Absolutely, no argument here-- but do keep in mind that we have been a hellaciously hard team to score on for quite a long time now. Guarantee me in advance that the final will be 1-0 and I'll run out and double down on the bets I didn't make immediately, because that is our kinda score...
I am surprised that those of you who purport to have some expertise are saying Smith was offside. Here is the pertinent part of the rule: A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by: interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or interfering with an opponent by: preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball or clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball So the questions are these, with the answer to one of them having to be "yes": Did she interfere with play by playing or touching a ball ...? Answer: no. Did she challenge an opponent for the ball? Answer: no. Did she clearly attempt to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent? Answer: no. Did she make an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball? Answer: no. If I am wrong, it would be nice if you would explain exactly what of the above language fit the facts of the situation. I am not interested in what you think the spirit of the law is or should be, but what you think in the letter of the law applies to the facts. Note: The argument you appear to be making is she could have been a distraction to the keeper or defenders in the area that they might have adjusted to. This is where I originally thought she was going to be called offside. On reading the rule, however, including the last bullet, it does not cover the possibility of being a distraction. For a keeper or defender, this simply means, "If she is offside, just ignore her" and take care of whatever else is going on. Second note: I am not defending the rule. I simply am saying the facts of the situation did not meet it.
Another angle of the conversation is how the Brazilian defenders reacted to the pass. It didn't look like they were reacting to anything Smith was doing so much as assuming she was offside and reacting to her being offside. If anything, if they had reacted to her being the one that was going to get the ball, they would have gotten to the ball before Swanson. It's the age old offside meme: Keep your hand down and keep playing to the whistle.
I thought overall she was the best of the midfield trio in the final. What this team needs in the next two years is a tight spaces type midfielder to help hold onto the ball.
In a different era, OS would have been the correct call. For the past couple of decades, IFAB has been very deliberately narrowing the definition of interference specifically because they want more goals. As a GK, some of the changes suck. But as far as the play goes, this wasn’t even close to being an offense in the modern Game.
What kind of nonsense is this? It's the officiating crew's job, the AR and VAR, to decide who's onside and who's offside, not the 'keeper or any other player. She has to pay attention to them if there's no whistle. Are you trying to tell us when an AR keeps the flag down on a delayed offside, GKs simply decide not to bother trying to make a save because she "knows" the attacker was offside?! Why did Alyssa Naeher even bother trying to make a save on Ludmila (in the 16th minute) since "it's not the job of a keeper to pay attention to offside player"?! At 0'23 of the highlight video *** This is, no doubt, a reasonable description of the trend in IFAB's revisions of the law over the last couple decades, but I don't know what definition of "modern Game" you're choosing to use. The Bruno Fernandes / Marcus Rashford goal I mentioned was just last year and it proved highly controversial. The dispute, however, is not so much what the current interpretation is. We know you're right about that. The dispute is whether it makes sense and whether "some of the changes suck", not just for GKs but for at least some of the fans and for the game itself. The debate on that is far from settled and nothing about the excuses the IFAB and its defenders are making is coming even remotely close to settling it. Because it's based on dishonesty about how players actually play a real game
Respect for Marta, but she was a thorn in the US side and so I took some small amusement from the fact that her last professional touch was a handball.
Lily is definitely on Emma's radar, and she will be inviting Lily in the future. It behooves Lily to join the US, but if she doesn't, oh well. The US is loaded with plenty of other young talent.
Lily’s family moved with her to the Netherlands & they’ve been living there for thr last five years. However, the Dutch league doesn’t pay well & pretty sure she & family will move to whatever club gives her the best offer(it be either Barca, Lyon or either NWSL or WSL club). It also depends on which NT offers her hidden bonuses(they don’t usually make them public) along with extra perks/prize money for participating in major tourneys(the Dutch got the Euros coming up next year)
Now is the time for Emma to try to get Lily to commit. We have needs is midfield and Lily could start. At least bring her in for Canada friendly in Sept (no cap tie) and START her this time. Its time to rebuild for the WC. We have a few things the need changing in the midfield and I hope she starts now. Show her how much we want her The silence in Macario is deafening. Anybody know anything?
