Category: Articles

Royals Lose: Tactics Are Pointless if You Don’t Execute

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Utah Royals head coach Laura Harvey held nothing back when talking about her team’s 2-0 home loss to Reign FC on Friday. The frustrating performance drops the team into fourth place, allowing the Reign to leap over them in the standings.

“We weren’t good enough from minute one to minute 90,” said Harvey after the game. “We were slow, lethargic and we didn’t have any spark. 

“Tactics are pointless if you don’t execute, and we didn’t even come close to executing.”

Reign FC seemed to have the game well in hand early in the game when they were freely taking shots at the Royals net. Passes out of the back from the Royals seemed lazy and the Seattle players leaped into action on nearly every turnover.

The first goal game in the 30th minute when Jessica Fishlock and Bethany Balcer put on a passing display that lead to a chance. Fishlock was the last one with the ball, shooting past Royals keeper Nicole Barnhart. Fishlock continued to torment the defense later in the half, dribbling through the defense and finding a wide open Ifeoma Onumonu for an easy double.

Royals did little to fight back with Reign FC nearly making it a three goal lead several times in the second half.

“I think, ultimately, we weren’t good enough,” said Royals midfielder Mandy Laddish. “We didn’t fight hard enough, we were spread out, we weren’t connecting passes at all. 

“Sometimes you come out and you just are flat, and I think that’s something that we addressed at halftime, and unfortunately I don’t think we fixed it as well as we’d like.”

The loss is the Royals’ third of the season. Next they will travel to New Jersey to face a winless Sky Blue FC team. It could be the opportunity Harvey and the team need to get back on track heading into the remainder of the campaign.

Stop Complaining about the Qualification Process for the Olympics. It’s Fine.

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Two of the world’s four best teams will not be competing in the Olympic Women’s Soccer tournament in 2020. France and Germany, due to their elimination in the quarterfinals of the World Cup, have also failed to qualify for the Olympics. This has provoked some consternation and confusion, as well as quite a few demands for changes to the system.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Unfortunately, as is often the case when Americans jump into situations to offer their opinions, it’s quite a bit more complicated than this.

There isn’t time to run a fair European qualification process

It certainly is strange that European teams don’t get a separate qualification process for the Olympics. It feels like double jeopardy: fail in one tournament, and you’re also blocked from the next.

But there is a pretty obvious explanation why they do it this way: the steady march of the clock. UEFA already runs full qualification campaigns for the World Cup and the European Championship, which take up the vast majority of available time. World Cup qualifying didn’t finish until November of 2018, and Euros qualifying begins in August of 2019. That’s next month!

Compare to CONCACAF’s qualifying process for the Olympics, which is theoretically spread out over a few months but for all realistic purposes takes place in a single two-week tournament. Teams from Central America and the Caribbean go through their own mini-competitions for the privilege of making that final event, but the US and Canada—far and away the two best teams, and the ones overwhelmingly likely to actually make the Olympics—jump directly into the competition at this final stage.

UEFA can’t do something like this because they have close to 50 teams, of which 15-20 could realistically challenge for a spot. It takes time, a lot of time, to whittle that down using any kind of fair process. And with the Olympics coming just twelve months after the World Cup, that time doesn’t exist.

The alternatives aren’t really any better

UEFA could try to create a modified system – maybe inviting a certain set of the top teams in the World Cup to play a mini-tournament. But this doesn’t really resolve the underlying problem of double-counting success and failure. Plus, it’s arguably equally cruel to the teams who outperformed their competitors at the previous tournament, who would now be forced to do it all again. And it would still eat up a decent chunk of time that isn’t really available. European leagues, after all, run through the fall and winter and expect member countries to follow the FIFA calendar. There really isn’t time for even a two-week break.

One change that would slightly ease this process would be to expand the field for the Olympics. Twelve teams is a weird number for a tournament, especially when geographic balance is enforced so rigidly. If it grew to sixteen, you could add two more European teams, guarantee a second spot for Africa, and allow a third Asian team to fight the playoff against South America. The men’s tournament has 16 teams, so there’s no good argument against allowing the same number on the women’s side.

But lack of good arguments has never made much difference when it comes to the Olympics’ organizers, who are not going to want to bring in 72 more athletes and schedule six more matches. And there’s no guarantee that they’d allocate the slots in a way that makes sense. And even if they did, it would just mean five European teams get selected through this process, without actually fixing the underlying time crunch.

