Closed door with Norway

The USA had a super secret closed door match with Norway. The Norway version is on the Norwegian FA site. Unfortunately, there are only details about Norway.

Final score was USA 2, Norway 0 on a score in the first half by Cheney and a PK by Morgan after she was fouled in the box.

After the match, the two teams agreed to do penalty kicks. Norway won that little. Contest 6-5.

 

Well, it wasn't a pickup squad.

they didn't list the USA players who played, but they did list the Norway players.
the 9 players in Bold were on the World Cup roster.

Ingrid Hjelmseth -
Ingrid Moe Wold (Ingrid Ryland 61.min),
Marita Skammelsrud Lund,
Nora Holstad Berge,
Marit Sandvei -
Gry Tofte Ims,
Maren Mjelde,
Lene Mykjåland - Hege Hansen (Ingvild Isaksen 46.min),
Isabell Herlovsen,
Ida Elise Enget (Cecilie Pedersen 65.min).

but yeah, they are apparently focussed on the Euro Qualifiers in September, not having qualified for the Olympics, according to their coach.

these players were in the shootout. (again, World cup Roster players in Bold)

Maren Mjelde, Cecilie Pedersen, Lene Mykjåland, Ingvild Isaksen, Ingrid Ryland, Gry Tofte Ims. (Norge vant 6-5).

 

Ok, the Norwegian National team put who they thought were their 11 best players on the pitch, or at least who they think will be their best 11 for Euro Qualifiers in September. At lest that's what their coach says.


Nobody plays all their players in all matches. 7 of those 9 players played against Brasil in the WC. all 9 played in some match or other in the World Cup. If they weren't your best players you need new coaching. I venture that the USA didnt start more than 9 players from the World Cup either, since Krieger isn't on the team now and OReily wasn't on the team then. And you can't say that several players on the USA team started all games, starting with Rapinoe and Morgan. Hell, you can't even tell me whether we played Wambach Solo, or any other current starters but Morgan and Cheney.

I'm not sure what your point is, but the idea that Norway fielded some sort of B team is ridiculous. They suited up a pretty good chunk of players who contributed to their World Cup effort.

They are transitioning players like all teams do between cups. Norway will probably transition more players because they weren't very successful and are looking for alternatives. They aren't in the Olympics just like Germany because of the results of their World Cup effort. It is no wonder they are looking at new talent.


That's a pretty far cry from your insinuation that they left 7 or 8 of their best players Out of the match.

That's just plain not true.

If you want a reason for the loss look to your coach. He said the USA were faster, fitter, and stronger across the board.

 

Except they only listed 6 kickers on the FA site, so yeah, they were 6/6

 

I dunno, but at some point we will no doubt hear from a German fan that they are the best in the world and passed up the Olympics because, you know, the World Cup is the only important competition.

 

I'm pretty sure there are no live stream webcasts to to a super secret closed door match. Sorry, all we have is a report from the losing team and a couple of twitter posts.

Anything else?

 

I stand corrected She said the USA were faster, fitter, and stronger. ( wow, thanks. I see the power of red type now)

I can see why they opted out. The European season is so terribly busy. It'll be interesting to see how many of the opt out players are around for the next WWC.

now they can all opt out until Qualifiers in September..

 

Perhaps you should have included that the average number of CAPs for 5 of those regular players You mentioned was 33.6 CAPS ( including two players over 30 years old!) Then I can see the problem. See, we have players with those kinds of numbers and everyone around here thinks those players never play. But thanks for the correction. Now I see that OHara and Leroux are regulars, and Morgan is an old lady with 40+ caps. That should stop all the whining around here about not playing new players.


Now I can just point to them as indispensable regulars.

 

A fair question. If you total up the CAPs of those players, it averages out to 117.2 , so I think if somebody said we were missing experience it might be justified. In the world of soccer, 100+ CAPs is a good career for most players.

