Canada-Argentina result thread (R)

[Duane Rollins]

I don't see this yet so...

Canada starting four up front,

They need to put seven in to get an advantage over Japan.

[Duane Rollins]

10 min in...

no score

Are our girls aware that they can hold the ball for more than two seconds?

Horrible start. Argentina looks to be the better side. Forget scoring seven goals -- just win....

[Duane Rollins]

1:0 Canada

Hooper - PK (18')

Latham makes a good run to draw the PK

[kclee]

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

10 min in...

no score

Are our girls aware that they can hold the ball for more than two seconds?

Horrible start. Argentina looks to be the better side. Forget scoring seven goals -- just win....



kick, kick, kick the ball to Argentina. Pellerud should try coaching during the game.

[Duane Rollins]

32' Still 1:0

Canada has had a couple of good chances off of Argentina mistakes. However, they have yet to create anything on their own. Latham forced the PK on a great individual effort and deserves full credit for the goal. As I type this Canada gets its First corner off the game.

[Duane Rollins]

half time 1:0 Canada

U G L Y

[Krammerhead]

They stink.

[Duane Rollins]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead

They stink.


Succinct...but accurate.

Canada will NOT beat ANY side of quality playing like this. They may not beat Argentina playing like this.

[Duane Rollins]

On the up note.. Helen is looking pretty good. And she actually critiqued the team so, hey, that's something.

[Krammerhead]

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

On the up note.. Helen is looking pretty good. And she actually critiqued the team so, hey, that's something.


Yeah, but she also said that a 4-2-4 lineup was a pretty good one, when in fact all it did was give us 4 forwards who do nothing.

[Duane Rollins]

Second half kicks off.

1:0 Canada

[Duane Rollins]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead


quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

On the up note.. Helen is looking pretty good. And she actually critiqued the team so, hey, that's something.


Yeah, but she also said that a 4-2-4 lineup was a pretty good one, when in fact all it did was give us 4 forwards who do nothing.


Baby steps Krammerhead, baby steps.

[Rodway]

We just got to go for broke now and try for 7. Cus a 6 goal win or 6 goal loss won't made any difference. Either way we'll need to beat Japan to advance!

[Duane Rollins]

Goal mouth scramble at 51' -- Canada can't finish.

The play came off of a set play, which is the only aspect of the game that Canada has looked good at so far this tournament.

And forget Helen, the Argentine keeper is smokin'

[Duane Rollins]

64' 1:0 Canada

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...huh, wha...

sorry...

[jonovision]

From the CSA ticker:

"79 - Latham makes it 2-0 when she hammers home her own rebound. Lang provided the cross and Latham hit a great header which Ferro did well to save but the ball fell to Latham who volleyed it home "

[jonovision]

"82 - Latham makes it 3-0 when she pounces on a loose ball following a Kiss free kick"

[Rodway]

Can not understand why Evan isn't using the bench? One of our biggest strenghts going into the tournment was susposed to be our depth. Every single one of our players are underachiving.

There's no excuse for coming out so flat this game. I'm really at a loss for words!

[Duane Rollins]

So I guess Sportsnet isn't live....

This is a BAD game. Yikes.

[Krammerhead]

I'm not at a loss for words, but I'd better not type them out.

[Krammerhead]

I have a few words for Sportsnet as well who is pretending that this game is live when it obviously isn't.

[Rodway]

Why on earth would you tape-delay a 15 minutes, just so you don't have to pre-empt soccer central?

[Rodway]

Game Over! FIFA's matchtracker is 10 minutes ahead of the CSA's

Our first ever WC victory. Time to rejoyce........ NOT!

[Duane Rollins]

Um...

Highlights =

1- Latham - The only Canadian player to show up.

2- The play where the ball bounced off the crossbar and dinged the Argentine keeper in the head. It was the most entertaining moment of the game.

3- The final whistle.

Lowlights

1 - Was Sinclair on the pitch?

2- Time of possession...Argentina 60%, Canada 40%

3- I will never get that 90 minutes of my life back. That very well could have been the worst soccer game I have ever seen. And I'm Canadian so....

[kclee]

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

Um...


2- Time of possession...Argentina 60%, Canada 40%




40% possession!?! I would have though less. After all, it only takes a second or less to kick the ball back to the opposition.

[Elaine]

quote:Originally posted by Rodway

Why on earth would you tape-delay a 15 minutes, just so you don't have to pre-empt soccer central?
the game kicked off in columbus @ 8:30 with all the anthems done before then.

sportsnet aired all the anthems and "pregame" stuff starting at 8:30, thus why they were about 10 min behind the game happening in "real time".

elaine

[mtlfan]

Canada's First World Cup Victory teaches us this:

It's not how you play the game that counts it's if you win that does.

[Gian-Luca]

Our first senior World Cup victory, to be sure.

