Tag: England

Premier League Moving to Take Over Women’s Super League

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Women’s football in Europe may see a cataclysmic shift as the clubs of the English Premier League have agreed to take over the Women’s Super League. The move paves the way for a process that could see major money flooding into the women’s game in England like never before.

Undoubtedly, English football is the wealthiest league in the world and their resources could change women’s football around the world. Already we’ve seen the progression of the English national team due to work done by Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester City and now Manchester United. This would add even more money from clubs that have yet to fully throw their weight behind the cause.

The next step for the clubs will be a feasibility study that could take some time to finish. No major changes are expected this season, but team’s could start supplying resources in an unofficial capacity at any point. 

Currently the Football Association runs the Women’s Super League, which would mean they need to hand off the day-to-day operations to the once outlaw Premier League. Last year they increased investment in the game by 50 million pounds over the next six years and have a significant interest in the game’s growing success.

(Note: The English Premier League works with the FA but is not a part of them after breaking away due to revenue disagreements in the early 1990s.)

Recent promotions of Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur have boosted the league’s notoriety as well as a 10 million pound sponsorship from Barclays. With that said, the league did suffer a bit of a setback in 2018-19 with attendance dropping below 1,000. However, teams did see the massive ratings associated with the English Women’s team advancing to the World Cup semi-final and are ready to broaden the scope with better broadcasting deals, sponsorships and even games being played in EPL stadiums.

Football is Coming Home? A Breakdown of the England National Team

Posted on by Backline Soccer

England enter the semifinals in good form, fresh off their best performance of the tournament—a 3-0 defeat of Norway. That match demonstrated both their strengths and weaknesses. It therefore provides a good template for understanding how they could win the tournament, or how they could lose it.

A strong and multifaceted attack

England’s primary strength is a dynamic and diverse attack. At the tip of the spear is Ellen White, who has probably done more than any other player to raise her stock over the course of this tournament. She has five goals, and has been integral to their attack. And this from a player who was by no means a certain starter coming in. This is because England’s strike force is extremely deep—almost certainly the second most powerful behind the US in the tournament.

Supporting White on the wings will likely be Nikita Parris and Toni Duggan (though the excellent Beth Mead could also make an appearance here). Both are top-quality strikers themselves, but have found themselves redeployed in support roles, to generally positive effect. Parris, in particular, has been devastatingly effective out wide, quite impressive for someone who is primarily a goal-poacher in her club role. But with England, Parris has been supremely unselfish, generally looking to create rather than score, and dragging defenses out to create space for the central strikers and onrushing midfields to work.

The England attack also relies on generating space for their progressive midfielders to work. Generally, the #10 has been Fran Kirby, one of the most talented passers in the world, who has the ability to unlock even the most solid defenses. But Kirby also has a tendency to go missing for long stretches—failing to generate space to receive the ball, or drifting forward and occupying space that is well-marked, and where her diminutive stature will make it hard to win balls coming in high. So coach Phil Neville may decide to opt for the young but extremely dynamic Georgia Stanway instead. In either case, that attacking midfield role will be critical to their chances. They can certainly survive a poor performance in that role—given their ability to create from wide positions—but without that extra spark in the middle, it will become quite predictable

Whoever plays the number 10 will likely be flanked by two more defensively oriented midfielders. Jill Scott will almost certainly be one of the two. The veteran brings experience and calmness to the team, and she’s playing about as well at the moment as we have ever seen. In the quarterfinals, Scott was joined by Keira Walsh. The pair largely controlled the game in the first half, as Norway generously gave them space to work. But once pressure was applied, Walsh began to falter a bit. That’s certainly what their remaining opponents will want to do. Both Walsh and Scott are excellent all-around players, but neither is a devastating ball-winner, nor are they at the top levels for retention. They therefore rely on support and positioning to supply them with options. An opponent that overloaded that space might find some real success.

Lucy Bronze

The other key strength for England is Lucy Bronze. The right back is one of a handful of players in serious competition for the Golden Ball, particularly amazing for someone playing fullback. But Bronze is far more involved in all levels of play than the usual fullback. Her defensive work is good, but it’s in the attack that she rises by leaps and bounds above the competition. She has a vicious shot, as Norway was forced to recall in the last round, and can also make superb overlapping runs down the right flank. But the true heart of her ability is revealed when she cuts inside, effectively becoming an additional creative central midfielder. By adding a fourth player to the midfield, she can overload the opposition, ensuring there is always a free body. And since she arrives from unexpected angles, it’s extremely hard to pick her up before she arrives. All that attacking does mean England’s right flank can sometimes be dangerously exposed. This is where the deeper-lying midfielders will be critical. If they can read Bronze’s movement and avoid chasing play forward, they will be in position to protect that space. If not, they will be exploitable on the counter.

A solid but exploitable defense

England are most troubled by quick attacks. The central defensive pairing of Steph Houghton and Millie Bright have generally been solid, but neither deals especially well with balls over the top, and they can both also be exposed by quick passing on the ground near the top of the box, which forces decisions on whether to step or stay. If they are given the chance to set, the backline is robust. It’s when they’re trying to defend in space that things get far more dicey. So far, their hesitations and mistakes have generally gone unpunished. But against more lethal opposition, England could certainly have given away three or four goals in their previous knockout matches. Against the remaining opposition they might not be so lucky.

