Tag: France

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.

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 17

Posted on by RJ Allen

June 17: Matchday 1

China 0 – 0 Spain

I was hoping against hope this would turn out to be an exciting game. Instead, it played mostly as expected, with Spain trying somewhat fruitlessly to score and China trying somewhat effectively to earn the scoreless draw that advanced them to the next round and protected them from the United States.

But it wasn’t quite as dull as that sounds. Spain couldn’t score, but they did actually create quite a bit. They had a period of about twenty minutes in the first half when they were totally in control, and building very coherently and effectively down the left side. It didn’t produce any goals, but they came close enough to feel pretty good about their approach. Things quieted down significantly to start the second half, as they succumbed to their usual tendency to pass and dribble themselves into oblivion rather than just taking a shot. But with the final twenty minutes they came back to life a bit, and actually put quite a significant amount of pressure on China. In the end, it didn’t produce any goals, but that was more to do with an outstanding performance from Peng Shimeng in China’s goal. But on another day, Spain could have won this 2-0 or 3-0.

What to make of all that really depends on what you think Spain’s fundamental problem is. If it’s a general lack of self confidence and belief, a 0-0 result against a pretty mediocre China team wasn’t the thing to unlock their potential. But if it’s an inability to actually take the shots that would turn all that possession into something useful, well they did actually demonstrate some progress here. That’s something they can build on.

Of course, there’s also a third problem, which is that Spain also suffers from the basic lack of a clinical finisher. They can create plenty but there’s never anyone there to put them away. And there frankly isn’t really anything they can do about that.

For China, this is pretty much the exact result they wanted. And they got it without doing much to hinder their chances in the round of 16. I anticipated a more physical performance from them, really looking to get in Spain’s faces (and shins, to be honest) and make life difficult. But they mostly didn’t play that way. Presumably, it’s because that style requires a lot of work, and they didn’t want to burn the energy. And that style also exposes you to a lot of risk of bookings – which could trigger suspensions of key players.

So instead they backed off, defended a bit deeper, and just hoped that they could hold out. It was actually quite surprising to see them play a fairly lackadaisical style, since energy and athleticism is kind of their whole thing. But it worked, albeit with a bit of luck.

None of this is to suggest that China was actively trying to throw the game. They were attacking, just not a whole lot, and not in any significant numbers. If one of the chances had gone in, I’m sure they would have celebrated a big win over a good team and taken their lumps in the knockout stage. But this was clearly not a team trying everything they could to win a game.

South Africa 0 – 4 Germany

I only caught tiny glimpses of this one, since it was on simultaneously with the China-Spain game. But from what I saw, Germany dominated, and maybe shut up a few of the critics who had started wondering if they were actually any good. At the same time, this was a rotated South Africa side, so Germany certainly should have been expected to dominate, so one doesn’t want to read too much into it.

They’ll certainly be happy to have notched a few more goals for some key players, but the really important thing is that they topped their group with the full 9 points, and secured themselves a spot on the other side of the bracket from the top two teams in the world. Well, probably. It does still depend on the US not losing to Sweden.

For South Africa, this wasn’t the final result they’d have hoped for, but for a first-time team in a very tough group, there were plenty of positives here. A great goal in their first game and a hard-fought game against China are both fantastic points to build from.

As with many new entrants to the tournament, it remains an open question whether this will actually be a foundation on which more support can be layered, or whether their institutions will let them down and the team will fail to scale these heights again.  We’re all certainly hoping for the former.

Nigeria 0 – 1 France

South Korea 1 – 2 Norway

I couldn’t watch either of these games because I was on a train with no wifi coming back from Le Havre. From what I can tell, they both more or less went according to expectations, with France dominating but unable to find a goal, and with a fairly even game between South Korea and Norway.

The big controversy was obviously the penalty that determined the game in Nigeria-France. I haven’t seen anything but screen shots, but this is yet another example of the problem we’ve been discussing ad nauseum. The rules of soccer are not well-equipped for the burdens we are placing upon them, and it’s causing a lot of problems. I won’t dwell any further on the point now, but it’s absolutely something we’re going to need to come back to again.

These results put France through in first place, as we all expected, meaning that they have fulfilled their part of the bargain and slotted themselves in place to set up that quarterfinal showdown with the US. They’ll still have to get through the round of 16, of course, and the US may yet slip elsewhere. But it’s looking more and more likely.

