WWC23 group stage: USWNT vs Portugal, August 1 3 am ET

Well we know, or at least as close to knowing as e can be, that The Netherlands will soundly defeat Vietnam by at least three and, possibly as many as 5 or 6.
We also know that we advance with a win or a draw and, with the win, we end up tied with The Netherlands and the determining factor will be goal difference. I cannot see the USA beating Portugal by more than three so should The Netherlands win by 5, unless my arithmetic is faulty, puts us tied with The Netherlands.

I think we may get beaten because Portugal simply wants it more and that also know that a loss or tie sends them home.

I have doubts that we will field a team that is actually able to win but I really hope we pull it out in spite of poor coaching.

 

I hope the US is mostly focused on winning this game and not on trying to win the group. Portugal is playing well, and the best way to mess this up and lose is to have a game plan that risks losing by trying to win by 3 or 4.

 

Hate to tell ya, but if we come in group 2nd, we’ll play Sweden in round of 16. The Swedes are the only team in the world with a winning record vs the US in major competitions & currently looking very strong. So best to avoid them right now & hope they get eliminated by Spain in the quarters(be the path if both win their respective group’s).
Portugal usually bunkers, but you think they’ll have to come out of their shell & attempt to score if they want to try win & move on to the playoffs. But from scouting Vlatko & his almost none use of subs, so probably will wait till late in the game to make their move in hoping the US tires out.
Our only choice is to score & score fast, then likely they’ll have to open up so we’ll be able to score more. Key here; Vlatko needs to hit then with an high press, but it would take a toll in exhaustion later on in the game, so subbing will be essential

 

Oops, my bad, I definitely meant from 2011 on, it’s 1-3-1 vs Sweden

I think a lot of the teams keep playing the same old lineups now do the long/ave 6 day breaks between games(which gives them the extra day(s) to recover

 

Score by mid first half and Portugal will be forced to play pretty loose. Of course, this can lead to more pressure on our defense but also opens up the game and gives us more scoring opportunities.

To me the real key as I posted in the US - The Netherlands thread is which approach Vietnam takes. If they try and massively defend like they have so far to keep the score low that helps the US. The Netherland can have their 75% possession passing the ball around the middle of the pitch. That doesn't score goals. But if Vietnam goes after one of their pre tournament objectives, to score a goal, then that could be bad for the US. If Vietnam goes all out to score their first ever WC goal then I could easily see the Dutch netting a bucket load of goals. At the end of the day would Vietnam rather lose 3-0 or 10-1? No clue.

But at the end of the day. Win this match and advance. 1st or 2nd however it shakes out and worry about the R16 when you get there. If its Sweden then so be it.

 

Regarding Vietnam, they lost 9-0 to Spain in a friendly just one week prior before playing the US. So that’s the score the Dutch will try to more emulate. Not sure if they got the firepower to do that, but they do come in with a lot of experience

 

In effect the third game is the beginning of the knockout round often, and so it is here.

And the knockout round mantram is "survive and advance." It is an illusion that it is better to avoid Sweden or Spain or England or anybody-- you'll have to beat them at some point, or else you'll have to beat someone who just beat them. Better to play them when you are fresh.

What you'd really like to do is avoid going 120 to survive and advance-- that's where you can give up an advantage. And even there Canada did fine and won a championship despite hardly scoring...

Survive and advance. Just win baby.

1-0 will do fine.

 

Here is the line-up I’d like to see Vlatko Andonovski start against Portugal:


---------------------------------------------Naeher--------------------------------------


Huerta or Fox---------------Ertz-----------------------Girma-------------Fox or Dunn


---------------------------------------------Sullivan------------------------------------------


---------------------Lavelle------------------------------------------Horan-----------------


Williams------------------------------------Morgan-------------------------------Smith



1. Outside Backs

A hard question for me is whether Vlatko should start, on the one hand, Sophia Huerta at right back and Emily Fox at left back or, on the other hand, Fox at right back and Crystal Dunn at left back. Dunn was partly responsible for Holland’s goal against the US. She got pulled too much into the middle and left Victoria Pelova open. When Pelova received the ball and then struck the ball across the box and it came to Dunn, she cleared it right back to Pelova, who then passed it to Jill Roord, who scored the goal.

