D3boards.com

D3soccer.com => Women's soccer => Topic started by: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2007, 10:03:18 pm

Title: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2007, 10:03:18 pm
I thought that the retirement of Hamm, Foudy, Chastain, etc., after the Olympics would inevitably mean a rebuilding period.  Silly me!  If I recall correctly, they are undefeated since then (26-0-4?) and once again ranked #1 in the world.  Obviously, then, they CAN win another World Cup - WILL they, and send the long over-shadowed Kristine Lilly out in a blaze of (well-deserved) glory?

Since this board has been pretty dead, I was tempted to post this on the Men's World Cup (etc.) thread, but thought I'd try to resurrect this board.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 11, 2007, 09:59:47 am
Game one: USA 2, North Korea 2.

Abby Wambach headed in a goal shortly after the half to go up 1-0.  She was injured in a scramble soon after and, hoping she could soon return, the coach chose not to replace her, playing 10 on 11.  This nearly proved disastrous, as NK scored goals in the 58th and 62nd minutes to take the lead.  However, Wambach returned in the 65th minute, and Heather O'Reilly scored in the 69th to tie it.  There it stood, despite furious offensive action by both teams.

Abby seems to be the indispensible 'spark' for this team.  Anyone know how her scoring pace compares with Mia Hamm's all-time records?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on September 11, 2007, 04:57:29 pm
Abby seems to be the indispensible 'spark' for this team.  Anyone know how her scoring pace compares with Mia Hamm's all-time records?

I saw a stat of this during the game and Abby was the 2nd fastest American to reach 78 goals.  I think it took her 100 games?  I can't recall who scored 78 faster, but Hamm was 3rd fastest and it took her something like 125 games.  So that puts Abby's proficiency into perspective.

BTW, she scored from a blast off her right foot that went right through the keeper's hands.  She should have scored off of a header in the 1st half, but it hit the cross-bar and came straight down and Korea was able to clear.

I think your description of her being 'indespensible' is pretty accurate as well.  Especially considering that the US coach chose not to sub her out of the game and it almost cost the US the match.

BTW, did you catch the group that the US drew?  Calling it the group of death is an understatement as there are 3 teams currently ranked in FIFA's top 5.  The US is #1, Sweden is #3 and NK is #5.  And Nigerea is no slouch as they check in at 23 I think.  Who comes up with these draws?  I mean, how do 3 of the top 5 teams in the world end up in the same group?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 11, 2007, 05:51:09 pm
Every World Cup has it's 'group of death', but I can't recall ever seeing one with 3 of the top 5 teams.  I believe the pairings are done entirely by blind draw, but if FIFA is going to have rankings, why not use them to seed the teams?

NK is such an unknown quantity (I suppose fear of defections and/or discovering that other people don't live in a gulag may prevent many international matches!) that I wouldn't be surprised if even their #5 ranking is too low.  I haven't seen the full schedule to know if it is possible, but a rematch of the survivors of this group in the finals would not surprise me (and one team won't even make it out of group who would also be a worthy finalist).
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on September 11, 2007, 06:11:37 pm

NK is such an unknown quantity (I suppose fear of defections and/or discovering that other people don't live in a gulag may prevent many international matches!) that I wouldn't be surprised if even their #5 ranking is too low. 
Judging by their performance against an American squad that many were voting as an overwhelming favorite coming into the World Cup, I'd say your assessment of them being under ranked at #5 might not be far off.  From what I saw, they pretty much dominated time of possession, they were quicker than the US and they seemed much more fit in the end making the US players look as if they were standing still. 

The good news is that Sweden and Nigeria had a 1-1 draw so the US didn't lose any ground by their draw today.  The question I have is how much did this match take out of the US?  They were dragging big time at the end of their NK match.  I don't think they were expecting to have to excerpt so much energy just to preserve a tie in their opening match of group play against a team they have pretty much owned in the past.  And things don't get much easier for the US as they now face #3 Sweden in their next group match.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Jim Matson on September 12, 2007, 04:23:16 pm
I think it was also a case of the U.S. playing flat.  It was an unimpressive showing (even overlooking the poor coaching move mentioned above).
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: sac on September 12, 2007, 04:54:30 pm
When was the draw made?  Is it possible NK moved up the rankings scale after the draw was already made?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2007, 11:03:44 am
USA 2, Sweden 0.  Abby Wambach scored both goals (and now has 80 goals in 98 international matches).

I haven't found the NK-Nigeria score yet.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Stinger on September 14, 2007, 12:53:16 pm
World Class goal from Wambach.   It was beautiful.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on September 14, 2007, 04:31:20 pm
World Class goal from Wambach.   It was beautiful.
Amen to that!  I loved the look on her face after she scored.  It was like, "Did you just see THAT??" 

The US came up big today.  I heard the US coach describe their first 2 matches as almost feeling like semi-finals and a finals matches.  Getting the 3 points against a good Sweden team and to be sitting atop the group standings with 4 points has to feel good for the Americans with what you would have to consider the weak team of this group by default in Nigeria waiting as the last group match.

BTW, NK defeated Nigeria 2-0 so there is still a tie atop the group standings between the US and NK as they both sit at 1-0-1 with a +2 goal differential.  The way it looks, the runner-up of this group will likely meet Germany in the quaters, so the US needs a good result against Nigeria and hope that Sweden can pull out some magic against NK.

Did anyone catch the end of the England v. Japan match?  Talk about getting homered!  England scores the go ahead goal with 5 minutes remaing and looked to have the 3 points all but locked up.  Then with seconds left in stoppage time the referee calls a bogus foul on an English player just outside the box.  Japan scored on the ensuing free kick to salvage the tie.  They showed the foul and I couldn't see what happened to warrant the foul to be called?  And ESPECIALLY at that juncture in the match.  I could see if the English player took down the Japanese player, but from what I could tell, both players were just going for the ball.  I've seen FAR worse in the 2 US matches that didn't get a call.  Just too bad for England.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2007, 06:45:08 pm
On the other hand, perhaps the shocker of the tourney so far: England tied Germany, 0-0.  While Germany is still in the driver's seat for 1st, if Japan can pull the shocker (and assuming England beats Argentina), the Germans will not even advance. :o

NK is at +2, Sweden at -2.  Am I correct that if Sweden beats NK, but by less than 4 goals, goal differential beats out head-to-head?  If that is correct, USA and NK are veritable locks to advance.  If NK and USA both tie, or both win by identical amounts (or even lose by identical amounts of 3 goals or less), anyone know the tie-breaker for 1st and 2nd?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on September 17, 2007, 08:56:32 am
On the other hand, perhaps the shocker of the tourney so far: England tied Germany, 0-0. 

Another shocker is Brazil-4, China-0!  Brazil has looked REALLY good through their 1st two matches and they took the hosts out to the woodshed.  Granted, I don't think China is as strong as they have been in recent WC's, but still...

As far as the tiebreaker goes, I have no idea how that would work if the US and NK finished with identical records and identical results.  Hopefully Sweden can get a result and the US can get by Nigeria so we don't have to worry about a tiebreaker.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 19, 2007, 12:47:16 am
Lori Chalupny scored 57 SECONDS into the game against Nigeria, which then went scoreless the remaining 89+ minutes!  Since Sweden beat NK, 2-1, USA finishes first and will meet England in the quarters.  NK advances on goal-differential over Sweden, and will face Germany.

The other two quarterfinal games will be decided in a few hours.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 20, 2007, 02:50:55 pm
The balance in the women's game has improved dramatically.  In previous WWC's, at most 5-6 teams had any realistic shot, and at least 6-8 couldn't really even compete.  This year only three teams played like they didn't belong (Argentina, 0 pts, -17 GD; Ghana, 0 pts, -12 GD; and New Zealand, 0 pts, -9 GD - the only team to never score a goal).  Nigeria managed only one point, but considering the group they were stuck in, a -4 GD suggests they might have had a great shot at going through with any other draw.