I would argue that our first ever WC victory was in 1979 by Branko Segota, Mike Sweeney, Ian Bridge etc. in the U20 World Cup, when we beat Portugal...but excuse the unnecessary argument on my part. I'm in a funny mood after watching that match. To be honest I couldn't stop laughing seeing the Argentinian keeper get hit in the head by the ball off the post after the whistle. A bit cruel of me perhaps, but it looked comical & no-one was seriously hurt. I also couldn't stop laughing at the comments Gerry & Helen were making, though they weren't trying to be funny. Helen was looking great but sounding awful (anybody else just cringe when she couldn't figure out that a foul throw had happened for Argentina?), overdone only by Gerry Dobson, the Master of the Bloody Obvious.

I agree with the concept of criticizing the performance but thought it was overdone considering it was a Canadian victory, and I note that Pellerud escaped criticism completely. We have not looked good in one single match that was important with him as coach (Gold Cup semi-final vs. Mexico, Gold Cup final, Saturday vs. Germany and now today, despite the win), but in the media's eyes he can do no wrong. While the Canadian players deserve some criticism in their victory, to heap it all on this very young team & to not point any fingers at the coach (who can't seem to prepare them mentally for the important games) is a bit myopic IMO.

I can only hope the team gets a bit of confidence back from those late goals for the Japan match. Otherwise......

[Vancouver Fan]

Yup,that was pretty bad.That looked nothing like the game I've loved since I was a kid.They should be embarrased to even call that soccer.

What about the preperation?What about the coaching?Is that the result of months of training and friendlies?

If I was the Japanese coach I'd be feeling pretty good right now.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

Um...

Highlights =

1- Latham - The only Canadian player to show up.

2- The play where the ball bounced off the crossbar and dinged the Argentine keeper in the head. It was the most entertaining moment of the game.






1.I wouldn't say that. I don't think she "showed up" more than a few other players, which is to say that she gave a full effort but was only effective in spurts, as most of the Canadian team was. As a team they looked completely out-of-sync for most of the match.

2. Agree 100%.

[Nolberto S.]

Well..what can I say...actually I won't say a thing..since it pretty much sums up my beliefs for the last 2 years..in which I have been constantly criticized on how amateur Canada plays in either men or women teams and the old "run and gun" offence to "boot" (no pun intended) Well I'll just continue to be an outsider and hope that one day the entire CSA is given their pink slips and "new" blood preferably someone who has actually played in an elite team in Europe or South America and has an excellent coaching record in an "international competion" whether it be club, national team, etc. I'll leave it up to you K-man to provide the pessimistic bias..I get bored of "repeating myself" in this argument.

Sincerely,

Nolberto S.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by mtlfan

Canada's First World Cup Victory teaches us this:

It's not how you play the game that counts it's if you win that does.


True. But that doesn't apply to those who watch soccer because they enjoy the game. This was a game full of mixed feelings for me. The win was terrific and we should all be thrilled, but its tough to enjoy the win when you have a greater appreciation for what the opposition is trying to bring to the game than for our side is doing.

If you are a soccer fan as much as a Canada fan, you probably have mixed feeling. If your a Canada fan, your probably thrilled, But the soccer fan is probably very disappointed in the game

[Krammerhead]

I don't think anybody should be thrilled because it was a win. The opponent was supposed to be a pile of crap, and they made Canada look bad.

[Gordon]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

Well..what can I say...actually I won't say a thing..since it pretty much sums up my beliefs for the last 2 years..in which I have been constantly criticized on how amateur Canada plays in either men or women teams and the old "run and gun" offence to "boot" (no pun intended) Well I'll just continue to be an outsider and hope that one day the entire CSA is given their pink slips and "new" blood preferably someone who has actually played in an elite team in Europe or South America and has an excellent coaching record in an "international competion" whether it be club, national team, etc. I'll leave it up to you K-man to provide the pessimistic bias..I get bored of "repeating myself" in this argument.

Sincerely,

Nolberto S.


I've probably been one whose spared a bit with you on this Nolberto, as I do think that direct soccer, played properly, is a legit, if unattractive, style. But we have been playing butt ugly direct soccer these past couple of games and that is indeed amateurish. I have to think the blame lies with Pellerud for the poor performance because these ladies are obviously not prepared and slavishly following the game plan, even though you can not play direct soccer from the back third of the field. At the very least, the back line and the midfield have to keep the ball on the ground until they are in decent position to launch a long ball, and they are not doing that.

Also, what coach tries a new formation (4-2-4) at the World Cup? And why in the world does he have legit backs like Andrews, Consolante, Morneau and Hermus sitting onthe bench while playing a forward and a midfielder in the back? We desperately need Timko in the mdfield to contest and win a few ball, and Hooper should be up front. If we were playing "smart" direct soccer, I'd argue with you, but these days we are playing crappy kick and run just as you say. It is very frustrating to watch. As all bad soccer is.