The Olympics is a second-tier tournament, and that’s okay

So we can try to improve the system. Or we could just accept the reality that the Olympics isn’t as big a tournament as the World Cup, and never will be. That they ever seemed comparable is really just a historical accident. In the 1990s, when professional women’s soccer was barely a dream, every international tournament was an opportunity for real competition. And women’s soccer was added in 1996, in the United States, at a moment when American audiences were primed to grab hold of it. So it was a big success.

But as the pool of competitive nations grows, it’s far outstripping what the Olympics can offer. And so it can’t really be a true international tournament. In 2020, it will be without France and Germany. But if they had made it, we would have lost the Dutch, or England, or Sweden. Spain and Norway won’t be there. There will be no Argentina, no Scotland, no Denmark. We might see a playoff between Cameroon and Chile, with the loser missing out. These are all teams that could add a lot to the tournament.

Rather than lamenting all these absences, we should just get comfortable with the reality: the Olympics is a second-tier tournament, and that’s okay. It will still involve 12 very good teams, all of whom will do everything they can to win it. A gold medal will still mean a lot. But it simply isn’t the pinnacle.

Europe already has its own second-tier tournament with the European championships. And given the expanding quality of European women’s soccer, you could potentially argue that the Euros are equivalent to the Olympics at this point. Which actually creates some nice symmetry. European teams all get their own high-quality tournament to compete against each other. And the Olympics is a tournament for the rest of the world, with a few European teams invited to the mix to keep everyone honest.

Somewhat by accident, the Olympics has ended up being a very useful alternative for non-European nations that aren’t members of a federation deep enough to generate a meaningful tournament.

So if the system for picking which European teams come to play with everyone else in the Alt-Euro competition isn’t perfect, it’s just not that important. They have their own big event coming up a year later, and it’s not worth them mucking with their calendar to sort out their Olympic entrants. 

None of this was designed this way. But it’s worked out that way. And we should just accept it for what it is, instead of trying to fix the unfixable. 

Where’s Waldo, I mean, the NWSL

Posted on by Backline Soccer

You remember those old Where’s Waldo posters where you had to scour every section carefully to find Waldo in a sea of people and activity and even just plain scenery? It would take anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours, but you finally found him?

That’s how it feels to follow the NWSL during a World Cup year.

The World Cup is already more than halfway done. With the USA securing a semi-final battle against England, the whole world is watching to see what happens next with this game. Megan Rapinoe has been up front and center in the media, first with her comments regarding a visit to the White House and then with her dynamic performance against France, nobody can seem to take their eyes off the Americans and women’s soccer.

So then why aren’t people aware that the domestic league that Megan Rapinoe and the rest of the national team play in is still going on? That there are games being played at night after dinner time that new fans of the sport can be watching? The official Twitter account of the NWSL is doing a great job keeping fans updated on what’s going on at the World Cup…but not so much about anything else, including themselves.

I have an app that sends me three alerts: (1) that lineups for the NWSL teams playing have dropped, (2) that there’s 15 minutes until game time, and finally (3) that the game has started. It’s the only way that I remember league games are still being played. When I scroll the NWSL Twitter account, I get highlight reel after highlight reel of the players in the World Cup. I get more information about THOSE games than NWSL games.

“So the league supports its national team players, that’s not a bad thing.” And what about the rest of its players? The ones who aren’t in the World Cup? The ones who have sacrificed a lot to play professionally in a league that doesn’t play everywhere or offer a lot of resources (depending on the team).

Marketing seems to have gone the way of the dinosaur for all that I’ve seen of the remaining NWSL games being played during the World Cup. Nothing to hype itself by appealing to new fans like “Hey, suddenly a Megan Rapinoe fan? She plays for Reign FC! Here’s her highlight reel and here’s the link to watch games and meet her teammates!” “Like what you see of Alex Morgan? Orlando sure has a lot of PRIDE in her! Here’s how you see Alex after the World Cup!” This is when the NWSL should be working double time to take advantage of the interest in women’s soccer and highlight their own league and all the hard working, talented players who grind day in and day out and wear their club badge with pride.

If you take a walk down memory lane, there was more marketing for the NWSL during the last world cup. Hyping up player returns (regardless of when they exited the World Cup), selling merchandise and generally informing people that they didn’t have to wait four years or for friendlies to see their favorite national team players; they just needed to wait for the weekend (and odd weekday) to see them with their club. Now? Now my phone has to send me three different reminders to look for Waldo, I mean, the NWSL.

