Jump to content
admin

2019 Women's World Cup

Recommended Posts

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

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
22 hours ago, Lofty said:

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.

Glad to read you are all done now.  Finally no more of your pedantic posts or any other posts of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a **** show this forum has become. How about that WWC??? England and France look decent but I worry those annoying American girls will walk away with the hardware. I think I will be cheering for my teenage home.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your emoji-laden inane rambling about ******* linesmen really gets to the heart of my first statement. Of course a German England final could happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really great that we haven't seen penalties yet.  With four matches left, when was the last tournament to have penalties either at this stage or for the whole thing?

Edit:  That was easy, the 2007 World Cup had no penalties at all, but the knockout round started with a quarter-final.  Same with 2003, and 1991.

But as far as tournaments that have a Round of 16, no tournament - men or women - has ever gone through to the semi-finals without penalties.

Edited by RJB

Share this post


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

Really great that we haven't seen penalties yet.  With four matches left, when was the last tournament to have penalties either at this stage or for the whole thing?

Edit:  That was easy, the 2007 World Cup had no penalties at all, but the knockout round started with a quarter-final.  Same with 2003, and 1991.

But as far as tournaments that have a Round of 16, no tournament - men or women - has ever gone through to the semi-finals without penalties.

LOL, I just realised that there was penalties... Norway v. Australia in the Round of 16. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USA wins World Cup but again a controversial penalty given to US in second half when game was still 0-0. Penalty in soccer will probably never change but again in a sport where it’s so hard to score to give penalties for things like that like was given in this game is something I’ll never can come to grips with. Penalties should only be given if a foul was committed stopping a clear goal opportunity and for nothing else , for example I take a shot that is heading away from the goal to say the corner flag and it hits a hand and it’s called a penalty makes no sense , the ball was not going into the net, it wasn’t a clear goal opportunity but yet it’s called a penalty makes no sense to me I’m sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think it was a penalty when I first saw it. I also thought Morgan embellished it as she has done all through the tournament. 

But in the end it was a weak foul but high boot being dangerous tipped it. It was a dumb play by the Dutch player as Morgan was going from the goal.

I think the players are going to have to adjust to VAR and stop making low probability, high risk plays in the box anymore along with keeping their hands to the side. Tougher for the women since they don't play in leagues using VAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, red card said:

I didn't think it was a penalty when I first saw it. I also thought Morgan embellished it as she has done all through the tournament. 

But in the end it was a weak foul but high boot being dangerous tipped it. It was a dumb play by the Dutch player as Morgan was going from the goal.

I think the players are going to have to adjust to VAR and stop making low probability, high risk plays in the box anymore along with keeping their hands to the side. Tougher for the women since they don't play in leagues using VAR.

I didn't see a foul that warranted giving the U.S. a goal.  Had it not been for it the game would have finished 0-0.  The introduction of the VAR was an asinine FIFA's decision that has changed the game from football to "look at me but don't touch me".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that situation, the VAR can only bring the referee's attention to it.  It was the referee that called the penalty after reviewing the video, not the VAR.  I thought it was a weak foul, and Morgan did embellish it, but in the end it was the Dutch player who invited that disaster.

Share this post


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

In that situation, the VAR can only bring the referee's attention to it.  It was the referee that called the penalty after reviewing the video, not the VAR.  I thought it was a weak foul, and Morgan did embellish it, but in the end it was the Dutch player who invited that disaster.

I turned off the TV when the penalty was awarded, Morgan deserved a yellow card.

 

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...