[Ed]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Our first senior World Cup victory, to be sure.

"We have not looked good in one single match that was important with him as coach (Gold Cup semi-final vs. Mexico, Gold Cup final, Saturday vs. Germany and now today, despite the win), but in the media's eyes he can do no wrong. "



I guess you don't consider Inside Soccer part of the 'media'.
I assume a 4-2-4 might lead to some goals, but not if you have a 50 yard gap between the two lines of 4. Even's got an eye for talent for sure, but this game was a horror to watch.
At least we get the required win, in an ugly fashion, but nonetheless they didn't choke. The usual suspects were predicting a cake walk as if Argentina could hardly find 11 women to put on the field. They were quite impressive in the limited action I watched. I do hope the young ladies can beat the Japanese and then we might see some better ball.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

Well..what can I say...actually I won't say a thing..since it pretty much sums up my beliefs for the last 2 years..in which I have been constantly criticized on how amateur Canada plays in either men or women teams and the old "run and gun" offence to "boot" (no pun intended) Well I'll just continue to be an outsider and hope that one day the entire CSA is given their pink slips and "new" blood preferably someone who has actually played in an elite team in Europe

Well, for what its worth Holger played in the Bundesliga with Shalke so I think he qualified in that respect (depending on how narrow you'd like to define Elite). And the men haven't been playing the style you mention for several years, not under Holger at least. Now, if with a new coach things revert to the bad days of 1997 (the last time we played style that would be considered similar to what we are seeing with the women), then yes, I think people would start to agree with you about the men. But people on this board have been criticizing the style the women play for a long time now.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Ed


quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Our first senior World Cup victory, to be sure.

"We have not looked good in one single match that was important with him as coach (Gold Cup semi-final vs. Mexico, Gold Cup final, Saturday vs. Germany and now today, despite the win), but in the media's eyes he can do no wrong. "



I guess you don't consider Inside Soccer part of the 'media'.


In the context I was thinking of, no. I haven't seen the past couple of issues of IS so am unaware of any criticism there (from yourself I take it?), but by "media" I was mainly thinking of mainstream sources that non-Canadian soccer afficionados would likely have access to - ie. tv & radio broadcasts and newspapers. I haven't seen even a hint of criticism thus far, quite the opposite. In fact I believe that even a reliable writer like Neil Davidson was the first to suggest that Even Pellerud should be a leading candidate to take over the job of coaching the men's team.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Gordon


Also, what coach tries a new formation (4-2-4) at the World Cup? And why in the world does he have legit backs like Andrews, Consolante, Morneau and Hermus sitting onthe bench while playing a forward and a midfielder in the back?

I think Hermus is actually injured. Other people have suggested the others (including Moscato) aren't fit or in game shape, which takes care of the entire bench. The question then becomes why all of those players have been called if none of them are fit.

[Gordon]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

And the men haven't been playing the style you mention for several years, not under Holger at least. Now, if with a new coach things revert to the bad days of 1997 (the last time we played style that would be considered similar to what we are seeing with the women), then yes, I think people would start to agree with you about the men.

I think you may be a bit generous here. There were efforts to move away from the style, but it cropped up often enough that I'd dispute we were a "possession" team under Holger.

Also, and this is not directed at you Gian-luca, or anyone specifically, but bad possession soccer - see 2nd Cuban goal - is every bit as ugly as bad direct soccer.

[matthew]

Yeah we sucked. So what. We won 3-0 in the World Cup! I'll take it. We need to be much better Saturday and frankly I think Even is making it harder for them to perform. Timko was badly beaten twice (that open header she allowed in the first half could have been disasterous) just by being out of position. But I can't criticize her, but the man who put her in the position.

Wilkinson has to sit and Matheson needs to be pined as well. I'm glad you all thought Wilkinson hitting the keeper was funny. Personally I thought it should have been a yellow, which would have been her second. It was shot very late and I don't believe she couldn't hear the whistle for a second.

I thought Dennis played pretty well tonight, jumped up well and defended decently. We need to flood the midfield, not empty it. Having midfielders in said midfield would be nice too. This is the second team that had three or four back and three more in front of our attackers. Instead of attacking the open space (esp our defenders) we lump it forward. Even if we held it for a few seconds and let the mids get forward before launching the 30-yard ball we might have at least won some loose balls.

Does anyone else think that starting Swiatek sends a 'don't worry ladies, this one isn't serious, let's make sure we stay healthy and don't pick up any cards' kind of message. I don't think we lose much with Swiatek in goal ahead of LeBlanc, but it just smacks of taking Argentina lightly.

Speaking of which I'm sick of everything in the world of Sportsnet soccer being incredibly good or incredibly bad. There's no grey area. Maybe they think it adds drama, but really it makes them look foolish. Tonight Argentina was crap and we were going to roll and it was only a matter of how many goals we scored. The 4-2-4 was a great idea, because we were going to dominate. Then when we're not dominating the way we were 'supposed to' then we're total crap. It's like how Germany became the pre-tournament World Cup favourites sometime between their third and fourth goal against us.