Women’s World Cup Daily: The Axis Falls

Posted on by Backline Soccer
Italy 0 – 2 Netherlands

This was always going to be a tough challenge for Italy, and they gave it a real go. But after the teams came back out from halftime, the writing was pretty quickly on the wall. Under a blazing hot sun, playing their fifth game in three weeks, the Italian players were truly struggling to keep up the pace. The ball virtually never left the Italian half. Or if it did, it was only a hopeful long ball which was quickly snagged by a Dutch defender and immediately returned. It felt like only a matter of time before they scored, and so it proved.

The two goals both came on set pieces. Perhaps strangely, given that Italy’s obviously tired limbs seemed more exploitable in open play. But it turned out to be the dead ball situations that got them – with first Miedema and then Van der Gragt simply leaping over the opposition to power home goals.

It wasn’t a game that either side will much want to revisit. For all their dominance during the second half, the Dutch never really looked like they were doing much until their opponents began to fall apart. There will still be many doubts about their ability to unlock a defense better equipped to resist. For the Italians, the first half felt like a genuine competition, but it never really seemed plausible that they would score after the half, so even a 1-0 lead for the Dutch seemed pretty insurmountable.

For all that, I do want to hit a couple themes from the game.

First, Italy’s intriguing formation. They set up in a 4-3-1-2, with Aurora Galli as a free floating #10 in between the frontline and midfield. It’s a peculiar setup, one that you don’t see very often because it has some significant limitations. But for this game, it actually worked pretty well. Italy generally looked to defend deep, with two banks fairly close together. Normally, it would be two banks of four, but here they sacrificed some solidity in the middle for a roving presence higher up. It worked well because the Dutch seemed completely unable or unwilling to shift the ball into the middle.

The result was something very similar to last night’s game between the US and France, with Italy taking on the role of the Americans. Effectively, they dared the Dutch: here is an opening, go ahead and try to exploit it. And the Netherlands couldn’t do it. Every attack went down the wings, mostly turning into over-hit crosses or soft, low balls that were cleared easily.

And, because Galli was moving freely outside of the defensive lines, when the Dutch tried to recycle play out, she was often in unexpected places and able to snag a few interceptions and launch counter attacks.

They couldn’t sustain this approach into the second half (see above re: heat and exhaustion). But for 45 minutes it really worked.

Second, the continuing struggles of the Dutch wingers. This was another awful game for Van de Sanden. And while Lieke Martens was able to play – after some injury concerns – she was again pretty anonymous. These are two superstar players, but they’re simply not getting it done. And it can’t have helped to run around in the heat today either. To be fair, once Lineth Beerensteyn came on (as I have been yelling about for a week now), she didn’t really do much either. But it remains a real issue, and one that could really use fixing. The Netherlands now have five wins so far, without ever really looking like they were that good. But we have absolutely seen them perform at the highest level. If they can get things to click into gear, there’s zero reason why they couldn’t win two more games and take home the cup.

Germany 1 – 2 Sweden

I tried to watch this game, but it turns out that tethering to my cell phone and then using VPN to pretend I’m in the US was a bridge too far. So I didn’t see a second. But it sounds like Sweden more or less executed the plan that has looked promising against Germany before: give them the ball but defend well, and then hit them with long balls that exploit their weakness and slowness in central defense.

And so Germany go out earlier than expected. They certainly did not have as successful a tournament as I thought they would, both in terms of the final result and in terms of performances across the games. They weren’t bad, but they also weren’t good. Which isn’t that different from the four teams that did make the semifinals, all of whom have shown some real weaknesses. But the Germans couldn’t manage to overcome them, and so here we are.

It can’t go without mentioning that part (maybe a big part) of the reason they have struggled is that they lost their best player after the first game (because the referee decided to let China play recklessly – a point that I’m not going to let go). They have enough depth that it really shouldn’t have been devastating, but it is certainly part of the equation.

Sweden, meanwhile, are into the semifinal. They underwhelmed a bit in the group stage, but are a genuinely exciting team. You might not know that from the commentary about them, which still seems to believe that this is Pia Sundhage’s team that defended their way to an Olympic final three years ago. There is still plenty of defensive solidity here, but they can play many ways. They probably won’t be favorites against the Netherlands, but there really isn’t much between them.

