Jump to content
admin

2019 Women's World Cup

Recommended Posts

Marta always struggled for more government and sponsor support for the women soccer in Brazil to little avail.  Perhaps all the great Marta, Cristiane and Formiga will now hang their boots.  I hope they still have some left in them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, _Vic_ said:

I have a history of two sentences with you, from which I have mental health issues. Good demonstration of respect.

Crikey! I post here about once every 4 years, during WWC. Prior to this, I've responded to you exactly twice (this year, and frankly I don't remember any prior exchanges). And it was YOU who engaged ME, and in a rather offensive way. Not very wise if you genuinely find my replies so mentally disturbing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ref in the Spain-US fulfilled the rule, where every favoured team is also favoured in reffing in this WC.

I thought she was terribly biased and struggled hard to come up with those penalties, which were iffy at least. In the last one, the player dives after being touched, however slightly. I found it unfair, and frustrating, since beating the US is tremendously hard to do. 

They continue to chat with the refs, complain, whine, and use their reps and gamesmanship to get an advantage, as they have been doing for years. Seriously: what US player looked really good today?

Spain is happy to have shown they can make the US look mediocre, and attack them, even handle them physically. But I think they have to be disappointed, in the big picture: it was a performance to maybe get to taking them out of the tournament, or at least get into the extra period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Is anyone watching Japan v Netherlands?  That Japanese goal demonstrates what is missing in Canada's play.  They weren't afraid to run in to the box, find space, use skill to turn on goal, and the passing!  Every time Canada got the ball to the top of the 18 it was to Sinclair with her back to goal, no support, and 3 Swedes making sure she couldn't turn.  I don't know if that was a tactical choice or if that just demonstrates the missing pieces in Canada's attack.  Either way, we can't keep pumping the ball down the wings with poor crosses in to the box.  It's not good enough. 

 

https://upload.streamja.com/mp4/gv/gvwz.mp4

Edited by Patrick
Now with video!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Wow.  When did the rules change so much?  An arm in a natural position straight down by her side, a ball pounded at close range hit it, and that decides a knock out game in the World Cup?  Japan attacked and attacked and attacked, with skill and creativity, and Holland gets through by pounding a ball in to a crowd?   2 minutes left but I don't see much hope.

Edit: Nope. Another game where the refereeing is front and centre.

Edited by Patrick
Game over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Patrick said:

Wow.  When did the rules change so much?  An arm in a natural position straight down by her side, a ball pounded at close range hit it, and that decides a knock out game in the World Cup?  Japan attacked and attacked and attacked, with skill and creativity, and Holland gets through by pounding a ball in to a crowd?   2 minutes left but I don't see much hope.

Edit: Nope. Another game where the refereeing is front and centre.

I hate this shift in the interpretation of handball.  I expect teams will start to deliberately target arms in the box.  It's easier than scoring in open play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not even sure the referees are interpreting the new law correctly:

Quote

The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above
situations:
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or
the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near
the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which is close to their body and has not
made their body unnaturally bigger

•if a player is falling and the ball touches their hand/arm when it is between their
body and the ground to support the body (but not extended to make the body
bigger)
•If the goalkeeper attempts to ‘clear’ (release into play) a throw-in or deliberate
kick from a team-mate but the ‘clearance’ fails, the goalkeeper can then handle
the ball

New Laws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 2:59 PM, Lofty said:

Crikey! I post here about once every 4 years, during WWC. Prior to this, I've responded to you exactly twice (this year, and frankly I don't remember any prior exchanges). And it was YOU who engaged ME, and in a rather offensive way. Not very wise if you genuinely find my replies so mentally disturbing!

You may only post here every four years but you carpet-bombed this thread with 61 posts. 

If you were Ernest Hemingway I'd say cool, or if you had great insight into the game. But I think like many people I struggled with whatever came into your head as opposed to well-thought out and expressed analysis.

And btw I said I've replied to you with two sentences from which you've said I have mental health issues. Maybe it's just me but struggling to see a connection from that to how many times you've replied to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just imagine if these federations cared about their women. Look at what happened to the European nations when they decided that they care. 

At the end of the day, only one country can win. I’m actually quite happy with Canada this tournament. I’m frustrated of course, but now that I’ve had 24 hours I really don’t think much needs to change. The players are there, young one are coming through.  Tactically we can improve but a coaching change can achieve that marvellously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RJB said:

Just imagine if these federations cared about their women. Look at what happened to the European nations when they decided that they care. 

At the end of the day, only one country can win. I’m actually quite happy with Canada this tournament. I’m frustrated of course, but now that I’ve had 24 hours I really don’t think much needs to change. The players are there, young one are coming through.  Tactically we can improve but a coaching change can achieve that marvellously. 

Oh, I think a lot needs to change.

