Fury, W-league and 1994

[G-Man]

Originally posted by G-Man

I’ve been watching W-league soccer for the last 5 years and the Women's National team for longer than that. After watching the Fury dismantle Boston I have to say that right now the Fury are probably the best women's team I have ever seen play at the club level including WUSA.

Technically and tactically they are heads above the opposition that I’ve seen (this before the Montreal game)this year. They actually play the ball through the midfield and build an attack with speed and skill. No knock here, but they look like a top men's team.

They play the game that our National teams should be playing. And to an extent it sickens me when I do see our national teams play the style they do. The U-19's had problems stringing two passes together and let's not forget our WNT failure to Mexico.

The Fury drive home the point of what women’s soccer can be, while our national teams just drive people away from the game.

The W-league is evolving into a good league. It’s great to see Sudbury and Montreal back into the loop. And hopefully London will add to the mix next year. Progressive soccer is hip again.

It’s a shame out national team is stuck in 1994. It's a shame that the W-league games aren't shown on TV inplace of our national teams route one soccer.

Here's to the Fury coach being our National Team coach, so I can stop cringing. And one last thing Diana Matheson is wasted by Pellerud. This kid can play the ball.

[mtlfan]

quote:Originally posted by G-Man

Originally posted by G-Man

I’ve been watching W-league soccer for the last 5 years and the Women's National team for longer than that. After watching the Fury dismantle Boston I have to say that right now the Fury are probably the best women's team I have ever seen play at the club level including WUSA.

Technically and tactically they are heads above the opposition that I’ve seen (this before the Montreal game)this year. They actually play the ball through the midfield and build an attack with speed and skill. No knock here, but they look like a top men's team.

They play the game that our National teams should be playing. And to an extent it sickens me when I do see our national teams play the style they do. The U-19's had problems stringing two passes together and let's not forget our WNT failure to Mexico.

The Fury drive home the point of what women’s soccer can be, while our national teams just drive people away from the game.

The W-league is evolving into a good league. It’s great to see Sudbury and Montreal back into the loop. And hopefully London will add to the mix next year. Progressive soccer is hip again.

It’s a shame out national team is stuck in 1994. It's a shame that the W-league games aren't shown on TV inplace of our national teams route one soccer.

Here's to the Fury coach being our National Team coach, so I can stop cringing. And one last thing Diana Matheson is wasted by Pellerud. This kid can play the ball.

While I must agree that Ottawa is a fine team their opposition enables them to play whatever style they choose. While the W-League is improving there are many teams including the Xtreme that can't compete against our U19 National Team.

The USA LOST to Canada in the 2004 U19 CONCACAF Championship for the simple reason they were more interested in making passes while the Canadians focused on scoring goals.

What is the point of stringing 10 passes together without creating a scoring chance?

The style of play used should be based on winning conditions and that is why Bridge is still the coach under Pellerud.

Speed of execution and vision is what separates the top players from ordinary players, hence a fifty yard pass from Lang to Belanger to the back of the net is more a priority than counting completed passes.

Pellerud has four years to groom a more mature team for the 2007 WWC.

The birth of soccer popularity in Canada happened in Edmontion in 2002. The most important factor in bringing in the fans is WINNING.

I didn't meet too many disgrunted fans in Ottawa at the Championship game that complained Canada won but the Americans have a better style.

The best way to discourage fans is to lose.

[G-Man]

Our women's national team lost to Mexico playing the same route one soccer that our U-19 used in Ottawa. The result: no Olympics. No TV. No build up in the women’s game.

A huge step back. Right back to 1994. There is a reason why Pellurud came to Canada. He was a dinosaur in Norway. At the 2003 WC we beat teams we should have beat. China was due to a great performance in the nets. We barely beat Japan. It was a good draw for us.

You make it seem like passing is a terrible thing. Watch Sweden, Germany, the USA women’s teams. They all can pass a ball. The Mexican senior team can also pass a ball better than our national team. And they advanced.

Watch the Euro's. No kick and boot. You need to have some possession. You need to a build up. It's not all about ejaculation.

Even the Scottish have realized that you cannot live simply on long hopeful searching balls sent from the backs up to an aggressive forward.

Get real man. The women’s game has evolved. Pellurud and Bridge have not. They haven't realised that the winning conditions have changed.

I’ll watch the Fury anyway over a team coached by those two. Simply due that it is progressive and successfull. What I saw at the U-19's was a system of play based on the fear of losing and not the challenge of change and success.

[mtlfan]

quote:Originally posted by G-Man

Our women's national team lost to Mexico playing the same route one soccer that our U-19 used in Ottawa. The result: no Olympics. No TV. No build up in the women’s game.

