Jump to content
admin

2019 Women's World Cup

Recommended Posts

The view from the camera behind the goal line made it look like the defender jumped in front and then hip-checked the forward.  I was also doubtful about the call, but changed my mind after seeing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rkomar said:

The view from the camera behind the goal line made it look like the defender jumped in front and then hip-checked the forward.  I was also doubtful about the call, but changed my mind after seeing that.

Either way it was a judgement call and a close one at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sport Shaman said:

Either way it was a judgement call and a close one at that.

Yes, I agree.  I've been gaining more confidence in that particular referee as the tournament goes on, so I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.  She seems to have a good handle on the games.

Share this post


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

When you listen to USWNT players speak in interviews it's like they have a PR rep feeding them lines about "doing it for the next generation"  or "we all think about the young players, not us", but their actions scream self-centred (insert not nice term) and I think the second face is their real one.  They are the white suburban princesses of blue state America.  They're cookie cutter make-up wearing barbies complaining about pay (some complaints justified, some just delusional), about the turf they play on, and about the patriarchy keeping them down.  They have no self-awareness, no acknowledgement that their pay-to-play success is part of the problem.  They get right upset if anyone suggests that the lack of African American players on the team is due to anything but the current players being the best.  Yeah, Megan Rapinoe might be fighting the good fight but if you have a good hard look at her, her actions celebrating goals, her choices in appearance, and her forms of protest, I can't help but think she is much more interested in Megan Rapinoe than whatever oppressed people she says she is supporting.

And I'll take it "There" - Rapinoe is a lesbian.  How do we know?  Because she tells us, and tells us, and tells us.  She is so utterly wrapped up in herself that she thinks we all want to know all about her, too.  Did you know she's the first lesbian to do an SI swimsuit shoot?  Don't worry, she's got her people telling you that. 

Do you know who else is a lesbian?  Christine Sinclair.  I have followed her career since she was 16 and I didn't know that until recently.  You know why?  Because she's never made it the cornerstone of who she is.  Frankly, I can go down the US roster and tell you personal details on most of them, but I couldn't tell you which Canadian player swings which way and frankly I prefer that low key approach.  I am happy for Christine Sinclair, as far as I knowshe's married, she has a life outside soccer, she deserves that, but I don't need to know the details to appreciate her skills on the field.

Frankly, lesbians in womens sports aren't shocking.  They have been accepted for decades in Western countries.  Being an out lesbian today isn't brave.  When a man comes out in sport, that's brave.  But the patriarchy...

You could be mostly right, but if you have not experienced some form of discrimination of an arbitrary nature for reasons of difference, you should not be posting such stuff. And if you have, you'd know better. There are lots of places in Canada, probably a majority, where you cannot be an out lesbian with any kind of comfort at all. 

Watched Kerr score 4 today, all needed (it was 2-1 and S Africa attacking when she got the third), goals to ensure a classification. Not even the first was celebrated as childishly as Rapinoe et al with their umpteenth for the team.

Share this post


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

You could be mostly right, but if you have not experienced some form of discrimination of an arbitrary nature for reasons of difference, you should not be posting such stuff. And if you have, you'd know better. There are lots of places in Canada, probably a majority, where you cannot be an out lesbian with any kind of comfort at all.

Thanks for your wisdom but I stand quite firmly behind what I wrote.  In athletics there is no bravery in being out if you're a woman.  You know what takes courage these day?  Being a female Christian athlete.  Apparently you're a homophobe if you are a Christian and don't want to support Pride by wearing a Pride themed jersey.  I remember the outcry over Kendall Waston, as well.  Believe it or not, you can have a religious opinion and not hate LGBTQ people.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Patrick friendly note: we have an informal policy of "no politics" on this forum. This is a football forum and people come here to read about and talk about football, not politics.

People usually have strong opinions when it comes to politics and a short fuse with those who differ, so that threads can go absolutely nuts. Luckily this part of the forum is not highly frequented but in other areas your post would probably blow up the thread.

I appreciate you have strong feelings on these topics, as do I, and it so happens that I mostly agree with you, but this is not the place for that particular debate.

Share this post


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

 You know what takes courage these day?  Being a female Christian athlete

 

12 hours ago, Patrick said:

Being an out lesbian today isn't brave. 

Give me a break.  This is so unintelligent, misinformed, and disconnected from the reality of the world.

