USA vs. Brazil: Women's World Cup Gamethread
by norcalnick on Jul 10, 2011 7:30 AM PDT
in Bears in the Pros
Email
PrintWhen: 8:30 PDT
TV: ESPN
Stream: ESPN3
Losing to Sweden has forced an earlier-than-anticipated showdown with fellow world power Brazil. With Germany having been eliminated, today's winner will feel that they are the hands-down favorite to hoist the trophy next Sunday. The loser will have fallen well below expectations.
The United States desperately needs a spark at forward, where Amy Rodriguez and Abby Wambach have combined for just one goal and countless wasted chances. Team changes are very likely, but that doesn't necessarily mean the inclusion of Alex Morgan, though she acquitted herself reasonably well in the 2nd half against Sweden.
Enjoy this battle of soccer titans. USA!
187 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don’t get the sense that the US is playing for another goal – rather, they just want to protect the lead. That can be a formula for disaster.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
That was the worst call I've ever seen
Absolute bullshit, what the hell is that ref thinking?
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
Wow, it's Morgan time!
I didn’t think she’d get a chance with the US a women down.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
As long as we tighten up the defense and aim for the counter attack play we can survive this game.
Ursus arctos californicus – California golden bear
by berkeleyboy510 on Jul 10, 2011 10:00 AM PDT reply actions
I’m loving the whistling and boos the fans are giving Marta. I wonder if the neutrals in the crowd are taking the lead.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
We’ve had by far the better chances since the red card. Rather unbelievable.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
And with the last act of regulation time
Alex Morgan kills a Brazilian defender with a smashed shot.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
Too bad it wasn’t Marta on the receiving end. Seriously, yelling at a player from an opposing team when they are down injured. Marta must be an Oregon fan. She has the colors down.
Jesus
She’s so good and I hate her for it. That came from nothing.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
The Referreing Crew
calling this game is old Pac10 level quality.
Is it just me, or does it seem like the refs are favoring Brazil? Because that second penalty kick was ridiculous! =_=
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 10:43 AM PDT reply actions
I know, they have refs from different countries to avoid that, but seriously? And that’s not the only instance either.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Wow what a joke of an injury that seems to be.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 10:53 AM PDT reply actions
3 minutes
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 10:58 AM PDT reply actions
GOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 10:59 AM PDT reply actions
YESYESYESYESYESYES
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 10:59 AM PDT reply actions
PENALITES
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:01 AM PDT reply actions
er, penalties.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
USA
Penalty shootout! And we have Solo! =D
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:01 AM PDT reply actions
Let’s do it! BTW, welcome to CGB :)
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Keeper: “NOOOOOO!!!!”
Me: YEEEEESSSSS!!!!!!!
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:08 AM PDT reply actions
hahaha, there’s some poetic justice to that
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:08 AM PDT reply actions
Bah, too easy.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:08 AM PDT reply actions
We’re still in it. Remember the England v France game
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:09 AM PDT reply actions
The Brazilian keeper has guessed right every time so far.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:09 AM PDT reply actions
…and Solo’s guessed wrong both times :-/
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions
SAVE!!!!!!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:11 AM PDT reply actions
YES!!!!!!!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:12 AM PDT reply actions
XD Rapinoe with the tongue! She deserves to do that!
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:12 AM PDT reply actions
WE just need one more goal crosses fingers
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:13 AM PDT reply actions
here it is…..
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:13 AM PDT reply actions
YESSS!!!!!!!!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:13 AM PDT reply actions
U-S-A!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:13 AM PDT reply actions
That was freaking awesome.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:15 AM PDT reply actions
there was just no way they were going to lose after Wambach’s goal—perfection.
by slaphancock on Jul 10, 2011 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
USA!
(But I still think deciding games on penalty kicks is the single worst thing about soccer.)