One other complicating factor is that Bright was clearly struggling with fatigue and sickness (she apparently caught a bug) in the last game, and was at fault three or four times in the final half hour against Norway. But England have a lot of depth in the role, and should be able to mix and match without huge concern.

At left back, Demi Stokes seems to have asserted her hold over the job with a competent and assured defensive performance against Norway—particularly useful since Bronze is so often far more advanced on the other side. But Alex Greenwood could potential start here. If so, opponents will be even more inclined to attack wide.

Finally the keeper, Karen Bardsley, is extremely dependable, though unspectacular. If they’re relying on her to save the team from a barrage of shots, they may be in trouble. But her presence will go a long way to stabilizing the defense and preventing that situation from arising.

Phil Neville

England also have two other small but meaningful advantages, which are linked together. The first is their coach. Phil Neville was not a popular choice for the job in many circles, but he’s taken a team with potential and developed them into one that now consistently performs at the top level. He is adaptive, and helps organize his team to face the specific challenges of a game, setting them up to succeed. And he also seems to have kept the dressing room together. That someone like Neville could so easily step into the job and be a strength for his team is more a comment on the overall quality of coaching in the women’s game (frustratingly very low) than a resounding endorsement. But it is a strength.

The second advantage for England is a group of players who should be comparatively well-rested. Neville was criticized repeatedly in English media for rotating so much coming into the tournament and in the group stage. But England are now in the late stages with players who have expended less energy, and with a supporting cast that all have meaningful match experience. Given the heat in France, having a tiny bit more left in the tank could be the final decisive factor.

So just how good are England? It still remains to be seen. They have clearly established themselves as belonging in the top tier. Even if they lose to the US on Tuesday that will still be true, based on what they’ve accomplished so far. But there is still room for them to get even better. The next few days will tell us whether they can make the leap.

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.

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).

Women’s World Cup Daily: June 23

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Round of 16, Day 2

England 3 – 0 Cameroon

I have to admit that I don’t have the emotional energy to provide a ton of commentary on this game. There was just too damn much going on.

Obviously, the major story was the refereeing, and Cameroon’s response. At several points they seemed on the verge of literally walking off the field. At others they were pointing at the big screen insistent that it proved them right, when it very much did not. And the fouls…oh dear, all the fouls.

So rather than trying to digest it all, I will split my comments into a few bullet points, first on the match itself and then on the meta-match.

The game

1. England played exceptionally well in the opening 20 minutes, and showed in that period why they should be considered legitimate contenders.

2. England played like garbage in the next thirty minutes, and showed why they could easily lose to Norway in the quarterfinals.

3. That said, I don’t think you can draw too many conclusions from this match about England’s future prospects. They’re not going to play anyone like this again, and they certainly won’t play through this kind of chaos, or deal with the emotional thunderstorms of this game. England looked completely lost for much of the early second half, but you can understand why. At least Cameroon had anger to focus their attention. England had to stand around for long periods just feeling bewildered.

4. Cameroon did very well to execute their plan. They got beat – badly, and repeatedly – in the midfield, but their defenders were fantastic as stepping up to clear up the messes before they had a chance to explode. They posed a real threat on the counter, and could easily have scored a couple. But in the end it was always going to take a huge amount of luck, and they didn’t get it. The other events of the game will overshadow it, but they did about as well as you could reasonably expect in this game.

The discourse

1. Cameroon’s players absolutely lost their cool, and it was to their own detriment. None of the calls were wrong, even if they were extremely frustrating. Emotions were riding high, but it would have been good if they and/or their coaches had been able to pull things back a bit quicker than they did. It’s also not great to accuse the officials of rigging the game against you, especially when the calls were all correct, albeit close.

2. That said, they did rein things in pretty quick. As noted above, it was England who looked the most out of sorts for quite a while in the second half. Cameroon played better in the second half, even with what must have been a thousand volts of adrenaline running through them.

3. We also need to talk about the larger story here. Many of these players live on the margins of professional soccer. As much as emotions ride high in an event like the men’s World Cup, there are some relatively cushy fallbacks for players. Here, not so much. The stakes are enormous.

4. It also has to be said that the referee bears some of the blame for this. Once again, the communication was poor. The various VAR referrals were not well explained. And those things can build. Once you feel that the system is rigged, you will be even less inclined to listen the next time. It also seems to me that she genuinely felt bad for Cameroon and wanted to let them vent. But at a certain point, it just meant that the game fell completely out of her control.

5. Broadening the scope even more, as with our conversation about Nigeria yesterday, it is extraordinarily frustrating how people seem to be unable or unwilling to see how their depiction of black athletes can contribute to racial stereotyping in extremely harmful ways. That’s not an excuse for bad behavior, of course, but it’s absolutely a reason to seriously interrogate our assumptions of what counts as ‘bad’ behavior, and what interests are served by policing it in that way.

