I think that is fair. Lilly is the youngest, yes? Both she and Alyssa have played at the top in Europe, so they have experienced big crowds and hostile environments. But yesterday was that + being really physical. The combo of the 2 was a new experience for many. Some handled it better (Wilson, Davidson, Fox, Cooper, Patterson) and some worse (Rodman, Yohannes, Thompsons). Some got better as they went along (Hutton, McGlynn). I think they will all be better for it individually. And we as a team. Collectively.
The thing is Yohannes disappeared whenever we don't fully control the situation. Lost year's loss to Brazil, shebelieves loss to Japan, recent loss to Japan and this loss to Brazil. She was the weak link that got targeted in every of those loss. Her strengths really standout but weaknesses are also glaring. This is why I don't think she will see plentiful time in next year's world cup.
This was my first reaction. On further thought, however, Heaps was stuck in a 1 defender against 2 attackers near the corner. Where was the outside back on that side? You can't leave someone 1 on 2 in that area.
Thx. She also was tied for the lead on the team in touches, so play was moving through her quite a bit, and I don't remember her turning it over a lot in dangerous spots. A lot of losing the ball out of bounds etc. But, I do agree your of your criticisms of her at this point. I'm not quite as bearish on her as you though, and it doesn't appear that Emma is either. Personally, I think that the first choice CM/DM midfield pairing next year should and will be Coffey, Hutton. Based on what we have seen so far though, I'd expect that Lily will be in the mix somewhere as a sub or possible situational starter. We will see.
This. I know Hayes has been trying to get Yohannes to be more physical, but she is not close to that, and was exposed. What was interesting is that Yohannes committed one or two cheap fouls, and Brasil seemed to back off her after that, which gave her more space. She still was in over her head, but that seemed to change things a bit. Unfortunately, we are already down 2-1 at that point. And this. Usually, don't mind Heaps complaining all that much, but both those non-foul fouls were in the second half and it was clear what was going to be called and what was not. Yes, Wilson, but again, her passing was wanting. She was not the only one, but she really needed to do better. Sentnor was good an harassing, but didn't really add anything to my eyes. This really seemed like Cooper's type of match. She's not afraid to get into it, and she did. Not sure of the tactical changes at the half other than the subs, but what ever they were in addition to Cooper's physical play gave her lots of space. Needs to improve her decision making at those moments, but she was a huge improvement over A Thompson. Patterson's physical play was a surprise. In a previous match (or more?) versus this type of opponent, she looked overwhelmed. But in this first match, she met the standard and looked good. A Thompson needed to do better. But I don't necessarily put her performance down to just the physical play. Multiple times she made good runs and the pass was not there - Wilson was did that at least twice, once missing A Thompson to be through on goal, another allowing the keeper to intercept when A Thompson was well open in front of goal. While I agree about Coffey, the team need to win when players are missing.
That was Fox at the back post. It was her only mistake of the match, and unfortunately it allowed a goal.
One of the things I think we are missing in this conversation, particularly about the experience versus Brasil on Brasilian soil, is that one of the best players in NWSL so far this season - Dudinha - did not have a good match. She was threatening, but was off side too many times (poorly off side, not paying attention to the line), and should have had at least one goal, and my recollection is more. But she, like Yohannes and Hutton and other US players, seemed overwhelmed. And like Yohannes and Hutton, she is young (only 20). Side note - I know Sofascore gave her a 7.5, but I think that is too generous. Her positioning was quiet good, but her execution was not to her NWSL standards.
On the first goal, I was referring to Heaps on the right side, stuck near the corner defending two Brazilians on attack. One of the Brazilians got past her and got off the cross from which the goal was scored from the left side. I think you are referring to Fox not covering the goal scorer. But Heaps should not have been alone on the right side with two attackers, the back on that side should have been there too -- which would have been G Thompson. So yes, the attacker got around Heaps to get off the cross, which was the first problem I saw, but I think the bigger problem was her being alone having to cover two attackers.