Argentina isn't that crap and neither were we. It's a World Cup game. They're not going to roll over and die. We'd never won a World Cup game so frankly I thought all this 'will they score 10 goals' talk was ridiculous.

Anyway let's enjoy the win and get ready to beat the Japanese. It won't be easy, but we knew that all along. We need to play better, but hopefully we've learned our lesson and are ready to play with some passion.

cheers,
matthew

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Gordon


quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

And the men haven't been playing the style you mention for several years, not under Holger at least. Now, if with a new coach things revert to the bad days of 1997 (the last time we played style that would be considered similar to what we are seeing with the women), then yes, I think people would start to agree with you about the men.

I think you may be a bit generous here. There were efforts to move away from the style, but it cropped up often enough that I'd dispute we were a "possession" team under Holger.



Well we were certainly more of a possession team and less of a long-ball team with him than we are with Pellerud, or with Waiters or Lenarduzzi for that matter. Obviously we were never up to Dutch-standards in terms of being a true possession with Holger and towards the end we did move closer to Lenarduzzi style (especially when Holger insisted on playing Dasovic in midfield & Fenwick at the back), but it is still night & day in comparison to what we saw tonight.

Hopefully we will continue to improve with possession for the men with whoever the new coach will be. With the women I'm not sure what is going to happen at the moment.

[Ed]

Re:

"I guess you don't consider Inside Soccer part of the 'media'.

In the context I was thinking of, no. I haven't seen the past couple of issues of IS so am unaware of any criticism there (from yourself I take it?), but by "media" I was mainly thinking of mainstream sources that non-Canadian soccer afficionados would likely have access to - ie. tv & radio broadcasts and newspapers. I haven't seen even a hint of criticism thus far, quite the opposite. In fact I believe that even a reliable writer like Neil Davidson was the first to suggest that Even Pellerud should be a leading candidate to take over the job of coaching the men's team."

In the article for the January 2003 edition, I was praising Dale Mitchell for having his U20s take the Americans head-on, not going into the bunker defense like the senior men's (Gold Cup 2000) and women's (Gold Cup 2001) coaches. I think Pellerud has a great eye for talent and his style gets results; it's not pretty to watch though unless those long balls get to the strike force.
But all that aside, congrats to the ladies for our first SENIOR WC win (as you pointed out).

Also, congrats to the Calgary girls, Christine Latham for the goals (all of them) and Taryn Swiatek for her shutout win. I do believe I coached her younger brother many years ago; luckily, she had other coaches. :)

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by matthew






Speaking of which I'm sick of everything in the world of Sportsnet soccer being incredibly good or incredibly bad. There's no grey area. Maybe they think it adds drama, but really it makes them look foolish. Tonight Argentina was crap and we were going to roll and it was only a matter of how many goals we scored. The 4-2-4 was a great idea, because we were going to dominate. Then when we're not dominating the way we were 'supposed to' then we're total crap. It's like how Germany became the pre-tournament World Cup favourites sometime between their third and fourth goal against us.



I think you summed up my feelings perfectly here. As I said before, while criticism was obviously warranted, it was overdone and exactly in the fashion you mention, just like everything with their commentary is overdone (I think Kara Lang's age has been mentioned 2526 times in the two telecasts combined). And not to belabour the point, I don't think the criticism was directed in all of the places it should have been.

And yes, Wilkinson should have been given a 2nd yellow. One of the areas where they should have criticized Pellerud was for not taking her off earlier (Pellerud doesn't inspire confidence with his ability to make substitutions). But it was still hilarious. :D

I actually thought Swiatek looked better than LeBlanc.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Ed

Re:

In the article for the January 2003 edition, I was praising Dale Mitchell for having his U20s take the Americans head-on, not going into the bunker defense like the senior men's (Gold Cup 2000) and women's (Gold Cup 2001) coaches. I think Pellerud has a great eye for talent and his style gets results; it's not pretty to watch though unless those long balls get to the strike force.


Shame on me - I have that issue & remember that article (and those comments) fairly well. I think it must be past my bed time. [:o)]

And yes, congrats to the girls, here's hoping we get past the Japanese.

[strobe_z]

Swiatek looked pretty decent in net.. but can she actually kick a ball to a teammate? How many times did she boot the ball out into touch for no reason? Not that anyone else seemed to have a better success rate.

While we're asking questions... what will it take to tighten up the mid-field? How many times were our strikers so far away that I was doubting the defenders could even kick the ball that far? when they did actual get a ball served, they had no support whatsoever.. not just in the air either. Lord knows how many times there were lazy "through passes" to strikers rolled right past 1-2 Argentine defenders.. did they not think that they wouldn't bother to make the intercept.

