Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Women's International' started by L'orange, Jan 8, 2019.
Now they can truly be considered a major club!!
It was excruciating to watch the Dutch play out their counters - no speed and really bad passes.
From what I see Veurink is still there but I have not seen de Haan since Euro (Other thing is I don't follow Oranje too close...)
The team stats from InStat show clear US dominance.
I think the player stats from InStat can be quite useful, but how InStat weighs different statistics and rates/ranks players appears to be fairly questionable a lot of the times. (It also seems to fail to factor in context on certain plays/challenges/situations.)
Miedema already said in interviews she would love to join us.
Well, first we've got to get to the Eredivisie level, then we can talk business.
I did not see the final--had a commitment that could not be broken. I wasn't too upset about it as I thought: Well, if the Dutch get whipped, I won't regret missing the broadcast, and if it goes well, I'll watch the replay. I guess I won't watch the replay! Damn!
I did catch the halftime score of 0-0 and was very encouraged about it. I thought the Dutch might grow into the game and start playing some good football--but apparently the opposite happened! Oh, well.
It's sad that the Dutch can't win a World Cup--but it's a very tough ask for all teams. The men have lost the WC final three times, and now the women have carried on that unenviable tradition. Still, the Dutch had a great tournament and should be proud. And not just this tourney: Wiegman and this group have had an outstanding two-year run.
What are thoughts on how the Decker/Van der Gragt duo played today? I'm actually shocked that Wiegman made the changes she did, partly because she's not one to tinker much. We've had virtually the same lineup for two years. I mean, it made complete sense to try and shore up leftback with Bloodworth and then insert Dekker at CB--but then you've got two centerbacks with limitations in terms of speed, agility, quickness? Then, too, you've suddenly got Bloodworth playing a position she hasn't played at all in the tournament and hasn't played at all in quite a long time. I think she played some outside back for Arsenal early this past season but it's been a while. How did she look at left back?
I wonder what will become of Van Es going forward. It was very odd, no, that she didn't play at all after Cameroon? Was it her hand or her play--or something else? We're talking about a player who I think has started most every NT match for two years. I could see sitting her for one game, but the rest of the tournament? I mean, she seemed to think that Van Dongen was offering more--but not enough to start today! Interesting....
How did Martens look? Props to her for being tough and giving it a go with a toe that obviously needs quite a bit of rest.
Who was the penalty called on?
The question now is, what do the Dutch need to do to get better? Questions, questions!
I think the counter play was pretty poor in this tournament. Why, I'm not sure. Speed? Van de Sanden and Martens are known for their speed, are they not? But neither one of them was at her best in this tournament--Martens had a tough injury and Van de Sanden just wasn't effective enough. They all, and Beerensteyn, had some moments, but it as a slog. I do think the Dutch dithered too much on their counters--players weren't creating space or finding seams, and then we'd slow down the ball--pass side to side--and the opportunity that might have been there to start went begging. Really good counters are really like a small cavalry charge--three passes to people making runs and then a shot.
Could be the first year of a fully loaded schedule with deep running CL performances up till the final with this tournement right after it was a bridge too far...this time.
They've gone through that experience now and will physically be much tougher next season.
At the Olympics.
Van der Gragt. It was such an unnecessary, poor play that changed the game in my opinion. Lavelle's goal was so good, but I'm not sure it happens without the US getting the lead.
Thanks. Yes, I saw a few highlights--can't bear to watch the full replay yet--including foul. It was kind of dumb play, but what can we say. Van der Gragt had a strong tourney.
Wiegman's plan, it seems, was to play more defensively than normal and keep the U.S. from scoring--and that worked for a long time. But the coach said the Dutch struggled to get out of its defensive posture and forward into attack. I guess that was obvious to all who watched. It was a cagey strategy, but it is hard to change your personnel and playing style in the last game; it rarely works. The Dutch are not a team to sit back--just the opposite.
Indeed, but the fact is that we were spent by those midday scorcing heat matches, while the others had at least the sun out of the way with the evening matches, extra time match and a day less recuperation time.
The best option was to wear the yanks down and it worked until the unfortunate high boot move. What I personally would have liked to see more was less moving in the midfield and more direct dropping the ball over the pushed up US back line.
To our friendly neighbours.....did I hear that good old banter song " Schade Deutschland " ? I couldn`t quite understand the lyrics.
I didnot hear anything, but they could be singing about next year when Germany isnot at the Olympics.
I kind of hope so. Friendly Banter is always fun.
You're saying that we didn't try many long balls in the first 60 + minutes? That is surprising. Also surprising---Van de Sanden only comes in at 77'? That is shocking. I think Wiegman substituted Roord for Martens earlier than that--but why not Van de Sanden then? Team might need some work on quick counterattacking. We've got the players for it, don't we?
our vaunted, wide attack in this game, there was none! Wiegman decided to bunker instead & go with the centralized lone striker. Hmm..........maybe the lone fwd was Miedema?....nope(she incredibly was made into a midfielder)........maybe it was van de Sanden....nope(she only came in when we were down 2 goals)/
Groenen's short passing game was clean/good, but in the second half, she wasn't the dominating defensive presence she's been throughout the whole tournament and wasn't aware of Rapinoe on one play when she was looking to switch the point of play. Spitse and van de Donk were more involved defensively in the second half, but they were at times uncharacteristically careless with the ball at their feet.