A huge step back. Right back to 1994. There is a reason why Pellurud came to Canada. He was a dinosaur in Norway. At the 2003 WC we beat teams we should have beat. China was due to a great performance in the nets. We barely beat Japan. It was a good draw for us.

You make it seem like passing is a terrible thing. Watch Sweden, Germany, the USA women’s teams. They all can pass a ball. The Mexican senior team can also pass a ball better than our national team. And they advanced.

Watch the Euro's. No kick and boot. You need to have some possession. You need to a build up. It's not all about ejaculation.

Even the Scottish have realized that you cannot live simply on long hopeful searching balls sent from the backs up to an aggressive forward.

Get real man. The women’s game has evolved. Pellurud and Bridge have not. They haven't realised that the winning conditions have changed.

I’ll watch the Fury anyway over a team coached by those two. Simply due that it is progressive and successfull. What I saw at the U-19's was a system of play based on the fear of losing and not the challenge of change and success.

If you care to recap the WWC it is obvious that Sweden and Germany were able to combine both indirect play and direct play in their strategy. The squads are made up of mature experienced players who can execute a good first touch quicker than most Canadian players who are for the most part either grinders or teenagers.

If you analyse the roster Canada ended up using you will see it was a miracle result.

Canada had absolutely no depth due to injuries forcing Hooper and Dennis to play defence neither of the two with any experience in the back.

Teenagers Lang ,Timko, and Matheson gave fine performances but thay could not be expected to execute ball possession against neither Germany or Sweden.

When I saw how Kiss and Wilkinson performed against Argentina it was obvious that these girls are fine at the W-League but were not ready for high stakes soccer.

Morneau and Neil are grinders and not great ball handlers or dribblers so what would any coach instruct them to do?

As I wrote previously, speed of execution dictates what style a team can play.

The Olympic qualifying tournament did prove that the team is both immature and inexperienced.

I agree the Mexicans did pass better than the Canadians which proves my point about speed of execution. It is not the coaches fault that a player cannot make a perfect fifteen yard at high speed.

The up and coming players from the U19 is what will change the style. Robinson,Jamani, Belanger, Maranda will be able one day to play possession soccer.

The CONCACAF tournament did prove to me that the Americans are so concerned with completing passes that have no creativity in their game. It was especially obvious during their 0-0 draw against Costa Rica in Montreal. Both teams used indirect play and forgot that scoring goals is the objective.

The Italians are out of the Euro because they tie games instead of winning. The Greeks are in because they use whatever strategy necessary needed to win which is my point.

I find it difficult to understand how you can be disappointed that Canada won the U19 CONCACAF Championship.

Would you have liked to explain to the team their coaches are idiots and they should be ashamed to have beaten the Americans?

[G-Man]

Ashamed? No.

But what you're saying is that women's soccer in Canada is crap. That besides 8 players- we are hopelessly lacking in talent and development.

Which I disagree with.

The fact that Hopper played defense shows an utter contempt by Pellerud for our players and development system. That no where in this country was there a 5th defender capable of playing at that level. (And he had some young defenders on the bench who could have learned playing at the level- for the next WC or OLYMPICS)

That we would have to neuter our attack, and use the best striker in the world, as a marking back- is a slap in the face of every defender in this country.

The point about the Fury is that "WE" in Canada can play like the Swedes and the Germans. There coaches playing modern soccer and developing skilled players able to play with pace and able to pass the ball with accuracy.

Until we teach the players how to play this style of game, they will never learn it. Coaches are supposed to be teachers of the game, even at a National team level.

Coaching negatively like Pellerud and Bridge do, does nothing for the game in Canada, in matter of fact it harms it long term.

[mtlfan]

quote:Originally posted by G-Man

Ashamed? No.

But what you're saying is that women's soccer in Canada is crap. That besides 8 players- we are hopelessly lacking in talent and development.

Which I disagree with.

The fact that Hopper played defense shows an utter contempt by Pellerud for our players and development system. That no where in this country was there a 5th defender capable of playing at that level. (And he had some young defenders on the bench who could have learned playing at the level- for the next WC or OLYMPICS)

Where did I write that women's soccer in Canada is crap. That besides 8 players- we are hopelessly lacking in talent and development?

The reason that Hooper and Dennis played in the back was because of injuries to Boyd and Chapman.

While Consolante was with the team there is no way she could have given what Hooper did.

Pellerud did dot use Hooper or Dennis (injured) against Mexico in the Olympic Qualifying and they lost.

World Cup and World Championships is about results period.

Since you seem to have had a better strategy for the WWC please tell me who you would have put in the back.