6. To wrap this up, I absolutely don’t think that Cameroon covered themselves in glory today, and I certainly think it’s necessary for there to be genuine and serious criticism of some of the things they did. Not just the reactions to the refereeing decisions, but also the rough play, the spitting, etc. But the choice about how to engage in that criticism is an important one. Far too many people today leapt to outrage. Far too few took any time to consider the context. And that ultimately may end up being far worse for the world than anything the Cameroon players did.

France 2 – 1 Brazil (aet)

France certainly did not look like the tournament co-favorite that we all have been calling them. They managed only a handful of shots on goal over the course of the whole game, and struggled mightily to create any sort of dangerous attacking moves. The whole night, they focused almost exclusively on attacking with width and then sending in crosses. But their delivery was generally poor, and on the few occasions that Gauvin could get her head to the ball, it didn’t produce much.

There was one exception in the first half – an opening goal which was disallowed on review by VAR. To my eyes it was a good goal, and should have been allowed to stand. Who knows if that lead might have changed things. But it wasn’t allowed, and so it took until the 52nd minute before Gauvin got her goal. For once, instead of simply reaching the end line and then immediately sending in the cross, Diani chose to cut inward, beating a defender and giving herself less distance to cover with her cross, and a better angle. This time, the goal stood, and France had their lead.

While Brazil didn’t exactly come roaring back, they did begin to pose a bit more of an attacking threat, often led by Debinha who I must (begrudgingly, given my past critiques) admit was Brazil’s player of the tournament, by a mile. She raced into the space left open by Torrent, the French right back, and left Bussaglia – who could theoretically have tracked her – in her dust. From there, a dangerous cross whipped in left Renard with little choice but to weakly tap a clearance down into the penalty area. The waiting Thaisa thanked her for the gift by burying her shot.

And that was it for regular time. France certainly pushed, and seemed like they might get the winner. They were helped by the departure of Formiga, both because it removed an intelligent player from the field, and because Brazil simply didn’t have a similar replacement. Andressinha is a nice player, but simply can’t do the defensive work to control a midfield. France responded by bringing on Thiney, restoring their traditional 4-2-3-1, and finally started to look more like the France that was dominant earlier in the tournament. And yet…they couldn’t find their goal.

But finally, in extra time, the dam started to crack. France began pouring on the pressure. They brought in Delphine Cascarino who provided a breath of fresh air, and the pace out wide that had been missing. And it was only a matter of time. Eventually, it was (who else) Amandine Henry that actually delivered the winning goal. And for all of the good work Brazil put in over 120 minutes, it’s impossible to say it wasn’t deserved.

France weren’t good today. But they were good enough.

And so the fated showdown between the US and France remains on track. If the US can indeed win tomorrow, the last piece will be in place. And it will all come together this Friday, at the Parc des Princes. On the evidence of the tournament so far, the US will be favored, but I’d be very careful to avoid overinterpreting recent results. This France team had a rough day today, but they remain incredibly good. And unlike the US, they will come into the game having already faced some serious challenges. That could make them more fragile. But it could also make them more resilient. Only time will tell.

Notes

I am in England for the next few days (see the image featured above for evidence). I was hoping to catch the England game today in a pub with locals, but sadly wasn’t able to find anywhere with much excitement for the game. The tournament is doing good business up here, by all accounts, but I couldn’t find much evidence of it in town. But I’ll continue to poke around and see what I can find.

Women’s World Cup Daily: Previewing the Round of 16

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Tomorrow begins the knockout stage. While we all take a break today, here is a preview for each match. If you want a bit more detail on a couple of the most tantalizing games, head over and check out our own Allison Cary’s post on the Top Three Matchups in the Round of 16.

Germany – Nigeria (22 June, Grenoble)

Germany will be heavy favorites, but it would be a huge mistake to write off Nigeria. They were after all one bizarre penalty retake away from earning a draw against France. And their strike force has the speed and intelligent movement to wreck the fragile Germany defense. The big question will be whether Nigeria can do enough to harass the German midfield. If this turns into a training ground exercise sort of match, with Nigeria endlessly chasing, I have faith in Germany’s ability to pick off the defense and score the goals they’ll need.

Norway – Australia (22 June, Nice)

One of the most exciting matches of this round. If you subtract Sam Kerr, Norway has arguably the stronger team in all three lines right now. Of course, add Kerr back and the equations start to change pretty rapidly. Not only is she arguably the best striker in the world, her mere presence warps games and forces the other team to re-organize to accommodate. It will be fascinating to see how this plays out. In theory, this should be a high-scoring thriller, with Norway using their ability to attack directly to pose all sorts of troubles for Australia’s cobbled-together backline, and Australia firing back with Kerr and Foord up top. But it could go very much in the other direction. If Norway decide to focus on controlling the midfield and starving Kerr of chances, this might end up a tedious 0-0 decided on penalties.

England – Cameroon (23 June, Valenciennes)

England went three-for-three in the group stage without quite kicking into full gear. This could be more of the same, against a Cameroon team who has proven to be quite difficult to play without posing nearly as much attacking threat as anticipated. As with every England game, one big question will be who Phil Neville chooses to play. It’s a squad with a huge amount of depth, and with five or six spots where you can make compelling arguments in multiple directions about who to play. Will he go with experience or youth? Pace or precision? Volatility or dependability? I’m particularly curious to see whether Georgia Stanway might have done enough to play herself into taking over the role of creative midfielder from Fran Kirby.