Official Acceptor of TwistNHook's Unconditional Surrender Person of CGB and Queen of Spite Recs
by CalBear81 on Jul 10, 2011 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely. This penalty kick stuff is like saying that if the Super Bowl is tied you’ll decide the game with a field goal kicking contest. Or if a World Series game is tied, you’ll decide it with a home run hitting contest. Or if the NBA finals are tied, you’ll decide it with a free throw shooting contest.
Official Acceptor of TwistNHook's Unconditional Surrender Person of CGB and Queen of Spite Recs
Yeah, I never like penalty kicks either. I’d much rather have OT
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
No, in this Madam, you are wrong. Soccer drains you much more than Football or Baseball and Basketball is not a good analogy, since scoring is easy (someone will always score in overtime). Just paying endless overtime minutes would make a travesty of the game. I don’t like it either, but I can’t think of a better way to end a tie game, after they already had a overtime period.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
I don’t think I’m wrong. The analogy is that two teams play a sport for an hour and a half, and then, if it’s tied, they just stop playing that sport, and start playing some other, different, game that has entirely different rules than, and does not use most of the skills required by, the sport they have been playing for the past hour an a half. And they decide the outcome of the first sport by the results of the second, different, game. To me, that’s nuts.
Official Acceptor of TwistNHook's Unconditional Surrender Person of CGB and Queen of Spite Recs
I’ve played Soccer, and I agree it is very tiring. It takes so much energy out of you to keep going. I still don’t like the PK, but if they didn’t do it, the players would eventually collapse from exhaustion.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Then they need to use substitutes.
Official Acceptor of TwistNHook's Unconditional Surrender Person of CGB and Queen of Spite Recs
So what happens after a team subs their whole bench into the game? Keep playing until those players drop?
At the level of the World Cup? Yes. I think a sport’s championship should be decided by playing that sport, not by playing some other, different game. But obviously soccer fans don’t agree, so that’s fine.
Official Acceptor of TwistNHook's Unconditional Surrender Person of CGB and Queen of Spite Recs
There are plenty of fans who don’t like it either, but the notion that it’s a separate game is, I think, off base. It’s a different skill set, and not every team has it. But since it’s a possibility in elimination rounds, it’s not like teams couldn’t prepare.
Would you say that the OT rules in college football are a different game? (Not trolling, just curious)
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"
Well, I think it’s important to note that soccer’s overtime period is especially lengthy compared to other sports. In basketball, it’s a 5 minute overtime, which is 12.5% of the standard game in college and just 8.3% of the game length in the NBA. In soccer, a 30 minute overtime is an extra 33% tacked onto the match already.
In NFL, overtime is 1/4 of the game length, but it ends in sudden death. In college, the rules change to put people at the 25 yard line to make it easier to score. In baseball, they add marginal increments to the game until one team has a lead. So, there are plenty of adjustments in overtime in many sports to accommodate extra play.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh come on, it’s not like they bring out ping pong tables and decide it that way – and this game already had a overtime period. Although if they decided it by the golden goal rule, Brazil would have won.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
That was the point of my analogies to football, baseball, and basketball. Yes field goal kicking, home runs, and free throws are part of those sports. But they are only a very small part. And I think we would all agree that deciding one of those sports with one of those types of contests would be silly. That is how I view penalty kicks in soccer. But obviously, you don’t agree. So, okay.
Official Acceptor of TwistNHook's Unconditional Surrender Person of CGB and Queen of Spite Recs
I’ve got the answer:
Unlimited overtime, but every 5 minutes each team has to remove a player. This goes on until it’s just 1v1 on the pitch. Solo is solo!
by slaphancock on Jul 10, 2011 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
The lesser of two evils in my mind. If two great teams played for an awesome, evenly matched game, and it was still tied after 2 hours of exciting play, it would be a travesty if someone scored an ugly goal in the 180 minute, with everyone dead tired and playing like crap. That would cheapen the whole game.
It can feel that way on PKs too, but it’s different, and both teams know how it will end up if they allow it to end in a tie. Also, PK’s do add a certain drama.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
by Cugel on Jul 10, 2011 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I could not disagree more with this comparison
This is soccer not football, the rules of the game are just what makes them distinct sports. In penalty kicks everyone in the squad gets to participate not just some kicker. Penalty kicks put your goalie to the test so that they become just as important in contributing to the win as your Star forward. Penalty kicks create a situation where the team wins by executing the fundamental of the game under extreme pressure. Consider it a duel like in the wild west.
Ursus arctos californicus – California golden bear
by berkeleyboy510 on Jul 10, 2011 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Unresolved ties after overtime should be decided by a count of corner kicks
Paul Gardner, long-time Soccer America columnist (whom I generally don’t like), long ago proposed that PKs be replaced by a simple counting of corner kicks won during the game. I have always thought this to be a brilliant idea.
Soccer evolved from the same origins as (American/gridiron) football, Aussie-rules football, and rugby. Unlike its cousins, soccer has only one way to score—a hard-to-get goal with absolutely no credit given to coming close, a la an American “field goal” or Australian “behind”. The closest thing in soccer to an almost-goal, something that could unambiguously be counted during the course of a match, is the corner kick. Neither Gardner nor I believe FIFA should start awarding variable points (e.g., six points for a goal, one point for winning a corner), but it seems reasonable that if the game remains tied after overtime, rather than going to the lottery of PKs, simply look to the tally of corners won throughout the entire match to determine the winner.
Finally, while I’m very glad they abandoned the “golden goal”, I’d prefer that overtime consist of up to three 15-minute periods. If any team has a lead after one of these periods, game over. Also, allow an additional substitute with each overtime period to mitigate the fatigue. What’s the point of having all those extra players on the bench if they can’t be legally inserted (at least not all of them) into the match?
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jul 10, 2011 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions
That doesn't sound too crazy of an idea but after 120min or more of soccer most players are exhausted
If your exhausted, skill level drops considerably. I have seen many games played to a boring ending because the players are too tired to play at a high level. Corner Kicks still require a lot of energy in order to jump and scramble on the field. Penalties require the least amount of energy by the players to do the maximum amount of damage.
Ursus arctos californicus – California golden bear
by berkeleyboy510 on Jul 10, 2011 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Not what I (or Gardner) meant. The players don’t take corner kicks; you simply look to the scoresheet to see which team won the most corners during the 120 minutes of full-sided play. Thus, the U.S. would have beaten Brazil today by a corner kick score of 11 to 6, just as France would have beaten England by a corner kick score of 16 to 7.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jul 10, 2011 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Counting of corner kicks?? That doesn’t make sense to me at all. The object of the game is to put the ball in the net, NOT to win corners. I think it might make sense to give each team alternating free kicks or corners, so they can run set plays until someone scores. That might make sense. But the number of corners? Who cares about that number.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I think if they played like this it would distort the game; one of your objectives would be to win corners, rather than just focusing on scoring. Me no likey.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
No tie-breaking system is ideal, and I think we’d all like to see a winner determined during the normal run of play. But if we accept that we don’t want a potentially endless war of attrition, then the corner-kick count seems to be the simplest, fairest way to determine a winner based on the quality of the two teams’ performance that day.
I don’t see a big problem with teams going for corners rather than goals. There is still a priority on scoring goals, and as it is, attacking players already bang the ball off a defender because they think winning a corner is their best option. If corners were a tie-breaker, then maybe this happens with a bit more frequency, especially in overtime, but it’s not like it really distorts what you’re trying to do with the ball: win possession and direct it toward the opponent’s goal line.
The biggest change in play, I think, would be that defenders would be less willing to simply clear the ball out the back and voluntarily concede the corner. This would be a welcome change, I think, not something to fret about. By counting corners, you ultimately reward the team that not only possessed the ball but was able to move the ball toward the opponent’s goal line and put the defense under enough pressure so that they are forced to touch the ball out of play.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jul 10, 2011 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I love the penalties kicks. I wanted France to win the PK because they played better than England. And they won.
