Canada vs. USA - July 22, 2009 [R]

[mtlfan]

U.S. Women Defeat Canada 1-0 To Sweep Three-Game Summer Series

CHARLESTON, S.C. (July 22, 2009) – Christine Nairn, the youngest player on the U.S. roster at 18-years-old, scored a dramatic winning goal in the 89th minute as the U.S. Women’s National Team defeated Canada, 1-0, on a humid night at Blackbaud Stadium.

Nairn entered the game in the 81st minute to earn just her second career cap and tallied on a wild scramble in front of the Canadian net. With the U.S. pushing for a winning goal, midfielder Angela Hucles spun a hard cross from the wing to the near post where Abby Wambach jumped high to flick the ball in the air as Canadian goalkeeper Erin McLeod, her teammate on the WPS’ Washington Freedom, plowed into her from behind.

The ball bounced up in the air and back toward the goal where U.S. forward Lauren Cheney kept it alive, jumping over a Canadian defender to head the ball toward the net. McLeod recovered to get a slap at the ball, but Nairn was crashing the goal and knocked it into the net from close range with her hip. It was Cheney’s second assist in as many games after also setting up Wambach’s 100th career goal in the 1-0 victory against Canada on July 19th in Rochester.

As they did against the USA three days ago in Rochester, the Canadians sat back in a defense shell and looked to counter-attack, a tactic which found greater success than in the last match.

The USA out-shot Canada 18-8, firing seven shots in the first half, all from Tarpley and Megan Rapinoe. The USA would have taken a lead into halftime if not for two great saves from McLeod, who denied Tarpley from 15 yards straight-away and then tipped a Rapinoe blast over the top. Both Tarpley and Rapinoe exited at halftime as Sundhage sent on 21-year-olds Lauren Cheney and Tobin Heath, both of whom had excellent second-half performances.

Canada produced four very dangerous chances in the second half, the first coming just seconds after the restart as U.S. center back Rachel Buehler saw her pass picked off by Canadian star Christine Sinclair who burst through the U.S. defense and shot low to the left corner. Solo, who wasn’t tested much but came up huge when she was, stabbed her right hand to the ground to make a brilliant stop.

A few minutes later Sinclair was off on the counter again and played the ball into the right side of the penalty box for Jonelle Filigno, but with only Solo to beat she launched her shot over the bar. In the 60th minute Sinclair got in behind the U.S. defense again off a nice pass from Diana Matheson only to be stoned by Solo again. Solo also tipped a shot from Christina Julien around the right post in the 87th minute, but the referee missed the touch and the USA awarded a goal kick.

Despite the few dangerous chances on counter attacks, Canada tired in the second half and played more than a few searching balls over the U.S. back line that were run down by Buehler and Amy LePeilbet, both of whom played logged excellent performances in the back for the USA for the second straight match. Buehler battled all game with her WPS teammate Sinclair, who failed to score her 100th career goal in the last three matches against the USA and will head back to the FC Gold Pride still sitting on 99 goals.

- U.S. Women’s National Team Match Report -

Match: U.S. Women’s National Team vs. Canada

Date: July 22, 2009

Competition: International Friendly

Venue: Blackbaud Stadium; Charleston, S.C.

Kickoff: 8 p.m. ET

Attendance: 4,041

Weather: Hot, humid – 81 degrees

Scoring Summary: 1 2 F

USA 0 1 1

CAN 0 0 0

USA – Christine Nairn (Lauren Cheney) 89th minute

Lineups:

USA: 1-Hope Solo; 2-Heather Mitts, 6-Amy LePeilbet, 21-Rachel Buehler, 14-Stephanie Cox; 9-Heather O’Reilly (12-Leslie Osborne, 62), 7-Shannon Boxx (capt.) (16-Angela Hucles, 46), 10-Carli Lloyd (11-Christine Nairn, 81), 15-Megan Rapinoe (13-Tobin Heath, 46); 5-Lindsay Tarpley (19-Lauren Cheney, 46), 20-Abby Wambach

Subs not used: 4-Cat Whitehill, 8-Amy Rodriguez, 18-Nicole Barnhart

Head Coach: Pia Sundhage

CAN: 18-Erin McLeod; 5-Robyn Gayle (21-Chelsea Stewart, 26), 9-Candace Chapman, 2-Emily Zurrer, 13-Marie-Eve Nault (19-Shannon Woeller, 67); 14-Carmelina Moscato (20-Alyssa Lagonia, 80), 8-Diana Matheson, 4-Kelly Parker (10-Jodi-Ann Robinson, 64), 15-Kara Lang; 16-Jonelle Filigno (11-Christina Julien, 73), 12-Christine Sinclair (capt.)