Poor Canada!  They led Australia by a goal entering stoppage time, but the Aussies got the tying goal that sent them through.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on September 21, 2007, 11:23:16 am
Good points Mr. Ypsi.  I'm interested to see how the US does outside of the 'Group of Death'.   I definitely think Sweden had a good enough team to get out of another group and Nigeria played pretty even with everyone and makes me think that they certainly could've have challenged for a quarterfinal spot had they been in another group as well. 

So far, I have not been all that impressed with the US squad for all of the hype that was being placed on them before the tournament.  I'm sure that some of it has to do with playing in the toughest group in the tournament by far.  Couple that with the fact that they have had to play 2 games in pretty crappy conditions.  It would be nice to see them come out and get a nice convincing result against England though.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 21, 2007, 07:41:16 pm
On to the quarters:

I'm pretty confident that USA will take out England, and Brazil will do in Australia (though most games with the US team are an adventure, and if the Aussie women have the men's flair for upsets, watch out!).  Germany will probably oust NK, but I don't know enough about the Germans to know how they will cope with NK's speed.  The real toss-up (to me, at least) is Norway vs. China: I'm FAIRLY sure that Norway is the better team, but strange things can happen when you take on the hosts!  I'll take Norway, but will ALMOST be surprised if I'm right! ;D

England and Australia are probably the longest shots for the cup, but even they (and Sweden, Nigeria, Canada, and perhaps even Denmark and Japan) are (or for the others, were) legitimate hopefuls.  A far cry from WWCs past!
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 24, 2007, 12:36:17 am
Well, 4-0 in the quarters - guess that puts me in first place in the WWC pickems!  (Of course, it would be more impressive if I wasn't talking to myself! :()  Germany won more easily than I expected, while Brazil had a more difficult time than anticipated.

I'll pick USA over Germany in the final, so I guess that covers the semis as well!

Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Stinger on September 26, 2007, 04:18:34 pm
Hope Solo is benched in favor of Briana Scurry for tomorrow's semi final v. Brazil.  I am a bit shocked. Quotes from Solo signaled that she isn't injured.  I really hope this doesn't backfire.

Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 26, 2007, 06:12:18 pm
From the SI.com story, that was apparently the plan all along (though not announced, perhaps even to Solo) - Scurry was on the team specifically in case they faced Brazil.

Germany set a new WWC defensive record this morning - dating back to 2003, they have now shutout opponents for 529 consecutive minutes.  If USA survives Brazil (likely, given past history), I suspect that Abby Wambaugh will make short work of that streak! :)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Stinger on September 27, 2007, 08:24:45 am
Osbourne with a own goal in the 21st minute. We'll see how the US responds.

They have the early edge in shots. They'll need Wambach to get on target.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Stinger on September 27, 2007, 10:57:18 am
Ouch
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on September 27, 2007, 12:10:47 pm

Ouch

Yep, that about sums it up! 

I think it was evident that the hard work the US had to put in just to get out of their group caught up with them today.  And then when Boxx got that 2nd yellow and subsequent red?  I'm still trying to figure out what the ref saw there.  Since when does getting your feet tangled up with an opposing player warrant a yellow???   ::)

And that booking pretty much sealed the deal for the US and would allow Brazil to deliver the Americans their worst defeat in the history of the US National Team!

From the SI.com story, that was apparently the plan all along (though not announced, perhaps even to Solo) - Scurry was on the team specifically in case they faced Brazil.

Germany set a new WWC defensive record this morning - dating back to 2003, they have now shutout opponents for 529 consecutive minutes.  If USA survives Brazil (likely, given past history), I suspect that Abby Wambaugh will make short work of that streak! :)

I really don't get Ryan's move to bench Solo.  I don't care what Scurry has done in the past against Brazil.  The semi's of the World Cup isn't the time to be making a coaching change.  Especially when Solo had gone 3+ games without allowing a goal.  Not a good coaching move if you ask me. ::) ???