Van der Gragt's had a great tournament as a whole, but that second half was rough. Incredibly silly play on the penalty, and she gave Lavelle all the time and space she needed for the US' second. Bloodworth and Dekker were pretty solid defensively in my opinion, but it just wasn't to be for the Dutch on long passing. Van Lunteren did struggle to deal with Rapinoe's crossing ability as van Veenandaal made saves on Mewis and Morgan on Rapinoe deliveries. Of course, van Veenandaal was the best Dutch player on the day with additional saves against Morgan outside the box and Ertz and Dunn inside the box.
Martens, Roord, Beerensteyn, and van de Sanden tried their best, but the end product just wasn't there. I thought Miedema lost possession a bit too easily at times, but she had her moments of quality. She really should have gotten a shot off on that nice run in the second half.
Yea, do you think it was a mistake for the Dutch to bunker? I can't decide. I have not seen the game--just a couple of highlights, will watch later tonight--but it looks like that was the plan. On the one hand, the match was scoreless into the 60s', which anyone would have said going into the game was a big plus for The Netherlands and beginning to offer real potential to steal a win. I mean, the U.S. had scored on everyone--including France and England--within, what, 13' or so? Without the PK call this game could easily have stretched into the 70s or later without a score. I'm pretty sure Wiegman would have been quite happy with that.
On the other hand, it's never a good sign when you feel you have to change how you normally play--and change who you normally play--change your personnel and formation--for one opponent in one (big) game. I've never seen this Dutch team bunker--ever. Bloodworth hadn't played outside back for the NT in a long time. It seems a bit desperate really.
England came out and played in the middle of the field with the U.S., and I'm not sure why Wiegman didn't think her team couldn't do that. But she knows her team. It's also true that England was down 2 goals after 20' or so, and any team is naturally going to be on the front foot when behind by two goals, and the U.S. backed off a bit with the lead--the score always dictates. Still, had the U.S.--England game been scoreless for an extended period, I don't think England would have been as defensive as the Dutch were today, and that bothers me. Is England a better team right now than The Netherlands? I wouldn't say so, though they were noticeably better than they were in the Euro semifinal two years ago.
Miedema seemed crushed, rightly noting that a team might only get one chance in a World Cup final.
Here is NOS with postgame interviews--Wiegman and several players. I don't speak Dutch, unfortunately, as I'm dying to know if any of them had anything interesting to say about the Dutch tactics or the game.
It is back to the clubs after a rest, then the Olympics, and then qualifying for the next Euro--which is sure to be a major dog fight in two years with so many good UEFA teams. It will be interesting to see in a few months how the coaches might tinker to improve the squad. What is Van Es's status now? Might we see more of Bloodworth at left back or will it be back to centerback for her? I think it will be back to centerback--she's our best, all things considered--unless another good CB emerges. Van de Gragt was really good in this tourney: was physical, good positioning, good in the air, scored a goal. The Dutch were lucky she got back from injury and ready to go in time for this WC. I'm eager to see where Van Lunteren plays next as well.
Don't speak Dutch either, but that Groenen one is tough to watch. She wears her heart on her sleeve. That extra gear she often has just wasn't quite there today.
Edit: Are you able to translate the article on your device? It gives some of the quotes of the players. According to my automated translation, Van Veenandaal said they played the way they planned to and that it worked. (I'm assuming she meant up to the penalty, which is true.) Van der Gragt said she didn't see Morgan, but you should still never have your boot that high up in the penalty area.
Van der Gragt was coming back from an injury she had picked up in Barcelona, when this tournament started: I guess her conditioning coudln't be optimal and it showed in the last minutes of the final, when she was actually exhausted.
Maybe the coach should have subbed her out earlier, but it's not like Netherlands had the same batch of options as USA.
Wiegman told the game plan was to get Beerensteyn take on the two CD's as she thought they were the weak points of the States. She didnot deploy Beerensteyn in the play strategy to take on the wing backs as she thought those were a match in speed to her.
Unfortunately the passing to Beerensteyn and Miedema in the centre of the US defense was lacking. The times it did get there the panic was there with the CD's.
I guess it's cuz I watch/pay attention to the Bundesliga, but Wiegman using Bereensteyn as the lone striker/main target player as she was way upfront. blows my mind > her stats at Bayern Munich last year were 3 goals in 1396 minutes as a winger/fwd role. so that's aprox 1 goal for every 400 mins/compare that with the severly underused Jill Roord scoring 7 goals in 1033 min. at BM. So why on earth did Wiegeman think Bereensteyn could take on what can now proudly boast as the world's greatest defense?(3 goals allowed in 7 games)
sorry about my criticism of Wiegman, but if Ellis coached that way the final(loosing 0-2 while bunkering) she would be FIRED! Even after she won her 2nd consecutive WC title in dominating fashion, there's still lot of critque on Ellis by our own American fans. WHY? cuz this the high standard we set for ourselves. Guess the rest of the world don't take woso that seriously. it;s like; good job, girls........ now lets get back to the more important buisness men's soccer, lol
Actually she was used in a combo with Miedema.
I saw it, the Fox anaylsts commented on it, the websites charted it it
United States vs. Netherlands - 7 July 2019 - Women Soccerway
fifa women's world cup - Google Search
Miedema was clearly a mid
Actually they were kind of orbiting each other depending on who had the ball. So Miedema because of her better distributing skills was half attacking midfielder_supporting striker when Beerensteyn was in possession or closest to the ball/half striker when in the box with Beerensteyn_full striker when in possession in the box.