Showing posts with label USWNT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USWNT. Show all posts

Monday, July 18, 2011

Here and There

Busy week since the last post.

The Women's World Cup roared into the final with a pair of runaway semifinal matches; one more-or-less as expected with the USWNT defeating the overachieving Frenchwomen of Les Bleues 3-1, the other something of a shock as the Nadeshiko of Japan saw off the Swedes by a similar score.Interesting. Did you know that the nickname of the Japanese women's national team means the "personification of the idealized Japanese woman"? Seriously. And Japan being Japan, this means "acting for the benefit of the family, loyalty, domestic ability, wisdom, and humility"If there was a worse description of the JWNT I can't think of it. Their play was characterized by a ferocious tenacity. In England a certain type of footballer is referred to as a "terrier" and the Japanese women were the most terrorist of terriers in the Cup finals. You could count on one thing - they would keep coming at you. Down a goal to the Swedes, they pulled back first one, then another, and finally a third. They played an surprisingly effective possession game, finished efficiently, and seldom made errors.

By contrast the USWNT played as they had all the way up to the final, combining moments of inspiration with minutes of utter chaos. In particular, the US backline was a trouble spot against France as it was all tournament. Coach Sundhage at least recognized that Amy LePeilbet's lack of speed was a real weakness against decent forwards by shifting Chris Rampone over to left inside back to help her out. The Americans were still level in the second half before two lovely goals within three minutes put them through to the final.

Too much has been written about the final match for me to add much of note. It was a splendid show of football, 120 minutes of turn and turnabout that ended in that most unfortunate of modern accommodations to the tyranny of electronic mdeia, the penalty kick shootout.

The Nadeshiko were worthy champions. As they had all tournament they never stopped, never gave up. Down a goal they pulled one back in regular time; down another, they found an equalizer with three minutes left to play in extra time. Needing to win on penalties they made what they had to make. They lift a well deserved trophy as the best in the world.The USWNT was left with a bitter draught.

Although they were not at fault on Japan's second goal in the run of play the first was a dreadful, fundamental error - fullback 101; never, never clear the ball across the face of your own goal. The U.S. backs were panicked and acting randomly and the Japanese forwards made them pay for it.

The US finishing was appallingly wasteful. Although the Americans took three shots to Japan's one most of their strikes were not on frame. Even though they had about half the possession and many opportunities they could not find the strike to put the match away.

And their penalty taking was just dire. Missing one penalty kick is not good play. Missing three is inexcusable, and the American women will have a long two years to reflect on what might have been.The Japanese team itself, and much of the world's press, have made much of the "triumph" of the Nadeshiko over the tragedy of this spring's earthquake and tsunami, as though a fragile victory on a faraway playing field can rebuild the shattered houses and stores and factories, can console the bereft, can restore the land and people that were broken. And, certainly, for some in Japan there must be some nepenthe in enjoying the success of their women's national team.

But today the wonderful two hours are cold ink on forgotten newspaper, and the people in Tōhoku who celebrated yesterday will waken to face another day of grim rebuilding.Somehow I don't think that they are still celebrating.

In England all the news is about the "phone-hacking" crimes committed by Rupert Murdoch's employees. The English, and, increasingly, other peoples in other nations are heaping coals on Murdoch's head as evidence of his organization's contempt for laws, rules, common decency, and common sense piles up. Much public commentary on the terrible consequences in store for the media mogul amid lots of schadenfreude over the public spanking of the old swine and his lackeys.But, really.

When did anyone, any sane human, any functionally rational hominid with more than a rudimentary hindbrain think that giving this man - or any man, for that matter - the sort of power that Murdoch has over the Western "democracies" was a good idea?

And while Murdoch's personality - a crude, bullying shitweasel lacking anything resembling "morals", "compassion", or "introspection" - makes his immense unearned power all the worse because of the use he puts it to, the entire notion of allowing any single individual that sort of power is deeply, fundamentally flawed.

After all, in our modern far-flung polities we cannot hope to participate in the kabuki of citizenship without information. Information - news, gossip, rumor, research, muckraking - is power, real power. The capability to shape this information is power. And while we in the democracies have jealously doled out our political power in bits to prevent the autocratic accumulation of that power we have carelessly looked on without a murmur whilst this loathsome little man scrabbled up huge masses of it.

