You know what? I like the look. She’s like the female Butcher. I prefer my athletes to be a tad unhinged.
I was only referring to this WWC, and I definitely think VAR has helped the U.S. in 2019. The U.S. is the best team, but statistically speaking, there is always a chance you can lose, hence luck. Having said that, I don't think any other team (that made the knockouts) had as good a chance as the USA to make it to the final and win it.
She had a poor one in the NWSL, but I've found Rapinoe to be a great PK taker since her 2011 one against Brazil. I don't quite know what's up with Lloyd lately. She also crashed one against the bar versus Scotland late last year.
They earned their luck, but as with France, the US were more clinical. White....whiff. As the US showed, if you whiff, you better have a back up.
Ok, Press did her best but I still think she's not really effective as the left winger. It would be good to let her switch to the middle during counter. If we have another good LB we can move Dunn up. Also since our backline was a bit weak, is it possible to sub Becky and use JJ as the CDB, let Brian play the DM again? If we meet the Dutch we can't sit too deep to let their playmakers dictate play. If we meet the Sweden it's also a bit dangerous to do so.
On her goal today? Morgan was onside by a couple of feet. White was off by an inch or two. The way they're calling these now (and reviewing every goal for offside) it's hard to argue with the call.
Exactly, the US has the ability to control and disturb the midfield, they can't sit too deep especially if they are going to meet the Netherlands.
That's probably my beef with this. A ball is onside until it totally crosses the line.Not 3/4 of it - but totally. I would prefer if they would give the players more leeway i.e. your whole body has to be offside not just the inch of your toenails. That offside of Ellen White might have been called right but FELT wrong.Not just because of the final score.
This US team, top to bottom and any reasonable XI they put on the field is the best they’ve ever had. I’m confident in saying this team would take apart the 99 side. And for disclosure, if anything, I should be a 99er homer considering that was my generation and got to play at least one club match vs one of them (who was a guest player on a boys team). The fact that they’ve looked vulnerable is down to field improvement, for which I’m eternally grateful. 20 years ago, there were very few sides that could give the US any degree of trouble in any given tournament. By that, I mean a side that feels fortunate to keep things within a 3 goal match isn’t giving them any trouble. Today, 2/3 of the field wouldn’t feel that way. If I’m being honest, as a US fan, part of me has wanted them to lose this tourney. We (the general public, specifically) needs to come to accept the fact that how we develop players is not an optimal situation. By that I mean, throwing numbers at the problem and hoping enough people come through the system to produce the talent needed. The anology would be excavating an entire mine, throwing it into a polisher and finding a few loose diamonds that don’t look too bad in the end. What we need to be doing is separating stone from dirt and polishing a lot more stone. Some will end up amazing diamonds. Some rubies. Some only pretty rocks. But this mentality, which is supported by USWNT success via superior numbers, is allowing others to make up a lot of ground quickly and frankly it’s holding the men back too. The American public has no grasp of the magnitude of challenge on the men’s side of the game and what is coming in the women’s side too.
But we'd still have these incredibly close, just an inch offside calls to make. They'd just be shifted forward. Maybe we'd get a few more goals out of it, but defensive lines would adjust to the rule being changed. (And that would be a fairly major change to the offside rule . . . a bigger change than I'd expect FIFA to make).
Luck (or the lack thereof) in sports or in life in general is just nonsense to me. Like the USWNT earned their 3rd consecutive WWC final for free and didn’t work harder.
I’m not a big fan of either. Maybe she is liable for the odd error but Bardsley is a better shot stopper imo. Anything going past relatively quick either side of Telford is pretty much a goal. Her footwork to me isn’t good enough. Unfortunately England have never had anyone even close to world class in goal.
Yeah but the main problem is not the keeper but the whole left half backline. I am still very proud of the Lioness' performance and hope them do better in the future. How did England ppl react? I think the lioness deserve applause from their nation.
Yeah. I’ve been moaning on here for years about Bright (we always look far more solid without her in the team). It’s even more absurd now to have her in the team with more of a passing style. McManus or Williamson are both better (Williamson was the best defender by far in the warm up games). Left back is a problem position. Has been almost forever. I was just pointing out that our predicament was made even worse imo by the goalkeeper change. The reception will be good. Record viewing figures and attention on the women’s game. Semi-finals in a tight battle is nothing to be too down about when you consider the overall make up of the squad. Strong squad but with limitations in a few areas.
I looked at it after this comment broken frame by frame. It was a hell of a lot closer than 2 feet, but yeah, she was on by about 6 inches at the precise moment the ball was struck. I think the issue I have with VAR is that in spirit of defending (as an old center back who loved the offside trap as much as anyone), I always felt as though the impetus was on me to defend when things were that close. Getting bailed out when someone was 6 inches off or getting a goal reversed when someone was in fact 6 inches on isn’t a good thing IMO. This is different than when the ball is out (or not), because the play is much more complex as it deals with space differentials between multiple moving objects. The brain of the defender doesn’t perceive a difference when it’s that close. If it’s that close, it’s a defensive mistake to me. So just play. I know this gets into off is off and on is on, but even video review isn’t particularly clear cut. One of these days with better tech I wouldn’t mind something in the liner of waist bands that tracks forward most position at the waist (and just make that the rule) synced to a ball mesh that measures the precise moment the pass is played. We’d know in real time. Not a fan of slowing things up this much for something that to me is either way is a defensive mistake.
Yeah, but then you have players like Jacobsson of Sweden who has that long, think haired ponytail which would keep her onside if she was running at full speed and have at least half step advantage. Even as one who likes more scoring, that is a bit too far.
Best PK takers are not always your best players. Back in the USWNT 1.0 days, Akers was the PK taker. Overbeck would take them when she was off. Even with Hamm/Lilly/Milbrett/Gabarra out there. In the 1999 PK shootout in the Final, Overbeck & Fawcett took the first two PKs. Agree it seems curious, but England have their list and White is not at the top, apparently.
True. Unlike the game, which requires reading play, different skills, athleticism, penalties are a very focused task. It’s like foul shooting in basketball. And you didn’t see Shaw taking his team’s technical free throws when he was the best player in the world.