Disagree, Short was bad. Pugh was good but in my opinion she is better in the middle of the field as an attacking midfielder/forward.
That wasn't dirty. It was a professional foul and it was just an accident that Horan fell and the Japanese player fell on top of her. Yellow card for a tactical foul but it's not dirty. The thing is I thought Rapinoe fouled the Japanese player, tripping her to force the turnover. I just looked at it again. I lean towards a foul there but I can also see deferring to the referee on the field.
So called "professional" fouls are dirty plays. Making one says you are not good enough to play honest defense. I believe they should be punished stronger than they are. A direct red card for pulling a player from behind, holding when you are beaten or tripping from behind or any such dirty fouls should be pretty much automatic. Of course that would not be necessary if a yellow card actually meant something. Right now all a yellow card means is that the player can foul pretty much at will because most fouls that would be a second yellow do not merit a red. The gutless referees do not want to influence the game so they influence it by not making calls. Professional fouls are accepted but all they really do is further thuggery and mostly that has been a pleasant absence from women's soccer but is making more and more inroads working toward ruining the women's game as it has the men's.
It wasn't much of anything, the Japan player merely tugged at Horans jersey and Horan went full Oscar.
Fine, be more clear then by what you mean by "dirty" because when you say Horan was hurt by a "dirty" play, everyone's going to think it was a rough foul or one meant to injure her. You write long enough posts so make it clear instead of leaving room for a lot of insinuations.
It was flat dirty. I did not and do not believe that it needed more explanation. If I had meant to say "rough" I would have said "rough."
Megan Post-Match Interview Award Stand w fireworks Award Stand w fireworks & Pyyyyyyyrrrrooooo Trophy Raise (taken by a less skilled photographer)
She didn’t just tug. She landed on her back, look like she could have broken her shoulder or collar bone.
Not sure what this is supposed to mean? I wasn't implying any intent to injure, though you seem to have inferred it somehow. Just reporting what actually happened-- you can go find the video and see it any time. I initially thought she might have had a sort of mini-concussion, as her head got bounced off the ground by the elbow...
Go to 1:20. Different angles of the foul. Imagine about 100 to 120 pounds dropping on top of you with your shoulder facing towards the ground.
Until now I had not rewatched that foul and I was just going by what I remembered. After seeing it again I have to say I was wrong. I should not have said that was a dirty foul I should have said that was a rough dirty foul and should have had a straight red card. A foul does not have to be committed with intent to injure to warrant a red, all it needs is to be committed with some level for disregard for the fouled player and have a good chance of injuring and there be no intent to play the ball and not all of those need to be present for the red to be issued. That foul was definitely bad enough to warrant a direct red. But Japan was punished almost as bad as a red would have by the following free kick. That was one of the best free kicks, at least top 15-20, I have ever seen from anyone, man or woman in any competition. But I still think the foul warranted a direct red card.
The descriptions of Rapinoe's free kick remind me of a goal she scored in college, in the NCAA Tournament against Notre Dame. It was in the run of play but from about the same area of the field. Their coach said it was one of the hardest shots he'd every seen -- from male or female.
It actually reminded me of a shot taken in the run of play by Akers the Great. It was in Chattanooga Tennessee against Iceland I believe. A shot by someone else was blocked at the top of the box and was rolling toward Akers. She hit it in full stride about 25-30 yards from goal and executed the kick perfectly landing back on her shooting foot in perfect form. The ball jumped off her foot like her shoe was coated in flubber. It was rising all the way to the goal but stayed below the bar. As it approached the upper right corner of the goal the keeper started to reach for it. Then she appeared to pull her hands back to avoid injury. (I honestly think she could not have reached the ball as it was hit so hard.) The ball hit the upper right corner of the net and the whole goal shook violently. Behind that goal was a large brick wall extending 20 feet or so above the ground. If the net was not there I believe there would be a soccer ball sized hole in it and drilling 10 to 12 yards into the dirt hill the wall was holding back. I even think if neither the net or wall or hill were there there was a good chance NASA would have needed to be notified of a new low earth orbit satellite. OK that was a bit of hyperbole but it really looked that hard. I was at that match with my Girls U15 team and I was sitting next to our #1 goalkeeper. She said that if she ever saw a shot like that on the field she would duck away if she had time. Instead of a cheer right away there was about 20 seconds of silence then the fans went wild. All that is to say that the real greatness of all those shots was not really the velocity but it was the fact they kept the ball down and on goal. Many people can hit the ball hard but, as we see over and over, keeping it down on goal is the real skill. Skill plus speed of contact plus strength equals a great unstoppable goal. I knew Rapinoe could shoot hard but I never knew she could hit a free kick that hard.
