The US ousted Norway last night, 1-0. If anybody has ever questioned the value of the WUSA please look no further than this match. The WUSA has contributed mightily to the development and honing of the USWNT. All of the USWNT members played in the WUSA and you can see that it has prepared them to be the best. After getting through Norway, I think the US will win it all. They are just too good at every position. Other countries only have 2, 3 or 4 players on WUSA rosters and it has shown to date. My WOTM has to be Abby. Abby is a great aerial threat and the Norwegians readjusted her shorts, jersey and sportsbra almost everytime Wambach went for the ball. Fortunately she deked Reddick's kick in for the game winner. I saw dimensions of her game tonight that I did not know were there. The first was Abby's ability to close in and shut down Norwegian players on the ground. How many lunging last minute tackles did the woman make to dispossess Norway, then how many of those did she make and retain possession of the ball? The Norwegians thought they had so much space and then Abby sealed it off. The other dimension I saw was Abby holding the ball the to wind the clock down. She's always been willing to shield with her body, but her footwork looked almost Lilly-like. Finally, Wambach's ability to redirect with her head as it entered the finishing third was mind-blowing. So much so that Milbrett NEVER seemed to anticipate the ball was coming, much less going through past the defense. Calling Nurse Milbrett...patient Chastain needs a refill on her gatorade. Did I also mention that Abby may get a Golden Globe nomination after contact was made the keeper? Note to Abby: lighten up on the rolling around in agony and Ape will let you take the PK. Parlow and Hamm flowed well with Abby, it's disappointing the US could not get a goal in the flow of play, but their position-hopping really put Norge on its collective heels. You go, Wombat! Make SoccerTown proud. At midfield, Shannon Boxx was definitely the missing ingredient against North Korea. She won almost every ball and cannot remember more than one turnover. I wish the same could be said for Foudy. She had a bushel full of turnovers under pretty weak pressure. Lilly was steady, but not her usual stellar self. Bivens has really impressed me during the tournament. I liked her ability to play the 2nd D-mid, but also push up into the attack. She serves a really great cross, too. The defense was very solid. Other than the brief scramble in the box at the end of the game when Scurry cleaned up the mess, there was little pressure. The was one corner kick where Norway started to make some noise, but Wambach won and cleared that effort out of the box. Reddick proves to be a player that is savvy beyond her years and what a nice serve to Abby for the GW. Joy was very solid as was Kate and Pearce. Pearce did a great job of going forward, but I was disappointed that she did not get more quality crosses off. It was a great game and I think the cup is now the U.S.'s to win. We got the monkey off our backs and we headed for a repeat if April can keep the gals focused. God, I love this team! I have to give credit to the Norwegian keeper. She was the best player on her side. Without her play it could have easily been 3-0 or 4-0.
If the US team had more technical skill, the match would not have been close. Instead they rely on athleticism, organization, and team play. These are all good qualities, but if they could raise their technical ability a bit, they would be unbeatable.
I think this is exactly right. While we won the game and limited Norway to very few chances, we really didn't generate a high number of quality chances off the run of play. At times we looked far superior with our ball control but that diminished as the game wore on. The technical end of the game used to be the US's biggest asset. In this game, it was the effort that won, no the technical skill. On the good side, the tracking back by many players kept Norway from mounting much of an attack for most of the game and Norway was probably the toughest team left in the WWC. Hamm choking on the PK was horrible. I think there was too much time between the ball placement and the kick. The longer you have to think about it, the better the chance you miss. Parlow's header was a little off and so was her whole game. She was not a force in this one. Abby was the player of the game and her relentless work rate carried the team to a win last night I now believe it will come down to Germany or China (probably Germany) in the final with the US winning.
To be frank, we've not done much of anything during the run of play (technically speaking) in the tournament so far, at all. Thus far we have had a wide goal margin, but if you look at the actual stats of the games, only 2 goals have come during the run of play...the entire tournament. That stat in particular bothers me to no end. Set pieces alone are not going to win the tournament for us. (imo) That the score was so low last night didn't really surprise me at all...simply because Norway seemed to have them well scouted and neutralized every set piece with the exception of one. If all the rest of the teams do the same, from here on out, and we can't score in the run of play, we may very well find ourselves out of this tournament...or having every game end up in a shootout. IMO, I don't think Norway was the toughest team left...or even the best team in the tournie. They've not been playing well from the start and you really can't look at how they played against South Korea and judge that. Its not like Korea had played well against anyone and were a real threat. To me, the big threat for us is going to be Germany. Germany has been playing very, very well and if they can recover from Jones being out, and get through Russia (they should) we could very well have one heck of a fight on our hands. Meinert and Prinz are just deadly...and their defense isn't exactly sloppy either.
