12/21/24
September 27, 2007
Heartbreak for women's US soccer team.: As Brazil head to the World Cup final with Germany.
When I saw Boxx's second yellow at full speed my first response was to shout "she's off!" because it looked like a clear obstruction to stop a player from running onto a nice through pass, in what looked like a very dangerous counter attack. On the replay I could see that, if anything, Boxx was the one fouled. While the second yellow was clearly wrong, at full speed I was wrong, just like the ref. I didn't understand the switch in keepers but I don't think you can blame a 4-0 on that switch. But what did it do to communication across the back? Does Hope Solo control a defence who are more used to her well enough that that first goal is cleared? Solo was clearly very unhappy sitting on the bench and in the first half you could see a teammate tap her to let her know she was on the big screen and should stop looking pissed off. Brazil looked very good, particularly in the second half with the player advantage and the speed they have down the wings is frightening. Marta's chip-flick-chase-feint-goal was a thing of beauty. Let's hope the Germans can't cancel her out on the weekend, so we see teams chasing goals and not the sort of cagey tactical game you'd see on the men's side.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 10:30 AM on September 27, 2007
Greg Ryan deserves the blame for this one. You do not disrupt a team that is playing well. Hope Solo had not allowed a goal in over 300 minutes, Scurry had not played at all in over three months. It changed how the defense played and the confidence of the team was clearly not there. He also made some awful (defensive) substitutions. Yes Brazil played beautiful soccer and is on top of their game. Yes, the ref made a bad call on Boxx. But I blame the loss on Ryan, his bad decisions made a huge impact.
posted by urall cloolis at 10:42 AM on September 27, 2007
I agree. You don't change out the hot-hand for somebody who has been warming the bench for three months and Ryan has to answer for that. I think even Rainn Wilson would have known better.
posted by igottheblues at 10:51 AM on September 27, 2007
I also feel communication could have been different with Solo out there and maybe those first two goals never go in. I hope Ryan and Petignat find themselves looking in the want ads after this.
posted by Ricardo at 10:55 AM on September 27, 2007
"It was the wrong decision and anyone who knows anything about football knows that." "I know I would have made those saves [and] the fact of the matter is it's not 2004 any more." - Hope Solo. Ouch. Hope just slaughtered her Coach. I suspect that'll be the fork in Ryan.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 11:04 AM on September 27, 2007
Ouch. Hope just slaughtered her Coach. I suspect that'll be the fork in Ryan. And her teammate.
posted by bperk at 11:09 AM on September 27, 2007
There is no "I" in "Solo." No, wait... there is no "team" in...
posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 11:12 AM on September 27, 2007
Bismarck, where did you get those quotes? I would love to read the story if you can provide the link. Thanks.
posted by urall cloolis at 11:21 AM on September 27, 2007
They showed Hope being interviewed live after the game, so right now I can't link to the story because I saw it on TV. It'll be out there, soon enough though and when I find a link I'll post it.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 11:29 AM on September 27, 2007
And just like that : ESPN link (video with sound).
posted by Mr Bismarck at 11:37 AM on September 27, 2007
"There is no "I" in "Solo." No, wait... there is no "team" in..." There's no Hope in team?
posted by Mr Bismarck at 11:40 AM on September 27, 2007
Far be it from me to be any kind of futbol expert, but when it was announced that they were making that switch in goal, even MY gut feeling was that it was the wrong move. Obviously not the only reason for the loss but had to be a huge contributing factor. Goo ta doo da, Solo?
posted by THX-1138 at 11:59 AM on September 27, 2007
Someone's gotta shoot first.