Notes

– Coming into the tournament, four teams were regarded by the bookies as being a clear step above the rest: the US, France, Germany, and England. Until this evening, they had collectively won 18 of 19 games, with the only loss being France’s defeat to the US. Frankly, it wasn’t really a surprise that one of those teams eventually lost to someone else. It’s more weird that it took so long.

– This was my first experience seeing the Netherlands traveling fans, and it was everything I had been told, and more. Truly amazing to see the walk before the game, and to hear them all in the stadium during the match.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

– I’m off to Lyon! I’ve got an early train tomorrow and will spend the afternoon getting settled and exploring a bit. I’ve never really been to the south of France, so it will be a new experience.

– (Germany and Italy were two of the primary Axis powers, while Sweden was non-aligned and the Netherlands were, of course, occupied. With the US and England making up the rest of the quartet, it’s certainly a good day for the Allies.)

 

Women’s World Cup Daily: France 1 – 2 USA. Winning Ugly is Still Winning

Posted on by Backline Soccer

The main reason the US is better than France isn’t that the US has better players, though they do. And the US certainly isn’t better than France because they have better coaching–though Corinne Diacre hardly had a game to write home about tonight.

The main reason the US is better than France is that the US players take their chances when they come, and the French players don’t.

Tonight, that was enough to make up the difference. 

The US didn’t play well. In fact, for long stretches they were pretty awful. But they were good when they had to be. And they played smart. For the better part of an hour, this game was a dare. The US said to France: “prove that you can beat us.” And France couldn’t do it.

It didn’t make for an impressive showing. On the whole, France had the better possession, the better progressive movement, the better passing, the more dangerous attacks. But they never quite managed to pay off on the promise. Exciting attacks were wasted with an errant pass. Or if the pass connected, they sent in a cross when they might have found a more dangerous ball on the ground. And if they did manage to create a good chance, they failed to score it. 

Meanwhile, the US created virtually nothing. They sat back and soaked up pressure, counting on the central trio of defenders–Sauerbrunn, Dahlkemper, and Ertz–to provide help where necessary, and counting on Alyssa Naeher to find the saves where needed. And it mostly worked. 

One of the major themes of the game was problems with fullbacks. Crystal Dunn, on the US side, had a wretched evening, getting beaten over and over by Kadidiatou Diani–the only France player to truly show up on the night. But because Diani’s strike partners were consistently locked down, all of her incredible work ended up for naught.

For France, the fullbacks were also terrible, with Marion Torrent conceding all sorts of dangerous space on the right, and with Amel Majri consistently giving the ball away on the left. 

The difference of the game: when France gave the US an opening, they buried their chances. When the US gave France a chance, they dawdled and dallied, and couldn’t find the incisive pass.

So the US won ugly. They won despite Alex Morgan being (again) an almost complete nonentity in the attack. Except that she won the free kick that led to the first goal with a brilliant run, and created the second goal with a lovely pass. They won despite Megan Rapinoe again looking a bit off the boil. Except that she scored two goals! They won despite Tobin Heath basically not turning up for the night. Except for her assist. 

They won despite Rose Lavelle having her worst game in memory. They won despite Sam Mewis contributing very little. They won despite not starting Lindsey Horan for reasons that defy explanation. They won despite Crystal Dunn being exposed over and over and over.

That’s the thing about the US Women’s National Team. It may seem silly and it may be a cliche. But they know how to win. It didn’t really look that way for most of the game. They looked bewildered and befuddled, getting pushed around repeatedly by France. But then you looked at the scoreboard and remembered who was winning.

And so they’ve passed the big test. You can’t say they passed it with flying colors. But you don’t get extra points for looking good. And you don’t lose points just because you played an opponent that didn’t manage to turn up.

At the end of the day, all that actually matters is who advances and who goes home. And once again, just like the last seven World Cups, the US is advancing to the semifinals.

To The Team That Stole My Heart

Posted on by Backline Soccer

I don’t get a lot of chances to watch my favorite soccer team.

I cheer for the French national team, a fact that usually catches people off guard. An American women’s soccer fan who doesn’t cheer for the U.S.? Unlike so many of my friends and co-workers, it wasn’t watching the United States play soccer that made me fall in love with the game. It wasn’t watching Abby Wambach take shots or Hope Solo make incredible saves, it wasn’t watching Amy Rodriguez with her crazy pace or Becky Sauerbrunn defending that backline.

