England were pinging it around like a men's team at points in the first half. Mead was hugely wasteful though - every time the ball went out to her she'd slow it down, piss about then go backwards. Parris was much more like it down the other side - attacked the full-back and got her crosses in
England were pinging it around like a men's team at points in the first half. Mead was hugely wasteful though - every time the ball went out to her she'd slow it down, piss about then go backwards. Parris was much more like it down the other side - attacked the full-back and got her crosses in
Some good points made there Leuth, that's why she ended up crossing with her left foot despite being like Johan berg Gudmundsson and playing on the wrong side! (he played on right side obviously) Mead is a very talented player as she showed with the offside goal but the Scottish defenders made an effort to keep her on her left. Greenwood was the overlap natural left footer.
Parris was very good down the right with her partnership with Bronze which had Scotland in all sorts of trouble for 60 minutes before Scotland turned up and played well for the last 30.
I haven't had a chance to watch any of the games yet, got back from the ballet yesterday and the England game was on (sis in law's bf had it on whilst he was doing the family ironing ) and Scotland scored, so decided I was the bok and should not stay to watch the end!
Have been trying to get a womens world cup panini sticker book for my nieces but can't find one anywhere.
I like that my FIFA world cup app has updated to the womens one so easy to keep up to date with what's going on. My cousin's wife who plays football is out in France so enjoying her updates too.
I sadly have had a chance to read this thread, and some of the comments are woeful attempts at humour.
I'm not particularly interested in women's football and in the past have been dismissive of it. After much thought I have come to the conclusion that even if it's not for me it is churlish to put it down. Growing numbers are obviously enjoying it and this cannot be anything but a good thing. So I hope it grows and becomes an established part of our sports culture. Who knows in time I might start watching it.
suzisausage said: (sis in law's bf had it on whilst he was doing the family ironing ) sadly have had a chance to read this thread, and some of the comments are woeful attempts at humour.
Comparing it to the men's game is just totally stupid and pointless. I enjoyed the game and the technical level was pretty high. Surprised Scotland were so good although we will have to improve a lot to get near to winning this. The women's game has vastly improved in recent years. I remember watching Charlton Ladies 20 years ago when we were one of the best teams in the country. The level of improvement over that 20 years has been quite amazing. If it inspires more girls to take up the game, to watch the game and show an interest in the game that must be a good thing for all concerned.
suzisausage said: (sis in law's bf had it on whilst he was doing the family ironing ) sadly have had a chance to read this thread, and some of the comments are woeful attempts at humour.
Especially the bit in brackets above
I knew I should have taken a photo. I couldn't quite believe it myself to be honest. As me and mum were leaving he served up dinner too!
suzisausage said: (sis in law's bf had it on whilst he was doing the family ironing ) sadly have had a chance to read this thread, and some of the comments are woeful attempts at humour.
Especially the bit in brackets above
I knew I should have taken a photo. I couldn't quite believe it myself to be honest. As me and mum were leaving he served up dinner too!
I’m not sure (although I could guess) why people keep comparing it to the men’s game, surely they have the intellectual capability to realise they are looking at two totally different things?
But then women's football IS directly comparable to men's football, as it's an identical sport. Indeed on TV we now have female pundits like Alex Scott and Eni Aluko analysing men's football because of this, if the game they played was massively different from men's football that wouldn't be the case.
Not knocking the skills and effort on display, but as a viewing spectacle the reduced speed and power does lessen my enjoyment of women's football, whereas with other sports like say hockey that isn't the case.
I’m not sure (although I could guess) why people keep comparing it to the men’s game, surely they have the intellectual capability to realise they are looking at two totally different things?
But then women's football IS directly comparable to men's football, as it's an identical sport. Indeed on TV we now have female pundits like Alex Scott and Eni Aluko analysing men's football because of this, if the game they played was massively different from men's football that wouldn't be the case.
Not knocking the skills and effort on display, but as a viewing spectacle the reduced speed and power does lessen my enjoyment of women's football, whereas with other sports like say hockey that isn't the case.
The two are directly comparable, and I appreciate that the reduced speed and power does lessen the spectacle in pure footballing terms. But the drama is still the same, and ultimately a really exciting game doesn't necessarily have to be played between two teams at the highest level.
I've played in a 6-4 game at the end of the season. We came back from 3-0 down. The standard of football was crap, but it didn't stop it from being a bloody exciting game of football and probably more of a spectacle than the 0-0 Liverpool and City played out back in October.