I mentioned the controversial goal from January last year that Bruno Fernandes and Marcus Rashford pulled off in the Manchester United / Manchester City Premier League game. I also mentioned the excellent discussion in the Referee Forum over that goal. Here's a sampling of some of the comments. (Notice how the "Spirit of the Laws" comes up frequently in the discussion, even in the Referee Forum — and not by me!) @socal lurker made remarks consistent with the ones they've made here : The Bruno Fernandes / Marcus Rashford goal in the Premier League from January 2023 -> Most of the conversation about it in th Referee Forum takes place around page 55 to 57 of the 2022-2023 England Referee thread Here's a link to one of the comments to take you into the middle of it: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/2...epl-efl-cups-rs.2121880/page-56#post-41118710
Funny story: for about 7 years I coached a women's rec league team. It was an interesting mix. A couple of women that had played low-level D1, some soccer lifers, and once in a while a woman that had never played. We got a woman that had played low level D1 volleyball. For some reason it occurred to me to put her at forward. I figured, she's going to be a great athlete. And, years earlier, a guy I was playing with mentioned "beginners mind" it's kind of like goldfish-mind. Half of what keeps us back is memory of past mistakes. When you get down to it, scoring is kind of simple. So, sure enough, she was running like an gazelle through defenses, and was coordinated enough to easily beat keepers with a strike of the ball. She scored maybe 5 goals in the first 4 matches. Then she came up to me and said "you can't play me at forward anymore. It's too much pressure." I said, but you're killing it. She said, "I know, I didn't think scoring was a big deal" (probably a VB mentality, there's 21 pts per set. At least 21 scores per set. But, I've realized It.is.a.big deal!" This is my favorite coaching moment - I had her at D mid. A woman on the other team could turn on anyone, left of right. She was killing us, no one could defend that move. So, it occurred to me ... I yelled "Vicki, play a yard off her!" Vicki looked at me like I was crazy. Then she got this total look of recognition and a big smile. From then on, every time the opponent woman did her turn move, she rolled the ball right to Vicki. It was a turnover every time. It changed the game. But, that moment where she realized what I was trying, and looked at me like "Fck yeah", when lot's of other players would have resisted and debated. That was great.
Holiday could have been a legend if she hadn't retired at a young age. Not a criticism. She and Jrue seem like awesome people. Go Bruins!
Hopefully w/o Foudy. I will say, apparently the director kept her on a tight leash. She mostly stayed on topic, and even said a couple of times something along the lines of "ok, I know I'm only supposed to talk about the match, but ...." It's about time.
Demelo is slow. = defensive liability. You absolutely can not play her in the same midfield as Horan. And, Demelo's core competency is falling down. Sanchez may warrant another look. She's a luxury player (or whatever the term is). She seems to make outstanding passes on difficult passes and flub easy passes.
She's toast. Who's she going to replace. Besides, they'd have to change it to Cafe au Lait, and nobody wants that.
All the more reason to open up the competition in midfield. The desperately need a competitive cauldron enviorment for for thte 6's, 8's, and 10's. What we have now is barely good enough with no depth at all behind it. Remember when people thought the US could win both gold and silver by sending two different teams to the Olympics? Not with this midfield...
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5693423/2024/08/11/uswnt-olympic-winners-takeaways-analysis/ Very interesting and enjoyable reading, with plenty of visuals ...
"Barely good enough" I feel like there's some kind of mythologizing about the quality of USWNT's past. The Carli Lloyd breakout WC was the only one where we steamrolled the competition. And, that was after an injury forced Jill to change tactics. No, I don't remember that. If Shaw was healthy, we could go with the backups and have a good midfield: Shaw, Korbin, Sonnett. Give them some reps together and that's a very good midfield. All that said, yes, I agree, we need to spend much of the next couple of years testing some new mids, settling on a broader rotation. That doesn't change anything wrt LY. No matter what, for the next 3 years, we're going to be playing nothing like the Euro's. While NL will be playing in Euro qualies and probably Euros. I hope we get her, I just think it's a hard sell, unless she really wants to play for the US. This is getting a bit far afield, but I'm kind of over chasing US-born duallies. If they've lived a significant portion of their lives in the US and aren't sure, then maybe the passion isn't there. Why give them minutes instead of a player that is close in quality and is committed? At this point, I'd call her in for one more thing that isn't cap-tying, then leave it up to her. The next thing I called her in for would be cap-tying. If she's still on the fence, next woman up.
I think we started the rebuilding a while ago, as evidenced by the Olympics roster. Winning the Olympics while already into the rebuilding process is a bonus and truly amazing. I agree, there is more rebuilding to do, given the World Cup is not until 2027. And, I agree that we will need more in the midfield. We also will need more depth in defense, particularly at central defender. Our starting central defenders are fine, but we need depth. In fact, we need more depth almost everywhere. Plus, we most likely are going to need a starting keeper. So lots to do, but there is a good foundation already.
A timely article from SoccerWire, the top midfielders in the NCAA to watch this year, according to them: https://www.soccerwire.com/news/midfielders-to-watch-for-the-2024-ncaa-womens-soccer-season/
Just of note: Jill’s forced tactics that were oft discussed and hashed around here in BS, before it happened