And as far as Germany's shutout streak goes, after watching Marta for Brazil, I'd say that she has a pretty good chance of ending that streak!  Her 2nd goal would make Rhonaldino proud!!! :o
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: ScotsFan on October 01, 2007, 02:28:51 pm
And as far as Germany's shutout streak goes, after watching Marta for Brazil, I'd say that she has a pretty good chance of ending that streak!  Her 2nd goal would make Rhonaldino proud!!! :o
So much for that prediction?! ::)  Not only did Germany shut-out Brazil to become the first team to run through a WC Tournament (men's or women's) without conceding a goal, but they denied the great Marta on a PK in the process that would have tied the game!

Germany becomes the 1st women's team to repeat as World Cup champs and joins the US as the only multiple winners of the Cup.

The US was able to rebound from their devastating loss to Brazil by taking out some of their frustations in a  4-1 thumping of Denmark in the pretty meaningless 3rd place game.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: sac on October 05, 2007, 07:05:45 pm
Didn't get to opine on this when it happened, but as soon as I heard Scurry was going to start in goal vs Brazil, I knew they were beaten.

One  of the alltime dumbest coaching moves I've heard of.  Despite the "total support" of the team in the decision......supposedly. This was a terrible move.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on April 22, 2008, 01:23:46 am
The Olympics draws have been announced:

Group E: Argentina, Canada, China, Sweden
Group F: Brazil, Germany, Nigeria, N. Korea
Group G: Japan, New Zealand, Norway, USA

With Olympic rules (23 and under, or under 23?), it is real hard to handicap.  Going by traditional performance, I'd say EVERYONE (except, perhaps, New Zealand) is a legitimate candidate for gold!

I'll stick my neck out and peg Canada (probably better than China, but don't discount home-cookin'!), Nigeria, N. Korea, and New Zealand as the four early departures.  (Plan B replaces Canada with Japan - the Chinese are not real fond of Japan! ;))
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on August 21, 2008, 08:57:10 pm
WOW!  No Abby Wambaugh, and still the gold!

And Hope Solo got the shutout against Brazil - Greg Ryan, in case there was any doubt, you are officially an idiot. ;D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on May 26, 2011, 06:41:48 pm
Time to resurrect this thread - World Cup is comin' soon!

While it won't happen this year, a name to keep in mind for the future: Anna McClung.  Now a high school sophomore in Virginia, she made "Faces in the Crowd" (SI) for having at least a hat trick in EVERY (so far) game this season; as a freshman she set the state record with 65 goals in 16 games!  She's already on the national U18 team, though I assume she is only 15 or 16. 

She's cute too! ;D  Perhaps the next Mia Hamm (and, yes, I recall Freddy Adu :()?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: WLCALUM83 on June 05, 2011, 04:15:08 pm
Final just in :

In the last tune-up before the USA women leave for the World Cup:

USA 1, Mexico 0  (Chaney got the goal in stoppage time- Mexican goalie Santiago was playing as if she was standing on her head on defense a good share of the match)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on June 05, 2011, 05:14:22 pm
Final just in :

In the last tune-up before the USA women leave for the World Cup:

USA 1, Mexico 0  (Chaney got the goal in stoppage time- Mexican goalie Santiago was playing as if she was standing on her head on defense a good share of the match)

