Category: Articles

It’s Time to Start Letting Women Be Athletes

Posted on by RJ Allen

Is the job of the referee to pass moral judgment or to call the game by the book?

This might seem an obvious question, but it turns out to be a lot more difficult than it seems. And that has some big implications on how we assess officiating. In particular, how we think about officiating of the women’s game.

The issue here is the intersection of two different moral economies. In the first, punishment is a measure of virtue. The laws exist to sustain good behavior and discourage bad behavior. Cards are therefore reserved for those with bad intentions. Good players give 100%, pushing themselves right to the limit. And if every once in awhile they overstep the lines, it’s all part of an honest day’s work. They deserve the benefit of the doubt.

In the second, punishment is a measure of lawfulness. The rules are clear, and they are inexorable. Infractions require responses, just as naturally as applying force on an object will generate an equal and opposite reaction. Intentions make no difference; there is only the act itself.

As with most things, reality is more complicated than either of these idealized models.

Certainly, referees do their best to enforce the rules as they are actually written. A foul in the box is a penalty, regardless of whether it prevents a clear goal-scoring opportunity or whether it’s a pointless lunge on someone at the edge of the 18 going in the wrong direction. The rules simply are what they are. And if that occasionally produces irrational results, well, that’s simply part of the game.

But referees are not automatons. In fact, they exercise enormous discretion throughout the game, with every small decision. It’s up to them whether to call the game loose or tight, just as they must decide whether to enforce the letter of the rule or the spirit. Watch for just a few minutes and you’ll see a play that would be a foul if committed in the center circle which is allowed to go uncalled if committed in the box. You’ll see offenses whistled only for a foul in the 5th minute, which might be a yellow card in the 60th minute, or a red card in a game that has been overly aggressive. Watch any corner kick and you’ll see countless fouls—shirt grabbing, high elbows, hip checks, bear hugs. A strict reading of the rules would produce twenty or thirty penalties a game.

And in a certain sense, there’s no getting around this. Every line that is drawn produces edge cases—those difficult places where people step right up to the limit of the allowable. Policing this space will always involve subjectivity, no matter where you set the limits.

Ultimately this means that the question about the role of the referee isn’t a binary one. Referees do need to exercise some judgment about what is appropriate, above and beyond a literal reading of the rules as such. As we know quite well from centuries of debates in law and philosophy, pure textualism is a recipe for terminal incoherence.

So, rather than thinking about this as ‘one or the other,’ we need to instead dig into the specific frames through which decisions are made. And we need to ask what is at stake when certain presumptions become dominant.

Violent play, not violent players

Which brings us to the heart of the argument. Because at the moment there is a strong, perhaps overwhelming presumption in women’s soccer. The presumption that bookings should be reserved for the truly egregious offenses. You can see clear evidence of this in the numbers.

Just take a look at the number of yellow cards per game, across a few different leagues:

  • La Liga (Spain): 5.0
  • Serie A (Italy): 4.4
  • Bundesliga (Germany): 3.7
  • Premier League (England): 3.6
  • MLS (USA): 3.6
  • NWSL: 2.1

There is obviously variation across leagues in the men’s game, with Spain and Italy consistently calling a tighter game than some of the other big leagues. But the gap between the NWSL and all the major men’s leagues is enormous.

And it’s not just about the raw numbers. Watch any game and you’ll see plenty of offenses that could easily produce bookings. But listen to the commentary, or follow along on social media, and you’ll hear the same refrain, repeated endlessly: “she didn’t mean anything by it,” “just good, tough play,” “that wasn’t intentional.” The general sense of all these comments is clear: bookings should be regulated primarily through the moral economy of punishment. Cards are reserved for truly dangerous play, for offenses that go beyond the pale. They should be saved for ‘bad’ players, or for good players who egregiously overstep the line. It would be cruel, maybe even unfair, to issue a card when a player didn’t really ‘mean it.’

This attitude is widespread in women’s soccer—both among referees and within the community at large. And there are some good reasons for it.

Think about it terms of the games we all play with one another. Imagine a game of poker where your opponent says ‘call’ when they meant to raise. Technically, by the rules, they are bound to that statement. And if it’s the World Series of Poker, you’ll insist that the rules be followed. But if it’s a home game with your friends, played with low stakes or no stakes at all, you’ll most likely let them make the correction, on the principle of ‘no harm, no foul.’ If a rule can be enforced without unduly hurting someone who made an honest mistake, that’s preferable.

There’s a generosity here that is laudable. It avoids turning the game into a purely transactional process: results-focused, denuded of honor or respect. For many fans of WoSo, this is one of the primary selling points of the game. How many times have we heard the claim that women’s soccer is purer, more honest, closer to the true spirit of the game? “If you want to watch flopping, watch the men. If you want to watch soccer, watch the women.” 

But there are also real consequences to this sort of expectations-setting. For one thing, it provides an easy excuse structure for all sorts of violent play. If the overarching assumption is that women’s soccer is purer, closer to the spirit of honest amateurism, the presumption will almost always be against tight enforcement of the rules.

But a loose game is a more aggressive game. If violent play doesn’t produce cards, players will play violently. If dangerous challenges aren’t punished, players will make dangerous challenges.

And beyond the problem of actual physical danger, there is a broader question about the style of play. You’ll often hear that referees should ‘let the players play’ and ‘not insert themselves into the game.’ But this reflects a misunderstanding of what refereeing is. Players will exploit the space given to them—that’s just as true when it comes to referees as it is with the other team. Calling a loose game isn’t ‘letting the players play.’ It is a choice to allow certain kinds of play—hard-nosed, physical—to dominate.

That may be what people prefer, but it is an active choice that the referee has to make, not a natural condition of the game. And whether or not the players themselves are violent in some intrinsic sense, the game that results will be more violent if referees adopt this approach.

Gender integration and the problem of respect

But there’s a deeper issue here, one that has less to do with the style of play and more to do with the way we think about women in sports. And more broadly, the way that we as a society handle the integration of women into traditionally masculine fields.

If you look back to the turn of the 19th century, you’ll find a period of growing economic and political integration on gender lines. Women had always worked, but more and more they were entering fields that had previously been almost exclusively male. This was a product of industrialization and urbanization—shifts that rendered traditional agrarian divisions obsolete for huge swathes of the population. And as economic necessity shifted, it brought a great deal of consternation about how this would affect women.

