U17 CAN v. Colombia [R]

[Vic]

1-1 Halftime. Canada at the 9 minute mark, Colombia at the 10. We scored a nice goal, their's was a bit of a mess. A number of mistakes contributing to it.

Not a great half attacking or defending.

Attacking: I think someone needs to tell our back 5 that we are wearing white shirts. And if I'm one of our 2 strikers, I am in the dressing room right now saying if you guy's aren't going to play a ball to me, should I just stay where I am?

Here's another one. Remember last game? If you're going to shoot from Mars, hit the net.

Watching your realize how a talented intelligent attacking mid with pace like Mana could completely dominate a game. I imagine Lam-Feist would have done the same and probably ended both the NZ game and this one by the half.

Defending: we are continually getting roasted 1v1. Little hint: in case it wasn't obvious, they are going to try to take you on every time. Stay between the player and the net. DON'T COMMIT. Body or the ball. Backdoor support. Back to basics, keep it simple.

I think the officials on the lines are drunk.

This team is beatable. I hope we can turn this around.

[Vic]

Announcers comment: "Just need someone to put their foot on the ball and slow things down."

I thought the same thing last game also...

Wu has been brilliant. What a great sub.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Announcers comment: "Just need someone to put their foot on the ball and slow things down."

I thought the same thing last game also...

Wu has been brilliant. What a great sub.

Zawardsky out.. where is her left foot .. Jimmy .. she is your provinces product she should have scored.. with her left..

[Vic]

Colombia will beat NZ by more than a goal.

I believe this means we have to beat Denmark.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Colombia will beat NZ by more than a goal.

I believe this means we have to beat Denmark.

I suspect if we dont get better fast Denmark will beat us, the back line looks.. pressured they are not playing calmly.

And the player interview... Captian Briane McCarthy " our long ball to header style" not disadvanted by wet and cold..

Boy there we go again .. long ball to the head .. one foot players ... we are not going far in this one.

[sting]

Well, that was horrible. 23 fouls to 7. Play the game, stop the garbage. The girls have the

talent to play. They actually controlled a good part of the game. Use your skill and stop

the cheap shots. I know this is not the girls fault. This is Rosenfield's lousy tactics.

The way he swears around the girls in the documentary would result in any Coach being removed

at the club level. This team has so much talent and they still play long ball and try to intimidate

the other team. Stop this garbage and just play the game. The CSA should be appalled at the

fouls in this game.

[Vic]

Actually I think it was about 23 dives to 0. Not a great game by our standards, but I didn't find the fouls or the use of the long ball under pressure as the real problem. I thought we didn't walk away with 3pts for two reasons:

1) Same as the USA found out against Japan. We had too many big immobile players on the field for the opposition we were playing. You could see what Wu did to the game immediately.

2) Insipid attack. Lack of quality interplay in the final third. Our attackers seem to think they will beat three people on a regular basis.

It was ok, but far from a great game. I'm praying they play well with their backs to the wall next week.

[sting]

Vic,

I agree with all your points. Your right on the mark but while there might have been some diving,

we made some real awful tackles. We very lucky to walk away with one yellow card. We did not

need to play this way. When will we ever start to actually try and playing with the ball. If we

let the ball do the work for us, we don't need to keep chasing and making all those fouls.

The defence looked pretty shaky as well when tested.

[Tonka]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Actually I think it was about 23 dives to 0. Not a great game by our standards, but I didn't find the fouls or the use of the long ball under pressure as the real problem. I thought we didn't walk away with 3pts for two reasons:

1) Same as the USA found out against Japan. We had too many big immobile players on the field for the opposition we were playing. You could see what Wu did to the game immediately.

2) Insipid attack. Lack of quality interplay in the final third. Our attackers seem to think they will beat three people on a regular basis.

It was ok, but far from a great game. I'm praying they play well with their backs to the wall next week.

Agree with above... Columbian players were disgraceful the way they called for cards... I won't lie I was yelling at the computer.

I thought the attacking players were excellent, tireless running and when they had the ball they were genuinely dangerous. Midfied however was a different story. No support for the attackers... countless times Cameron was on her own at the front. We were most effective at the start of both halves when the midfield pressed up and contained the Col%%$5$5mbians...

I am sorry but watching this game there was little between the two teams other than the Columbians having higher skill levels with the ball at their feet. I dont like Rosenfeld but I dont think his tactics at this level can be questioned. Perhaps his team selection but not his tactics. At the WU-17 level the most important coaching aspects are psychological in nature.

[Vic]

I believe fouls in the middle are a Canadian tactic, which sometimes can be effective but in cases like this too much is the opposite. Strange yellow given too... I didn't see a replay but I thought it was a fair clearance because even if it was studs up when the ball was cleared, I thought they were down before the opponent arrived. You usually don't see that called on players that far apart. I thought the ref was a little over her head, but I really enjoyed watching someone with the backbone to crack down on people mixing it up in the goalmouth on corners.

[Vic]

Great points all round, especially about midfield support. Although if I had made a lot of runs to watch my strikers constantly go at packs of defenders it may hinder my desire to keep doing it.

