R - US & Brazil

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

In any event, Brasil is the better team.

Goalkeeping was a much bigger factor in the result of the final than it was in that blowout semifinal game.

We don't know what would've happened if Solo would've been in net and save that first goal caused in major part by Scurry indecision...that was my point.

Maybe the USA would've been more compose and play better. As you said the mental effect is very important. A team will be more nervous at the back and in defensive midfield when they don't trust their keeper, and that's what clearly happened. The idiotic move by Ryan gave the game to Brazil, without that move we would've had a good game to watch.

BTW, just read your last post. Brazil did expose Scurry in that first half just like Germany exposed Brazil goalkeeping in sunday,s final.

[Vic]

Perhaps you didn't see the USA - North Korea game she played. But then I'm sure she would have said "I would have made that save."

She's a great goalie, with some growing up to do. The rest of it... we'll never know. What's done is done. Fate takes over from here.

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Perhaps you didn't see the USA - North Korea game she played. But then I'm sure she would have said "I would have made that save."

She's a great goalie, with some growing up to do. The rest of it... we'll never know. What's done is done. Fate takes over from here.

I saw her played a lot of games. That NK goal was a freak one, just like Packie Bonner in 1994.

When I'm suggesting Hope Solo would've changed the game, I'm referring to her as the goalkeeper she is 99% of the time, not that freak 1 % against NK. And the same apply to all players when we are talking about them because nobody would play if we would always refering to a particular mistake they've made in their career.

My point is, Hope Solo is a superior keeper to Scurry and the move was idiotic by the coach.

[Vic]

quote:

nobody would play if we would always refering to a particular mistake they've made in their career.

That cuts both ways.

Geez, I haven't heard Packie Bonner in 10 years.

Perhaps Ryan sensed Solo melting down mentally after the quarter-final. Perhaps it was the GK coach's suggestion. Perhaps it was his idea and he made a bad decision. Who knows. The only guy who knows is Greg Ryan. I really like the team he put together, their style of play, their 51 game unbeaten streak going in, and how he's handled it afterwards. And on those grounds, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by loyola

BTW, just read your last post. Brazil did expose Scurry in that first half just like Germany exposed Brazil goalkeeping in sunday,s final.

huh?? The USA did NOT expose Andrea of Brasil. USA didn't create any scoring chances. None, whatsoever! That's why goalkeeping was not the difference at all.

What I wrote about the final was in reference to Anderer of Germany making one of the saves of the tournament.

Finally, if the USA is so mentally weak that 1-nil down causes them to throw in the towel, then Brasil is the better team in that regard as well. Brasil continued to create chances when they were 1-nil down against the best defence in the tournament's history!

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

huh?? The USA did NOT expose Andrea of Brasil. USA didn't create any scoring chances. None, whatsoever! That's why goalkeeping was not the difference at all.

What I wrote about the final was in reference to Anderer of Germany making one of the saves of the tournament.

Finally, if the USA is so mentally weak that 1-nil down causes them to throw in the towel, then Brasil is the better team in that regard as well. Brasil continued to create chances when they were 1-nil down against the best defence in the tournament's history!

Yes, I misunderstood what you meant but Germany had a keeper saving them and the USA had a keeper giving two first half goals to a pretty solid team (something you don't need at this level). Keeping had an impact in both games if you ask me.

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

That cuts both ways.

Geez, I haven't heard Packie Bonner in 10 years.

Perhaps Ryan sensed Solo melting down mentally after the quarter-final. Perhaps it was the GK coach's suggestion. Perhaps it was his idea and he made a bad decision. Who knows. The only guy who knows is Greg Ryan. I really like the team he put together, their style of play, their 51 game unbeaten streak going in, and how he's handled it afterwards. And on those grounds, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

Did you read his explanations of the move or what? Ryan said Scurry had an excellent track record vs Brazil and she was a better shot stopper on close range shot and he had that in his pocket a long time before the tourney began but alledgely only told Scurry.

His handling of the situation was very poor and he caught pretty much everyone by surprise. Even Dicicco and Foudy tought it was the wrong move. His evaluation of goalkeepers is also pretty weak IMO, it was obvious Scurry isn't in the same league as Solo (but I guess your only argument here is the NK goal....).

[The Ref]

Part of the role of a goalkeeper is to talk and direct her/his defenders during the game. If you suddenly change the goalkeeper, the new keeper's directions or lack of them may cause confusion among the defenders. Hypothetically the U.S. may have lost the game just the same with Solo on goal, but I think the score would have been much closer.