France – Brazil (23 June, Le Havre)

This is the glamor tie of the round, with two of the great names in world soccer. But these are very much two teams moving in different directions. France is a co-favorite for the tournament, while Brazil is an aging team trying to eke out one more result before their key players shuffle off the stage. Still, for all their struggles coming into the tournament (nine losses in a row!), Brazil managed six points in the group stage, including a solid performance against Italy in their last game. But for all that Italy has been great, they’re no France. Brazil will need much better from Marta (who hasn’t really contributed much, to be honest) and will need flawless games from the likes of Thaisa and Andressinha. That’s certainly possible, but if they expose any cracks, that midfield is going to get absolutely run over by France, and that will probably be the game.

USA – Spain (24 June, Reims)

If this game feels familiar, it should. The US played Spain just five months ago. It was a 1-0 game for the US that day, but Spain earned plaudits for their excellent possession and ability to control the game for long stretches. Expect some of the same this time, but probably to a lesser extent. The US were in their off-season last time, with Spain right in the middle of their season. That’s not true now, and it’s hard to see this version of the US conceding any space for Spain to play. The main question for the game is whether Spain is able to exert enough control in the middle of the pitch to dictate play, or if the US can overload the wings and bring overwhelming force to bear against the center backs before anyone can get back to help them. I’m betting on the latter, and would be surprised at any result other than a comfortable win for the US.

Sweden – Canada (24 June, Paris)

This has been widely billed as a boring tie between two teams that play hyper-defensively. Which is a good test of whether folks have actually been watching Sweden. Because this version of Sweden is hardly the stolid defending team that rode a series of drab games to the Olympic final three years ago. They may not be scoring much, but it’s not for lack of trying. They’re not going to say damn the torpedoes and go full leather into the attack, but this shouldn’t be a completely cagey match, and has at least some potential to be genuinely interesting. Both coaches have the ability and willingness to adapt, which could make for some fascinating chess as the game progresses.

Italy – China (25 June, Montpellier)

Italy were the surprise winners of Group C and as a reward got a game that certainly looks easier on paper than their groupmates. But in practice, this looks like precisely the sort of team that Italy will hate to play. China showed against Germany that they have the ability to play an aggressive physical game which depends very little on doing anything constructive. But Italy’s success so far has largely come from two things. First, picking at the weak spots in their opponent’s setup and then ruthlessly exploiting them. Second, using their physicality to disrupt the opposition, riding their luck a little bit to avoid getting tossed into the sin bin. Will they have the same results against the chaotic bundle of energy that is China? On the opposite side, will China look to play at full tilt like they did against Germany, or will they sit a bit deeper and ride their luck like they did against Spain. The former was far more successful than the latter, so I’d be surprised to see anything else here. Let’s all say a brief prayer for the lower-body health of Italy’s forwards.

Netherlands – Japan (25 June, Rennes)

On paper, this looks like the most exciting match of the round. Two teams with a lot of attacking potential, but in very different styles. The Dutch will look to spread the defense, to create spaces for Miedema to work in, and to give their wide attackers targets to ping with crosses, and create room for slashing runs. This relies on a great deal of technical ability but is fundamentally about vertical movement. Japan, by contrast, are all about triangles. They’ll hope to move the ball quickly through the middle. So far, Japan has been more potential than reality, and my gut tells me that will continue here as well. The Netherlands are absolutely exploitable, but I’m not sure Japan has enough firepower to match the goals they’re likely to concede. At the risk of invoking the pundit’s curse and ensuring this ends up 0-0, I’d expect goals—quite a lot of goals—here.  

Women’s World Cup Daily – June 19

Posted on by Backline Soccer

June 19: Matchday 13

Japan 0 – 2 England

Scotland 3 – 3 Argentina

I wrote about Scotland and Argentina here. 

For the other game, I have very little to say. I only caught glimpses, but England looked fine, while Japan looked…also fine. Obviously, England got the goals they needed, so will be much happier with the result. But nothing I saw here suggests that either team is quite ready to step into the top tier. England have a much easier draw now, and should have some time to play themselves into their top form, so I certainly wouldn’t count them out. But I’ll need to see more from them to be a true believer.

Notes

– I created a World Cup mix, with all the songs that I’ve been listening to on repeat while riding the trains around France. Give it a listen!

– I took a trip to the Atelier des Lumières this afternoon, and it was fantastic. It’s set in a 19th century smelting plant, and they display literally dozens of huge moving images on basically every surface in the place. The exhibit right now is primarily organized around Vincent Van Gogh and is truly breathtaking. It’s not simply pictures of his paintings; it’s a whole mesmerizing repurposing of his style and approach. I took some pictures, but they capture maybe 10% of the experience. You really just have to go. If you’ve got some time in Paris, I strongly recommend it.

– Back in the NWSL, Sky Blue are busy trading away one of their best players for future draft picks that they probably won’t even be able to use. I’m glad this organization has made some improvements in treatment of players, but it’s becoming increasingly clear that this is not a viable club. In my ideal world, they fold, or are transferred to a new market, and an additional franchise is brought in, taking the total up to ten teams. But if there aren’t two markets ready to enter, I’d rather stick with nine if that’s what it takes.