Also agree about the importance of psychology. And speed of all types - pace, foot speed and mostly speed of thought.

I think it's brilliant people here are watching this game.

"I won't lie I was yelling at the computer"

You have no idea

[Vic]

The Colombian women do not have a world ranking. I believe they have been inactive since the ranking system came out.

Think that's an officially licensed headband or sweatband referees in Canada demand players wear?

[The Ref]

Once again my favorite peeve has come up. The players are Colombians, not Columbians. The Colombians do not need to commit fouls, they do their talking with their feet. Will anyone tell me that our NTCs are able to produce even a shadow of the foot skills exhibited by 15-16 year olds such as these Colombians? Well, in spite of their skills they only walked away with a tied game. But from a South American point of view, to get one point of powers like Denmark and Canada, it is quite an accomplishment.

[Tonka]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Once again my favorite peeve has come up. The players are Colombians, not Columbians. The Colombians do not need to commit fouls, they do their talking with their feet. Will anyone tell me that our NTCs are able to produce even a shadow of the foot skills exhibited by 15-16 year olds such as these Colombians? Well, in spite of their skills they only walked away with a tied game. But from a South American point of view, to get one point of powers like Denmark and Canada, it is quite an accomplishment.

My bad sorry to have offended your pet peeve.. or is affended? I hope that isn't a peeve as well?

I don't want to come across as facetious (sp?) but where is it written that correct spelling is required to participate on discussions on this board. Unfortunately there are not enough people who care/watch our U-17 women's team to drive people away from this board with petty "peeves". Just an observation.

I appreciate your observations that our NTC's do not develop players with foot-skills to match the ColOmbians but I am going to attempt to justify this with a gross over generalization which I am going to suggest is rampant in Canadian Soccer and in particular Women's soccer.

Canadian athletes are not developed to be flashy/skilled players in any sport. I know I am reaching here but compare Euro hockey players with Cdn players... happily we are the hotbed of hockey so we are able to create enough "skill" players to compete on the world stage. I think this canadian mentality exists in Cdn soccer where we most definately are not a hotbed country. Being a grinder is always the Canadian way..

I am sorry for the ramble... I am tired and distracted by the Canucks game... (thank god for those sweedish twins)///

[Vic]

Remember - 2nd place in our group plays Germany. So the only real hope of going anywhere is beating Denmark.

If we beat Denmark

a) we win the group and play North Korea or Ghana in a quarter-final

If we lose to Denmark

a) if Colombia beat NZ, we are eliminated on points

if Colombia tie or lose to NZ, we play Germany in a quarter-final

If we tie Denmark

a) if Colombia beats NZ by 2 or more, we are eliminated on goal difference

if Colombia beat NZ by 1 goal, this is where it gets really interesting:

- all 3 (Den/Can/Col) are tied with 5 points and a +1 goal differential

- next tie-breaker is goals scored, so it would come down to if we tie Denmark 0-0, 1-1, 2-2, etc.

- the Danes currently have scored 3 goals to our 2, so if we tie them they automatically place above us and it comes down to us versus Colombia for 2nd place

- Colombia and Canada have both scored 2 goals so far, so who would get the "luck" to play Germany will be decided who scores the most goals in their next game

- if we both score the same number of goals in our next game, it goes firstly to points head-to-head, then goal difference head-to-head, and then goals scored head-to-head - ALL of which we would still be tied on

- then it goes to cards, and we are currently tied with them on 2 yellows a piece

- if that holds it would mean a coin toss

Source:

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/u20_u17_regulations_en_49613.pdf

The ranking of each team in each group will be determined as follows:

a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;

goal difference in all group matches;

c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.

If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their rankings will be determined as follows:

d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned;

e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned;

f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams concerned;

g) fair play point system in which the number of yellow and red cards are evaluated;

i) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee.

[soccer10]

Vic - great post on the breakdown of the final results and what they will mean for Canada. I have taken the liberty of posting your message on two other forums - giving you creds of course.

[terpfan68]

Just how good is Denmark? What can we expect? Obviously everyone in the group but New Zealand will be playing to get a spot in the next round, but New Zealand will be playing for pride -- a great motivator. I did not see Canada's last game but several posters mentioned that the Colombians were "diving" and requesting cards. Will the officials in the next game be aware of how bad this makes football look and perhaps take "corrective" action? ( I know most of the criticism that real football gets here in Canada usually concerns faking injuries, diving and of course the lack of scoring. I can defend the lack of goals (it is in the nature of the game) but have to agree with the other concerns.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by terpfan68

Just how good is Denmark? What can we expect? Obviously everyone in the group but New Zealand will be playing to get a spot in the next round, but New Zealand will be playing for pride -- a great motivator. I did not see Canada's last game but several posters mentioned that the Colombians were "diving" and requesting cards. Will the officials in the next game be aware of how bad this makes football look and perhaps take "corrective" action? ( I know most of the criticism that real football gets here in Canada usually concerns faking injuries, diving and of course the lack of scoring. I can defend the lack of goals (it is in the nature of the game) but have to agree with the other concerns.

