2019 Women's World Cup

sheroman01

cjmc wrote: »

Commentators say it’s a poor game , I thought it’s engrossing. Only saw the second half though

Your man on BBC? I wouldn't take his word on anything, dreadful commentator. Condescending, no interest and sounds like he's about to fall asleep.

Harry Palmr

Some appalling football here. Tired or not it's hair tearing at times, who'd be a coach?

sheroman01

caviardreams wrote: »

What a save by Lindahl!

Incredible save. Ball came through a lot of bodies too. Keeps it at 0-0 in a WC semi final. Save of the tournament for me, and there's been a few great contenders.

c.p.w.g.w

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Some appalling football here. Tired or not it's hair tearing at times, who'd be a coach?

Don't think its as bad as the commentators are saying...its not great but not that bad.

With all the soft VAR pen's in the tournament, it managed to missed a fairly textbook one

caviardreams

Ah jaysus. Poor Sweden.

Harry Palmr

The goal was well taken but the keeper was not quite as full stretched as she should have been.

~Rebel~

Dutch 1-0 up - great finish from Groenen bang in the bottom corner.

Wonder how the Netherlands will play now... try to keep possession the same as they have the rest of extra time, or fall back? If they do the latter, I could definitely see the Swedes getting another chance or two.

Harry Palmr

Sweden not crowding the keeper to any great effect. A bit of tactical time wasting now.

Swedish keeper living dangerously there.

Harry Palmr

The Yanks will cruise to victory.

(Last night's game got a peak of about 11.5m which is one of the biggest audiences of the year).

citytillidie

Third Place Play-off
Saturday 6th July 16:00
England V Sweden

Final
Sunday 7th July 16:00
USA V Netherlands

is_that_so

Probably safe to say US start as hot favourites. Credit to the Dutch for driving on in ET. Despite the indifferent performance at times, some great skill in the team, pretty solid defence and Van Sanden should start, just to torment the US backs! They'll also cause the US problems in set pieces.

is_that_so

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The Yanks will cruise to victory.

(Last night's game got a peak of about 11.5m which is one of the biggest audiences of the year).

Don't know about cruising but they should win. Dutch will be very physical and I reckon will hang on for a bit anyway!

~Rebel~

That's that... bit gutted for the Swedes. Should have won it in normal time had VAR been doing its job. Somehow missed a stonewall penalty.

Will miss seeing Jakobsson, quality player.

unkel

Some game. Sweden was better in all respects. More physical, better passes, just stronger. Some call it boring, I just call it the build up. No goals doesn't mean boring per se. But that overweight from the Swedes started to crumble a bit in the last 15-20 minutes or so. Perhaps they are generally not that much used to the heat. Dutch had strong comeback towards the end of the match, both teams dangerous at times. Then in extra time it was all Dutch really. Of course particularly after the goal. And what a goal that was from a tiny midfielder who had only scored twice before in over 50 caps

The underdog won. I doubt the underdog will win again against the might of the USA, but looking forward to the match for sure

siblers

FatherTed wrote: »

Oh Please. These women have played in more games than you've ever participated in. It was a focusing problem, they're in a WC Semi and want to get the ball moving asap and made a simple mistake.

I see foul throws all the time in the Prem(foot over the line, leg up when throwing etc) but the refs very rarely call them.

I find these womens games quite refreshing, way less diving, less cynical fouling and less complaining to the ref compared to the men.

Nope, I've played hundreds of games as a full back so I always pay particular attention to foul throws, it always annoys me when they aren't given in the mens game but there are rarely foul throws and Ive seen a fair few been penalised but in the women's world cup, I've seen one foul throw been penalised so far at the World Cup and all the others been allowed, this is meant to be elite level and it just looks amateurish.

My partner was watching with me and she plays club soccer and she thinks it's ridiculous too. It might seem like a minor thing to be critical for but it's the kind of thing that stops a lot of people taking the woman's game serious and I say this as someone who regularly watches and support the womens game

unkel

FatherTed wrote: »

I find these womens games quite refreshing, way less diving, less cynical fouling and less complaining to the ref compared to the men.

Funny you mention that. Until a few days ago I had never watched a womens game before. Watched the quarter finals just because it was on the telly in the house I was staying. Holland-Italy.