Bleacherbutt, I agree with you that WUSA has been huge as far as helping the USWNT, but Reddick has not played any games in the WUSA.
we cannot meet germany in the final. only in the quarters... i watched germany in person two times and they were an excellent team but, they beat a very confused canadian squad <who lost all shape after they lost their lead> and a japanese squad who is decent but just too small to challenge a team with size like germany. i think they will provide a tough test for us if they get past russia, but i don't think any team has shown me enough to beat us...the one team i was serious concerned about if they played their "A" game was brazil...but we need not worry about that anymore.
We beat Norway in the quarters. We will play Germany or Russia in the semis. We will play Sweden, China, or Canada either for the finals (hopefully) or third place .
our next opponent is either Germany or Russia, so we won't be in the final vs Germany, my guess for final is between US v Sweden.
Defense won this game. Norway got absolutely nothing all match long and the midfield killed the game end the last few minutes when Norway began to threaten.. The GK on Hamm's kick seemed to know exactly where she was going. I though Norway was going to break through after that. Abby Wambach is a beast. I agree with Mario. Very little technical ability. No one is ever able to break down a defender and I think the fact that most of the goals scored have been from set pieces bears this out.
I too thought Foudy sucked. The woman who replaced her (I forgot her name) was much better. When Foudy was subbed the US seemed a lot more fluid within the midfield, and this led to several dangerous opportunities. I can't believe we only scored one goal. Our strikers need to be a bit more preditory around the goal mouth.
I think the players with the most technical ability (Hamm, Lilly, Foudy) did not play their best game, although Hamm more than made up for it with her incredible work rate and defensive hustle. I agree with previous posts, if we can fire on all cylinders- athleticism, organization, work rate, team play, AND better technique in the offensive third, no team will beat us. Wambach was also my WOTM, although I would nominate the defensive 4 collectively as a close second- they really shut Norway down. Norway's first and only shot on frame came well after 70 minutes. Had it not been for Norby, and our lack of final touch, this could have easily been 3-0 or 4-0. Germany IMHO will be the match of the tourney- if we get past them, I don't see us losing the final.
I was in the stands for last nights match. I was incredibly impressed with Mia's performance (PK notwithstanding). Her work rate and defensive pressure were significantly better than anyone on the pitch. She played like a woman posessed. Did she kick it up a few notches, or is this going on every match? If this is normal Mia, the TV coverage doesn't do her entire game justice. Brian
I thought Boxx and Wambach were the best players for the US last night. I also agreed with the poster who thought Foudy played poorly. I lost count of how many passes she gave away. The Norway keeper played great. I don't think she coughed up one rebound all night and stopped (an admittedly weak) PK. Here's my theory on the huge number of set piece goals: The US offensive players, especially Wambach and Hamm, are really causing so many problems for the other teams, who are forced to foul them in frequently dangerous situations. If the US opponents didn't foul them so much (or just knock the ball out of bounds for a CK), these goals might be coming in the run of play, not on set pieces. In addition, Wambach had a goal called back after a phantom foul; she proceeded to score on the subsequent PK.
Re: Re: Re: US v Norway (R) But it has required those still playing to perform at a very high level and to be challenged to do so. I'll be interested in seeing when all this is done how much of a correlation there is between WWC finishing and number of players in the WUSA. (If Canada can beat China, that might be the best indication of all.)
