Are we going to see in the Orange Lionesses group the founding of an unbreakable record of goals being scored? The counter is now at an astonishing 32 goals in 4!! matches
Indeed. What's helped is I can't think of another very low ranked team that has a player who can score against much higher ranked opposition the way Banda has vs the Netherlands and China.
Nice discussion here. I was looking forward to Netherlands vs Brazil but missed it. Keep up the discussion, too, on the roster and Starting XI against China. There is no good reason I can think of for Wiegman to not rest most of her usual starters. Netherlands has a chance to give most of them 5 days rest instead of 2 before a knockout game; and there's not much point trying to avoid the US who is unlikely to finish 1st in Group G anyway. Rest the starters or at least have them play limited minutes. Beerensteyn and van de Sanden seem to platoon / share duties at RW anyway so Netherlands can give them 45 minutes each. But why risk Miedema, Martens, Groenen, van de Donk at all? Let's see what else you got. Let Wiegman see what else she's got.
From an ethical/karma stance, there probably is no point in avoiding the US. However, the Dutch finishing 2nd in their group, which in all likelihood would have them avoiding the US, is possible, especially if they rotate heavily vs China. I wouldn’t rule out Brazil beating Zambia by three more goals than the Netherlands beating China, and I think the Dutch drawing or losing to China has a higher likelihood of happening than Brazil drawing or losing to Zambia. Netherlands vs China kicks off at 1:30 pm Dutch time; I haven’t checked the kick-off time for Brazil vs Zambia yet.
I too think that the Dutch are likely to have a harder time with China than Brazil will with Zambia--but of course much depends on who is playing for The Netherlands and Brazil. Given that The Netherlands v. China match doesn't mean much to the Dutch, and that a poor result could mean avoiding the U.S. in the quarterfinal, I see no reason why Wiegman wouldn't "empty the bench," as the saying goes. I don't know how many players a team can activate/use in a game--but I'd start all my reserves, essentially. Besides the group-stage scenario that allows her to do so, Wiegman has brought all these players to Japan (as every team has has, yes), and they've mostly been confined to their hotel for, what, three weeks, except for training sessions. So give them a chance to play in an Olympic contest. It will be a once-in-a-lifetime experience for some of them. Will she do it: I have a feeling she'll start a few reserves but not as many as I'd start. Up front, I'd start R. Jansen on the left, and then give Smits at least a half at either CF or RF. Maybe play Beerensteyn a half CF as well, and then mix in Roord/Van de Sanden at RF. In the midfield, I'd play a new trio--Pelova, Folksmerta and and Kaagman. They have absolutely no real-match experience playing with each other--but so what. They're good Dutch footballers--they'll figure it out In the back, I'd keep Nouen at centerback and Wilms at right back because they are young and need more game experience. I'd then give Van Es and Van Dongen each a half at left back and play Dekker at the other centerback spot. She's got lots of experience. Play Kop at keeper. As I say, I can't remember how many players one can active for a match, but I'm pretty sure Wiegman could play all of the above players and still have several players on the bench, so she could bring in a Martens, Miedema, Van de Donk, etc. in the second half for some minutes if she had the urge to score or somesuch. But why not give all your players an Olympic moment on the pitch? It's the perfect opportunity. If the Dutch still win the stage and play the U.S., great. The Dutch don't match up as well as the Swedes against the Americans, in my view--the team is a bit mistake-prone in the back and I think the U.S. midfield is too physical for the Dutch trio--but it's never a bad thing to measure yourself (again) against the best.
I wouldn't jump through hoops to avoid the US in the quarterfinals. But here the objectives of resting your starters and probably avoiding the US are compatible. The difference in playing on 5 days rest instead of 2 is considerable. Once Wiegman picks a Starting XI by all means play to win; the fringe benefit is she gets to see which of her "B" side is playing really well. That could turn out to be important bit of information. I really don't see the downside to going with a heavy rotation of starters, resting some of them entirely and playing others only 45 to 60 minutes. Brazil kicks off same time as Netherlands. The interesting thing is that Group G, the US group, plays (I think) 3 hours earlier.
