Commentary
USA-Sweden Women's World Cup Player Ratings
- by Mike Woitalla @MikeWoitalla, Aug 6, 2023
Aug. 6 in Melbourne
USA 0 Sweden 0 (Sweden wins 5-4 on penalty kicks.)
Att.: 27,706.
The USA, after going four hours without scoring at the 2023 Women's World Cup, had its fate determined with a penalties shootout against the Swedes in Sunday's round-of-16 clash.
U.S. goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher, whose biggest tests in regular play had been hopeful high balls from the Swedes, blocked the seventh-round shootout effort by Lina Hurting, but the ball floated over her and cleared the goal line by a millimeter to send the Swedes to the quarterfinals. For the USA, it marked a historic early exit. In the eight previous Women's World Cups, the Americans had never finished worse than third place, which it did three times, to go with four World Cup titles — including the last two in 2015 and 2019 — and one runner-up finish.
In the 120 minutes that preceded the tiebreaker, the USA was the somewhat more refined of the two scrappy teams and forced goalkeeper Zecira Musovic into action far more often than the Swedes threatened Naeher. The Swedes failed to punish the Americans' imprecision with a goal of their own, but the USA's inconsistency that plagued it in group play — frequent poor passing, aimless crossing and off-target shooting — enabled the Swedes to survive long enough to win it from the spot.
The Coach: Vlatko Andonovski: His two lineup changes from the scoreless tie with Portugal that capped the USA's second-place Group E finish to the Netherlands (a 2-0 round-of-16 winner over South Africa) were Emily Sonnett for the yellow-card suspended Rose Lavelle and Trinity Rodman at right wing for Lynn Williams. Andonovski's only regulation-time substitution was bringing Williams on for Rodman in the 66th minute. With his first overtime substitution, he brought in veteran Megan Rapinoe, despite her poor performance off the bench against Portugal. If Andonovski brought her in for set plays, he badly overestimated her service ability. That he waited until the 120th minute to bring on Kristie Mewis and Kelley O’Hara indicated it was for their penalty-kick acumen.
The shootout: Mewis hit the net on her third-round kick but O'Hara hit the post on the USA's seventh- and final-round attempt. The USA, which shot first, took the lead when Nathalie Björn shot high in the third round after successful shots by Andi Sullivan, Lindsey Horan and Mewis. It maintained the lead despite Rapinoe shooting high in the fourth round thanks to Naeher saving Rebecka Blomqvist's effort. But Sophia Smith shot wide with a chance to win the game before Naeher converted. O'Hara's miss enabled Hurtig to win it for the Swedes.
For however close the USA did come to advancing to the quarterfinals, the two-time defending champion's play didn't resemble that of a serious title contender at this World Cup.
USA Player Ratings
(1=low; 5=middle; 10=high.)
GOALKEEPER
Alyssa Naeher had to make only one save, from a 12-yard shot straight to her, in 120 minutes of play. But she punched, batted away and caught the Swedes' most threatening high deliveries amid crowds. In the shootout, Naeher made one save and scored one herself before coming agonizingly close to preventing Hurtig's gamewinner.
Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
7
Alyssa Naeher (Chicago Red Stars) 95/0 (35)
DEFENDERS
Coming into the game, the backline, which rarely afforded foes decent scoring chances while the USA conceded only one goal, provided the most reason for optimism of a good World Cup showing for the USA. And once again it proved impenetrable, with central defender Naomi Girma intercepting through balls and shutting down Stina Blackstenius whether she came through the middle or ventured wide. Girma's partner Julie Ertz blocked shots and won tackles — although her distribution wasn't as precise as Girma's. Left back Crystal Dunn stifled the Swedes' right flank forays but for better or worse played conservatively going forward. Right back Emily Fox had few problems defensively but her ball-winning often ended up with out-of-bounds clearances or errant passes. A lack of effective outside back attacking by the USA made it easier for the Swedes to cope with U.S. flank play.
Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
5
Emily Fox (NC Courage) 33/1 (25)
8
Naomi Girma (San Diego Wave) 20/0 (23)
7
Julie Ertz (Angel City FC) 122/20 (31)
6
Crystal Dunn (Portland Thorns) 136/24 (31)
MIDFIELDERS
Adding Emily Sonnett, an ineffective attacker, to a midfield whose Andi Sullivan provides mainly defensive attributes meant the burden of midfield offense fell on Lindsey Horan, who's more of a midfield marshal than a playmaker. She matched most of her promising moves with misplays, but did come closest to scoring for the USA with a header off the crossbar and a sharply hit low shot that arrived within arm's reach of the keeper Zecira Musovic. Horan's shot far wide after those chances from inside the penalty area served as a reminder to how desperately the USA needs goal-dangerous midfielders — especially when its frontline doesn't produce under pressure, as in this World Cup.
Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
3
Emily Sonnett (OL Reign) 77/1 (29)
4
Andi Sullivan (Washington Spirit) 49/3 (27)
5
Lindsey Horan (Lyon, FRA) 133/29 (29)
FORWARDS
Trinity Rodman had three first-half shots. Her two 20-yard attempts went to the keeper Musovic and over the crossbar. Her inside-the-penalty-area shot was easily saved by Musovic. Sophia Smith had some success dribbling forward from the midfield in the first half but didn't trouble the Swedes closer to goal, like when she followed up a badly shanked close-range half-volley with a cross straight to the goalkeeper. A few minutes later, she similarly lofted a ball into Musovic's arms after her promising possession on the left wing. Smith's best play came in overtime, when she set up a chance for Williams, but the team's second youngest player on the day, to Rodman, ended her World Cup with a spot kick miss. Center forward Alex Morgan was a non-factor until the 76th minute when she retreated for the ball and sent Williams down the wing and set up a shot for Sonnett. In the 89th minute. Morgan's header was saved by Musovic. Morgan hadn't scored or troubled defenses much in three group games. Teams with an ineffective center forward don't get far in knockout stage play unless they have an array offensive prowess, which this U.S. team did not.
Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
4
Trinity Rodman (Washington Spirit) 21/4 (21)
3
Alex Morgan (San Diego Wave) 211/121 (34)
3
Sophia Smith (Portland Thorns) 34/14 (22)
SUBSTITUTES
Lynn Williams stormed down the wing shortly after coming on before hitting a cross without aiming. She played much like Rodman, whom she replaced: looked threatening when she received ball with space but failed to produce when pressured. Right after Megan Rapinoe came on, Sullivan sent her best pass of the day to Rapinoe in the penalty area, but Rapinoe mis-trapped it for a goal kick. Rapinoe under-hit her first corner kick and sent her second out of bounds. She took a midfield free kick that more than half her teammates lined up for, set to meet the ball on a sprint through the Swedish offside trap — only for Rapinoe to send it short of the entire squadron. The USWNT icon, a two-time World Cup winner, ended her national team career with a spot kick over the crossbar.
Player (Club) caps/goals (age)
3
Lynn Williams (Gotham FC) 55/15 (30)
2
Megan Rapinoe (OL Reign) 202/63 (38)
NR
Kelley O’Hara (Gotham FC) 160/3 (35)
NR
Kristie Mewis (Gotham FC) 52/7 (32)
TRIVIA: The penalties shootout tiebreaker against the Swedes was the USA's fourth in nine Women's World Cup appearances. It lost the 2011 final to Japan on spot kicks after beating Brazil in the quarterfinals in a shootout, and it won the 1999 World Cup over China on Brandi Chastain's famous finish.
Aug. 6 in Melbourne
USA 0 Sweden 0. (Sweden wins 5-4 on penalty kicks.)
USA — Naeher; Fox (O'Hara, 120), Ertz, Girma, Dunn; Sonnett (K.Mewis, 120), Sullivan, Horan; Rodman (Williams, 66), Morgan (Rapinoe, 99), Smith.
Sweden — Musovic; Bjorn, Ilestedt, Eriksson, Andersson; Angeldahl (Bennison, 97), Rubensson, Kaneryd (Jakobsson, 81), Asllani (Hurtig, 81), Rolfo; Blackstenius (Blomqvist, 111).