Moreover, Huerta has played only 6 minutes so far in the World Cup (against Vietnam). So, she would be totally fresh against Portugal. And, since Vlatko gave Huerta a chance to play for the US against Australia in Sydney in November of 2021, she has tended to play well for the US. She has been solid on the ball, a good crosser and a good ball-winner with a solid positional sense.

In addition, Emily Fox has been good for the US at both left back and right back. So, if Vlatko were to start Fox at left back against Portugal, I wouldn’t have any worries that she would struggle in the match.

However, Huerta doesn’t have great speed. And my impression is that Portugal is a fast and quick team. They’re number 10, Jessica Silva, who plays as a center forward or attacking center-mid, is especially speedy. Moreover, against Vietnam, Portugal played at a high-tempo as a team. They moved the ball around the field quickly, and they pushed forward with energy to score.

Nevertheless, partly because Portugal started 7 different players against Vietnam than they did against Holland and because I’m not that familiar with the Portugal team, I don’t know with whom Huerta would be matched against Portugal. In Portugal’s game against Holland, they started in a 4-3-1-2 with their number 13, Fatima Pinto, at left midfield. Here are the starting line-ups for the match:

https://www.fotmob.com/match/4052709/matchfacts/netherlands-vs-portugal

Pinto, who last season played in Spain for Deportivo Alaves, did not seem that fast or quick. She lumbered a bit.

In Portugal’s game against Vietnam, Portugal started in a 3-5-2, with Joana Marchao, their number 5, at left midfield:

https://www.fotmob.com/match/4052711/matchfacts/portugal-vs-vietnam

Marchao, who last season play in Italy for Parma, is skillful and has a good positional sense, but she didn’t seem that fast.

However, although Crystal Dunn was partly responsible for Holland’s goal, she did play better in the second half. She had a number of good passes, controlled the ball well and didn’t make any defensive mistakes. Moreover, in the match, Dunn led the US in passes attempted (53) and, among US players who attempted at least 20 passes, she was tied for second on the team in pass accuracy percentage, at 74%. Here is a link:

https://www.fotmob.com/match/4052710/matchfacts/usa-vs-netherlands

However, I want to have fresh players on the field, especially given the injury on Friday to England midfielder Keira Walsh. So, that would weigh in favor of starting Huerta over Dunn. But, by my count, there are 5 and ¼ days (126 hours) between the US’s game against Holland and their game against Portugal. So, I don’t think Huerta’s being totally fresh should weigh heavily in favor of starting her over Dunn.

It's a hard decision for me. But right now, I’d start Dunn. Partly because Dunn played almost all the first two games of this World Cup, I have a good idea of what I’d get from her. Since Huerta has played only 8 minutes so far in this World Cup, I’m not sure what I’d be getting. And it’s very important that the US at least draw this match, and a win would be much better.

Another option to start at outside back is Kelley O’Hara. But, against Portugal, I would start Dunn and Huerta ahead of her. Since May 14, O’Hara, because of injury, has played only 126 minutes at the club level and only 6 minutes for the USWNT, which came at the very end of the US-Vietnam game.


2. Ertz at center-back or defensive-midfield?

This is another hard one. Should Vlatko start Julie Ertz at center-back (next to Naomi Girma) and Andi Sullivan at defensive-midfield or Ertz at defensive-midfield and Alana Cook at center-back? I would go with the former. At this point, I’m more confident in the combination of Ertz at center-back and Sullivan at defensive-midfield than I am in the combination of Ertz at defensive-mid and Cook at center-back.

Although Cook has many good qualities, she’s been somewhat mistake-prone for the US. And, when playing center-back, Ertz rarely has made important defensive mistakes for the US and hasn’t made any such mistakes for the US so far this tournament. And she had a great block in the second half against Holland, which may have prevented a goal. Moreover, if Vlatko were to start Cook at center-back, she could commit a turnover that leads to a goal and the US could lose 1-0. I don’t see that happening with Ertz at center-back.