Norway are through in second place, and booked a round of 16 match against which of Australia, Italy, and Brazil finishes second in Group C.

And Nigeria have been very hard done-by. The rules have been followed, but in text far more than spirit. And now they’ll have to wait on results in other groups to see if they will advance. They still have a good chance, though not a great one. They are behind China, and will almost certainly trail whoever finishes third in Group C. That means they need two of the following three things to happen:

  • A draw in Scotland-Argentina
  • A draw in Cameroon-New Zealand, or a 1-0 victory for New Zealand
  • Chile to win by two goals or less, or draw, or lose (unless they lose by 15 goals)

These are predicated on the assumption (which I think is accurate) that would lose on the fair play tiebreaker if they end up equal on points, goal difference, and goals scored with any of these teams. But yeah, it’s a complicated process, and I’m sure the next couple days will not be fun for the Super Falcons.

Notes

– This was another great game from Mapi León, the Spanish center back who is a boatload of fun to watch play. Her aggressive ball-playing from the back would be incredibly dangerous on many teams, but it really works for Spain who love having an extra body in the midfield to start attacks. And she had quite a few excellent defensive stops and clearances that cut out potentially dangerous attacks. I called her out as a player to watch in my Group B preview and I’m feeling pretty good about that one.  

– I commented on this during the game, but one major issue with the China-Spain match is the system in which 16/24 teams advance. It’s an inelegant setup, and one which makes it a little too easy for teams to advance. Any system is going to end up with dead rubber matches, or games where both teams are happy with a draw, but they’re more common when three-quarters of a group can advance. The worldwide dispersal of talent probably isn’t there yet to truly justify going to 32 teams, but I’m not sure it would be that big of a drop, and 32 is the obvious, objectively correct size for a tournament. Again, the talent probably isn’t there yet, so you’d likely end up with a bunch of groups with the top two teams both beating the bottom two teams and going through easily, which would hardly be more interesting. But I don’t think we’re that far away from this being a reasonable move.

Tomorrow’s action

Two games tomorrow, which will sort out the fate of Group C. This is certainly the most volatile group, with real potential for any of the top three teams to finish in any order.

  • Jamaica – Australia. Jamaica are pretty much only playing for pride at this point, with no realistic path to the knockout rounds. But there has been a lot of positives so far, and they do have a foundation to build from. Australia will be looking to win, and win big. They could still top the group, and secure a spot in the easier half of the bracket, but it would take a big win, and some luck in the day’s other game.
  • Italy – Brazil. Italy have been potentially my favorite team of the tournament so far, and this will be another test for them. Any result and they top the group. Even a one-goal loss would potentially be enough, since Australia would need to score five on Jamaica to pass them. But a two-goal loss would drop them below the Brazilians, and could even leave them stuck in third place.

If I had to guess, Italy-Brazil feels like a draw, leaving Italy to top the group, Australia to finish second, and Brazil third. But I really wouldn’t be surprised at any order here.

 

Women’s World Cup Daily – June 12

Posted on by RJ Allen

June 12: Matchday 6

Nigeria 2 – 0 South Korea

So far, the World Cup has mostly been games with clear favorites trying to overcome plucky underdogs, with only one or two real exceptions. This game was something different: two solid teams, with different styles of play, and no obvious advantage. Before the tournament, I think I said that South Korea might just beat out Nigeria, but certainly not by much. Nigeria have good attacking options, but their direct approach didn’t seem particularly well-suited to handle the collective defensive work that South Korea could bring.

I therefore anticipated a cagey match, with South Korea controlling possession, and probing carefully, always with an eye toward protecting themselves from the counter. And that’s more or less what we actually got. The problem was that South Korea made a huge mess of one attack, with a missed clearance finding its way into their net for an own goal, and with a wonderful bit of strength and skill from Asisat Oshoala – who had up until that point actually been pretty terrible in the tournament.

For South Korea, this is just about the end of the road. Despite having a team with a fair bit of potential, they just weren’t able to find their rhythm. And now, given other results, they’ll either have to beat Norway by four goals (very unlikely), or beat Norway and make up 5 goals on Nigeria – who are playing France so it’s possible.