Now he is in difficulty because of the very sort of drives that drove him to amass that power - insatiable greed, brutal disregard of anyone's welfare but his own - caused him to break yet another set of rules. And why should we be surprised? The man has been honest about his contempt for the entire notion of "community". He is the epitome of a modern "conservative"; a selfish thug whose only limits are the capacity of his own lusts, a bloated Falstaff with a copy of Ayn Rand in place of his bottle of sack, a cartoon of a plutocrat, sneering and mocking the common scum too little and too frightened to prevent him from taking what he wanted, a caricature of a man who has no respect for anything but a boot in the face. He was born for this.

But more to the point - anyone in his situation would be dangerous, madly, insanely dangerous, as dangerous to democratic government as a viper in an unmade bed, as an unlabeled bottle of toxin in a medicine cabinet. His clutch on the information business should have been a concern of every sensible citizen of the US and UK (not to mention his spawning beds in Australia) years ago, regardless of whether he was publishing paeans to their policies or not. He was and is not the symptom but the disease, the slow, fatal poison of arrogant stupidity and blind partisan rancor that shouts its beliefs so loudly that, regardless of their value, the warnings of danger and threat cannot be heard over the moronic din. In the throes of the late stage Murdoch Syndrome an entire society can strut off a cliff because it is convinced by its own noise that the cliff doesn't exist, and that those tiny voices warning of danger are the rantings of dirty hippies who hate profit and patriotism.

Will anything come of this latest bit of dirty Murdochism?But at this point expecting our debased "democracies" - where elections have degenerated into auctions, and legislatures into brothels sucking and humping for the wealthy and powerful pimps that own them - to actually do anything about the vile Murdoch's grip on information power would be like expecting one of those debased catamites to become Solon.

No. In this, as in everything else, our own luxury, ignorance, and sloth will assure that Cousin Rupert will be invited to continue to grease our long national descent into servitude and ignominy.

And, as if to make my point with a vicious humor, the ridiculous mummery over the U.S. "debt ceiling" continues. I won't even bother to discuss it. What's the point in trying to dissect which bozo is using a bigger hammer to hit himself, his opponent, and every bystander within arm's length, harder than the other bozo?

Make no mistake; the United States has always been an oligarchy.

But at least one time the oligarchs were men who took themselves and their duty to their nation seriously. They might have been rapacious bastards intent on enriching themselves, but they at least did it with a sense of the importance of the stage on which they acted. Now all that it seems to require to take part in the Washington carnival is a monstrous ego and a complete lack of shame or personal integrity. The small handful of decent souls on the Left, like our junior Senator from Oregon, are left, like orphans in the storm, to look around them and wonder what will remain when the foul winds cease and the successors of our idiot polity emerge to claim the ruins.

What degree of fools with they think us, I wonder?

While wide and abroad the ignorant teatards clash by night we here in Portland are enjoying quite the cool, wet summer. The poor Mojo Grandparents aren't quite sure what to say. They've been here visiting for the month of July and so far we've managed to rain on them several times. I tell them it's global climate change and they just look about them in a sort of disbelieving incomprehension. Their little rental place over near Kenton is lovely, though - we stayed over the past weekend and enjoyed the hot tub and the comfortable Pullman kitchen and the high brass beds. The rain shivering the maple leaves and dappling the dark waters of the koi pond was much cozier viewed from a hot morning ofuro and a steaming cup of the richness of Colombian tilth, earthy as soil and thick with cream.