When privilege starts to look like equality, it's often perceived as oppression.  There is a lot of ignorance in what you're saying here.  Next are you going to try to say that Christmas is under attack? 

Whether you like the US team or not, there sexuality is completely irrelevant.  What is relevant is that they are doing all of the same things that Christine Sinclair and her teammates are doing, and that is realizing that they have to leave the game in a better place than where it was when they started.  You know, the campsite rule.  You call it self-serving and self-promotion, but really it is integral to making things better for girls and women around the world. 

Patrick, I'm sure that your life is so much more challenging than anyone else, but perhaps you should stick to watching Bill O'Reilly and telling yourself what a bunch of snowflakes everyone else but you is.  Spare us from this tripe.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RJB said:

When privilege starts to look like equality, it's often perceived as oppression.  There is a lot of ignorance in what you're saying here.  Next are you going to try to say that Christmas is under attack? 

When was the last time a woman was kicked off the USWNT for being a lesbian?  And for being Christian?  Equality mean equality, right?

8 hours ago, RJB said:

there sexuality is completely irrelevant.  What is relevant is that they are doing all of the same things that Christine Sinclair and her teammates are doing, and that is realizing that they have to leave the game in a better place than where it was when they started.  You know, the campsite rule.  You call it self-serving and self-promotion, but really it is integral to making things better for girls and women around the world. 

Their sexuality is irrelevant, and yet Megan Rapinoe can't shut up about it.  She is so oppressed for being a lesbian!!  What Sinclair is doing is being a human being who happens to be a lesbian and the best female soccer player the world has seen.  She inspires girls, and she and her teammates have actually been part of building a better program in a country where just 20 years ago people on forums like this didn't want to fund the program.  Rapinoe?  Not so much.

 

8 hours ago, RJB said:

Patrick, I'm sure that your life is so much more challenging than anyone else, but perhaps you should stick to watching Bill O'Reilly and telling yourself what a bunch of snowflakes everyone else but you is.  Spare us from this tripe.

Spare me your cheap personal attacks.  You know nothing about me, and your reading comprehension is lacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, admin said:

If you guys want to talk about this stuff, do it on Reddit. 

 

Agreed. I took the bait. 

Looking forward to tomorrow, seeing us face our toughest challenge of the tournament so far.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

An interesting article about attendance numbers for this World Cup. Of note, total ticket sales are just over 1 million while the 2015 edition had 1.3 million.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/jun/18/womens-world-cup-empty-seats-fifa-france-2019

Also the David Squires' cartoon re: VAR in the France v. Nigeria match is great:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2019/jun/18/david-squires-on-the-womens-world-cup-goals-and-good-old-var

Edited by sloth8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VAR.  What more than I can say?  Scotland was robbed.  Once again poor officiating has hurt this tournament.  The women deserve better than being a training ground for unqualified female referees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I thought the late pen against Scotland was legit but the subsequent save should definitely have stood. And by the way, it took about 7:30 to take the pen (from initial call to re-take being scored) and then there are only 4 added mins? WTF? Anyway, "three nil, and you mucked it up..." (G-rated version).

Edit: I particularly enjoyed the quip from the notorious English rag linked above about VAR being used "to reduce the massive advantage goalkeepers currently have on a free shot from 12 yards out". Very droll. Just dispense with the penalty kick already and award a goal.

England vs. Japan was interesting. Japanese high press is extremely effective and they get an extraordinary number of turn overs in their opponent's half. England meanwhile move the ball around very well and create good scoring chances. Just about deserved to win after intense late Japan pressure but 2-1 would have been more reflective of the play. No controversies in this one. And I don't think anybody really cares who won.

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


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

VAR.  What more than I can say?  Scotland was robbed.  Once again poor officiating has hurt this tournament.  The women deserve better than being a training ground for unqualified female referees.

I think that overall the refs have been very good. Certainly not obviously worse that the refs at the men's World Cup, although those matches are harder to officiate. Pretty much all of the problems have been with VAR but I think more with policy rather than actual decisions.

You are only looking at it from the players' point of view. They don't have to compete with the men. How do female officials gain top flight experience if not at the Women's World Cup? This is the pinnacle of the game for female players and I fully support it being the pinnacle of the game for female officials too.

Share this post


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

I think that overall the refs have been very good. Certainly not obviously worse that the refs at the men's World Cup, although those matches are harder to officiate. Pretty much all of the problems have been with VAR but I think more with policy rather than actual decisions.