Germany 1 – 0 Spain

This was an enjoyable game in many respects, but also a very frustrating one. It was enjoyable because we got to watch two very talented teams start to build toward their true potential.

Spain possessed the ball well, unsurprisingly, but also managed to produce more incisive passes and direct movement than in their first match. It didn’t produce any goals, and they couldn’t really sustain it, but through the opening half hour, they looked like the version of Spain that we all tipped as a genuine dark horse.

Germany showed that they can play well without Dzsenifer Maroszán – albeit in a less exciting style. They were mostly content to cede possession, and to attack directly when they could force a transition. It was a fairly measured defensive performance – not much in the way of true pressing – but it was enough to keep Spain relatively at bay and generate enough chances. They were able to convert one of their two or three clear chances this produced – about par for the course – and it was enough to take home the three points.

It was a frustrating game, however, because we only saw glimpses. Spain produced some good work in the opening 30, but really struggled otherwise. The two Garcias looked lively in the buildup, but failed in either their touch or shot once they got into the box. Hermoso did some good creative work pushed back in the #10, but it’s not clear she did enough to justify taking her away from goal. Especially since the shift pushed Alexia Putellas out wide left where she was a relative non-factor. The underlying problems are all still there for Spain. They can possess the ball nicely, and there are flashes of brilliance. But it never quite comes together.

For Germany it was frustrating because this team has so much more potential. A squad with this kind of midfield talent shouldn’t struggle so much to keep the ball. I’m a big fan of Sara Däbritz (a Däbritz Believer, as I named myself today), but she was extremely restrained in this game. In fact, I tweeted this exact point:

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

And then approximately twenty seconds later, she scored:

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

Still, the goal had little to do with her creative work, and more to do with cleaning up a loose ball at the end of a nice attack down the right. Which is where the vast majority of Germany’s attacks went. They had clearly targeted Corredera as a weak link in the Spanish defense, and found a lot of success down that wing, with great work from Gwinn at right wing and Hendrich at right back.

The biggest concern for Germany going forward has to be their center backs. That’s nothing new. They were a problem against South Africa, and a clear weak link going into the tournament. But this game potentially showed how that weakness can be managed. The biggest problem is their movement in space and skill on the ball. With a high defensive line, those are both very exploitable. But they are both reasonably strong defenders with their backs to the wall. If allowed to set up deeper, they’ll be solid. That does, of course, mean conceding quite a bit more space. But this game showed that the German midfield is probably good enough to generally cover that ground. It will mean playing a lower-possession game, but that’s not necessarily a problem.

France 2 – 1 Norway

A wonderful game, possibly the most entertaining of the tournament so far. That’s partly because each of the goals was a delight in its own specific way. And partly because the level of play was exceptional throughout. France were clearly the better team over 90 minutes and certainly deserved their victory. But Norway were no pushovers. They did excellent work to police the midfield and keep from getting overrun, while their wide players struggled but (mostly) held out against the waves of attack.

The key match-up in the game was on the French right wing, where Diani showed off her pace and skill, regularly beating the defense. However, she never quite managed to make anything of the crosses she was able to send in. So despite the apparent danger, the eventual goal actually came from the other wing. And what a wonderful goal it was. It started with the French counterpress which recovered possession quickly. A quick pass to Henry found her with a mile of space in front of her to run at the Norwegian defense. As they closed ranks, Henry slid a quiet ball wide left to Majri who now had plenty of time to pick out her pass into the box. As the ball bounded in, Thiney held off her defender and shielded the ball, allowing it to reach Gauvin, who then buried her shot.

All together the whole move took maybe 13 or 14 seconds, and involved six or seven French players. It was a wonderful team goal.

Then came the bonkers Wendie Renard Own Goal, or ‘But Contre Son Camp’ (CSC) as I have learned they call it in France. It was a colossal mistake, of course, but also a demonstration of what happens when you force defenders to make point blank decisions while facing their own goal. Renard simply couldn’t know what was behind her and had to try to put the ball out. She missed, and the game was even.

But France eventually found their winner through a penalty. On that point, I won’t bother to rewrite what I already said on twitter, I’ll just link to it here, and reiterate the crucial point: defending in the box is supposed to be hard because we want to incentivize good attacking soccer. In the case of the handball rule, we’re probably going to need to change the rule or interpretation. In the case of these ‘would be fouls anywhere else’ calls, the change is going to come from defenders changing their behavior. And that will make soccer better.