So, who on the US team hits the ball with the most velocity? Carli Lloyd is, of course, a contender -- with her foot often described as a cannon. Rapinoe, as noted above. I recall also Lavelle's goal in the World Cup finale. She's smallish but she puts everything she has into that shot -- which for me was the goal of the year. My vote, however, would be for Sam Mewis. She fires rockets. Thinking about the physics of the thing (not that I understand physics) it would seem logical (to me) that a long-legged player, as Mewis is, can generate more power than a short-legged player. Maybe. But there's that Ozzie player, Gorry, who is only 4 feet 9 inches tall who has a cannon for a foot.
I don't know about velocity, but I can only recall one who can “hit with no regard for Humanity” October 23, 2016
However, I take my description back-- there's an angle there that shows: 1. The elbow did not hit the back of Horan's neck and 2. Her head did not bounce off the turf, and 3. The appearance of same in the other angles was due to a hip to the ear, and how hard her shoulder was driven into the turf. Anyone who suggests that was an acting job deserves to immediately suffer the same foul so we can see how they act. My prediction would be "dead armadillo."
I will probably get crucified for this....but I thought Horan fell over quite easily as well, but US players are sometimes prone to doing that. The second penalty against Spain in the world cup springs to mind. I digress. The thing is Tanaka's tackle was a poor one and she deservedly got a yellow. The way Tanaka fell on Horan was unfortunate, but I am pretty sure she did not mean to do that, but it was clumsy. In her defence she does play in a league where players do not fall over so easily. The thing is Tanaka panicked because she lost the ball in a dangerous position. It was good pressure from Rapinoe and Horan.
Eh, the tug was hard enough to knock Horan off balance, but I also sort of agree in that I think Horan knew her position on the field and where to draw attention to the foul. In any case, agreed on the yellow. It was merited as a tactical foul. However, nothing about this foul was dirty or serious foul play (unlike what a poster above says).
Pantsing someone isn't foul play? I, at least am not arguing that is was thuggery; but it was a clear and obvious foul, and even if Horan "went down easily" (which I'd dispute) she certainly did not "get landed on easily." She got landed on hard. It seems like the very last thing American fans are going to reach sophistication on is the difference between making real fouls apparent, and diving. And BTW, going down easily is often a good way to protect one's knees and ankles; a Mia Hamm, a Wambach, a Little Horse is going to get fouled tactically A WHOLE LOT. Just as it is a practical tactic for the fouling team, it is practical for the constant foulee to drop and roll rather than stress one of the more fragile joints trying to be macho about it. You forced the foul, take the profit, much like forcing a defender to give up a corner along the end line...
No, I'm saying its definitely a foul. Just not "serious foul play" which would merit a red card. And I definitely don't, by any means, think she dove. Maybe read my post again? Or maybe I just wasn't clear. She possibly made the foul (yes, definitely a foul, which I said in my post...a tactical foul) apparent by going down in a good position on the field; she may also have just gone down because of getting knocked off balance.
No No-- I didn't think you did-- that accusation was made farther upstream. The reason I started from your post--my fault-- was that I didn't stop to consider that your "serious foul play" might have been referring to card reasons, rather than just, y'now, serious foul play. I don't think "serious foul play" was intended-- just a serious tactical foul. But if you are responsible for even unintentional actions, well, that falling on was pretty bad. I might not have red carded it myself and yet not argued with the ref if she had.