Quarterfinal: China v Canada [R]

Discussion in 'Women's International' started by nsa, Sep 30, 2003.

  1. TOTC

    TOTC Member

    Feb 20, 2001
    Laurel, MD, USA
    I guess you are watching Telefutura? I think it interesting that the Americans stick to saying last names first (Pu Wei) but the FIFA graphics say "Wei Pu." (Interestingly, she is really known to friends as 'Wei-Wei".)
     
  2. Awe-Inspiring

    Awe-Inspiring New Member

    Jan 18, 2000
    Congratulations to the Canadians.

    My ego now gets the better of me and I must point out that when interviewed on Soccer Fanatics Radio before the tournament started I expected Canada to beat China in the quarterfinals.

    But I did not expect Sweden to be a semifinalist.

    And I think Canada can beat them.

    If the USA can defeat Germany, this will set up a dream final - USA v. Canada. Wow.
     
  3. wellington

    wellington Member

    Jun 4, 1999
    Charlotte, NC
    Club:
    Charlotte
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    The China-Canada game was the best match so far in the tournament. I had to watch all 90 minutes and I though sure the Chinese would at least equalize. However, I'm glad to see Canada go through, but China played some beautiful soccer and their skill and flair will be missed. Of all the teams that I have seen.

    Observations:

    - China outplayed Canada, but could not score!
    - China wasted too many free kick opportunities and had some bad corner kicks; they could have easily beaten Canada 5-1 if they converted dead ball plays like the US
    - The ref let some physical play slide by in the first half; the refs need to do a better job protecting the players; too many reckless challenges
    - Canada is tough -- they play a physical brand of soccer (a little too reckless at times -- yellow cards may be a factor if they can make it past Sweden with 4 players getting cards last night).

    Now we have the battle of the bruisers in the semis: Canada vs. Sweden. I think Sweden is fairly lucky to be this far in the tournament -- I have not been that impressed with them and hopefully Canada can knock off the Swedes.
     
  4. Mel10

    Mel10 New Member

    Apr 24, 2001
    in your underpants
    I'm still slightly excitable from the game.

    So so so good.

    Everytime Taryn made a save ... I think I had an orgasm.

    Well, not really, but close.

    What an amazing game, and an amazing result.

    We'll ignore the fact that the ref almost cost us the game more then once with some jaw dropping, obviously incorrect calls.

    I wish Kara would make those sideline runs more often. Christ.

    Hooper is a great defender.

    Taryn WOTM easily. Someone give this woman a gold star.
     
  5. Gordon

    Gordon New Member

    May 6, 2002
    Saskatoon, SK
    Hooper moved to the back about a month ago as Canada's back line has been decimated by injuries. Only Nonen is first choice of the 4. Pellerud thought that Hooper was a better option than U-19 starters Sasha Andrews (on the team) or Clare Rustadt (not selected). Hooper's first hundred games or so for Canada was a forward. Her last 6 or 7 have been as a defender
     
  6. NER_MCFC

    NER_MCFC Member

    May 23, 2001
    Cambridge, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That was exactly my thought, although they might both use a different approach now that they won't be facing a finesse team.

    It seems to me that North Korea showed the world how to beat China (by being very physical and athletic) and the Chinese don't seem to have adapted particularly well. It clearly wasn't a matter of tactics because China used to be able to handle bunkering long ball teams easily.
     
  7. bungadiri

    bungadiri Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jan 25, 2002
    Acnestia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    My impression was that their wing play was slow and very predictable, when they had the ball on the wings at all (seemed like almost never). Particularly in the second half, they seemed to resort to the long ball up the middle into the box and there's no way that's going to yield much given the physical mismatches they faced. These two things are not unrelated, of course (perhaps they relied on the long ball because they knew their wings were crap), but some kind of personnel change seemed in order long before they did anything. Poor coaching.
     
  8. Mel10

    Mel10 New Member

    Apr 24, 2001
    in your underpants
    China was being patient to a fault.

    Although, I'm not sure they are capable of a scrappy goal. I dont think I've ever seen them score one.
     
