2015 Women's World Cup
- Thread starter Titans Bastard
- Start date
Sweden just hit the post, corner, great save, corner, great save, great clear.
I can't believe they didn't score.
SWE/AUS is the much better game so far.
I can't believe they didn't score.
SWE/AUS is the much better game so far.
M
MentalDisabldLst
Guest
So whoever said handballs in the box aren't being called was apparently spot on.
this game is very frustrating sometimes.
this game is very frustrating sometimes.
Fox' coverage is goddam terrible. They might as well film this from a blimp with the muppets announcing.
There's been 5 I've seen committed none called. The only PK given for a handball in the box was a terrible call yesterday where the ball hit the defender square in the center of the chest. The standard of refereeing in the women's world cup is roughly what you get in high school.MentalDisabldLst said:
Is Alexi Lalas going to spark up the fire pit later? That's a big log pile behind him.
I really hope he doesn't. Fire pits tend to attract ginger guitar players.
I really hope he doesn't. Fire pits tend to attract ginger guitar players.
I get the argument for short corners in many instances, but US/NIG isn't one of them. Maybe the best aerial striker in the history of women's soccer against a team who has been terrible in the air against set pieces, they should be driving the ball into the box every chance they get.
I agree with whomever posted earlier (I think soxfan) that this US roster is a 4-3-3 that unfortunately lacks the creative CM. the number 10 seems to think she's a number 6 and if anyone could make a pass without over hitting it Morgan might have scored 3 today
Man, Sydney Leroux is one of my top 7 or 8 favorite athletes alive but she is playing like shit these last ten minutes or so.
She's a sneaky not very good player. She has great pace and decent strength, but her skill level isn't very high. She has the first touch of a baby elephant and not much passing or defending skill.Gunfighter 09 said:
I could see her thriving on the wing of a 4-3-3 with Wambach holding play and Leroux and Morgan making runs off the central striker. She's all pace and power so she needs to be running behind the defenseCellar-Door said:
US and Aussies through. Sweden waiting on the Costa Rica/ Brazil match then possibly tiebreakers.
With more power and work rate, I think. Not scaled.soxfan121 said:
I know they're playing on turf and turf really sucks for pass weighting but the time off must be spent on figuring out who can play an acceptable through ball. They're giving away so much possession and wasting good attacks on horribly over hit passes
teddykgb said:
Eh, they were 2 missed calls away from scoring 3 goals in the first half. And if the US had 2 or 3 in the first half, I think the wheels would have come off Nigeria.
That said, it was only 1-0, but they're going to play a team that's likely not as good as any of the 3 they already played in the next round.
I don't think they're terrible but they aren't playing well enough to survive in knockout tournament play. Everything looks too hard for them right nowDrewDawg said:
Seven points in three games against a very hard group. True they didn't look great doing it, but it's a brand new tournament in the knockout stage. I hope the players are practicing penalties because 1-1 or 0-0 seem like very plausible results for this team against virtually anyone left in the field.
With one day of group matches left, here's the current situation.
12 teams have qualified for the knock-out rounds: Canada, China, Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Japan, Cameroon, Switzerland, USA, Australia, Brazil, and Columbia.
That leaves 4 spots left, the second place teams from Groups E and F, and two more third placed teams. Any of the 6 teams in Groups E and F not already qualified (Costa Rica, Spain, Korea; England, France, Mexico) can qualify.
The only 3rd place team that cannot qualify is Thailand. Sweden will have to hope for results to go their way in Groups E and F to qualify (they should qualify with a Costa Rica loss, a Spain/Korea tie, or an England loss.)
12 teams have qualified for the knock-out rounds: Canada, China, Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Japan, Cameroon, Switzerland, USA, Australia, Brazil, and Columbia.
That leaves 4 spots left, the second place teams from Groups E and F, and two more third placed teams. Any of the 6 teams in Groups E and F not already qualified (Costa Rica, Spain, Korea; England, France, Mexico) can qualify.
The only 3rd place team that cannot qualify is Thailand. Sweden will have to hope for results to go their way in Groups E and F to qualify (they should qualify with a Costa Rica loss, a Spain/Korea tie, or an England loss.)
teddykgb said:
It looks hard for a lot of teams.
#1 Germany played one decent team and managed a draw
#2 USA
#3 France was beaten by Colombia
#4 Japan struggled to beat #48 Ecuador 1-0. Cameroon beat Ecuador 6-0.
#5 Sweden finished 3rd in the same group the USA won.
Yes and when you put a lot of struggling teams into a knockout tournament, all of them have a good chance of losing one game and getting knocked out.
You need to be a juggernaut to be favored to win a knockout tournament - being good but not great means you're rolling some pretty poor dice.
You need to be a juggernaut to be favored to win a knockout tournament - being good but not great means you're rolling some pretty poor dice.
Sure, and nowhere did I say the USA was playing great and should be favored, I just said everyone seems to be struggling.
But had the offsides not been called and the PK awarded, it's 3-0 at the half, and even if they put it on cruise control in the second half, there's less talk of a stagnant offense.
But had the offsides not been called and the PK awarded, it's 3-0 at the half, and even if they put it on cruise control in the second half, there's less talk of a stagnant offense.
teddykgb said:
This was my takeaway too. I lost count of the number of times they missed open runners with horribly weighted passes.
I thought Wambach was excellent though in the first half, she tired some in the second half. In addition to the goal, her hold-up play was the best part of the US attack, she had several very nice one-touch layoffs to midfielders, who mostly used them as opportunities to hit more overweighted long balls.
I'd like to see them play less vertically going forward and hold possession more. They were looking for through balls too soon, even when the angles for it weren't there. There were one or two occasions where instead of hitting the ball down the line they worked it back across the field and switched the play to the opposite side, and that generated much better crossing opportunities than most of their vertical play. I'd like to see them do more of that.
DrewDawg said:
I'm not convinced they got the offsides call wrong and the number of missed hand balls has to be in double digits right now.
In any case, I think we've veered completely off track. I was commenting on the commentators giving us propaganda like reviews of the US performance. They're having a very hard time of it right now and the commentators are not reflecting that information, in my opinion. The US hasn't looked strong and I worry that they're going to have a day where the goal goes the other way, but all of this discussion chained off of my comment related to the commentary which has been very positive for a team whose play has been surprisingly mediocre, even if against good competition.
The Germans may regret getting that insanely easy group. Right now their path to the final could be Sweden in the round of 16, France in the quarters, and the US in the semis.