vote for the player of the tournament, the Kiwi media provided the ultimate token of their enduring esteem and affection. Their choice was backed by the head of FIFA's Technical Study Group, Sylvie Beliveau. " She is an exceptional player," enthused Beliveau. "Her ability on and off the ball, her reading of the game and her movement and anticipation set her above the other players here. " Unforgettable.
Partially agree and disagree - some arbitrary comments in the order you wrote - More technical skill - Yes - but more soccer IQ ? ....... Well remember China WNT used to be #1 or #2 at the world level, now they are neither #1 or #2 in Asia ! .....Why? ...... Well part of soccer is that is also a contact sport, and winning is about goals, and at least half come from set-plays, and in the box, size matters - even a little jersey tug will not yield a penalty. So for results, men's game or womens' game, players with size and general big lungs end up being at least, if not more, effective than players who rely on skill. Of course I hate this, but c'est la vie. So, the USA players are in their national system, and the DPRK players are in theirs. Perhaps 5 years from now, if the same teams met again, the result might be different. You know a western politician would predict the opposite ! The 2.5 minutes of FIFA highlights do make it look like a dominant display, and the USA defence seemed to run out of gas towards the end. But could that edge in US possession be correct ? I am not sure about attention & money - the plight of the Brazilian players is well known, and in the whole world, are there more than a couple of dozen professionals ? However, what the other countries had was a soccer Tradition & Culture - deeply rooted, even if originally in the mens' game - and much more powerful in the national conscience - spillover of this knowledge-base halped the other teams to catch up, and possibly have overtaken the USA now. Yes, absolutely - but isnt this great - the USA had set the initial standard? - and also hosted 2 World Cups. The game at all parts is improving rapidly - because it had to.
An excellent final word here from FIFA.com - amazingly attendance totalled nearly a quarter-million people ! http://www.fifa.com/u17womensworldcup/news/newsid=950454.html#dreams+drama+down+under Also I see there is a goal-of-the-tournament here - http://www.fifa.com/u17womensworldcup/video/goalofthetournament.html If that England goal is the winner - well I have my own opinion - but I leave it open - which among the 10 would you choose ?
What do you mean, "matter" ? We are not discussing the Official best goals, just talking on a soccer message board. So on the world stage, of course opinions here dont "matter", even if every one of us were unanimous. But for those interested in judging, then obviously their interest matters to themselves, individually and as a group.
That "best" would be what the interested are forming opinions about. But I am confused, on the one hand you seem interested, but on the other you stray from the original focus ?
Get back to me when the interest heats up. You keep saying that to me in various threads, obviously I must have BSADD. So we're clear, I am completely uninterested in compiling a list of the best goals of the tournament because I really don't think it "matters" what I think, you think, FIFA thinks or anyone else thinks about it to be honest.
Maybe you do - recall that last week, I didnt think much of a goal, because it was so like another forgettable goal, with the only trivial difference being that in one case the GK got her fingers to the ball ? Well you came back at me asking whether this difference mattered - which of course was exactly my point ! https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?p=16237209#post16237209 Ok, you can take a pass on this one then.
Ah, well here's the issue, it's actually you who have missed the point. You're statement: I disagreed with that because of the number of high shots that did result in goals with only the truly best goalkeepers in the tournament--Philippe, Richard and maybe one or two others I'm forgetting at the moment--being expected to make that save. Your reply was to reference another unspectacular high shot that DID go in. That hardly backed up your point that Christiansen's shot should have been saved and begged the question what was really the difference between the two goals you referenced. Both resulted in goals. Both highlighted the fact that your statement about the level of play and the expectation of that save being made given the nature of a number of goals at the tournament was not, IMO, very accurate. That was the point then and it still is. It comes down to you questioning the goalkeeper in that specific instance while I think it would be more accurate to questions the goalkeeping, particularly related to dealing with high shots, in the tournament in general. We probably disagree again which at this point really doesn't bother me a single bit.
Came across this snippet in another forum where a coach if keeping a blog on his trip to the Brazilian National Team Training Center.
unbelievable unbelievable - literally - surely there is a huge degree of exaggeration here ? I mean, dont they have schools in Brasil - its not exactly a third-world country ? if it was maybe the Congo or near there, I might believe it.
How often have you been to Brazil? There are millions of Brazilians who say it most certainly is third world. I suppose technically it is a developing country meaning that it's got an elite super rich class, some middle class and a whole lot of people in poverty. And what exactly does the blog entry have to do with Brazil having schools????
Honestly, I didn't think it strayed that far off topic ever. Now if we were to limit our conversations to just the US team because of the forum we're in fair enough but the conversation about the tournament seemed to be a bit more dynamic here early on so I think a lot of people just gravitated to this thread rather than the one in the International forum. In any case, I really don't think anyone here took the low road as you imply.
Petta was a phenom. Prolific goal scorer even having missed a year due to injury as well as not being able to play many minutes as WH has been beating most everyone rather handily for the past few years.
Marshfield player was wearing a super velcro suit. DP actually got free quite a bit and had many shots but her club teammate, the Marshfield GK, was superb in her own right. DP just named to NSCAA HS All American Team