  9. Gordon

    Gordon New Member

    May 6, 2002
    Saskatoon, SK
    You'll be saying this for decades Norfolk. Direct soccer will always be around and Canada will be back in 4 years, as one of the favourites, playing a more polished version. China played a boring style of possession soccer and generated only one or two good scoring chances. They scored only 3 goals in four games: and scoring is how you win games. China is easy to defend because they attack slowly. Canada is playing with only one of their first choice defenders and managed to shut them out. Heck, Tanya Dennis wasn't even a backup on the U-19 team last year, and Burtini and Hooper are forwards! Ghana and Australia only gave up one against China, and neither are international powerhouses.

    Now Canada played truely horribly against Germany and Argentina. It was just bad soccer, and ugly to boot. Canada does need to play with more control than it sometimes does. But possession is over rated if it does not lead to quality attacks, and China seldom mustered a quality attack. Germany was much better than China, and could alternate between the slow build up and quick direct attacks. Note that all four teams left are capable of quick strikes. Canada relies solely on that style, which is perhaps a mistake. I like the way Germany and the US plays, with an ability to throw both styles of attack at you. But if we ever start playing like China, I for one will be disappointed.
     
  10. LomaB8

    LomaB8 New Member

    Jun 3, 2001
    Hamilton,ON
    Yeah it says that (Hooper was WOTM) in the article, but on TV they interviewed Swiatek and announced her as WOTM.
     
  11. gousa9

    gousa9 New Member

    Aug 28, 1999
    Canada
    it's fun watching taryn do tv interviews ... you can tell she's not used to the attention!

    elaine
     
  12. CAFAN

    CAFAN Member

    May 30, 2003
    No one can accuse Taryn of using 10 words where 5 would do. Man is she to the point. Also noticed why she's so alert. The girl never blinks. :)
     
  13. TOTC

    TOTC Member

    Feb 20, 2001
    Laurel, MD, USA
    There's something about Canadians and goalkeepers: Dallas Eliuk (box lacrosse), Mike Mamood (men's field hockey), and ice hockey goalies from Terry Sawchuk to Ken Dryden to Patrick Roy to Martin Brodeur.

    And now there's Pat Onstad (San Jose) and Swiatek in soccer. LeBlanc ain't bad either.
     
  14. CAFAN

    CAFAN Member

    May 30, 2003
    Canada's style requires a great defense. Lots of opportunities for the opposition to counter on lost possession. Starting defenders (Chapman, Boyd, Nonen and Hermus) had lots of skill and experience and all but Hermus had blazing speed. All 4 were hit by injuries prior to WWC. Amazing the team got this far. Nonen is the only one left in the line-up and she is still slowed by a bad hamstring. Canada needed to put as much speed and experience as possible on the back line to make up for the injuries. Andrews and Consolante were the only pure defenders on the bench but they're not experienced enough to put in the middle and not fast enough to play on the wings. Can't credit Hooper, Nonen and the defense enough for the job they've done!!

    I still hate to see Canada play the bunker style but the more I think about it, the more I can see Pellerud's reasoning. Field was quite slick. Pellerud would have known that going in. Worst possible scenario for Canada is to play a very skilled passing team on a slippery surface. Canada relies on speed, power and aggression to run onto long balls and pressure the opposition. The better the traction, the more Canada is able to use their strengths and vice-versa. You could see Lang, Latham and Wilkinson in particular were having a hard time just staying on their feet. Last time Pellerud used a bunker strategy was against the USA in the Gold Cup on a very slick, rain-soaked field. Same scenario as last night.
     
  15. Paul Schmidt

    Paul Schmidt Member

    Feb 3, 2001
    Portland, Oregon!
    I know a Canada fan who hasn't been keen about Hooper playing in back. To me, she was the one relieving the pressure on Canada by, at least, finding an open teammate out of the back (when using feet, not her head). China could suffocate a team up the middle, but Hooper did the job of two women last night.

    However, China's left side was a serious disappointment. It's one thing to play a boring possession game, but a lightly marked Liu Yali couldn't find a teammate 70% of the time, and the defensive support (when with the ball) on that side wasn't stellar, either. Everything dangerous seemed to come through Pu Wei.

