Tag: Women’s World Cup

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.

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 25

Posted on by Backline Soccer

Round of 16: Day 4

Two fantastic games today to finish up the octofinals. Tomorrow is a day off, and then things get even more intense. If that’s possible.

Italy 2 – 0 China

The first half of this game was a huge amount of fun, and could easily have seen three or four goals. Italy were in firm control for the opening 20 minutes and really should have found more than just the one they got. But as the minutes ticked on, China appeared to settle in while Italy started to drag significantly—looking very much like a team that had played four games in less than two weeks, at the tail end of a long and grueling season.

I was particularly impressed with China’s control of play in the middle of the pitch. After an extremely physical (arguably vicious) performance against Germany, they appeared to back off considerably in their other group games. Against South Africa, they showed excellent ball movement and thoroughly controlled the game. But against Spain, they just looked timid. So I was certainly wondering how they would come into this match. What they provided was a good mixture of their strengths. They were certainly physical, but in a far more controlled fashion. During that period of dominance, they simply wouldn’t let Italy get a second on the ball.

Unfortunately for them, they simply couldn’t translate a lot of potential into a final product. Repeatedly, a delightful searching ball would find a Chinese forward in space. She would turn, execute an excellent dribble, and all that was needed was one final incisive touch or quick pass to set up a shot. But instead of doing anything, she would simply stand on the ball, giving an Italian defender time to dispossess her.

To some extent, that’s simply a credit to the Italian defense, which has only grown stronger with each game. The individual players in the backline are good, but the chemistry between them also seems to be growing. It’s a cliché, but the Italian defense is solid and extremely well organized.

At the same time, I also really wonder about the training and coaching system in China. Because watching these players, it’s clear that they have boatloads of ability, and some excellent soccer instincts. But as soon as they need to make the fateful decision to create a chance, they would freeze and the chance would evaporate. When one player does that, it’s possible that it’s simply a flaw in her game. But when many players do the same thing, it feels like a problem in the coaching.

In the end, that’s what took China out of this tournament. They demonstrated a lot of potential, but lacked a coherent structure through which they could apply their ability.

For Italy, the incredible journey continues. They weren’t particularly great today, but it was enough to get the job done. They’ll face a significantly harder task on Saturday in Valenciennes. And given how much they seemed to be struggling with exhaustion here, it’s hard to think they’ll be fully ready to go in less than four days. But a lot of their journey has been improbable.

Netherlands 2 – 1 Japan

One of the finest games in the tournament. Two technically adept teams working at high speed, passing the ball relentlessly, attacking with pace and precision. It was glorious to watch.

But it was also one of the most frustrating games of the tournament. Japan were marvelous and unloaded an assault on the Dutch goal in the second half, but just couldn’t find a way through. And then, in the dying moments, it was the Dutch who scored a heartbreaker, on one of those ‘technically by the rules but come on’ handballs.

It was exceptionally cruel to Japan, who played as well tonight as they have in years. Sugita was incredible. Iwabuchi created chance after chance. Hasegawa scored a wonderful goal. The defense stopped up the Dutch quite well. It was just wonderful all around. But soccer isn’t fair, and so they’re going home.

It felt particularly unfair on Japan because they did everything right coming into this game. Rather than sticking with an aging squad after 2015, they cleaned shop and started fresh. That meant a lot of losses and tough games, but it helped them arrive in France ready and revitalized. Then, after a bad performance against Argentina, Asako Takakura reshuffled her lineup, and turned everything around.

https://twitter.com/lgbtqfc/status/1143621366870134785

Compare that to the Netherlands who have rested on their laurels and aggressively refused to make necessary changes. They rode Lieke Martens and Shanice van de Sanden to the Euros in 2017, and so they’re sticking with them here, despite extremely mediocre performances. Martens certainly made her contribution today with that lovely backheel goal, but was pretty nonexistent otherwise. And van de Sanden was a caricature of her worst habits. Only once she was subbed off for Beerensteyn (free Lineth Beerensteyn!) did the Dutch finally get some useful action down the right flank – including the play that eventually produced the penalty, which came from Beerensteyn driving in to make something happen instead of sending in yet another helpless cross.

But that’s the way it goes. Sometimes the right approach loses and the wrong one wins. That’s soccer.

For all that they’ve failed to find their top gear (or really, anything past second gear if we’re being honest), the Dutch are through to the quarterfinals. And while my love for Italy knows no bounds, the reality is that this is probably the easiest draw for that round. So even without truly finding their form, they could make the semifinals. Heaven help their opponents if they actually manage to put it all back together.

Notes

– We have to fix this ‘any ball that touches your arm at all is a penalty’ rule. We need to fix it yesterday.

– I want to buy an Italy Bonansea shirt, but as far as I can tell it’s basically impossible for me to do so. Fans at this tournament have to stand in lines a hundred people deep to buy merchandise. They aren’t selling alcohol. Matches are listed as sold out, when there are actually plenty of seats available. It sure feels like the soccer elites have left a massive amount of money on the table in the past month. That’s how sexist they are. Just about their favorite thing in the world is money, but it’s still not enough of a lure to get them to properly organize this event.

– It’s hilarious to me how differently the media in England, the US, and France have responded to underwhelming performances from their respective countries. I feel like it says a lot about each country.

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

– I was not enthusiastic about Jill Ellis’s ‘tactical’ decisions last night. For an even better piece on that same point, check out this one from Kim McCauley.

– This piece from Stephanie Yang is important, though unpleasant, reading.