You can probably imagine how these arguments went: if women are to work in factories, what will happen to their uniquely feminine virtues? Can we afford to expose their delicate natures to the grim, economized reality of life in the factory? Won’t something ineffable be lost in the process? And if the tide can’t be stopped entirely, shouldn’t we at least impose some restrictions, to protect them from the worst extremities of life in this workforce?

In short: women were brought into a masculine space, but they were never regarded as full participants. Since they were purer and better, they would be eaten alive by the horrors of a purely marketized life. It would be wrong to expose them to its depredations.

On the positive side of the ledger, the desire to protect inspired legislation to restrict maximum hours and impose some bare standards of safety for women. In a landmark decision (Muller v. Oregon), the Supreme Court upheld these protections, even as they were striking down similar progressive laws for the broader workforce. Women—pressed on one side by ideologies of laissez-faire capitalism, on the other by ideologies of gender exclusionism—were granted a limited set protections that men would not obtain until the New Deal.

But this came with devastating negative consequences as well. Women were introduced into industrial life, but as partial members. Their pay was lower, they were denied the social standing that accompanied the work, and integration did nothing to erase the old gender expectations. They could never be regarded as full participants in the masculine economy—where money rules and moral life is sidelined.

The same process happened in the realm of politics. For many at the time, the argument against suffrage was all for the sake of women. Politics is a grim and dirty business, one in which moral considerations are all-too-easily steamrolled in pursuit of power. It would be wrong to expose women to this world. Their natural virtues would be polluted, and something important would be lost. Again, the argument is framed in positive terms. Precisely because women are better and purer, they should be protected. There is a moral character to their existence, and it would be wrong to regard them as nothing but economized, rational agents in pursuit of their own narrow interests.

In each of these cases, the desire to treat women primarily as women—and to presume a certain virtue associated with that status—was framed as a matter of respect. But there are real dangers in the desire to ‘safeguard’ the moral virtues of femininity.

It often comes at the cost of denying women agency.

Rethinking respect and acknowledging the agency of choices

While the consequences are not nearly so extreme, you can see the same tropes at work in our contemporary soccer landscape. 

In the men’s game, everyone is far more comfortable thinking about cards as transaction costs, to be calculated within the logic of cost-benefit analysis. A professional foul is ‘professional’ precisely because the player makes the judgment that the advantage (stopping a dangerous attack) is worth paying the cost (a yellow card). In the same way, a corporation might regard fines for misbehavior as simply part of the cost of doing business. The defining question is not ‘is this illegal?’ but ‘what are the consequences?’

We have centuries of examples of societies that are deeply uncomfortable with allowing women to exist within this sort of moral economy. And it’s not difficult to draw the connection between that general discomfort and the specific practices of law enforcement that exist within the game of soccer.

I don’t think that referees are consciously considering the virtues of femininity when they make decisions. Nor do I think that most fans would put it in those terms either. But this can produce significant effects, even if it is merely a form of implicit bias. The landscapes of our lives are organized around structuring assumptions which filter down in unpredictable but powerful ways.  

And this particular set of structuring assumptions–about the superior virtue of our women athletes–risks denying them the respect that is unthinkingly paid to their male counterparts. The willingness to regard their choices as active and intentional: to see their decisions as their decisions, their mistakes as their mistakes, their successes as their successes.

Put simply: we owe it to these athletes to acknowledge the agency of their choices. They are full participants in their own play. And that play can (and should) be judged within the rules of the game, without implying some moral failure on the part of the player.

By no means is this an argument for some kind of total gender-blindness. Given the widespread and persistent biases grounded in gender, acting as if it didn’t exist is only a recipe for a different set of exclusions. And even if it were possible, the ‘freedom’ to integrate into an amoral and neoliberal political economy is not much of a freedom.

So we have every reason to remain skeptical of a system that accepts ‘what can I get away with?’ as its defining moral question. We saw this effect at work in debates over the contours of second wave feminism, which prioritized inclusion and deemphasized the scope of broader critique. We have (rightly) come to recognize the limits of this approach.

So there are no simple answers here. But we do need to start asking better questions.

What does it mean to take women’s sports seriously?

Our sports landscape is overwhelming male. Look at TV exposure, media coverage, money, advertising, and so forth. These all go overwhelmingly to the historically dominant sports, and to the male athletes who play them.

Still, women’s sports are growing, and that is tremendously important. But just like the integration of our economy and our politics in the late 19th century, there are dangers as well as opportunities in this change.

On one side, women’s sports can provide an important counterweight to our mainstream sports culture, which often trends toward the unthinkingly masculine, with some real (often extremely serious) consequences. Beyond that, there’s the issue of representation. Girls growing up in this country today can see themselves in the players that they watch. That matters, and it is part of why we tend to want to emphasize the virtues of the players.

But at the same, women’s sports matter because they are sports. And all the good elements I just mentioned depend on this. If we treat our female athletes as essentially women, and only as athletes in some secondary sense, we do them a disservice. And we do ourselves a disservice, too.

So let’s grant our athletes the freedom to be athletes, and stop burdening them with the expectation that they have to be heroes. They are selfish and imperfect. They make dangerous challenges and throw elbows. They engage in cynical play. They lie and swear and break the rules. And that’s all okay. Because part of what it means to grow up is to recognize that none of us are perfect. It’s what we do within the constraints that makes us who we are.

Perfect on Paper: 5 Reasons the Portland Thorns Should Be In First Place

Posted on by RJ Allen

The Portland Thorns is a team that has every advantage in the world. Their team makeup reads flawlessly. Their individual player résumés appear as though they were plagiarized, they are so good. And their coaching staff is top notch. To put it simply, the pendulum should always be swinging their way. But somehow they are sitting in third place on the table. It’s not a bad place to be in, but it’s not where they should be. No, they should be in hanging out in first.

Here are the five reasons why.

The United Nations of Teams

Take a look at the allocated players on Portland’s roster. It’s more than any other team in the league – six players in total. And that only takes into account the American and Canadian players. They have another five international players on top of that. Their roster features players from six different countries and a whole lot of talent. They are one of the few teams in the NWSL that really had to evaluate, not just how Women’s Euro would affect them, but also the Tournament of Nations. I, for one, am a huge fan of having such an elite assortment of players on the team. It makes watching the game that much more intriguing and diversifies the skill sets of other players. And these players aren’t just okay foreign players. They are some of the best international players currently in the game. So it should be like watching our own miniature Olympics every time they take the field. Yet they aren’t the best team in the league …

 

Technical Ability

With this international dream team comes immense technical ability. Everyone brings something different to the table, and there aren’t a lot of missing pieces that need to be filled. Looking at the lineup you have Lindsay Horan, who can be lethal on a set play; Amandine Henry who can break down a transition in the midfield like it’s child’s play; and Haley Raso, who finds a way to slip into open space like someone just left the door open for her. Match that with Klingenberg’s service from the wing or Adrianna Franch’s seven clean sheets and what should we have? The best team in the league. But what do we actually have? Third place.