The referees will ignore pleas made in Spainish to a chinese speaking referee.. the issue of dives in womens soccer .. its simple the referees are mostly out of there depth in understand the skill of players to dive or commit professional fouls. It was clear the referee was making some calls based on .. ( and it happens here ) the big girl should not push the little girl, yet the little one gets to push the big one.

That said Canada has to win.. not tie to have the right mental place to advance successfully, I was not impressed by the mids play they seem to be contstrained from going forward to provide back pass options for the forwards, it was so Pelerudish at times, worse is that we dont have two footed players.

The CSA spent the money gave this group lots of training time, yet the coach has not advanced the skills of the players to play with two feet, and yes it can be trained at this age.

[The Ref]

Just a comment or two on "diving". Did the Colombian girls do any fake diving, I can't say for sure, the computer image lacks good definition and I was not there. Maybe there was some, but not all 27 fouls called against Canada. What happens when you have two opposing players, one is a foot or more taller and 50 or more pounds heavier, and there is some kind of physical contact for ball possession the factor of "excessive force" comes into place in relation to the bigger and stronger player against the smaller and lighter one. Hence the reason that many of those fouls are called by the official. In other words, just because the opponent is smaller and lighter you cannot use the same force you would use against one the same size and weight. Fair or not, one can argue both ways, but that is the criteria used by officials based on the rules.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Just a comment or two on "diving". Did the Colombian girls do any fake diving, I can't say for sure, the computer image lacks good definition and I was not there. Maybe there was some, but not all 27 fouls called against Canada. What happens when you have two opposing players, one is a foot or more taller and 50 or more pounds heavier, and there is some kind of physical contact for ball possession the factor of "excessive force" comes into place in relation to the bigger and stronger player against the smaller and lighter one. Hence the reason that many of those fouls are called by the official. In other words, just because the opponent is smaller and lighter you cannot use the same force you would use against one the same size and weight. Fair or not, one can argue both ways, but that is the criteria used by officials based on the rules.

I have no idea what law of the game you are referring to in "based on the rules" its a figment of the referee's imagination and or culture or sense of "fair play", the issue of fair play should only come into play when you know the laws of the game and you feel one player or team is infringing on the laws ..

Fair play also demands each team and player respect the opponent and play as hard as possible against an opponent to win the game.

If a stronger more powerfull player executes fair challenge, shoulder to shoulder the lesser strengthend player has no cause to protection by the referee.

Its the same when both players are pushing each other in a static position if the weaker player falls, the foul should not be called upon the stronger player as was done at least once in the game yesterday, too often in my opinion the referees call such plays erroneously, it take two to tango and two tango, one may lose with no foul being committed, its a often miss called interpretation by referees.

[terpfan68]

I have to agree with Trillium. When my daughters were small the call often went in their favour and the larger player was punished even when my daughters were the more agressive player and there should have been no call or a call against my daughters. After they grew (finally!) and they were larger than the opposition the calls went against them (often unfairly). I think there is a natural inclination in some referees to worry about the larger player injuring the smaller player even with a fair tackle and so they make their calls so as to inhibit the agression of the larger player. I might add that not all referees do this but it seems to be a part of the women's game especially if the referees are male. (The protection of female instinct no doubt.) Female referees who have played the game seem to understand and use the rule book to make their calls. (That is at the non-international level of competition. I have no experience at the international level. I would guess that there is a greater need for quality (and qualified) female officials at high level competitions and suggest that the pool of available officials varies greatly in competency.)

(Daughters = Triplets)

[Vic]

Triplets? One to work the middle and one on each line

Thanks soccer10.

Two-footed players. I saw some of the outside mids give some great crosses with both feet. Using your left is hard to coach into kids at 14. The kids who are the best at it have been doing it since 8. Who knows when the OSA got her. And perhaps the kids with the left feet don't have the pace, endurance, intelligence, heading, strength, poise, motivation, etc.

New Zealand. Yes, NZ will be playing for pride but they just got eliminated and that will have an effect on their liveliness. Playing to win the World Cup and playing to just win a game are different things. The Kiwi team is a great story though and have a lot of character, I have no doubt they will come out strong where most other countries would fail.

Denamrk. How good is Denmark? Hard to tell because we've only seen clips, but we can surmise a couple of things. We both played Colombia and New Zealand.

vs. Colombia:

We were even with Colombia on shots, shots on goal and corners. The Danes had 17-11 shot advantage and 11-3 corner advantage.

vs. New Zealand:

We had a slight advantage with the Kiwis on shots, shots on goal and corners. The Kiwis had a slight advantage on the Danes.

In both games we had almost identical possession as the Danes so our styles are probably quite similar.

Two game totals:

Canada / Denmark

Shots 30 / 33

Shots on goal 10 / 11

Fouls Committed 33 / 20

Corner Kicks 7 / 14

Offsides 5 / 3

Actual playing time 42 / 43

Possession 44% / 46%

[The Ref]

FIFA Law 12 starts by saying:

"A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:"

Bold font is mine.

[Vic]

Irony being McCarthy got the yellow for studs up later on:

[sting]

Vic,

Was her yellow for the studs? I know she had her studs up late in the game and the ref talked to

her as Colombia was screaming for a second yellow but the ref never gave it.