USA has to start scoring goals from run of play, other wise it will make it hard for the USWNT to win the WWC4. Germany v USA should be a great game( Of course Germany has to win the QF match first) ............................................. My ratings for USWNT vs Norway Scurry: 7 Pearce: 6 Sobrero: 7 Fawcett: 6.5 Reddick: 7.5 Foudy: 7 Boxx: 6 Lilly: 6.5 Hamm: 5.5 Wamback: 7.5 (WOTM) Parlow: 6.5 Overall: 6.5 Subs: Milbertt: 5 Bivens: 6 April: 6.5 She has to stop playing Milbertt. MacMillian should have come in for Parlow. REF: 6 ( There was no P.K,and Parlow should have gotten a yellow for that high kick ) This is the 3rd Bogus P.K given to the USWNT. Only true P.K was the second one against N.Korea. Attendance(25,103)/Field conditions: 6.5 I can't believe the length of the soccer field was at football season level for WWC game . (only 2.5 yards from both end zones were used) 105X75 yards is 5 yards shorter then the min required for International standards.
About the only way the Germans don't win tonight is if the bus breaks down on the way to PGE and Russia gets a forfeit from it It's not whether they'll win, it's how much Germany wins *by*. As for set pieces v. run of play, maybe that's a thread in the making all by itself... Paul
Wambach was the hero last night. She was awesome. A friend who watched the game with me and is a huge Man U fan kept repeating in hushed tones every time she made a superb physical play, "Van Nistelrooy." Wambach is that good. The defense played well, but let's keep things in perspective. One reason that Norway mounted no chances is that most of the time the ball was in the Norwegian end, because Wambach and Parlow were able to hold onto it and to control long serves from Reddick and Boxx. Boxx was superb, winning header after header and showing good ball control to turn contested balls into USA control. Reddick also played really well, going two ways, and Fawcett was rock-steady (as we expect her to be). The disappointment was in midfield. Although Hamm and Lilly did well defensively, their passing was not crisp. Indeed, Foudy did a better job passing for most of the night. The lack of scoring on the run of play does not particularly trouble me. First, the USA has been scoring early, changing the complexion of the game. Second, the USA is scoring off set pieces because their hustle and skill is earning fouls and corners. Besides, consider the following. The first goal against Sweden was in the run of play. It changed the course of the game (opening up things to allow the second corner kick goal). The Nigeria game was over in the first 13 minutes, so the lack of set pieces was not an issue. The North Korea game's opening goal really was in the run of play, and only a bizarre call turned it into a penalty kick. The game changed after that point. The Norway goal was on a "set play" but it was a 40-yard lob free kick from Reddick. That could as easily come in the run of play. The goals in the run of play will come. What is really exciting is to watch an awesome player like Wambach have a break-out World Cup. Her quotes are fantastic, too. What enthusiasm!
Re: Re: Re: Re: US v Norway (R) Well, Canada beat China 1-0 and Germany beat Russia 7-1. Also, I think WUSA has made a difference, why you ask? Well, I am 100% sure that WAMBACK, Boxx and Bivens would not have been on USWNT for this world cup , if it were not for the WUSA.
Bente Nordby & the U.S. Defense Bente came up huge again in a big match against the U.S. and was the main reason why Norway kept the score as close as they did. I thought Norway had a chance if they could create at least 2 or 3 good scoring opportunities, but without a healthy Hege Riise, it looked like Norway could have played another 90 minutes against the very tough U.S. defense and still not manage to score a single goal. I expected Joy Fawcett to play a solid match, but Kate Sobrero also played extremely well as did Catherine (please don't call me "Cat") Reddick.
* I haven't seen a team in this tournament that has a defense and a transition game like the US. A big big part of this is Boxx. I've been EXTREMELY impressed with her play as DM. * I haven't seen a defense that can keep a lid on the size and skill of Wambach and Parlow. * As far as the midfield: The US (and most of these teams, excepting Brazil) play entirely too direct. They are worried about square balls in the middle, so they tend to band the ball up almost 80 percent of the time. They have the skill/technical ability to break teams down, but you can really see a reticence that is ingrained in their play. * Have to agree with a previous poster -- don't get hung up on set piece v. run of play. We're scoring. When you draw that many fouls and corners, good things happen. * Germany is definitely the biggest test remaining. Sweden is good on the counter, but the D is weak. Canada plays very physical ball, but they have no variation in attack and I just don't see them as a big threat.
Why? they have spent a lot of time working on them. Yeah they only scored one goal against Norway but the set piece has been exceptional. They have raised their goal average on set pieces to something like 65%. why not let that be a strength. Especially with set piece artists like Mia, Mac and Cat? IMO it's an advantage over every other team. I don't think our run of play goal production has suffered.