Yellow cards: USA — Ertz 119; Sweden — Asllani 49. Red cards: none.
Referee: Stéphanie Frappart (France). ARs: Manuela Nicolosi (France), Élodie Coppola (France). 4th official: Casey Reibelt (Austria). VAR: Massimiliano Irrati (Italy) AVAR: Tatiana Guzman (Nicaragua) Offside VAR: Katrin Rafalski (Germany).
Att.: 27,706.
Stats:
USA/Sweden
Shots: 22/9
Shots on target: 11/1
Saves: 1/11
Corner Kicks: 9/3
Fouls: 11/15
Offside: 4/1
Possession: 56%/44%
Photo: Richard Callis/ISI Photos
Now they have plenty of time to go on there Social Justice Tour...
Really? All in for their equal pay and inclusion
campaigns. Are you questioning their dedication on the field?
Mylene; According to ESPN;
They made MORE Money Losing, 6.7 million,
than the Winning Team will make in The Final 4.3 million
Failing Up, Doesn't Look Good for Equal Pay Argument.
If they are REALLY into Equal Pay, they Should POOL ALL Their N.I.L. Commercial Money and Split it Evenly with ALL The Players on the Team .. Heck, Let them Split it with the Men's Team Also...
See how FAST they Run Away from THAT IDEA.!!!
Socialism is a NON-MOTIVATOR.
They should get Paid by;
Butts in the Seats,
Clicks on the Internet,
Eyes on the Tele (´⊙ω⊙`)
% Of USSF Commercial Sponsors
Bonus for WINS in the Semis and Finals.!!!
NADA, NOTHING, ZIP, ZILCH;
FOR GETTING KNOCKED OUT IN THE ROUND OF 16.!!!
Santi, get your terms right history major. Socialism is based on individual rights. Democracy is socialism. The signing of the US Declaration Independence was the greatest event in the history of socialism. The ratification of the US Constitution was the second greatest. Our US view of socialism guarantees the individuals a right to own private property. (It was referred to as "the pursuit of Happiness". "Happiness" replaced the word "property" used in an earlier draft.) So our American Values embrace private ownership of property. We don't allow the government to turn communist. Communism is a type of socialism that bans the individual ownership of property. Marxism is a critique of Capitalism that mistakenly believes that only Capitalism can be corrupted by greedy individuals. The mistake was in thinking communist government's could not be corrurpted. Marxism has it value in providing a warning to guard against greedy people corrupting our capitalist republic.
You should also know that our Constitution guarantees the people a right to not just a democracy, but a Republic, which is a democracy that protects individual rights against the will of the majority. That is the great leveler function of our courts system. To protect individual rights against abuse by the government.
Bob, Agree with your Last Paragraph...
Not sure Where that other Gobulty Gup came from;
Sure would be Great to sit down and have a Beer and Discuss Politics with you some time...
But, for Now... I'm trying to Stick to the Political Things that AFFECT THIS TEAM... We can Pick this up on another Thread some time.
The goop was political philosophy and knowledge that comes from 8 years of formal education, pre-law and law. One of the papers I wrote was a comparison of the US and USSR constitutions.
It wasn't history or politics. I would welcome discussion of any topic with you. Since I retired I miss intelligent conversation. Although I am not allowed to drink alcohol anymore. Not supposed to even drink coffee, but there are limits to my tolerance.
Well Bob, Then we will Drink a "Cyber" Beer one of these days, when the Soccer Posts are Boring.!!!!
Tremendous game by USA ...
For Sure the Best Game we have seen the USA play under Flatko,
and Maybe one of the Best Planned Out and Executed "Game Plans" EVER. (You all may think I'm being Sarcastic, I'M NOT)
A Total Masterclass Tactically and Technically(Mostly)
4 Things that Led to USA Loss;
1. NO NEAR POST Runs by Morgan
2. Lyndsey Horan DID NOT "BOSS" THE GAME
3. Sweden GK had "A BLINDER"
4. Megan Rapinoe was Brought IN to do ONE THING.
** SCORE IN THE PKs **
More Later;
Agree it was our best game of this tournament -- defense just about impregnable, and for the first time we mostly controlled the midfield. The double pivot worked well -- Sonnett did her job and deserved a 6 rating imo. Rodman and Smith (and Williams) were more helpful in the wide areas of midfield and controlled the ball better than they had before. Vladko coached about as well as he could (again imo). This team was highly limited by a lack of real playmakers in any position, for a variety of reasons. We had some injuries to really key players (Swanson), and a few of our former stalwarts (Morgan and Rapinoe in particular) have aged noticeably. But mostly, we simply don't have players with the technique and creativity to be dangerous in this more modern version of women's soccer. Or maybe we have them but choose to play more physical and less technical players instead. Just one example -- our outside backs. Not trying to scapegoat them -- they are both very athletic and hardworking and defend stoutly. But truthfully, we as fans are happy if Dunn or Fox simply completes a pass -- ANY pass, useful or not -- because they make so many turnovers. In the past 3 games put together they couldn't have made more than 5 penetrating passes or runs. This is largely true for all of our midfielders (except Horan) and forwards as well. Its hard to win if you can't score.
Congratulations to all of our older playrs who will be retiring soon. You were champions for a long time and did our country proud. Now its time to move forward with some new players and some new ideas.
To add to your point about Fox and Dunn... I've been asking myself the entire time I've watched them play under Vlatko. Why do they play on the wrong side of the field? Dunn is right-footed and Fox left-footed. Yet, they always play on the opposite side of the field. As an outside back, they should be on the their strong side. They are not 7s or 11s that like to cut in and shoot like a Robben. They are meant to attack down the flank, overlap, and cross it. Mind-boggling to me!
Feel like you missed the mark on most of your ratings. It was a wide open game and Sweden's biggest threat seems to be set pieces. Glad to see the US finally show up. They could always have done better especially, in the final third. Think moving forward should be easy. You have to move on from Vlatko!!! Rapinoe showed you nothing in her two previous appearances and you go back to that empty well again? If I am Cook, playing for this guy moving forward is a problem . Smith & Rodman should be in their prime in 2027. The 4-3-3 did not work with this lineup. Though it was laughable that, Sweden's coach thought his keeper intimidated the players taking the PK's. They were lousy kicks, period.
Correct you are Kevin;
I don't usually like to Pick a Battle with Mike W.
But I surmise his Ratings are based on Disappointment and Loss in PKs, and NOT how the Game Actually Unfolded....
(If we had Won the PKs, the Ratings would have been Much Higher)
Therefore I will do something I don't usually Do..
A Player by Player Rating....
Agree. Sonnet and Fox made this a contest. They linked our stalwart defenders to the attack. We went from having NO central options in group play to 3-4. Dunn has outlets. Fox and Sonnet offered options, inverting her runs. They gave Sullivan balance too. Williams should have started at the 9 with Rodman and Smith. Sub Sanchez in at the 8 for her bangers in the second. She is more agile on the ball too than Horan.
10-Emily Fox
She was a Constant threat down the Right when she would Cleanly take the Long Ball Switches from Girma Down with her 1st Touch and Take Off into the Open Space, Looking to Combine with Horan or Rodman/Williams. Defended Well. A Perfect Game.
Conversely;
4(5-1) Crystal Dunn
She Continues to Be an "Event Horizon"( I would say Black Hole, but someone would probably accuse me of Racism)
The Ball goes into her and IT NEVER COMES OUT.!!!
Poor 1st Touch that Always requires her to Spend Time and Energy to Recollect the Ball, and in the Meantime, the Next Play in the Rhythm has Been Closed Down and Disappears, and then it's Battle 1v1 and the Ball ends up Out of Bounds or Kicked Away Aimlessly...
Probably not her Fault as she is NOT Really a Left Back...
Would be interesting to see if her Poor Touch Twitchiness could help in the Attacking Mid Area or at Rt Wing.
She did a Good Job Defensively, as she usually does... Very Hard to get by her.