I became a women’s soccer fan during the 2015 Women’s World Cup. I saw that FOX Sports was running the games on their stations, so I decided to turn on France vs. England in the group stage. And I fell in love. It was watching Wendie Renard defend the backline and Amandine Henry dominate the midfield that made me fall in love with women’s soccer. It was Eugénie Le Sommer and Louisa Nécib and Claire Lavogez and my first favorite soccer player, Laure Boulleau. I didn’t care if I was “supposed” to cheer for the U.S., France stole my heart and they would always be my squad.

When I watched France take on Germany in the Quarterfinals, it didn’t feel fair. This should have been a final, but life isn’t fair. These women were warriors. We played through 90 minutes, and then 120, until finally we stepped up for penalties. In the end, it was 21-year-old Claire Lavogez, a player I had identified with deeply in that tournament, who missed the penalty for France. Germany went on and we went home.

It was one of the most painful matches of my life. And I think I cried a little bit, but I knew that this was only the start of my relationship with this team.

I didn’t know that it was gonna be my last time watching Laure Boulleau play. I didn’t fully understand at the time how much effort was gonna be required to keep up with France, how few chances I’d get to see them. I tried to make the most of it. In 2016, I got to watch them in the Olympics. During the first She Believes Cup, I went to Tampa to see them play in person for the first time. I followed them through the Euros, but really it was all building towards this moment.

I couldn’t wait to see these women take the world’s biggest stage in their own country.

A lot of people thought we could win this World Cup. I hate to be a pessimist, but I didn’t. I wanted them to with all my heart, but I didn’t think the French women had made the necessary changes to win on this stage. We had seen a lot of retirements, brought in a lot of youngsters, and had a head coach who had not yet proved she could win on this level.

They did everything they could to prove me wrong.

And I’m so god damn proud of this team.

They couldn’t avoid a quarterfinal collision with the U.S. Like 2015, it felt unfair. Why was this in the quarterfinals? But there was no time to dwell on that.

The U.S. came out swinging and in the 5th minute, they took the lead. Megan Rapinoe launched a free kick that I knew instantly was going in. The cluster of players blocked Sarah Bouhaddi’s vision. The ball went right through Amandine Henry’s legs and past an outstretched Bouhaddi. 1-0 USA.

The French fell into a familiar rhythm. They dominated possession, but they couldn’t finish. They didn’t even get a lot of great shots off. You don’t usually see the U.S. allowing possession and defending like they did, but it worked. The French out possessed the US, they took more shots, they had more corners. But it wasn’t enough.

In the 65th minute, Rapinoe got her second goal. The French defenders scrambled to stop Sam Mewis and somehow left Rapinoe wide open. She took her shot and it sailed past Bouhaddi. I broke down in tears because I knew that was the end.

I was messaging my friends and family, telling them that the game was over, that there was no way France could score two goals in 25 minutes. Just as I started to accept our fate, Wendie Renard found the back of the net. She seemed to be flying across the field, both in actually scoring the goal and in the celebration.

I screamed and cried again.

The Renard goal was one of those moments. It felt like a personal reminder not to give up. It was the French team’s way of reminding me why I fell in love with them. And even though we didn’t win, and I cried for a third time as I watched the French players shake hands with the U.S. team after the final whistle, it didn’t feel like the world was collapsing around me anymore.

The French will be back.

Last week, I said thank you to Marta. This week, I say thank you to France. You didn’t win it all, but you played your hearts out. You reminded me why I love this team, why they are my favorite soccer team in the world. And for that, I am forever grateful.

Sky Blue Fire Head Coach Denise Reddy

Posted on by Backline Soccer

The season only gets darker for Sky Blue FC as they have announced on Twitter the firing of head coach Denise Reddy. The team will begin an external search for a replacement.

Reddy joined Sky Blue in 2017 and has been at the helm for two of the worst professional seasons in recent American soccer history. Last year Sky Blue grabbed just one win, coming on the last day of the season, and finished with a record of 1-17-6. This year they have started equally bad with no wins through the first nine games.

All of this has happened despite bringing in US Women’s National team legend Carli Lloyd. While her contributions have certainly diminished when compared to her earlier work, she was meant to be a mentor to younger players such as Julie James and Raquel Rodriguez. Instead frustration has boiled over with ownership and off-the-field issues such as poor training conditions taking over most of the discussion.