– Jeff Kassouf and Kieran Theivam’s The Making of the Women’s World Cup is out today in the US. If you haven’t already ordered it, definitely do it now. It’s great, and will make for some excellent reading while you wait for more games in the tournament. My full review is here.

– I was busy for most of the day with my conference, which has been great. Picture above is of the Newcastle city wall, built during the Middle Ages. It was breached by the Scots in their invasion during the English Civil War. So that’s fun.

The United States have enough to beat Spain. Barely.

Posted on by Backline Soccer

I have, at times, been a Jill Ellis apologist. But not today. This was about as poorly-managed game as you can imagine someone putting together, and came agonizingly close to bringing the whole US tournament crashing down.

It’s not Ellis’s fault that several of her key players were terrible, but it’s absolutely her fault that she persisted in playing them as the minutes rolled on, and on, and on. And it’s also on her to do anything to change up the game once it becomes clear that the team is no longer clicking. And it’s on her to get her team’s heads in the right place when they’re getting rattled by the other team’s physical play.

The vaunted US attack is not fit, and it’s a big problem

Coming into the match, I had some real questions about the fitness and form of Megan Rapinoe and Alex Morgan. Absolutely nothing about this match put my mind at ease. They both looked to be seriously struggling.

Rapinoe lost the ball a good half dozen times in the opening half hour, and was regularly shown the business by Marta Corredera. In fact, Spain seemed to be deliberately shading their defense toward the left, hoping to get extra bodies in front of Tobin Heath, and actively encouraging the US to play toward Rapinoe. It absolutely worked.

Morgan, once again, was clearly not 100%. Her touch was poor and her movement sluggish. The US produced fewer dangerous balls than usual, but there were still plenty. Normally, Morgan would latch onto the end of them. But today she simply wasn’t there. Against a Spain team that rode their luck (and trusted a referee who seemed reluctant to get out her whistle) with aggressive physical play, Morgan looked very much not up for it. One of the key changes in her game over the past couple years has been a more vigorous physical presence. We saw none of that today.

This was a game screaming out for Christen Press and/or Carli Lloyd – who both eventually came on in the final waning minutes, long after they would have had the chance to make a difference.

The US got their goals, but they were both from pretty soft penalties. I wouldn’t call either a mistake – those were fouls, albeit pretty weak ones. But for this US team to create so little is a reason for genuine concern. And it’s absolutely time to ask some serious questions about whether Rapinoe and Morgan are really ready to go against France.

The US defense has significant holes, and it’s a big problem

Further back, the US got reasonably good games from the midfielders, but they looked nowhere near as crisp as in previous games. Lavelle and Mewis both seemed to press a lot, trying for perfect passes that didn’t come off, rather than working it a bit more cooly. 

And in the defense, once again, the left side was a real danger area. Becky Sauerbrunn is a legend, but she just doesn’t have the pace of precision anymore. Crystal Dunn seems to get worse at defending with each passing week. And she also isn’t managing to get involved with the attack, which is the whole point of playing her!

And then there’s Alyssa Naeher, who was shaky on balls over the top, and far more than shaky with the ball at her feet. Spain pounced on the one gift that was given to them, but couldn’t quite pry things open to get another. But it’s certainly not hard to imagine a Diani or Cascarino from France having a field day down the left.

Spain raised their game, and gave the US some big things to think about

For Spain, this was an excellent performance, and one that showed why people were talking about them seriously as a dark horse coming into the tournament. They held the US largely at bay, losing on two garbage penalties, and were able to build some decent attacks as well. They were able to do it through flexibility and a clear collective vision.

They worked very hard to keep a coherent and tight defensive shape in the middle, trying to shift bodies left to protect against Tobin Heath but generally waiting for the US to come at them. They also leaned pretty heavily into physical defensive play. Which really shouldn’t have worked – the US is the strongest and fastest team in the tournament and no strangers to a crunching tackle (they all play in the NWSL for god’s sake). But surprisingly, it was very successful. The US looked frustrated, and simply weren’t able to find their rhythm after a strong opening 20 minutes. For much of the second half, they looked like they were more interested in appealing to the referee for foul calls that weren’t coming than they were in actually trying to win the game.

I’ve commented previously on my feelings about referees who permit violent play to continue, and I certainly would have liked to see a tighter hand on the till here. But this was not like the China performance against Germany. Spain were going in, but they weren’t going over the top with it. 

In the attack, Spain did not rely nearly as heavily on possession as expected. As the game progressed, they did start to hold the ball a bit more. But generally their attacks were direct, and involved putting the ball in the air far more than usual. 

Again, this seemed to reflect some good scouting. The US backline is slow and prone to errors when asked to chase quick defenders down. And we definitely saw that here. By the end of the match, Spain’s aerial efforts were a bit too speculative, and the US began to settle in deep and handle them fairly easily. But for much of the game, they seemed out of sorts.

The US are still favorites. But this is a wide open tournament

In the end, the US did enough to go through. But it was a very weak performance from a team that was being talked about just last night as the obvious and virtually inevitable winner of the tournament. They absolutely could still win this thing, and it would be just as big a mistake to overinterpret one mediocre game as it was to overinterpret a couple good games against bad teams. 

Every team at this tournament has flaws. But that’s not actually the interesting story. Because the only reason those flaws really matter is that many teams at this tournament are good enough to exploit those flaws. The US is still the best in the world, but the world is a heck of a lot closer. Spain showed that today. And France may well show it again on Friday.

Three Results Reviewed: This World Cup Has Been A Blast So Far

Posted on by RJ Allen

Sometimes I forget how much I love soccer. It sounds strange but after recording and editing podcasts and writing pieces and editing those and editing the works of others, it can sometimes feel like a tad bit of a slog.