I've got many many more questions, but I don't even feel like putting them into words.

[The Ref]

I think Pellerud needs to come down to earth. 4-2-4? give me break. None of his choice players and formations has worked. Our girls are attractive and look very well groomed but need go back to passing school. Better mental preparation will be fitting as well. On the play when Latham was brought down and a penalty given, shouldn't have the Argentinian player be sent off? for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponenet moving towards the goal. I was expecting a red card in addition to the PK.

[Gordon]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca


Well we were certainly more of a possession team and less of a long-ball team with him than we are with Pellerud, or with Waiters or Lenarduzzi for that matter. Obviously we were never up to Dutch-standards in terms of being a true possession with Holger and towards the end we did move closer to Lenarduzzi style (especially when Holger insisted on playing Dasovic in midfield & Fenwick at the back), but it is still night & day in comparison to what we saw tonight.

Hopefully we will continue to improve with possession for the men with whoever the new coach will be. With the women I'm not sure what is going to happen at the moment.


I certainly agree with all you say re the improvement in possession with the men's team. And I also hope that we keep moving that way. It is more fun to watch, and it is tough to win in Latin America using anything other than a slow build up. Plus you can stay even with a stronger team by keeping the ball away from them.

[Reza]

quote:Originally posted by Ed

Re:
I think Pellerud has a great eye for talent and his style gets results; it's not pretty to watch though unless those long balls get to the strike force.




You totally sure about this Ed? I challenge anyone who believes that we are getting results to list out all games played in the past three years and describe what getting results means. I am sort of puzzled by this false notion of getting results.

If we are talknig friendlies, for all the occasional wins against the bigger teams, we were destroyed quite badly on a few occasions and for as tournaments...well, thus far there is nothing to show for.

I still think Canada will beat Japan though, but hope that for the sake of the game, we start changing our style. Just today, Brazil destroyed Norway 4-1. I think this is it pretty much for women's soccer...all signs seem to indicate..this is the turning point that we saw in men's soccer in 50s and 60s as the world started to gradually move towards more intelligent football play.

[mattbin]

Call me Ishmael, but what's said on this board depends on whether we make it to Round 2 or not. And that depends on whether we beat Japan or not.

So:

1. We lose to Japan, or tie them in a 1-1 or 0-0 scrappy-type affair.

Result: The Women failed, Even failed, we suck, back to being humiliated by the odd Finn who dares to say "testicle".

2. We defeat Japan.

Result: We are the greatest [women's] footballing nation since Noah took the Footballers Two by bloody Two. Look out China!

3. We defeat Japan soundly.

Result: Scenario 2, but, like, totally exponential.

Look, we're all far too involved in this. Without a convincing (7-0 is considered marginal, here) win over Argentina, Canada sucks. We give no latitude, no relative judgements. In that case, everything sucks except the one result you want.

Yes, I saw the match.

I'm not saying we played well, I'm saying that if we'd tied Germany then 3-0 would be a wonderful result. So let's not forget that we have neither won nor lost yet--we've only begun to fight.

So go Canada, make us proud. Well done today. Best of luck Saturday--we'll all be shouting at our TVs.

Incidentally, if any of you Toronto yobbos want to take in Saturday's match at Scally's or something, I may be game...


Allez les Rouges,
M@

[Andrew W]

Ishmael! :D

[Andrew W]

Coming purely from a fan's point of view, this game was an absolute horror to watch. [xx(]

[bettermirror]

you know watching this game (and the world cup in general) it has become clear how pathetic the women's game is to everyone except little girls.

a)the style of play is abominable. any good quality british columbia u17-u18 metro league team could manhandle the canadian women's national team. probably the chinese, germans, and americans too.

b)how seriously can anyone possibly be taking the women's game when in the penultimate tournament - the world cup - their are still american football lines left on the field. how seriously can anyone take it when it was scheduled for china, they couldn't have it, so it goes to the most powerful nation instead of their neighbours or a european country with a chance to win like norway or germany.

c)the players wear those ridiculous headbands.

[Andrew W]

I was going to ask because I've never seen one before, but what the hell are those freaky headbands? Are they supposed to help protect the head?
I'm all for protecting yourself, but holy s*** they're are ugly. [:0]

[mattbin]

quote:Originally posted by Andrew W

I was going to ask because I've never seen one before, but what the hell are those freaky headbands? Are they supposed to help protect the head?
I'm all for protecting yourself, but holy s*** they're are ugly. [:0]


Yeah, I agree with all that you guys are saying. But let's face it, our team is not being chosen on the basis of looks.

Note: Before that is taken to be a pejorative comment I will add, for those on this board who have never met me, that I'm not getting anywhere on looks myself (it's all charm, baby). I sometimes wonder about the American team, though, as about 60% of their newer players seem to pretty blonde women named Tiffany. Maybe it's just me.