posted by yerfatma at 12:37 PM on September 27, 2007
This was one of those 'lucky to get nil' matches. Sorry, but the US could have played all night with 11 (or 12) players and still not scored. That fourth goal, and bits of the entire performance, had me thinking of Mexico 1970. While ESPN's non-expert bloviators and expert apologists will blame the goalie-swap, the underlying truth is that this team was built to out-compete Germany, and didn't factor in the need to get past Brazil to reach the final. As such, you had physical toughness against speed and skill, tackles that looked worse than they would have done against a similarly-matched side, early yellow cards and a defence on its heels. Let's hope the Germans can't cancel her out on the weekend, so we see teams chasing goals and not the sort of cagey tactical game you'd see on the men's side. The refereeing will be crucial. You get the same contrast in styles, and there needs to be a balance between preventing the Germans from kicking the Brazilians around the pitch, and punishing them excessively for, um, playing like Germans. I will give this tip of the hat to Julie Foudy: she was right to say that a Brazil team with the any federation investment would be scary good. She was also remarkably professional, given that it was clear how she'd been hearing from her former teammates and was itching to chew out the manager.
posted by etagloh at 12:46 PM on September 27, 2007
Sum pee-cha lay. Nee nee goo soo wa, Solo. Boska! (Fucking nerds).
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:47 PM on September 27, 2007
Just because someone likes womens football doesn't make them a nerd, Weedy. Gotta get back to my Hutanese classes now.
posted by tahoemoj at 01:17 PM on September 27, 2007
"Fucking nerds?" Da beesga coo palyeeya pityee bo tenya go kaka juju hoopa!
posted by Hugh Janus at 01:22 PM on September 27, 2007
Thanks for the link Bis. I agree with Hope Solo- she would have made those saves! The first two goals were definitely keeper error. Scurry looked like a deer in headlights on the cross/own goal. Hope would have easily called the ball and the defender would have let her handle an easy cross. The second goal Scurry was beaten to near post, which should never happen from that distance. At that point a 0-0 game is played a lot differently than 0-2. The third goal Scurry waited on and made a poor effort (diving away from and not towards the ball). Solo has much more range and it would have been a tough, but makeable save. Although the fourth goal was an amazing run and flick by Marta, the shot could have been stopped and I believe that Solo would have made the save. Part of the problem was rust and lack of confidence by Scurry from not playing in over three months, keepers need to get into a rythm in order to be on top of their game. Greg Ryan should know that, which is why I place the loss solely on him. He thought he was going to show he is a genius with the move that even the players questioned. Instead he was a fool and should lose his job over it. He even defended the move after the game, which proves he does not learn from his mistakes.
posted by urall cloolis at 01:25 PM on September 27, 2007
I think the Star Wars quotes is whats making them "fucking nerds".
posted by Ricardo at 01:27 PM on September 27, 2007
4. karmic retribution for those hideous gold jerseys. yeah, the goalie change was probably a mistake. although from what i've read about Solo's performances she's been a bit shaky in this tournament (i haven't been able to see the games, i've just read the recaps on numerous message boards so i could be way off). but the US only had 7 shots (3 on goal). you can't pin that on Scurry. you can, however, pin that on Ryan. this team wasn't built to handle Brazil. it was built to beat Germany. (or, um, on preview, what etagloh said, cause he said it much better) i saw these 2 teams play at Giants Stadium earlier this summer. the US won that game 2-0, but i wouldn't say they dominated. the Brazil team doesn't get a chance to play together all that often and it showed in that game. you could tell their players were faster than ours, but technically they couldn't finish (i seem to remember a lot of fouls too). also, Marta wasn't playing that day. i guess Brazil got their shit together in time for this tournament. i like to see my national team win as much as anyone. but there's also a part of me that wants to see the women's game grow globally and that's only going to happen when teams like Brazil (countries that have traditionally strong men's teams) start winning these tournaments. i'm not saying i'm glad the US lost, but i'm not heartbroken over it. 2003 was much more upsetting.
posted by goddam at 01:35 PM on September 27, 2007
The coach should have played Solo but last time i checked you still can't win with zero. Don't think Solo is a prolific goal scorer. It wouldnt have made a difference.
posted by Debo270 at 01:48 PM on September 27, 2007
what i've read about Solo's performances she's been a bit shaky in this tournament Solo only allowed two goals in the tournament. Both were while her team was a player down against North Korea. She made an amazing save in injury time to preserve the tie. She played over 300 scoreless minutes leading up to the Brazil game. Before the tournament Greg Ryan had promised Scurry that he would find a game for her during the Cup, I would imagine as a retirement present. I hope it was worth it to him.