Subs not used: 1-Karina LeBlanc, 3-Gina Pacheco, 6-Kaylyn Kyle, 7-Rhian Wilkinson, 17-Brittany Timko, 22-Stephanie Labbe, 23-Sansar Bahar, 24-Karli Hedlund

Head Coach: Carolina Morace

Statistical Summary: USA / CAN

Shots: 18 / 8

Shots on Goal: 7 / 4

Saves: 4 / 6

Corner Kicks: 4 / 2

Fouls: 3 / 5

Offside: 1 / 2

Misconduct Summary:

CAN – Chelsea Stewart (caution) 42nd minute

Officials:

Referee: Sandra Serafini (USA)

Asst. Referee: Debbie Coleman (USA)

Asst. Referee: Melanie Johnson (USA)

Fourth Official: Alan Schechtman (USA)

ussoccer.com Woman of the Match:

Amy LePeilbet

[Vic]

Headline reads: Carolina Heartbreaker

0-1 in the 89th in Charleston.

Stuck working until morning and will repost then, but mixed feelings. So nice to be able to turn on a tv and watch the Canadian women play. We have so little money and they are together so infrequently it's almost surreal to see them play. Better show than Rochester for Canada. Americans are struggling on both ends. Their attack was insipid against our numbers. I read when Wambach scores they are 66-1-2 and outside of service to her they don't appear to have experienced cunning and savvy attackers like the Germans or Brazilians have plenty of. And not just up front, in the back too. Granted they are down a few starters but their backline got jack-knifed twice by Sinclair and once by Julien. Trillium, Julien made good with her time and you almost got your wish. The question I had at the end was who got more out of it. Had the Americans bunkered down like we did it could have gone on record as the most boring game of all-time and we probably wouldn't have even got the ball in their box. Thank God they didn't or when the numbers came back it may have been the last women's game Sportsnet broadcast.

[Drew Shaw]

I have a different take than you, Vic.

The style of play Canada attempted was good. We actually tried to hold the ball and play possession football. The bad news is that we were trying to do it against one of the best teams in the world, and we couldn't make many opportunities. The good news is if we do that against lesser teams than the US, we will (a) win, and ( play attractive football while doing so. The style of play under Pellerud was not only boring and unsuccessful, it degraded the skills of the players.

The result is a disappointment. We could, and should, have scored. But we weren't outplayed and outchanced like the last two games. Of course, the US could have scored another too. I disagree that we played in a defensive shell. We attempted forward movement every time we won the ball. We did not just lump the ball up field as soon as we got it as we did under Pellerud. The problem again is that the US are so good they were going to get a lot of time on the ball, and we were forced to defend a lot. I see it as a reaction to a superior opponent, not an intentional tactic.

Overall I was pleased with what I saw. I was not impressed by Filigno; though Sinclair also couldn't beat Solo when in alone. And Lang needs to learn how to do more with her left foot than just stand on it if she wants to be considered a great player. Sinclair is probably the fittest Canadian player, and it was obvious that the US team was both fitter and faster across the board. I thought Parker made good

And cuties? Chelsea Stewart is the cutest Canadian player. After her are Emily Zurrer, Kara Lang, and coach Andrea Neil.

[The Ref]

^ Wow! I must have been watching the wrong game!

[soccertaxi]

Is it just my vision, or did it look like Nairn's goal went off her arm?