(-1.???... You Guessed it probably by Now.... NO HAND OVER HEART DURING NATIONAL ANTHEM)
Let me Start my Player Rating with the 3 Mentioned Above...
USA Set-Up in a 4-2-3-1.... Something I have NEVER Seen Them do Before.
6- Alex Morgan, Playing as a "HIGH" Forward... Job.???
To Stay up against Stretch the Center Backs of Sweden and try to Break The Trap and get Loose behind the Defense.
Mission Accomplished...
There was only a 10 minute Gap in this, during the 2nd Half, were She Started to Come Back Too Deep into the USA Midfield and We Lost Some Valuable Minutes of Pressure on them.
As I Stated Previously, She is NOT A NEAR POST CRASHER/FINISHER and She Was ABSENT AGAIN in Fulfilling this Role ... You Don't have to Score on that NP Run, Just BE THERE to Keep the Ball alive in the Box.
Vlatko whiffs on his chance to fall on his sword post-match.
He's Spineless;
That's why the Players Picked Him...
Following the Same Logic of Re-Hiring Ggg;
Betty Crocker and C-P-C will HAVE TO RE-HIRE HIM.!!!
Because they "Learned So Much" and we "SAW" so much Improvement in the Round of 16 Loss, and "THE PLAYERS LIKE HIM".
OR; Will there be Reverse Sexism and C-P-C will say; "
"THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE FOR OUR WOMENS TEAM"
I Think the Women should have to Be STUCK WITH FLATKO, JUST THE WAY THE MEN GOT STUCK WITH GGG.!!!
"What's Good for the Goose, is Good for the Gander"
EQUAL PAY = EQUAL COACHING
Oh, and Don't Forget to Give Flatko a NICE BIG RAISE, To EQUAL his Pay Up to Ggg Standards.!!!
2- Lyndsey Horan
She didn't "BOSS THE GAME"
As Frank and I have Pointed Out, She has Plateaued..
Granted, it's a Pretty High Level, but with her Abilities, She should be able to Put her Foot on the Ball and Bounce People OFF Her, as She Drives to Goal or Holds the Ball to Draw Fouls or Multiple Defenders to her, Thereby Opening Up Other players that she can Dish Off To.
TOTAL FAILURE Today... she had All kinds of Space in that RT Midfield Quadrant that she was Floating in, But Rarely did she Control the game like she Should have. Did make some good Relays out to Fox and Rodman/Williams... Had a Tremendous Shot that I still don't know how that GK saw it, Much Less Saved It
This may be unexpected coming from me, but they all deserve 10s, even those who didn't see any minutes. The US played much better than Sweden, and looked far more dangerous. And they didn't lose. Before the TV god of sports promoters arrived, there was no penalty kicks. The match would be replayed in its entirety another day. The replays would repeat until there was a winner. Far more satisfying than penalty kicks.
I will make an exception to my not commenting on particular ratings in the case of Sonnett. She was outstanding playing out of position in the most difficult match of this world cup. You don't like it because she couldn't do anything effective with the ball? NOT HER FAULT! She didn't even have time to learn the position. The coach put her in the midfield while Mewis and DeMelo sat the bench. Did they both have the flu?
Sonnett is my hero. I didn't see her worth when she first got her cap. But Ellis and her staff invested time in her and it paid off, not with a starter, but with a solid dependable backup who could fill in at any position in the back. Today she was every much heroic as Naeher.
Hold your heads high team.
Agreed Bob
9-EMILY SONNET
Thrown into a Unfamiliar Role as a Double Pivot, in a Unfamiliar System that the USA had NEVER PLAYED BEFORE.
She was STELLER...
Always in the Right Place, Always Nicking a Ball away from a Swede, getting to 2nd Balls, Quickly and Cleaning and POSITIVELY Playing the Ball Off to a Teammate.
Played So Well, that if we Would have Advanced, Either Lavelle or Horan would have had to Sit.!!!
8-Andi Sullivan
Ditto what I said Above for Sonnet ... Just Not involved in the Game as much as Sonnet.
Bob you have had several excellent posts today. As far as Sonnett is concerned, her sterling midfield play allowed Horan to fulfill the offensive thrusts that Lavelle normally makes. I completely don't understand many of the ratings that Mike W provided today. Unfortunately for Horan, her lack of speed takes away from her excellent vision and sometimes affects her ability to control the ball as she is often forced to move her body prior to the arrival of the ball in anticipation that high defensive pressure will relieve her of the ball.
I do agree with the revised ratings by Santiago and with most of what Frank says with the exception of his assessment of Girma. She is one of the few American players who can actually use both of her feet interchangeably. Yes, many of her passes were long but many were to change the side of play and almost all of them were accurate. Unlike most US players, she has the touch to make accurate passes in the air.
Overall, this was a game where you could give Vlad some credit for starting Sonnett at Horan's usual position and putting Horan in Lavelle's position. Sonnett's athleticism allowed her to support Sullivan resulting in Sullivan having her best game of the tournament. Considering that Sonnett has never been an attacking player, she did the best that she could in that respect. The truth is that playing both the more skilled Lavelle and Horan at midfield places the defense (and particularly Sullivan) in a more precarious position. His introduction of Rapinoe clearly turned out to be a mistake. Also, it is hard to fathom that Sophia Smith and O'Hara were selected to take PK's. I guess this is a reflection of the lack of skill of some of our players (as expressed by Frank).
1-Megan Rapinoe
She was Only Brought for ONE THING, TO SCORE PKs
I Felt Generous to give her a 1, because she Ran her A$$ back to Steal a Ball in Defense and she made a Good Tactical Foul ... Otherwise she did NADA.
Oh... Did I Mention... SHE SKYED HER PK.!!!
OH, I'm Changing my Rating,,, WHY.???
Her After Game Interview, where she Sniffled thru saying: "HOW MUCH SHE LOVED PLAYING FOR HER COUNTRY"
F a ucking, LYING, HYPOCRITE.!!!
ZERO-0-0-0-0-0 →(° °)┗⟵(o_O)(ﾉﾟ0ﾟ)ﾉ→
I don't want to hear about Vlatko this and Vlatko that...Vlatko basically represent the inept 'brain trust' of the US coaching academy, which, to me, is par for US coaching... Why do we even license coaches for they create a very incomplete player product as far as skills and thinking go the other aspects, Turbo, fight, and athleticism ,we're tops in that for it requires little know-how of the game.
Look at what the coaching academy has produced in way of 'coaches', which to me is pitiful after 50years of soccer...It's still basically Turbo and Athleticism...What I find ironic that none of the coaches over the years walking around with their 'A' license or less won't recognize their collective failure in player development. "I teach skills to my players, I don't teach Turbo" is usual come back....Yeah, really??? Welll how come the player style of ball has not improved but remained at the lowest common denominator.
Teaching skills has nothing to do with going through the technical exercises and drills. You teach skills by demonstrating and showing when to apply them in situations. In my days of 'street soccer' youth players learned from each other and especially from the BETTER/OLDER players......Since we don't have pickup to learn , the coach takes the place and should teach the necessary skills. For example, in a small sided game, a situation occurs and you immediately stopped the game and demonstrate in this given situation , it is best to the specific technique, like a quick little 'toe jab' or a lift of the ball, etc. Many youth are not aware of the various skills that a player can use depending on the situation and that is why it is very important for the coach to introduce the finer elements of skills that kid a my days would learn from older players....
Unfortunately there very few coaches who are capable of teaching for it takes having a very good technical backround as a former player. This is why having a license is useless for it doesn't provide the coach the technical know-how. And this one of the reasons we produce so many stiffs as players who have no creativeness. Teaching the skills to the youth as they play small sided games provides a smoother flow in learning, and they learn right away the whys and hows , and whens to apply it at the moment. It's imprinted right there and then, and that is something which is missing, when practicing the drills or exercises.
NEXT POST...
Well Frank;
Now you have HIT on the Necessity of Coaching, Nowadays
Not enough Hours "On the Court" and I don't see that Changing.