posted by urall cloolis at 01:49 PM on September 27, 2007
The coach should have played Solo but last time i checked you still can't win with zero. Don't think Solo is a prolific goal scorer. It wouldnt have made a difference. That is a unique thing about soccer, you CAN win with zero. A 0-0 tie can lead to a win in a Penalty Kick shootout (tiebreaker). I contend that if Solo was in the game the team plays with more confidence and they play with a better rythm, leading to more goalscoring chances.
posted by urall cloolis at 01:52 PM on September 27, 2007
Does FIFA own the commentators? Their first statements were correct, “one of the worst calls I have ever seen.” Later on they try to soft scrub the call as “questionable.” Are you kidding? With the way the US was playing in the first half, the most likely result without the horrific call may have been a Brazil win 2-1, possibly 3-1, 3-0 or 2-2 overtime. With the call, 4-0 seemed a very likely result with one on one defense. Nobody likes sour grapes, but call a spade a spade. The ref single cardidly took away the game. Finally, I must state that Cristiane’s calling for the red card with 2 fingers and then fist pumping after the bad call will hopefully invite bad karma in the final. Go Germany!
posted by caselaw at 03:29 PM on September 27, 2007
If anyone missed the game the highlights are here. Now you too can marvel at how bad the Boxx decision was, but make sure you watch Brazil's fourth goal - it's a work of art.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 03:50 PM on September 27, 2007
You cannot discount emotions in a soccer match(or any sport for that matter). Brasil playing well was helped by the events that occured leading up to the game and during the first half. Ryan made a bad decision based solely on the fact that it created a controversy two days prior to the game and took focus away from the teams momentum. Aside from that, I believe Hope prevents own goal by calling off defender. Marta still scores but a 1 goal game is different rather than a 2 goal deficit and a man down. The referee made one of the worst calls in sports history. There is a reason why there are assistants. Had a foul been called, big deal, play goes on and US still has 11. Nothing should be taken away from the Brasil team as they got stronger as the match continued but it would be wrong for anyone to say that the events caused by Ryan and the referee did not give Brasil the fuel, emotion and confidence needed to beat the US. It is also easy to say the US did not score but soccer is a game of momentum and with those events occuring, the US was not playing with the confidence they are use to and when it comes to scoring goals in soccer, it is ALL about confidence.
posted by pfarley at 04:26 PM on September 27, 2007
That 4th goal was so very sweet.
posted by aerotive at 04:35 PM on September 27, 2007
I think the Star Wars quotes is whats making them "fucking nerds". No man, it's what makes us fucking cool. What's sad is that we understand.
posted by THX-1138 at 04:59 PM on September 27, 2007
It's easy to point at Scurry for the first goal, because the change of keepers was the story here, but you really have to ask what Leslie Osborne is doing going for a ball that's shin high with her head. She seems to get caught with her right foot planted and her left foot away from the goal, leaving her to try an awkward and low header. You can see Scurry shout something as the ball comes in, but Osborne goes in all the same. As the ball goes in there are five defenders and Scurry on screen and no Brazilians at all.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 06:17 PM on September 27, 2007
The last minute keeper change would be the least of the coach's worries. Did he even watch the Brazil v Australia quarter final? All the information he needed on how to deal with Brazil was already there. The US team lost not because of a change of keeper or a poor refereeing decision. Brazil won because they out-thought and out-played Ryan's team: - their midfield played a spoiling role. Evidence the number of free kicks in the first 20 minutes. This disrupted the US game plan. - the fullbacks (Elaine and Maycom) pushed forward and didn't allow the US to get down the flanks and exploit the width. A bit like Cafu and Roberto Carlos used to do in the men's team. Call it part of the Brazilian style - the US relied on long balls forward, easily defended by the Brazilian centre backs (who both had great games). The Brazilians also positioned a holding midfielder in front of them. Result - no service to Wambach or the other strikers. Can you remember any time when US strikers had the ball played to their feet? In the QF, Australia took the game to Brazil and came back from 2-0 down and were unlucky to go out to a spectacular goal. They also tried long balls, but seeing that this wasn't working, changed tactics and used angled balls on the ground to the strikers, pulling the central defenders out of position. The pace of Sara Walsh and Lisa de Vanna desperately troubled the Brazilians, with them getting behind the full backs and forcing them stay back. This took pressure off the midfield and allowed Australia some time to build attacks. The US, in contrast, didn't have a Plan B. That's poor coaching.