– More NWSL news: Taylor Comeau has retired. She should obviously do what’s best for her, but I hope we someday get to the point where highly-useful non-starters are able to regard staying in the league as a good career move.

– Even more NWSL news: the final has finally been announced in North Carolina. I don’t really understand why it isn’t in Utah, and I really don’t understand why it took them so long to announce it. Please do better.

Tomorrow’s action

Four games tomorrow, which will close out the group stage. They will fill in a lot of gaps in the bracket, so everyone will be watching closely to see how it plays out.

  • Cameroon – New Zealand. Two teams on zero points. Both will need a win, and potentially a big win. So far New Zealand has shown almost literally zero effort to attack, but they have some legitimately good players, so it’s time to see if they can do anything with them. Cameroon has been better in their games, but hardly as explosive as we hoped they would be. Tomorrow could be the day that changes.
  • Netherlands – Canada. Both teams are through, but it’s a pretty big difference to win the group. First place gets Japan in the round of 16, while second place gets (probably) Sweden, which isn’t a huge difference. But the quarterfinal matchup is the difference between running into Germany or getting to face Italy, China, or Nigeria. Netherlands hold the tiebreaker, so Canada would need to beat them to secure first.
  • Sweden – USA. We all know what’s up here. The US arguably would be better of losing the game – and thus avoiding France until the final. But this US team is not going to take their foot off the gas. Sweden may be able to neutralize them enough to hold on for a low-scoring draw, but I doubt it. And it’s very hard to see them actually beating the Americans.
  • Thailand – Chile. See above. Another match between two teams on zero points. Both need a win to have any hope. Chile will know the exact margin of victory they’ll need (3 goals would certainly get it done, but less might be enough depending on what happens in Cameroon-New Zealand). Thailand only have a chance if the day’s previous game ends in a draw, since there’s no chance of them pegging back their goal difference.

As I write this, I’m on the train heading to Le Havre, to kick off a week of some extreme bouncing around. I’ll be back in Paris tomorrow for a day, and then off to England for a conference, before heading back to Le Havre, Paris, and Valenciennes for the quarterfinals.

Women’s World Cup Daily – June 14

Posted on by RJ Allen

June 14: Matchday 8

Japan 2 – 1 Scotland

It’s almost bizarre how closely this game tracked with Scotland’s first match. Once again they fell behind 2-0 in the first half, partly due to a somewhat questionable penalty. Once again they finally found some attacking venom in the final twenty minutes, and did enough to get a consolation goal back, despite looking extremely leggy. Once again they were furious about the refereeing.

In the end, 2-1 was a pretty fair result. Japan were by far the better team for most of the game, but weren’t able to translate it into as much attacking success as they would have liked. And while their light pressing was enough to frustrate Scotland for most of the game, the defense broke down a bit toward the end.

Scotland can deservedly feel a little hard done by, with several decisions going against them. The penalty is a great example of something RJ Allen brought up in our pre-World Cup episode of The 123rd Minute – an NWSL player who is not ready for the stricter refereeing at this tournament. Rachel Corsie does this exact thing multiple times per game every weekend for the Utah Royals, and no one bats an eye. And even on the international level, it was a soft penalty. But the reality is that if you put your hands on an attacker in the box – particularly if you do it high up on the body rather than down at the waist – you’re opening yourself up to a penalty.

Later in the game, Scotland seemed to earn a penalty of their own, after kicking the ball off a Japanese player’s arm in the box. It’s precisely the sort of thing that shouldn’t be a penalty, but which have been repeatedly called according to the new interpretation of the rule.

In either case, you could absolutely go either way. It just happened to be the case that both decisions went against Scotland. For them and their fans, that will be absolutely infuriating.

The Scottish team probably didn’t ‘deserve’ a result on the night, given the overall balance of play. But while it often felt like Japan was on the verge of adding more, they only actually managed the one goal from open play. So if those two decisions had merely evened out, Scotland very easily could have earned a point here.

Even without that point, they have a decent chance of making the knockout stage. It will take beating Argentina, of course, but they’ve kept their goal difference very tight, which is the key thing. If they can actually get the three points, they’ll go through.

Japan haven’t technically qualified yet, but for all practical purposes they have. They looked much better today than they did against Argentina, and seem very much like a team who will play to the level of their opposition. There’s no realistic chance of them winning four straight games to win the tournament. But I certainly wouldn’t want to play them in a knockout game.

Jamaica 0 – 5 Italy

Going into the tournament, Italy were generally regarded by casual fans as a random European team who probably couldn’t be written off, and by more knowledgeable folks like Yours Truly as a team with ‘Potential, Who Aren’t There Yet.’ And then a few genuinely knowledgeable people (everyone is following Sophie Lawson, right?) popped up a hand and said ‘well, they might actually be there already.’

Folks, they’re here already.

I’ve been lucky enough to see them in person twice, and they might just be my favorite team in the whole tournament so far.

No, this Jamaica team is among the weaker teams here. But that’s a relative matter. They’re still pretty good. And Italy played them exceptionally well, and more than deserved a lopsided result, even if there were some peculiar twists and turns along the way.