Other Countries are going thru the Same Problem... Kids have Too many other Distractions.
A Good Coach, can Set Up Training Situations that can CUT Thru Years of Bad Habits that also get Picked up in Street Soccer(Those guys are usually Great Futsal Players)
Our Problem IS;
Obviously... Our Youth Coaches(Especially on the Girls Side), are "Beating" Out of the Players the Individuality and Skill that we are Seeing Come thru in Other Countries who still have Futsal/Street Soccer... South Africa, Columbia, Morocco, Nigeria....
As Lalas Pointed Out, Our Level is Falling, as Their Level is Rising...
"SOCCER GLOBAL WARNING"= WE ARE ABOUT TO GET SWAMPED.!!!
Also think Girma maybe the best center back at her age that, I have seen in the women's game.
8.5-Naomi Girma (Could have been a 10 except for 2 Thing)
Sweden had Obviously "Game Planned" to Keep Ertz from Distributing the Ball out of the Back, I guess they Figured they could Trap Girma into Give Aways or Outlets to Dunn or Poor Up- Field Long Balls with her Weaker Left Foot.
The Plan was succeeding for the First 10 Minutes or So;
I don't know if it was the Coaches or Herself that said "F"That;
I'm going to GO OVER YOUR HEAD AND PLAY LONG BALL TO FOX WITH MY RIGHT FOOT.!!!
Changed the Whole way the USA could Progress Up-Field in a Composed, Methodical Attack.
She gets .5 Deduction for the Early Give-Aways, until she changed Game Plan.
After awhile, they had to Back Off Some, and then she Started Connecting Balls to the Inside Midfielders, and even "Eating Up The Space" in front of her, and then Hitting Excellent LONG Diagonals with her LEFT Foot.!!!(We have a u20 LCB who does this Well, Might be a good future Pairing.???)
FULL 1 Point DEDUCTION FOR NOT PUTTING YOUR HAND OVER YOUR HEART DURING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM.!!!
WHY are YOU Making a CONCIOUS DECISIONS TO DISRESPECT YOUR COUNTRY.!?!?!?
WHY DO YOU HATE YOUR COUNTRY.!?!?!?
You have the Chance to be the Future Captain of this Team, DONT BLOW IT ON SOME "Social Justice" AGENDA.!!!
@Mike W
What I saw was that Horan was playing more like a second striker than a midfielder. It appeared to me that she was playing forward in a 442 defensive shape as well. Which made me think of second striker instead of simply attacking midfielder. So this looked and played like a 424. Two core midfielders while the other players changed lines with the flow of the play.
I wish I knew what happened in the locker room, because somebody motivated and lead this team and Vlatko hasn't done that before. Knowing how the USWNTs in the past operated, I suspect that the veterans filled the leadership void. At this point there was no downside for the veterans. Call it their last hurrah.
Bob, I don't know if it was Girma or Flatko that came up with the Game Plan to Switch Field to Fox, "Over The Top" of the Swedish Press, that Really Broke the Back and Spirit of Swedish "Runners"...
They Spent A LOT of Time Chasing Back and Across Field ..
Always Late and Frustrated.
It sure Opened up Horan as that "Low Forward/#10" that you Picked Up On... Just Wish Horan would have Taken Advantage of ALL that Time and Space she Had on the Ball... {Sigh... Woulda, Could a, Shoulda (꒪ヮ꒪;)}
The US played well enough to win, but couldn't quite pull it off (if either Smith or Rapino had scored, I'm guessing the ratings would have been better, per Santiago's comment). I thought Sweden started pretty well, but after the first 15 minutes or so, the US controlled the match most of the way (with some exceptions). The US defense held firm (one shot on target that I remember, though Naeher had to make a tough save on that one). Given this was theoretically against the 3rd best team in the world, the US was clearly the better team. Unlike previous games, we hit a lot of shots on goal in this one. Their keeper made about 5 or 6 good saves, and 2 excellent ones, on Morgan and Horan).
Still had some of the same issues as we had previously; too many long balls (and crosses) that were hopeful, rather than targeted. Vlatko still failed to use his bench effectively. I would have subbed Morgan much ealier (though she did end up with a strong shot on goal from a sharp angle, and her header late in the game, so with forwards it's sometimes hard to tell when they'll suddenly have an impact). Rapino, presumably brought on for her passing ability, had a very poor outing. I thought Sonnet deserved better than a 3 (she seemed to win a lot of balls in midfield); generally I thought our midfield was better today than we've been (other than Horan,who's been consistently good).
The other coaching decision I don't like is bringing people on to take penalties; Mewis first touch in the entire WC is a penalty with the game on the line? C'mon, that's increasing the pressure on an already high pressure situation (ask O'hara; right technique, a touch off...). Vlatko had his chance, time to try someone else in charge.
I thought the ref generally did a good job; high pressure game, both teams going hard but playing cleanly, and she let them play (consistently didn't give players looking for a foul the fouls they wanted).
Ref was a Non-Issue... Just the way you want them to be
10-Kristie Mews
1 Touch ... 1 Goal.!!!!
PERFECTION.!!!
Conversely;
0-Kelly O'Hara
1 Touch ... Missed the PK
Usually when I see these ratings I not in agreement. Not this time. Fox did yeoman work down the right flank - for once the US wasn't realying on just Dunn and Smith on the left. Sonnett and Sullivan were workhorses in the middle. Sonnett in particular was all over the field making both defensive and attacking plays. Rodman was dangerous every time she got the ball.
5(7-1-1) Sophia Smith
Was kind of Forgotten out on Left Wing, as Our Attack was More on the Right Side, and Dunn wasn't Getting the Ball much from Girma.
Did a better a job of Tracking Back as "Left Wing/Mid" in the 4-2-3-1, than I would have expected.
Didn't do much when she was Moved to High Forward for Morgan
-1 for Choking on PK
-1 for; You Guessed It, NO HAND OVER HEART DURING SINGING OF NATIONAL ANTHEM.!!!
After previous effort disappointment, I thought they played hard.
Putting that aside, where is Thompson with her speed? Come on Coach, was she hurt or are you stupid? Rapinoe? Seriously? I'd fire him just for that stupid move. Now ladies, let's cut the woke stuff and get back to a focus on playing the game of soccer. I sure hope you learned a lesson here and think about this on your way home.
No Question that Thompson would have been a More Effective "Field" Sub than Rapinoe... But I surmise that by that point Flatko was thinking about PKs ... And that is why he Brought Rapinoe(I concur with that Reasoning... ONCE SHE WAS ON THE ROSTER)
BUT, I NEVER CONCURRED WITH HER BEING ON THE ROSTER FROM THE START.!!!
I guess Flatko felt she needed 20 minutes "Run" on the Field to Warm Up this Old Legs... Might have been a chance for a PK before End of Game Time also.
The system needs an overal change. Our soccer will not get better, for the licensed coaches ,the ones who are responsible for this mess in the past 50 years are suppose to now improve this structure, that has created nothing but stiffs....forget it... If I ran a soccer association, I would only players who are very, very ,technical and certain not ones with licenses...I prefer those who can do things with a ball and I don't mean juggling, but can interpret situatons to the technical qualifications
No one can be surprised with the outcome of this game...it was coming...The Swedes are not very creative and individuality is not stressed , their game and thinking has to do with the 'collective'. The Swedes are about as creative as me trying to find a bottle of blonde hair coloring while in Sweden. We almost beat Sweden becuase we're tough and can give anyone a game if we are allowed to have the ball, which the Dutch didn''t allow us through a POSSESSION game. The Swedes are tough and they were up for it were hoping for a corner, or a dead ball play, or reach the penalty stage.
I saw Girma's rating as an 8. She is one of the worst passers, she is not good at building up from the back and all she does is kick long...Look at Ertz, who likewise has poor passing abilities, every short to medium range pass is toooooo Slow...I fall asleep watching the ball move to Girma. Neither one is good in building up an attack.
