Canada vs Brazil Game 2 [R]

[mtlfan]

Predictions for tonights rematch:

Hooper is going to be grumpy as she missed on a breakaway yesterday in Atlanta's 0-0 draw with Boston. The good news on that was Canada's Leblanc made the save. Hooper did pick up a yellow card so I think she will add to her collection today.

Latham missed her San Diego game and will want to impress Pellerud to remove any chance for call up players such as Allen, Wilkinson and Parker of taking her place this fall.

Lang will ensure at least one defender will need the stretcher.

Neil will punish the player who punched her in the face resulting in a black eye.

My statistical predictions:

Final score will be Canada 3 Brazil 1

Cards Canada 6 Brazil 5

Don't forget 7:00 PM on Sportnet and pass the word around

Steve

[Auger9]

oh man! i cannot wait to watch this game!

bad news- we don't have LeBlanc. good news- Hooper's back!!

This game is going to be brutal. With Brazil losing two games, both by a goal scored in the last few minutes, in the last 2 weeks, they're all going to pissed off (just adding to how pissed off they always are).

Lang, Hooper, and Neil are definitely going to cause at least a few injuries, and they'll most likely have a yellow card each by full time.

Brazil's going to be coming out hard, so we'll just hit them hard!

There is suppose to be a very large crowd, more than the England game, so any fans up in Ottawa area are definitely getting their moneys worth!

my starting 11.

Hooper, Lang, Neil, Timko, Chapman, Kiss, Hermus, Latham, Matheson, Andrews, McLeod

Nucks in '03!

[Auger9]

does anybody know what the weather is like in Ottawa, because it's been raining all day here.

Nucks in '03!

[Auger9]

here are the starters:

1 - Erin McLeod

16 - Brittany Tiumko

11 - Randee Hermus

4 - Sasha Andrews

9 - Candace Chapman

7 - Diana Matheson

5 - Andrea Neil

8 - Kristina Kiss

2 - Christine Latham

10 - Charmaine Hooper

15 - Kara Lang

and Brazil

12 - Giselle De Vasconcellos

4 - Monica De Paula

8 - Renata Costa

13 - Michelle Reis

14 - Tania Ribeiro

15 - Rafaela De Moraes

16 - Kelly Da Silva

17 - Maycon Dos Santos

18 - Cristiane De Souza Silva

19 - Elaine Moura

20 - Janaina Novaes

Nucks in '03!

[Mimglow]

One thing I noticed about this match with which I had a problem. The team was playing a 4-3-3 and were gettting beaten regularly in the midfield. Pellerud never bothered to make an ajdustment. It turned out okay, but against a better side we would have gotten burned.

Mimglow, Ottawa

_________________________

You are the witness of change

And to counteract

We gotta take the power back

Rage Against The Machine

[beachesl]

Mimglow, and others at the game: I sensed, watching on TV, that the ball was acting really screwy on the turf, am I right? It seemed to take big unnatural bounces, and when the passes were on a low arc, they seemed to carom like a baseball thrown on astroturf. I wondered if this was the reason why Canadian passing seemed so off tonight, as well as why both sides had trouble trapping and controlling the ball. At times, it seemed like they were playing on a paved schoolyard.

In my mind, I think that the Brazil coach has a darn good point. Why prepare for the September WWC (on grass)on an artificial surface?

How is the turf in Montreal (it sure looked good from the game highlights)?

My concern about playing on FieldTurf is thAt it looks bushleague, especially the visual abortion at Frank Clair. How does that make Canada look to other Federations, CONCANAF and FIFA, either those at the field or those watchoing the highlights on TV. It could cripple our chances of getting any tournaments (like the 2007 World Youth Cup), not to mention friendlies, at home.

I believe that the current FIFA policy will allow WCQ's at approved locations IF there are no suitable alternatives in the country (like they did for some of the last WCQ's in some of the Caribbean countries), but I can't see them allowing it for artificial turf locations when there are so many other natural grass locations available (albeit most of them in small stadia).

Too bad, because there have been fair size crowds for International soccer in Ottawa and Montreal, and for the Impact in Montreal.

[beachesl]

Mimglow, and others at the game: I sensed, watching on TV, that the ball was acting really screwy on the turf, am I right? It seemed to take big unnatural bounces, and when the passes were on a low arc, they seemed to carom like a baseball thrown on astroturf. I wondered if this was the reason why Canadian passing seemed so off tonight, as well as why both sides had trouble trapping and controlling the ball. At times, it seemed like they were playing on a paved schoolyard.