And then I started watching this World Cup. And all of that slog was washed away like a summer rain washing the pollen out of the air.

The World Cup has been, by and large, pretty damn amazing. We’ve gotten to see historic goals, historic points, players doing fun things, teams seeing their nation’s colors in the stands. And there are still 40 plus games to go.

There have been some great results so far. Let’s take a look at the three that have some big impacts.

Argentina 0 – 0 Japan

Argentina has about as much support from their federation as Pope Clement VII had from King Henry VIII. That’s to say support in the negative direction.

But they did it. Argentina held for 90 minutes against a young Japanese team. And they didn’t just hold, didn’t just bunker for 90 minutes and try to hold on by the skin of their teeth. They played soccer. They fought. They showed a country which hadn’t really ever been allowed to see this team due to federation neglect that they were ready for the world’s stage.

They shouldn’t have to prove themselves to their federation. They should be supported as each men’s national team and women’s national team should be. It frankly sucks that they have to show they can compete before they will get the support they need to go out and win games.

But in this game they did show they aren’t going to just roll over after making it to the biggest stage in the world. They have fight. And that was pretty neat to see.

Italy 2 – 1 Australia

It’s not really a secret that I am a fan of the Australian team. I find them fun to watch, outside of a backline that leaves me questioning why bad things happen to good people.

But watching Italy and Barbara Bonansea leading the charge out there was magnificent.

Italy played like they knew the world was watching, and they wanted to put on a show for each and every eyeball on them. Bonansea scored the latest non extra time goal at 90+5 to take 1 point to 3 for the Italians and really put Australia against the ropes for the rest of the group stage. Now matches Australia may not have had to think about all that hard are life and death. And Italy in their green, red and white, have a shot at not only leaving the group but doing so on top.

Margherita pizza all around.

France 4 – 0 South Korea

One of these matches is not like the others, I get it.

But France, sweet France did the damn thing to set off the World Cup on the right foot.

France looked like they knew this was their event to win. And really, it is. And while some teams (Canada) have gone in to events and let that weight crush them, it looks like France is going in to the event and letting it lift them up. They have a chance to create a new narrative for themselves as a team that can win the damn thing and not just a super talented team that chokes. The idea of them as the lovable team that can’t get it done might finally be put to rest.

And knowing they are on a crash course for a meeting with the US in the quarterfinals only makes watching them more exciting.

What are your favorite moments?

Backline Chat: The World Cup Is Here!

Posted on by RJ Allen

Charles Olney (@olneyce): Hello, and welcome to our pre-World Cup Backline chat. Given time zones, this is probably the last of these I’ll be able to do for a while, but I’m excited to get some conversation in before the big event kicks off.

But, before we jump into the international talk, let’s cover the NWSL, since that gives us some actual results to work with. So, to open things up: everyone who had the Washington Spirit in first place at the World Cup break, raise your hand.

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): No one saw this coming. At all.

Charles Olney: I will admit that I have missed both of their recent victories, so I’m not in a good position to comment, but it sure seems like it hasn’t been a fluke. They really are playing very well.

Creating a lot of discomfort for those of us who are still angry about the lack of response to the abuse allegations from the offseason, which RJ discussed very compellingly in a recent piece.

RJ Allen: The league has to do something when it comes to Burke or that will become the media narrative around this team. Honestly part of the reason they haven’t is they are so under staffed. Which is just horrible.

Allison Cary (@findingallison): Yeah. But I agree that any success they have will be overshadowed by this until the NWSL and the Washington Spirit take some substantial action.

Charles Olney: I would love to be able to focus on the players, who deserve a lot of credit. And I’d love to be able to have a normal conversation about what Burke has brought as a coach (whatever it is, it seems to be working), but it’s hard to dig into either with all that floating over.

RJ Allen: It’s very ‘other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?’

Charles Olney: That said, does anyone have any insight into how they’ve turned things around? Is this just them waking up from a dream and forgetting all about 2018, and this is where they ‘should’ always have been given all the young talent they stockpiled?

RJ Allen: I think having so many young, hungry players who are willing to seemingly run through walls for each other really helps. They remind me a bit of the old Western New York Flash team in 2016.

Charles Olney: It certainly seems to help that Andi Sullivan is finally back playing really well. But there’s also a cohesion to the whole team that goes beyond any one player. I’ll absolutely be curious to see if they can sustain it. The WNY comparison is a great one. That team was also maybe a year ahead of schedule, but they didn’t care about timelines.

RJ Allen: Ashley Hatch looks really solid this year as well. And her having a big year is key.

Allison Cary: Yeah, Hatch has been a standout. And of course having Bledsoe in goal is a big help too.

Charles Olney: Elsewhere in the league, I feel like I’m getting some whiplash. Chicago looked like they were going to dominate the break, now they’re in crisis. Utah was flying high and now is stumbling badly. Houston and Seattle keep throwing away points…or maybe finding points. North Carolina look mortal. Is this just what we should expect for the whole break?

Allison Cary: It’s all chaos. Welcome to the NWSL.

RJ Allen: You know who are good soccer players? Christen Press and Sam Kerr. You know are away from their club teams right now? Christen Press and Sam Kerr. Oversimplification, yes. But when you pull so many starters out it is just brutal.

Allison Cary: But then isn’t it brutal for their opponents too?

RJ Allen: Some teams have lost bigger pieces and some teams have stepped up. We see it every World Cup and Olympic year. Some teams have deeper benches.

Charles Olney: At the moment, Portland feels like the exception. On paper, Chicago looked far stronger this weekend, but Portland just blew them away in the opening half hour and then held on nicely for the win. Was that just finally being back home in a great atmosphere? Are they set for a reversion to the mean, too? Or do they have something special?