posted by owlhouse at 06:28 PM on September 27, 2007
I hate these threads because it's clear I'm not seeing 90% of these games, even when I watch the whole thing.
posted by yerfatma at 06:58 PM on September 27, 2007
Erin Paul of the CBC relates the circumstances surrounding her after match TV interview with Hope Solo.
posted by Trolley at 07:43 PM on September 27, 2007
"I would have made those saves." "Anyone who know about soccer..." Dear God, you were being outplayed all over the park. It's a team game. The more this goes on, the more the goalkeeper issue becomes a media-fuelled distraction from what happened on the field. And looking forward, I think Germany has the team and the game plan to deal with Brazil. But the contrast in styles should make it a great match.
posted by owlhouse at 07:58 PM on September 27, 2007
Brasil are a bit brittle on defense. A combination of lousy coaching decisions that upset USA team chemistry, combined with a USA refusal to take advantage of Brasil's weaknesses, and some unfortunate referee decisions, however, masked this weakness and gave us an unrepresentative lopsided result. Anyone who simply looks at this 4-0 result and thinks he knows the relative merits of the USA and Brasil women's teams is a fool. On any other day, with halfway decent USA coaching, this would have been a very close game. The handful of times the USA actually got an attack going, Brasil looked very vulnerable. But trying to come back while 2-0 down and a player short isn't going to make it very easy to attack Brasil. The time to have exposed Brasil's defensive weaknesses was before the two give-away goals and before the red card, not after. All around, a complete meltdown by the USA. It reminded me a bit of the 2006 USMNT game against the Czechs in that the entire team seemed to have been lobotomized somehow. This shouldn't be happening, yet it is. If USSF is serious about their national team program they need to change something in their system that is obviously broken. Bizarre changes to their starting lineup seems to be becoming a USA specialty and that can't help either. We'll see proof of these facts when Brasil has to face Germany. Unlike the USA, German coaches and players are unlikely to play to Brasil's strengths. I expect either a close game or possibly a blowout in favor of Germany. Germans aren't going to have an emotional meltdown like the USA had today.
posted by dave2007 at 08:16 PM on September 27, 2007
"Dear God, you were being outplayed all over the park. It's a team game." Yes, it is a team game - which is why switching the goalkeeper at the last moment was insane. Hope Solo has had a long time to develop and shape her defense and develop a sense of placement and communication that can't be substituted for at the last minute by putting in a different goalkeeper. The first two goals - the own goal especially - were mostly due to breakdowns in the defense that happen when the goalkeeper and her fullbacks aren't communicating properly. With Hope Solo in goal and a defensive system working properly as it was supposed to, those first two goals don't happen and you give the midfield and forwards time to get their act together and start testing Brasil's defenses. Since, in fact, the USA defensive system was a shambles right from the start, this never happened. "The more this goes on, the more the goalkeeper issue becomes a media-fuelled distraction from what happened on the field." But what happened on the field is what everyone expected to happen after the change in goal was announced a few days ago. Every single commentator thought it was a bad idea and hinted or predicted openly that it would turn out to be a disaster for the USA. And they were right. The only reason it wasn't talked up more before the game was because no one on the USA side wanted to second-guess or jinx the coach before the game. But anyone reading between the lines could figure it out. I'm sorry but this is one area where you can't chalk this up to a "media-fuelled distraction". That's missing the forest for the trees. When they called it a mistake and accurately predicted what would happen, before the fact, that's not a distraction. Maybe without the change in goalkeeper USA would still have lost, but it would not have been a 4-0 blowout.