In my mind, I think that the Brazil coach has a darn good point. Why prepare for the September WWC (on grass)on an artificial surface?

How is the turf in Montreal (it sure looked good from the game highlights)?

My concern about playing on FieldTurf is thAt it looks bushleague, especially the visual abortion at Frank Clair. How does that make Canada look to other Federations, CONCANAF and FIFA, either those at the field or those watchoing the highlights on TV. It could cripple our chances of getting any tournaments (like the 2007 World Youth Cup), not to mention friendlies, at home.

I believe that the current FIFA policy will allow WCQ's at approved locations IF there are no suitable alternatives in the country (like they did for some of the last WCQ's in some of the Caribbean countries), but I can't see them allowing it for artificial turf locations when there are so many other natural grass locations available (albeit most of them in small stadia).

Too bad, because there have been fair size crowds for International soccer in Ottawa and Montreal, and for the Impact in Montreal.

[dbailey62]

While the field did look bush, it wasn't because it was FieldTurf. Imagine trying to wash the football lines off of a grass field. They'd have done better painting over the football lines rather than trying to wash them out.

BTW, the bush league look of the field was more than adequately compensated for by 18,000 spectators who paid to get in unlike the Azteca match referred to by Gerry and Helen for which no admission fee was charged.

Surely it is better than Birchmount or Centennial Park.

[dbailey62]

While the field did look bush, it wasn't because it was FieldTurf. Imagine trying to wash the football lines off of a grass field. They'd have done better painting over the football lines rather than trying to wash them out.

BTW, the bush league look of the field was more than adequately compensated for by 18,000 spectators who paid to get in unlike the Azteca match referred to by Gerry and Helen for which no admission fee was charged.

Surely it is better than Birchmount or Centennial Park.

[Bill Ault]

I don't think the field had much to do with the standard or style of play - the Fury teams are training on the stuff on a regular basis and while it is different it's better and truer that 99.9% of the natural grass surfaces in this part of the country. The stadium is approved for WCQ - no qualifications - if that is where we want to play the games we will. It looks like, according to my sources, that Ottawa will be getting 2 or 3 games a year for the next few years.

[Bill Ault]

I don't think the field had much to do with the standard or style of play - the Fury teams are training on the stuff on a regular basis and while it is different it's better and truer that 99.9% of the natural grass surfaces in this part of the country. The stadium is approved for WCQ - no qualifications - if that is where we want to play the games we will. It looks like, according to my sources, that Ottawa will be getting 2 or 3 games a year for the next few years.

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by beachesl

I sensed, watching on TV, that the ball was acting really screwy on the turf, am I right? It seemed to take big unnatural bounces, and when the passes were on a low arc, they seemed to carom like a baseball thrown on astroturf. I wondered if this was the reason why Canadian passing seemed so off tonight, as well as why both sides had trouble trapping and controlling the ball. At times, it seemed like they were playing on a paved schoolyard.

I noticed the same thing watching on TV, within the first few minutes. I found that this, together with the visible CFL lines, made the game less enjoyable to watch. I hope we don't have to rely on surfaces like this.

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by beachesl

I sensed, watching on TV, that the ball was acting really screwy on the turf, am I right? It seemed to take big unnatural bounces, and when the passes were on a low arc, they seemed to carom like a baseball thrown on astroturf. I wondered if this was the reason why Canadian passing seemed so off tonight, as well as why both sides had trouble trapping and controlling the ball. At times, it seemed like they were playing on a paved schoolyard.

I noticed the same thing watching on TV, within the first few minutes. I found that this, together with the visible CFL lines, made the game less enjoyable to watch. I hope we don't have to rely on surfaces like this.

[DoyleG]

Not really much time between the Renegades game on Friday and today's match to bring the field up to standard.

[MikeD]

This was the 12th international match I've attended at Frank Clair since they put the FieldTurf in for the 2001 Francophone Games (10 Francophone Games matches plus the two WWC team friendlies this year) at it was the very first time you could see the football lines.

The reason for this, I think, is that the Francophone Games didn't have to share the stadium with the CFL team in 2001 and the Canada-England match, earlier this year, took place before the start of the CFL season (the Ottawa Renegades' first home game this year was May 30) so the football lines for the season hadn't been put in yet.

