Ironically, it was the fruit of the U.S.'s 1999 World Cup success, the WUSA, that allowed Germany and others to so effortlessly bridge the quality gap between themselves and the sport's traditional powers. So while the national teams from Norway and China caught early planes home, those from Canada, Germany, and Sweden advanced to the semifinals. And while The WUSA was so effective at developing the on-field skills of the Germans, Swedes, and others that it may have sealed its own fate. Were the U.S. to have won--or even advanced to--the World Cup championship match, the sport may have captured at least a fraction of the attention that it earned in 1999. Instead, few people even knew who was competing in the Cup finals. Some pundits blamed the suspension of the WUSA and the pall that it cast over the U.S. team for America's woes. But if anything, that should have stoked the U.S. players' fire. The reasons why the U.S. lost are instead more tactical and physical than mental. Among them: * Loyalty. For too many years, the core U.S. stars commanded roster spots and playing time that could have been used to develop younger players. When it came to selecting the U.S. World Cup roster, so few qualified players had been bloodied that coach April Heinrichs even selected an eventual starter, Shannon Boxx, who hadn't yet earned a single cap. Selection problems continued when injured vets Shannon MacMillan and Danielle Slaton were brought back into the fold even though neither was ready to compete at a World Cup level. * Age. Some of the U.S. vets have lost a step or two, and it showed. Tellingly, after Mia Hamm was rested--something that would have been unthinkable four years ago--she never regained the momentum she enjoyed in the team's opening two games. * Poor preparation. The U.S. spent its pre-tournament training playing against weak nations such as Ireland and Costa Rica. That isn't going to cut it--especially now that the U.S. doesn't awe its opposition simply by stepping onto the field. * Tactics. Between odd substitution choices and a bizarre insistence on playing an outdated formation, Heindrichs did herself no favors. * A lack of skill. The U.S. has turned from a lithe, crisp-passing team to a physical bruising one that lives and dies on opportunism and set pieces. (Only two of the U.S.'s 12 WWC goals were scored in the run of play.) Cindy Parlow started the U.S.'s trend toward physical play, but the development of Boxx and 6'0" Abby Wambach made it law. As a result the U.S. was matched in skill by second-tier nations, and when it competed against another physical side, it lacked the speed and combination play necessary to control the game. The Olympics are next for the U.S., and things aren't going to get any easier. The U.S.'s lack of experienced, young, skillful internationals likely means that the team is going to have to battle for any accolades it earns in the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, the days of Harem, Foudy, Chastain, and company are practically over as well. Without those household names, starting a new women's league will be a difficult task, to say the least. After the 1999 Women's World Cup finals, the love affair with and respect afforded the U.S. team lasted throughout the rest of year, resulting in both the team being named Sports Illustrated's Sportswomen of the Year and the creation of the WUSA. After the 2003 Women's World Cup, ABC couldn't end the event quickly enough, cutting away from the broadcast before the trophy presentation. Unfortunately, most of the country and any potential WUSA investors had likely already long abandoned the Cup, tuning out after the U.S.'s semifinals loss. | ||
Articles from Soccer Digest |
Sunday, 25 January 2009
Why the U.S. stumbled at the World Cup.(Direct Kick; women's soccer)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment