rkomar

A good question to ask is: Is 30 million dollars enough money to go around? National programs are not cheap to operate. I don't think it is enough money. With over 6 billion dollars in revenue, would it kill FIFA to hand over a few tens of million dollars more to the women's programs? It would make a huge difference in many country's programs. It may even be good business sense in that the revenues from the women's side of things could go way up if the quality and viewer numbers keeps going up (a factor of 40 difference in revenues makes it look like there is plenty of room to grow there). With so much cash available to them, I think it's up to FIFA to explain why so little goes to the women.

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 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.

The slow-mo closeups of the fouls showed how the US players embellished so much. Instead of landing on their feet, they would often lift their feet on contact and flop to the ground. The ref fell for it most of the time. I don't mind that the US won the game; they were expected to. I'm just disgusted that the poor reffing was the difference that won them the game. Let's see if the same ref gets any more games in the tournament. Even more interesting, will the US get the same help playing against the French?

You can't blame VAR for the soft penalty. In fact, they offered it as something the ref should look at again. That's all they can do.

I can't believe the ref allowed that second penalty to stand. That contact was so weak compared with other shenanigans taking place in the penalty area. VAR gave her a chance to change her mind, but no...

I saw a lot of turnovers from Huitema against the Dutch, so I'm a bit mystified why she's getting so much love right now. I would put Leon ahead of her in this tournament.

I can see them now, when I couldn't see them before.

They are putting a moratorium on the automatic yellow card on each offence, but I'm sure the ref can hand out the card later for repeat offences.

It looked to me like we were over-excited in the game. Passes to where you hoped your teammate would be rather than where they can be. That's just an attitude problem. We were fine in terms of skill and fitness, we just need to address the mental side of things. I think we can be a lot better than we showed in that game. Hopefully they will use this experience to be more cold-blooded in the next game.

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.

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.

So she's thinking of those who don't have the privileges she has, and is protesting the situation. I don't see that as having gall. She's just trying to make things better, even if things are pretty good for her.

New Zealand, although good defensively, didn't really press the ball carrier very hard in either of their two games. So, both Canada and the Netherlands looked pretty comfortable on the ball in those games. Cameroon actually put more pressure on us when we had the ball, making us hurry the play more. So, although we looked to be playing better against New Zealand, I'm not going to be more confident until I see us play that well against the Dutch.

I don't think it's all for wasting time on the clock. It's also for slowing down the game and taking momentum away from your opponent. So, even if you stop the clock, I think you'll still see delay tactics.