And now the US won the PK =D
Now USA v France
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:17 AM PDT reply actions
And to think…the 3 biggies, Germany, Brazil, and USA were supposed to make it through.
Now only USA remains. Although I prefer Japan winning against Germany, because they were the better team in that match.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:20 AM PDT reply actions
Brazil has great players, but I just don’t like their attitudes. That’s why, if Brazil won, I would be cheering for everyone but them.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:22 AM PDT reply actions
I agree
For as good as Marta is, she’s the worst offender. Yelling at an opposing player while down injured, throwing the ball down the line when the refs switch their decision on a throw-in and kicking the ball away from the spot of a foul, dragging an opponent down from behind by the shoulders. You would think that somebody so gifted would be more humble.
Usually people that are extremely gifted tend not to be humble.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions
And then there’s exceptions, like Wambach and Solo =)
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that makes the exceptions even more impressive. Though, I don’t know if Solo in particular necessarily has a reputation for humility :)
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 10, 2011 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions
True, but at least she doesn’t take it out on other people or throwing a tantrum
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
One of the biggest faces of women’s soccer and most of the crowd boos each time you touch the ball. That’s a shame for Marta. It wasn’t just the bogus red card call that turned the crowd against her – her antics fueled the crowd’s disgust as well.
The red card in the box that lead to Brazil’s first score? That one was legit.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
I don’t think the red card call was a foul, but that’s not what upset me. It was the harsh call on Solo moving when she barely moved at all and was well within the rules. Everyone was confused at why that call was so tight, even the announcers.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, that one was BS, but the red card was not because the foul was so bad, but because it was in the box on a obvious shot on goal (and a beautiful pass to herself, god that was pretty).
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
to be fair, I think the PK was disallowed because a US player encroached on the box before the kick was taken (not Solo).
by slaphancock on Jul 10, 2011 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I think for dissenting. Just being off the line wouldn’t have been a cause for a yellow. The refs were all over the place, and I think at this point they were trying to tamp down on the complaining.
by slaphancock on Jul 10, 2011 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
My eyes are going but on the replay, it seemed like the foul was a lot less worse than what it appeared to be in realtime. To me, I can see where it was redcard worthy but initially, I felt it should have been a yellow because it made the game 10 on 11. After the bogus call on Solo on the first save, I felt that ref was helping Brazil out. That game was called unevenly for both sides. In the end, who cares! Those calls set the table for one of the most awesome sports comebacks I have ever watched.
Indeed. At first I was pissed off and I still am a little, but because of those this became the most exciting match I’ve ever watched. Also, we our streak of winning with1-0 against Brazil.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I disagree, Cugel. That was a soft penalty to give. Yes, Marta’s flick-on was beautiful, but it was still a 50:50 ball. Buehler did extend her arm to impede Marta as they battled for the ball, so awarding a penalty can’t be called an “injustice”—like the overturning of Solo’s subsequent save—but that call does NOT get made most of the time. I’d estimate that 8 or 9 times out of ten, the ref takes a close look and yells, “Play On!”. Marta clearly left her own feet trying to win the ball; she wasn’t taken down.
To show a red card in addition was an absolute joke. The whole point of FIFA’s directive about red cards being given to players who foul to stop an unimpeded scoring opportunity was to eliminate the practice of cynical, intentional, “professional” fouls OUTSIDE the penalty area, where the offending player makes a calculated decision to flagrantly break the rules in order to defuse an imminent threat. The punishment of a simple free kick and (typically) a yellow card was simply not enough of a deterrent to such unsporting behavior, so FIFA mandated that a straight red be given. Fair enough. I applaud these efforts and wish FIFA would take a similarly hard line against diving and faking injuries.