Have you notice when Ertz passes the ball to Girma, the ball takes a skip, counter spin and slows down. Somehow she has never been taught to pass properly. Now here is the kicker, the pass actually is a highly sophisticated pass but she doesn't know it for you use this pass when your teammate runs downfield bypassing the opponent, with the pass is placed ahead of her in manner so it backspins the moment it hits the ground, slowing down, backspins and to her on the run to meet...Furthermore Ertz stands flatfooted on defense when in a possible 1v1 situation...
NEXT POST...
Frank, it's difficult to fix youth soccer in the US because it is driven by money. As a fan of the national teams, I want the best coach possible for the first team. Technical errors are easy to point to and break your team down at crucial moments. What I also want is, someone that is tactically proficient at there job. They must be someone that, gives the players the best chance to succeed. Do you think that the USMNT or the USWNT have that at this point? I do not. Hopefully Wiegman will be available in a couple of weeks!
Kevin, it is nice to talk tactics when you the players who have the technical qualifications to carry it out the plan or concept you want....But technique comes FIRST
10(9+1) Julie Ertz
9 for Playing a Almost Perfect Game( Technical Deficiencies Noted)
+1 FOR YELLING AT RAPINOE, FOR BEING SELFISH AND TRYING TO SCORE A GOAL "OLYMPICO" FROM THE Corner Kick.!!!
I Hope this is NOT her Last Game for the Nats... She seemed to indicate that, in her Post Game Interview...
I am sure she Could still be playing at this Ability or Higher by Next Summer s Olympics...
Heck, if she can play like this After a 2 year Lay-Off, we could just Let her Train on her Own and Bring her IN for CB of National Team Games.
I would recommend and watch the dutch play and specifically watch how the backline passes the ball. First of all it is hard, unlike Ertz's passes, and it is done with the INSTEP, watch van de Gragt the center defender for the dutch... The dutch pass the ball with mustard on it as compared to our backline using 'tar'...The passing techniques that is taught by our 'coaching collective' is POOR.
Look at how the girls took the penalties, which goes for the Swedes too. They strike the ball as if hitting it with a hockey stick. There's absolutely no touch given to the shot and that is why so many of the missed shots, looked like they went into the upper tier of the stadium, or ended up in the parking lot underneath cars...You also see the lack of touch in the passes from the backline going downfield when they hit with the inside of the foot.....
The problem with Horan is that she should play on the leftside of the field not the center or on the rightside....On the leftside she had better overal fieldview, it allowed her to move less with the ball as far as steps go and able to pass off quicker. Whenever she receives the ball between center and the rightside she often had to turn a 270degrees or has her back to the situation and furthermore it placed her next to the sidelines where has no speed and has less passing options.
The problem with Morgan is that playing up front she needs to be able to outmaneuver in small spaces and play smart 1v1. In the first minute, threatening 1v1 ,dribbling with the leftfoot, she should have forced the defender to move to her left by dribbling one time diagonally to her right and cut back for the shot, instead she cuts inside with left ,thus eliminating chance to score...
When the Swedes were threatening in the first couple of minutes by the endline, our whole back stood in one line facing the ball and totally had no eye for the situation in their back....These are simple high school mistakes that shouldn't happen.
Also notice the Swedish goalie looked very confident in her manner, even relaxing on her rightleg instead of her leftleg in the moment while talking and setting up her defense.....The dutch, the Swedish, and our goalie will hopefully win recognition......
Agree with you Frank. Long way to go in coaching educations. In that context - the main problem is - they beleive they are doing a good job. There is zero accoutabiluty. In the micro context of the WNT Andonovski was unable to put a finishing touch on players or create tactical advantages - in the game play or in subs and tactical adjustments. This was clear after two years. Nothing done. Now you see the embarrassing play - many commenter here are delusional. They were poor - technically - especialy - but tactically as well. Thank you SA and Frank.
Humble, Thanks...You said it well," they believe they actually think they are doing a good job", LOL
Kevin, it is nice to talk tactics when you the players who have the technical qualifications to carry it out the plan or concept you want....But technique comes FIRST
Absolutely and always! It still doesn't help you overcome being hand cuffed by the one being paid to help you achieve your best results.
Yup, Kevin, True.....But I'm of those who like to put these idiots out of business by developing a pickup culture....It can be done the same way like how we started soccer 50years ago. Remember when kids didn't have a soccer culture....Remember those day with NASL trying to start soccer.....
Why doesn't every community where soccer is played have a website where you can play pickup soccer...
I thought that I would provide my dream of how USSF should run the National Team programs.
1. No separation of programs by gender. Two teams by gender. Sharing one vision, one front office, and one coaching staff.
2. No other vision is acceptable. We don't want a vision that is based on only 2 of the 4 aspects (physical and mental) of the game. We need a vision that is based on superiority in all 4 aspects of the game. Who wants a car with only two of its four cylinders working. A team that is superior in all four aspects of the game has tactical options to defeat all opponents.
3. We have US coaches and managers who can lead this program.
In the front office behind a desk full time I would include Arena, Reyna, Ellis, and Heinrichs. I would love to add Klinsmann if he could share the view and cooperate. He tends to the authoritative leadership style which doesn't work well with professionals. He does have a lot of strengths to add to the front office. Understanding that when you include those people you also include a whole network of contacts available to them.
Coaching the teams Ramos, Perez, and (Martin) Vasques and whoever additional they wanted to hire or fire. Foreign coaches are great as long as they share our vision of the game. But for continuity we need US soccer people leading the programs. They can hire people like the Dutch coach Frank suggested that I never heard of before and cannot remember his name. Like technical experts (great players) as trainers. Other staff: nutritionist, doctor, pyschologist, strength and conditioning (actually better described as an athlete development coach, i.e. training guru) I figure we need a full time staff of at least 12.
4. Kick the USSF business people and the board out of the soccer side. Not against Cone and other veteran players wearing two hats.
My selections are based on my impressions over the years. I have never met any of them, but I think these people could lead the national team program to future greatness. More importantly, they all (except for Klinsmann) have demonstrated they can work well in a team and place the welfare of the team first. In addition these people I named would be much better at picking the managers and coaches than I am. (I even respect Klinsmann's judgment and knowledge.)
This is my dream. Long past time we put the sport first.
Klinsmann has another job now and would probably be unavailable to the USSF. He is contracted to coach the South Korean Mens team through 2026, the next mens world coup.
I respectfully disagree. We need more progressive-minded people like the Guradiolas, Bielsas, and Artetas of the world in USSF rather than the status quo of the Arenas and Heinrichs. That’s why we are where we are right now. Cronyism at it finest - ‘Yes’ people with the same old, same old ideas. I agree that Hugo Perez should be more involved. Hence, why El Salvador hired him to change their entire federation around. However, everyone else is a hard pass for me.
Bob, I'm going to Leave this Discussion for the Eventual;
What Next.??? Navel Introspection Article that Soccer America will be Surely Posting Soon.
Heinrichs and Arena are not "status quo" people. They have both want changes. Pep is not progressive. He is committed to his view of the game and his coaching methods. But his view and methods are positional play which is what I want to commit to just as strongly as he is. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "progressive".
Agree to disagree, but most of the individuals who are involved at the highest levels of USSF right now or within recent memory are not trying to change the game or the organization for the betterment of the sport within the US, worldwide, grassroots levels, etc. And that includes everyone you stated above with the exception of Perez and JK too. Perez did a wonderful job of developing players during his tenure with the USYNT, and JK tried to make systemic changes, but both faced a ton of push back by the status quo that didn’t want to make true change. In my opinion, the individuals on your list are not game-changers. They may have been good managers at some point or good players in their own right. However, when I talk about progressive managers or individuals that work with pros and youth players, I mean trying new things, being reflective and introspective, willing to fail in order to succeed, using analytics and periodization, and having an impact on the game - reading the game, how we play the game, how we develop players at the grassroots levels, etc. Pep is absolutely progressive with his ideas and how his teams play the game - False 9, 1/2 spaces, outside backs turning into another 6, rotations within his MF, third person runs in the final third, and so on. Bielsa, Klopp, Cruyff, Tom Byer, Michel Bruyninckx, Todd Beane, Raymond Verheijen, Albert Puig, Wiel Coerver, and the list goes on - they are/were progressive. The ones on your list, I'm not reading their books, following them on social media, or becoming inspired by them. They are antiquated just like the rest of USSF. Hence, why the rest of the world is catching up to the USWNT and why the USMNT continue to flounder.