My little girl left me a message on my cell phone at work today; "Hi" she piped "Are you here, or not? Maybe you are having fun but maybe we can do special stuff! Bye!" You are pretty special stuff yourself, little girl.Meanwhile the Big Boy has discovered a "massive multiplayer online" game called "World of Tanks". He enjoys the heck out of it - though I notice that the magic is palling a little lately - even though he appears to be really terrible at it. His gameplay seems to consist of driving around until someone else shoots him up. Hey...so long as the death and destruction are just pixels.But what does make it difficult for the kid is that for some reason the game designers haven't bothered to try and give the game any sort of tactical context. It's just what is says it is - a world of tanks, clanking around spitting out projectile death like big steel bugs. The problem is that my son had to start like everyone else, with one of three types of light tanks - one, interestingly, being the pre-WW2 German "Leichtetraktor", a purely training vehicle that never fired an actual shot in anger.But the little battles he ends up in usually have one or more medium tanks as well, and the larger Pzkpfw-38t and BT-7 lights tear apart the tiny tankettes as they did back in 1939. And by the time the kiddo gains enough experience points to move up to a heavier light or a medium tank he finds himself in simulated battle against T-34s and Panthers, or M-10s and Easy Eight Shermans with his BT-7 or his Panzer III Ausf. A.I tried to explain that he got beat because in real warfare a light tank is a scouting and screening weapon, intended to face nothing more than machinegun fire of the cannons of other reconnaissance vehicles, and than a recon commander faced with a battalion of medium tanks would quickly pop smoke and grab a hat...that his lack of success against the heavier tanks was an artifact of the roles of the different weapons in actual battles versus the demands of his make-believe World of Tanks.

I don't think he got it.

But, speaking of tanks and just for the record: the Panzer IV really was a hell of a good weapon.I'm not a tank man and for me the big steel foxholes always just looked like shell magnets. But in its time the Sonderkraftfahrzeug 161 went wherever it was sent and fought whoever it found there and did its job damn well. Whether freezing cold, baking heat, rain, mud...the Pzkpfw IV was a reliable tool and a tough enemy, and where weapons are concerned you can't give much higher praise than that. The Germans of WW2 were right bastards; outside of the American Civil War South there isn't another cause in history quite as bad as Nazism. But they made some good weapons, and the ugly, boxy, clunky-looking old panzer did good service in its day.

Did you know that the last Panzer VIs fought in the Levant in 1967?No shit. The story I read is that while the Syrians armed themselves from whoever would sell them weapons the largest number of former German tanks came from France, who were also selling weapons to the new Israeli government and felt that they had to be..."fair". So they sold off some dozens of war-reparation Pzkpfw IVs to the Syrians. In the Six-Day War the Syrian armor attacked along the Golan Heights and were defeated, although with some loss among the Israeli tank corps. Several of the Syrian panzers still remain on the heights, silent reminders of battles long ago.Anything else? No? I guess that's all the blogging for today, then. Back later with the Battle for July.

Sunday, July 10, 2011

Gutted

Such a day. I'm gutted. Let me tell you why.

It started this morning, when I got up to watch the US women play Brazil in the last of the quarterfinals. I thought it would be a tight match and predicted it would go to penalties...but not the way it did.I can't do justice to the match; that would take a Victor Hugo, who would have painted the late afternoon's events in his Romantic palette of dark and light and the chiaroscuro of heroism and villainy; the thunderous opening own-goal, the grumbling gathering storm of Brazilian pressure...the sudden lightning-strike of the Buehler sending-off and the saved...and then retaken and made...Brazil penalty. The unbending resolve of the U.S. women, like a rock against the storm-surge of the Brazilian attack. The individual brilliance of Marta, rising like the spirit of the storm itself to score Brazil's second and force the American women to attack relentlessly just for a chance to continue playing. The collective beauty of Megan Rapinoe's lovely service and Abby Wambach's precise header that sent the match to penalties.And then, of course, the horrible whiteknuckle lottery of the PKs, and Hope Solo's redemption on the Brazilian third effort, where she denied the very defender - Daiane - whose own-goal had begun the storm what seemed so many aeons ago.So I was already emotionally drained on my way down to Jeld-Wen Field for THE match of our Timbers' season, the home engagement with our loathed rivals the Seattle Sounders.For this match, though, you would have needed a more tragic muse. Poe, perhaps, or one of the Greek tragedians, to tell the tale of triumph and disaster, of Portland leads gained and lost, of individual heroics but of, finally, the tragedy of a team unable to play together for an hour and a half.