However, Sullivan was partly responsible for Holland’s goal against the US. As FOX soccer analyst and former German international Ariane Hingst noted so well during halftime of the US-Holland game, Sullivan was out of position in the midfield when Dutch forward Lieke Martens received the ball in midfield. But, as Hingst said, when Sullivan realized she was out of position, it was important that she not compound the problem by then overcommitting on Martens. But she did overcommit, Martens dribbled by her, and Sullivan was taken out of the play. Instead, she should have contained Martens and kept in front of her without lunging, so that Martens could not dribble freely through the US midfield and make a pass that left the US totally vulnerable. In other words, don’t try to make up for an error by doing something that is even more problematic. Here is a link to highlights of the US-Holland match:

https://www.foxsports.com/watch/play-68a45ef7e000102

The relevant sequence starts at about minute :57.

Moreover, Sullivan’s passing in the match was not at an elite level. For one thing, she didn’t help control the midfield with her passing the way Jill Roord did for Holland. However, her passing wasn’t bad. She attempted 36 passes, with 28 being accurate, for a pass accuracy percentage of 78%, the fourth best on the US team for the match.

Moreover, Sullivan strikes me as a very coachable player who learns from her mistakes. So, I doubt she would commit the same kind of error against Portugal that she did against Holland.

I think the bottom line is I have more confidence in Ertz at center-back than I do in Cook. And it’s important for the US to at least not lose this game and preferably win it. If I knew that the US would finish first in their group, I would consider starting Cook at center-back and Ertz at defensive-midfield partly to see how it goes. And if I knew that the US would finish second in their group, I might do the same thing. But with so much riding on this game, I would start Ertz at center-back and Sullivan at defensive-midfield.

Finally, here is a link to a good article by ESPN’s Jeff Carlisle in which suggests that Vlatko should start Ertz at center-back and Sullivan at defensive-midfield, at least against Portugal:

https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_...julie-ertz-uswnt-best-position-2023-world-cup

Carlisle is uneasy about the idea of Cook starting at center-back, especially given that, with Ertz at center-back this tournament, the US has been good defensively. So far, they have allowed only 5 shots and 1 goal in the tournament, and one of their games was against Holland, which made it to the Finals of the 2019 World Cup and the Quarterfinals of the 2022 European Championship.


3. Rose Lavelle

I don’t know Lavelle’s full medical situation. But from what I can see as a fan, she is okay physically. It doesn’t look like her playing now seriously risks her aggravating her knee injury. And the US has been a far better team with Lavelle on the field. So, I’d start her against Portugal.


4. Lynn Williams

Against Holland, Vlatko should have put Lynn Williams in for Trinity Rodman at about the 70th minute. In the match, Rodman turned the ball over a lot. In fact, her pass accuracy percentage was only 42%, the worst on the team. She also didn’t apply defensive pressure that well. She tended to lumber toward her opponent rather than incisively attacking and pouncing on the ball with precision and quickness. And, as a team, the US didn’t press well in the first half. Rodman also seemed to tire in the second half.

In addition, Williams is a very athletic player who has been excellent this season in the NWSL. She also is very experienced, including having 53 caps for the US, with 15 goals. And she had fresh legs. So, Vlatko should have put her in for Rodman to try to win the game against Holland.

Moreover, against Portugal, I think Williams should start at right wing ahead of Rodman. As I suggested, Rodman was mediocre against Holland. And Williams will be totally fresh for Portugal. Williams also played well in the July friendly against Wales (including hitting the through-ball to Sophia Smith that led to Rodman’s first goal), and she’s tied for third in scoring in the NWSL with 7 goals.

Finally, Williams is a good presser. She’s fast, quick, has good endurance and knows how to attack the ball and to press in coordination with her teammates so that the team presses effectively as a unit.


5. Alex Morgan

I thought Morgan was solid against Holland. She played well with her back to goal and made a number of good passes. She also is composed. When players such as Lindsey Horan and Lavelle can get hot-headed, Morgan has poise to keep people from playing recklessly and getting cards.

In addition, she almost scored on that goal that was offside. Perhaps she can learn from the play and time her run a little better next time. Her finish was outstanding.

In the second half, Vlatko should consider putting Rodman in for Williams or Morgan, depending on which player is doing less well. And, in general, Vlatko shouldn’t be as averse to putting in subs as he was against Holland. Fresh legs help a team, and the US has good depth. Alyssa Thompson and Megan Rapinoe are also available to come in as subs.