RJ Allen: I think playing in Portland after such a long time not being able to was a huge boost, yes. But Purce and Charley were really fantastic that match.

Charles Olney: My gut says that with lower overall quality, there is just more room for wacky results and we shouldn’t read too much into anything. But maybe one team (Portland perhaps) just reels off five or six wins and opens up a huge lead.

RJ Allen: Right now chaos reigns.

Charles Olney: It certainly has been exciting seeing some of these marginal players get a chance and REALLY take advantage of it.

RJ Allen: Bethany Balcer, Rookie of the Year.

Allison Cary: Amen.

Charles Olney: DiBiasi, though! And Sam Staab!

Allison Cary: Yeah, DiBiasi was also a standout to me.

RJ Allen: They will be nominated, for sure.

Charles Olney: After a very down year for rookies in 2018, it’s been great seeing new faces doing so well this year.

Alright, what about the other side of the table. We’ve got seven teams within six points of each other at the top, and then two teams that have COMBINED for three points through fifteen games. Is there any hope at all?

Allison Cary: Nope.

RJ Allen: Nope.

Charles Olney: We’re missing Luis, our resident Orlando optimist, but I’m pretty sure he would say…”nope”

Allison Cary: Orlando hasn’t shown any signs of life. Sky Blue has had better flashes, but…

RJ Allen: I don’t know what you do with Orlando. They were bad ever when they had their full team.

Allison Cary: Yeah. I think there’s some deeper stuff going on there.

Charles Olney: One conclusion that could be drawn is that Tom Sermanni actually did a lot to hold them together as much as he did. Alternatively, he let things get so out of hand that they were unfixable even after they got someone new?

RJ Allen: I understand that you have to give Marc Skinner time but the team is just not playing well under him. Orlando once bet the farm on Morgan and there is a very real chance she nopes out when LAFC comes in and they will have nothing.

Charles Olney: But it’s weird how quickly Orlando went from having a solid roster that people insisted on calling a top-tier roster to having a mediocre roster that people think is pure garbage. Because, it’s not great, but it’s also not THAT bad.

RJ Allen: The roster is playing THAT bad though. The players themselves are mostly NWSL level.

Charles Olney: But they really did over-leverage themselves based on Morgan and Marta, and that’s really coming back to bite them now. There’s no denying that.

Allison Cary: There are a decent amount of international and national team players on that team. But no one was performing even before everyone left for the WC.

RJ Allen: And they aren’t getting butts in seats either. Which is why I think they did it partly in the first place.

Charles Olney: In conclusion: I hope they turn it around somehow. but ‘turn it around’ is relative. I just want them and Sky Blue to start pulling closer to the pack.

Charles Olney: Okay, let’s turn our attention to the World Cup, which is starting this week.  It’s a huge event, obviously, and there’s a million pieces to unpack. But what are your top level thoughts about the tournament as a whole?

RJ Allen: I really hope it’s fun. The women’s game just needs a really fun world event where some wild shit happens and a lot of great goals are scored.

Allison Cary: Agreed.

Charles Olney: I think that this tournament has a chance to be a genuine turning point in a way that we’ve never quite seen. But I’m not going to demand that it be a revolution in order to call it a success. As you say, it will definitely be fun, and that will be enough even if that’s ‘all’ we get.

Allison Cary: It definitely feels special. It feels like the tournament we’re gonna look back on and say “that was it.”

RJ Allen: It feels like it may be 1999 but for more than just the US.

Allison Cary: That would be magical. I want all the new teams to do as well as possible, especially teams like Jamaica and Chile and Argentina. It will mean so much to even be able to go back with goals, even more if they can get a win or two.

Charles Olney: I got a chance to talk with Kieran Thievam for the podcast this week, and that’s the comparison he made. 1999 was a big deal here, but not really anywhere else. But this could be that tournament for five or six teams.

RJ Allen: I think having it in France helps. It’s close together with other countries who can reasonably just decide to show up. I understand not always having it in Europe but logistically it is really nice.

Charles Olney: Definitely. I was looking at the Dutch group schedule, for example, and they’ve got two games in the northeast of France. That’s just a 3-4 hour train ride from the Netherlands. I bet there is a LOT of orange in the crowd for those. And there’s potential there for a lot of teams. The English traveling contingent is going to be big. And if this is a breakthrough tournament for, say, Italy and Spain, there’s a LOT of folks nearby who might decide on a whim to make a trip.

RJ Allen: I love the idea of the Aussies hosting it in 2023 but it would be a travel struggle moving place to place and just getting there. Being able to just decide to go to a game the day of, tickets not withstanding, is amazing.

Charles Olney: One slightly negative thing is that there doesn’t seem to have been much marketing in France itself, which means there will probably be a major difference between games. Some with 50,000, others with 5000. That feels like a missed opportunity.

RJ Allen: It does. You would think they would want the money that having games with 50,000 people bring in if nothing else. But hey sexism is real.

Charles Olney: Alright, dialing in a little bit on the games themselves, who are we pulling for, outside of the obvious?

RJ Allen: I would like Scotland to win some games and get to the knocks outs. Please and thank you.

Charles Olney: I’m definitely on Team Jamaica, and if RJ doesn’t mind the company, I’ll join her on the Scotland bandwagon

Allison Cary: Yep, those were the two teams I was gonna mention.

RJ Allen: I would like Sarah Bouhaddi to do well and have a good World Cup.

Allison Cary: Please.

RJ Allen: I am invested in her journey.