Regrettably, I don't think they can completely obliterate the lines until the Renegades have played their last match. I noticed from looking at Elaine's photos from Thursday's match in Montreal (on the Go Big Red website), that the football lines were also visible in Molson Stadium (probably for the same reason.) The CFL season runs from the last weekend in May to the last weekend in October, so I imagine this will be an issue any time one of our national teams wants to play in Frank Clair or Molson Stadium between those dates.

As for the pitch quality, this was the first match I'd seen on FieldTurf in the rain and the ball did seem to be acting a little funny (although comparisons to astroturf or a paved schoolyard are completely out of proportion.) It had rained heavily earlier in the afternoon, stopped before the match, then started raining lightly again from midway through the first half until just before the start of the second.

One of the features of FieldTurf that I've read about is that it absorbs rain better than most natural surfaces, so water doesn't pool on the playing surface (which slows down the ball and is dangerous for the players.) It looked to me like this feature worked well, but the rain left a layer of slickness on the synthetic grass blades which caused the ball to run faster than normal. The ball also seemed to be bouncing a bit higher than normal, probably due to the fact that most of the rain had soaked into the rubber/sand mixture beneath the synthetic grass. This would make the mixture harder, less like normal ground, and therefore make the ball bounce higher.

Thus, while rain on a grass surface generally makes the ball run slower and bounce less, it seems to have to opposite effect on FieldTurf. I consider this an improvement and a definite advantage of FieldTurf over grass. Which WWC team match was better to watch: the Gold Cup final against the US, in which the ball couldn't be played on the ground because of the pools of water of the grass, or last night's match?

Mike D

[beachesl]

Well, I accept your epxlanations (very interesting) concerning the FieldTurf. The apparent fact that we have large stadiums, with great fans, in Montreal and Ottawa ready to go is very positive. If we can get the international soccer community (besides the technos at FIFA) to accept this, and get appropriate stadiums going in Vancouver and

Toronto (or Hamilton), we should be able to host anything short of the big enchilada, the men's WC.

Cheers.

[Mimglow]

I was in the stands for the match, about 13 rows up. The football lines DID have a negative effect for the enjoyment of the game. Not too much, but some.

I prefer natural grass because it's just that: natural. Rain slowing down the ball for a soccer match is natural, it wasn't made in a lab.

I know that Frank Clair will keep its Fieldturf indefinitely, as they cover it with a dome in the winter to be used as a soccer facility.

Mimglow, Ottawa

_________________________

You are the witness of change

And to counteract

We gotta take the power back

Rage Against The Machine

[beachesl]

Bill Ault, or anyone else: would you be able to point me to a document where Frank Claire, or FieldTurf stadia in general, have been approved "no qualifications" for WCQ matches. As I understand the current FIFA policy, they will permit FieldTurf matches on an individual approval basis if there are no appropriate alternatives in the country, as was done for some of the last WCQ matches in some Carribean countries.

Can anyone clarify this important point?

[MikeD]

There is currently no FIFA policy on the use of Fieldturf in World Cup Qualifying. This policy will be contained in the official Competition Regulations for the 2006 World Cup, which FIFA has not yet released.

It is true that past Competition Regulations have only allowed artificial surfaces to be used with FIFA permission and that this permission would generally only be granted if there was no natural alternative available and the surface met the standards of the FIFA Technical Committee. However, it is my understanding that FIFA will be changing this policy for the upcoming World Cup and allowing artificial surfaces that have been approved by the Technical Committee (such as Frank Clair) to be used even if there are natural alternatives available.

FIFA has already taken a step in this direction by allowing a Fieldturf stadium in Finland to be used as one of the venues for the upcoming finals of the Men's U-17 World Championship. I have also heard (independently of Bill Ault's earlier post) that the CSA is already planning on using Frank Clair for one or more WCQ matches on the assumption (or inside information) that this will be allowed under the new regulations.

Again, though, nothing will be confirmed until after FIFA releases the regulations.

Mike D

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by Sigma

We (Voyageurs) are probably the only people who care about visible CFL lines. I took a few non-soccer fans to the game last night and they didn't even notice/care.

Well, yeah, they didn't notice because they aren't soccer fans! They don't watch hundreds of games every year like many of us do, so why would they care?

quote:The lines didn't bother me at all.

Okay, but I'd be surprised if that is a majority opinion amongst soccer fans.

[Elaine]

my "report" and photos from the ottawa game is up @ Go Big Red!!

elaine

----

Go Big Red!!

http://www.gobigred.ca

Everything you need to know about Canadian Women's Soccer!!