Christine Sinclair

She could have been included in the last reason, but I think she really deserves her own section in this argument. We all know she deserves it. Her country even knows it – It’s why she was recently appointed to the Order of Canada, the country’s highest civilian honor. In her international career, she has scored 168 goals. She is a force. And for every American who has ever watched a match versus Canada, they know that she is one of the greatest threats inside the box. She is that extra boost of power up top, the veteran who holds everyone to her standard, and one of the most lethal strikers in the game. She is also someone who works harder than the team’s third place showing would have you believe.

Club and Country Teammates

There is something to be said about familiarity. The more you see and are around a person, the more you get to know them. The same can be said for soccer. The more you play with a teammate, the more you get to know their style of play and how they move on and off the ball. Sure, international breaks can sometimes interfere with the ease of chemistry when allocated players come back to their club team, but for the star Americans on the Portland Thorns that is not the case. Tobin Heath (who is currently sidelined with a back injury), Lindsay Horan, Meghan Klingenberg, and Allie Long almost never get a break from each other. They go from club to country and back. There should be a cohesiveness with these players that create a major advantage that other teams are not afforded, but it seems at times that they have difficulty capitalizing on this advantage. And yes, Klingenberg shockingly did not make the Tournament of Nations roster, but for the past few years, those four have not seen the pitch without the others on it. And even without Heath currently, their chemistry should still be the stuff of legends, but it doesn’t seem enough to propel them to the top of the table.

Providence Park

Even though it is only the third largest stadium in the NWSL, it is notoriously the hardest to come in and play at. It’s a sellout crowd that relentlessly chants for their team and against the opponents, and flags that will never stop waving. It is smoke bombs after goals. It is the pounding of the crowd in your ears. And it is the extra push that any other team in the league would die for. Being a part of the Portland Thorns doesn’t mean you just go out a play with ten other women on the pitch. It means that you play with a stadium of warriors behind you. Warriors that would do anything to help give you the edge. And they do. It is a major uphill battle to come out with an away win at Providence Park. The atmosphere is something that most other teams have to consider in preparations because they aren’t used to that kind of sound or that kind of rowdiness. Providence Park makes other teams’ matches look like scrimmages in comparison. Because no one is as hyped as the fans in Portland. But shouldn’t that drastic shift in atmosphere lend somewhat of a helping hand to the players on the pitch? Maybe not a push to make Portland better, but definitely a distraction that could cause the opposing team to lose focus. Still, the Thorns are not the best in the league.

Sure, there is a lot more that goes into the Portland Thorns and their record than just these five reasons. They have to work out the kinks like everyone else. And yes, they are on the rise. In fact, they have an excellent chance of finishing the regular season at the top of the table. But they should have been there sooner. They should be looking down at the rest of the teams. They should have been number one by now. They are perfect on paper. They should be in the standings.

EURO’s Roar Hear All Around The World: A Group Stage Recap

Posted on by RJ Allen

The first round of the UEFA Women’s Euros is officially over. With the quarterfinals set, we’re taking a look back at the group stage, and breaking down the winners and losers.

Group A

 Standings:

  1. Netherlands
  2. Denmark
  3. Belgium
  4. Norway

Breakdown:

  1. The Netherlands

The host nation have come out with a surprisingly strong start to their competition. They finished their group with 9 points in three games, defeating Norway 1-0, Denmark 1-0, and Belgium 2-1. Each match featured different goal-scorers–showing the diversity of their attack–and the defense only allowed a single goal across the three matches. Ranked 12th in the world, the Netherlands are certainly giving people a reason to talk as they head into their quarterfinal match against Sweden.

  1. Denmark

Featuring Portland Thorns striker Nadia Nadim, Denmark made a strong showing in the group stage. Their only loss came at the hands of the Netherlands, which was also the only goal they allowed. That defensive showing was strong, but with only two goals scored in three matches, they’ll need to find more attacking power if they expect to win against Germany.

  1. Belgium

Belgium has been an up-and-down team leading up to the tournament, and the same remained true in the group stage. They beat Norway 2-0 and were competitive against the Netherlands, losing 1-2 after a 74th minute goal from Martens. This was a team that stayed tight in a pre-tournament friendly with France, but lost to Spain 0-7. The good performances are evidence of real quality, and there are definitely positives to take away from their tournament experience, but they’ll need to find more consistency moving forward.

  1. Norway

Widely considered to be title contenders, this was a disappointing showing for Norway. They lost all three matches, failing to score a single goal in the process. Considering their squad features Ada Hegerberg, the best scorer in Europe if not the world, Norway cannot help but be upset on their trip home. It could be a career defining moment for Martin Sjögren, who took over the team in December 2016.

Group B

 Standings:

  1. Germany
  2. Sweden
  3. Russia
  4. Italy

Breakdown:

  1. Germany

The defending champions won their group fairly comfortably, with two wins over Russia and Italy, and a scoreless draw against Sweden. But they’ll need to show something more if they hope to come home with their seventh-straight title. Of their four goals scored in the group stage, three came off of penalties. That’s concerning for a team historically known for great goal-scoring. Germany haven’t lost a knockout game in this competition since 1993. Could this be the year that changes?

  1. Sweden

Sweden will be going to the quarterfinals, but are probably disappointed to have finished in second. They started the tournament off strong, earning a tight draw with Germany, the team they lost to in the Olympic Final. Overall, they scored four goals in three matches, which will be pleasing for a team that have often struggled to find the net. But allowing Italy to score three goals in that final group stage match is bound to sting—they’ll have to keep their usual sharp defense against a Dutch team that has scored in each of their matches.

  1. Russia

Russia and Italy will both pleased to have kept up with two of the top teams in the world. In the end, they finished just one point behind Sweden. Russia’s win came in their match against Italy. In their other two games, they failed to score while allowing four goals. There weren’t a lot of bright spots in those games, but they should still be happy to have stayed competitive with the best in the world.

  1. Italy

After their first match against Russia, it looked like Italy might be one of the worst teams in the tournament. But it’s unfortunate that they started off their tournament on the wrong foot because after that defeat they looked a very different team–staying competitive with Germany and ultimately beating Sweden 3-2 in their final match. Had it not been for a red card against Germany and a weak match against Russia, we could be telling a different story. Unfortunately, it wasn’t Italy’s day.