Allison Cary: Me too, not necessarily by choice.

RJ Allen: I do not know why I enjoy her so much. She is everything that I dislike usually about goalkeepers but we stan who we stan. And yes, Charles, please join me on the Scotland bandwagon.

Allison Cary: I, too, am on the Scotland bandwagon. My sister goes to school there. That’s my connection.

Charles Olney: I’m also really excited to see Thailand. They’re maybe the most isolated of all the teams, with virtually no one that plays outside of Thailand. And they had a pretty easy road to get here. So they might get blown away. But the few times I’ve seen them, they’re one of those teams that manages to frustrate the opposition without completely backing into a shell. I really hope they find a result or two.

RJ Allen: If Scotland beats England I may have to move to Scotland like Allison is going to move to France if they win.

Allison Cary: Europe here we come!

RJ Allen: I am really excited to see Canada too. I want them to have one more least real shot at a title for Sinclair.

Allison Cary: I would love to see Thailand do well. I think it could mean a lot not just to them, but to that region.

Charles Olney: Some of the other bigger teams that I’d really like to see do well: France – because it would be incredible for the home nation to finally overcome their problems with the big games, Spain – because they’re ready to join the ranks of the very top nations in the world, and Australia – because Sam Kerr.

I mean, I love a lot of things about Australia, and would be thrilled to see them do well in any case. But after watching Marta spend a career as the best in the world with no trophies to show for it, I don’t want Kerr to go through the same.

Same logic applies for Canada and Sinclair.

RJ Allen: France vs Australia would be a fun match. Not for Allison, but still.

Allison Cary: I’m really hoping this is France’s year. But… I’ve cheered for teams that choke my whole life and it’s a hard thing to break out of.  I’m starting to believe they could really win this thing and that’s just setting me up for complete and utter disappointment.

Charles Olney: One thing I’ve noticed is that most of the teams I’m pulling for are very likely to face the US: Thailand, Spain, and France. So I guess that sets me up for happiness no matter what happens?

Allison Cary: That’s soccer.

Charles Olney: Yep. The reality is that ALL these teams are interesting and fun, and there really aren’t any bad choices. But let’s try to quantify that: which team would you LEAST like to see win?

Allison Cary: Norway winning would be… complicated. But there are a lot of players I like on that team, so it might be worth it.

Charles Olney: That was my answer, too.

Charles Olney: They’ve also already won one, even if it was quite a while ago, in a very different game. But yeah, I’d be hard-pressed to be sad about that group of players winning it.

RJ Allen: Germany. I am petty.

Charles Olney: I am absolutely here for RJ’s pettiness re: Germany. But I would love to see them win. That team is wonderful.

Allison Cary: I have mixed feelings about England. I shouldn’t, it will be massive for that country if they do well. But the way they handled Mark Sampson and the Eni Aluko thing— and I mean the players, not the FA— rubbed me the wrong way.

RJ Allen: The problem is you can say that about almost any federation. Every federation, the smaller ones more than most, have huge issues. So I try not to count that against the players/coach if it’s changed.

Allison Cary: Well, but like I said I’m not talking about the FA side. I’m talking about individual comments from players.

RJ Allen: But I don’t deny I get why you feel like that.

Charles Olney: Okay, so it’s foolish to make predictions, but we’re all fools, so let’s make some predictions. I think we’re all on record already with some of these, but we can knock them out quickly.

First: who wins the tournament?

RJ Allen: France

Allison Cary: Do I say France? I don’t know what to say.

Charles Olney: You have to pick! It’s France for me, too.

Allison Cary: Damn it. I guess I’m committing. This definitely means they’ll choke.

RJ Allen: Or as Kim McCauley said, whoever wins the US vs France game.

Allison Cary: That’s a fair prediction.

Charles Olney: Okay, #2: golden ball and golden boot winner. I think Miedema wins the golden boot, and Henry wins the golden ball.

Allison Cary: Miedema for boot.

RJ Allen: Sam Kerr for Golden Boot, Amandine Henry for Golden Ball.

Allison Cary: I’ll go with Henry for Golden Ball.

Charles Olney: We all think very similarly, it turns out. We need more conflict here! Let’s try this one: who is the most surprising team in the semifinals.

RJ Allen: Canada.

Allison Cary: England.

Charles Olney: I’ll go Canada as well. But if it’s someone really wacky, I’ll take whoever finishes second in Group A (I’d bet on Norway, but SK or Nigeria could do it).

Charles Olney: Next: how many minutes do Morgan Brian, Ali Krieger, Ashlynn Harris, and Adi Franch play combined?

RJ Allen: I could see Brain or Krieger get time in the first two games so 47.

Allison Cary: I’m gonna go a bit higher and say 60. Taking risks.

Charles Olney: I think there’s a real chance that it’s zero, but just for the sake of differentiation, I’ll take the over on those. Maybe 90.

RJ Allen: Does Julie Ertz play more than 30 minutes at centerback by the end of the US’s time in the World Cup?

Allison Cary: Follow up— does Tobin play right back?

Charles Olney: Oh, that’s a good one. I think yes, and not for any particularly obvious reason, either. I think no on Heath at right back, unless it’s for like two minutes while they’re warming up a sub.

RJ Allen: I think at some point we see Tobin Heath slotted back. If she “plays” or not is another question.

RJ Allen: I think Ellis will want Mews in without taking anyone out. So Ertz will drop back sometimes.

Allison Cary: Yeah, that’s a good reason. I was kind of with Charles on the “yes but for no real reason.”

RJ Allen: Does Christen Press play in more than 3 games?

Charles Olney: Yes. I think she probably goes unused in one group stage game but plays in most or all of the rest.