We sang and chanted, cheered and celebrated...but in the end, as it often does in this cruel game, as it has recently for our Boys, it came to naught. Seattle ran off a 3-2 victor, and we were left to sing a last song to them to tell them we were proud of their efforts and still supported them...but I know we all left sadder than we would have as winners.I've said this before, but it bears repeating; soccer is like life because it is so often unforgiving. You hope and believe, and in return you receive a handful of ashes.

But just as a steadfast faith that dies unseen and unknown is in itself a gift, the heart of the Beautiful Game is in the giving, not the receiving. The true supporters sing proudly even in - especially in - defeat. Because they know that the road leads through dark places, and the last measured act of defiant Life is to go down that dark road head up and singing. Because - like the young women on the field in Dresden, like the supporters in the stands in Portland - where there is love, and faith, there can never be despair, only defeat. And the undespairing heart is never truly defeated.

Friday, July 8, 2011

An Die Memel 2 : Quarter's Eve

Well, the hurley-burley's done, the group stage is lost and won; tomorrow begins the task of reducing eight to four. What did we see in the group stage that might help us figure out who's going through, and who didn't, and why?Germany is not perfect! The French scored a couple of neat headers off corner kicks in their match against the Frauenschaft. I have no idea what Germany was thinking; marking space, whether you call it a "zone" or whatever you call it, is a sin in soccer. But the final result was still a win for the gals from the Bundesrepublik, who now get to knock my poor Nadeshino Japan on the head.

For my money the Germans still look the class of the tournament. They'll have to look pretty awful against Japan to change my mind on that. Just solid all the way through.The Swedes dug deep and found something. Having slagged off on them as old and tired, their 2-0 victory over the U.S. crowned a perfect run through the group stage for them, and, more to the point, they looked fairly comfortable slapping around the vaunted Americans. Their reward was to face the ridiculously lucky Matildas in the quarters. If the Sweden that showed up against the Yanks shows up against the feckless Aussies the lutefisk-gobblers should be a lock for the semis. But that's no certainty; the Sweden that looked so unconvincing against Colombia might just turn up, and then it's anyone's match. The IKEA-fanciers have improved with every match, and I have to eat my words; they look good for a possible run deep into the knock-out stages.Brazil is both beautiful and unpredictable. The cariocas were undefeated in the group stage, and Marta and the gals from the land of football showed one of the reasons why FIFA should really just designate their side the official representative of CONMEBOL and be done with it (Colombia's dire showing was the other). But this team seems fragile, to me. And, like the Brazilian men, I think that if they come unstuck they have the potential to be truly awful. I think that if a determined USWNT shows up on Sunday things might not go well for them. I'm not sure why I believe that...but I do. We'll have to see.Australia is ugly and unpredictable. Well, they got through. That game against Guinea was awful, though, wasn't it? How you let your defenders get their pockets picked not once, but TWICE, and by the same player? Brutal errors at the back but some luck up front with help from the truly wretched Norwegians, who really need to pay a visit to their neighbors and ask the Swedes for whatever they've been using to train with.

Well done for the Matildas to get past the group stage, but I can't help thinking that unless Sweden gets very, very bad very suddenly that the dream might be over. Play for a nil-nil draw, shielas, and hope for some lucky PKs.The US has had only one good match and is looking very beatable right now. And the "good match" was against this year's designated CONMEBOL bolso de perforación of women's football, Colombia. I think I mentioned in the earlier post that the outside backs looked slow and roundable, and sure enough Amy LePeilbet - aside from the truly appalling own goal - was beaten like a drum all night by the Swedes. I thought that Coach Sundhage would see how bad the North Koreans made her look and adjust, and she didn't. Shannon Boxx looked slow and off-pace again, as well - the entire U.S. midfield was ineffective against the Swedes. Some bad luck, too, like Rapinoe's miss off the crossbar...but, still. It was the U.S.'s game to win, and they couldn't do it against a solid but otherwise unexceptional Swedish side.

So now Sundhage needs to fire this team up, needs to ensure they bring their A game against Brazil or the U.S. might not even have a chance of a consolation third. I think an aggressive U.S. still has a chance. But it's still a much less more certain chance than a quarterfinal against the Aussies would have been.There has been some really awful officiating in this tournament. I normally don't whinge about officials. Referees are like the weather; some good, some bad, some just so terrible that you want to pull your head under the covers and whimper. So long as they're just bad both ways...enh, you have to deal with them.