Reddy herself had quite a resume before joining the team. She coached in the W-League with Jersey Sky Blue and the Chicago Red Stars before jumping to Europe with Vittsjo GIK and Linkopings FC in Sweden. She returned to the newer NWSL in 2016 as an assistant coach with the Washington Spirit and then as the head coach with Sky Blue in 2017. 

What may have appeared to be a chance to get in on the ground floor with a young team quickly turned sour with little hope of getting better. Reddy coached through the diminishing fan base, awful press and lack of resources. In the end, the results weren’t just bad but some of the worst possible. Now she steps aside with little news on who will be the replacement.

Interest in the job is more than likely at an all-time low. The team will more than likely look within the league for an option but there is a possibility that more news is imminent that could involve far more than just changes to the coaching staff.

Women’s World Cup Daily: Are England the new favorites?

Posted on by Backline Soccer

England have played five games in the World Cup, and won all five. After the events surrounding their 3-0 victory over Cameroon ended up overwhelming any conversation about their actual performance, they came out tonight and recorded another emphatic 3-0 victory. With many of their fellow contenders struggling mightily to overcome their opposition, England is both the first team to take a berth in the semifinals as well as maybe the team with the most momentum.

They were fourth-favorites coming into the tournament, according to the bookies, and none of the teams ahead of them (the US, France, and Germany) have yet been eliminated. But one will be gone by this time tomorrow. So England is certainly among the favorites. But have they done enough to lift themselves up to the level of the other top contenders? Or maybe even outpaced them?

I wouldn’t go that far. Because while a 3-0 performance tonight was certainly reflective of the game overall–a match that England dominated for long stretches–there were also far too many danger signs here to simply ignore.

But let’s start with the good. First and foremost: Lucy Bronze. She was unstoppable tonight, and has arguably been the player of the tournament so far. She created the first goal, with a brilliant overlapping run, as well as the confidence and skill to take her defender on rather than simply sending in a fruitless cross. By attacking on the dribble, she ripped through the Norwegian defense, and gave her two wide open targets when she cut back her pass. Ellen White completely whiffed, but it didn’t even matter because Jill Scott was right behind her to bury it. Bronze also created the second goal and scored the third. She was a force of nature.

But this wasn’t purely the Lucy Bronze show. England also got a great performance from Nikita Parris, who is a goal scorer for her club but has refashioned herself very nicely as an unselfish wide creator for England. Ellen White scored another, pulling level with Alex Morgan and Sam Kerr in the golden boot race. Jill Scott and Keira Walsh bossed the midfield. Steph Houghton and Millie Bright executed some superb tackles and clearances to keep the clean sheet. Fran Kirby showed off the magic she can perform with the ball. And all of this was orchestrated by coach Phil Neville who (despite grumblings to the contrary over the past weeks, months, and years) actually does seem to have a very good idea what he’s doing.

So there were many positives. England played well for long stretches, toying with Norway, then breaking with incredible speed. When it all clicked, they looked masterful.

But the lingering, glaring problem: when things broke down, they broke down fast and catastrophically. Norway didn’t manage to score, but it was only through an almost comical inability to finish the chances that kept presenting themselves.  

Many of the most dangerous plays came from incredibly simple attacks. Norway would simply launch direct balls straight at the centerbacks, who repeatedly struggled to handle them, sometimes literally just missing their clearance and watching the ball bounce behind. Bright and Houghton both seemed to have a lot of difficulty mapping defensive space, and found themselves caught by these simple attacks repeatedly. This may be in part to a lack of experience playing together. Despite being the obvious first choice pairing, they have actually had very few chances to actually appear in the same game. On one of these, goalkeeper Bardsley came out to close down an attack and clattered into Lisa-Marie Utland. Play went on as Utland kept her feet. But on a different day, with a more aggressive VAR check, that could easily have been a penalty and a red card for the keeper.

On a similar note, Scott and Walsh controlled the midfield for much of the game. But when they lost their grip, it almost instantly turned into a huge problem. On those few occasions where Norway found a slipped pass, their wide runners like Reiten and Saevik were clear through into the penalty area before anyone got near them. On a different night they could have turned those chances into high-value shots.

There were also quite a few nervy moments when England tried to play out from the back, or across the backline. Misplaced passes or dilly-dallying on the ball left them struggling to catch up to a quick Norway attack.

Again, I don’t want to overstate these points. England were excellent for 85% of this game. They could easily have scored three or four more, on top of the three they did manage. They pushed Norway around with ease.