Was fascinating. I was very impressed about their technical skills, found it really enjoyable to watch. After a while it dawned on me that there was no diving, no theatrics, no exaggerations of injuries, far less yellow card fouling. Like you say, refreshing, a bit of a revelation even. The ladies were playing the game as it should be played. Far more heroic than any mens soccer game I have ever watched.

I thoroughly enjoyed watching the match tonight too. Fair play to women's soccer in general and to all those women playing it.

Blinky Plebum

unkel wrote: »

Funny you mention that. Until a few days ago I had never watched a womens game before. Watched the quarter finals just because it was on the telly in the house I was staying. Holland-Italy.

Was fascinating. I was very impressed about their technical skills, found it really enjoyable to watch. After a while it dawned on me that there was no diving, no theatrics, no exaggerations of injuries, far less yellow card fouling. Like you say, refreshing, a bit of a revelation even. The ladies were playing the game as it should be played. Far more heroic than any mens soccer game I have ever watched.

I thoroughly enjoyed watching the match tonight too. Fair play to women's soccer in general and to all those women playing it.

These were World Cup quarter and semi finals, no need to talk about the players like it was group of eight year old kids you were watching.

eagle eye

Blinky Plebum wrote:

These were World Cup quarter and semi finals, no need to talk about the players like it was group of eight year old kids you were watching.

Did you quote the wrong post or are we supposed to somehow figure out that you are joking?

ThunbergsAreGo

eagle eye wrote: »

Blinky Plebum wrote:

These were World Cup quarter and semi finals, no need to talk about the players like it was group of eight year old kids you were watching.

Did you quote the wrong post or are we supposed to somehow figure out that you are joking?

I assume it was the fair play comment.

On a side note it's been nice to see people speak primarily positively about the tournament and treat the players as human, with no abuse or vitriol when mistakes etc occur.

It would be great to see fans and the media take this approach in men's football.

Blinky Plebum

eagle eye wrote: »

Did you quote the wrong post or are we supposed to somehow figure out that you are joking?

It was the overall patronising ( i felt) tone of the post.

The last comment "Fair play to women's soccer in general and to all those women playing it." is like the sort of thing you'd say about a kids team and the people involved with them.

These players at the latter stages of the world cup are professionals nobody talks like that about female Athletes,Tennis players,Golfers,Swimmers etc.

Mars Bar

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

It was the overall patronising ( i felt) tone of the post.

The last comment "Fair play to women's soccer in general and to all those women playing it." is like the sort of thing you'd say about a kids team and the people involved with them.

These players at the latter stages of the world cup are professionals nobody talks like that about female Athletes,Tennis players,Golfers,Swimmers etc.

His intentions are all in the right place, I feel.

The last sentence was a bit patronising, I agree, but it's coming from a good place. It's nice to see people allowing themselves to be pleasantly surprised by the standard of the game now.

Omackeral

Didn't see anything patronising in that post above. All I saw was praise and the poster being impressed. I myself have never watched a full game of Women's football until this tournament and now I'm
strung out on it. I fly home to make sure I get kick off or else have it set to record.

Sounds to me like the poster above was pleasantly surprised by what they've been watching and was encouraged by the sport and its athletes in general.

Blinky Plebum

Omackeral wrote: »

Didn't see anything patronising in that post above. All I saw was praise and the poster being impressed. I myself have never watched a full game of Women's football until this tournament and now I'm
strung out on it. I fly home to make sure I get kick off or else have it set to record.

Sounds to me like the poster above was pleasantly surprised by what they've been watching and was encouraged by the sport and its athletes in general.

I guess the point I was making is why should anybody be surprised by it.

They should be good at what they do, the players at the top level all get paid money, they play with club teams around the world and they put a huge amount of effort into what they do.Fact is the players should be good footballers.

Nobody acts with awe when they see female athletes in other sports yet for some reason people this summer some people seem to be amazed that these women are half decent at soccer and that the sport isn't laughably bad.The last world cup and euros were quiet good aswell so it isn't even that suddenly this summer they players have improved ten fold.

unkel

I didn't mean to be patronising at all. But I can see how you read it that way. It's probably to do with my complete unawareness of women's soccer. I had never seen a match before and I had no idea it was at this level. My apologies.

I was very pleasantly surprised watching the last few matches and I'm looking forward to the final!

bucketybuck

Terms like "nice", "pleasantly surprised" and "fair play" are all inherently patronising.

