WWC19 USA v SPAIN Round of 16, pre/pbp/post

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by McSkillz, Jun 20, 2019.

  1. Non-dairy Creamer

    Feb 28, 2007
    there was contact, it was minimal

    she had already kicked the ball away by the time of contact

    the ball was kicked away about 10-15 yards to 2 Spanish players

    Rose clearly embellished afterward knowing there was some contract and that the ball was gone (unplayable)

    Looks worse because the extended leg

    I don't know exactly where the ref was but I'm assuming outside the box like standard so the ref from her position couldn't have known if there was solid contact or how much as the play happened goal-side

    we've seen times when an attacker toe pokes the ball too far forward in the box and is then clattered into and no penalty given because the ball was unplayable

    it was an awkward play made to look worse by the outstretched leg, perhaps sometimes a ref will err on the side of "I didn't make a mistake" in looking at VAR not wanting to reverse their own decision

    for me it was an incredibly soft penalty, the US hasn't score from the run of play in something like 259 minutes.

    and yes, I think Rose felt something, knew the ball was unplayable yards away and went down easily
     
    Patrick167 repped this.
  2. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Just to be clear, I was specifically addressing one aspect of this play. That is, whether Rose Lavelle took a dive, which I stated bothered me because it was a criticism of her character.

    I was not looking any deeper. Really, I have no idea what the heck you're talking about in your last paragraph.

    I didn't bring up whether the ref and/or VAR were correct, or if the foul was soft, etc., etc. Your response really has nothing to do with my specific point. It's on you if you want to rehash the entire thread.
     
  3. Timon19

    Timon19 Member+

    Jun 2, 2007
    Akron, OH
    Yeah, I didn't really ever think it was a dive per se. Possible, but unlikely embellishment.

    But I really don't get that it impugns her character if she had taken a dive. It's endemic to the game. Even players without a reputation usually end up diving here and there.
     
    bigredfutbol repped this.
  4. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    My post was referencing THIS specific play, not every similar play in history.
    Regardless, seems like you agree with me that it wasn't a dive, which is all I was saying.
     
  5. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is the kind of stuff I don't like to read. Being critical of a person's character. How the heck do you know she went down easy or that she embellished or that contact wasn't more painful? Have you watched that much of Rose Lavelle? Have you been kicked by studs enough to know every nuance of that sensation?

    Now you see what I'm talking about.
     
  6. Timon19

    Timon19 Member+

    Jun 2, 2007
    Akron, OH
    I can think the poster is wrong and not think it impugns her character.
     
  7. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    I don't think Rose dived. It looked like it live because she takes a step. But when the fouled leg comes down she is no longer balanced. It is funny that people thought VAR would catch all the forwards diving. It turns out defenders have been hacking them and getting away with it.
     
  8. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm quoting here from a poster (RedStar91) in the referee forum, but not quoting directly so as not to pull him into a thread he probably doesn't want to be in. Its only tangentially related to the discussion, but it is enlightening. (the bold is my own)

    "The main issue I have with the media complaints and fan complaints, especially someone like Grant Wahl who keeps blabbing on asking "why did VAR "work" so well in Russia but not here?" is that everyone can't seem to accept that no matter how you employ VAR (unless you don't use it) it will inherently lead to more referee involvement on games. It is just going to lead to more penalty kicks and red cards (well we thought it would, but they have somehow scrapped that aspect of VAR).

    It's been my biggest complaint about the complaints of VAR. They want VAR to be there and "fix" injustices, but not be there too much. People want to have their cake and eat it too. It's simply impossible.

    It's like people don't realize that 95 to 99% of referee errors are errors of omission rather than commission. Every regular poster on this forum gets that, yet the general public seems to not understand that. VAR was always going to lead to more penalty kicks and you're already seeing referees start to give more penalty kicks on the field because, subconsciously or consciously, they know that VAR will call them out on it.

    We'll never know the answer, but I bet if VAR wasn't in the US vs. Spain game at least one of those penalty kicks given to the US would not be called simply due to the referee probably not being 100% sure on both.

    Penalty kicks have always been missed, it's just that VAR is now catching them and people are just not comfortable with or accepting of that.

    They don't want referee errors to "decide" the game, but when those errors get fixed and "decide" the game, they don't like it. "
     
    jnielsen, orcrist, LIZZIE and 2 others repped this.
  9. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    BS posters are funny.
    Before VAR, people were complaining the ref missed a PK and cost their team.
    After VAR, people are complaining that the ref gave a PK and cost their team.
     
    jnielsen repped this.
  10. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I was at the game, with seats fairly close to the sideline a little closer to mid-field than the box. The ref was about five yards from the play and almost directly behind it (meaning, behind on the side Sweden was defending). She was not obstructed from viewing, so she had a clear, direct look. At the time, I thought it was a light foul for a PK call (but, I thought Lavelle's going down seemed pretty normal and nothing embellished). At the same time, I thought the ref had a better look than I did, so maybe the contact was more than I thought. I had no benefit of replays. That all is simply what I thought I saw in the heat of the moment.