6. Pressing

In most of the first half against Holland, the US didn’t play a high press. Or, if they did, it wasn’t well-coordinated. The Dutch players often had time to carefully pass the ball around the back and into midfield. I was saying to myself: Why doesn’t Vlatko have the team pressing?

Now part of the issue in the first half might have been that the US wingers were often switching sides and/or playing narrowly. The latter is a clear problem. If the team plays narrowly, then the other team’s outside back often can easily receive the ball and play good balls into midfield. So, when the team presses, it’s important for the US wingers to generally stay wide enough.

As for the US forwards switching positions from time to time, I’m okay with that to an extent. For instance, in the friendly against Wales, when Rodman first came into the match, she started playing at center forward. But at some point in the second half, Rodman and Sophia Smith switched positions, with Rodman moving to the wing and Smith moving to center forward. This switch contributed to the US’s two goals.

But, against Holland, the position-switching was too haphazard, and it led to times when the US did not have a winger on each side of the field. All the forwards were either bunched into the middle or bunched to one side of the pitch. It’s important that all three pressing points of the front line are generally occupied with one US player or the other team often can easily get the ball to the open defender and play the ball safely into midfield.

However, in the second half of the Holland match, the US pressing was much better. Moreover, according to an interview with Rodman, Vlatko made clear at halftime that he wanted the team to play a high press so that when Holland’s defenders were playing the ball out of the back, there wasn’t such a large gap between them and the US’s three forwards. Rodman stressed that this change in strategy was one reason the US played so much better in the second half. Here is a link to the interview:

https://www.foxsports.com/watch/play-68a4a7542000102

See minute :42 of the interview.

I should add that I think Alex Morgan pressed very well in the second half. Although her pressing didn’t lead to her making any steals herself, she forced Holland to play passes that were not accurate, and the US quickly won the ball back.


7. Sophia Smith

I want Sophia Smith to play with confidence and feel able to take players on and try to beat them. But there were times against Holland where a simple pass would have accomplished as much, if not more, than her dribbling by two or three players or taking a shot from a difficult angle. And it would have been fairly easy for her to complete the simple pass. I wonder if she didn’t see her open teammate or if she thought that it was important for her to try to score the goal herself. But in the future, I hope she’ll be aware that she sometimes has simple passing options available to her, and if she would try them, there is a good chance that the team would score.


8. Horan and Lavelle are carrying yellow cards

Both Lindsey Horan and Rose Lavelle have received yellow cards in this tournament. So, if the US advances to the Round of 16 and either player gets a yellow card against Portugal, she will miss the next game. It’s important that they not miss that game. They’re extremely important players to the US. So, it’s important that they keep their heads against Portugal.

 

Playing to "avoid" a team, if it means taking large risks or even small but unnecessary ones, is a good way to prevent good performance. This has happened in the past and could easily happen again. If we beat Portugal by 10-12 and we advance then everything is fine BUT I do not think the USA can do that. If we win by just 1 or 2 then we advance but, probably, meet Sweden. That is we can take high risks and, maybe, avoid Sweden BUT that kind of play could cost us the match. In which case we go home.
We need to do EXACTLY what we did in France a few years back where we had a chance to avoid France by playing conservatively but it was a risk. We chose just to play the match as well as we could and faced France earlier than a lot of people wanted but that was better than taking risks and, maybe, going home.
If we are to win this WWC or even have a good chance of playing in the Final we either, at some point, need to beat Sweden or whoever beats them.
In other words unless the risk that gets taken is absolutely needed it just makes no sense to do anything that puts the USA at any risk of losing. It does matter, just a little, if we win the group but that "mattering" does not mean any risks should be taken if those risks reduces the probability of at least holding this match to a draw.
We advance if we win or draw and I believe that The Netherlands will clobber Vietnam by many multiple goals and that would mean we would have to score a LOT to win the group and there just is not enough advantage for the USA to take risks to win the group.
Look at what just happened to the highly favored Germans.
We need to approach this match in a VERY business like manner and never let Portugal even think they might win.