But that other 15% generated five or six excellent opportunities for Norway. Only a superhuman effort by the Norwegian attack to find more and more new ways to avoid putting the ball in the net, and some top quality goal-line clearances, kept England’s clean sheet.

So that is the big question for England. Can they produce this sort of dominant attack–fast, direct, intelligent, multifaceted–without bringing along the calamitous defensive breakdowns? If so, they can absolutely beat anyone in this tournament. But we haven’t seen it yet. In every game so far, there have been moments when they switched off and relied on extreme generosity from their opponents to avoid scoring. Somehow, their luck has continued to hold. But Japan could easily have scored several. Cameroon were ascendant for a big chunk of the second half. Norway absolutely should have found at least two tonight. And good luck has a way of running out when you encounter the very best opponents.

All you can do is beat the teams in front of you. And England have managed it five times from five so far. But the real test is still to come in Lyon. And only time will tell.

How Did It Get So Late So Soon?

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Time is a funny thing. We always think we’re going to have more of it. That we can do more with what time we have. In sports time is everything. American football, basketball, hockey, soccer, they all have clocks controlling when it’s time to end the game and declare an outcome.

When it comes to players’ careers the clock is still there, tick, tick, ticking away. We just can’t look up at the top left of our screens and see the seconds passing. We don’t know if Alex Morgan is in the 41st minute of her career or the 65th. There is no clock over Lucy Bronze’s head that ticks slowly by to tell us when she might take her final turn on the pitch.

But sometimes the writing is on the wall. While there is no clock over their heads there is a sense that we’re getting close to the 90 minute mark. Will they get one minute of stoppage time or seven? Will there be last minute heroics or an uneventful whining down to the final whistle?

I wish we had more time with some players. It doesn’t feel like we should already be nearing the end.

I wish Christine Sinclair had more time. I wish she was nearing her halftime mark and not inching ever closer to the full time’s three whistle blasts. But we thought we had more time. We’re human and she is an all-time great. We let what we wanted cloud over to what we may otherwise have seen. We took for granted that Christine Sinclair would break the all-time goal scoring record at the World Cup. We assumed without looking at the clock, without knowing how much time there was left that there was more of it. And we were wrong.

I don’t know if Sinclair will play in another World Cup for Canada. If she is fit and able to contribute in 2023 I would love to see her out there. But Father Time? He’s undefeated and his sense of timing is not always one we can understand. And like it or not he is coming in on Sinclair before any of us are ready to see the collision.

Every World Cup this happens. And every World Cup we feet a little sting at what it means to never to see Lauren Holiday play again or Célia Šašić lace up her boots or Abby Wambach to put in another header. Win or not we see players who use the World Cup as their last bow; that last moment to turn their face toward the sun and just try to stand in the warming rays. We see the tears from players in federations that have not supported them who know they may never return to this stage. We see giants in the game know their time has come and they must go from a player on the field to a supporter in the stands as those who came before them did.

Time moves on if we’re ready for it to or not. Players go from the next big time to elder stateswomen of the game. Marta goes from lighting the world on fire to impassioned pleas to the next generation. Sinclair goes from being in the shadow of those who have come before her to the giant who supports the next generation on her shoulders. Why did time have to move so fast?

The World Cup is the greatest event in sports. Every four years like clockwork it shows up and puts on a show for us. The truth is the clock has already started ticking on players who haven’t gotten their first senior cap yet who will play in 2023 or 2027. Time does not work on our schedule but on one we cannot control or predict.

“How did it get so late so soon?” Dr. Seuss once asked.

That’s a very good question.

Women’s World Cup Daily: Previewing the Quarterfinals

Posted on by Backline Soccer

After a lovely trip to Newcastle and a conference on social and political philosophy concluded, I am back in France and ready to brave the weather to see some exciting quarterfinal ties.

As you may have noticed, it’s effectively the US against the world at this point. If you want to see my thoughts on what this European dominance means, check out my piece over at AllForXI.

Norway v. England (27 June – Le Havre)

A rematch of the Round of 16 game from the last World Cup. England won that showdown and will be favored to come out ahead here again. But not heavily favored. On paper, the England squad is superior, with better top-level talent and greater depth. But that certainly does not mean Norway is weak. And what they may lack in individual ability, they have made up for with organization and structure. Their greatest weakness is an over-reliance on a few players to orchestrate the attack. If England can successfully mark Graham Hansen, for example, they will significantly dull the edge of Norway’s attack. By contrast, England have five or six viable fulcrums of the attack, and multiple players in most of those positions who can provide different variations. Look for Lucy Bronze at right back to play a crucial role. Her ability to overlap wide right, or to tuck in and create from a more central position could go a long way to unlocking the Norwegian defense.