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

For a brief moment, it seemed possible that France might not win this group. But they’re now virtually locked in. Which means they’ve held up their half of the bargain, and that fatal showdown between the US and France in Paris on June 28 remains very much in the cards. I know I’m excited!

Notes

– I’m going to try not to say much more about the US game against Thailand. It’s mostly there in the piece I wrote last night. But the key thing I want to come back to is: I’m not looking to cast blame. And I don’t think there’s any definitive right answer to these questions. But I just wish people (myself included) were more willing to take a look at what they take for granted, and consider whether it’s really something they want to endorse. I know most of the conversation on this subject has been standard talking head stuff, but I feel like a little bit has seeped through at the edges which really has me (and hopefully others) reflecting a bit on what responsibilities we all have to be good humans as well as sports fans.

– This piece from Kim McCauley convinced me that I probably understated the genuine strategic value of the US going all-out.

– If you’re not following Katja (@applessquabble), you’re really missing out on learning about the Scandinavian teams (and plenty of others as well).

– As my twitter followers know, I’ve become a huge Miranda Nild fan – she’s a Bay Area girl (go Bears!) who just played her first World Cup match against her home country. Check out my quick thread on her comments after the game last night. For a very emotional moment, she comes across really well.

Tomorrow’s action

I’m previewing these games over at Stars and Stripes FC tomorrow, so take a look over there at some point fairly early in the AM eastern time to see my thoughts.

But the tl;dr is that Australia-Brazil is a HUGE game, much more significant than we were anticipating, while South Africa – China is another between two teams with zero points who need a win. It’s in Paris, so that’s the one I’ll be at.

Women’s World Cup Daily – June 7

Posted on by RJ Allen

June 7: Matchday 1

I have a rundown of the game over at Stars and Stripes FC, which is where you should go for a discussion of the match itself.

I want to use my space here to throw out a few other random thoughts about the experience. First things first: this was (by far) the best-attended women’s soccer game I’ve ever been to. I haven’t been to any of the other big tournaments, so I don’t really have a comparison, but it felt intense. I know that most games in the tournament won’t have this kind of atmosphere, but wow, what a way to start.

In terms of the game itself, the conclusions are pretty obvious: France is really good, the support from the crowd was incredible, and that has to be terrifying for anyone who will play them.

Assorted thoughts:

– Corinne Diacre rules.

– VAR. Hope everyone is ready for it because it’s going to be wild! It was nice to get the first big VAR controversy out of the way in a game where it didn’t really matter. Even if it meant losing out on a truly lovely goal. But there are a couple keys things we should all keep in mind. First, all goals are automatically reviewed. What’s more, the judgment doesn’t defer to the result on the field in the way we’ve come to expect. That’s why this particular goal was overruled. That means: no need for ‘clear and convincing evidence.’ VAR will simply assess the facts and issue a judgment.

– I keep reading pieces from (reputable) international sources discussing the #USWNT which focus on Carli Lloyd as a key player. On the one hand, this is funny. But there’s a deeper point to make here. Even with the massive expansion in resources and availability of information, the scale of women’s soccer conversations is still quite small. Which means outside a very narrow band of engagement, even relatively good sources are kind of feeling their way through the dark. Under those conditions, you grab hold of the name that rings some bells. If the name is Christine Sinclair, you’re in luck – she really is still essential. But if the name is Carli Lloyd, you’re four years behind the game.

Thinking about this, I’ve also concluded that we should probably be equally skeptical of US-based sources (even good ones) who highlight mostly veterans as the key players for other squads. Is Caroline Seger actually that important anymore? Fran Kirby was the next big thing in 2015, but is she actually essential in 2019? In both cases, I think the answer is still yes. But can I really be sure? I’m certainly going to try to be careful about this more going forward in my own assessments.

– I swung by the ‘fan village’ at Les Halles in the center of Paris today. They’ve blocked off a huge chunk of real estate in a prime location, right next to the Église Saint-Eustache (see picture). It looks like it could be a pretty nice place to watch a game. If I have the time, I’ll definitely try to catch one there.