I agree that the result is a disappointment as the game was totally winnable, and we want to win not tie or lose by one! But the game itself is not a disappointment in my book. I saw lots of progress since their first game playing the new style. It seemed to me that they were executing the coach's tactics. While the tactics were not the most exciting, they were effective. Morace is still testing players and I think that this was a good system to try many and see whether they are strong enough to hold off the #1 team in the world. Keep in mind that this result was achieved playing half a dozen very young and green players. Creative attacking will come...once they get more comfortable with possession in the midfield and get to know each other better. They just do not have the sixth sense yet, that comes with playing together.

I also see a gradual changing of the guard...something to be expected. Morace couldn't change all of the players at once, and we are seeing her system work better with some of the new players. I expect we will be seeing a lot more of Kelly Parker, Christina Julian and some of the other newcomers.

Sinclair, Chapman, Matheson, Zurrer seem very comfortable in the new system and I have no doubt they are part of the plan for the future. I'm not so sure about Lang and JAR...disappointing in my books...I was surprised Lang stayed out the entire 90, as she just did not seem that effective. She got stripped almost every time she had the ball and JAR seemed to be watching the game and always seemed to be running alone behind the attacking American...I am normally a fan of Filigno, but she seemed a bit slow and lacking in creativity tonight. I do think however that she's part of the plan for the future.

In my opinion, the team is on the right track and I think that they will be very successful under Morace. Player that impressed/surprised me most tonight was Julien...she did quite a bit in her short time. And, Chapman/Zurrer were just amazing once again! Forgot to add McLeod in the amazing...

[bjarne]

I agree with almost everything you said soccertaxi. I thought the team played overall pretty well tonight and think that Julien as a forward was the best match for Sinclair in the short time that she had out there. You could almost see the frustration of Sinclair making runs or hitting balls and the inexperience of Foligno and or JAR shining through in not reading what was going on. I can see the potential in Foligno, but she is just not there yet. Matheson completely impressed me as always with her just consistent running and I thought Moscato also looked good in there with her composure. Chapman and Zurrer again were an absolute force and I think we've found our center back pairing for the future. Interesting all the players that have been tried at outside back, thought Timko from an offensive standpoint did a solid job while also being pretty good defensively. I thought Macleod had a similarly spectacular game to Leblanc, so that is definitely one position that I think we look very solid in for a long time to come.

All in all I think playing low pressure defense was smart and relying on the counter, especially having a player like Sinclair breaking. On the other hand, the Americans did not look very in sync, whether or not that is a compliment to our defending, I'm not sure, but I expected more from them. Boxx still is a force.

[Vic]

Great comments all round.

I thought the ball went in off the attackers lower back, and I also thought it was in the first time and swatted out.

- we sit 9-deep on defense. Mids in or on top of the box. Strikers on center, acres between. I've also seen the USA play a similar style and be successful with it (i.e. Brazil in Beijing). I just thank God they didn't do it last night or it may have been the end of North American growth rates in women's soccer.

- we played both games like we had a lead, and even pulled back our formation with 15 minutes to go on the weekend to "win" a tie. We are still playing not to lose, and not to win. Have some bravado. Shoot for the moon.

Lost in translation - with them down to one starting defender last night, direct play probably would have won us the game.

[BearcatSA]

quote:Originally posted by bjarne

On the other hand, the Americans did not look very in sync, whether or not that is a compliment to our defending, I'm not sure, but I expected more from them. Boxx still is a force.

I was able to watch only the first half of this match, but I got the impression that if they had converted one of their first half chances (massive props to McLeod!) they would have run in a bunch in a short period. They seemed much stronger in the midfield and when they didn't have possession they closed down and forced hurried passes and won the ball back much of the time during that first 45. But then again, I'd expect the no. 1 ranked women's team to be dominant in this area in front of their home supporters.

As suggested by others, more games against varying opposition will allow for a better assessment of which players actually have the skills/technique and instincts to do the job within the more possession-based style of play Morace wants to use (kudos to the coach!), especially in the midfield.