If the majority of our players are not in Europe for 2023, we won't make it out of the group, and may not even qualify.  That is how fast things are evolving, when we are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/24/2019 at 12:21 PM, _Vic_ said:

I have a history of two sentences with you, from which I have mental health issues. Good demonstration of respect.

 

2 hours ago, _Vic_ said:

You may only post here every four years but you carpet-bombed this thread with 61 posts. 

If you were Ernest Hemingway I'd say cool, or if you had great insight into the game. But I think like many people I struggled with whatever came into your head as opposed to well-thought out and expressed analysis.

And btw I said I've replied to you with two sentences from which you've said I have mental health issues. Maybe it's just me but struggling to see a connection from that to how many times you've replied to me.

Huh? YOU are the one who said you have mental health issues! See above.

You started off with two quite offensive sentences and in spite of banging on about respect you seem to be continuing that theme.

My comment about how many times I've replied to you was in regard to the supposed mental health issues my posts have given you, not the number of sentences in your replies.

So far as the number of posts I have made on this thread, I'm inclined to take your comment about mental health issues a little more seriously knowing that you went to the trouble to generate that number. You may recall that many of them related to my taking an unpopular position regarding the USA goal celebrations which resulted in my responding to a number of people.

Honestly, I have respected and appreciated your contributions to this forum in the past and that is the only reason I am now showing restraint in my replies to your ongoing nonsensical and disingenuous (see above) jibes in my direction. I have no idea why you are doing it but now would be a good time to stop.

Make that 62.

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patrick said:

Wow.  When did the rules change so much?  An arm in a natural position straight down by her side, a ball pounded at close range hit it, and that decides a knock out game in the World Cup?  Japan attacked and attacked and attacked, with skill and creativity, and Holland gets through by pounding a ball in to a crowd?   2 minutes left but I don't see much hope.

Edit: Nope. Another game where the refereeing is front and centre.

I thought the ref did a very good job. 8/10. The one bad ref I have seen was Spain vs. USA. Spain definitely got jobbed there. It actually occurred to me that she could have taken a back hander.

As for the Netherlands pen, I've seen that same situation called many times over the years, including live at Newcastle vs. QPR (crowd screams for a pen and the ref gives it -- luckily that one was saved but Newcastle scored late to make it 1-1); and also not called many times. But with the new rule changes, I think it is a pen every time. I don't like it, but that is how I saw it.

Sorry if you saw that post as a thoughtless carpet bomb!

63. 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Patrick said:

I'm not even sure the referees are interpreting the new law correctly:

New Laws

Her arm was out to the side, not close to her body, thus making her body "unnaturally bigger". However, IMHO the arm was nevertheless in a "natural" position for balance; thus using the old "deliberate" handball rule, I would say not a pen.

Sorry for that thoughtless and poorly expressed analysis. OK, I'm done now. 😅

64. They do add up!

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh? YOU are the one who said you have mental health issues! See above.

"I have a history of two sentences with you, from which [you've determined] I have mental health issues." I figured your reference to passive aggressive disorder was pretty apparent.

ergo: "And btw I said I've replied to you with two sentences from which you've said I have mental health issues."

You started off with two quite offensive sentences and in spite of banging on about respect you seem to be continuing that theme.

Sentence number two is quite offensive?:

"The women's boards have always been a strong alternative community of people respecting each other and there's never been a need to ignore anyone. Hopefully that doesn't change."

So far as the number of posts I have made on this thread, I'm inclined to take your comment about mental health issues a little more seriously knowing that you went to the trouble to generate that number. 

Again, mental health attacks are pretty low.

Here's another number - 40. The number of people posting in this thread, of which one person has contributed over a quarter of the  comments to.

Honestly, I have respected and appreciated your contributions to this forum in the past and that is the only reason I am now showing restraint in my replies to your ongoing nonsensical and disingenuous (see above) jibes in my direction. I have no idea why you are doing it but now would be a good time to stop.

Ah yes, the innocent victim card again. When there is a pattern perhaps there is more to things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, _Vic_ said:

Huh? YOU are the one who said you have mental health issues! See above.

"I have a history of two sentences with you, from which [you've determined] I have mental health issues." I figured your reference to passive aggressive disorder was pretty apparent.

ergo: "And btw I said I've replied to you with two sentences from which you've said I have mental health issues."

You started off with two quite offensive sentences and in spite of banging on about respect you seem to be continuing that theme.

Sentence number two is quite offensive?:

"The women's boards have always been a strong alternative community of people respecting each other and there's never been a need to ignore anyone. Hopefully that doesn't change."

So far as the number of posts I have made on this thread, I'm inclined to take your comment about mental health issues a little more seriously knowing that you went to the trouble to generate that number. 

Again, mental health attacks are pretty low.