FIFA fan village - Les Halles

– The opening ceremony was a little goofy, but a nice bit of fun as well. You haven’t really lived until you’ve seen 300 soccer dancers in motion.

Tomorrow’s action:

  • Germany – China. Germany should win. But if they don’t, this group suddenly gets very interesting.
  • Spain – South Africa. Spain have loads of potential but need to show that they have figured out how to produce some goals. Starting out with the weakest team in the group is good news on that front. But if they can’t score in the first half, things could start to get pretty nervy.
  • Norway – Nigeria. This is a huge game for both teams. No one in this group should count on getting a result against France, so taking points off each other will be essential. Norway should win here, but Nigeria are no slouches.

I’ll be heading to Le Havre to see Spain and South Africa, and will be on the train during all of Norway-Nigeria, but should be able to see some of the other game.

Backline Chat: Welcome to a World Cup Year

Posted on by RJ Allen

Charles Olney (@olneyce): Hello, and welcome to our first Slack Chat of 2019. I hope everyone had a good new year, and is excited for a big year. To kick things off, I thought we should start with some fun stuff before turning to some of the more depressing elements in recent news. So…it’s a World Cup year! What is everyone most excited for in 2019?

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): I really am looking forward to watching the first time teams in the World Cup.

Allison Cary (@findingallison): I’m excited to see Scotland and I’m excited to see if France can keep playing quality football.

RJ Allen: Kim Little on the world’s stage? Yes, please.

Allison Cary: My sister is going to school in Scotland so it’s particularly exciting for this to be going on while she’s there.We’re hoping to catch a game in France.

Charles Olney: My honest answer is simply that I’m excited for the incredible opportunity to be in Europe this summer, which means I’ll be able to see a bunch of the World Cup in person. And I’m obviously excited for the chance to see the US make a deep run. But in terms of storylines, I think there’s just so much potential. Could France finally win a title? Could England or Australia take that next step? Could some of these new rising powers like Spain and Italy make the leap into the inner circle? Can some of the new teams put their mark on the tournament.

RJ Allen: I have a lot of questions about the World Cup but you’re right, there are some really amazing storylines.

Allison Cary: So much potential.

Charles Olney: I’d love to see the US win, but I have to admit that a new winner would probably make for a more interesting tournament.

RJ Allen: US, Norway, Germany, and Japan are the only winners. It would be nice to see another name added to the list.

Allison Cary: If France wins, per a previous slackchat, I’m obligated to move to France. I’m not opposed to that lol.

Luis Hernandez (@radioactivclown): I’m looking forward to the matches and if New Zealand can get out of the group. Plus how the NWSL will handle absences.

Charles Olney: If it were to be a first-time winner, who do people think is most likely? France is probably the obvious pick, especially given their recent victory over the US, but are people still high on some of the other big teams?

RJ Allen: I would have guessed Australia two weeks ago.

Allison Cary: I would say Australia but I’m not sure with the latest coaching drama.

RJ Allen: Now? I don’t know. France or maybe England? I’d love to see Canada get one for Sinc.

Allison Cary: England maybe? I’m not sure if they’re ready to go all the way.

RJ Allen: I really would like a team other than the US to win. I think it’s better for soccer world wide if other teams can take down the US now and again.

Allison Cary: I agree with RJ.

Charles Olney: I was looking over the betting odds this morning, and put up a tweet. I have to say that the odds look a little off to me, but I’m curious if others think so.

RJ Allen: I do not think these betting books know Germany’s state of affairs right now.

Charles Olney: I still think the German team has a lot of potential, but yeah, I certainly don’t think recent evidence suggests they belong in a tier with the US and France.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I’m also not that confident in Japan.

RJ Allen: This is, to me at least, proof that while betting markets are not great now, they might drive some change. The house wants to keep their money. So they are going to need some better stats and better people predicting these things. They might drive that area.

Charles Olney: I think it’s interesting that Spain is right up there. I really enjoyed watching them against the US this week, but I felt like they were still a little under the radar. I wonder whether some of that is people transposing their judgments about the quality of the men’s team.

RJ Allen: Brazil being so high might be the same thing.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I think Spain could make a decent run, but I don’t see them going all the way. They looked better than expected against the US, but not quite there yet.