[Vic]

I'm not arguing for or against anyone. What I am doing is saying as opposed to people who know - I don't know. I don't spend day in and day out with the US goalies. I don't know their mental states. I've probably seen them a dozen times each, but I'm still nowhere near certain knowing who was the right choice or how each would react in different situations. But if you do, or anyone else does, then kudos.

[Vic]

Sorry Ref, that wasn't for you... didn't reload and see your post.

I've also seen new keepers come in and instill confidence in defenders. I think it depends on who the defenders have more faith in to run their box. But in general I agree with that and usually live by it. But goalies are freaks, and that's proven again here... and anyone who thinks Scurry isn't a freak either I got news for you. Who knows what the backroom intel is/was. As a coach, you want to win more than anyone in the stadium, and perhaps all of them combined, and you put the goalie in that net you have the most confidence in. Ryan didn't have it in Solo, and that's probably her doing as much as anyone.

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Sorry Ref, that wasn't for you... didn't reload and see your post.

I've also seen new keepers come in and instill confidence in defenders. I think it depends on who the defenders have more faith in to run their box. But in general I agree with that and usually live by it. But goalies are freaks, and that's proven again here... and anyone who thinks Scurry isn't a freak either I got news for you. Who knows what the backroom intel is/was. As a coach, you want to win more than anyone in the stadium, and perhaps all of them combined, and you put the goalie in that net you have the most confidence in. Ryan didn't have it in Solo, and that's probably her doing as much as anyone.

It's a clear case of a coach taking one of the worst decision ever and thinking goalkeeping is just about shot stopping....footwork, ball at their feet, communications, cohesion? Does that ring a bell coach Ryan? His comments about seeing Scurry shot-stopping abilities in practice just showed how clueless he is about goalkeeping. When I attended a keeper coaching seminar a few years ago some dutch coach told the crowd that 75% of the actions for a keeper is with the ball at his feet, 15% crosses, 10% shots. That's a pretty telling stats and good coaches will usually take that into account when selecting their keeper and clearly Scurry wasn't up to Solo's level on the first 2 aspects and I don't think she is for the third one either. Mr Ryan you should know the difference between practices and games for a keeper, it's not the same thing, receiveing 100 shots in 30 min and 4 during 2 hours is just not the same.

I,m pretty sure Ryan wanted to win as well, the move was just plain stupid, something you don't do in those circumstances. Before the semi, Solo had been the starting keeper for the USA 40 of 49 last games (missing 2 because of her father death, Scurry played 5). That's a clear #1 in my book.

He made a mistake and he's not man enough to acknowledge it, instead, he prefers to put the spotlight on Solo to save his job...

[Vic]

The guy's played professionally and been coaching professionally for almost two decades. I'm sure he has a very good idea what goalkeeping is about.

Ryan didn't put the spotlight on Solo. It was on him until she opened her mouth. All she had to do was shutup and it was on him. And as far as man enough, he did admit he should have platooned them from the start.

I'm biased, I liked Solo and Ryan going in, and still do, despite their flaws.

[amacpher]

With all due respect, the fact that you attend a goalkeeping seminars and are, presumably, a 'keeper yourself helps explain why you overrate the impact that a team's goalkeeper has on a match.

Most "experts" claim that a 'keeper like Cech or Buffon is worth 10 points a season. That roughly translates to 1 goal every 4 matches. Not 4 goals in one match. [8)]

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

With all due respect, the fact that you attend a goalkeeping seminars and are, presumably, a 'keeper yourself helps explain why you overrate the impact that a team's goalkeeper has on a match.

Most "experts" claim that a 'keeper like Cech or Buffon is worth 10 points a season. That roughly translates to 1 goal every 4 matches. Not 4 goals in one match. [8)]

I didn't say 4 goals, I said the first 2 and you didn't argue when I explained to you why I felt the first one is Scurry's fault.

What I'm saying is a keeper is much more than just shot stopping.

As for your experts saying 10 pts a year for a keeper, how many points do you think David James, Robinson and some others are loosing every year, because that's what we're talking about, keepers giving bad goals and costing games. But let's be clear, I'm not saying Solo would've changed the result, I just think the first 2 wouldn't have went in with with her in goal and that could've had an impact on the dynamic of the game. Actually I'm pretty sure they would've lose anyway but don't underestimate the stupidity of this move by Ryan.