Inside the box, however, players rarely commit such cynical, intentional fouls, because they know the punishment—an almost certain goal by way of PK—would be severe. You’re better off as a defender in most cases to let the attacker shoot and hope your keeper can make the save.
In this case, while one could reasonably argue that Buehler did indeed foul and Marta deservedly won a PK, there is absolutely no way a card was deserved—not even a yellow. There was nothing cynical, unsporting, or dangerous about Buehler’s challenge; she simply was making a rather desperate last-gasp defensive effort, which is what we should expect and encourage all players to do.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jul 10, 2011 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Buehler did extend her arm to impede Marta as they battled for the ball, so awarding a penalty can’t be called an "injustice"
And that’s why you can’t really complain, you’re right in that it was a close call, but once the ref has made the call that it’s a foul in the box, (to stop a shot on goal) I think the rules demand a red card. At least that is how I understand the rules, maybe I’m wrong. My knowledge of soccer rules is less than encyclopedic.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
but once the ref has made the call that it’s a foul in the box, (to stop a shot on goal) I think the rules demand a red card.
Under FIFA’s Law 12, a player can be sent off for “denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick”. This seems straightforward enough: commit a foul that prevents “an obvious goalscoring opportunity” and you see red. But what exactly is an “obvious goalscoring opportunity”? How strictly should this be interpreted? After all, Law 12 also calls for a red card when a player uses “offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures”, and it’s pretty safe to say that one can get away with a lot of “offensive, insulting or abusive” behavior without picking up even a yellow, let alone a red.
Contrary to what many commentators say, there is no hard-and-fast guideline that if you commit a foul in the box or if you’re the last defender or etc. then you must be red-carded. Indeed, FIFA’s guidelines for interpreting the laws are quite vague, providing only a laundry list of things the referee should consider, with absolutely no guidance how to measure or weigh those considerations. Frankly, from the ref’s point of view, the list is less than helpful.
FIFA’s intent regarding “obvious goalscoring opportunities” is actually made clearer, I think, by some of the language used to interpret yellow-card offenses. Under the catch-all heading of “unsporting behavior”, referees are directed to issue YELLOW cards when a player “commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack”. This language suggests a conscious, cynical, intentional action by the player to foul—as opposed to a desperate, clumsy challenge in which one is sincerely trying to win the ball. Did Buehler foul Marta? Perhaps. Was she deliberately fouling her without any attempt to win the ball cleanly? I don’t think so. Thus, I don’t see this as even a yellow-card offense.
One of the things I love about the Laws of Soccer is precisely the fact that they are so concise, so broadly open to interpretation, in sharp contrast to American football rules which attempt to legislate to the umpteenth degree every possible event that might take place on the field. Hence, we get the obsurdity of the “tuck rule” and “did the receiver catch the ball and make a ‘football move’” before dropping it?" But the vagueness of soccer’s rules is only a strength if you have a referee who is competent and fair minded and able to use his/her powers of interpreting the law to good effect. That clearly was not the case today.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jul 10, 2011 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks
But the vagueness of soccer’s rules is only a strength if you have a referee who is competent and fair minded and able to use his/her powers of interpreting the law to good effect. That clearly was not the case today.
I do agree with this, she was an awful ref. And thanks for the explanation of the rules.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
Remarkable Feat
Playing with 10 players since the 65th minute, tying it up in OT, and winning the PKs . Simply awesome.
I hate to admit it, but I lost hope when the final 3 minutes came around. But now I doubt I’ll lose hope again with this team. =D
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:26 AM PDT reply actions
And we won the World Cup because of a PK on this day in 1999. What a great way to celebrate. xD
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:30 AM PDT reply actions
Angelina Jolie as Solo? They look similar.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Kind of. Now that they interview her idk.
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
funny. . . those two were exactly the two I was thinking of when I wrote the post (curtis and jolie). Maybe Taylor Momson as Rapinoe? Michelle Rodriguez as Marta?
by slaphancock on Jul 10, 2011 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Me: I love you.