I'm worried if the Mexican keeper was standing on her head and we still only got one goal! :D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on June 06, 2011, 09:59:34 pm
No finishers.  That's the big worry for the USWNT. The U.S. has relied too long on the "serve it to Wambach" philosophy.  Abby was a non-factor yesterday. (She can't do it alone and other teams have learned to try and marginalize her.)  They need to have more weapons on top. Might be time to get Alex Morgan into the starting line up.  She has been great for the WNY Flash.  She might be the extra spark the US women need.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on June 27, 2011, 11:14:45 pm
Tomorrow is game number one for USWNT.  Will they rise to the challenge or flame out like the men?   Its hard to believe US has not won a World Cup since 1999.  As much as anything that was the event that inspired this generation of college player.  The next few weeks should be very interesting!  :o 
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on June 28, 2011, 02:39:01 pm
2-nil over North Korea.... A slow start, but they took charge in the Second Half.  The change at Midfield was a difference maker.   After the disasterous Greg Ryan years, Sundhaage (sp?) has been a steadying influence.  The US should beat North Korea, and they did.  Its more than the men's team can say....
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on June 28, 2011, 06:12:07 pm
North Korea's teams tend to be very good, and impossible to scout since they rarely play anyone (publicly, at least).  If the psychopath who 'owns' the country doesn't purge the team (which he may well - reportedly the men's team was subjected to extreme sanctions, and the men's coach seems to have been disappeared), the women's team has to be considered a favorite to win it all in four more years, as they are the youngest team in the tourney (and 'won' the first half).

On to Columbia (which should be a win) and Sweden (which will be tough, but obviously winnable).
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on June 28, 2011, 09:50:23 pm
The defense looked suspect in the first half, and Boxx was rough in the midfield.  The US defenders seem a little slow.  I would look to see other teams try to exploit that.  North Korea would have scored if they had more confident forwards.  They basically rolled the ball across the front of the goal--but couldn't put it away.  That was about as close as you can come and not score.

On the other hand,  a two goal win is about as good as its gotten in this tournament...a lot of close games so far.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on June 28, 2011, 10:31:06 pm
I think our left side defense (at least today) IS suspect.  NK couldn't quite exploit it, but better teams might.  I'm hoping the coach can correct that before it is fatally exploited.

With no disrespect to some other very fine teams, I think the champion will be the winner of the (expected) Germany-USA semifinal. 

But a lot of games to go. ;)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on June 30, 2011, 07:17:10 pm
Saw a bit of Nigeria v. Germany today.  Germany doesn't look so dominant.  At the end Nigeria tried to run the German goalie, which caused a big uproar.  I saw a local high school coach pull the same trick against the keeper on my daughter's HS team.  The refs blew it then and today with a non-call. 
I am still amazed by the "gender gap" in soccer officiating.  Somewhere,  there is a patronizing paternalism (pardon the alliteration) that seems to believe that women are incapable of intentionally fouling one another.  Anyone who has watched any girls' or womens' soccer at a competitive level knows what a fallacy that is.  I thought back on the Elizabeth Lambert disaster last year after watching the knock down today and thought both of them came out of poor officiating.  Oh, I could go on, but enough rants for me today..... ::)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 01, 2011, 06:26:56 pm
What happened to Canada?   This was going to be their year, but instead it looks like they are going home at the bottom of Group.  That's sad.  My kid played club ball in Canada and they have some really talented players.  From what I've read, their soccer organization is even more dysfunctional than ours.  Their coach quit or was fired,  the players threatened to strike, the coach comes back,  the players don't have a decent stipend for travel, the women's team apparently is treated poorly up there....too bad!  :-\
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 02, 2011, 02:04:28 pm
TOTAL domination over Columbia today - 3-0, but it really wasn't even that close!

That puts the US at +5, so a win OR tie against Sweden wins the group (and avoids Brazil in the quarters).
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 02, 2011, 04:21:18 pm
Great game for the US. 
Onl;y remaining question,  when does Abby's scoring drought end?  She managed to do everything but score today.  Have to agree with the commentator today, you have to feel when she breaks out the flood gates will open!  GO USA!
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 03, 2011, 11:30:13 pm
France and Brazil seem to be the two main threats to the US right now.  Brazil is very fast up front, but their defense is shaky.  US matches up well with its more European passing game.  France,  however, has been a big surprise.  They look tough. 
Also,  don't count out Japan and Germany.  The Germans have lots of controversey with Birgit Prinz.   The Japan v. England match will be very telling.  If England beats Japan all bets are off....

