I've really enjoyed the tournament so far. There is a game on each morning as I have my breakfast so I get to watch a bit. Also just watched the last half hour of Canada v New Zealand. The skill levels are quite high. Some of the goals in the 3-3 draw between Nigeria and Sweden were brilliant. Lovely feints, flicks and passing movements. And the Norwegians scored a peach of a freek kick against the Germans. I think it clipped both the underside of the cross bar and the inside of the upright. Millimetre perfect it was.

From a parochial point of view it was disappointing to see the Yanks beat us Aussies. We dominated the first half but were over run in the second. Some loose finishing and brilliant keeping from Hope Solo (great name) kept the USA in the first half and quality from Rapione saw us beaten in the second. 

Yeah I've usually watched some of the WWC over the years but I was quite surprised at how good the first touch and close control was this time, (take note "Wele") as I said in the general football thread the short passing pussyball style really suits the womens game as they cannot be pressed for long and are not susceptible to much speed and power.
The other thing I noticed is that the ladies tire quicker and struggle towards the end of the game, I think it should be just 40 minutes a half for them.
In the USA/Aus game I thought the Aussie coach got his tactics right, the USA had superior players but Australia pressed them well counter attacked and looked good for a point but fell behind to an unlucky goal then they tired at the end.

😆

Ref was probably checking her make up in the rear view mirror......Just joking.......
That was from 2011 though, its not as if male refs are immune to disgraceful decisions too.

No worse than Graham (3 yellow cards) Poll.

😆 I hadn't seen that. What a bizarre situation! How on earth could the ref miss that a player held the ball for 5 seconds?!

Nah it's clearly ball to hand. Play on!

Biggus wrote:

No worse than Graham (3 yellow cards) Poll.

It's worse. A lot worse.

Biggus wrote:

No worse than Graham (3 yellow cards) Poll.

During that World Cup I was in London staying with my Grandma who knew absolutely nothing about football. My memory of that incident is coming downstairs the next morning and she laughed and said "they are all laughing about that Brian Poole on the radio."

😆

Australia now 2-0 up V Nigeria.

Dull stuff from Sweden. Guess they fancy themselves against you Aussies. Played the US like a fiddle.

Who's playing on girlyball today?

Biggus wrote:

Who's playing on girlyball today?

Jolly old England vs Mexico

Brazil - Spain

Ta Jens, should be worth a look.

The Spanish striker Pablos plays for Arsenal ladies.

Today it's a shoot out between Germany and Norway for top spot in the group. All about the goal difference, as Germany and Norway both beat their first opponents by heavy margins, and drew their own match. Germany has a 6 goal advantage, but are playing against the better team. Could be fun to watch for all out attacking football.

Ingmar Bergman Max Von Sydow Greta Garbo Bjorn Benny Anna-Frid & Agnetha Gustav Adolphus Alfred Nobel Bjorn Borg Anders Limpar Freddie Ljunberg Klaus & Rex- Your girls really took a beating. 😆

Yeah, I'm truly devastated.

Biggus wrote:

Ingmar Bergman Max Von Sydow Greta Garbo Bjorn Benny Anna-Frid & Agnetha Gustav Adolphus Alfred Nobel Bjorn Borg Anders Limpar Freddie Ljunberg Klaus & Rex- Your girls really took a beating. 😆

😆

Thought you'd like that one Jens.

Lol One of the Colombians is named Ospina, any relation?

The Arsenal players involved aren't playing particularly well.

As I type though Sanderson nearly pulls off a great goal.

[video=dailymotion]

take a bow luv!

That keeper is ridiculously short, 5'8" according to wikipedia.

For a man maybe. Pretty tall for a woman though.

It was a genuine question, Lulz. The answer appears to be yes, the goals are the same size in male and female football. Bit stupid when a 5'8" keeper is considered "tall" in women's football.