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

The guy's played professionally and been coaching professionally for almost two decades. I'm sure he has a very good idea what goalkeeping is about.

Ryan didn't put the spotlight on Solo. It was on him until she opened her mouth. All she had to do was shutup and it was on him. And as far as man enough, he did admit he should have platooned them from the start.

I'm biased, I liked Solo and Ryan going in, and still do, despite their flaws.

Well, I prefer to side alongside Tony Dicicco on that one, a WC winner and the proud owner of one of the best keepers school in North America. That guy knows about goalkeeping and I'm not sure Ryan knows a lot the way he handled all of this (keeping his theory secret to the team and Solo, but telling Scurry...poor management).

[Guest Ed]

I see Hope Solo had to eat by herself as she was 'shunned' by her teammates. Funny thing is, Scurry badmouthed her team and goalkeeping a few years ago but not quite so publicly.

Sounds like f*ing high school.

We should hire this Ryan fellow, who should be available soon. Will fit right in with our ladies team as no-one gives a rat's ass about winning, as long as they get along.

[Cheeta]

Agree almost 100% with everything Loyola wrote. Anyone who thinks he can interrupt the familiarity and cohesion that's been built up by a team, never mind a defense, with it's keeper of 40 of 49 matches and improve because of that interruption is off his nut. And to test the theory during a WC semi-final? WTF?

But here's the part that kills me, that really bugs the **** right out of me. I still fail to see where Solo so shat on Scurry. She said she knows she could have played better than Scurry. So what? So what? Think most everybody would agree with that.

But what about Solo? She's the gatekeeper who gets the USA to the WC semi-finals and is then put to the curb "on a hunch" by her manager. Spat in her face with that move to Scurry and where were her so called team mates on that move? Where were the senior players on that call by Ryan? Did any stand up and say to the manager that the move would be disruptive, that it was a bad call and Solo had earned the right to try to do her part for the USA team to get to the final? Don't know. But from what we have been hearing I can guess they probably did a yes-man routine and sided with Ryan and their old team mate Scurry on the matter.

Guess Solo was just baggage for those 40 matches. Good of the USA ladies to let her tag along for the ride.

And judging from the display of team spirit, solidarity, and friendship surrounding Solo's move to the bench for the Brazil match, and their subsequent reaction to Solo's comments afterwards, I can only say Ms. Solo should be glad to be rid of them.

She'll maybe get her chance again yet. But she'll have to wait for the final changing of the guard within the USA WNT for that to happen.

P.S. Don't really see what more Solo had to lose by speaking her mind. There was NO WAY IN HELL Ryan would have played her for the meaningless Bronze Medal match. No effing chance in Hell.

[The Ref]

What happened with the American way of never leave a man behind. The coach and his troop left Solo behind to fend by herself.

[The Ref]

A U.S. forum is reporting that Ryan now has fired his goalkeeping coach. Anyone can confirm this?

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by loyola

I didn't say 4 goals, I said the first 2 and you didn't argue when I explained to you why I felt the first one is Scurry's fault.

Maybe its partly her fault. Along with a couple of outfield players. Then we can go back and blame a couple more on the play when the corner was conceeded.

quote:

As for your experts saying 10 pts a year for a keeper, how many points do you think David James, Robinson and some others are loosing every year, because that's what we're talking about, keepers giving bad goals and costing games.

When they say world class keepers are worth 10 pts a year, that means 10 pts more than they would get through an average 'keeper (like James). It other words, its a net gain</u> of 10 points and, thus, already factors in points that average 'keepers "throw away".

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by loyola

I didn't say 4 goals, I said the first 2 and you didn't argue when I explained to you why I felt the first one is Scurry's fault.

Maybe its partly her fault. Along with a couple of outfield players. Then we can go back and blame a couple more on the play when the corner was conceeded.

quote:

As for your experts saying 10 pts a year for a keeper, how many points do you think David James, Robinson and some others are loosing every year, because that's what we're talking about, keepers giving bad goals and costing games.

When they say world class keepers are worth 10 pts a year, that means 10 pts more than they would get through an average 'keeper (like James). It other words, its a net gain</u> of 10 points and, thus, already factors in points that average 'keepers "throw away".

[JPB]

The first two goals in the match were due to keeper errors. But those errors were telegraphed during the first half of the first half of play. Scurry was not comfortable. Her defense was not comfortable. The Brazilian attack was far from menacingly until after the first goal; and only lukewarm until after the second goal.