She is clearly the lowest on the Totem Pole in CM. Either in the 6/8 spot behind Coffey, Heaps, and Hutton. Or in the 8/10 spot behind Rose, Heaps, Shaw, and Moultrie. Cat, too, if you want to put her there. And Sentnor is in that convo along with Bethune. The only other 6/8 even really in the picture atm is Jackson. And she has LESS experience than Yohannes does. To my eye, she has a ways to go with strength, physicality, and competitiveness. And ball security/reading the game. Too often goes to flicks & low percentage stuff. Sometimes just keep the ball. However, I think it is clear that Hayes has made the decision that she is worth the investment and I agree. She will continue to get minutes. Heaps is a fine example sitting right there. She has come a long way in a year. She is 14 months out from her first cap. She has moved from Ajax to Lyon and started a CL Final. I think it is reasonable to assume she can make more leaps forward. Still only 18.
In place of whom? As I as that as Hayes said pre-match that she had an expectation that Brasil were going to play pretty much how they played. So, she could have picked Flint, but seemed to deliberately not pick her.
Post match interviews. Lots of comments on the chaos of Brasil team and the environment. Mandy McGlynn Tierna Davidson Lindsey Heaps Sophia Wilson
I had decided to allow this result to digest a bit before I decided if I was having sever indigestion because the match was too spicy or because the play upset my stomach or for some other reason. I have decided that it is somewhat a combo of the three and I have decided that I believe it was totally preventable. Brazil has almost never played the USA straight up and they incorporate the so called "dark arts" nearly every time we play and they were actually playing for something as they were at home, before a very pro Brazil crowd and were ranked below the USA and wanted to move up. Not every national team, men r women, is as cavalier about friendlies as we are and Brazil is one that takes every single soccer match seriously. Hayse should have worked hard to prepare the team for the atmosphere and the type of play to expect. Obviously she did not have them ready for what was to hit them and the USA entered the match expecting a fun friendly with hugs and kisses at the end. But what they actually faced was a determined and well prepared team that was willing to do almost anything to win the match and there was none of the "lets have fun" attitude that the USA usually expects. From the very first whistle we were facing a chainsaw wielding set of maniacs' that was looking to treat this match like Leatherface treats a party of pretty little naive cheerleaders in the woods and we got cut up and stored in the freezer. It was neither pretty nor effective from our point of view. This is the first bad mistake that we have seen from Hayes and I expect her to right the ship quite effectively. Her first and biggest mistake had to do with the team selection. She selected mostly the most skilled players and put them out to play good soccer. While what she should have done was select the toughest most no nonsense set of players and put them out to kick ass regardless of the score. The pre match speech should have included the phase some like "Lets go out ther and get the first foul, the first goal, and the first card. But what we only managed was the first goal and that goal was actually pretty weak and not celebrated like a team really wanting to win. All the celebration was about who scored and there seemed almost no "Now let's go get more" attitude from the players. The team looked more like girls at a pajama party that just won a mock pillow fight and was looking to relax with popcorn and icecream and a feel good movie. You do not go into a place like Brazil against a team the really wants to win and have that attitude and play well. We were knocked around and our response was not to knock back but rather it was to cry to the ref about what was being done to us. Brazil, on the other hand, made every attempt to play what the ref was calling. Should the ref have done a better job and called more fouls both ways. Of course. But our reaction was to sulk about it not to right the ship and play what was called. In actuality Brazil came ready to play and we came ready to party. The post match speeches, after this kind of breakdown, is totally meaningless. The only reaction that matters at all is what happens next. It is fortunate that the breakdown happened in the first match in Brazil and we have another to right the ship. The way we play this next match will say a lot about this team. If we come out and play another stinker then we are badly in need of some real changes however if we come out and kick ass and match Brazil's intensity, even if Brazil decides to be the nice girls, and knock some people around with little regard for playing nice. That is we must be the aggressor for the entire match. We should be the tiger in the poem: We want Brazil to believe they should have let sleeping tigers lie.
Has she ever picked Flint? For sure she deliberately didn’t pick her. I think a midfielder of flint, Hutton, yohannes would have been at least as good as what we started with. But it’s moot. It’s not going to happen.
Flint issue is that she does not pass very well nor carry very well. Incoporating Flint will our system too reactive than desired.