posted by dave2007 at 08:28 PM on September 27, 2007
Owl makes a great point about angled passes. Brazil played a flexible 3-5-2 which was keyed around man-marking the two American forwards, with a woman free in front and behind the two to cut off passes over the top or dropped in front. (Essentially a 1-2-3-2-2 formation.) The way around this protection is to play the ball from side to side until you've pulled someone out of position and then hit the angled pass into the gapor over the top. Instead the US continued to play straight passes which were easily dealt with. Bazil combined this over/under cover with a high pressing game the contrasted starkly with the US' decision to allow Brazil the ball in defence without pressure. American defenders and midfielders often found themselves closed down and having to pass quickly toward targets that were well defended. I was wondering how well Brazil could maintain their tiring closing down, but Boxx's red card meant that they didn't need to. Owl's comparison to the old days of Roberto Carlos and Cafu also holds water - Maycon in particular was very dangerous going forward from the fullback role. I was stunned by her pace in the first half, because the defender she blew by didn't seem to be a slouch herself.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 09:05 PM on September 27, 2007
With Hope Solo in goal and a defensive system working properly as it was supposed to, those first two goals don't happen Though you still have a midfield that picks up early cards for hefty tackles and is playing on a knife-edge for at least an hour. The goalkeeping switch isn't a 'media distraction', but the analysts were prescient in saying 'set pieces, set pieces' given that there was no real threat from open play. When players are trying 25-yard shots from the start, it's not a good sign.
posted by etagloh at 09:26 PM on September 27, 2007
Brianna Scurry has terrible form for a goalkeeper. I would not tolerate it from a HS player, college player, let alone a pro. She got away with it and looked decent in the peak of her career due to athleticism and lack of quality opponents. She is on the team now due to her past, not the present or future. Hope Solo has very good form and has played quality games with clean sheets in the time the womens game has evolved. So I agree with everything that Hope Solo said after the match. I will never understand why Greg Ryan made this terrible move. Scurry may have played awfully, but Ryan is the one who chose her for the squad and decided to play her in such an important match. So my vote for LVP (Least Valuable Person) is still Greg Ryan.
posted by urall cloolis at 10:16 PM on September 27, 2007
Abbreviated Match Analysis of Scurry (this is what I do for a living some of the year- my analysis is way too lengthy to post here so I will keep it to GK and coaching main points): Minute 7- misses badly on a lobbed free kick, lucky US is not down 0-1 at this point as Brazil shot over an empty net. This sets the tone for the entire match, the US can not play with confidence or numbers going forward at this point on. First corner sequence- Scurry stays on line instead of taking two steps and using her HANDS to make a catch on the cross. Leads to second corner- Scurry yells "mine" way late. Should have yelled "away" or "keeper" as soon as it was read (which she did way too late). Osbourne had to make an effort as she has no idea what is going on behind her. Second goal- Scurry leaves room at near post and gets beaten there. She should not ever get beaten near post from that distance and dives toward the goal trying to make the save instead of toward the ball, making the angle more difficult and lessening the chance to make an EASY save. Third goal- She was still thinking of second goal and probably told by Ryan at the half not to leave the near post open. She was way out of position again- was almost beyond the near post when shot was taken and dove backwards again. Poor form and poor positioning. Fourth goal- In position to make the stop, yet dove backwards instead of toward the ball AGAIN! Attacking the ball and diving forward- hands first instead of feet first is the only way to make a save of this distance (and good form overall). Saves she made: Early ball into middle (lob off another free kick)- caught the ball in the air but needed to catch it off her chest instead of with hands (poor form again). Save from close distance in second half that looked good to naked eye- lucky it didnt become another goal- led with her feet forward and hands toward her goal. Through ball in second half- came out strong, yet led with her feet again and her hands toward the goal. If stronger pressure was there it would have been another goal. Overall- On a scale of 1-10, maybe a 3, which is what I would expect from a good club or college keeper, not a national team player. Result: The early deficit was too much to come back from. The team played long ball due to the possible problems of building it up. If they build up and lose ball they get Scurry in trouble again. If they play long ball they either get a scoring chance or have more time to defend as a team. When they were down a man (woman) they still brought in a defensive sub (Elliston) for an offensive player (O'Reilly) to man mark Marta due to no trust in Scurry. Ryan did not want to bring in Solo, or he would lose face. By trying to contain Marta he ended up playing defensively while down instead of offensively. He was trying to minimalize the loss instead of trying to steal the game. As a result he ended up giving more chances and losing worse than necessary. Yes Ryan made a bad choice, it would be too easy to blame the player. If Ryan spent any time in training watching Scurry play he would know she was not the choice. Scurry has always had bad form but he still chose her without any effort to change the form or get the help to do so. Or he did and it did not work, which makes the decision even worse. If Ryan keeps Solo as GK the team comes out looser, plays their brand of soccer without worrying about what is going on behind them. It changed the entire complexity of the game start to finish. His decisions during the game afterwards did not help his cause. If he wanted to man mark Marta he should have done it from the start or once she started to make an impact- with a starting defender, not one off the bench. Game adjustments are not that difficult.