I’m not really going to get into the penalty save/retake situation, except to say that this is yet another prominent example of the way that the laws of soccer are essentially arbitrary, and ill-suited to the kind of work we expect them to do in the 21st century. Did Schneider come off her line? Yes, by a very small amount. Is this sort of thing called? Almost never. Is it technically a violation? Yes. What are we honestly supposed to do with a system that’s so fundamentally incoherent, which simultaneously claims to measure fouls by a fraction of an inch?

Over the course of the game, Italy showed that they are strong not only in their tactical play – they were masters of occupying space and shutting down passing lanes – but also in their sheer physicality. There was no single player in the Italian backline who could individually handle Bunny Shaw, but as a group they kept her relatively quiet. As the captain Sara Gama noted after the match, Shaw is dangerous because she will shoot from anywhere and with almost no warning. But all those shots were blocked because there were consistently two or three Italians hanging on her shoulder.

And the Italian attack was superb. Admittedly, the Jamaican midfield gave them some room, but it was still marvelous to see them exploit it. And their striking core is proving themselves to be one of the most dangerous in the tournament. And they can find success in so many different ways and from different angles. Barbara Bonansea didn’t add to her goal tally but her link play was excellent. Cristiana Girelli managed a hat trick without any of the three looking particularly impressive. But those things don’t happen by accident. It may look silly to score with your face or to chest in a goal, but it takes being in the right place. Then, substitute Aurora Galli entered the game and produced a wonder strike fitting of a 5-0 victory.

Italy, a team that has not been to the World Cup in two decades, is through to the knockout stage with every chance of topping their group. As Girelli told me after the game: “It’s a kind of magic. I mean, we left from Italy hoping to enjoy first, and then to pass the round. We made it, so we are really happy!”

For Jamaica, this was another frustrating result. They actually played quite well, and almost certainly should have found at least a consolation goal, if not two, in the second half. But the chances didn’t fall. At times, it looked like their urgency overwhelmed them and they tried just a bit too hard – playing faster but not necessarily smarter. But there were huge bright spots. Despite the goal tally, keeper Sydney Schneider put in another solid performance, including the penalty save that was taken away. Shaw couldn’t score, but occupied several Italian defenders all night, and gave her teammates space to work. Mireya Grey was a breathe of fresh air in the attack, while Jody Brown brought tons of energy in the second half. Chinyelu Asher looked dangerous out wide, while Havana Solaun played quite a few dangerous passes. And Deneisha Blackwood put in one hell of a performance at fullback. She was a dynamo, covering huge amounts of space, wrestling off defenders, winning tackles, and generally looking like someone who is impossible to play against. It was the best I’ve ever seen her play, and genuinely thrilling to watch.

England 1 – 0 Argentina

I saw zero minutes of this match, since it coincided exactly with my travels back from Reims. That means I’ve now seen zero minutes total of England. I was really interested in England going into the tournament so it’s weird I still haven’t seen them. And since I’ll be at the Scotland-Argentina match that happens at the same time as their final group stage match, I probably won’t catch much of that either.

It sounds from reports that this was a less successful defensive performance from Argentina, rescued by a show-stopping night from Vanina Correa in goal. Still, it’s incredibly impressive that they’ve gone 180 minutes against two of the top ten teams in the world and only conceded one goal.

Two points could theoretically be enough to advance, if neither New Zealand or Cameroon win a game, and Chile and Thailand. But more realistically, they’ll need a win against Scotland to go through. I wouldn’t say the chances are high there, but it’s certainly a realistic possibility.

The danger is that they’ll have to actually open themselves up a bit to attack, and in doing make it far harder to keep their own goal protected. I’m certainly pulling for them,. As much as I love the Scotland team, it would be a hell of a fun story if Argentina get through.

Notes

– As I mentioned above, I wrote a long piece on the laws of the game, and the problems that VAR is exposing (though not precisely creating). Give it a read, and then read Ian’s response/elaboration which offers a very interesting alternative perspective.

– I am a massive Bunny Shaw fan, but she should have been sent off. Her attempted bicycle kick put a boot directly into Sara Gama’s head. It was lucky that the connection was more glancing than full-on, but just a few inches different and she could be in intensive care right now. It wasn’t intentional, but that’s a red card.

– Kim Little is one of the best players in the world, but she’s having to do too much and it’s really limiting her effectiveness. I don’t know what the right place for her to play is, but it’s probably not holding mid. I understand the impulse to put your best player at a critical hinge, but I think they need to trust someone else to do a job, and take some of the responsibility off Little to shepherd play every single instant.

– I have thoroughly enjoyed riding the trains with fans of the various teams. Props to the Jamaica fans on the 21:12 out of Champagne-Ardenne tonight. Y’all were great.

Tomorrow’s action

  • Netherlands – Cameroon. The Netherlands couldn’t finish in their last match, but given the lethal strikeforce they have at their disposal, there’s no reason to expect that to last. Cameroon were solid against Canada, but this feels like it’s as likely to finish 4-0 or 5-0 to the Dutch as it is for Cameroon to get a result.
  • Canada – New Zealand. These teams are both good at many things, but scoring goals is not one of them. Of course, having said that, maybe it will end up a wild 4-3. I doubt it, though. We’re still in Sinclair watch. Failure to get any against Cameroon makes it much less likely she breaks the record in this tournament, but it’s absolutely still possible.