If you want to beat a team like Brazil, then the physical looking, 6’1 ft Flint would be the answer. If you want to pick the 23 best players that fit Emma’s style, then she most likely she ain’t. For all we know we might not even run into Brazil at the WC, but most likely will if we want to win the whole shebang Similar wise, Spain’s running away from the rest of Europe, so should we build a team around beating them or not? but one thing cool about woso is that’s its ever evolving, what’s on top this year, could take a mighty stumble by next year. still got to be a little concerned about Brazil; they’ve beaten us now twice in an row, which i think’s an record?
The great USWNT teams of the past would not have allowed the physical play to go unanswered and they would not be "nice" in their interviews. I don't know Emma's coaching style well enough to say one way or another, but I hope she has the team sharpening their cleats (old school reference). Play to win every time. No friendlies attitude. This becomes a team and spirit building exercise. If they get up, keep trying to score. The best revenge would be not only to do a better job of standing up to the dark arts, but winning 6-0.
I don't buy that for a minute. The whole point of coming down to Brazil was they wanted an unfriendly friendly. And that is what they got. I think Emma will be delighted with Brazil's approach. Now, telling the team what to expect and them experiencing it are two different things. The 2nd half was much better. Was that a function of Brazil being up 2-1 or will we bring that to game 2? As for the offense. I am of the opinion that our most technical & creative attackers are Lavelle, Swanson, and Macario. Our most technical and composed MF is Coffey. And it the back it is Girma. None of those players started and only 1 played. Rodman has always been the least productive & least technical of the Expresso. But also the most physical & best defender. She plays furthest back. Oft times Rose (or the CAM) is more advanced. This plays into the strengths of each player. Rodman needs space or 1 v 1 chances to really thrive. Bunkers are tougher for anyone, but having super good touch, vision, and passing abilities are not her strongest suits. Ditto Wilson. She has gotten better. But speed is still her strongest suit. Thompson even more so. We saw this at the last WC. Swanson & Cat out. Rose hobbled. We struggled. Now, I think we have improved as a team since then. Rodman, Wilson, and Thompson have all improved. Coffey in CM. There is better atracking depth (Shaw, Moultrie, Cooper, Sears, Sentnor). The floor is higher. But Rose, Cat, and Swanson are still the players most likely to creatively unlock a D. Maybe Moultrie. But even with a team as dedp as ours, missing Girma, Coffey, Swanson, Rose, and Cat in the XI is gonna sting some.
In this match, rankings don't matter. This is a rivalry and Brasil wanted to beat us on home soil because of the rivalry. I encourage to list to the post match interviews. It is clear they were prepared and they knew what to expect, but a coach can do everything possible pre-match, and they can still not get it together. In fact, the general theme was that the first 15 minutes were a struggle, but apart from that, they felt they did fine (both Hayes and Davidson said that specifically). That tells me they figured out what needed to be done. I think that is a bit over the top in describing Brasil. Everybody going into the match knew how they were going to play, yet the CR allowed the physical play to persist. When she started calling fouls, that changed things. Our players also stepped up. As an example, look at Fox - she dealt with the physicalness of the match. Cooper and Patterson, too, as well as Hutton. There were two issues - Yohannes (don't need to restate what has been said multiple times), and their defense planing Wilson close and hard - Wilson talked about that post match. Interesting in this context, the goal Wilson scored started with Rodman bumping a Brasilian player off the ball, and she gave Wilson the ball in space. The Brasilian players backed off and Wilson took advantage. Other than that, and maybe one or two other instances, Wilson was tightly and physically marked. And then what? The perception is that the team are cream puffs, when that is not true. In this first match, it looked like that mostly because of Yohannes in the middle. If we play to Brasil's style, then they win. In the first 15 minutes, yes they imposed themselves, and the second goal I really think would have been saved by Dickey. But once the players got over their nerves, it was a much closer match. The biggest difference I think was Haas - She imposed herself on Wilson and Heaps all match, and even blocked a Patterson shot that would have tied up the match. Go look at Brasil. On every non-foul they thought was a foul, they had 2 players complaining to the official. All match long. Occasionally a US player would step in, but it was all Brasil all match like that. Yes and no. The starting XI did not have Coffey available and Lavelle is on restricted minutes. And no Girma. And no Dickey. Basically, four players that would I think would have ordinarily started didn't (and this is assuming Hutton starts in place of Heaps). Had this been a WC, Coffey would have put off her surgery (probably), Lavelle would have probably started, Girma would have been called in and probably started, and Dickey would have been there. This was a match for Hutton (she met the challenge), Yohannes (did not meet the challenge), G Thompson (was decent), and A Thompson (did not meet the challenge). That apart, this is a team that largely does not have the experience of playing in a hostile environment like this. Heaps does. Lavelle would. Probably Swanson, Fox, Davidson, and Sonnett. But the rest of the team don't have this experience, and needed it, and the younger the player, the harder it is likely to have been. Heck, even the young Brasilian, Dudinha, struggled. edit - cleaned up some grammar.