Here's another number - 40. The number of people posting in this thread, of which one person has contributed over a quarter of the  comments to.

Honestly, I have respected and appreciated your contributions to this forum in the past and that is the only reason I am now showing restraint in my replies to your ongoing nonsensical and disingenuous (see above) jibes in my direction. I have no idea why you are doing it but now would be a good time to stop.

Ah yes, the innocent victim card again. When there is a pattern perhaps there is more to things.

WTF! OK, I give up, you win!

For the record, I did not mean to imply nor do I think you have mental health issues. I was only responding facetiously to your rather dramatic assertion to that effect.

And I may as well also say that I don't feel like a victim here. I'm quite capable of shredding the gibberish you have posted above, but I guess it is up to me to stop the madness before we cross the event horizon! I'd rather just talk about the football.

You have given me a good laugh with that reply, so thanks for that!

Peace!

Edit: Only a quarter? I was hoping for at least a third!

65 and counting! 😁

 

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you got a good laugh. The right question is why I appeared out of the blue. Hopefully one day you figure that out. And hopefully now you'll:

a) stop polluting threads (volume) 
b) with every thought that comes into your head (content)
b) and think more about what you post (accuracy)

If you come back in four years with that under control, my job here is done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, admin said:

 

If the majority of our players are not in Europe for 2023, we won't make it out of the group, and may not even qualify.  That is how fast things are evolving, when we are not.

I agree with you for the most part, but this is not something the CSA has any influence over. If European clubs want to sign our players, great, if they don’t then they won’t. The only thing the CSA has any influence over in terms of leagues is whether or not there is one here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RJB said:

I agree with you for the most part, but this is not something the CSA has any influence over. If European clubs want to sign our players, great, if they don’t then they won’t. The only thing the CSA has any influence over in terms of leagues is whether or not there is one here. 

I'll preface this by saying I don't know what the rules are in European leagues compared to the NWSL.  That said, the CSA does subsidize some Canadian players in the NWSL.  There are no Canadian teams in the NWSL but there is some cooperation between the CSA and USSF.  Could Canada offer the same subsidy to European teams?  If there are no rules against that then why not?

I think we need to start thinking well outside the box when it comes to Canadian women's player development.  First, we have to admit that domestic leagues are there for entertainment and profitability for the owners and not to develop Canadian NT players.  That's a nice secondary benefit, sure.  Once we understand that, we have to admit a domestic women's league, especially one that is geographically national, just isn't going to happen.  We obviously need a quality league for our women to play in and develop, and I don't think the NWSL is it.  So what else could we do?  Me, I wonder if the CSA couldn't purchase a club in England, some small 'borough team and seed it with CWNT players or prospects.  Are there nationality rules in the FA WSL?  Is there an opportunity for a partnership with a European FA such that we could both benefit?  Us from existing infrastructure and geography, and them by improving the quality of the league?  

The NCAA isn't going to be able to keep up with the European teams, especially now that a transfer market is emerging for female players.  If European clubs can see the financial benefit of developing female players then the NCAA model of taking 18 year olds for 4 years of intermittent play will die.  Jordy Huitema is an example of that future.  Still, we need to develop depth, and we need to allow late bloomers a chance to bloom.  The current development model basically shuts girls down at 15 if they aren't identified as an elite prospect.  That's way too early.  If our best are integrated in to European leagues where will our depth players play?  Where will they get the chance to improve?  We can't afford to let the Europeans bury us like I think they will the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, rkomar said:

I hate this shift in the interpretation of handball.  I expect teams will start to deliberately target arms in the box.  It's easier than scoring in open play.

Not to mention the automatic yellow card.

The problem I have with the handball in the area penalty is that the punishment (an almost certain goal) is so often grossly disproportionate to the offence.

I'd like to see a rule with a penalty shot given if the handball was a) deliberate or b) it takes away a highly probable goal, otherwise, a free kick of some sort or nothing at all at the discretion of the referee. So, since the shot on net was prevented by the Japanese player, accidental or not, it would result in a penalty. For something like the PSG-ManU penalty (the ball hitting the arm of a defender with his back turned at the top of the area), a free kick or nothing. 

Years ago, I was in my team's 18 yard box, facing my keeper, when another defender blasted the ball to clear and it smashed into my arm. Penalty was called which, seems to me, to be totally absurd.

Anyway, I'm sure there must be excellent reasons why my scheme is a bad idea (maybe the rule was like that years ago) but I don't know how it could be any worse than what we have now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, _Vic_ said:

Glad you got a good laugh. The right question is why I appeared out of the blue. Hopefully one day you figure that out. And hopefully now you'll:

a) stop polluting threads (volume) 
b) with every thought that comes into your head (content)
b) and think more about what you post (accuracy)

If you come back in four years with that under control, my job here is done.