This looks to be a fun week of women's soccer! ;D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 05, 2011, 11:04:17 pm
Exciting game between Germany and France, and England handles surprising Japan.  The Germans look to be back in top form.  Tomorrow its USA v. Sweeden. Although both teams have made it through to quarters it may tell a lot about USA's depth.  Also,  expect Abby to start, but if USA takes the lead she may be replaced by one of the youngsters.  They don't want to risk a second yellow on this game.....Can't wait!!!!!! :)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 06, 2011, 07:21:50 pm
Ouch!  Abby finally gets a goal (and no card), but the US falls to Sweden 2-1.  Instead of Australia, we get Brazil in the quarters. :(

Oh well, to win it you have to beat the best eventually, but I sure had hoped to postpone the main threats a round further!

And at least Pia isn't gonna bench Hope against Brazil! ;D ;)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 07, 2011, 12:12:10 am
Unfortunately, Brazil's strength play to USA's weakness.  Our back line is sloooooooooowwww.  :o  Everyone has been trying to take on the outside defenders.  With Brazil's speed Pia better have a new wrinkle on D or the USA will be done this weekend.   For starters,  they play too high for the speed they have.

Maybe they need a sweeper, but that would nullify any offside trap. 

They probably could use an agitator to mark Marta,  she seems to have a short fuse. At the very least they need to mark her to limit her offensive skills. 

Go USA!

PS- College soccer season about two months away and counting! ;)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Gray Fox on July 10, 2011, 12:21:43 am
Has anyone else noticed that there is no flopping and the refs are better in the women's WC.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 10, 2011, 12:33:53 am
Has anyone else noticed that there is no flopping and the refs are better in the women's WC.

Not real certain about the refs (there have been some howlers), but you're certainly correct about the flopping.  NO flopping might be an overstatement, but WAY below what the men do.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Joe Wally on July 10, 2011, 10:34:18 am
Has anyone else noticed that there is no flopping and the refs are better in the women's WC.

Not real certain about the refs (there have been some howlers), but you're certainly correct about the flopping.  NO flopping might be an overstatement, but WAY below what the men do.

Agree, Ypsi...the relative lack of flopping clearly improves the flow of the game.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 10, 2011, 12:34:51 pm
USA benefitted from an own-goal in like the second minute, and leads Brazil 1-0 at the half.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Gray Fox on July 10, 2011, 12:57:27 pm
the refs are better in the women's WC.
I spoke too soon. :'( :'(
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Ralph Turner on July 10, 2011, 01:59:40 pm
Has anyone else noticed that there is no flopping and the refs are better in the women's WC.

Not real certain about the refs (there have been some howlers), but you're certainly correct about the flopping.  NO flopping might be an overstatement, but WAY below what the men do.

Agree, Ypsi...the relative lack of flopping clearly improves the flow of the game.
Flopping is the real turnoff for me concerning soccer!
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: pg04 on July 10, 2011, 02:04:50 pm
I think for the first time ever, Women's Soccer just made me scream.  Actually, I think I got more excited for Abby's goal than mostly anything the men's team has done!
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 10, 2011, 02:05:52 pm
A tying goal in stoppage time of overtime can do that to a guy! ;D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: dahlby on July 10, 2011, 02:15:05 pm
OMG...It is too exciting. Congrads USA.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 10, 2011, 02:15:57 pm
USA makes all 5 PKs - WE WIN!!! (5-3)

What a luxury to have the best GK in the world! ;D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: sac on July 10, 2011, 02:26:02 pm
Well that was simply unreal.

Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Gray Fox on July 10, 2011, 03:26:37 pm
USA makes all 5 PKs - WE WIN!!! (5-3)

What a luxury to have the best GK in the world! ;D
And the best looking one, too.

The two minute "flop" - fake injury - gave the USA the extra time they needed to tie the score.

Great game.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 10, 2011, 03:30:02 pm
Has anyone else noticed that there is no flopping and the refs are better in the women's WC.

In the final minutes Brazil looked like they were in swimming pool!  So much for the "no flopping".

You can always count on the USWNT to be classy.  They were fantastic.  As cynical as one can be, you can't help but be proud to be an American with those women representing us.... Well done!  Go USA!!!!!!
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Warren Thompson on July 10, 2011, 04:50:43 pm
While the officiating in the women's World Cup might, overall, be better than in the men's version, today in USA v. Brazil there were calls that could possibly constitute some serious exceptions to that claim.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: WLCALUM83 on July 10, 2011, 05:06:23 pm
Anybody think Buehler being out for the next match will hurt the US too much?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 10, 2011, 08:43:36 pm
Anybody think Buehler being out for the next match will hurt the US too much?
Raechel is a good player and the defense (for a team predicated on defense) is a tad thin.  Let's hope they can come up with some more magic.  France has been the surprise team of the tournament. 
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 13, 2011, 07:24:26 am
In about 3 hours USWNT takes to the pitch... For those who are fans of women's soccer let's hope for another roller coaster game and a US win!!  For fans of women's soccer with heart problems  a US win will do!!!!  GO USA!!! ;D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: sac on July 13, 2011, 02:51:32 pm
Someone please explain to me how or why Megan Rapinoe does not start for this team.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 13, 2011, 03:08:11 pm
Someone please explain to me how or why Megan Rapinoe does not start for this team.

That was an ongoing topic on the SI.com blog of the game.  While some agreed with you, the majority view seemed to be that her energy is best utilized as a 'backbreaker' when the other team is already tired (that was certainly the case today; France was dominating, she came in, suddenly the game is out-of-reach ;D).
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: BlueDevil Bob on July 13, 2011, 03:16:55 pm
I'm a soccer novice although I've been watching the World Cup.

So, what does CAP stand for?

Hope Solo is a stud.  8-)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on July 13, 2011, 03:37:16 pm

So, what does CAP stand for?


It's basically the number of times a person has played for a given team, coutnry, etc.  Your question made me wonder the origin of the cap, and I found the following:

In Football (Soccer) a cap is an appearance for a select team, such as a school, county or international team in sports. The term dates from the practice in the United Kingdom of awarding a cap (meaning an item of headgear) to every player in an international match, however, the act of awarding a cap is now international. The practice was first approved on May 10, 1886 for Association Football, after a proposal made by N. L. Jackson, an Old Corinthian:

"That all players taking part for England in future international matches be presented with a white silk cap with red rose embroidered on the front. These to be termed International Caps."

Actual caps are not usually given anymore (caps for friendly matches still exist, and each player gets one cap per international competition), but the term "cap" for an international appearance has been retained. Thus, a cap is awarded for each game played and so a player who has played x games, for the team, is said to have been capped x times or have won x caps.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 13, 2011, 05:58:26 pm
Someone please explain to me how or why Megan Rapinoe does not start for this team.
Amen!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: sac on July 13, 2011, 06:08:48 pm
Someone please explain to me how or why Megan Rapinoe does not start for this team.

That was an ongoing topic on the SI.com blog of the game.  While some agreed with you, the majority view seemed to be that her energy is best utilized as a 'backbreaker' when the other team is already tired (that was certainly the case today; France was dominating, she came in, suddenly the game is out-of-reach ;D).