RJ Allen: Can we all agree if North Carolina was in the World Cup (at full roster) they would be on the top 5 in the list?

Charles Olney: Definitely. I was actually thinking about them and Lyon and how they’d fare if they attended the World Cup. And I think it’s a good sign for the game in general that we’re getting close to the point where the very highest level of soccer is at the club level rather than the international level. We’re not quite there yet, but the tipping point might be coming soon.

Charles Olney: Okay, so turning the attention toward the US in particular, I’m curious if anyone has any broader thoughts about the recent friendlies. Anything to worry about there, or just a normal way to kick off the year?

Luis Hernandez: No worries for the first two matches after months being off for me.

RJ Allen: I think a lot of the worry about the games are going to end up not being founded. They have been off for a few months, it’s their pre season, a lot of players aren’t playing or have been hurt. If they look like this in May I will worry. But right now, no.

Allison Cary: I’m not worried about the U.S. Maybe it’s just me, but I learned more about the U.S. opponents in these two friendlies than I did the U.S.

Luis Hernandez: I enjoyed how Spain moved the ball. Didn’t know they were skilled to do that for their team.

RJ Allen: I agree with Allison. I think we learned a lot about France.

RJ Allen: We had no real answer for Henry. And while Horan should be able to match her, this game she very much did not.

Charles Olney: One impression I got from talking with the French players and coaches at that game: it mattered to them. A lot. They really wanted to lay down a marker, and it showed in the performance. That’s a great sign for a team that’s often struggled a bit to handle the pressure. I think they’re ready this time.

RJ Allen: That to me is a big deal. France doesn’t seem to really fear the US, at least in that match.

Allison Cary: Yeah, which caught my eye. France seemed really ready to prove that they belonged in that top tier.

Charles Olney: The US may still end up beating them in the quarterfinals, and we may end up talking about yet another France team that underperformed. But right now, I feel as confident about France as I ever have.

Allison Cary: They weren’t intimidated. They played their game. If they do that in June… they’re dangerous.

RJ Allen: Also, can we talk about the packaging of the games themselves for a moment? They were not really featured games. They weren’t cash cows. They were in Europe. The game against Spain was in the middle of a day. That feels big for the US in general.

Charles Olney: Yeah, that’s a great point. The US has often treated friendlies more as opportunities to make money than anything else. And they arguably still have a few of those coming up later in the spring. But on the whole, this seems like a team that’s keeping their eyes on the prize. And that’s a good thing.

Charles Olney: So, that’s a lot of positives. But I do want to focus our attention on two other stories that have been dominating the news lately, which are less encouraging. One is the confusing and troubling story surrounding the coaching change at Australia. The other is the persistent moving disaster that is Sky Blue FC. Let’s start local and discuss the unfortunate team in New Jersey.

RJ, you had some reporting that just came out about events there. And we’ve had a couple other stories recently about the continuing problems. At this point I almost don’t know where to start.

RJ Allen: So I have had a lot of conversations in the last few months with people that are no longer with Sky Blue. About a week about I spoke to someone still much more connected.

As I think you and I have spoken about on the 123rd Minute, Reddy had largely escaped conversation. And this person made it clear that is a mistake.

Charles Olney: I almost feel like we spent so much time in 2018 talking about the problems at the management level that we all really wanted to construct a narrative where the coach and the players were innocent victims just trying to survive in a cruel world. But your reporting makes it seem like Reddy maybe should have come in for a lot more criticism at the time. It was certainly strange to see a team that honestly had a lot of talented players do SO wretchedly bad week in and week out. And it was peculiar how the coach never really seemed to come in for the kind of criticism we’d expect.

RJ Allen: The information I have really does paint a picture of someone who sucked in as much power as they were able, due in large part of the issues in management, and had a hard time using that for the benefit of the players.

Charles Olney: It does strike me as a situation where it would be incredibly hard to succeed. So it’s possible that in more favorable conditions, Reddy might have sailed along just fine. So I certainly hope that none of this ends up taking away attention from the major problems at the top. But it’s definitely important to look at all parts of the picture.

On that note, as we are talking here it’s been two weeks since the draft. There, Tony Novo promised significant news on progress would come ‘within 30 days.’ Is anyone holding out hope that we’ll actually see something meaningful there?