I kinda wonder why the keepers wear them, too--they don't typically head the ball, unless they are a particularly good (or bad) keeper. Maybe in case they get a hard shot off the melon or something? Dunno.


Allez les Rouges,
M@

P.S. This would be a lot easier with a footnote function. Mods, when are we going to have a board that allows us to create footnotes? I never got an answer on the facetiousness smiley, either.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by Andrew W

Coming purely from a fan's point of view, this game was an absolute horror to watch. [xx(]


Funny... When I labelled the women's game as "crap" on these boards a month ago I got bombarded with people disagreeing with me. Boy am I glad I watched the Boca Juniors game last night instead (not that I was ever really debating it)!

[jonovision]

Regarding the headbands:

Yes, they are meant to protect against head injuries (obviously). But the main cause of these injuries is not heading the ball. Read the following article.


VANCOUVER - Soccer, a fast-growing sport that is widely believed to be safer than football or hockey, is causing many head injuries, a Montreal doctor says.

And that's one reason that many players in the Women's World Cup tournament that began in the United States Saturday will be wearing a padded headband.




Canada lost to Germany 4-1 Saturday in the first round.


RELATED: Germans dump Canada at women's World Cup

"What many people are surprised to learn is that concussions in soccer are just as prevalent in what people consider more violent sports such as football and ice hockey," said Dr. Scott Delaney of McGill University.

In a medical paper, he reported that more than 60 per cent of university soccer players had symptoms of concussion – headaches, nausea, amnesia, sensitivity to light – in a single season.

Reports suggest it's not so much heading the ball that causes problems as incidental contact, when players hit each other, the ground or a goal post.

That's led some players to adopt protective headgear.

Charmaine Hooper, considered to be the best player Canada has ever produced, is among them. "This is helping me to play longer and if it does then I'll wear it."

But traditionalists like national coach Even Pellerud said he's not convinced soccer players even need head protection.

"If somebody can prove it, I will consider it but we haven't seen the proof yet. At the moment it's more business than proof," he said.


Kelsea Mavety would disagree. The 19-year-old can barely walk, let alone run, because she has pounding headaches, blurred vision and balance problems brought on by a series of concussions she suffered playing soccer.

She'll never play soccer – or any other sport – again



Since the main cause is running into other players and running into the post, I think goalkeepers might have as much or more use for these headbands as outfield players.

[Sigma]

quote:Originally posted by mattbin
I kinda wonder why the keepers wear them, too--they don't typically head the ball, unless they are a particularly good (or bad) keeper. Maybe in case they get a hard shot off the melon or something? Dunno.


Keepers can be hit in the head by a knee, foot, etc...

I know I was hit many times in the head by a knee. [xx(][V]

[Andrew W]

Like I said, all power to you if you want to protect yourself. They sure draw the eye though.

[Chet]

Don't judge women's soccer by one game. That game was the worst possible advertisement for the sport that I could imagine. Sad because I've seen the Canadian WNT play so much better. It's like they've saved their worst games for the most important tournament. Same thing happened in the last WWC.

Of course the women aren't as good as the men. So what? Criticising women's soccer on that basis is like criticising the World Track and Field championship because humans don't run as fast as horses.

By the way, the USA didn't get the tournament because they're the most powerful nation on earth, they got it because they hosted the previous WWC and therefore had the all infrastructure and facilities in place. There's nothing unusual about an event's previous host being the backup when an emergency forces it to be relocated at the last minute.

I love this team, but they're playing like crap right now.

[SeanKeay]

quote:
Funny... When I labelled the women's game as "crap" on these boards a month ago I got bombarded with people disagreeing with me. Boy am I glad I watched the Boca Juniors game last night instead (not that I was ever really debating it)!

A Canadian game is still a Canadian game tho A-MAC.... support canadian soccer any way possible

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Chet

Don't judge women's soccer by one game. That game was the worst possible advertisement for the sport that I could imagine. Sad because I've seen the Canadian WNT play so much better. It's like they've saved their worst games for the most important tournament. Same thing happened in the last WWC.

Of course the women aren't as good as the men. So what? Criticising women's soccer on that basis is like criticising the World Track and Field championship because humans don't run as fast as horses.

By the way, the USA didn't get the tournament because they're the most powerful nation on earth, they got it because they hosted the previous WWC and therefore had the all infrastructure and facilities in place. There's nothing unusual about an event's previous host being the backup when an emergency forces it to be relocated at the last minute.

I love this team, but they're playing like crap right now.


Gotta love your post!
Well written.

[matthew]

I didn't think we needed to 'win big'. In fact I wasn't fancying us scoring seven goals unless Argentina went down a woman again. With that in mind, a 5-0 win or a tie left the same result - us needing to beat Japan.