Group C

 Standings:

  1. Austria
  2. France
  3. Switzerland
  4. Iceland

Breakdown:

  1. Austria

This is Austria’s first Euro tournament and I don’t think anyone expected them to finish at the top of their group. But they have put on an impressive performance, and the momentum that they have gained from winning this group is likely to give them a boost in the next stage of the competition. They finished with seven points, earning wins over Switzerland and Iceland and drawing against France. They are the first Austrian team, male or female, to win a game at the Euros. Now it’s just a question of how far they can go.

  1. France

France lives to see another day thanks to a late equalizer against Switzerland from Camile Abily. But they put themselves in significant danger and were a mere twenty minutes from missing out on the next stage. For a team who entered the tournament as a favorite, that will be massively disappointing.  In the end, thanks to that goal, they finished with five points, consisting of a victory over Iceland and draws against Switzerland and Austria. They scored only three goals and looked sloppy defensively, two things that could spell serious danger with England waiting on their horizon.  If they can right the ship, they still have a chance to take home the title, but it won’t be an easy road ahead.

  1. Switzerland

I think many—including the Swiss team—expected them to move out of the group stage. Ultimately, they finished just one point behind France thanks to a loss in their opening game against Austria. Ramona Bachmann was named Player of the Match in their game against France, but it wasn’t quite enough. After some solid performances, Switzerland will be sad to leave this tournament early.

  1. Iceland

Iceland looked like a bit of a dark horse going into the tournament–a team on the upswing, who may have been hoping to mirror their male counterparts. Unfortunately for them, it wasn’t to be. They failed to win or draw a single game in their group and only scored one goal in three matches. Their squad features many well-known players, including Dagny Brynjarsdottir of the Portland Thorns, who will be returning to the NWSL sooner than she had hoped.

Group D

Standings:

  1. England
  2. Spain
  3. Scotland
  4. Portugal

Breakdown:

  1. England

England are probably the team with the most momentum in the tournament right now. They’ve been on the upswing ever since their trip to the semi-finals in the 2015 Women’s World Cup.  They finished with three wins in three matches, winning Group D without much difficulty. Jodie Taylor currently leads the tournament in scoring with four goals—including a hat trick in the team’s opener against Scotland. But the whole team has contributed to their success, and to their lead in tournament scoring, with six other goals across the three games to give them an impressive goal differential within their group. Now, they go on to face France in the quarterfinals.

  1. Spain

Spain is one of the more inconsistent teams in the tournament, and the last day of matches proved that. The team just narrowly made it to the next round, tying Portugal and Scotland on points, and only advancing on tiebreakers. That’s a surprising result after their strong start to the tournament–with a win over Portugal and a tough loss against England.  Now, they will go on to face Austria in the Quarterfinals—a team that has a ton of motivation and momentum after out-playing France to win Group C.

  1. Scotland

Considering they opened their tournament with a 0-6 loss to England, Scotland had a pretty good group stage. They lost their second match against Portugal 2-1, but won their final match against Spain 1-0 and were only one goal away from qualifying for the next stage. And all that without their star player, Kim Little, who is out with a ruptured ligament. They will be sad to go home, but happy that they kept the competition tight.

  1. Portugal

Similar to Scotland, the situation didn’t look too good for Portugal after their 0-2 loss to Spain. They were completely dominated in that initial match, but came back to win their second game against Scotland and probably posed the largest threat to England in their group. Unfortunately for them, England held strong and denied Portugal the goal that would have lifted them to that second place slot. Like Scotland, they will be upset to go home, but they should be proud of their performance and the growth that their federation has shown.

USWNT struggle again, Australia take full advantage

Posted on by RJ Allen

You know that saying “it’s not how you start, it’s how you finish?” Well that certainly was the case for the United States against Australia on Thursday night in Seattle in front of a cool 15,748 people. The first 15 minutes were solid from the Americans, showing wave after wave of pressure on the Matildas, with veteran midfielder Megan Rapinoe leading the effort.

The next 60 minutes, however, were a different story.

I will admit, I thought Australia put out a better lineup and they had the right personnel on the field. And though the Americans are ranked #1 in the world, their performance was far from it. Every position was make-shift; starting with the defense consisting of Becky Sauerbrunn, Abby Dahlkemper, Casey Short, and newcomer Taylor Smith. While they were solid for most of the night, the eventual game winner to Tameka Butt for the Aussies was from two poor attempts at clearing the ball. Mishaps we don’t often see from a United States backline.

I noticed we were passing it back to keeper Alyssa Naeher quite a bit. Several passing combinations between the keeper and the backline had fans gasping for a breath with the uncertainty if it was going to cost us a goal or not. Luckily it did not, but it could’ve easily produced a goal or two with how close the always-dangerous Aussie Sam Kerr was getting.

The midfield was an area that really struggled to find cohesion and rhythm all night. The lone bright spot was Rapinoe, who was racing up and down the flanks, creating opportunities for herself and the team alike and pressuring when she thought necessary. It was a relief in my eyes to see her bring her NWSL form to the National team after a spell away. Her fellow mids sprayed a few passes here and there but for long periods of time I forgot who was on the field in the midfield. Sam Mewis, Allie Long, and Mallory had a few quality moments throughout but for the majority it was disappointing.

Up top for the USWNT were Christen Press and Lindsey Horan, two players who are playing quite well for their respective NWSL clubs, Chicago and Portland. But they couldn’t find the right chemistry and when they did, Australian keeper Lydia Williams was up for the task.

Watching this American team on Thursday night, it was no secret there was some disconnect but Jill Ellis is still in her experimenting stage so in the future it could be something that works. I don’t want to take one game and use that as the sample size because that would not be fair. But at some point, when do we figure it out? I thought that point would be the SheBelieves Cup back in March, but here we are at the end of July and once again, we’re on the bottom of the table.

When Jill Ellis started bringing on the substitutes, I thought maybe our tactics would change, (you know, building an attack from the back, putting more players in the box) but I was wrong. Now in the last 10 minutes, sure, we showed some serious quality in our movement but that was due to being down and having that dreaded sense of urgency on home soil. Carli Lloyd, Kelley O’Hara, Morgan Brian, Crystal Dunn, and Alex Morgan all arrived later in the second half. Lloyd almost found an equalizer but once again Williams stood tall in goal against her Houston Dash teammate. Morgan and Dunn made their presence felt, pressuring the backline and pushing the ball forward with great pace but nothing to show for either.