[soccerforever]

I don't mean to be harsh towards our girls, but the Americans deserved to win. They had more than half a dozen clear cut chance to blow us out in the first half. Their angle passing and deep run from the back have created tons of room and made our girls chasing after shadows. On the other hand, it was heartbreaking to see our team, once again, losing in the dying minutes against our across the border rival. It is the same old story - The Americans are more skilful, more orgainzed, more experience, better bench power, better tactics, more physically fit, more focus (they can do that 120 minutes, go ask the skilful but unlucky Brazilian!) and more offensive minded. All these do not take away the progress that our girls made. In the opening ten mintues, we had two great build up from the ground which almost open up an opening for a one to one situation. There were still times that the midfield passing was too haste and direct (inherited from the old method), which ended up losing the ball. The forward run, full support of other team mates and timely pass should be Morace's mandate. Just look at the Amercians and you will get the answer. It will take more than a year or two to build a strong and cohesive team from these young Canadians.

Back to the individual players. Mcleod and Chapman saved the team from time to time. Zurrer also made some positive contributions. After a leaky opening, the defence settled down. I thought Nault did a decent job on the left. The right side of the defence created tons of problems throughout the game. As seen from my last article for the Toronto game, we still have not found the right full back yet. Putting Timko into that position will be a waste as she has speed to pass the opponent and can score goals too. The Americans gave a lesson to our young Chelsea Stewart, and she should use that game to improve on her defensive ability. The introduction of Kelly Parker in the last few games has ease off the work rate of Matheson. Parker, who played in WPS, should be a key player in midfield. Moscato was consistent throughout the game. My biggest disappointment was with Lang. Other than a good turn around the penalty area which ended up with a mi**** shot, she was going through the motion in the entire game. Where are the fire and aggressiveness from 6 years ago? Lang is one of my biggest supporter and I hope Morace will motivate and train her to the next level. Back in the 2003 Women World Cup, Lang, Hooper and Sinclair were the few world class Canadian players. Now we only have Sinclair. One weakness in the midfield was the room that we gave to the Americans around the penalty area. Tarpley was taking all kind of shots throughtout the night and we were lucky as she wasn't at her best. Another weakness was we do not have the sixth sense as the Americnas. We lack the anticipation with and without the ball. When we received the ball, we do not know how to create the space when closely marked. We were too hestitant in our next move. This will come in time with more exposure in WPS and the European Leagues. Sinclair is still our best player. She was making all of space and laying off good ball to the team mates. She even tried a difficult low shot in the first half which Solo saved. Then she had an excellent chance in the second half which Solo made a world class save. Should the ball goes low on the other side, it might have been a goal! As for Filigno, she was well marked by the American players but she does have potential. Julien was an eye catcher when she came on the field. She almost scored.

I don't expect us to beat the Americans consistently, at least not for a long time. The overall team have improved since the Toronto game against USA. The players are not hestitate to play the ball on the gound but we still need the consistency. Keep it up, girls!

[Vic]

Lots more great analysis. Good point on how interesting it will be to see who are this generations icons are.

Highlights are here (including "it tickles... the endline"):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbczS7ZJcTs

At least no one can feel bad personally about the loss. I count five different players getting beat on the goal.

[madhatter]

Random opinions - from a nationalist first, soccer fan second (admittedly lacking in the soccer expertise area)

As a team, the Americans are faster, stronger, bigger and play with more technical ability. Whatever style the Canadians attempt, this reality will mean that the Canadian team will have great difficulty in dictating the nature of the game. I laud Morace for instituting and sticking to a style of play which is more attractive under these difficult conditions. I enjoyed watching the game much more than games under the previous regime which relied on kick and chase. In so many of those game the outcome had to be the only thing that really mattered.

Gerry Dobson isn't particularly astute: his comment after the Morace interview - that Morace did not have a good grasp of English - and his subsequent explanation, revealed that he is a poor listener. To me at least, she was suggesting that the team needs to play weaker teams in order to give them confidence - particularly in a new style of play. Playing this way can lead to dangerous errors when faced with a superior opponent (JAR's back pass to an American started the sequence which led to the goal) I believe that, even with the loss, the team can take some real positives from this game, recognizing that they can institute this style without being overwhelmed by the Americans. (I cannot remember a game played against the Americans where they did not dominate the ball, no matter what the final outcome was.)

Rapinoe is a very good player and exposed whomever was defending on the right side. It didn't take long for Morace to realize that Gayle was out of her element there. Stewart also had some serious difficulties, but seemed to gain confidence as the game went on.

I would guess that Lang is quite frustrated - her limitations are being exposed and she probably realizes that. I am not sure what the experiment with playing her on the left side was about - perhaps to try to encourage or force her to adopt a style outside of her comfort zone. I am not sure she can do this successfully.

It is very difficult to say how successful the team will be as it moves forward. From the perspective of this fan, however, there is a lot more to hope for than there used to be. I feel that I can now anticipate getting some enjoyment from watching how the team I cheer for plays, in addition to hoping that they score more goals.

[Vic]

Quality and I agree with almost all of that. Even without committing to both directions (as an American said "and relying on Christine Sinclair to beat four defenders") it's still refreshing and a nice change to see us go up the park on the ground instead of airmail. As our previous coach used to say, more pleasing to watch and support. Here's to hoping it's more pleasing in 2011 also.

I didn't realize an errant Robinson pass started the play that led to the goal. That makes it six players.

[soccerforever]

Lang's best position is to play on the right wing duing her earlier years. After her long injury and moving down to the States for studies, Lang seems to be lacking the pace and acceleration (and she is only maybe 22 or 23 at the most) and timing. Playing on the midfield area is not her best position; and definitley not on the left side!

[soccertaxi]

I agree with you Mad Hatter that Gayle was out of her league in that game...the commentator seemed surprised she was being substitutued but I wasn't.

As for Stewart, I agree that she adapted quite well as the game wore on, considering she is primarily a mid and forward...

I find it interesting that Morace is primarily using midfielders as outside D's. I am guessing she feels it is easier to teach a midfielder to be a defender than to teach a defender to go in on attack. Timko, Wilkinson, Stewart are mids and even Nault and Woeller play Mid and D. I am guessing that her plans for the future involve using defenders as an integral part of the attack. I love that type of attack strategy as it allows for so many more creative an unpredictable attack options. I am looking forward to seeing it come about in the future.

[Vic]

Classic Italian soccer. Pack the box and shift left and right. Bog the game down and lull your opponent to sleep and then strike. Committing wing defenders? Can you say Maldini?

[Team Canada Supporter]

A couple comments as a coach:

- Lang has so much to offer from her right foot than anyone in the women's soccer world that she may have a tactical or technically bad game, but what she can offer, supersedes what may seem like a badly played game. The most frustrating thing about this beautiful game, is that a team can play a tacticfully amazing game and still lose a game 1-0 due to one amazing shot by the opponent. Lang has that to offer. Please, anyone name me anyone who can change a game from a shot on goal from 45-50 yards!?!?!?!?!?!?! There is nobody. Lang may have some parts of her game to be left to be desired, but her physical skills, natural abilities (yes these 2 are different) and her 2nd to none competitiveness on the ball make her a dangerous player for a complete 90 minute game. She must be on the field at all times, because she is one of the few game changers in international football.

- Sinclair is a top 5 player in the world, but she gets visibly frustrated on the field from her own teammates' choices of tackles/passes/shots. She did that too much this game. She has the most natural ability to score goals from any one I have had the pleasure to watch play the game. I hate to say that she tried to force some received balls and shots this game, but it seemed like whe was trying to force goal 100. She'll get it. Probably 200, but this game was a frustrating one for her. I will never label her as a sulker, but she visibly sulks ocasionally.

- Matheson is one of the most underrated mid-fielders in the world in terms of consistency.

- Chapman and Zurrer are indeed a pair to be reckined with. Chapman has naural ability that makes me think why she doesn't play as much as she should in Boston.

- JAR has game changing ability and is still maturing. Lay off her people. She exibits many weaknesses for sure, but their is more upside than downside.

- Timko and Franko were missed

- Wilkinson seems confused at times in the backfield. When she comes back, it's tough to deny her playing time from her competitiveness and speed, but she is without a position.