One other point to look out for: both England center backs are in doubt—Steph Houghton from the injury she received from a vicious tackle at the end of their match against Cameroon. Millie Bright to a flu bug that’s apparently working through the camp. However, coach Phil Neville has rotated heavily, with an eye toward ensuring that anyone could step into the team if need be. That has been widely attacked by the English press, but may yet prove to be prescient here.

France v. United States (28 June – Paris)

This is the game we all marked on our calendars last winter when the draw was announced. And now it’s finally arrived. A couple of days ago, after a very difficult match against Brazil, France was being talked down significantly. Then the next day the US needed a couple of soft penalties to defeat Spain and things were recalibrated again. To my eyes, this remains every bit the exciting clash that it was always expected to be. Neither team is flawless, but both are exceptionally good. And I have a feeling that we’ll see both bring good performances here.

The game is likely to be defined primarily by who controls the wide spaces. Both sides like to attack with width, though it’s more of an absolute religion with the US than with France. A huge amount will therefore depend on which of those wide strikers turn up on the day. For the US, Megan Rapinoe has looked well off her game. But if she can find her form—or if Ellis does the somewhat unthinkable and starts Christen Press there instead—the left wing could be an important danger zone, given that Torrent at right back is exploitable for France. By the same token, Crystal Dunn has had a lot of difficulty at left back, and she hasn’t come up against anyone nearly as good as Kadidiatou Diani or Delphine Cascarino.

But while the wings will be crucial, we shouldn’t completely ignore the middle. With players like Rose Lavelle and Sam Mewis in fine form, the US has finally started to generate dangerous attacks from the inside out at this tournament. If they can maintain that sort of passing acumen here, it could make it much harder for France to cover all their gaps. But that will be no easy thing, given the strength of the French midfield. It all may therefore come back to Amandine Henry. If she produces a game at the top of her abilities, it could be enough to shift the whole tide in France’s favor.

Italy v. Netherlands (29 June – Valenciennes)

Every team left at this stage is excellent, but these are arguably two of the least-excellent teams remaining. In theory, the Dutch are the stronger team. The 2017 European champions are stuffed full of attacking talent, and should have enough to overpower an Italian defense that hasn’t yet had to face anything on this level. But at least so far, the Netherlands hasn’t been able to produce the sort of free-floating attack that we’ve all hoped to see. Their two wide forwards, Lieke Martens and Shanice Van de Sanden have both been well out of form, and the whole team seems to be lacking in ideas. If Vivianne Miedema has a good game, it probably won’t matter since she can score a brace from one and a half chances. But if she doesn’t, it’s unclear where the goals will come from at the moment.

Italy looked knackered against China, and I worry for them having to play another game on short rest. But of all the teams at this stage, they’ll be feeling the least pressure and will have the best chance to let the adrenaline carry them. Strong defensive positioning may be enough to keep them from getting overrun, and they have the personnel to come at the Dutch defense quickly—not so much through individual speed, but through quick and intelligent ball movement.

Germany v. Sweden (29 June – Rennes)

The Germans have not been especially fancied, but have done their business with relative calm all tournament. After an extremely difficult opening hour against China, they haven’t really been troubled. I don’t see any particular reason to think Sweden will be the team to knock them out, though there also isn’t any reason they couldn’t get it done. Both of these teams have been unfairly treated as ‘boring’ in quite a few corners, but there’s actually quite a lot here to enjoy.

On both sides, an impact sub could end up making a big difference. For Germany, it doesn’t sound like Dzsenifer Maroszán will be able to play a full 90 (or 120) on her broken toe but might be able to come in for a crucial late intervention.  For Sweden, Lina Hurtig got a full match against Thailand but has otherwise been a late substitute in the other three games. She’s exceptionally talented and might just be the spark they need.

Predictions

According to the betting odds, England, the US, and the Netherlands are modest favorites, while Germany are a bit heavier favorites. I do think those are the four likely winners, but I also would be tempted to take the odds and bet on the underdog in three of the four cases (with Italy the one exception).