But what effected the USA's keeper and defence? They did not play that way when Hope was tending the net. It takes time to adjust. It takes focus and concentration as well. But the team was distracted.

All of this direclty followed the decision by Ryan.

If Ryan had this special idea, and if he was so confident with Scurry's play, then, he should have played Scurry during some of the games leading up to the tournament and at least once during the group stage. But he did not. That's poor context for a poor decision.

Given Ryan's experience, it is incongruous that he would pop this sort of switch on his team -- at the seminfinal match. It was an unforced error. Yet he said it was to counter Brazil. That's a really dumb thing to announce to the opposition.

His justification is very lame. It was that attempted justification that was the target of Solo's post-game remarks. That some would try to spin her criticism of Ryan's decision into a lowblow against Scurry or the other veterans of 2004 victories, is a really long stretch.

Ryan played the political game instead of publicly taking full repsonsiblity for having erred. He should have taken that burden off all of his players, including Solo. He could have spoken with Solo and with Scurry and with the team leaders -- offline right after the loss -- and told them that he would speak to the press and take all the slings and arrows for the team. That is how Ryan should have behaved in the aftermath of one of the biggest self-inflicted coaching blunders ever in a world cup competition.

This was not a keeper blunder -- on or off the field.

From what I saw in the consolation match, the choice to play Scurry was political. Following Ryan's decision to bench Solo and play Scurry in the last match of their tourney, the team, reportedly, had a meeting and as a group they decided to ban Solo even from the bench. That was about as mean spirited and stupid as the effect of Ryan's original mistake.

It said that Solo's contribution in helping the team arrive at that point was all fogotten. This banning of Solo was no tit-for-tat in reaction to Hope's honest criticism of Ryan's decision.

This puts new light on Ryans attempt to justify his decision to replace Hope in the Brazil match.

Hope's fifty matches in net versus Scurry's one. It was bogus to suggest, by Ryan's decision, that Hope was not good enough to face the Brazilian attack. Afterall, Ryan had Hope on the bench in case Scurry had to be substituted during that very match. Yes, think about that. Ryan did this to Hope -- to the whole team -- on the world stage. He put Scurry in a compromising situation on and off the field.

But Ryan kept Hope in the net in the games that took the team to the seminfinal. He did not put Scurry in for even one game -- for the sake of giving her a chance to get match sharp and for her defence to be better prepared for Ryan's big -- and supposedly planned -- surprise.

Ask yourself how you would have prepared the two keepers and the rest of the team for such a move against Brazil. How to get the most out of those women? How to give them every advantage you could? How to use your coaching toolkit to tune-up the team for victory against very tough competition?

Ryan mismanaged. That led to putting Scurry in a ridiculous situation of HIS making, not hers. And it obviously flew in the face of Hope's strong performance up to that point. It clearly unsettled the rest of the team. If it was a risk, and no one can doubt it was a major risk at that stage in the tourney, its implications were forseeable.

As I said, this decision is inconcurguous with the considerable experience that Ryan brought to the tournament. And that experience includes the success he and his team had with Hope in goal.

I have no inside source. I have no direct evidence. But my instincts tell me that this Scurry versus Brazil was more about Ryan than about Hope or Scurry or the Brazilians. The little stunt with the passing of the captains band to Scurry looked too much like more spin on the spin.

[Vic]

Just in case this is bringing anyone else down... a little Hope of a different kind:

http://www.azadiradio.org/en/news/2007/08/640CA91B-0398-4955-876A-CBD10E839560.ASP

[CoachRich]

This is another great vid of the Women's game moving ahead where it has never before -

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

Maybe its partly her fault. Along with a couple of outfield players. Then we can go back and blame a couple more on the play when the corner was conceeded.

When they say world class keepers are worth 10 pts a year, that means 10 pts more than they would get through an average 'keeper (like James). It other words, its a net gain</u> of 10 points and, thus, already factors in points that average 'keepers "throw away".

You're clearly unable to admit that Scurry was at fault on that first goal, aren't you? I guess that unless a keeper gets lob on the opening kick off you always find a way to blame others for a weak goal by a keeper.

As for your stats, let's just say we're discussing Scurry impact on the Brazil game, and surely a keeper who give 2 weak first half goal had a negative impact on the game (specially when her back up that day would've surely dealt with those 2 situations with better technique and communication).