Ankl Brkr, we have a definition problem. "Progressive" in this context means someone who wants to make a slow methodical change in a process. It does not mean "superior". Pep's views and methods are superior, but he was a student of Cruyff who developed his views over 50 years ago.
Ellis and Heinrichs are progressive regarding their views and methods. They in fact made methodical improvements in the women's program leading to the 2015 and 2019 world cup wins.
I believe that Arena has demonstrated his desire to adapt and grow through his entire coaching career. That is my opinion based on observation of matches during his time with UVA, with DC United and with LA Galaxy. Reyna also has demonstrated a personal commitment to convert not just the national team programs but all soccer in the US to positional play.
The three coaches I mentioned, Ramos, Perez, and Vasques, all have experience both coaching the national senior teams but more importantly doing developmental coaching as well. Vasques even has some experience coaching women. I think those three are the US's best choices for leading a switch to positional play expecially if they can hire more experienced positional play coaches to help them. I didn't ask for Bradley to sit behind a desk because I think US Soccer is best served by his continued coaching. I don't think he is ready to leave the field yet.
You have to understand that having US managers and coaches leading the program is better than bring Pep in to lead our program. In the long term it would be much more effective to have foreign coaches like Pep working under US leaders who fully support him. We want permanent change, not just some brief spring of good soccer.
When I said progressive, because I'm the one that said it in the first place, I was referring to implementing new ideas and/or reform. Like I said, I'm not interested in what the USSF has done up to this point because it's not working. I never said we need Pep, I said we need influential individuals with new ideas. The rest don't offer that. We've rested on our laurels for far too long. It's time for the old guard to step aside and let new people with fresh ideas take over and lead.
We were the better team today and should have advanced. That’s why I hate PKs. In extra time, I wish they would take one player off the field for each team every five minutes until a goal is scored instead of having PKs. Let the end result be decided on the field during the run of play.
Nonetheless, two really poor PKs didn’t help our cause along with one that hit the post. However, the Swedish GK was outstanding in regulation and allowed Sweden to get to PKs to have a chance. Once again, though, Vlatko’s line up and subs were head-scratching. I know we were missing several quality players, but I truly feel the player pool, roster make-up, line ups, and subs is what held us back the entire tournament.
With that said… why was Thompson and DeMelo exiled to the bench? If Vlatko is retained, then god help us all.
10-Alyssa Naeher
I must admit, I was Advocating for the Taller GK Murphy for this Game... Due to Sweden Height and Probability of PKs...
More than Glad to Eat a little Humble Pie.
Though Awkward and Out of Control, She got to Everything in the Air, And kept A Clean Sheet.
Saved a PK, MADE A PK.!!!
8-Rodman/Williams
They played Extremely Well... Rodman, though "Sick" was a Constant Threat, Took a Pounding and Kept on playing until it Looked like She was Turning Pale...
Williams Kept up the Same Good Pressure and Crossing...
By the way I have seen the image that the VAR used to judge the winning PK good. What they claim is that the ball was mm's out. The photo doesn't show any separation between the line and the ball so I would have said it was not fully past the line at the time that the image was taken.
On the other hand I don't see the keeper's hand in the image. So in my mind they should have used a later picture showing separation between the ball and the line. What the picture assumes is that the ball continued to travel away from the line after this image was taken, instead of up, down, sideways or backwards. I don't like assumptions especially when they are unnecessary.
I also wonder why they didn't release an image that clearly shows separation between the ball and the line. Even just a few mm. I wonder if the technology is capturing the image too soon? Remember this was a slow moving ball, not one traveling across the line at 50 feet per second
By the way camera technology allows a camera to automatically take a quick succession of shots in a matter of miliseconds. Don't tell me FIFA set up a goal line tech that only captures one image? DUH!
I don't understand why FIFA did not use the goal line technology the men use, where the ref has a watch that indicates when the ball fully crosses the line. Are the women not worth the investment? Anyone know what happened here?
What makes you think that the ref didn't have a watch that told him when the ball crossed the goal line?
It still makes No Sense to Me.!?!?!?
Was the Ref Wearing a "Beep" Watch or Not.???
If the 2 Technologies where in Conflict, then they should Negate each other and the Call on the Field should.Stand... NO Goal.
We Start Kicking Round 9, Tomorrow @ High Noon.!!!
Yes Bob, the Picture Does NOT show any Separation between the Ball and the Goal Line;
Therefore; Whole of Ball is NOT over Whole of Line.!!!
It's more like a "Hanging Chad"
No Goal.!!!... Recount/Recertify Time
Can we get some of Trumps Lawyers on this.!?!?!?
I wonder how Many of our Women will say for the Rest of their Lives; The Ball was NOT over the Line.???
Bob, the universal sign for refs when indicating the ball went over the line is to point to their watch, which buzzes when the ball crosses the plane indicating a goal. That didnt happen. I don't have further info, and I don't know the brand of goal line technology used--FIFA doesn't say.
I have something disturbing to report. According to the Washington Post the competition rules do not allow VAR review of whether a ball crossed the goal line or not. The beep watch technology is not supposed to be subject to VAR.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/var-soccer-womens-world-cup-2023/
Bob,
So a MACHINE "Called" the Game Over.!!!
WOW... I still Don't see any Space between the Whole of the BALL, and The Whole of the Line.
So it is Touching the Line and Therefore, Part of the Line.
Probably Take my Old Geometry Teacher to tell me the Touching is Not "ON" the other Shape.
And What about the "Beep" Watch.??? are those in Use or Not.???
The Ref would have Known, Immediately... If the Watch Went OFF.
And She made NO Reaction like it did.
My Theory is that is Why she di NOT Signal GOAL Orginally,
Video Replay shows the LinesPerson Looking Down at Her Watch,
But, She didn't React Like it had Gone Off, I'm sure she would have Told the Center Ref, if it Did.
So, I am thinking that the Watches WERE In Effect.
If the 2 Technologies were in Use and Conflicted, Which Technology was "Superior".???
You got it backward Santi. The buzzer didn't go off. The referee didn't signal that it was a goal. Meaning the electronic sensors confirmed the save. Before the official could continue, the VAR got involved contrary to the competition's rules. And the officials improperly ended the match in Sweden's favor.
If I was a sports gambler, I would be demanding my wager back.
Bob, it's either my Typing or your Readings...
We are Saying the Same Thing... I think.???
Watch did NOT BUZZ...
You can Tell by the Linespersons Reaction...
She Looks at her Watch, but just puts her Arm Down like Nothing is On the Watch.
She also did NOT Raise her Flag to indicate the Ball was Over the Line.
She also did NOT go and Confer with the CT Ref, or Vice-Versa , kinda Unusual.???
Looks to me like 2 Technologies were in Use, And they were IN Conflict.!!!
Wonder what the Tournament Rules say.???
According to the Post article the competition rules say VAR does not apply to goal line decisions. The Article was dated July 18 so it was current. If FIFA changed the competition rules at the last moment, all nations should have been notified of the change.
What gets me is that nobody has said anything about it. The US coaches and the FIFA officials all should know the competition rules inside and out. The whole thing smelled fishy which got me researching the competition rules.
Yup... The article Raises more Questions than it answers;
"
Is video review used to determine if the ball crossed the goal line?
Return to menu
No. For the third straight tournament, the women’s World Cup will use goal-line technology to determine whether the ball fully crossed the line for a goal. Using numerous high-speed cameras, the technology will send a signal to the referee’s watch within one second of the ball crossing the line if a goal was scored — making such situations one less thing for the VAR to worry about."