They start from the position of assuming the standards were rubbish and then give them a pat on the head for this not being the case. Its a natural response from most people for various reasons, but I know that personally I would hate to be discussed about in that sort of way.

The Good Ole Boys

bucketybuck wrote: »

Terms like "nice", "pleasantly surprised" and "fair play" are all inherently patronising.

They start from the position of assuming the standards were rubbish and then give them a pat on the head for this not being the case. Its a natural response from most people for various reasons, but I know that personally I would hate to be discussed about in that sort of way.

Is people not allow to be honest now. He just say what he think. You is take moral high ground to gain point on intenet, that might be what makes me sick to my gut, but I would never complain about it.

The Good Ole Boys

Is Asllani ok? I think that Spitzer kick her many time last night and she not deserve this kind of punishment.

The Good Ole Boys

The Good Ole Boys wrote: »

...that might be what makes me sick to my gut, but I would never complain about it.

Remarkable stoicism!

unkel

bucketybuck wrote: »

Terms like "nice", "pleasantly surprised" and "fair play" are all inherently patronising.

They start from the position of assuming the standards were rubbish and then give them a pat on the head for this not being the case. Its a natural response from most people for various reasons, but I know that personally I would hate to be discussed about in that sort of way.

I'm guilty as charged

My apologies again for my ignorance. I guess I got an education during the quarter finals. Happy that I know a bit more about it now. I really enjoyed watching it.

osarusan

It has come on massively in the last 20 years or so.

I suppose it should come as no surprise really, that when there is enough money in the game for players to become full time, and receive full time and high quality coaching, the game will improve.

The fitness, the structure, the way they move the ball, is all so much improved.

Not across the board of course. Plenty of amateur players at this world cup. There is a huge gap between where the US players are, and many other teams.

NYT had a good piece where they interviewed 108 players appearing in this World Cup, on their life, on the money side of it... very interesting, but fairly grim for most of them. 8 of the interviewees were from Thailand and the highest earner among them reported about US$6,000 a year from football. The lowest, a woman from Jamaica, reported $0.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/07/sports/soccer/world-cup-survey.html

LuckyLloyd

The key mistake is looking to compare. It’s a different sport that stands on its own two feet imo.

Apparently the US v England game was the most watched sporting event of the year thus far on UK TV at just under 12m viewers

The Rugby World Cup later this year will have a massive resourcing disparity between the best and worst team too. You’ll also get a lot of negative pointless comparisons to the men’s football World Cup when it’s on. People can’t help themselves.

Harry Palmr

Technique is technique - there is no such thing as a male ability to play a ball and a female ability to play a ball. I'll take the game that bit more seriously when passing out of play as a drinking game will not be fatal.

LuckyLloyd

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Technique is technique - there is no such thing as a male ability to play a ball and a female ability to play a ball. I'll take the game that bit more seriously when passing out of play as a drinking game will not be fatal.

Men and women are fundamentally different physiologically. We don’t negatively compare the technique of Serena Williams to Roger Federer. Nor do we negatively compare the women’s 100m Olympic Champion with Usain Bolt. The women in this World Cup are the most technically gifted athletes in *their* sport in the world. That’s all that matters.

The Good Ole Boys

Harry Palmr's comments is regressive and harmful to women sport. This World Cup is the best of the best competing to win the biggest prize. It good watch. I am now big fan of women football.

bucketybuck

The Good Ole Boys wrote: »

Is people not allow to be honest now. He just say what he think. You is take moral high ground to gain point on intenet, that might be what makes me sick to my gut, but I would never complain about it.

I is chastise.

Harry Palmr

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Men and women are fundamentally different physiologically. We don’t negatively compare the technique of Serena Williams to Roger Federer. Nor do we negatively compare the women’s 100m Olympic Champion with Usain Bolt. The women in this World Cup are the most technically gifted athletes in *their* sport in the world. That’s all that matters.

(women can turn a boot to cushion a pass rather than let it bounce off the ankle)

What about decision making? So often it's hit and hope rather than recycle the ball and be patient. At times it's making late season Man Utd (mens) side look like Liverpool (men).

LuckyLloyd

Harry Palmr wrote: »

What about decision making? So often it's hit and hope rather than recycle the ball and be patient. At times it's making late season Man Utd (mens) side look like Liverpool (men).