It would, of course, be masking that it is a pretty diverse group that goes from the 260 CAPs of Rampone to the measly 24 CAPs of Krieger. If I were discussing a USA team list and talking experience, I'd knock out Krieger, Rapinoe (52 CAPs) and even Cheney (67 CAPs) and insert HAO (166), Lloyd (135), and Boxx (168). Only Krieger is in the CAP range of the Norse players you mentioned. The other two have more caps than any of five Norse players you mentioned.

Making those changes would give an experience factor of a whopping 206+ CAPs per player, which I'm pretty sure would top any 6 players on the planet. The thing is, around here the discussion is usually that some of those players have been around too long, not that we are missing their experience.

If, on the other hand, you look for players on the USA roster and total up the CAPs of the LEAST experienced players on the team ( not counting the alternates, who I'm pretty sure were there to watch) you would have to insert Heath(45), Leroux(14), Saurbrun (24), O'Hara(19), and Barnhart (43) to find a group with a lower average than the 5 you included. That gives a average of 29 CAPs, not far from the total of the players you listed.

Again, when you come around to this forum, the discussion is whether the players that contributed to the 206+ cap total ( or even the 177+ average) have been around too long or not. When we have the discussion about who will be on the 2015 WWC team, I think it's pretty safe to say that the experienced players will not be here en masse.

I think that is also true for the 2 Norse players on your list I didn't talk about with over 100 CAPs. They will be bumping up against the 35 year Ceiling for the next Cup. Again, it might be fairer to discuss whether those 2 are thought of as experienced or have overstayed. When most teams have three years to build for a Cup effort, they look for younger players in those positions, especially early in the cycle. If they don't pan out, you can ask the older players back to compete for a spot. The USA will be in the same position in a month or so. Right now, the players who won the immediate competition for spots are there.

Does that answer your question?

 

I'm starting to see the problem. The fact is, that no, you don't get a CAP sitting on the bench. You have to actually step on the field. Ask Press or Engen about that. As to the number of matches teams play, well, there is still not the experience level, and you can't call players who don't play much regulars. Maybe Norway needs to schedule more.

....And the players I mentioned played the first game of the World Cup against the highest ranked team in the group, Brasil. You don't think that Norway intended to throw that game so they could have an elimination match against Australia, do you? If that was the case, the Norway coach should consult with Ryan and Henrichs on how to blow your chances in a Cup to much better effect. By the time Australia rolled around, it looks to me like the actions of a desperate team trying something new. It didn't work either. I don't think it makes your case.

I'm struggling with why you did pick them. Three of them actually make my point better than yours. Cheney competes with Lloyd for minutes, and it is in fact Lloyd who is considered the experienced one. I'll venture that at this point in their careers, if Lloyd starts and Cheney sits, nobody talks of leaving experience on the bench. They rather talk of PUTTING a regular on the bench. ( Lloyd did play, i see) Cheney didn't even have 30 CAPs when she started against Japan.

The same could be said of Rapinoe and HAO. There is more tha 100 CAP difference in experience, and if Rapinoe sits, nobody talks of leaving experience on the bench there, either. They rather talk about not giving new talent a chance.


Same with the third slot, and this even though we aren't in a development stage right now. We a getting set to defend an Olympic Gold where the experienced players already proved themselves.


In all those cases, what is talked about is leaving talent on the bench even if there is no experience. That is something you did not discuss with the Norway players, probably because you noticed as I did, that the defenders in that group had more goals than the forwards.

The Norwegians are defending nothing and trying to get back to their formidable past. They need new blood to do it. They have nothing to lose in getting the most talented, not the most experienced players. If they make mistakes now, it matters little.

But you can't say they left a more experienced team ("the regulars") on the bench. As their coach said, they are trying to assemble a team for qualifiers in September. They only have a match or two left before qualifiers start again and they don't want to miss two cups in a row. Presumably, they are putting their best on the pitch.


If they arent't, they need to look for a new coach.