Oh ok sorry. Thought you were being sarcastic. Dunno if their goals are the same but for any female being 5"8' is considered pretty tall and very far from being absurdly short. Maybe absurdly short in goalkeeping terms for men but even for women I don't think most goalkeepers are 6". She might be slightly on the short side for a female goalkeeper but I doubt it's by more than 1 or 2 inches.

Edit: By the way I find it insulting to be called stupid for insinuating that a 5"8' woman is tall.

No, I'm not calling you stupid! I mean that it's stupid to use the same size of goal when all of the female keepers are way smaller than their male counterparts. She is too short to effectively cover that goal frame, that goal was mostly scored because she's too short (not taking anything away from the shot or the placement, which were excellent). That's why I looked up her height straight away, it's the first thing I noticed when I watched the clip.

Fair enough. Are you sure though that the size of the goals are the same as for the men's game. If so then maybe there is a problem. But I doubt it's that big of a deal seeing as everyone is subject to the same rules. Not sure but if children and young people now are anything to go by then I think generation by generation people are becoming taller.

No facts to back this up, just my impression when I compare how tall everyone I knew when I was young compared to the teenagers and early 20 something's I see running around now. If that is the case then the goalkeepers of the past must have found it harder than the 6"5 monsters we see in goal nowadays.

Think I'm just saying that as long as the rules and equipment is the same regardless of opponent then whatever disadvantage against one team also works to their advantage when attacking the other.

IG has a point. After all, increasing the size of goals for the men's game would probably be unjustifiable even though you can use the same argument that the effects would be symmetrically applied.

That said, it's clear the women's game is far from a mature stage. It might not have gotten to the point where keeper size is much more significant in consideration, as basic skill-sets might not be great for women's keepers overall.

Everything is the same, even as I said before the 90 minutes.
I think 80 minutes is enough for them they fade badly at the end.

Edit: @Lulz, Btw I find it insulting to be called a monster.

banduan wrote:

[video=dailymotion]

take a bow luv!

Is their Henry the same as our Henry?

Biggus wrote:

Everything is the same, even as I said before the 90 minutes.
I think 80 minutes is enough for them they fade badly at the end.

Women have no problem competing in much more physically demanding marathons and triathlons.
It's just that the footballers fitness levels are low because of their game is not rich enough to fully support professionals.
A bigger issue for me is the size of the goals.
The keepers have almost no chance if the shot is well placed.

Nah women don't have the same stamina and endurance as men.

It's science.

banduan wrote:

IG has a point. After all, increasing the size of goals for the men's game would probably be unjustifiable even though you can use the same argument that the effects would be symmetrically applied.

That said, it's clear the women's game is far from a mature stage. It might not have gotten to the point where keeper size is much more significant in consideration, as basic skill-sets might not be great for women's keepers overall.

I agree that goals should be smaller for the women's game to match their height. I'm just saying that until they do so both teams are disadvantaged in the same way defensively whilst both being in an advantageous position whilst attacking. Difference would be if women were playing against men, in which case there will be many more problems.

Oh and for reference the game was created over a century and a half ago when men were considerably shorter than they are now. According to this BBC article in the century up to 1975 men's average height has increased by almost 4 inches. As such maybe there is a case that the goal sizes for women now are how it was for men back then.

That it's become easier for men to defend their goal due to this increase in height is moot because the advantage applies to all the teams now whilst also being disadvantaged because goals that could have been scored way back when against little keepers are now uncommon.

Edit: @[deleted], monster in a good way. Don't worry, it's a compliment.

Edit 2: Don't even know why the need for this argument. Are the goals too big for the women? Yes, probably. Will they benefit from reducing the size of the goal? Definitely. Will they also find it as a disadvantage to reduce the size of the goal given it will be a lot harder for them to score? Of course. I guess as long as the rules and standards are the same across the board then it will be both beneficial and disadvantageous to both teams so the authorities in the women's game probably need to meet with the teams in the women's game and then come to a decision on what they all feel is in their best interests.