Allison Cary: No.

Charles Olney: Leading goal-scorer for the US?

RJ Allen: Tobin Heath. I think she is doing things with the ball right now that are cheat mode.

Charles Olney: Morgan is the obvious answer, and probably is right, but given how weird these things can sometimes go, it genuinely could be someone really wild like Lloyd or something.

Allison Cary: Morgan. I’m gonna stick with predictable.

RJ Allen: In 2015 it was “we need a bitch, get Kelley”, who is the bitch in 2019?

Allison Cary: I definitely don’t know how to answer that question.

Charles Olney: I feel like that’s not the vibe of this team. For better and for worse.

RJ Allen: I think those are answers unto themselves.

Charles Olney: But they still have Kelley!

RJ Allen: They do. And she played like herself in New Jersey against Mexico. I think she and Becky Sauerbrunn are huge for the US. If they both don’t play 8/10 each game we’re in trouble.

Charles Olney: RJ and I already discussed this one on the podcast, but can rehash here: which US player(s) get suspended for yellow card accumulation?

RJ Allen: The Great Horan.

Allison Cary: Horan

RJ Allen: Or someone really funny like Rose Lavelle.

Charles Olney: If I remember correctly, we also mentioned Ertz and Heath as real possibilities.

RJ Allen: Heath called herself a psycho when she plays in a piece written by Richard Farley. And on the pitch, she is 100% right. She could get a few cards.

Allison Cary: I see Ertz as a solid possibility.

RJ Allen: I almost want it to be Becky Sauerbrunn but I also 100% do not want it to be Becky Sauerbrunn.

Allison Cary: I’m good with her getting suspended when the US plays France. Or her being suspended for that game, rather.

RJ Allen: Allison, I have a question for you. Would you rather see France win or Becky Sauerbrunn score a game winning goal?

Allison Cary: France win. They’re my TEAM. But I love Broon like all normal people do.

RJ Allen: All sane ones at least.

Charles Olney: Any final thoughts?

RJ Allen: Please @ Soccer Gods no ACL injuries, ok?

Allison Cary: One quick note: everyone should read the article by Shireen Ahmed in Time about the women who won’t be playing at the World Cup. It’s a must read.

Charles Olney: That is a great call. So, with that, let’s wrap up for the week. I hope everyone is excited for the World Cup, and will join along with all the coverage we’ll be providing over the course of the tournament. I’ll be posting something (almost) daily, and there should be plenty more coming from back home as well. It’s going to be a grand ride, and there will certainly be a lot to talk about along the way.

And don’t forget that the NWSL will be back on June 15 after a one-week break, so there will be plenty there to cover as well!

Ten Players to Watch at the Women’s World Cup

Posted on by RJ Allen

Kicking off in just a few days, the 2019 Women’s World Cup features the deepest and most impressive field that we have ever seen. There are too many great players to count. Hopefully, you’ve read some previews of the big names, especially this fantastic one from Kim McCauley and the team at SB Nation. Those lists are full of players who will be the defining factor for their team–players like Sam Kerr, Christine Sinclair, Dzsenifer Marozsán, Asisat Oshoala, and so on. 

But there are a whole lot of players that won’t necessarily show up at the top of those lists, but who will still be critical contributors. I want to identify some of those names: the players who probably are not the key contributor for their team, but who still deserve a fair share of attention. 

Ashley Lawrence (Canada)

Canada’s Swiss army knife can play virtually anywhere and make a real difference. She has most commonly been used as a fullback, a role which highlights her defensive abilities and exceptional workrate. But she can also play as a wingback or wide midfielder, with more license to drift inward and playmake. And at times she even slots as a pure central attacker. That sort of flexibility is critical to a Canada team that strives for maximal tactical flexibility, often switching formations in midstream. With Lawrence able to move so freely into what role is needed, she gives them maximal capacity to adapt to circumstances without having to make a substitution.

Jennifer Beattie (Scotland)

Beattie will work with Rachel Corsie to form one of the most dependable central defensive pairings in the whole tournament. In addition to her stalwart defensive capabilities, Beattie may be even more important for her ability to play as a ‘modern’ center back. Her skill on the ball will allow Scotland to play a more expansive and possession-oriented game, and could be the key to getting their excellent attackers the time and space they need to work their magic.

Fran Kirby (England)

Kirby is a mercurial player, who often seems to drift out of games, and can be frustrating for fans to watch. But she’s also one of the smartest readers of the game in world soccer—a purveyor of impossible through balls and clever slipped passes, who pops up when you’ve almost forgotten about her, turns on a dime and settles the ball into the far corner. Against teams who will give them some space to play, Kirby could be the key difference-maker for England.

Becky Sauerbrunn (USA)

Sauerbrunn is opposite of a flashy player, with her strongest defensive skill being simple positional awareness. She rarely goes in for a last-ditch tackle because she’s already waiting there when the attack arrives. Her mission is to close things down before they ever have a chance to develop. On a team overloaded with attacking players, her ability to hold the defense together will be essential if they hope to make a deep run. She won’t get one-tenth of the coverage that some other US players will receive, but there might be no single player who is more critical to the team’s success than Sauerbrunn.

Sara Däbritz (Germany)

Always a wonderful playmaker, Däbrtiz has increasingly added goal-scoring to her arsenal, and has also developed into a far more physically resilient player. She’s got one of the best left foots in the game, and is coming off the best season of her career at Bayern Munich. She’s also just completed a transfer to Paris Saint-Germain for the upcoming season, which suggests a player ready to challenge herself at another level. Dzsenifer Marozsán deservedly gets all the headlines, but in Däbritz Germany have a second world-class midfielder, one who often flies unjustifiably under the radar for international audiences. But that may be about to change.