On the other hand, the discipline of the US team to take the ball into the corner and kill the game in injury time the last three rounds was exemplary. No ego involved in trying to score another goal, just patiently and deliberately playing the percentages. Excellent decision making there.

Harry Palmr

Spare me LL. You're in happy clappy and yes condecending mode and I'm not having it. :pac:

ThunbergsAreGo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

On the other hand, the discipline of the US team to take the ball into the corner and kill the game in injury time the last three rounds was exemplary. No ego involved in trying to score another goal, just patiently and deliberately playing the percentages. Excellent decision making there.

I only agree to an extent, against a 10 woman England they had multiple opportunities to go backwards to the keeper or play it around the back but instead tried to go forward and lost the ball. They didn't actually play the percentages at all - rewatch it almost all of the transition passing was really loose. England were demoralised at that stage

It is like getting it into the corner was their only way to kill time.

ThunbergsAreGo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The key mistake is looking to compare. It’s a different sport that stands on its own two feet imo.

Apparently the US v England game was the most watched sporting event of the year thus far on UK TV at just under 12m viewers

The Rugby World Cup later this year will have a massive resourcing disparity between the best and worst team too. You’ll also get a lot of negative pointless comparisons to the men’s football World Cup when it’s on. People can’t help themselves.

i think its a different sport when it suits people - its not, it is the same game played by the same rules as the mens game at all levels.

However if its a different sport have its own stand alone podcasts, news sites etc, and dont tell people if they dont like it is because they are "sexist" - (not on here by the way). I dont listen to stories about Cricket on football Weekly.

Will be interesting to see if it has a positive affect on games participation and interest in womans football next year - the key thing for the game to evovle is to get woman interested in it, expanding on footballs traditional male fanbase

LuckyLloyd

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Spare me LL. You're in happy clappy and yes condecending mode and I'm not having it. :pac:

I just disagree with you. I think you’re fundamentally off track the minute you start trying to compare like with like here. Take it on it’s own merits. We can agree to disagree on that if you like.

LuckyLloyd

naughtb4 wrote: »

i think its a different sport when it suits people - its not, it is the same game played by the same rules as the mens game at all levels.

However if its a different sport have its own stand alone podcasts, news sites etc, and dont tell people if they dont like it is because they are "sexist" - (not on here by the way). I dont listen to stories about Cricket on football Weekly.

Will be interesting to see if it has a positive affect on games participation and interest in womans football next year - the key thing for the game to evovle is to get woman interested in it, expanding on footballs traditional male fanbase

I disagree on the first point, and I just don’t have any dog in the fight here to think otherwise. I don’t see what anyone gains by treating them as the same sport and trying to compare them.

So oddly enough I agree on the rest - the women’s game should build it’s own media offering and market itself heavily to girls and young women and build a base of participation and interest. I don’t see any roadblocks to that: the product is entertaining and relatable. With the 20by20 drive it seems to me a huge focus should already be in that area. This World Cup can’t be doing such efforts any harm!

ThunbergsAreGo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I disagree on the first point, and I just don’t have any dog in the fight here to think otherwise. I don’t see what anyone gains by treating them as the same sport and trying to compare them.

So oddly enough I agree on the rest - the women’s game should build it’s own media offering and market itself heavily to girls and young women and build a base of participation and interest. I don’t see any roadblocks to that: the product is entertaining and relatable. With the 20by20 drive it seems to me a huge focus should already be in that area. This World Cup can’t be doing such efforts any harm!

Not odd at all, and I agree - its the same sport but comparisons are futile. Its like comparing men and womans boxing - two styles employed by each very very different.

MrKingsley

I really dont see the issue with holding the sport to higher standards.

These players are not playing on old, bobbly, worn football pitches anymore with one of the girls' dad coaching. They are professional athletes.

I really do find it laughable that it is instantly sexist, regressive or misogynistic once people have issues with the standard on show.

If the sport wants to really grow then the product needs to improve. I really do believe that.

gmisk

MrKingsley wrote: »

I really dont see the issue with holding the sport to higher standards.

These players are not playing on old, bobbly, worn football pitches anymore with one of the girls' dad coaching. They are professional athletes.

I really do find it laughable that it is instantly sexist, regressive or misogynistic once people have issues with the standard on show.

If the sport wants to really grow then the product needs to improve. I really do believe that.

A lot of the players at this world cup are not professional (i.e. they have day jobs). The wages for professional female players are tiny compared to men.