Overall it was a lackluster performance from a team that continues to struggle at home, now having lost a total of three matches this year compared to three matches from 2001-2016. While we may be experimenting in nearly every position, it’s not pretty to watch. With this caliber of players, the talent we have in this country, it’s hard to imagine a scenario where we continue to lose in tournaments and something doesn’t give before the 2019 Women’s World Cup.

Tournament of Nations? More like Tournament of What-Ifs for the United States.

Off the Bench with Backline Soccer: 2017, International Break #2

Posted on by RJ Allen

Backline Soccer Recap:

The Scouting Report:

We went live on Monday night with our weekly TSR. A reminder that you can catch TSR live every Monday night at 8pm EST on our YouTube channel. Make sure to follow the podcast on Twitter @ScoutingPodcast.

In case you missed this week’s episode, catch up here:

My colleague, Jacqui Porter, will be writing a great recap of the USWNT and Matilda’s match on Thursday night, which you can read later today. Come back next week as I will be back to regularly scheduled programming with NWSL previews!

This Isn’t About Soccer Anymore

Posted on by RJ Allen

Twice a season, I travel from the Greater Milwaukee area down to Bridgeview, IL, to catch a Red Stars game. I work most weekends, and I’m a public transport person, so when I go, it’s a big deal. I take the day off, I borrow or rent a car, and I have a great time.

Guaranteed.

No matter who wins or loses, I’m there to enjoy a great game of soccer. I get seats in roughly the same area each time, and there’s a season ticket holder who sits next to me who I’ve discovered is very nice and enthusiastic about soccer. I’ve done the two games a season for two years now, and every game I’ve been to, she’s been there, cheering on the players.

This past Saturday, the Orlando Pride were in town, and it was a fabulous game.

An admission? Because I don’t do the season ticket thing, I splurge on the games I go to, and get seats where I can practically see the sweat dripping off the players’ brows. And I’ve done the thing where I stay after–once to get a picture with Christie Pearce (because a picture with Captain America!) and once to thank Ali Krieger for her response to an article I wrote on being a fat fan of soccer. So don’t get me wrong, I understand the desire to rush down to the barrier and hopefully get a chance to meet a player.

This game, though, was going to be crazy.

And so I, and the woman who sits next to me, left our seats immediately after the game ended, wanting to get out of the way of the rush we knew was coming. As the stadium announcer was still imploring fans to be careful and considerate as they made their way to the barrier, eager to see Alex Morgan, Ali Krieger, Marta, and others, we were trying to work our way up the stairs. But both sides of the stairs were blocked by young girls and their parents trying to get down. Ironically, trying to get into our seats, our places that we were leaving so they could get closer.

I’ve written before about how sports stadiums aren’t built for larger fans. And Toyota Park is no different. So getting up the steps as the crowd of people were rushing down was actually a little nerve-wracking and I saw more than one grown adult get pushed off-balance as people kept coming down. It bottle-necked immediately, with fans filling both sides and preventing people who were trying to leave from getting into the aisle and up the stands. The woman I sit next to was pushed into the seats more than once, as others refused to move or blocked the stairway. Several of us leaving asked people to move to one side so we could clear the area for them, and faced eye-rolls, stares, “I can’t hear you” faces, and comments.

And then there was one white, middle-aged dad who told the woman in front of me that maybe she should lose some weight before she came to another game. Insinuating that she had no place in these stands with him and his daughter, watching these players, much less on that stairwell trying to leave so his kid could have a better chance at meeting whichever player she was there to support.

You know those moments when you wonder what you would do if a situation happened right in front of you?

I’m not ashamed to admit that I told him he was an asshole. He was an asshole.

He probably continued walking down those stairs thinking the same thing about me, that I was an asshole and that I, too, was too fat to be there. Because his comment could have just as easily have been directed at me.

So why am I writing this?

Two reasons, at the least.

First, to the stadium managers at Toyota Park. Obviously you knew that there was going to be a big crowd hoping for autographs post-match because you made an announcement.

Anytime the two most popular players in the NWSL and on the USWNT are in one location, there’s going to be a rush of fans. Next time, please consider sending staff members to those points around the barrier to the field that you can predict will end up bottle-necked and full of people trying to squirm their way closer. A few identifiable members of staff can help keep exit lanes clear of people, direct traffic, and make sure that fans can both head toward the field and head toward the exit with ease. I don’t think I should need to point out that too many people in too small a space can be dangerous, but maybe I do? Anyway, as a fan, I would certainly appreciate it. And I have a sneaking suspicion that the players confronted with what looks like mayhem might appreciate it as well.

Second, to the man who believes fat people have no place in the stands. I want to say “fuck you,” but I won’t. Nor will I apologize for calling you an asshole, though, because bigger people always end up having to be the bigger person, having to apologize for our desire to inhabit the same spaces as everyone else, and I have spent too long fighting with myself over my right to exist anywhere I damn well please. Instead, I’ll say this. You didn’t need to say what you said. Trust me, overweight people are always aware that the world doesn’t fit them. I’m sorry you live in the kind of world where you think it’s okay to say that to another person, though. And I hope your kid got the autograph or selfie or chance to talk with her favorite player.

And lastly–to the woman who sits next to me at these games. I hope I see you next year. I’d like to talk to you some more about the sport we both love.

Unsung Hero of the Week: Notable Naughton in Chi Town

Posted on by RJ Allen

In this weekly series, I will be highlighting a player from the weekend who was their respective team’s unsung hero, win, lose or draw. A player who does the dirty work, does the little but important things in a game, and someone who didn’t exactly fill up the stat sheet but found other ways to contribute.

This week I’ve chosen Chicago Red Star defender Katie Naughton.

The Elk Grove Village native was selected in the 2016 NWSL College Draft in the second round, going 19th overall to Chicago. She was one of seven players selected to join Rory Dames’ squad that year, and one of the three local players selected by the team. The 23-year-old center back played her college ball at Notre Dame, appearing 87 times while scoring 11 goals in her four-year career. In her rookie season, she played in 17 matches and quickly became an important building piece for Chicago. So far in 2017 Naughton has played in 14 games, and has become one of the five defenders Dames can rely upon to rotate in and out of the starting XI on a game-to-game basis.