Interesting reading some of the opinions here. Away games are always a different challenge, and the USA are not used to many as the finances of home games are too compelling for both parties. This group is relatively inexperienced vs the teams of old. That said, in my opinion, there are fundamental flaws in the composition of the squad. Too many similar profiled attackers who rely on speed and balls in behind or excessive dribbling. No pure finisher. Lack of toughness in the middle of the park. I don't know if this is because there are no other options or by design, but I can see this group being relatively easy to play against for certain experienced and good teams. They are also very capable of beating poor ones comprehensively.
Not exactly sure what you mean, but there was an article a while back which talked about how most other countries couldn't afford to host the US because of how expensive our team is. Plus, the quality opponents such as Spain or England or such have been tied up first with Nations League and now with WC qualifying. What do you mean by a "pure finisher?" And how do you mean it in this context? Like who in WoSo is a pure finisher? I ask as I think Wilson is a very good finisher and very opportunistic.
Also, thinking about this, Man City had 3 key players to their WSL double win - Bunny Shaw, Kerolin, and Hasagawa. The US team faced two of them, and those two were pretty ineffective against the US (particularly Hasagawa in the 3rd match where Hutton essentially marked her out of the match).
Cannot speak for them, but "pure finisher" is usually a term for a traditional, proper, real #9. A target forward. Not a speedster or winger or false 9. A proper CF. Someone who does their work in the area. Holds the ball up with their back to goal. Physical. Good in the air usually. Brings others into the game. On the men's side, Brian McBride is the US archtype. Haaland. Lewandowski. Kane. Players who can do that AND have speed and skill a VERY rare birds. Drogba. Ronaldo (Brazil). Mbappe, Messi, Dembele, and Vini Jr. are all good finishers, but I'd not call any a pure finisher. It is speaking not so much to the quality of the goal scorer as to how/where they play on the pitch. Their role is pure instead of varied. A pure finisher is someone who is only (or mostly) gonna play one position. Center forward. Period. You are not gonna play Harry Kane wide or Haaland as a false 9. Get in the box. In basketball terms, think of a "pure" center. Look at the Knicks and Spurs. Wemby and KAT are both gonna start at center, but neither are "pure" centers. They handle & playmake. They shoot 3s. Now, Mitchell Robinson for the Knicks is a PURE center. Set screens. Roll to the basket. Blocks shots. Offensive rebound. Does not guard well in space. Keep him near the basket on both ends as much as possible. Think Shaq. Now some players can play as a true C, but can do much more. Wemby can block shots on D, but alsonis MUCH more mobile, as were Russell & Wilt. Jokic can handle the ball & shoot. Jokic isn't a pure C in my book, either. It isn't perfect analogy. I don't want to get into "Harry Kane does more than finish" argument. He does. Great passer. I am using it more as pure CF. And great ones are gonna do more than just score (pass, hold up, win duels, etc.). But most times, they are functioning as a CF when they do it. On the women's side? Akers. Wambach. Carli Lloyd. Currently? Esther Gonzalez? IDK? Our pool does not have a lot of that. Lynn Biyendolo and Joseph are the closest. Hatch? I am not saying call up Hatch, but a player of that type. Our pool has a lot a speed merchant/winger types & false 9 types. Not too many target forwards. Emma has acknowledged as much. Cat & Cooper are probably the most physical. Rodman can be. Sentnor has the fight but not necessarily the size/strength. This is why I always have Biyendolo in a projected 26. Not necessarily because the is a top 26 player (though it is close). But because she brings an element the others do not. Unless you wanna throw Heaps up top, we don't have that right now. And Lynn certainly isn't near the same level as Akers or Wambach or Carli, and she did start out as a wide player, too. But I'd want to have that card to play as a manager.