I’m not going to either of these games. In fact, I’m not traveling anywhere at all. For the first time in the whole tournament, I could just sit on the couch in my Airbnb all day if I wanted. But assuming I can get myself up, I’m going to see some water lilies at the Musée de l’Orangerie, and if it’s nice out do some reading in the Tuileries Garden, and then get some crepes.

Which, hey, if you’re in Paris and you want to talk about soccer or see some great impressionist art tomorrow, hit me up.

Women’s World Cup Daily – June 9

Posted on by RJ Allen

June 9: Matchday 3

Australia 1 – 2 Italy

This was among the wildest soccer games I have ever seen in person, and I was at one of the bonkers 5-4 games between Seattle and Sky Blue a couple years ago, so I know what a wild soccer game is like.

Australia came into the tournament as an exciting team with a chance to go far, but with a wretched defense and a lot of concerns about whether they could fix it. This game sure did not help to alleviate those concerns. Italy had the goal in the net in the opening fifteen minutes, only to have it disallowed on a very close offside call. This would definitely be a pattern.

Over the rest of the game, Australia’s high and ragged line was broken time and again by the quick Italian forwards, who raced in behind and laid waste to Lydia Williams’ goal. Time and again, those plays were called back on the offside rule. But the margins were often razor thin. Australia was clearly playing with fire, and eventually they got burned, with Italy pulling it back to 1-1 after a ghastly mistake from Claire Polkinghorne, who gave the ball away and then watched Barbara Bonansea put away the goal.

Unlike many games in this tournament, which have wilted pretty heavily in the second half, this one grew and multiplied, growing only more intense with every minute. First Australia threatened, then Italy came back. Lisa De Vanna nearly got sent off within fifteen minutes of subbing on. The Australians began falling over as soon as they entered the box, desperately hoping for a penalty.

In the end, it was Italy that found the winner, thanks to another dumb mistake from Australia, who needlessly conceded a set piece, and then watched helplessly as Sam Kerr backpedaled desperately and just missed clearing the ball, leaving Bonansea free at the back post to nod it in.

And the crowd erupted. And so did the Italian team.

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

Australia is still probably fine. They’ll be favorites in their other two games, and even a draw against Brazil wouldn’t kill them, since four points is effectively a guarantee to advance under this system. By the same token, Italy is now in very good shape. A result against Jamaica is by no means certain, but that would be sufficient to advance them to the knockout stage, a big deal for a team that hasn’t been to this tournament in two decades.

Brazil 3 – 0 Jamaica

All of us soccer experts managed to talk ourselves into believing that Jamaica could potentially pull this off, but it ended up a comfortable win that the casual fan always expected. There were many factors involved. Jamaica definitely looked like a team attending their first World Cup, with quite a few nerves getting in their way. They also struggled in the midfield, as expected, and played a slightly naïve system that pushed high too often and left them critically exposed. Only a showstopping performance from Sydney Schneider in goal kept them in the match for as long as they were.

For Brazil, this was obviously a nice performance and a great way to break a long losing streak. Jamaica weren’t that bad, but Brazil dominated the game, and provided a nice template for how they should play against stronger opposition. It also built well on a set of performances at SheBelieves in February and March that didn’t produce any results but at least looked more credible than some of what we saw from them in 2018. There are still a lot of holes in this team, but they once again look like a viable player on the big stage. It’ll take another strong performance against a better team to really convince me, but the world is better when Brazil is good, so let’s hope so.

The big topic is how (and maybe whether) they should reintegrate Marta. I am a strong believer that Marta makes everyone around her better, and don’t think Brazil’s struggles had anything to do with her being in the team. So I’m entirely on the side of bringing her back in when healthy. But if nothing else, this performance gives them some runway to work with if she isn’t immediately 100%.

For Jamaica, this was probably their best chance for a result, so their odds of making it out of the group have definitely taken a hit. But it’s by no means over, and there was a lot to like in this performance. Shaw didn’t find the net, but she showed plenty of the talent that made everyone talk her up. And the team as a whole looked far more solid and coherent than they did even a few months ago. There’s still a chance for something special from this group of players.

England 2 – 1 Scotland

I missed this game entirely, thanks to poor train station wireless. But it sounds like a fun one, with England in full control for the first hour or so, only to let things slip away a bit and invite Scotland back into the game. 

It doesn’t really tell us anything we didn’t already know. But it’s nice to get some confirmation that England is, in fact, pretty good. And that Phil Neville actually does have a pretty clear idea of how he wants to set his team up – despite quite a bit of pre-tournament hand-wringing about his tinkering and inconstancy. It was also nice to get some confirmation that Scotland are a perfectly credible team, who can pose real challenges to anyone in the tournament. 

I’m really looking forward to seeing both of these teams play going forward.

Notes

– I wrote a piece for AllForXI about the Hegerberg conversations, and all the ways that we continue to harass women by demanding impossible levels of perfection and refusing to respect the dignity of their decisions. For more on the subject, check out this nice piece from Meg Linehan on the nature of resistance and different aspects of the fight for equality.