Chicago 2-1 Orlando:

Chicago is undefeated at home and they don’t get scored on very often. In fact, the Red Stars have only allowed 13 goals (second-best) and just five goals at Toyota Park, also second-best. But heading into this game, Chicago were without their two regular starters: Julie Ertz and Sam Johnson (Ertz would enter the game in the second half). Orlando, on the other hand, were coming off an explosive 4-1 win over Kansas City, surely taking the field with a bit of confidence. I had thought that the game would be a little more even, to be honest, especially considering that Sermanni had moved Marta into the middle, the spot where Ertz would’ve been. And initially, Orlando took advantage of that mismatch, dominating and controlling 70 percent possession in the first 20 minutes.

Naughton had the challenge of handling not one world class player, but two; international-level competitors Marta and Alex Morgan. It was certainly an adjustment period for the Red Stars with Ertz and Johnson not around, but like I discussed in an earlier piece centered around Arin Gilliland, this group is capable of rotating players on the backline and being successful no matter who is lined up. Wave after wave of Orlando attacks came, but Naughton and her teammates held on, not getting down or panicking for even a second.

In the 22nd minute, Orlando had a nice spell of possession, switching fields and finding Marta to distribute from her central role. Pride midfielder Dani Weatherholt attempted to speed the play up, wanting to slip a pass to the cutting Morgan. Naughton read the intention just in time, stepping in front to escape the possibility of Morgan receiving it and turning for a 1v1 with Chicago goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher.

Throughout the first half, Naughton and her backline were clearly doing some extra communication, realizing that Orlando were building confidence after each run into the final third. Leading the way for the Red Stars defense were Casey Short and Naughton, working to make sure the outside backs Gilliland and Taylor Comeau were on the same page positioning-wise.  And while the Pride continued to put pressure, no matter how much knocking they did, Chicago answered the door every time.

Chicago would find a goal in that first half, courtesy of Sofia Huerta and Christen Press (of course). This partnership has certainly been profitable for the Red Stars side; the team is 5-0-2 this season when these two link up for a goal or assist.

Just before halftime, though, Naughton was called upon again. This time it was Marta who attempted to take her to the end line on the left side. The Brazilian and five-time FIFA Player of the Year was doing her dance, hoping to shake Naughton to get into the box. Access completely denied, Naughton waited patiently, not diving in for one second. I enjoyed this play because the Red Star showed off her footwork. She contained the forward long enough and won the ball; not many defenders that go up against Marta wouldn’t have already been on the ground at this point. Chicago went into the locker room with a 1-o lead.

The second half was a different story for Chicago. To reduce the amount of time and space they were giving Orlando in the middle, they brought Ertz to shape things up. Immediately Orlando pressured once again on the left side, with Marta sliding over to make it to the end line of Chicago but Naughton once again stood her ground and won the encounter. The presence of Ertz was clearly helpful, as she took on some of the defensive duties, while Naughton and Casey switched the attack more to try and get Orlando unbalanced.

In the 88th minute, Naughton would make one more play to beat Morgan’s attempt at scoring, beating the USWNT star to header, clearing it to squash the chance of Morgan turning in Chicago’s own 18.

Part of the problem for Orlando was they were not willing to have patience in the final third. Too many times they rushed passes, tried to force themselves forward, and just did not get into the box enough. For Chicago, they were opportunistic, making a few passes before all the sudden they were off to the races, with Press leading the way. While Orlando did manage to score, it was in the 93rd minute and too late. While it wasn’t a perfect defensive game for Chicago, Naughton and the backline got the job done well enough to grab all three points.

With the loss, Orlando slipped to seventh place with 19 points while Chicago pushed past North Carolina into first place with 28 points.

The Unused Sub: From The Peanut Gallery

Posted on by RJ Allen

The following were my running thoughts and observations as I attended the Tournament of Nations double-header in Seattle as a spectator.

GAME 1: JAPAN VERSUS BRAZIL
Japan’s kits are sweet.

11 minutes in and a decent amount of people here for the first game, given a good deal likely had to duck out of work early and we know the majority are here for the USWNT.

I am sitting in section 107. The last time I caught a soccer game of any kind from this side of CenturyLink Field was the inaugural Sounders FC game in 2009. To think that’s where my life with soccer began and where it is today.

14th minute and Marta gets a shot. The crowd claps. Yes, it’s still something surreal seeing a five-time FIFA World Player of the Year in person.

There is a yout in the next section over going HAM at a rice cake. Kid is living it up.

The first 20 minutes have been slow-ish. Kind of surprised at how much feeling out is going on given it is a friendly.

27th minute – Overheard someone saying: “With seats this close, they look like real people.” I have no idea where to go in terms of… analyzing that take.

As much as they lack quality or get interrupted at the last possible minute by Brazil, Japan’s attempts on goal draw oohs from the crowd.

42nd minute – Japan has had so many chances that they should be up like lots to zero.

WE HAVE A GOAL! What a snap header by Momiki.

The sun cannot set any faster here so the west facade of CenturyLink blocks it. It’s making me want to get a beer faster. I got a beer at halftime.

https://twitter.com/jacobcristobal/status/890727057243594752

Seattle Reign FC’s Rumi Utsugi is going to go the full 90 and I swear, where would the Reign be without her?

My seat neighbor Whitney totally called that Brazil will get the equalizer in the final minutes and look what Camila did.

Maybe because it’s the mystique/reputation of Brazilian flair or the fact that it’s a friendly, but their attack seems… frantic in a way that if any other national team was doing it, we’d be raising an eyebrow and going, “Huh?” But it works for them and up until Camila’s strike from distance, it didn’t phase Japan. They looked composed defensively but as part of their youth movement and ushering a new era, you can tell there’s work to be done in finishing their chances. I do not exaggerate when I say that line should have finished with Japan claiming 3 or 4 goals.

The Americans are here. As are more people. A great deal of people are stuck in concession lines as we are less than 5 away from kickoff.

GAME 2: UNITED STATES VERSUS AUSTRALIA
Saw some friends during intermission, waded through seas of humanity, got a burger AND STILL GOT BACK IN TIME FOR THE ANTHEMS!

I kind of miss the wrecking ball stylings of Lisa De Vanna in the NWSL.

It has to be an athlete’s superstition – Sam Kerr wearing a shirt one size bigger than she is has entertainment value.

A light jog to Casey Short is a full dead sprint to us plebeians.

The amount of real estate between the jersey numbers for Australia is weird.

And a nation holds their breath as the wonderyout Mallory Pugh got fouled hard.

The U.S. had their chances. Australia almost punished U.S. on their slip-ups. The cheeseburger I had was tasty.

