yup, we see things the same way. I just hate the conservative approach and believe these type of decisions cost us the world cup (playing it too safe). Nighswonger needs more reps. The centerbacks can cover. If we pass well, then Canada is on their heals and worrying about us and not the other way around.
ah, yes. The old “she sucks. All she can do is score” argument. Consider you have no idea what it takes to be a good striker. She scored twice and made her PK. By default she was today the best striker on the team.
I was doing my best not to pile on. Maybe I needed to say something in this thread so she would have had a goal later on the free kick that grazed a defender's shirt before going wide.
She certainly contributed tonight. But her performance is more predictive than her goals. She’s just not that good.
Shaw has earned her spot for the Olympics. She looks great in the middle of the pitch. I'd like to see this Mal Swanson + Sophia Smith + Trinity Rodman combo start a game and play for a good 70 minutes together. It looks like it has real potential. We went into a defensive shell too soon and were giving up way too much space to Canada after the 80th minute. If they are going to cede 2/3 of the pitch to their opponents, they need to wait until the last 2-3 minutes. The longer they do this the more likely there comes a moment for a sleazy move like Leon's dive.
It looked like Canada played with an 5-back(3 CB’s, 2 FB’s)—-usually mean’t to extra guard the flanks, thus trying to take the sort of ‘classical winger’ out of the equation in this game. Smith’s agile though and to credit, switched to her left and came down the center a little more. What’s kinda hurtin the US now is not going with an more familiar’Attacking Mid’—-in this match Horan(an usual #8) started at AM, then it was Swanson(an usual winger) that took over as Horan got switched over to DM—-playing with an double in lieu of an more creative/attacking mid, is not an good fit for the US
"an absolutely awful shot" From where I'm from a goal is a goal. Did you think it was as easy shot to make?
I'm not a big fan of Smith, but I thought she did well today. We know she's fast and can finish, but her link-up play (when she's not on the receiving end) has always disappointed. Her passing last night looked a lot better than I am used to seeing from her. She really should have finished the chance set up by Swanson, but I've been glad to see her make her PKs these last two shootouts after the WC miss.
Smith was terrible in the first half and great in the second half. I have never seen a player so passive on offense in the first 45. It was like she was told to just keep possession and not take anyone on. This just led to turnovers and counter attacks. Wingers need to dribble and she wouldn't in the first half anyone. Credit to her and the coaches for figuring it all out, just don't understand why we were so bad to start; who the bleep thought this was going to work and came up with the starting game plan?
Shoot, I try not to "what about" but if that is someone's criteria... they must be livid about Horan on the pitch. Wide open chances a plenty, were any even on frame?
I've posted this above, but Smith really plays way better opposite Swanson. I've speculated why, but Mal elevates Smith's game when they are both on the pitch.
If we want to park the bus, we need to do it the right way.. In the past we would move Ertz from the 6 to play between the center backs and then play 5 across to allow the left and right center backs to provide more cover to the fullbacks. Dunn got isolated at the end of the game without cover. We needed to actually play 5 across the back to close up gap between players. We can either sub or move a player back. Also note that we didn't sub anyone in the back 6 (4 backs plus the 6 and 8 in Sonnett and Horan) until Krueger came on very late. Who does this when up a goal? At a minimum, bring on fresh legs somewhere defensively. This is the time for one of the Grandmas to use their experience and play for 10-15 minutes, keep the team organized and keep possession. Sonnett is my pick for killing the game off role. Krueger was the right move, but at the wrong time. We got the lead at minute 64. Why not bring her in at say minute 70? Also, if we shift to an actual 5-4-1, the striker needs to be able to cover ground and be a sub. We had Smith at the 9, but she had played the whole game and gassed at that point. Moran would be really good for the last 15 to 20 minutes as her ability to press and run is pretty good. I don't hate any of the players, but the older ones just need to be subs and the younger ones should start. This gives you options for the last 15-20 minutes to adjust as needed.