    Something I'm aware of, however, is that what one thinks one sees isn't always what actually happened. I know this from years ago where I was at a game, saw a play, and on viewing video the next day saw a play completely different than what I'd "seen" in real time.
     
  11. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Surprised this GIF didn't get posted here:



    A teary Sauerbrunn is not a frequent sight, but glad she held it together (and continued to play well) until the end of the match. Also I was impressed with how she took complete responsibility for the Spain goal post match; even if she's no longer wearing the captain's armband, she showed real leadership.
     
    jnielsen and TimB4Last repped this.
  12. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Oh, I saw that and I didn't think it bode well for the team. Means they feel a lot of pressure to go deep in this tournament. It would've been embarrassing to go out in the round of 16 and they all know it.
     
  13. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    See, I disagree on it not boding well for the team. I think it just showed that Sauerbrunn felt that responsibility and also the relief of getting the result. This team has always felt the pressure to reach the final and win it all. But they also usually know how to deal with that pressure, and not let it consume them in the moment. Throughout the USWNT, "pressure is a privilege" has been the mantra. Not dealing with the pressure and not dealing with distractions would be the blow-up of 2007. Dealing with the pressure is Sauerbrunn giving Ertz a brief talking-to in the 2015 semifinal when Ertz is getting teary on the field after giving up the PK. Dealing with the pressure is Chastain going from scoring an own goal in the quarterfinal of 1999 to scoring the tying goal.

    I'm not worried about that moment. I think Sauerbrunn has moved on, and she dealt with it in a healthy way (compartmentalized in the game and let the emotions release afterwards). Now I do worry a bit about them dealing with the possible distractions of the lawsuit and the Trump tweets, but I'm hoping that they are being honest in saying that they're not distracted by those.
     
    jnielsen repped this.
  14. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I feel like there is more pressure on them now than in 2015 for several reasons, none of which have anything to do with Trump's tweets or the lawsuit.
    First, it is very difficult to repeat as champions in and of itself.
    Second, I expected a player of Sauerbrunn's age and caliber to be able to hold it together emotionally in carrying this team's expectations. It's one thing for a young Julie Johnston/Ertz to break down in her first WWC during a critical moment, it's quite another for Becky to show such emotions after the first round of a knockout match.
    Third, I feel like the players are being promoted more and more with each passing quad, which adds another layer of pressure. Although, I could be wrong here, but it certainly feels that way.
    Lastly, and probably most importantly, this team was built to score and break down bunkers. Yet, they failed to score against the run of play during the Spain match, which is a little concerning.
    I hate sounding like a negative nellie, but those are my concerns.

    Of course, I think this team has many positive attributes, some of which you mentioned, I'll add their "never say die" attitude and "bring it" mentality.
     
  15. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    1. You don't think drawing multiple PKs is a perfectly valid form of breaking down a bunker?

    2. You think Spain bunkered?
     
  16. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    1) It's a valid form of winning, but not dependable.
    2) No. I think ever since the Sweden loss, Jill has been trying to make this team more and more offensive minded.
     
    orcrist repped this.
  17. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    Well, y'know, if the other team is allowed to commit the fouls without penalty, there's nothing much to be done about that; otherwise it is pretty dependable, I think.
     
  18. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, I just mean that I think PK's are a legit way to win matches, but teams don't typically practice drawing penalties, because they depend upon the opponent committing an error and the ref calling it.

    Also, some players are more savvy at drawing PK's than others. I think set pieces are more a more dependable form of scoring.
     
    orcrist repped this.
  19. Non-dairy Creamer

    Feb 28, 2007

    Soccer players get accused of diving all the time. Tranquillo mi amigo/a

    basically Julie Foudy has said her leg didn't move and I agree.

    there was contact and it looked worse but Rose lost all control of the ball by then, look at the GIF the ball is already flying upwards before contract.

    I don't even recall her writhing in pain on the deck either.

    for me a very soft penalty.
     
  20. FanOfFutbol

    FanOfFutbol Member+

    May 4, 2002
    While it may well have been a "soft" penalty at no point in the laws of the game is "control of the ball" mentioned. If a player is tripped in the box it is a penalty regardless of the position of the ball. in fact if a player is tripped in the box and the ball is at the other end of the field it is still a penalty. Referees use the ball's position as an excuse to avoid calling a foul so as not to impact the game but by failing to make the call they impact the game.

    The only place where the position of the ball is mentioned that I remember is in the "shielding" law where a player may impede another if the ball is within playing distance like when a defender shields the ball to allow it to run into touch.
     
    MiLLeNNiuM repped this.
  21. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    However they do practice putting opponents in positions where they must choose between risking a penalty and risking a dangerous shot...
     
  22. MiLLeNNiuM

    MiLLeNNiuM Member+

    Aug 28, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, I get that.
     

Share This Page