Match Day 5: Netherlands-New Zealand

Good game so far. Slight Dutch dominance possession wise, but New Zealand have had the best scoring chance when they hit the crossbar.

 

so far, quick transitioningbeen the key for success at this tourney, that's why I'm surprised the Dutch have played so deliberate with no long balls to van de Sanden(at least in the 1st half)

 

Netherlands went so close to score at least 3 times

 

that sucks for the kiwis

 

NZ really put the pressure on Netherlands, i believe this is the reason Netherlands had so many blown chances and shots off goal...that pressure forced a lot of haste and poor timing in so many misses

 

jill roord knows how to make me love her

 

90+2' (of +4') 0-1 Miedema taps back to box top wide left, van Dongen one-touch cross to 6-top 1/4 right -- Stott leaves Roord at 6m left post and drifts (her) leftward toward ball. Beerensteyn jumps into a header as Erceg leans back into her, chest-to-back collision pushes Erceg over, no call. Ball bounces off Erceg's head and pops up to 4m 1-left. Roord slides under it, heads down across mouth past Stott and Nayler both going for left post, bounces at 1m center and into 1/4 right back low. Ugh -- if only Nayler had stayed central and let Stott cover the line shot -- but every defender has been hearing Bonansea's near-post shot go bump in the night ...

FT 0-1.

 

Good match--huge for the Dutch to get the win, late. Credit to New Zealand: They are an excellent defensive team--lots of experience, well-organized and played their a$$es off--and had a couple of good chances out of counters in the first half. They double-teamed Van de Sanden all day, and swarmed Miedema, and it was hard for The Netherlands. And the Kiwi goalkeeper is also excellent.

Even so, Bloodworth missed a sitter right before the half--should have been an easy goal. And Miedema dithered with the ball about the 67' minute mark (or somewhere in there) and failed to see a wide-open Martens on the left side of goal. I thought the Dutch were actually pretty darn good--this is a good team--but played a little in transition at times; it is in transition where goals can be scored in football, of course. Trying to beat a team that is bunkered in is /always/ hard, I don't care who your forwards are. Credit to Wiegman for getting Roord and Beerensteyn in the game--they won it--though I thought Beerensteyn should have been brought in 10 minutes earlier.

Sermanni has done an excellent job with New Zealand. It is not the most talented squad around by any stretch, but they've got some good, veteran defenders who read the game well, get into lanes, and are smart. Erceg was great today). NZ isn't great but it is far better than the pedestrian Kiwi teams we've seen in past years. Let's remember that they just shut out--and beat--a very good England squad about 10 days ago, 1-0.

This is a tough group, in fact, because some of the best defensive teams in the tourney are in this group. Canada is arguably the best defensive team, and NZ might be right behind them, and Cameroon, as we saw yesterday, is also stout. I think the Dutch could find more joy later in the tournament than in group play. We shall see.

 

I wonder will there ever be a game UEFA doesnt win?

 

That along with van de Sanden completely squandering Groenen's excellent entry pass frustrated me the most. I completely agree with the Netherlands actually looking fairly good offensively, and bar the Gregorius chance (what a save from van Veenandaal), I think the commentators overstated how good New Zealand actually was offensively.

 

What do you mean?

 

Brazil won their game, Canada won their game and im sure US will defeat Thailand in a few hours.

 

Brazil played Jamaica, and Canada played Cameroon. As you mention, the US will play Thailand. Jamaica, Cameroon, and Thailand are all not UEFA teams.

 

In games with only one UEFA team, the UEFA team won. The only UEFA team not to win was Scotland, and that was against another UEFA team in England.

 

Ah, okay.
Thanks for explaining.