You are only looking at it from the players' point of view. They don't have to compete with the men. How do female officials gain top flight experience if not at the Women's World Cup? This is the pinnacle of the game for female players and I fully support it being the pinnacle of the game for female officials too. 

I don't think the officiating has been that great, but my opinion is informed as much by past officiating, say a certain game at the 2012 Olympics, as these particular matches. But we can disagree.  On your second point,  yes, I am totally taking the player's point of view.  They work hard to get to this level and they deserve the best available officiating, not the best available female refereeing.  I think perhaps the intrusiveness of the VAR is an attempt to back up some the less qualified officials.  As to how female referees get top flight experience?  By refereeing in top flight leagues.  There are female assistant referees in the English Premier League.  There is nothing stopping female referees from working anywhere, even a men's World Cup.  I don't think the WWC should be a training ground for anyone.  I know some of the English players agree, at least based on their comments regarding Super League officiating.

Believe me, I want more women referees, I want my own daughter to referee, but the players deserve the best officiating possible and this rule prevents that.

Share this post


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

I don't think the officiating has been that great, but my opinion is informed as much by past officiating, say a certain game at the 2012 Olympics, as these particular matches. But we can disagree.  On your second point,  yes, I am totally taking the player's point of view.  They work hard to get to this level and they deserve the best available officiating, not the best available female refereeing.  I think perhaps the intrusiveness of the VAR is an attempt to back up some the less qualified officials.  As to how female referees get top flight experience?  By refereeing in top flight leagues.  There are female assistant referees in the English Premier League.  There is nothing stopping female referees from working anywhere, even a men's World Cup.  I don't think the WWC should be a training ground for anyone.  I know some of the English players agree, at least based on their comments regarding Super League officiating.

Believe me, I want more women referees, I want my own daughter to referee, but the players deserve the best officiating possible and this rule prevents that.

1. Female players are MUCH better now than they have ever been. And so are female refs.

2. VAR has already been used in England for men's matches (amid much controversy)! It isn't for backing up weak refs!

3. Officials work hard too. You could make the same argument with female players: let them compete with the men and they will make it if they are good enough. The reality is that if female officials have to always compete with the men, opportunities will be extremely limited. I'd support your POV if there were very few good female officials but that is clearly not the case.

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... I'm surprised by user name and password works because it's been forever since I logged in.  You can kind of tell that even my user name is outdated.  But whatever.  I'll keep it for memories.

Does anyone have any predictions for Canada vs Netherlands tomorrow?  I think as much as everyone saying that Netherlands will be a tough opponent, Canada is truly the better team.  I hope that they can show it tomorrow.  I predict a Canada win like 1-0.  Looking forward to hearing what everyone else thinks.

Also, the commentators (Kyle, Matheson, etc.) are saying that it is more advantageous for Canada to finish the group because being first means playing Japan, and being second means playing Sweden who they think is tougher than Japan.  I am not sure if I agree with that given that Japan is ranked higher than Sweden and that Canada has had better luck beating Sweden in recent years.  Again, I look forward to hearing your thoughts.  The whole purpose of a discussion is to hear different opinions and predictions.  So don't be afraid to say that you have a different opinion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sinc_Tanc_Olympic_Action said:

Also, the commentators (Kyle, Matheson, etc.) are saying that it is more advantageous for Canada to finish the group because being first means playing Japan, and being second means playing Sweden who they think is tougher than Japan.

If Canada goes into the game thinking that a draw will be best because then they'll finish second is the type of thing that cases Fate to step in and have USA lose and finish second.   There are no guarantees, they are both opponents that can beat Canada. 

5 hours ago, Lofty said:

1. Female players are MUCH better now than they have ever been. And so are female refs.

2. VAR has already been used in England for men's matches (amid much controversy)! It isn't for backing up weak refs!

3. Officials work hard too. You could make the same argument with female players: let them compete with the men and they will make it if they are good enough. The reality is that if female officials have to always compete with the men, opportunities will be extremely limited. I'd support your POV if there were very few good female officials but that is clearly not the case.

This is such a superb response.  We can't watch this tournament and expect it to be a carbon-copy of World Cup Russia.  This has been a superb tournament so far with a higher standard than ever.  And we should expect that 2023 will be even better.  It's such a great era for Women's soccer.  And the refereeing has been fine if you ask me.  Any issues with VAR are VAR issues and perhaps we could blame the evolution of that rather than blaming female refs. 