– I also wrote a piece right here at Backline about the Video Assistant Referee system, and the way it’s beginning to take over the experience of these games.

– Sydney Schneider put on a ridiculous display in one of the CONCACAF qualifying games I got to watch back in Texas last fall, and I have been a huge fan ever since. Glad to see her turn in a good game in the World Cup. And she’s still only 19! And hey, while we’re on the subject, go read this great article on Schneider.

– I find it strangely comforting that Sam Kerr is kind of rubbish at taking penalties. It’s just a nice reminder that no one, even a superhero like Kerr, is perfect at everything.

– Good news! According to Jaclyn Mahoney at Football Reference, we’re well ahead of the pace for yellow cards per match (at 2.9 this year, compared to 2.0 and 2.1 in the last two tournaments). I’m a firm believer in giving out more cards.

Tomorrow’s action

  • Argentina – Japan. This should be an easy win for Japan, with Argentina one of the weakest teams in the tournament. But it will still be an interesting test for this young Japan team. Will they put away their chance easily or make it difficult? It will also be the second game in Paris, and I’ll be curious to see how the atmosphere compares to the crackling opening night.
  • Canada – Cameroon. Again, this should be fairly straightforward. But the potential contrast in styles, at a minimum, should make it interesting. Canada is one of the most conservative teams in the tournament, scoring few and conceding fewer, while Cameroon is one of the most open. It’s also always worth watching Canada, because we’re nearly critical stages of the Christine Sinclair countdown.

Q&A: Professor Jean Williams Discusses Women’s Football Conference

Posted on by RJ Allen

On March 8th and March 9th 2018, the National Football Museum in Manchester, England hosted a two-day conference on women’s soccer. “Upfront and Onside: The Women’s Football Conference” looked at the history of women’s soccer, the evolution of women’s participation around the world, and the state of the game today. The conference tackled issues such as gender roles, religion, sexual orientation, and culture, and sought to create an inclusive atmosphere that brought in voices from every region.

Jean Williams, a Professor of sport from the University of Wolverhampton and one of the leading scholars in the world on women’s sports, organized the event. We spoke to her about the conference, the history of women in soccer, and the state of women’s soccer today. 

Backline Soccer: What kind of topics were discussed at the Women’s Football Conference? How successful do you think it was? 

Jean Williams: We discussed women’s soccer from a variety of international perspectives and this included South and Central America, North America, Europe, Asia and Africa. The overall quality of the papers was very high with several eminent Professors presenting new work. This was not just historical but related to contemporary debates about LGBTQ rights, how to digitise and collect women’s football research material, issues around the hijab and the forthcoming Women’s World Cup in France and so on. 

BS: What does it say about the change in football culture that the National Football Museum was interested in hosting an event like this? 

JW: The National Football Museum has always been supportive of women’s football and we had debates with the Director of the inaugural museum in Preston about integrating women’s football material through the collections. However, the accession of the Chris Ungar collection, with 25,000 items of women’s football memorabilia, has allowed us to revisit the ideas and current research trends in women’s football. 

BS: What do you think is the most significant moment or event in women’s football history? 

JW: There is no one moment. If there is one key defining aspect it has to be that women have always contested their right to play football since the modern codification of the game in 1863. It’s about a right to resources, a right to spectacle and a right to choose an athletic profession, as well as the freedom just to play.

BS: What do you think allowed women’s football to take off in countries like Germany and the United States? Do you think that success is duplicable around the world?

JW: The US is quite different than Germany, because soccer is still a minority sport compared with the big three and a half of American Football, Baseball, Basketball and Ice Hockey. Germany is a football country, so we can’t compare the two. But there are some strategies that link the two like playing double headers with women’s and men’s teams. You can begin to see Manchester City for instance with its ‘one club’ approach integrate the women across the brand. That’s the big message because having a women’s team can leverage sponsors that men’s teams don’t bring in. 

BS: It seems to be a time of growth and change for women’s football. Do you agree? If so, why do you think this is happening?

JW: These are not metaphors I would use. Change certainly, like China not now supporting its women’s team as much as in the past in search of hosting, and winning a men’s world cup in the next two decades. Growth depends how you measure the women’s game. Women are not a minority population in the world. Give the women’s game 51% of FIFA’s budget to match women’s place in the world, then we could see real growth. Similarly, we don’t need more leadership courses for women in football. Women are not the problem. The voting systems that protect male power are in need of change, to represent more women in the highest aspects of football administration. 

Having covered some serious topics in the women’s game, we wanted to give Professor Williams a chance to answer some fun questions about her favorite players and predictions for the NWSL season. 

BS: Who do you think is the best player in the world right now?

JW: Marta (still, probably always).

BS: Who is your favorite (current) player? 

JW: Nadia Nadim.

BS: Who is your favorite player of all time? 

JW: Mia Hamm, Nadine Angerer, Sun Wen, Mercy Akede, Shanice Van de Sanden, it’s an impossible choice. I could write an essay on Nadine Angerer’s hats. Next year at the World Cup it’ll change again. 

BS: Who do you think will win the NWSL this year?

JW: I think the Courage but I hope the Thorns.