50th minute – overheard someone telling Sam Mewis to shoot from 40 yards out. Heh.

Aussies scored. I imagine #FireJill is lit like a Roman candle. And I feel bad for the person that owns the Twitter handle @jill.

Lydia Williams ain’t here for your Carli Lloyd #BreakingBarriers Moment. Matter of fact, she ain’t here to roll over for the U.S. and that is awesome. Honestly it would have been great if Sam Kerr did it to Alyssa Naeher again with a header from the cross in the second half like she did to her/the Chicago Red Stars a couple weeks ago.

The crowd, which was 15,748 is now Mad Online at various things: the ref making lack of or outright bad calls. Time-wasting by Australia. The US squandering chances – really that attempt by Alex Morgan was bad.

As much as we deride “One Nation, One Team” it does apply to the type of goal the US (men’s or women’s national team) tends to concede. It’s always that one moment, about 3o seconds to a minute where everyone has a sloppy brain fart and the opponent pounces on. That’s how Australia got their goal.

And that’s all I got for the evening. Was the first night of the Tournament of Nations good for you? Probably not if you were rooting for the United States to win. I think we all went in curious to see what Jill Ellis means by experimenting and we got a dud up top with the Horan/Press combination. Mewis and Long in the midfield probably has a way to go to being something that lets us all sleep comfortably at night. Megan Rapinoe’s 2017 form is fun to watch, though for the national team, she cannot do it all on her own. Is the United States hosed come 2018 CONCACAF Women’s Championship aka 2019 World Cup Qualification? Who knows, but tonight in Seattle, Jill Ellis’ long term plans went as well as a FURT sandwich.

And since Australia won and is in the lead after matchday one of the Tournament of Nations, they get the music video break.

Song: “Black Fingernails, Red Wine” | Artist: Eskimo Joe

Clash of Titans: The USWNT vs AusWNT

Posted on by RJ Allen

The #1-ranked United States Women’s National Team will open the Tournament of Nations against a familiar opponent, Australia (#7). They have a record of 25-0-2 against the Matildas and will be looking to stay undefeated. The match is set for July 27 at 7 pm on ESPN and will be played at CenturyLink Field in Seattle.

 

The Lineups

Head coach Jill Ellis will be experimenting as has become the status quo for the US team. Her call-ups feature plenty of veterans, with a few newer faces and a small sample of youth as well.

  • Goalkeepers: Alyssa Naeher, Jane Campbell, Abby Smith
  • Defenders: Becky Sauerbrunn, Ali Krieger, Kelley O’Hara, Julie Ertz, Abby Dahlkemper, Casey Short, Taylor Smith.
  • Midfielders: Carli Lloyd, Megan Rapinoe, Morgan Brian, Allie Long, Samantha Mewis, Margaret Purce.
  • Forwards: Alex Morgan, Crystal Dunn, Christen Press, Sydney Leroux, Mallory Pugh, Lindsey Horan, Lynn Williams.

Some notable players are currently unavailable due to injury, including Tobin Heath, Meghan Klingenberg, Rose Lavelle, Ashlyn Harris.

Australia is a dangerous team because they have two things that I love: youth and speed. It’s no secret they have always embraced their young talent Down Under and head coach Alan Stajic has continued to do just that. The Matilda’s ToN roster has an average age of 24, with two 17-year-olds (Ellie Carpenter and Princess Ibini) rounding out the bottom, while the oldest is Lisa De Vanna at 32.

  • Goalkeepers: Lydia Williams, Mackenzie Arnold.
  • Defenders: Clare Polkinghorne, Steph Catley, Laura Alleway, Alanna Kennedy, Caitlin Cooper, Ellie Carpenter, Gema Simon.
  • Midfielders: Katrina Gorry, Tameka Butt, Elise Kellond-Knight, Emily Van Egmond, Chloe Logarzo, Alex Chidiac.
  • Forwards: Sam Kerr, Lisa De Vanna, Hayley Raso, Emily Gielnik, Princess Ibini.

Notable players out due to injury; Kyah Simon, Michelle Heyman.

 

The History

The last time these two powerhouses met was back in 2015 at the opening match of Group D in the Women’s World Cup in Canada. Rapinoe led the Americans to a 3-1 win by scoring a brace while Press also contributed a goal in the second half. The United States would go on to win their third star while the Matildas reached the quarter-finals but would go no further thanks to eventual second-place Japan.

In 2016 the tables turned a bit for both countries in the Olympics. The Americans would crash out of the tournament in the quarterfinals (the earliest exit in history) while Australia took a devastating loss to Brazil (again on penalties) in the quarterfinals as well. Both teams had high expectations but were eliminated from the Games in stunning fashion. 2017–for both teams–has been a year of experimenting and figuring out how to prepare for the next major tournament as the cycle begins again, the 2019 Women’s World Cup in France.

 

The Match

The United States will want to put on a better performance than their last home tournament, the She Believes Cup back in March, where they took fourth behind France, Germany, and England. They made a better showing last month in their first overseas friendlies in years, when they managed 1-0 wins over Norway and Pia Sundhage’s Sweden last month. Australia surely feel the same need to prove something after they finished third in the Algarve Cup in March with a shocking loss to Denmark in penalties.

Players to watch for both U.S and Australia will be Megan Rapinoe and Sam Kerr. Rapinoe has been in remarkable form for her NWSL side Seattle Reign, scoring a league-leading 12 goals, including a hat-trick on July 22 in a thrilling 5-4 in over Sky Blue. Kerr has equally been impressive with Sky Blue, netting 11 goals so far this season. Rapinoe and Kerr will surely give the opposing defense some challenges if they can translate their NWSL club play onto the international stage at this tourney.

Route Two Soccer – Sky Blue and Seattle play the craziest game of the year

Posted on by RJ Allen

Photo by MikeRussellFoto, find more @mikerussellfoto

This weekend, Seattle and Sky Blue played one of the craziest games in the history of the league.

I was lucky enough to see it in person, from high above the Memorial Stadium pitch, perched with the seagulls. And when I arrived, my plan was to write a normal tactical column.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Sky Blue had announced a three-back setup, and I was curious to see if that stuck. Would this be their normal 3.5/4.5 approach that they have used before, with O’Hara ranging all up and down the right side? Would it be a true back three? Something else?

And for the first half, that column still made sense. And we will be turning to that tactical conversation in a moment. But ultimately, it felt pointless to fixate in too much detail on the particularities of positional arrangement, when the true story of the game was its emotional arc and the absolute chaos that ensued in that half-hour of madness. So before talking O’Hara and Sky Blue’s hybrid system, we should take a moment to think about momentum.

