Jump to content

Olympic Qualifying


Vic

Recommended Posts

i'm befuddled why cdn defenders seem to only have 1 way to play - kick the long ball. This is okay at times; but when 90% of the time it goes to a mexican or out of bounds, what's the purpose?

and then kicking long balls to 1 striker with no support reminds me of the men's team in the 80s & 90s.

Chapman's free kicks & corner kicks appear to be in slow motion.

only skill I saw was Tancredi's strike at goal, a few nice moves by Folingo. why is it that the 17-18 yr olds come to the team as revelations but seem to regress with age - Kara Lang comes to mind - what has happened to her? hasn't she recovered from her injury yet? or is it something unique to the women's game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You know what? These Mexican players are 1% away from taking this game. There positionally mature. They're on the same page strategically and tactically and they've got a bit of skill to them no doubt.

Seriously. If they were just a hair sharper/quicker this Mexican side could be more than a handful for almost any womens team I've seen the last couple of years.

Bit small, and facing a tough wind, but still. Tonight at least they look like there's something to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

With you there. Textbook response by the keeper I thought. Especially with the defender closing.

Textbook response is making yourself as big as possible, narrowing the angle by coming out to face the shooter as they strike the ball, and keeping the ball out of the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

You know what? These Mexican players are 1% away from taking this game. There positionally mature. They're on the same page strategically and tactically and they've got a bit of skill to them no doubt.

Yeah they do that well, but lucky for us - other than the left midfielder, they shoot like little girls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think this kicking it up type of game suits Lang's game because he doesn't get to run with the ball which is a positive part of her game and does not get scoring chances either. This style takes her right out of the game in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to the women, especially those who were also on the 2004 team that failed to go through, have to feel good for their redemption. Tancredi, Matheson & McLeod get top marks for being the main reasons we go through.

A shame that a medal is very unlikely with the style we play. I doubt the "let's score when an opposition player slips and falls on her ass totally of her own accord" game plan will work a second time. We basically had 7 preparatory matches this year for this game and it remains alarming that our girls so often don't know where to run when one of their teammates have the ball. But still, let's enjoy the moment for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Textbook response is making yourself as big as possible, narrowing the angle by coming out to face the shooter as they strike the ball, and keeping the ball out of the net.

shrug

Not going to dwell too much on this but think she played it well.

I expect that Perez made the decision to guard against being chipped and allowed the remaining upright defenders to pressure Tancredi as she closed on goal. If that means Perez reacted too late for you, ah well. That's the way it goes some times but it seems the right choice for me.

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Yeah they do that well, but lucky for us - other than the left midfielder, they shoot like little girls.

Agree with you there. It's like they want to walk the ball into the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

shrug

Not going to dwell too much on this but think she played it well.

I expect that Perez made the decision to guard against being chipped and allowed the remaining upright defenders to pressure Tancredi as she closed on goal. If that means Perez reacted too late for you, ah well. That's the way it goes some times but it seems the right choice for me.

Blaming the keeper on that one is like blaming a keeper for not saving a PK taken in the middle of the goal...

It's a freaking 40 yards breakaway with no real pressure on Tancredi. The keeper can't come out to soon to avoid the chip and Tancredi didn't realy miss a touch so Perez didn't have a great chance at closing the angle. She did what she could do on a crazy mistake by her center back.

Congrats to the girls but that was painfull to watch. I agree with the comments about Mexico looking better than us, they just can't shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 - Asia (AFC) including host nation (China, Korea, Japan)

1.5 - Africa (CAF) (play-off with CONMEBOL) (Nigeria)

2 - North and Central America (CONCACAF) (USA, Canada)

1.5 - South America (CONMEBOL) (play-off with CAF) (Argentina)

1 - Oceania (OFC) (New Zealand)

3 - Europe (UEFA) (Germany, Norway, Sweden)

---

12 - Total Women's teams

Last spot is April 19 playoff with Ghana v. Brazil.

quote:

The FIFA Organising Committee in cooperation with the confederations

shall form groups and/or sub-groups for the men’s and women’s

preliminary competitions by seeding and drawing lots, whilst taking

sporting, geographical and economic factors into consideration as far

as possible.

Should be interesting to see if they seed Argentina (the CONMEBOL winner) or Brazil as the A team. We can pray they seed Argentina, and we draw them, Nigeria and New Zealand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Vic, why did the keeper not come out? Mexico had a break away during the game as well, but our keeper came out and made her self as large as she could. This is what the Mexico keeper should have done as well.

Would it have saved the goal? Maybe not. Is she to blame? No. But she didn't help any by doing nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

If that means Perez reacted too late for you, ah well. That's the way it goes some times but it seems the right choice for me.

I respect that opinion, and especially when you express it in a classy way like that. I'm a lot more critical, but then I have some pretty good reasons. And I'll leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by royalcity

So, does this feather in Pellerud's cap move him up the CSA's coaching food chain?

Geezus, I hope not.

Anyone who's watched Canada play in 2007/2008 must know that this is as good as it's going to get under Pellerud.

Watching Mexico today you at least got the feeling they have an upside. And I'm far from a big fan of the so-called "possession football". But...

In 1979 I got a good talking to from a red-eyed, whiskey breathed Scot who coached me. He said "Cheeta, heart and goots are suppose to compliment yer football skills, not replace them."

I got that lecture in 1979</u>. From some git who immigrated to Canada because he couldn't make a decent living in Scotland. So what does that tell you about the state of affairs of the WNT in Canada in 2008?

Somebody should have given the Norwegian that same lecture 20 years ago.

(Okay, I'm being dramatic to emphasis a point. It might have been 1980, but the point is still valid).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erin McLeod was magnificent in that game, great decision making, good shot stopping, absolutely fearless. Sinclair playing in front of the defence was best outfield player on the pitch. Kudos to the women for making it. Big difference from 4 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by royalcity

So, does this feather in Pellerud's cap move him up the CSA's coaching food chain?

Not bloody likely.

I fully expect that the Olympics is the last we see of Pellerud working for the CSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...