Allison Cary: Nope.

Charles Olney: And if not, do we think Sky Blue is going to actually make it to the end of the season with enough players to fill a starting XI every game?

RJ Allen: No.

Allison Cary: No.

RJ Allen: They might have enough players because as we all know people dream of playing pro. There are enough ex NCAA players in New Jersey to fill in an XI. Look at Sky Blue’s roster in the past. They have always counted on local players. More than most.

Charles Olney: I do still hold out a little bit of hope that the remaining players manage to band together and fight this out, like you’d see in a classic sports movie where the underdogs find a way to show everyone their spirit. And there IS still a decent amount of talent theoretically on that roster. But as each week goes on, I find it harder and harder to be positive.

RJ Allen: My question is though, what does that buy? If they win games, what does that buy other than some cover to keep the team going? It might make the players a bit happier but all it does it prolong the fate that is written on the walls.

Allison Cary: Yeah, perpetuating a bad system isn’t necessarily good. Unfortunately, Sky Blue struggling along could do more harm than good.

RJ Allen: And I admit I am a bit pessimistic about all of this. But still.

Charles Olney: At this point, I think the best case scenario is a modestly positive year, which will allow everyone to feel good about moving on during the next offseason when they’re pushed out of the league…or when someone who will make real changes comes in to buy them out. But I agree: doing just well enough to survive without making any real changes might be even worse than ‘raze the ground and then salt the earth after.’

Charles Olney: Alright, so another troubling story: Alen Stajcic, the coach of Australia, was let go under the cloud of a recent report describing ‘toxic’ conditions on the team. It’s a very strange story with quite a lot of it hidden from view. I’m curious if anyone has any clear thoughts about what it all means.

RJ Allen: I think the federation has handled this horribly. Even if he was released with 100% cause, the federation makes it look like a hit job in a way that makes them look worse.

Charles Olney: Can’t argue with that. It does seem like, based on the information they seem to have, firing him was the right call. But the manner in which it’s been done has been very rough.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I don’t feel like I have enough of the story to make a clear judgment. But it’s been weird.

Charles Olney: Which doesn’t really do any favors to anyone.

RJ Allen: Players seem caught off guard too. Which is never a great look.

Allison Cary: Yeah, their statements haven’t been a position reflection on the federation.

Charles Olney: Which makes me wonder about those players who contributed statements about the toxic environment. Are they just hanging back in silence, feeling like they were hung out to dry by this process? Are they feeling pressure to say positive things now, because that same toxic environment is lingering, as many of the players who liked Stajcic have said positive things?

It would be particularly cruel to make it even harder for players to be honest and clear about how they’ve been treated because the Federation doesn’t want to air their own dirty laundry.

RJ Allen: Without the details of what a “toxic environment” is, I’m not sure what to think. Does it mean not welcoming newer players or players without the pro polish to them? Does it mean abuse? Without details it’s left up to us to put name to it. Which is never good.

Allison Cary: Yeah, especially considering the England scandal is still fresh in a lot of people’s minds, it’s not hard to assume the worst.

Charles Olney: There have been some more details in some of the media reports that have come out after. Things like abusive comments, body shaming, harassment that’s unrelated to on-field performance. All of which does sound like a really negative culture. But none of those are official statements, so we still have to wonder. And yes, I totally agree with Allison that the context of the Mark Sampson affair absolutely can’t be forgotten.

RJ Allen: Seeing more senior players supporting Stajcic just makes it more difficult for everyone. Having Kerr and LDV and so on look like they are blind sided is going to make a lot of the fans question this all. Plus an assistant quit in protest.

Charles Olney: Alright, I think we’ll probably have more to say on this subject as we potentially get more information. But for now, why don’t we turn back to some more positives, and discuss the NWSL. We have the draft, and some trades to mull over. And I’m curious what y’all think about where teams stand going into 2019. Who has made progress? Anyone who looks like a good bet to break into the top 4? Anyone who made the playoffs last year that you think is in danger of dropping out?

Bearing in mind that this will be a strange year, where many of the top teams will be losing huge portions of their roster for half of the season or more. Is there anyone that will be relatively unharmed by the World Cup that looks poised to take advantage of that opportunity?