She was also the primary reason a 10 man team was able to be threatening vs Brazil.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 14, 2011, 12:02:37 am
I'll remain agnostic on that debate (as well as whether Alex Morgan should be a starter over A-Rod).  For now, I'll trust Pia.  If they don't beat Japan (Japan?? :o), I reserve the right to reconsider! :D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 14, 2011, 12:58:15 am
Just looked over the roster and discovered something cool - the best female GK on planet earth (Hope Solo, of course) was born on my birthday!  Fortunately for the WNT, it was MANY years after my birth! ;D
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 14, 2011, 07:45:55 am
Here is a question---- Japan's style of play is similar to France.  They have a quick pace and solid foot skills.  Does the US make changes in this last game given the troubles they had against the French side, or do they follow the same game plan and hope for better execution?   ???
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on July 14, 2011, 03:38:56 pm
I agree Rapinoe has been key for the US.  I also think (IMHO) that she is a much better player off the bench. 
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: 2xfaux on July 14, 2011, 05:01:30 pm
Am I correct in understanding that only 3 substitutions are allowed in a match?  Are there injury exceptions?
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 14, 2011, 06:32:55 pm
Am I correct in understanding that only 3 substitutions are allowed in a match?  Are there injury exceptions?
3 subs per game and no injury exceptions.  Because changes are so limited, coaches sometimes find themselves in trouble if they sub too much early.  Its also why soccer players are often in better shape than other athletes.  There is a great short book called "How to Score, The Science of Soccer" where author Ken Bray estimates that a center mid runs something like 8 miles during the course of a match.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 16, 2011, 06:33:58 pm
 ;D

Pia Sundahage singing....she better not give up the day job!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB10rJJX3dM&feature=player_embedded#at=44
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 17, 2011, 05:34:34 pm
Heartbreak!   :( 
I can see the old guard tomorrow:  Soccer is boring...women's sports are boring...blah,blah,blah.   I would take that over some fat guy scatching himself on a pitcher's mound any day!!!!

Well played!  Women's soccer came of age today!!!!! ;)
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Gray Fox on July 17, 2011, 07:34:14 pm
Statistical Summary: USA / JPN

Shots: 27 / 14
Shots on Goal: 5 / 6
Saves: 4 / 3
Corner Kicks: 8 / 4
Fouls: 10 / 11
Offside: 3 / 2

Misconduct Summary:
JPN Aya Miyama (caution)           97th minute
JPN - Azusa Iwashimizu (sent off)   120

A good red card for Japan, I would say. :'(
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on July 18, 2011, 09:09:48 pm
Any thoughts?

http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/id/6780349/women-world-cup-seven-memories-world-cup-roger-bennett
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Joe Wally on July 19, 2011, 08:20:24 am
Statistical Summary: USA / JPN

Shots: 27 / 14
Shots on Goal: 5 / 6
Saves: 4 / 3
Corner Kicks: 8 / 4
Fouls: 10 / 11
Offside: 3 / 2

Misconduct Summary:
JPN Aya Miyama (caution)           97th minute
JPN - Azusa Iwashimizu (sent off)   120

A good red card for Japan, I would say. :'(

The backline really crumbled toward the end of the game.  A much deserved win for Japan, IMO.
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on July 19, 2011, 04:42:34 pm
For me it looked like Japan was playing with the same attitude the USA had in the Brazil match. 
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on August 03, 2011, 11:19:43 pm
Had no idea where to post this-

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-opinion/6830670/women-professional-soccer-league-turmoil

My goodness the women's game needs some leadership.  We were heartbroken when the WUSA went under due to poor management.  The WPS was on life support when the WWC brought some attention to the game, but this crew has a passion for self destruction.  Shame on them all.  >:(
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: woacfan on August 16, 2011, 10:24:39 pm
Nice to see some props for Joe Sahlen's club; a class act.  They've avoided the Florida circus and have kept this tottering league afloat.  They deserve a championship this year, if for no other reason than they saved the WPS ;D....for now. ???

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/soccer/08/16/alter.wps/
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Gray Fox on October 09, 2015, 08:37:48 pm
The USA won in 2015:

   http://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/
Title: Re: Women's World Cup
Post by: Gray Fox on July 12, 2017, 09:40:26 pm
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/soccer/mia-hamm-anson-dorrance-jill-ellis-brandi-chastain-tributes-tony-dicicco-memorial-service-connecticut-20170710.html