I agree with all the general points and of course you know the Dutch squad better than I do.The matchday roster is 16 field players + 2 GKs. So from the 22-player tournament roster (19 + 3 GK), if you think of your team as having ten usual starting field players, you can replace 9 of them on a given matchday starting lineup, include one regular starter and have six of the "A" team on the bench. Netherlands is in a spot to really benefit from the 5-substitute rule in effect this year. For instance, if they wanted to play some regular starters to keep some continuity on the field, they could theoretically start 5 "A" team players plus 5 normal bench players and be able to swap out all 5 of the "A" players, 4 with normal reserves and one with another "A" player. I was tempted to recommend starting the match with most of the core midfielders to keep the game from just turning shambles. But now that I see the ref is Salima Mukansanga from Rwanda, I'm wondering if it's worth the risk. I know that's possibly a stereotype but the best refs, the ones trusted with the biggest matches, have generally come from certain countries and continents that tend to support women in sports. Hell, I wouldn't trust American referees in a big match because our pool just isn't top-grade right now. (And so there are no American center refs on the women's side in these Olympics) China can play good soccer and because they are in a desperate spot, I think (hope) they will concentrate on trying to play soccer and score good goals. But I dunno... I hated them at the last World Cup — a borderline dirty, cynical, cheap-shotting team. One of them, Shanshan Wang, is still with them. She's the one who broke Dzsenifer Marozsan's toe in the group stage in 2019 with a horrid tackle. For sure, I wouldn't dress either Miedema or Martens. I was thinking of having Groenen and van de Donk start the game to settle it, get the Dutch youngsters into a flow, but I just don't know if it's worth it. So maybe as you suggest, just play Pelova/Folkersma/Haagman.
Ha: Wiegman certainly doesn't pay attention to armchair fans--and why would she. I thought she should rest her key players against a bad China teach in a match that didn't mean much of anything. Instead, she plays mostly her usual starting lineup save for keeping Miedema and Van der Gragt on the bench to open the game. The Dutch wallop a hapless China 8-2--and Martens and workhorse Groenen not only didn't rest but played a full 90+! And Miedema is in for the last 20 minutes--scoring goals, per usual. It seems Wiegman was focused more on sharpening the squad than resting up--and we'll see how that plays out against the U.S. in the quarterfinal. I sure hope we don't see a tired Groenen at 45' in the next match. Needless to say, the U.S. will be exponentially tougher than China and Zambia. Notes: --Beerensteyn with a couple of early goals for the Dutch--the second a casual flick of beauty. --Maybe I'm wrong but Roord has seemed rather quiet/un-influential in the tourney. Meanwhile, Pelova was very lively tonight after coming in for Roord in the second half--and scored a goal. --The Dutch back four still have issues when under pressure in the box---confusion about who should be picking up who--doesn't bode well for the next match. ---Poor Kaagman: Either she's got a knock or Wiegman doesn't like her. The team is up 8-2 in the last game of the group stage and she still doesn't get on the pitch. Not a minute of action--and meanwhile, Wiegman brings in Miedema late--why, I'm not sure. I don't think her game needs sharpening. But hey...a confident performance before a big knockout match. ---Loved the English broadcaster for this match--he was great.
We'll see if the Dutch can create some chances, which they haven't done in the previous two matches with the U.S., though the WC final was weird given Wiegman's decision to bunker. I saw that Great Britain's coach subbed out six starters for today's match against Canada--leaving midfield stalwart Kim Little on the bench. Yet workhorse Groenen plays a hard 90' against a bad China team. If Groenen is not fresh against the U.S., Wiegman will have some explaining to do.
Really odd, since the only thing Netherlands had to do to secure a QF spot and 2nd in the group was not to lose with more than 4 goals. I guess Wiegman found it of great importance to meet USA in the next round instead of Canada even if that makes no sense at all.
I respect a team for just going out and trying to play its game in a situation like today and I'm willing to consider the alternative thesis — that playing well, scoring goals, and winning makes you feel like you have wings on your feet. That the mental lift is more important and instead of laboring to conserve energy, you build it, you build energy. What a vote of confidence in her team by Coach Wiegman! To be essentially telling them she wants them to play the US! And sometimes it's best to face a team like the US early, while they're struggling, before they have a chance to right the ship and start rolling.
Very well thought and well written. I totally agree and, at Wiegman's place, I would have probably followed a similar reasoning.
It does, and it is valuable but against China of this games they should have been able to do that with their 2nd string wich would have accomplished the same thing and rested their key players. Actually it would have acompliced more since it would have built up the 2nd strings confidence too. Mentally you may gain energy by spending it but physically you do not. Winning with the 2nd team would probably have been better to build confidence for the whole team not just the starters, pretty sure this didn't build much confidence among the players not used or brought in when the match was already won.