 

Share this post


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

Wow... I'm surprised by user name and password works because it's been forever since I logged in.  You can kind of tell that even my user name is outdated.  But whatever.  I'll keep it for memories.

Does anyone have any predictions for Canada vs Netherlands tomorrow?  I think as much as everyone saying that Netherlands will be a tough opponent, Canada is truly the better team.  I hope that they can show it tomorrow.  I predict a Canada win like 1-0.  Looking forward to hearing what everyone else thinks.

Also, the commentators (Kyle, Matheson, etc.) are saying that it is more advantageous for Canada to finish the group because being first means playing Japan, and being second means playing Sweden who they think is tougher than Japan.  I am not sure if I agree with that given that Japan is ranked higher than Sweden and that Canada has had better luck beating Sweden in recent years.  Again, I look forward to hearing your thoughts.  The whole purpose of a discussion is to hear different opinions and predictions.  So don't be afraid to say that you have a different opinion!

I really don't have a good feel for what will happen tomorrow. I'm going to say 1-1 and we will see some squad rotation on both teams because this match really doesn't matter much. And this is why:

Probable path to final:

1st: Japan / (China/Italy) / Germany.

2nd: Sweden / Germany / (Netherlands/Japan).

Although I agree with you that Japan are likely to be a bit tougher than Sweden, I think I prefer the 1st place path because I think Sweden will be slightly tougher than (China/Italy). And Germany in the semis rather than quarters is better. But overall, not a huge difference.

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


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

VAR.  What more than I can say?  Scotland was robbed.  Once again poor officiating has hurt this tournament.  The women deserve better than being a training ground for unqualified female referees.

It was a penalty (the ball moved forward and the player was tackled thus the call). keeper broke the rule thus the retake,  Scotland BLEW a 3 goal lead. They must blame themselves.

Share this post


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

It was a penalty (the ball moved forward and the player was tackled thus the call). keeper broke the rule thus the retake,  Scotland BLEW a 3 goal lead. They must blame themselves.

Scotland was robbed:

The Premier League has VAR, but they're not going to allow this.  And I doubt they are gong to make their ARs wait 10 seconds while the video ref calls the off-sides.  As I said, this WWC is using VAR at an incredibly intrusive level.  Why?  Because the refereeing is not up to the task.  Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong, but if you do please also tell me why VAR is being used like this at the WWC.  Is this now some minor league test tournament suited for experimental rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had some good moments today but there was a lot of sloppy play and way too many hopeful long balls that didn’t really have much chance of finding a target. I guess a 2-1 loss against Netherlands is respectable, but I was not impressed with the team today.   On the bright side, Sinclair got one goal closer to the record. 

Share this post


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

Scotland was robbed:

The Premier League has VAR, but they're not going to allow this.  And I doubt they are gong to make their ARs wait 10 seconds while the video ref calls the off-sides.  As I said, this WWC is using VAR at an incredibly intrusive level.  Why?  Because the refereeing is not up to the task.  Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong, but if you do please also tell me why VAR is being used like this at the WWC.  Is this now some minor league test tournament suited for experimental rules?

I would say that the refs at the VAR booth are not up to task either.  It is absurd to referee a game from TV screens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

We had some good moments today but there was a lot of sloppy play and way too many hopeful long balls that didn’t really have much chance of finding a target. I guess a 2-1 loss against Netherlands is respectable, but I was not impressed with the team today.   On the bright side, Sinclair got one goal closer to the record. 

I think we reached our Peter Principle.  Next probably will be Sweden and that will be another very tough game.

Edited by The Ref

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

We had some good moments today but there was a lot of sloppy play and way too many hopeful long balls that didn’t really have much chance of finding a target. I guess a 2-1 loss against Netherlands is respectable, but I was not impressed with the team today.   On the bright side, Sinclair got one goal closer to the record.  

The European teams are getting better, fast.  We have to find a way to get our prospects playing in the European leagues.  The NWSL is simply not a good enough league to develop our young talent.  That league doesn't have the budget, support, or facilities to match European clubs.  Huitema choosing to pass on the NCAA is, strangely, a good sign.  If our players are good enough to play in Europe and the pay is enough to justify delaying an education then that's where we should be sending them.

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...