posted by urall cloolis at 11:25 PM on September 27, 2007
"I would have made those saves." "Anyone who knows about soccer..." Whether or not she is right, I think it is unacceptable for Hope Solo to be making these sorts of statements in public. There are some rules for team sports that include not bagging your team mates or your coach. If any one of my Under 16 girls had said this sort of thing after a defeat, they'd be off the team. Urall cloolis - good analysis, however I disagree with your assessment of the third and fourth goals. In the third, Christiane was unmarked 10 yards out with only the keeper in front of her, and she placed it beautifully in the corner. Not the keeper's fault - no-one could have saved it. Similarly, the fourth had Marta about 7 yards out, having already beaten three defenders. Scurry had no chance and no time to fully react. Also, Australia came from 2-0 down against Brazil in the QF, so the US wasn't out of it if they had changed their approach. The sending off didn't help, but even up to that point their play was one dimensional. I have trouble getting my players to go in between the sticks, so the last thing we need is everyone blaming the keeper for conceding goals. I tell them every week that it has to get past 10 others before it comes to the keeper. Simplistic, maybe, but in the game I watched last night, the US progressively lost the midfield, then their attack, and finally their defence. The rot didn't start with the player wearing Number 1.
posted by owlhouse at 11:42 PM on September 27, 2007
owl- I agree on the defending on third and fourth goals- my analysis was only on the Goalkeeping / Coaching decision. I agree that the defense should have never given up the yardage and space to make the shots happen. I will still stick to my asessment that Solo would have had a better chance to make each of those saves and that Brianna was out of position on the third and dove backwards instead of toward the ball, cutting off the angle on the fourth. Brilliant play by Marta to set it up and finish. I am not blaming Scurry- just stating reasons why she should not have been in at all (COACHING ERROR) through my analysis. Owl- again- I like the fact and preach it- that GKs at youth level should be encouraged, not broken down. But we are talking World Cup, not youth. The analysis provided was more for SpoFi to understand why the decision was poor and how it effected the teams performance overall, other than "well, they didnt score so it doesnt matter" attitude of many SpoFi posters. I do like hearing other coaches/players viewpoints and unlike Ryan try to pick up even the slightest bit of info that could help me or a team in the future. Cheers!
posted by urall cloolis at 12:19 AM on September 28, 2007
I still think Solo was correct in her statement. Trolley had a great link earlier on the circumstances in which the comments were made. While she threw Scurry under the bus, I do not think that was her intention. I think she was trying to say why the decision was bad, even if it came out worse. By the press manager saying she is not allowed to comment since she didnt play pissed her off and helped her make the comment more than anything else. She will probably be suspended for the 3rd place game as a result, but it needed to be said and may open the USSF up to accountability on their coaching choices. But that is one of the traits that makes a good goalkeeper...headstrong and the belief that they can stop anything, it only increases my belief that Solo is the right goalkeeper for the US Womens Team.
posted by urall cloolis at 12:48 AM on September 28, 2007
I still think Solo was correct in her statement. Do you think she should have made it though? It seemed like a lack of maturity on her part, to be that visibly upset in front of a camera. I completely understand why she was upset, but in the long term she's hurt herself as a teammate and there's no team she can beat without 10 other people.