I was quite surprised that Martens and Groenen, indeed a workhorse, went the full 90 again today. Hopefully, they'll both be in good shape vs the USWNT. A very rough tournament for the Chinese keeper Peng. She was guilty of poor goalkeeping on a fair few of the goals China conceded; credit to her for good saves vs van Dongen (header from a Roord corner) and Beerensteyn (near post shot) though. English broadcaster on NBC? Apart from mixing up players at times, he was pretty good. He also called out Groenen for praise near the end of the match, and he pronounced Peng with an "o" sound (not quite right but closer) instead of an "e" sound, which is widely accepted in English speaking countries though.
Fair point, and I was expecting more rotation. That being said, some 2nd team players/reserves would have gained some confidence from this match. For example, Beerensteyn played very well and got a full 90, Pelova had a very solid second half, and van Es got an assist on her very first foray forward. Dekker got some minutes under her belt. I would have played Kop over van Veenandaal, but so be it.
Keys to the Quarterfinal? Can the Dutch hang with the U.S.? It seems pretty basic, really: The U.S. is going to press The Netherlands, and the Dutch will have to deal with it well enough to get the ball out of their defensive end and into their attacking half, and to their forwards, to have a chance in this match. The Dutch couldn't do this in their last friendly with the U.S. a few months ago: the team lost the ball a lot, played on the back foot most of the match, as I recall, and lost. I don't think they had a single SOG in the match--or maybe 1. Needless to say, that doesn't cut it. It's nice to have Martens and Miedema, but if you can't deal with a strong press by the opposition and can't the ball forward, you're not going to create scoring chances. Should the Dutch high-press the U.S. and try to create turnovers themselves? That's one way to counter a press: press back. Or might they sit back a bit and make the line of confrontation near the halfway line and try to win balls in the midfield and generate counter-attacks? I don't know, but they're obviously going to have to be a lot more front foot than back. The midfield plus young Wilms (assuming she plays) and Janssen will have to assert themselves, win battles, and possess the ball. It's a big ask for all of them.
Another key. Can van Veenendaal keep the Orange Lionesses in the game when they're under siege? She's done it before. She did it against the US at the World Cup. Her form has been off of late, I've heard. Anyone know why?
I've no idea why she's not the old Veenendaal. In her league matches I saw her make some gaffes that are untypical for her and she doesnot ooze confidence sofar with the Orange Lionesses.
"The Dutch couldn't do this in their last friendly with the U.S. a few months ago: the team lost the ball a lot, played on the back foot most of the match, as I recall, and lost." Yeah, we recall this match a bit differently. The US very much deserved the win, but they didn't put the Dutch on the back foot most of the match. The Dutch had notably more possession, and they did get the ball routinely into the attacking half and often enough to their forwards in my opinion for more to have happened. Of course, they barely created anything, but that had just as much to do with Martens and Beerensteyn being out of form on the day and Roord playing out of position as a CF. I recall the frontline losing the ball a lot. I don't disagree with what you think will be key, but I think Martens and Miedema being in top form tomorrow will be just as important. Neither was particularly good in the WWC final, and Martens wasn't great in that friendly while Miedema didn't play in it.
The USA played its first match after a 261 day layoff. The shot differential was 14-2 in favor of the US and Naeher didn’t get credited for a save, so the Dutch couldn’t have been very threatening in the final third.
Not sure where I said they were. I literally said they barely created anything. I'm just saying the Dutch midfield/defense got the ball into the final third well enough in my opinion. You can't let Martens, Roord, and Beerensteyn off the hook for the lack of chance creation and put it all on the other Dutch players in my opinion. We can disagree though.
Does Roord's midfield game need more bite, as they say? I kind of think it does. She is talented but she seems a bit casual on the pitch to me, sometimes. I wonder if Weigman would entertain inserting Pelova if she thinks she could add something. Pelova was active against China--admittedly China wasn't very good--and she is good on the ball; got a low center of gravity. Roord is good on the ball, too, but I just don't see the intensity or quite the work rate with her that we've long seen with Groenen and DvD. This has always been my issue with her. It's interesting that she and DvD were in the midfield for Arsenal in all of their big matches this past season, and they struggled against the press quite a bit. Arsenal was missing Kim Little in a couple of those matches, so that was a factor, to be sure.