Hope Solo: I know.
by Avinash Kunnath on Jul 10, 2011 11:38 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
This makes me think of something the announcer said in a previous game.
“The Soccer Gods are smiling down on them.”
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 11:40 AM PDT reply actions
Hope Solo is Amazing!!! Go USA!
Ursus arctos californicus – California golden bear
by berkeleyboy510 on Jul 10, 2011 11:51 AM PDT reply actions
Shoutout to Alex Morgan
Good things happen when she’s in the game.
Morgan has yet to find her moment in this tournament, but she’s showed some real signs of creativity and skill on the rare occasions she gets the ball.
Wambach showed today why she needs to be on the field, but there is absolutely no chemistry right now between Morgan and Wambach. Morgan is repeatedly looking for players to combine with, but Wambach is instead always looking for the long cross, a la the one that yielded today’s goal, and nobody in the U.S. midfield is up to the task of partnering with Morgan—especially not with tired legs late in the game. My hope, but not my expectation, is that Morgan would start alongside both Wambach and Rodriguez; in retrospect, what a missed opportunity the Sweden game was to not give such a combination a try.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jul 10, 2011 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Man, I’m still energized because of that game. We’re #1 for a reason! =D
by Jessica Shultz on Jul 10, 2011 12:13 PM PDT reply actions
I told my wife, who didn’t watch it, that it was the single best sporting event I have ever watched. Not for the athletics as much as for the drama—it was a 2 and a half hour narrative, with twists, insurmountable difficulties surmounted, villainesses, heroines, a crowd that turned, and a happy ending.
Watch the replay (I think ESPN is replaying it late tonight). Really. It was unbelievable.
Ok I will watch on espn3
my friend told me basically the same thing too. Thanks.
I would have watched it had I been home, but i wasnt.
maybe you had to watch it live (or at least not know what was going to happen)
I missed the game originally but saw enough chatter on Facebook to know what had happened. Just finish watching the replay on ESPN3, while it was exciting, I think my expectation was set too high by other people’s comments.
by LEastCoastBears on Jul 11, 2011 12:58 AM PDT up reply actions
But OF COURSE
That’s why you have to place yourself in “Media Blackout” if you can’t watch an event Live. You have to not read the internet or any emails or answer your phone.
If you knew the outcome, then you are just sitting there waiting for it and there is NO drama.
Last year on this weekend, I went to my kid’s swim meet and recorded the World Cup final and told everyone of my friends to not talk about soccer when the game came on (they were looking at their iPhones). But then some idiot at the meet felt she had to suddenly make an announcement over the loud speaker that Spain had won. She ruined it for me completely and I was SO pissed.
I learned that these days, no matter what extreme efforts one may go to to remain in “media blackout”, that it is very difficult to do so. So, yesterday, I stayed at home and watched the drama unfold.
Did I feel guilty for not rooting for my kids’ swims? Yes.
Did I feel it was worth it?
ABSOLUTELY.
Daiane was the Goat of the Game
1. Kicked in the own goal.
2. Kept Wambach onside in the 122nd minute, stupidly.
3. Missed her PK.
Ooops.
Marta was the known villian.
Daiane was the goat.
Marta is actually lucky Brazil lost. I believe she plays professionally in NY. Had they won, she should have been advised to find a new country to play in.
She played professionally in Hayward until recently!! :-(
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jul 11, 2011 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions
U.S. Women Beat Brazil After Stunning Goal At Women’s World Cup (VIDEO)
http://goo.gl/nV6b3
First,
A Pia gif! (Hilariously cute.)
[img]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lo7kmxKH6a1qat986o1_400.gif[/img]
Second, a lot of Alex Morgan pictures. [url=http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lo7kmxKH6a1qat986o1_400.gif]Here[/url]
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
Related FanShots on California Golden Blogs
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