Oh boy, you just don't give up.

a) I'll continue to post as much as I like!

b) So you are a mind reader. Very impressive.

c) You have not cited one single instance of inaccuracy. Although it would take much more than that to support your sweeping assertion.

If you job was to come on here and behave like an a$$hole, it certainly is job done!

Why don't you just stop posting nonsense and clue in to how little I care about what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, _Vic_ said:

Huh? YOU are the one who said you have mental health issues! See above.

"I have a history of two sentences with you, from which [you've determined] I have mental health issues." I figured your reference to passive aggressive disorder was pretty apparent.

ergo: "And btw I said I've replied to you with two sentences from which you've said I have mental health issues."

My reference was to your passive agressive comment, not a mental disorder. YOU are the one who said you had mental health issues. Duh!

16 hours ago, _Vic_ said:

You started off with two quite offensive sentences and in spite of banging on about respect you seem to be continuing that theme.

Sentence number two is quite offensive?:

"The women's boards have always been a strong alternative community of people respecting each other and there's never been a need to ignore anyone. Hopefully that doesn't change."

What pathetic weasel words. Your post was an aggressive attack hidden behind a thin veneer of civility. And you try to weasel out by saying one sentence was fine?!! Man up!

16 hours ago, _Vic_ said:

So far as the number of posts I have made on this thread, I'm inclined to take your comment about mental health issues a little more seriously knowing that you went to the trouble to generate that number. 

Again, mental health attacks are pretty low.

Here's another number - 40. The number of people posting in this thread, of which one person has contributed over a quarter of the  comments to.

To call that a mental health attack is ridiculous. It was very obviously a facetious reference to YOUR comment about mental health.

You seem a little obsessed.

16 hours ago, _Vic_ said:

Honestly, I have respected and appreciated your contributions to this forum in the past and that is the only reason I am now showing restraint in my replies to your ongoing nonsensical and disingenuous (see above) jibes in my direction. I have no idea why you are doing it but now would be a good time to stop.

Ah yes, the innocent victim card again. When there is a pattern perhaps there is more to things.

That was an attempt to de-escalate, but like a true a$$hole you use it to make another insult. You could not victimize me on your very best day.

I guess you still want to fight, so let's GO! In case you didn't realize it, that ridiculous reply made you look like a pathetic weasel. Keep it up!

The event horizon looms...

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't give up? Interesting comment after another two posts of throwing down.

And you've thrown in another disorder now too. But oh wait, you're just being facetious. Of course.

"I'm quite capable of shredding the gibberish you have posted above. You have given me a good laugh with that reply, so thanks for that!"

Yeah, you attempted to de-escalate. It's so clear.

For someone who doesn't feel like a victim to be repeatedly posting you're the innocent who people keep picking fights with and you don't understand why is a bit out of character.

F*ck this is a pathetic display. How about this one. What can I say, you bring out the a$$hole in me. That's your gift. 

I've expressed my thoughts pretty clearly. And I'll do what I should have done after two sentences and said thanks. Lesson learned and apologies to everyone who had to stomach such a wretched display of humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 12:21 PM, _Vic_ said:

I have a history of two sentences with you, from which I have mental health issues. Good demonstration of respect.

 

54 minutes ago, _Vic_ said:

I don't give up? Interesting comment after another two posts of throwing down.

And you've thrown in another disorder now too. But oh wait, you're just being facetious. Of course.

YOU are the one who said you had mental health issues, not me! You can keep trying to weasel out of it but the post is there for all to see. Man up!

57 minutes ago, _Vic_ said:

"I'm quite capable of shredding the gibberish you have posted above. You have given me a good laugh with that reply, so thanks for that!"

Yeah, you attempted to de-escalate. It's so clear.

Another not very clever attempt at spin. That quote is from when I realized you were determined to fight no matter what. Here is the correct quote:

Honestly, I have respected and appreciated your contributions to this forum in the past and that is the only reason I am now showing restraint in my replies to your ongoing nonsensical and disingenuous (see above) jibes in my direction. I have no idea why you are doing it but now would be a good time to stop.

1 hour ago, _Vic_ said:

For someone who doesn't feel like a victim to be repeatedly posting you're the innocent who people keep picking fights with and you don't understand why is a bit out of character.

You will probably understand how little regard I have for your thoughts on character after all the disingenuous and weasely posts you have made here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2019 at 10:00 PM, _Vic_ said:

I've really struggled with your posts from volume, content and accuracy perspectives. Please think more and post less.

And just so it is clear, THIS is the passive aggressive post (not disorder!) that kicked off this sh!t show. It is YOURS, not mine. And it is clearly and intentionally offensive.

I admit I could have backed out at any time so I hold my hand up to that, but your smug and sanctimonious demeanour somehow impelled me forward, even after I had decided to just leave it.

Apologies to all. I am done now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...