I know we didn't look good, but I'm with mattbin here, we won a World Cup game 3-0. I think sucking is better for us going into Japan then rolling over Argentina would have been. We know we have serious work to do and hopefully Even is realizing that a few of these experiments didn't work.

I also thought Swiatek played well, it wasn't her form that worried me, but rather the idea that we could afford to give LeBlanc the night off, which to me looked like we were taking the Argies lightly. Maybe that's not true, but given the final friendlies and the first game, LeBlanc seemed to be the established No. 1, so to deviate from that worried me. I don't think there's much to choose between our three keepers, though I would start LeBlanc Saturday.

Last night's game was ugly. Does that mean women's soccer is by definition ugly? Not really. I thought the Sweden v US game was pretty good. It's a different game from the men's so I don't see why people consistently compare them.

cheers,
matthew

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by matthew
Last night's game was ugly. Does that mean women's soccer is by definition ugly? Not really. I thought the Sweden v US game was pretty good. It's a different game from the men's so I don't see why people consistently compare them.


I must say I never bought the "its a different game" argument for women's soccer. I see the different style of play when comparing women's and men's tennis or NBA with WNBA (even though I barely watch any of that stuff), but not with women's soccer. How is the style different??

That being said I'm glad there is a WWC. More chicks are at the soccer pub these days. As long as at least 80% of the TV's are showing men's soccer, I'm happy!! :)

[Auger9]

It seems as if the ladies have lost their passion. That, IMO, is why they were playing so well in the summer. They scored in routs against poor teams, and had come-from-behind wins against good teams. Now, we get to the WC and they play like crap. They play like they're expecting to lose. Too hesitant going for the ball. Giving up to much. All they need to do saturday is get that passion back, score goals, and bodycheck the hell outta those little japanese players.

If we lose, it'll be a disappointment, but won't really seem like it cause we're playing so poorly all of a sudden. If we win, no biggie. I'll be happy that we made it to the quarters, but it was expected of us. I'll become ecstatic if we win the quarters, especially against china.

But I also know that if we lose the quarters, everyone will start blaming the coach, bashing the women's game, and continue to critisize canadian soccer, even though it was never likely of us to reach the semis, most had too high expectations.

And i know that April Heinrichs said she doesn't want to schedule the americans for a lot of games over the summer in prep. for the WC, because last time she did that, the players became to stressed and lost their passion. Only irony there is that if we didn't play during the summer, we would have the attitude but not the skill. So what's more important, skill or passion?...

[Auger9]

HEY! Canada's in first for yellow cards!

[Andrew W]

I think I said that the game was a horror to watch. I never said women's soccer was crap. I rather enjoy watching the women play. I've seen them live several times in Edmonton. It's not the men's game and I don't expect the men's game, but I do expect a level of passion, hustle and technique. We saw none of the three, especially the latter. It was embarrassing watching us hoof the ball away.[V]
Anyhoooo, let's hope for a step up on Saturday or they're coming home and planning for '07.

[Patrick]

How is Women's soccer different? Let me count the ways:

1) Women are slower than men, therefore the game is slower, there should be more time on the ball so a skilled team has more of an advantage than in the men's game.

2) Women aren't a strong as men. Those beautiful crosses that men put over with pinpoint accuracy are more difficult for women because they have to kick the ball relatively much harder to get the distance and this has an effect on control. Further, blistering shots from 30 yards out are not a common sight.

3) Women are smaller than men. Player may have skill but giving up 9 inches (Matheson vs Sinclair) is difficult to overcome with skill in an aerial crossing game.

4) Because of the above, throw ins are much less of a factor in a game because the distance of most throws is limited. Free kicks can be more deadly because a team with a height advantage can more easily take advantage of crosses into the box.

All that and more make the women's game very different. If you ask women to play tennis like men you will get a good laugh. But then again, 20 years ago men's tennis was great and women were laughable. Now men's tennis is serve, two returns, ace, ace , boring.. Women's tennis is much more enjoyable to watch and that's not even taking Anna Kournikova into account[:I]

[The Ref]

Earthquake in Japan. I wonder if that will affect their performance on the field. It reminds me of a past men's WC when Peru was in it and they had a bad one in their home country. Anyone knows or remember how it affected them if at all?

And about our two games. We had the goods, but did not deliver them. Our delivery driver Pellerud took the wrong turn and is still lost. Typical of us men never asking for directions. Hope our own women under Chairmaine's direction will take the bull by the horns and show the rest how it is done.

[Auger9]

there's a good chance we won't even be playing China in the quarters. They tied Australia?! Russia's in first with 6pts and China second with 4. Their last game is against eachother...a tie or China loss and we're playing Russia in the quarters....assuming we actually make it there...

and an article:
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Soccer/WorldCup/Women/2003/09/25/209341-cp.html

Canada needs to rediscover winning form

By LORI EWING



NEEDHAM, Mass. (CP) - Over the past few weeks, Andrea Neil and the other veterans of the Canadian women's soccer team have spoken fondly about being a part of something special.