Alexia Putellas (Spain)

Putellas is one of those players who sees angles that no one else can find, weaving passes through gaps the size of a postage stamp. If Spain live up to their ‘dark horse’ potential in this tournament, Jenni Hermoso will likely be the one scoring the goals that help them get there. But Putellas will be the one further back, orchestrating the symphony that helps it all come together.

Konya Plummer (Jamaica)

The biggest story on this Jamaica team is Khadija Shaw. And for good reason. She’s a generational talent, and has every chance to become one of the great strikers in the game. But don’t sleep on Konya Plummer. Jamaica’s captain at the ripe old age of 21, Plummer is an excellent defender—a good ball-winner and a sturdy presence in the air—and will play a huge role in organizing the Jamaica defense. For a team that will likely spend much of the tournament without the ball, that may be the single most important role.      

Lina Hurtig (Sweden)

It’s not even certain that she’ll be able to play significant minutes, since she has struggled constantly with injuries. But if healthy, Hurtig might be the difference-maker. Sweden have long needed a creative wide player who can stretch the opposition and develop more sophisticated attacks. That’s Hurtig. If they get the best from her, they will likely also get much more from their strikers, helping provide the goals that might otherwise be in short supply.

Delphine Cascarino (France)

With less than a dozen caps, Cascarino is a relative newcomer to the French team, but she has already made a huge impression. The Lyon striker is coming off a breakout season with the best club team in the world, and has been able to parlay that into significant time with her country as well. Attacking from the wing, she brings pace and technical ability, as well as a clinical ability to put away chances. France is spoiled for options in the attack, but it certainly seems like Corinne Diacre will call on Cascarino quite a bit.

Yui Hasegawa (Japan)

Japan won the 2011 tournament and reached the final in 2015, but they’ve spent the past few years undertaking a significant overhaul. The youth revolution has left Japan looking far weaker that you’d expect from a World Cup finalist, but it has also breathed new life into the team. At just 22, Hasegawa has no experience with the great Japan teams of previous tournaments, but will also not weighed down by those expectations. Like most Japanese players, she is skillful on the ball. But unlike many of her compatriots, she also has a sharp cutting edge, and may provide some of the directness that Japan sometimes lacks.

Reports of Germany’s Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Posted on by RJ Allen

They somehow seem to be flying a little under the radar, but Germany are very very good.

Germany had a rough 2017. There’s no pretending otherwise. Coming off an Olympic gold medal the previous summer, they were flying high. But 2017 was a descent into the depths. The biggest moment came in the quarterfinals of European Championship, when the Germans were knocked out by Denmark. Not only was this Germany’s earliest exit, it was the first time they had lost a knockout game in the competition since 1993. That game ended a run of six consecutive titles. But if that wasn’t enough, they then proceeded to lose to Iceland in the early stages of World Cup qualifying.

All of a sudden Germany, one of the titans of the game, were on the ropes. Steffi Jones, hired after the Olympic victory, was shown the door after less than 18 months on the job. The team seemed listless and uncertain. And while results did turn around under interim coach Horst Hrubesch, that early loss to Iceland left Germany still unsure of qualification all through 2018.

But they did qualify, and ultimately with relative ease. The three goals they conceded against Iceland in November 2017 turned out to be the only goals they allowed in the whole campaign, ending up with 38 goals scored to just 3 against. And with the arrival of Martina Voss-Tecklenburg, they also have a permanent coach. While it remains to be seen how she will structure the team over the long run, it increasingly seems like the lull during the Jones era was a blip rather than the new normal. So when considering the strength of this Germany team, it’s probably wiser to look at the underlying talent. And, well, there’s a lot of talent.

We’ve grown accustomed to pre-tournament hype for Dzsenifer Marozsán, but familiarity should not become the enemy of wonder. Marozsán really is phenomenal, and she’s arguably better right now than at any other point in her career. And it’s not just Marozsán. From top to bottom, the German midfield is absolutely lights out. Consider Sara Däbritz, one of the most technically gifted players in the world, who can pirouette around tackles, and drop inch-perfect balls behind the defense. Then add the always-reliable Melanie Leupolz to keep the keel steady, not to mention versatile players like Linda Dallmann and Lina Magull. Need experience to shore things up in a rough game? Bring in veteran Lena Goeßling. Need youthful energy? Giulia Gwinn is not yet 20, but already looks like a world class player.

This German midfield is outrageously good, and matches up favorably against any other team in the tournament.

The other lines aren’t quite as strong, but it’s not like there are slouches in any of these positions. At forward, Germany certainly doesn’t possess the sort of game-changing player who can put the team on her back. But given their diverse attacking talent, they don’t really need one. Instead, Alexandra Popp and Lea Schüller will generally serve as the central point around which the attack will orbit—dropping back to bring in the midfield, drawing defenders out of space so that fluid attacks may develop, and then stepping up to convert the chances that result.

They seem most likely to default to a single-striker formation, with Popp the likely starter. But Schüller is in such good form that they may shift things to allow them both to play. In their tune-up match against Chile, for example, Schüller played out wide, giving her a slightly different look at the attack.

To the extent that there is a genuine weakness in the squad, it’s in the defense. Like many top teams, they lack a truly world-class goalkeeper, with Almuth Schult having endured a tough year (including a serious case of the measles). The backline is also not necessarily set, having seen quite a bit of experimentation over the past year, including shifts between a back three and back four. Some consistent names have appeared: Sara Doorsoun, Verena Schweers, Kathrin Hendrich. But there has also been a lot of movement, with some of the midfield depth options occasionally being dropped back into defensive roles.