But the Australia-Equatorial Guinea game got rough to the point of dangerous. And some really obvious stuff went flying past the referees, not just the usual thuggery. Watch Marta's first goal against Norway - it starts here about 0:27, with the really revealing shot at about 0:41 - where she just shoves the defender down from behind. Yes, there's some lovely footwork in a second or two where she drops the Norwegian left inside back on her ass with pure awesomeness. But...if dumping the first player to ride the nose plow isn't a foul...what is? The play should have never proceeded past the initial shove. Terrible, terrible non-call. Game-changer. And not the only one I saw.

It says something that I expect a higher level of officiating - and, perhaps, a higher level of play - from the women's internationals than the men's. But I do, and this year for all that there has been the usual fine play and good officiating, there's been some truly dire stuff there, too, which is perhaps why I noticed it...

OK - so; what's next?

My predictions for the quarters:

Germany over Japan 3-0
France over England 2-1
Sweden edges Australia 1-0
US draws Brazil 0-0, wins on PKs 5-4

And the semis?

I honestly have no idea who would win between France and Sweden. I'll pick France, simply because I'd like to see the go to the final.

The other semi will be a terrific match. It'll be either Brazil-Germany or, it I'm correct, the USWNT-Germany. I think I have to pick the Germans to go through for my France-Germany final.

But the horses of the night are running swiftly...and tomorrow, we shall see.

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Qualified

The U.S. Women's National Team qualified for the finals of the Women's World Cup today, winning 1-0 over Italy to go through 2-0 on aggregate.This would once have been a "dog bites woman" story, but this year has been very different from the qualifiers the USWNT has played from all the way back to 1991.

For one thing, the team did not go through at the top of the CONCACAF group; that would be Canada, led by Christine Sinclair. Mexico, as always staffed with U.S. collegiate players from Mexico, went second.So the USWNT had first to defeat Costa Rica for third place, and then beat the sixith place European team - Italy - for a spot in the finals.

And the other real difference is that the U.S. doesn't have either an individual player or a group of players significantly better than the best in Europe or Brazil.

Instead, this U.S. team has showed itself to be; often flawed at the back, where missed communication has led to several ugly goals or good chances for the opposition; lacking the controlling midfield that was key to American success in 1991 and 1999, and especially sterile up front, where the only real consistently successful weapon has been Abby Wambach.I've talked about this before; Wambach is a genuinely great player, but her ability makes her a perfect target and she tends to be badly over-used by a U.S. midfield that lacks passing dexterity and control and has no real wingers. The U.S. tends to go hey-diddle-diddle right through the middle, where it exposes the defensive ineptitude of most of the rest of CONCACAF as well as the clumsy soccer played by most of the women's teams from South America, Africa and Asia.But the Germans have proved in the sternest fashion, by beating the Americans to the Cup the past eight years, that they have solved Wambach. Four years ago the brilliance of Marta combined with the tight marking that neutralized Wambach to allow Brazil to put a hurting on a badly coached, demoralized, and overage U.S. team.

The change has been in part because the northern Europeans always had, and the Brazilians have gained, the skills they needed to play world-class football. But in part is has been because the U.S. team that burst on the world like an explosion in 1991 was a truly brilliant squad made of uniquely gifted players. We only partially realized at the time how good the Ninety-oners were; Mia, Tiff, Loudy, Brandi, Joy, Kristine, Michelle, Brianna...we can see now that they have to be considered one of the great teams of history, and the modern USWNT looks smaller only in the long shadow they cast now that they are gone.Two goals over the hapless Italians is just sad. And the lack of goalscoring isn't an aberration; the US has had difficulty scoring against decent teams all year. This year the U.S. begins its campaign for the Women's World Cup in an unusual position, as a challenger, and not a favored one at that.

I will be cheering and hoping for glory in Germany. But this year I suspect my support will, like many other WNT fans, be tinged with more than a little nervous anxiety. For the American women will be landing in Germany next spring not as the Team of Destiny, but the Team of Doubts.