posted by yerfatma at 05:48 AM on September 28, 2007
I don't think there was really anything to be gained by Solo making that statement in public. I wonder, though, if she'd already said the same things privately and more diplomatically and been blown off. I think it was still a mistake to vent in public -- the past is past, and as for the future, I'm sure that all the people who would influence future decisions on coaching and strategy already knew what the deal was without having to hear Solo tell it. But Solo might not have understood that. In any case, sounds like Ryan's trying to kiss and make up.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:49 AM on September 28, 2007
Do you think she should have made it though? That is a tough call. If the situation was handled properly the comments would have never been made, and probably shouldn't have been. But I definitely understand why the comments were made and that it was the truth. Being visibly upset, it is the coaching staffs responsibility to recognize this and to handle it promptly. I have no problem going to a player or team and admit any mistakes that I have made, before anything snowballs. Ryan should have went to Solo immediately after the match or in its waning moments and told her, "I fucked up, lets talk about it at the hotel". Instead Ryan still claims he made the right decision, refusing to accept any responsibility for the loss. That being said, I also believe that Solo owes Scurry an apology about how it came out.
posted by urall cloolis at 09:01 AM on September 28, 2007
I wonder, though, if she'd already said the same things privately and more diplomatically and been blown off. Ah, good point. At that age, in that scenario, I would have done and said far worse.
posted by yerfatma at 09:43 AM on September 28, 2007
Hope Solo is very hot, and is probably a better player as well, even though Scurry's prime was better than Solo altogether. You have to remember Scurry wong the World Cup, and Solo has not. Scurry will probably start Sunday, and they will lose. Hope Solo shoul not be so andry, even though she has a right to be to some degree. I hope Solo does not yank that ridiculous ring out of her nose. The nose ring goves one point to Briana for professionalism.
posted by SFValley_Dude at 12:05 PM on September 28, 2007
You have to remember Scurry wong the World Cup, and Solo has not. It's pretty hard to win the World Cup when you don't even start.
posted by jmd82 at 02:44 PM on September 28, 2007
Thanks for the video link. btw, the Marta goal was the best of any of the highlights of the US v Brazil match. The defenders looked slow, as did Brianna. The US own goal was bad defending. Why go for a header when a boot would've been easier and safer? Plus, defender on the line and keeper could've called for it. Just amateurish. The Boxx red card was a total travesty. I don't know how you can red card someone when they get elbowed in the back. And effing Cristiane goes running off cheering the decision should;ve got a yellow card for misconduct -- but didn't. TWO BAD CALLS. They should suspend the ref, fer crying out loud -- they did the same thing to an EPL ref who gave a penalty kick in a Liverpool v Chelsea match when a Chelsea player went flying even tho nobody had touched him. Video review proved it. The ref apologized. And he was suspended for a few matches. Too bad the result stood, but fair enough acknowledgement. Woulda been cool if they fined the player, too. Is there any investigation of this red card incident? The rest of the goals were cheap. Seems like the US players were running scared, more than anything. And again, Marta totally PWN3D the US defender with the flick-and-turn.
posted by worldcup2002 at 04:34 PM on September 28, 2007
Hope Solo is very hot The only part of this discussion that I feel qualified to fully agree with :-) The video clips of her with that pouty/pissed look on the bench made her look more hot, too. :-)
posted by bdaddy at 06:10 PM on September 28, 2007
Solo has a stake in this team, it's future, and her own career. The coach made a terrible, highly questionable decision that cost this team a great deal, not just in world ranking, but also in sporting bra ad contracts. I don't blame her for speaking out at all, especially if a private conversation didn't get anywhere. What I can't believe is that not a single spofier has asked how much money Ryan had on this match.
posted by irunfromclones at 06:13 PM on September 28, 2007
I saw three reasons the US is going home early (metaphorically of course). 1. Brazil. They played fantastic football and dazzled not giving the US any time on the ball. 2. Greg Ryan. Made some dubious decisions including leaving out Hope Solo and substituting a defender in while down a man and down 2 goals. 3. Nicole Petignat. With the US down 2 goals, they possibly could have found a way back with Shannon Boxx on the field. With one of the worst red cards I have ever seen, the US never had a way back. I do feel the silky play of Brazil and the coaching errors got us to 2-0 in the first place so I place less blame on the referee than I would like to.