Overall:

Give the team some time, but when they keep losing close game after close game regardless of tactics (Pelleruds boot-n-go to Morace's possession style) vs. the USA demands it to question the players. In what way, one could ask them, but being close is not enough and it is by no means a moral victory.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by Team Canada Supporter

A couple comments as a coach:

- Lang has so much to offer from her right foot than anyone in the women's soccer world that she may have a tactical or technically bad game, but what she can offer, supersedes what may seem like a badly played game. The most frustrating thing about this beautiful game, is that a team can play a tacticfully amazing game and still lose a game 1-0 due to one amazing shot by the opponent. Lang has that to offer. Please, anyone name me anyone who can change a game from a shot on goal from 45-50 yards!?!?!?!?!?!?! There is nobody. Lang may have some parts of her game to be left to be desired, but her physical skills, natural abilities (yes these 2 are different) and her 2nd to none competitiveness on the ball make her a dangerous player for a complete 90 minute game. She must be on the field at all times, because she is one of the few game changers in international football.

- Sinclair is a top 5 player in the world, but she gets visibly frustrated on the field from her own teammates' choices of tackles/passes/shots. She did that too much this game. She has the most natural ability to score goals from any one I have had the pleasure to watch play the game. I hate to say that she tried to force some received balls and shots this game, but it seemed like whe was trying to force goal 100. She'll get it. Probably 200, but this game was a frustrating one for her. I will never label her as a sulker, but she visibly sulks ocasionally.

- Matheson is one of the most underrated mid-fielders in the world in terms of consistency.

- Chapman and Zurrer are indeed a pair to be reckined with. Chapman has naural ability that makes me think why she doesn't play as much as she should in Boston.

- JAR has game changing ability and is still maturing. Lay off her people. She exibits many weaknesses for sure, but their is more upside than downside.

- Timko and Franko were missed

- Wilkinson seems confused at times in the backfield. When she comes back, it's tough to deny her playing time from her competitiveness and speed, but she is without a position.

Overall:

Give the team some time, but when they keep losing close game after close game regardless of tactics (Pelleruds boot-n-go to Morace's possession style) vs. the USA demands it to question the players. In what way, one could ask them, but being close is not enough and it is by no means a moral victory.

Lang.. should only be used as a late sub at this point, her skill level and physical endurance do not allow her to be usefull for a full ninety minutes.

She may be a game breaker at a style where you catch a keeper off their line and take a hail mary strike, that is not going to be the way this new team under Morace puts balls into the net.

Sorry to say but she is very close to her last cap unless she does some hard work on her own, ever single day to eat properly, train intensely for physical strength and work on her foot skills.

She needs to hit a weight room and muscle up to be the very best physical specimen on the team, and to get a faster step to the ball and on her feet dribbling.

It can be done, the question for Lang is mentally is she tough enough to do it.

[The Ref]

^ I agree. Some of the same problems apply to others of the old guard as well. From what I see it doesn't look like there is an effort to overcome rustiness. Mental or physical. My concern is whether Morace, in the little time left, will she have the guts to streamline the team and start replacing old wood with new young and willing players. We seem to have enough of them around.

[Vic]

I don't know how many of you played in university, but there are two difficult parts. The first is the sense of commitment owed, and the second is the time. Managing good marks and good soccer at the div1 level isn't for everyone. Many people struggle with it. The more important and relevant factor though is her life. She got her first cap at 15 and has been front-and-center of the limelight for almost a decade. Not an easy job for someone just past puberty. There was no "normal" growing up, no hanging out, etc. It was soccer 24/7 and be careful what you eat, when you sleep, what you say, etc. The word Lohan comes to mind.

Regardless of whatever happens or doesn't happen on the field, there's good news - she's growing up! She ain't perfect, she ain't Barbie, and she ain't Marta (and btw, no one mentioned the balls in the air Lang took out of our box that Zurrer couldn't get to).

Let her get out of school and make a decision and then see what happens. In the meantime whatever happens, happens. If someone is better or worse, so be it. Best 11 on the field is the name of the game. But if she chooses a stint as a pro player, and she commits to that full-time like the other pros we have - my money's on her.

[Vic]

quote:My concern is whether Morace, in the little time left, will she have the guts to streamline the team and start replacing old wood with new young and willing players.