For what it's worth, had either side been playing any of the teams at this years WWC they would've been comfortably played off the park.
This is true - I probably enjoyed the women's match more than the men's match shown just before it. It isn't about skill levels or power, it is about the competitive nature of the game. Having seen a lot of youth football, I have seen some girls who are better than the boys before the physical difference plays a bigger part. Scotland's Emsley reminded me of those girls but nobody in the England team did. Maybe it was the rawness, but she was a very talented player and the best I have seen so far in the tournament albeit based on one match. She looked like the sort of player England would benefit from greatly.
England were very professional in the first half and overwhelmed Scotland but stopped doing that in the second. What it probably told us is that they are best on the front foot. In the first half I could see how they might win the cup, but changed my mind in the second.
Stanway (I think her name is) Has to play central midfield, and England did looked more purposeful and solid when she came on. Mead couldn't beat the defender so was ineffective. Bronze and Parris worked well together. Parris looked very good for 60 minutes or so but then totally faded.
The good news for the Lionesses and the Jocketts are that both Argentina and Japan are mediocre if 30 minutes of the first half is anything to go by. First boring match after 7 games.
The good news for the Lionesses and the Jocketts are that both Argentina and Japan are mediocre if 30 minutes of the first half is anything to go by. First boring match after 7 games.
Japan have made the last 2 world cup finals, they'll go far in this again.
The good news for the Lionesses and the Jocketts are that both Argentina and Japan are mediocre if 30 minutes of the first half is anything to go by. First boring match after 7 games.
Japan have made the last 2 world cup finals, they'll go far in this again.
No way. They look like Gobinson is in charge of them. Pass it around in front of teams all day long but no penetration whatsoever. Argentina were a level below them so had to defend, but they did so pretty easily I think.
Argentinaian keeper was definitely iffy but Japan couldn't capitalise.
Don’t think the Argies have played any friendlies for two years as in dispute over pay and not having a coach or something. Think they only play qualifiers
Comments
Mead is a very talented player as she showed with the offside goal but the Scottish defenders made an effort to keep her on her left. Greenwood was the overlap natural left footer.
Parris was very good down the right with her partnership with Bronze which had Scotland in all sorts of trouble for 60 minutes before Scotland turned up and played well for the last 30.
I haven't had a chance to watch any of the games yet, got back from the ballet yesterday and the England game was on (sis in law's bf had it on whilst he was doing the family ironing ) and Scotland scored, so decided I was the bok and should not stay to watch the end!
Have been trying to get a womens world cup panini sticker book for my nieces but can't find one anywhere.
I like that my FIFA world cup app has updated to the womens one so easy to keep up to date with what's going on. My cousin's wife who plays football is out in France so enjoying her updates too.
I sadly have had a chance to read this thread, and some of the comments are woeful attempts at humour.
After much thought I have come to the conclusion that even if it's not for me it is churlish to put it down. Growing numbers are obviously enjoying it and this cannot be anything but a good thing.
So I hope it grows and becomes an established part of our sports culture. Who knows in time I might start watching it.
The women's game has vastly improved in recent years. I remember watching Charlton Ladies 20 years ago when we were one of the best teams in the country. The level of improvement over that 20 years has been quite amazing. If it inspires more girls to take up the game, to watch the game and show an interest in the game that must be a good thing for all concerned.
Not knocking the skills and effort on display, but as a viewing spectacle the reduced speed and power does lessen my enjoyment of women's football, whereas with other sports like say hockey that isn't the case.
I've played in a 6-4 game at the end of the season. We came back from 3-0 down. The standard of football was crap, but it didn't stop it from being a bloody exciting game of football and probably more of a spectacle than the 0-0 Liverpool and City played out back in October.
For what it's worth, had either side been playing any of the teams at this years WWC they would've been comfortably played off the park.
England were very professional in the first half and overwhelmed Scotland but stopped doing that in the second. What it probably told us is that they are best on the front foot. In the first half I could see how they might win the cup, but changed my mind in the second.
Stanway (I think her name is) Has to play central midfield, and England did looked more purposeful and solid when she came on. Mead couldn't beat the defender so was ineffective. Bronze and Parris worked well together. Parris looked very good for 60 minutes or so but then totally faded.
First boring match after 7 games.
The first dud match, but Argentina get their first ever point in WC against the 2011 WC winners.
Argentinaian keeper was definitely iffy but Japan couldn't capitalise.
Think they only play qualifiers
3-0 in 30 minutes.