If you Follow the Hyper-Link in the Article; It takes you to the FIFA Website; EVEN MORE DISTURBING NEWS !!!
The Video says there is a 15 Millimeters "Tolerance".!?!?!? WTF.!!!
The System is supposed to send a "Goal" picture to the Refs Watch;
IN ONE SECOND.!!!
The Referee should have Known IMMEDIATELY, if it was a Goal or Not.!!!
There is NO VAR; WHO IN THE HELL WAS SHE TALKING TO.!!!
Who Told her it was a Goal.!!!
And why didn't the coach and USSF protest?
These ratings are horrible inaccurate. Smith was negative. Rapinoe was negative. Both are amazing players but not on this day. Sonnett was solid. Williams was a spark.
Best US game by a wide margin. That Rapinoe was brought on instead of DeMelo is a puzzlement. That she was brought on at all shows eiher hows thin the US roster was or puzzling the substitutions were. That she could have won the game, but ended her WCup career by sending a spot kick softly over the top was consistent with her performance.
It is just deranged and authoritarian to demand players perform to your expectations of a pregame ritual. Whatever advocacy they do off pitch on their own time is up to them. This is a free country. I have lots of complaints about the tactics and coaching and wish the play had also been better but this anti-woke crusade is dumb.
You just Contradicted yourself, because they are CONSCIOUSLY doing Advocacy ON THE FIELD, by Choosing NOT to put their Hand Over Their Heart... Clearly a game of Millimeters... What was Rapinoe thinking as she Took her PK.??? "I'm gonna show all those Haters" .. Loss of Focus...
Haven't you ever been involved with a Team, where the Players are In Turmoil... Can't you Recognize it ???
Ask Carli Lloyd, if you don't Believe Me.!!!
Santi, Well Said!!!
Mylene, thanks for the heads-up on the podcast with the Welsh player. I learned a bunch. Her take on the U.S. going to a 4-2-3-1 was spot on.
Missed that one... Which Podcast.???
Mylene, you are correct. People are way too focused on controlling what players do outside the game and how they think. The US is about liberty, not mind control. The Nazis were very good about getting people to think and act alike. Not really a model we should emulate.
People express their love for their country in different ways. Crticizing players for their political views is fine; criticizing the players for having political views and daring to express them is missing the point of being American.
Kent, You're absolutely right ,there are shades of Nazism all over the place...just look at our "cancel culture" that supports a certain political party they support .... just look at how people are treated when wearing a red hat....
True, it is such a shame.....
Rather harsh assessment and ratings in light of the quality of play individually and collectively ... save in the final third. Nonetheless, a very good Swedish team posed 1 threat in 120 minutes. The USA was far more comfortable on the ball and maintained meaningful possession much better. Sonnett was awesome. That rating shocks me. This USA team (lacking numerous payers who no doubt would have raised the team's level and provided more flexibility) was not great, but still pretty darn competitive. To suggest they could not pl ay with the best teams is nonsense ... they outplayed the # 3 team in the world and suffered the oftentimes cruel fate of fickle PKs. For sure, USA weaknesses were exposed on this stage and there were plenty of them. But credit must be given where due. I am proud of how the USA competed in this match.
Sonnet and Sullivan as double 6 completely changed how the US played. Sonnet a 3? Did you watch the game?
I thought Fox played much better than previously, same with Sullivan. Sonnet addition (adding def mid) made a big difference. I thought Huran had another solid, good performance. Williams was better than before, even Morgan, just still not good enough for a World Cup. We had numerous opportunities to win in regulation which is more than we did against Netherlands and Portugal. In a World Cup against a foe like Sweden, we must convert the few opportunities, create more chances, or defend flawlessly and nail the Pk's! Congrats to Sweden and their gk for their performance. To beat Japan, I believe will be require much better.
Guys, PHEW, what a day, yesterday, talking about getting your typing fingers exercised, LOL....All the comments given are great by everyone...You guys are a great group and fun to kick a ball or rather words around with.. Let me say the following....
First, there were some questions about why a leftfooted back is playing on the rightside and vice versa. Perhaps the coach thinks the opponent's wing attackers tend to cut inside a lot which is a big trend in today's soccer instead of going down towards the endline, which means it is better for the back to be able to stop the wing going inwards with a slide tackle which otherwise is difficult to execute.
Or perhaps, the back is very fast and can outrun the attacker, or simply it's due to injuries... and no other choice. Other factors could be where the sun/shade is at that time of day which can also be a factor, or the age of the opponent's midfielder or the lenght of the grass....These are aspects , I don't think our level coaching is ready for this stuff, can also be involved.
Many factors need to be taken into account, as stated by Tonnie Bruin Slot(Cruyff's assistant) about how Cruyff when he coached for he applied nearly about 300 factors and details like that as compared to the average European Pro-coach who could come up with around 100 or so....And yes, as Humble1, states there needs to be better coaching education which doesn't mean more coaching license classroom instructions for the more licenses and class room instructions the more removed we become from the 'field', thinking. Cruyff thought as a player when he coached, he wasn't a classroom type of guy and learned the deeper insight by having played at the highest level.
There are many, many interesting 'details and insights' of the game that are not taught at the Coaching Academy by some rumdumb instructor with "A" license who played at the level of X-box soccer games. The real insights of the game are learned by those who were in the 'trenches' themselves, like Cruyff, himself. This is why he wanted always former players at Ajax to teach the youth not some 'A'- licensed 'rumdumb coming from the coaching academy because they lack teaching knowledge of the finer parts of the game and come across to theoretical and dogmatic,(YOU SEE WHY WE PRODUCE STIFFS AS PLAYERS).
NEXT POST
Good comments Frank. I would sum up your view as there is no substitute for coaching and playing than quality playing experience. Coaches and players without that solid base of playing experience are handicapped. They will never reach their full potential.
Coaching classes alone aren't enough. Playing organized soccer alone is not enough.
I used to say that elite soccer players are self selected. Meaning the players who only touch a ball during organized practices and matches are going to compare poorly with players who play pickup in the neighborhood as well.
Our twisted pay to play system still selects younger players based on age alone. This creates an artificial barrier for talented younger players. So being talented will likely get you noticed by someone, but maybe not the club you wanted. The most important critera for selecting elite players ought to be coachability and mentality--not age.
You are so right Bob, there is no substitute....that's why I want experts to come to help out...Cruyff likewise had to learn from others as well when he was young and that was at a time when there were no licensed coaches, instead he learned from the players themselves. When he began to play pro ball at 16 at Ajax, his peers would tell the insights of the game....
The KNVB in Holland FORCED coaches to be licensed, which had the effect of negatively REDUCING the real soccer knowledge being taught because former players didn't feel like having to go back to the classroom to be taught, after so many years playing, by a 'rumdumb' licensed instructors who never came close to the level these former pros played. As Cruyff states, "licensed instructors are no guarantee for youth to play better", instead ,he stated "it is more of a hindrance"
As Franz Beckenbauer , once stated, that Cruyff knows more about the 'game' than all the instructors at German Bundesliga Coaching Academy. There is a lot lost knowledge about the game out there which is not taught. AND THIS IS WHY I KEEP HARPING ON GETTING 'EXPERTS' WHO PLAYED THE GAME , to come over and teach our players the real field knowledge that these rumdumb licensed instructors lack...BINGO!!!
Others think we need to teach tactics as well technique ,but realize the process of learning technique is not about drills and exercises. Realize as players learned their skills in small sided games as I did in 'street soccer' they are automatically ALSO learning tactics they understand at their level and age. Technique and Tactics are NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSICE!!! The more a player grows technically the more tactically he grows because he sees his skills applied as 'shortcuts', he's thinking is progressing about the game. So relax about the Tactics not being learned, he is learning. But to say 'well they also need to learning tactics", they are you just don't see it....