This is certainly a place where Germany’s relative lack of recent matches (they’ve only played four in 2019, compared to a team like the US who have played 10) may prove a hinderance. With more time, Voss-Tecklenburg might have had a chance to solidify her defensive structure. That said, there’s also a case for freshness. Things haven’t had a chance to grow stale yet, and positions haven’t calcified. That may give the coach more freedom to adapt to events and to the opposition.

Put it all together and you have a squad that is on par with supposed frontrunners like the US and France. There are weaknesses, certainly, and Germany probably do deserve to be considered a half-step behind the favorites. But only a half-step. This team is really good. So if you’re still thinking about them as the struggling side that stumbled into 2018, you’re well behind the times.

World Cup Power Rankings: Betting Odds Edition

Posted on by RJ Allen

There have been a lot of power rankings out there for the World Cup. I even wrote one myself back when the field was first established. And I encourage you to go check out the various cases from the experts. But there’s another time-honored way of assessing the odds: looking at what the bookies think.  After all, when hard cash is on the table, there’s a serious incentive to get things right.

As we’ll see, that incentive does depend on significant trading. When small amounts are on the table, there isn’t enough incentive for the big traders to swoop in and correct the market, and mistakes will endure. So don’t take this as definitive—merely as one way among many others to assess the odds.

Implied odds of winning the World Cup

So here are the implied probabilities of winning the tournament, based on betting odds:

France 20
USA 20
Germany 13
England 11
Netherlands 5
Japan 5
Brazil 5
Australia 3
Canada 3
Spain 3
Sweden 3
Norway 2
China 1
Italy 1
New Zealand 1
South Korea 1
Scotland 1
Argentina 0
Chile 0
South Africa 0
Jamaica 0
Nigeria 0
Cameroon 0
Thailand 0

These numbers reflect a composite view from four different betting companies (bet365, skybet, William Hill, and betfair) listed at Oddschecker. Importantly, these are not the actual percentages at which you could make a bet. Instead, these are the implied probabilities once the odds are re-weighted on a 100% scale. For example, you’d only actually make $3.50 on a one dollar bet on the US, even though the odds suggest it would be $4, because the betting company has set their odds so that they’re only required to pay out one dollar for every 1.4 dollars coming in.

With that caveat in mind, we can still use these implied probabilities to make a rough assessment of what bettors think of the various teams. And for the most part, the answer is: they agree with the pundits. But there are a few exceptions.

Outside the top two, about which almost everyone seems to agree, many might put Australia and the Netherlands next, rather than Germany and England as reflected in the betting markets. And there are a few head scratchers–teams that seem to be getting credit for results in the distant rear-view mirror.

Crowdsourcing the odds

To dig into the differences a little more, I ran a series of twitter polls in early May, based on the betting odds at the time. The numbers have changed slightly since then, but not enough to make much of a difference. In the polls, I asked readers to decide whether they would buy or sell based on the implied probabilities. In most cases, things were within a fairly narrow band from 33%-66%–precisely what you’d expect if the odds were set well. But there were a few exceptions, which are worth digging into.

First, 67% preferred to buy the US at a 19% chance, while 68% wanted to buy France at those same odds. That suggests that the favorites might be slightly stronger than bettors currently think. 

Lower down, a healthy 77% wanted to sell Japan at 5%. That seems reasonable to me. Japan were a regular participant in the finals of the big tournaments in the first half of the decade, which might bring them some cache. But those teams are long gone, and it would be quite surprising if this Japan repeated those performances. Similarly, 79% wanted to sell Norway at 2%. Now, a 2% chance is extremely small. It means that Norway would win once if they played this tournament fifty times. But based on the team Norway is bringing, that probably does feel optimistic.

But the biggest margin, by quite a ways, was the 90% who wanted no part of Brazil, even at 4% odds. Again, the legacy of Brazil might be influencing the betting line. Because this Brazil team isn’t even a shadow of their former greatness. I make it a habit to never bet against Marta, but I think you can make an exception here.

Conclusions: How do the markets help us?

As I noted above, these discrepancies don’t necessarily mean that there is easy money to be made here. After all, even if the odds are ‘wrong’ about Australia, and they actually have a 20% chance, that still means that 80% of the time you’ll lose your money. Plus, given the way the odds are stacked, the bookmakers are almost certain to rake in big profits regardless of what happens. You might beat the crowds, but you’ll rarely beat the house.

And yet, looking at the odds can help us think through the tournament in useful ways. For one thing, the sheer range of options is worth noting. There are definitely favorites, but even if you combine the chances of the US and France winning, it barely reaches 40%. That means it’s odds-on that someone who wasn’t a ‘favorite’ wins the tournament.

This is also a reason to be careful about drawing too many conclusions at the end of the tournament. The winner will deserve all the accolades they receive, but let’s not forget that there’s a great deal of randomness here. Victory is never foreordained. It takes real work, real skill, real performances on the field to take home the title. But it also takes some luck.

This also helps illustrate just how hard it is to put together a string of knockout victories against tough competition. The US Women’s National Team in 2019 is probably the best squad that this country has ever assembled. If not, it’s extremely close. Even so, in four of five worlds, they go home unsatisfied. 

All of which is to say: it’s a very different world now than it was in the tournaments of the 1990s, or even the 2000s. The game has grown, talent has spread, and victory is much harder to come by. That significantly increases the likelihood of failure by the best teams. But it should also make victory taste that much sweeter for whichever team is lucky enough to make it to the top of the hill.