The power of momentum

In the space of just thirty minutes in the second half, seven goals were scored. By the 60th minute, Seattle was off to the races, with a 4-0 lead and no end in sight. And yet, even then, things didn’t feel secure.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Seattle’s coach, Laura Harvey, commented post game that she still felt nervous, knowing how explosive this Sky Blue team is, knowing how easily the momentum could shift. And that worry was prescient. Because in the 60th minute, Merritt Mathias conceded a penalty on a pointless foul right at the edge of the box (or possibly, even, just outside the box). Kelley O’Hara stepped up to convert, and the whole game turned on a dime.

Both Harvey and Christy Holly, the Sky Blue coach, called attention to this change in the tide, though neither seemed to think that it resulted from any cataclysmic shift in the style of play. So there is a lot to unpack here. Did the game open up during this period? Did the teams change their game plans? What, exactly, happened here?

The simplest answer is that the game overtook the players. Adrenaline rushed, the pace of play quickened, the blood began pounding, and the relentless drive to score took over. Meanwhile, the defensive structure became frayed, passes started to go askew, lines broke down.

And there’s a lot of truth to that. As I said above, trying to analyze this game from a tactical perspective feels a bit beside the point. At the same time, the basic structure of the game didn’t change all that much.

Sky Blue made some substitutions and slightly re-arranged their shape, dropping Killion into the back line, bringing on some more wide attackers, and giving O’Hara even more freedom to wander at will. But more than anything, what changed was the sense of belief.

The defining characteristic of the New Jersey side this year has been their deep faith. No matter what, they believe that the game remains winnable. They don’t stop working; they fight and scrabble and push. Meanwhile, Seattle seems to be a team that blows a bit more with the wind. When things are going well, they look great. But when the high begins to wear off, they look discombobulated.

You saw some of this even in their two blowouts earlier in the season (against Houston and Washington). In both of those games they were rampant for long periods, but once the game was beyond reach, they lost the plot. Neither Houston nor Washington had enough time to make a game of it, but the trouble signs were there nonetheless.

This time, though, they were playing Sky Blue, and there was still half an hour left. That turned out to be more than enough time for the lack of attention and sloppiness to completely change the course of the game. Once the momentum turned, their gyroscope was unbalanced and all hell broke loose.

What on earth is the Seattle defense doing here?

Now, to be clear, it’s not that Seattle looked terrible for the entire period. It’s just that they seemed to switch off in key moments. A Sky Blue team that had been pressing for chances all game, and making a good show of it, suddenly found that extra bit of space that they needed. And they capitalized.

In the end, the game had four distinct phases. In the first half, things were fairly even, with both sides playing the game they expected to play. The first 15 minutes of the second half featured a rampant Seattle time, full of confidence, creating opportunities and finishing their chances. Then, things turned and the next 15 minutes put Seattle on the back heel, with a Sky Blue team that seemed absolutely certain they were en route to a famous victory.

Then, to Seattle’s credit, once the lead was gone, they seemed to right the ship and set out to find the ultimate winner. They had been flailing while trying to hold onto a lead that slipped through their fingers like sand. But seemingly, the actual realization that the lead was gone allowed them to reset their approach, and return to playing their game.

That’s notable, and something that Seattle can certainly take from the game. But they certainly must also be worrying about the lack of attention and structure that allowed things to go off the rails so quickly.

3-5-2? 4-4-2? How about a 4-5-3?

As noted, Sky Blue announced their setup as a back three. And at times, they did play that way. But at other times, they were quite clearly in a standard 4-4-2. So what was it?

The key here is O’Hara, who plays as something of a hybrid. In attack, she presses very high, looking for all the world like an attacking wingback. When she does, the other three defenders spread out to split the field into thirds. And when Seattle broke in transition, they were breaking against a back three.

But when Sky Blue has time to reset their defense, O’Hara drops back and the other members of the backline settle back into a back four.

This isn’t a new setup by any means, though it was arguably more pronounced this week than it has been before. That largely seems to have been due to the limitations of personnel. Clearly concerned about the Seattle attack, Coach Holly chose to use Nikki Stanton as the left back/left CB, and asked her to stay home.

Ultimately, the terminology here doesn’t matter as much as the actual style of play. You can say that it’s a 4-4-2 with one attacking fullback and one defensive fullback. Or you can say it’s a fluid blend of two approaches.

From my perspective, it’s almost tempting to call it a 4-5-3 since, when working well, they manage to get all the value of O’Hara the fullback combined with all the value of O’Hara the winger.

It certainly asks a tremendous amount of her, and her energy in this position is a huge part of what allowed Sky Blue back into the game. It’s a huge advantage, and O’Hara’s attacking chops have been deadly in each of the past three big comeback games for Sky Blue.

At the same time, there are risks to this approach. Managing a back three can be difficult, particularly in transition against a fast team. And Seattle’s fluid attacking corps is particularly tough to handle, as I wrote about last week. A back three is usually well suited to handling a traditional frontline with two forwards but can run into problems when the opposition can rapidly switch between one and three strikers.

We saw some evidence of those difficulties in this game, particularly with Stanton on the left. When they were playing in a back three, she tended to push too narrow at times, leaving acres of space for Seattle’s right side attackers to move through. She also had some difficulty tracking the complicated movements of Naho Kawasumi (a difficult task for anyone, but particularly for a converted midfielder playing in a fluid system).

However, on the whole, the system worked successfully. It played somewhat defensively in most cases, with its main effect compared to a normal 4-4-2 being to put all of the attacking responsibilities on the shoulders of one attacking fullback. That was a useful tradeoff, on the whole, because the one attacking fullback was O’Hara, and she made the most of those chances.

Conclusion

As I noted at the start, it’s hard to draw too many conclusions from such a singular and strange game. But even though Seattle came away with the three points, it’s probably Sky Blue who can take the more positive lessons. Their ability to fight back under extreme conditions was proven once more. The team spirit was further clarified. And the usefulness of their overall team structure was confirmed.

Going forward, they will need to clamp down on the defensive profligacy earlier in matches. They are spending a huge amount of energy—both physical and emotional—on these rousing comebacks, and that could be a real problem as the dog days of summer set in. In the end, that may consign them to a strong mid-table finish rather than the playoffs that they have been hoping for.

But there is one thing that we can now state with absolute confidence: writing off this Sky Blue team even one second before they are mathematically eliminated would be a huge mistake.