Now they're trying desperately to keep it from slipping away. The Canadians held a players-only meeting on Thursday, the morning after a lacklustre 3-0 win over Argentina at the 2003 FIFA women's World Cup, and heading into a do-or-die game with Japan Saturday in Foxboro, Mass.

They reminded each other of their goals: to play well and show the world how far they've come in four years. They talked about what it would be like to go away empty-handed.

"You can't even put words to it," Neil said. "The feeling four years ago was devastating, this is what you spend your entire career preparing for.

"If it didn't go well on Saturday, and expectations are we're a far better team than we were four years ago . . . I can't even put it into words how that would feel."

The Canadians, who came into this World Cup full of confidence, find themselves facing elimination when they play Japan (1-1) in the final preliminary-round game for both teams (TV, check local listings). The winner goes to Portland for the quarter-finals, the loser goes home to ponder what could have been.

Canadian coach Even Pellerud said it's gut-check time.

"I think they need to sort it out themselves how much they want this, how high their ambitions are, because I can't teach them to be ambitious, that comes from their heart," he said. "This game on Saturday will boil down to desire and ambition and effort. It's going to be very simple."

The Canadians came into the World Cup itching to make a statement on the women's soccer stage. They wanted to prove that they are far better than the past two World Cup teams that went home after the preliminary round with just a tie.

And they had the results to back it up: an overtime loss to the United States in the Gold Cup, a silver at the under-19 world championships, and, in the last few weeks, a 10-game unbeaten streak and 41 goals in nine games.

"I thought (our record) was legitimate, we played some very good teams, we beat some good teams," said veteran Charmaine Hooper. "I felt we earned that respect, and it's only right for us to come into this tournament and expect the same type of play and have the same type of respect."

But things have been unravelling since the tournament started, first in a 4-1 loss to Germany, then the puzzling game against Argentina, where the Canadians looked wound tighter than a drum.

Argentina was ranked a lowly 35th, and was making its World Cup debut, yet they played with poise at times, they passed the ball nicely. The Canadians made them look good.

Japan, on the other hand, had an easy time of Argentina, running circles around the inexperienced team in a 6-0 victory.

"We haven't played as well as we know we can, there's no getting around that," said striker Christine Sinclair. "Bottom line is, we've got 90 minutes of soccer to prove the past two games aren't us."


Neil, along with Hooper, Silvana Burtini and Isabelle Morneau are making their third World Cup appearance, and have lived through the worst of Canadian women's soccer over the years - the lack of funding, the tiny crowds, poor results, coaches' firings and hirings, bitter players.

But the team has been making up major ground over the last four years, under the direction of Pellerud, who was hired in 2000 as Canada's first full-time women's coach.

Pellerud is frustrated the team's not living up to its promise.

"That is the hardest thing for a coach, to know we have a team that has performed and has improved and has developed," said Pellerud, sitting in the lobby of the team's hotel. "A lot of great players to watch and not being able to show that potential in important games is the worst thing. It would be very sad."

The coach said at this point, there's little he can do or say to help his players rediscover the style of play that's propelled them into this tournament on such a high note.

"You need to perform under pressure," he said. "There is no time to relax now. It's just up to getting back the simple guidelines of how we play, and do it with determination.

"The winning key for us is to come back and play with confidence and with determination, with aggressive attacking style and with defensive intensity.

"Those key words brought us success, we need to find it back again."

[amacpher]

I have to say the fans at the game (and all the games) are pretty good! The Argenine fans were even jumping up & down like they do in Argentina. I was worried before the WWC that they would be like MLS "fans", but fortunately not!

[The Ref]

Reading the above article as posted by Auger9, a few things come to mind that have been bothering me since the first game.
1. First, what has happened. Why has the team all of a sudden become totally unglued where even the coach can't explain and is literally throwing his arms to the air.

2. I can understand there may be one or two players having a bad day, but the whole team, very unusual and suspect. It is like a disease that has attacked the whole team, coaches included.

3. We have done poorly, not because the other teams were way above our league, something I could accept, but because we simply played so poorly that we forgot some of the basics. Again why?

4. The players themselves recognize and admit they have played poorly. That says to me on the flip side, that they recognize they are capable of playing better. So why don't they. Is it not their responsibility to deliver what they were trained and selected to do.

5. Finally, all the fan support that the women u19 and senior have earned and accumulated in the last few years is all for nothing.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Reading the above article as posted by Auger9, a few things come to mind that have been bothering me since the first game.
2. I can understand there may be one or two players having a bad day, but the whole team, very unusual and suspect. It is like a disease that has attacked the whole team, coaches included.

Did you watch Team Canada's hockey team in the 2002 Olympics?? Point #2 also described that team pretty well for their first 2 or 3 games. That's team sports...