Agreed that we need multiple threats to attack with so the defense can't load up on one player. I think it was Shaw moving to the 10 that made the biggest difference. We have looked really good with a front 4 that all has speed. Horan in the front 4 just doesn't seem to work too well.
Bad shots that happen to go in are not sustainable is the concern. It did seem like it was on the easy side and she still hit it directly at the keeper. I think she needs too many opportunities to get a goal compared to a good striker. Hey, if she can look pedistrian at best and sometimes awful but score twice, I am all for it. But I dont think you can count on that happening. Hope I'm wrong. Let's see how Emma uses her.
Guilty. I was incensed by Horan acting like she was playing roll-in with her neices or something twice in the six yard box.
I have much respect for Alex Morgan, but watching Trinity speed around the middle was fun and should, along with Mal/Smith/Shaw and hopefully Macario add fear to the rest of the Woman's soccer worlds defenders. Edit: would rather see Shaw in the front three than in the middle. Would rather the mid folks be better holders, passers, dribbles, with speed than strikers per se.
Funny nobody is talking about how the post saved them again. I mean, 6 minutes earlier she was sprung and dribbled until she was pinned by the keeper and the defense without getting a shot off, so I was happy she took the shot without a touch. I can't judge the technical merits of the form of the shot, but I'm happy that she might be learning. Seems like the 1st goal also she let it rip through traffic rather than trying to dribble out of traffic. I'd like to thank Dunn for her service, I don't think we win in 2019 without her in the backline, but I've seen enough. Take Krueger as the backup to the olympics and go with Nighswonger as the starter, with Sonnett as the "anywhere but forward or keeper" player. I'm a big fan, but one of her shortcomings is she does not have fast feet. I see it as similar to what I think happens with Smith, perfect is the enemy of good enough. She was trying to settle the ball for "the" shot instead of taking "a" shot, and she doesn't have the footspeed in close quarters for it. Glad it's Hayes doing the work and not Vlatko or a US based lifer...
I'll say "touché" to all except the shot being on the "easy side and she still hit it directly at the keeper." Also, it was not a bad shot. It was not an easy shot to finish. An easy shot is when the goal is open. I know that you saw the goal but you may want to watch it again. If the strike was to the keeper, she would have stopped it and not missed it when she moved and stuck her leg out to her left.
Thanks for the clip. I re-watched and paused and I will admit that I cannot actually tell whether the ball goes under the keeper's seat, as I believed live and when I first pored over the replay, or whether it goes to the left of the keeper's frame and just beats the keeper's kick. Since I can't be sure, I retract the awful label. Sorry, Ms. Smith. It was at least possilbly a better shot than I thought.
This has kinda been my take on Shaw. I want her as close to the goal as possible but wow she looked good in the 10 spot last night. She was instrumental in both goals. The team was not the same when she came out. I could still see her as a false 9 type feeding our wingers and creating havoc in front of the goal but whatever. Regardless of where she plays, she is one of the first players penciled in the starting 11 now for me.
Why shaw at the 10 works: The front three need verticality or speed to be dangerous, this opens up space for the 10 to go to work. The 10 does her thing once space is created and why the best player plays here. Horan is just too slow and can't score on the broken plays or half clearances by the opponent. A fast athletic 10 can get to the loose ball and finish. Shaw is able to provide the build up passing, the athletic ability to get to rebounds behind the 9, and just create on her own. Horan just provides the build up stuff and a very rare goal in the run of play. I think of Horan as the 8 where the focus is on the build up. This all happened in the second half and should have been the plan from the start. Note that a healthy and younger Rose did a bunch of good things in the 10. I think Shaw is a better passer than Rose though. Rose's vision is limited and misses stuff with her head down. Again, Shaw is our best player and the girl to build the offense around. I would not sub her off either. Albert, Coffey, and Horan can rotate in at the 6 and 8 spots.
I am not entirely sold on Shaw 's passing ability. She had some good passes last night but one game doesn't define a player. Over the stretch of the 6, 8 games, she did not show it. It's true that Horan has trouble follow up her passes and finished the 2nd ball but she is still our best creator/ passer, ball controller.