RJ Allen: North Carolina is going to win the league by > 9 points. NTers or no. That team will win on the underdog story all their “best” players are gone.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I agree.

RJ Allen: I think Chicago has a really good shot this year. Seattle with Groom will be fun too. And now that we’re in this part of the season I can’t wait for the Laura Harvey mega trade.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I like Utah.

Charles Olney: That’s definitely the thing that’s most been missing this offseason.

Allison Cary: Definitely.

Charles Olney: I’m personally very torn on Houston. I think there’s a decent chance that they suffer a bit of regression to the mean this year, dropping down a bit simply because they probably overperformed their talent a bit last year. On the other hand, they’ll have a roster that’s comparatively less hit by the World Cup. And maybe they actually take a step forward. If so, they could actually even sneak into a playoff spot. I’d certainly love to see a new team make the playoffs – whether Houston or Utah. It’s always good for a new set of fans to have a playoff team to support.

RJ Allen: If Daly is there all year, and I don’t think she will be, and Mewis the Elder is back, they have a really good shot.

Charles Olney: Anyone have any thoughts about Washington? Their new coach seems to think very highly of himself. Anyone believe that he’ll be able to back it up?

Allison Cary: Not really. I just haven’t seen anything promising.

RJ Allen: I think that he is going to have some :fire: quotes from post games.

Charles Olney: I’d like to believe they have a plan. But…it’s a little hard to see how it’s supposed to work. I’ll keep my fingers crossed for them, I guess.

Alright, any final thoughts on the world of women’s soccer before we wrap up for the day? Any other stories that have piqued your interest?

RJ Allen: I am so glad we got to see soccer from the US. I missed it.

Allison Cary: The Afghan women’s national team story has gone a little quiet. It’s hard not to feel pessimistic there, but I think it’s important to just mention it.

RJ Allen: I agree.

Charles Olney: Absolutely. There’s just so much depressing news out there. It can feel overwhelming trying to keep up with it all.

Allison Cary: Absolutely.

Charles Olney: That’s kind of a grim note to finish on, but I think that’s alright. There’s plenty to be excited about too, of course, but it’s important to always remember how much work there still is to do.

Alright, thanks everyone for participating, and thanks to the folks out there for reading. We’ve got a big year coming up and are excited to get to share it with you.

France Beats USA: What Does This Mean For France?

Posted on by RJ Allen

On Saturday, the United States traveled to Le Havre, France to face the host nation of the 2019 Women’s World Cup in a friendly. The U.S. went through 2018 without losing a single match, but they started the new year with a 3-1 defeat against France.

Many have looked at this game from the American perspective. But what does this victory mean for the French national team?

France has been one of the top ranked teams in the world for a long time, but they have failed to win a major tournament. They are considered strong contenders for the 2019 World Cup title, due to their skill level and the added bonus of being a host nation. But the same was true for their last three major tournaments, and each time they fell out in the quarterfinals. That’s a trend they’ll be hoping to break this year.

The French started Saturday’s game with a goal in the ninth minute scored by Kadidiatou Diani. They were able to stop the U.S. from controlling the game and executing their preferred style of play. But Christen Press got some chances for the United States, and France’s lead felt shaky until the 56th minute. It started with a beautiful pass from Marion Torrent that cut through the U.S. defense. Diani got on the other end of the ball and took a shot from a difficult angle that went over Alyssa Naeher and into the net. When Marie Katoto bagged another goal for France in the 78th minute, the French knew they were starting their year off with a win.

There were many positives for the French to take away from this match. First, they scored three goals on fourteen total shots. Finishing has always been an issue for the French national team, but Diani and Katoto stepped up to make sure France did enough to get the win. Additionally, the crowd in Le Havre was sold out and definitely favored the French side. It was a positive glimpse of what to expect this summer.

Before the game, team captain Amandine Henry spoke with the media. “We know that we can play the big teams,” she said. “We know that we have to be mentally ready, and we are. We also know that we have to play from the first to the 90th minute. We are definitely more mature now.”

My own biggest takeaway from the match is the Henry is right. Whether its the finishing, the dominance, or the boost from the home crowd, France proved on Saturday that they are amongst the best in the world. They can face the big teams and no one should count them out.

In the World Cup host nation, they are hoping that their win over the United States is just the start to a legendary 2019 campaign.