My real concern is that our fearless leader is not up to the task and will do something either pre-match or during the match that costs the USA the match. He is VERY capable of screwing things up that way. He could even start Rapinoe and Morgan in a new formation like a 4-4-2 with those two playing as the forwards. It would be a truly dumb move BUT he has, in the past, done things equally dumb.

Just make the focus winning and keeping Portugal scoreless and accept, but not play for, the draw. In some cases "good enough" is truly "good enough." All we need is to advance.

This has been a pretty good WWC to watch but having the USA playing anybody in the knockouts would make it better for me.

 

Horan will earn her captains band on Tuesday. She needs to play smart and ensure her teammates, especially Lavelle, keep their heads about them. This group could well come down to fair play points. And while we were totally screwed against the Dutch it could still be a factor. And we want the full roster available for the R16 match.

And I am with Ed. I start Smith, Morgan, Williams across the front.

 

I’d start :

Smith Morgan Williams
Lavelle Ertz Horan
Fox Grima Cook Huerta

I would rather see more changes than fewer.

 

Works for me. I would be a tad nervous about our back line. Changing out 2 of the 4 can cause some communication issues. Not to mention this would have Fox switch sides to play the left with Dunn out. If they worked on this in training enough it should be fine. Also could use O'Hara in place of Huerta.

 

For me:

Naeher; Fox, Girma, Cook, Dunn; Ertz, Horan, Lavelle; Williams, Morgan, Smith.

What we'll get:

Naeher; Fox, Ertz, Girma, Dunn; Sullivan, Horan, Lavelle; Rodman, Morgan, Smith.

I am fine with what I think Vlatko will do. That lineup has the strongest defense. And the forward line with the highest ceiling, so giving them max time together to gel makes sense.

But for me, I want to win the group & avoid Sweden. Portugal will likely sit back & play counter to start. Getting an early goal & forcing them out will be instrumental in doing that. So I put a premium on having our best offensive MF out there. That means putting our best MF on the pitch, which means Ertz & Lavelle.

I also think Williams is a better player right now that Rodman. And plays more like a winger, is a better passer, and provides better width. I like Rodman's speed more vs tired teams than fresh ones.

I feel pretty confortable with Cook (or Sonnett) vs Portugal. If we get the lead early & they open up, I can move Ertz back.

 

In relation to Ertz playing center back or defensive mid, I think it depends on what their intent is for the knockout rounds. As of now, Ertz, Girma, and Naeher have only two games playing together. If Ertz is going to play CB in the knockout rounds, they probably need to keep playing her there. The same issue is there, to a lesser degree, with Fox and Dunn.

 

Here is a philosophical and also practical question: If you are playing to win the whole thing, does that affect your lineup decisions for the next game, as compared to trying only to win the next game? Does it mean you take risks with the next game that you would not take if you only were playing to win the next game?

 

Yes and yes. Calculated risks.

 

I agree. As a former goalkeeper and goalkeeper coach I will say that the most important part of a defense handling "emergencies" is communication. You both have to KNOW what the tendencies are and the defenders must KNOW what to expect. You can learn a lot in practices but there is never the urgency like there is during a match.
There are many standard calls and and adjustments that are usually called by the 'keeper and the defenders must learn to react in ways that is 100% predictable so that if a shot must be surrendered it will be one that the 'keeper sees clearly.

The good news is that it only takes a few matches, as long as there is some pressure, for top 'keepers and defenders to learn about each other BUT it does take a few matches.

As many here know i do not think that Naeher is a very good 'keeper but she is pretty good and this is NOT the point to change and I do not think our bench keepers are as good as she is, and she does usually read the game pretty well.

Does anyone have a Delorean that i could borrow? I am actually getting excited and i want to get to the next match ASAP. But I guess I am doomed to experience this time/space continuum in the same slow linear fashion as everyone else. sigh.

 

Generally speaking you have to win this game in order to play the next game, so you focus on this game and figure you'll think of something for the next.

But you should have people who haven't played much that you think will be effective against specific opponents; or at least more effective fresh than the nominally better player who is tired and/or dinged up...

 

Help!

I'm not finding the match on FS1 on sling. What channel will it be on?