Some have mentiond about Sonnet and Sullivan playing well, I didn't mention them but keep in mind, are we going to play the usual defensive lineup or are we going to replace one of our centerbacks for a Beckenbauer type who moves up with the ball and can distribute, for that is what I want to see. A Beckenbauer type, relieves the pressure from other midfielders and backs, and it forces the opponents to commit, which creates space for our midfielders, also it can create a given and go with the #6 or a TRIANGLE, with #6, and the other centerback.
REMEMBER CREATING SPACE, well if you want that scenario, than you don't want to play with a double pivot or two #6s. WHY???, because they will not only block the upcoming space for a Beckenbauer type but also draw more opponents in the middle. It's going to be a high-trafficked area, NOT GOOD!!! As a result, it forces our backs to receiving the ball more which forces us more in 7v10 mode because we leave the other flank out of the game....
NEXT POST
Furthermore, if the backs are getting the ball more because the middle is blocked , than realize all the space ahead of the back, which is between him and wing, due to a lack of an outside halfback.
Now you have to take account of a lot of other factors coming into play that otherwise would not come up when the applying a doube 'pivot', like switching the ball a crosspass to the other wing which is now more difficult, very difficult, between a back and the wing on the other flank. You see now why Cruyff at Barcelona's Dream Team, used a #6, Guardiola in the center lane and circle to expedite the ball to the otherside, that's what they used him for......
Next, any pass from the back straight down the wing, a vertical ball would force the wing to come back and receive the pass with his back facing downfield....RINUS MICHELS WOULD BENCH ANY PLAYER ATTEMPTING THIS TYPE OF PASS.... for as Cruyff states, one of the worst passes anyone can make.
The double pivot can cause us to lose numerical midfield advantage by all of a sudden having one #6 as the other moves up....So we can talk about double pivots, we first have to connect the DOTS to the other players and add up the positives and negatives.
I prefer the Beckenbauer type for will get rid of the two stiffs playing centerback, WE NEED IN OUR PLAYER DEVELOPMENT MORE ROUNDED DEFENDERS, who have the ability to lessens the pressure off the other players on the build up.....
Goals. We needed goals. Much to look at beginning with PKs. They’re goals after all.? I still can't believe Rapinoe and Smith took PKs, not with the way they were playing. Rapinoe was off. Her technique and execution of almost every aspect of her game fell short of acceptable. And not just in the Sweden game, the entire WC. I'm quite puzzled as to her inability to recognize and admit that to herself and follow that up with: "Hey Coach, play someone else. I just don't have it". I've been thinking that she must have a super-agent representing her and probably does. The Rapinoe brand is strong. But if the agent knew how to assess soccer performance the best advice would have been to advise Rapinoe to sit, cheer, and go home with her brand intact. After the Vietnam game, I was sort of defending her against the strong criticism in the comment section here, but I assumed she knew enough about her own strengths and limitations that she’d be able to know when to call it quits. I was wrong, but the coaches should have known. Her touch was off, but most importantly she wasn’t kicking well. She should take a PK? This deeper level of self-understanding should be part of player development, but we’re light years away from even thinking about that.
Sophie Smith. So much promise but something was off. She kept falling, slipping. Anyone on the bench evaluate her footwear? Was her body so amped up her mind couldn't catch up? Her touch was off, and there are things that a coach can do to help with that. Sometimes a player needs to over-concentrate on foot-eye, thigh-eye, body-eye coordination to synch up the system. Ball juggling with extreme eye focus on the ball can heal that dis-ease. But again, her body was begging to get back on track, and it just never did. Again, have her take a PK? Again, someone needs to help her learn how to assess and fix the problems she was having. She's young with a big future. Anyone up there able to help her?
Alan
I think there are also many men in not just soccer but most sports that are gay but they can't come out.
soon as they go public they loose endorsement as well public backlashes. I can't understand why today we still have this hatred for gay people, they don't bother me or how I live.
what people do in their own house is none of my business.
kind of wish everyone stay out of peoples lives, so what if they are gay. This wave of anti gay that's going on really bother me, who am I to judge other peoples choices.
Unfortuneately the majority of Christians in the USA these days do not practice Christian charity. They are even ill behaved among themselves. Tolerance is not even thought of any more. My own denomination split up in the past year because a minority were upset that the Church did not adopt a proposed anti-gay political policy. They split up over a matter that wasn't even a religious dispute.
When the majority of citizens are no longer tolerant of others, that puts a lot of stress on our institutions that protect the rights of individuals. I don't expect the current "culture wars" to end any time soon.
Santiago I know you threw out some number of what our teams make especially the women's team.
they each get $60k for this round of 16.
I think you need to understand it's their living not just the honor of playing for your country. That day is long gone even the Olympics have proffetional athletes.
$60K is à pittens for any professional male athlete in this country. I don't understand your objection on why these ladies want to make money.
Uffe,
I don't Begrude anyone Making as Much Money as they Can.
What I don't like is Getting PAID For FAILURE.
1st... I am Not Sure where you came up with that 60k Figure. Can you cite a Source for me.???
2nd... For USA Players under the Equal Pay CBA, There is NO Direct Amount Payment Per Player per Round... The Money is Split with the Men... FIFA wanted to Pay the Players Directly, but the Federations Fought back and FIFA had to Back Down.
I'd Have to read the CBA Closer to see if there is a "Signing Bonus" for being Named to the World Cup Roster versus a "Friendly" or "CONcacaCrApF" Qualification Game.
This Years USA Roster included MANY More Players than the 23 at the World Cup, so I imagine there is Some Formula in the CBA as to Which Player gets, Which Amount...
** An aside... I wonder who is In-Charge of the Disbursement, and WHEN does it Occurr... ???
Theoretically, You would have to Wait until the End of the Fiscal Year, to SUM UP All the Money, Then Split it,f between Men and Women and Federation..
Then Sub-Divide it to Players who were on the Roster for at Least One Game, Under some Formula.
According to TIME Magazine: "The reason for all the rooting: the historic collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) that the players’ unions for both teams signed with U.S. Soccer last year. Under the deal, the federation takes a 10% cut of the total prize money that FIFA awards the U.S. for its finishes in the 2022 and 2023 World Cups and the other 90% is split evenly between the men’s and women’s teams."
Santi, Talking about getting off track whenever responding to Uffe, LOL....
News flash Santi - Liverpool lost to RM twice in last decade in the mother of all pay days - Champions League - 'Pool took 2nd and about 100M in winnings both times. RM took about $105M both times. $5M to the winner of the final. Did not catch your rant on that injustice. Getting to each round of the tournament pays about $10M to each team, then a small bonus to win. This progressive payout system is normal. Have a nice day. Ladies have plenty of silverware - which our men lack - all those years - they were paid far less. Tab Ramos made more as the HC of YNT than Jill Ellis did when she won the last WWC for the USA. Time to make amends. This is ok. Take a seat in the corner for 5 mate.
VERY INTERESTING Break-Down of the USA Game on uTube: The RECAP with Heath & Press.
Also a Very,VERY Interesting Interview/Discussion on Women ACLs and Menstrual Cycle.
I highly Recommend it to you all.
Santi, the RECAP is also available as a podcast. I listened to the last two after Mylene, a woman commenting here, recommended it. I agree that it's worthy of a listen.
OK Uffe;
I got "The Numbers"
According to JUST WOMEN'S SPORTS article: Emma Hruby 8/7/23
FIFA pay to USSF; $3,250,000 (Round of 16 Loser Pay Out)
According to CBA; USSF gets only 10% = $325,000
That leaves $2,925,000 for Players; this has to be Divided by 2(with the Men's Team)
That equals $1,462,500 ÷ 23 = $63,587.oo (Thousand) per player.
The significant point is that performance bonus paid to players increases with increased success. Yes the USWNT players are paid more than other nations' players. Always been that way. Look at the cost of living here!
You must be aware of this issue because minimum wages got so much attention when MLS started up. It was impossible for minimum wage players in the MLS to support themselves. Some of the MLS coaches shared their homes with players so that they could continue to play professional soccer. I could have retired to Mexico or Central America and lived well off my social security alone. But my freedom and rights are more important to me than money. Of course. International pay comparisons are apple and oranges comparisons.