I've wondered the same thing many times. And which also brings up an important point. The focus is all on formation and tactics, but the players are equally or more important. I'm really curious to see our World Cup 11 next Fall and compare it to Pellerud's Olympic 11. Too bad we couldn't play them against each other. Now there's a game I'd pay $500 to see.

[page1of1]

What soccer methodology/stlye (I don’t even know if that’s the correct terminology, lol) do the girls play in their NCAA programs? I'm guessing they lean towards being possession oriented, but it's interesting that the Canadian girls are successful in their collegiate teams but it isn't exactly translating into their international play. There are probably a number of factors that contribute to this; does it all go back to Pellerud's style? time and money? the collection of players out there?...

(Probably just reiterating what everyone has already said.) Things are still a little shaky but do look promising. Defense looks like it’s shaping up pretty well, but much remains to be desired in the offense. They held possession well and passed along the ground in the Canadian half of the field, but as soon as they passed midfield it all sort of fell apart. They’d suddenly loft the ball into the air and lose possession, or try to spring a player but with too heavy of a touch on the ball.

Sinclair looked good, as did Julien. I totally cheered when Julien faked out a few defenders in the box (ohh, so close to a goal) and the fact that they call her Corky makes me like her even more!

I lothe the fact that it's so difficult to get news about the CWNT players. Does anyone know what's up with Randee Hermus? She hasn’t been called up this year, and if I remember correctly, although this might have been an old article I read, she’s been taking on more of a leadership role/coaching the youngins on the Whitecaps. It’s difficult to imagine that she’ll be 30 this year. Do you think she’ll be back with the national team?

I’m ecstatic about Parker being around because she’s been working her butt off on the pitch. What about bringing back players from the past like Katie Thorlakson? She was a scoring beast at Notre Dame.

[bjarne]

The playing styles on the different NCAA teams are all over the shop. You have your teams like Santa Clara and Portland that put the ball on the carpet and play very attractive soccer, you have your Big 10 teams like Ohio State, Illinois, Penn State that play a more physical, direct brand of soccer traditionally. There really is such a large variance. I definitely agree with you Vic that with a player like Lang, playing Division 1 soccer, while balancing national team, school marks etc, is a large commitment, and I for one for a second don't question Lang's committment. She is a physical specimen and at a school like UCLA I am sure spends large amounts of time in the weight room. Where I question where she fits into this team is from the standpoint that Morace is demanding a more technical brand of soccer, and that is just not Lang's strength, which was evident in the 2 US matches. I too am very interested in seeing the starting 11 in the next World Cup and like Vic would definitely chip my $500 in to see Morace's 11 versus Pellerud's 11.

With Hermus, I think she is done, especially with the emergence of Chapman and Zurrer. She has been plagued with shin splints throughout her career, if I remember correctly, as well. I'm interested to see what happens with Thorlakson. She is coming off of 2 ACL surgeries but her style is definitely extremely technical, so we'll see if she gets called in. Anyone hear anything if Latham or Nonen are going to get called in for a look at any point? I was just looking over box scores and saw Nonen played 90 minutes for LA Sol yesterday.

[sj]

biggest disappiontment Robinson

she gave the ball away too cheaply

her pass towards the canadian goal giving it straight to a us attacker

resulted in the goal.

caught the whole team sidefooted

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by sj

biggest disappiontment Robinson

she gave the ball away too cheaply

her pass towards the canadian goal giving it straight to a us attacker

resulted in the goal.

caught the whole team sidefooted

Sidefooted ? interesting term... not sure what it means exactly... not flatfooted by sidefooted .. so .. ?

[soccertaxi]

quote:Originally posted by page1of1

What about bringing back players from the past like Katie Thorlakson? She was a scoring beast at Notre Dame.

I saw Thorlakson play with the Whitecaps a few weeks ago, and she was not playing up front, if I remember correctly she was playing outside D...could have been outside mid, but I don't remember seeing her up the field at all. I didn't see anything spectacular either work rate or skillwise. She didn't seem to have the quickness and fire of old times. But that was just one game, probably not fair to judge her on that. Woeller, Stewart and Moscato were playing too and were definitely playing with more fire and having more impact on the game. Not surprising that they were called up.