    Another thing, Swiatek did a very good job taking crosses and other high balls. Thing is, out of the saves she made, I recall only one requiring any effort (everything else was right at her). Canada did lock down Sun Wen and Bai Jie (maybe one open shot from the two of them), but the team as a whole flat out had no finishing touch.

    Hope to see anyone and everyone on Sunday (find me at the Bitter End, or down low in 103)
     
  16. Tom T

    Tom T New Member

    Feb 25, 2003
    Soccer Wasteland
    Certainly no offense meant to the other teams, especially Canada, but China's lack of finishing, or lack of whatever, is a major story here.

    I can only think that those who skipped the WUSA this year only lost a bunch of money (to them).

    Although they had their moments, it looked like they were here only because they got free tickets or something.
     
  17. CAFAN

    CAFAN Member

    May 30, 2003
    Focusing on the loser's deficiencies is the oldest way in the book to discount the winner's accomplishment.

    Bigger story is that 12'th ranked Canada, the second youngest team in the tournament, went from 0 wins in 3 previous WWC's to a berth in the semi-final. And in the process defeated previous WWC finalist, China.

    That Canada did this by filling in for 3 injured starting defenders with a raw rookie and converted forwards is also part of the story.

    Could also talk about Pellerud starting a rookie keeper (Taryn Swiatek) in net ahead of WUSA and international vetran Karina LeBlanc.

    How about Canada's U19 WWC silver medal and the 5 players (Sinclair, Lang, Timko, Andrews, McLeod) now playing on the senior WWC team?

    China is the smaller part of this story.
     
  18. Tom T

    Tom T New Member

    Feb 25, 2003
    Soccer Wasteland
    I probably picked the wrong thread, sorry.

    Like I said 'No offense to.... Canada'. They beat one of the best teams in the world. Canada's stock has been rising for a while and it should - and it is a great story.

    Without diluting any of their opponents, I am still rather intrigued by China's lack of results.

    You can count on me to be cheering for Canada in the semis.
     
  19. CAFAN

    CAFAN Member

    May 30, 2003
    Good on ya mate! Eh?
     
  20. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    I believe this game was lost to the terrible mistake of the referee.

    That was an off-side play, very obviously. It shouldn't be counted as a goal in the first place.

    This game should have been a shoot-out in the end.

    Technically, China is a better team. They should have advanced.

    We should implement TV playback in improtant soccer games like this.
     
  21. CAFAN

    CAFAN Member

    May 30, 2003
    Sounds like a bad case of sour grapes to me.

    Slo-mo playback of Canadian tv coverage doesn't show an offside. What coverage are you talking about?

    No points awarded for style in soccer. Are you suggesting a change in the format? Goals for/against plus points for technical and artistic merit? Or maybe we could just forget the goals and go with team routines choreographed to music? :)
     
  22. Labdarugo

    Labdarugo Member

    Dec 3, 2000
    Downwind
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Maybe I'd believe you if the goal had come in the 90th minute, but it didn't. It came in the SEVENTH MINUTE. China had 83+ minutes to equalize but didn't. How is that the fault of the ref?


    Quoted from http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/03/en/031003/1/buk.html
    "China paid the price for taking too many touches in front of goal. Sun Wen and Bai Jie were intricate and tricky, but without the blistering long shots of former midfielder Liu Ailing, the Steel Roses were short of firepower. ...
    "China’s demise cannot be solely attributed to their physical shortcomings however. Compared to the supremely confident U.S., or even Japan and North Korea, the Steel Roses looked anxious throughout, visibly frustrated at their inability to get up a head of steam. Had they shown a little more composure in front of goal, all those hard-won chances would surely not have gone to waste."
     
  23. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    That doesn't matter. It's still the fault of the ref. A bad call is a bad call. It's entirely unfair to any teams. It just deflates a team when this happens.

    Sure, the chinese was weak in the attacking front, but I think that's the problem of their coach. They had the control most of the time and had lots of chances.
     

Share This Page