Congratulations! Your girls beat Brazil. That was considered a big upset.
Printable View
Congratulations! Your girls beat Brazil. That was considered a big upset.
I have a number of Brazilian relatives - this might be the only time I get to "stick it to 'em" for a change.
:2tsup: :2tsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by rrich
The Brazilians had more shots at goal, more procession but couldn't convert. We had less chance but we took them. Well done.
Our next match would be against either Japan or the Netherlands, Japan is the current champion so they are the favorite no doubt.
Good luck to your girls Rrich against Colombia tomorrow.
Beware of China. I've seen them in a friendly here in the US. They are exceptionally good at single touches. When the ball is passed to one girl, in a single kick the ball is off to another girl.Quote:
Originally Posted by justonething
And yes, Japan looks awesome.
The US game was ugly, ugly, ugly! We did not deserve the win.
"Water Retaining Structure"! Those Japanese girls are good. Your girls almost cleared that ball and then it would have gone to two 15 minute periods.
Oh well your girls done well and can be proud of their efforts.
They did do well and women's football has copped a shellacking in the past. The Norwegians have it in perspective.....
TT
Now both Japan and US have gone through and the rest 've gone home.
I felt sorry for the English girl who shot her own goal at the 90th minute. I hope she will get over that.
I hate to say this. But I am not a fan of penalty goals, given the influence of penalties on a game's outcome. We want to watch a game whose outcome is decided by players, not ref's often dubious decisions. If they have to award penalty goals, then they better get it right by using video referees. How many games are there in this world cup that were decided by the award of penalty goals? often incorrectly I might add.
Good luck to the stars and strips and the rising sun. May the ref be not heard or seen and the best team wins.
I never got penalty kicks. Sure award a direct free kick in the box, but why ensure it's a goal by making it an impossible task for the keeper to save?
As an ex ref I gotta say, I never got it wrong :D
TT
Well done to the Stars and Stripes. They played well. As a neutral, I was a little disappointed that Japan never got close enough to threaten the US, but I am pretty happy that there was no penalty shots awarded.
Thank you. It was a huge surprise because the betting line was Germany all the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by justonething
I can't believe that it was the same team that played Columbia.
I have never been a fan of penalty kicks to decide the outcome of a match. Perhaps after 90 minutes, all of the bench sitters must enter the game and still allow three substitutes but for real injuries only.
It is a team sport and the extra players should mean something for the team. After two additional 15 minute periods, continue the match in 15 minute periods until a golden goal. There always be critics of the golden goal. But if a team hasn't shown superiority after 120 minutes, then the first one to score is the winner. At the end of total six additional periods, (That means two 90 minute matches in total.) the penalty kick solution with each team required to have all of their players take a penalty shot before the one goal advantage thing. Any red card during any part of the game would leave a hole in the penalty kicks or the same as a miss.
I hate the foul in the box being a penalty kick. But without that rule there would be constant muggings in the box. I'm not sure of the Aussie word to use. A mugging is a strong arm robbery here in the US.
I have no problem with a match being a tie but in a world championship tournament there must be winner. It is one of those dilemmas in life.