MrKingsley

gmisk wrote: »

A lot of the players at this world cup are not professional (i.e. they have day jobs). The wages for professional female players are tiny compared to men.

Equally there are an awful lot of professional players who didnt play in the world cup.

Take the last 8 for example. The vast majority of these players would have trained in youth academies and have been playing in professional leagues for the majority of their careers.

Corholio

MrKingsley wrote: »

I really dont see the issue with holding the sport to higher standards.

These players are not playing on old, bobbly, worn football pitches anymore with one of the girls' dad coaching. They are professional athletes.

I really do find it laughable that it is instantly sexist, regressive or misogynistic once people have issues with the standard on show.

If the sport wants to really grow then the product needs to improve. I really do believe that.

The thing is though a lot use criticism as a mask for all that. Being highly critical on things where in the mens game for the same thing they wouldn't. Not everyone is like that of course but I think it's naive to think every criticism of it is well balanced and thoughtful either. Already saw the usual 'can't wait for the proper football' comments on here. They definitely aren't worried about the product growing.

As much as the standard needs to keep getting better, the amount of masculine gatekeeping from some needs to disappear as well.

Blinky Plebum

Corholio wrote: »

The thing is though a lot use criticism as a mask for all that. Being highly critical on things where in the mens game for the same thing they wouldn't. Not everyone is like that of course but I think it's naive to think every criticism of it is well balanced and thoughtful either. Already saw the usual 'can't wait for the proper football' comments on here. They definitely aren't worried about the product growing.

As much as the standard needs to keep getting better, the amount of masculine gatekeeping from some needs to disappear as well.

I don't think that is happening as much as some might think.

People are so used to criticising male players that everyone has become immune to criticism and it's really not taken seriously, however as we have seen in this world cup whenever someone criticises a female player it gets taken more seriously and it seems like it wouldn't be the type of critisism levelled at a male player when it defintely would have.

Take for example the criticism of the USA for over celbrating the late goals agains Thailand, some people used the "they're only getting criticised because they are women" line forgetting that using just one example Ronaldo was ripped by people for running around like a lunatic after his late menaingless penalty againt Atletico in the 2014 champions league final.

Same thing with the Cameroon England match, peopel constantly criticised Barcelona players over the years for whinging at the referee and acting the maggot, when Cameroon were criticised for doing the same, it was seen as unfair criticism by some.

If the womens game wants to grow they need to accept that criticism is part of it and that men should be allowed to criticise aspects of the game without accusations of sexism being levelled at them

is_that_so

The Good Ole Boys wrote: »

Is Asllani ok? I think that Spitzer kick her many time last night and she not deserve this kind of punishment.

Seems she's fine. Had a scan and no major damage. Just a precaution as her neck was hit last night. Sure she didn't deserve the attention but it's nearly as common to find her doing the fouling. She's competitive and doesn't hold back!

Corholio

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

I don't think that is happening as much as some might think.

People are so used to criticising male players that everyone has become immune to criticism and it's really not taken seriously, however as we have seen in this world cup whenever someone criticises a female player it gets taken more seriously and it seems like it wouldn't be the type of critisism levelled at a male player when it defintely would have.

Take for example the criticism of the USA for over celbrating the late goals agains Thailand, some people used the "they're only getting criticised because they are women" line forgetting that using just one example Ronaldo was ripped by people for running around like a lunatic after his late menaingless penalty againt Atletico in the 2014 champions league final.

Same thing with the Cameroon England match, peopel constantly criticised Barcelona players over the years for whinging at the referee and acting the maggot, when Cameroon were criticised for doing the same, it was seen as unfair criticism by some.

If the womens game wants to grow they need to accept that criticism is part of it and that men should be allowed to criticise aspects of the game without accusations of sexism being levelled at them

The Cameroon thing was pretty much criticised across the board from what I saw. It was petulant, unprofessional behaviour definitely. I definitely think there is an element who do over criticise things in the womens games though because there is an element who don't like it at all, I mean that's pretty blatant across all social media etc. This can not be compared to the mens game in that regard because there isn't anything 'better' above that to compare it to.

I'm not saying all criticism of the womens game falls into that category of course, been a lot of well analysed stuff too. But there has absolutely been some gatekeeping criticism too behind a facade of 'analysis'. I'd be very surprised if people would say this doesn't go on.