Women’s World Cup

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 hours ago, FenwayFrank said:

It’s the menopause coming in early, I’m surrounded by menopausal women 😉

That's just what they tell you to excuse them giving you a wide berth or giving you short shrift. 

In reality it's not the menopause; women probably just think you're a pr*ck. 

Edited June 23, 2019 by canarydan23

[Surfer 1,547]

OK at least one team can play proper football. These French ladies are really good - can run, pass, header and shoot. If England play them they will get rolled over, not 13 - 0, but they are in a different class to any of the other teams I have seen. Good for them for showing what women’s football can be. 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Surfer

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Thought Brazil ran them dead close - and they finished 3rd(?) in their group.

This WC has been pretty good, but let down by the officials who don’t seem up to using VAR. 

[CANARYKING 634]

Haven’t seen a decent referee yet, yesterday’s lost the plot completely 

[Woodman 92]

15 hours ago, Van wink said:

At least they added the VAR time

Over 15 minutes added time in total in the England game - we're going to have some late finishes next season if this is how VAR is going to be in the Prem.

[king canary 7,562]

For me yesterday shows the problem isn't with VAR it is with the implementation of it.

That final penalty seemed nailed on to me and it is difficult to escape the idea the ref bottled it for fear of the reaction.

[Yellow Wal 314]

It's going to be a long and difficult season. This is only the start of the problems with VAR. It will get worse. As well as the interpretation of some replays referred to VAR (handballs, penalties, red/yellow cards) we will also have the argument of whether an incident should have been referred or not.  VAR is fine for offsides and goal line technology is a must, but apart from that it should be left to the referee.

All they have to do is get it right!  

[Mr Angry 1,544]

4 hours ago, CANARYKING said:

Haven’t seen a decent referee yet, yesterday’s lost the plot completely 

I think Phil Neville lost it a bit with his comments after the game, England won, just move on. Doesn’t he remember what it was like to feel the emotion of representing your country in a World Cup? 

Oh, wait 😀

[Indy 3,283]

12 minutes ago, Yellow Wal said:

It's going to be a long and difficult season. This is only the start of the problems with VAR. It will get worse. As well as the interpretation of some replays referred to VAR (handballs, penalties, red/yellow cards) we will also have the argument of whether an incident should have been referred or not.  VAR is fine for offsides and goal line technology is a must, but apart from that it should be left to the referee.

All they have to do is get it right!  

I don’t think VAR is in anyway a bad thing, if anything it showed how well it makes the game fair, unfortunately it’s only flaw is that the ref has the final decision on the monitor, so it’s up to them.

That said, it was a certain goal for England and had VAR not been in use that second goal would have been ruled out.

Anything new has it’s teething problems but ultimately will be of benefit to ensure a fair result is more often than not is come to.

Edited June 24, 2019 by Indy

[Indy 3,283]

For the record, I fully appreciate just how far women’s football has come, some very good football being played and well worth watching.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

2 hours ago, Mr Angry said:

I think Phil Neville lost it a bit with his comments after the game, England won, just move on. Doesn’t he remember what it was like to feel the emotion of representing your country in a World Cup? 

Oh, wait 😀

I quite disagree. Cameroon's behaviour was totally unprofessional and budget, completely incompatible with an ever-improving women's game that's growing in size and scope with every passing year. What Cameroon did yesterday set an appalling example to a global audience, and Neville calling them out for it with such candour was absolutely spot on.

If you 'just move on' rather than bringing attention to it and dealing with it accordingly, it leaves the door open for other teams thinking that they can influence the outcome of a match by downing tools and/or kicking lumps out of people when things don't go their way.

[Woodman 92]

6 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

I quite disagree. Cameroon's behaviour was totally unprofessional and budget, completely incompatible with an ever-improving women's game that's growing in size and scope with every passing year. What Cameroon did yesterday set an appalling example to a global audience, and Neville calling them out for it with such candour was absolutely spot on.

If you 'just move on' rather than bringing attention to it and dealing with it accordingly, it leaves the door open for other teams thinking that they can influence the outcome of a match by downing tools and/or kicking lumps out of people when things don't go their way.

The referee could and should have been more authoritative and given yellow cards for dissent to the players much earlier.  She spoke at length to the captain, but should have dealt with the player/s who were leading the protest much quicker.  She could have also spoken to the coach who seemed to be accepting of the VAR decisions at the time (though his post match interview wasn't!).

[king canary 7,562]

8 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

I quite disagree. Cameroon's behaviour was totally unprofessional and budget, completely incompatible with an ever-improving women's game that's growing in size and scope with every passing year. What Cameroon did yesterday set an appalling example to a global audience, and Neville calling them out for it with such candour was absolutely spot on.

If you 'just move on' rather than bringing attention to it and dealing with it accordingly, it leaves the door open for other teams thinking that they can influence the outcome of a match by downing tools and/or kicking lumps out of people when things don't go their way.

Agreed. In one game Cameroon managed to...

- Elbow a player in the face (no red card)

- Spit on an opponent (intent a little unclear)

- Threaten to walk off after a correct offside decision

- Claim they were being discriminated against racially

- Shove the referee

- Attempt to injure an opponent.

Neville is well within his right to say what he did.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

2 minutes ago, Woodman said:

The referee could and should have been more authoritative and given yellow cards for dissent to the players much earlier.  She spoke at length to the captain, but should have dealt with the player/s who were leading the protest much quicker.  She could have also spoken to the coach who seemed to be accepting of the VAR decisions at the time (though his post match interview wasn't!).

Totally agree with this too. I would be very surprised if that referee takes charge of another game at the tournament. As well as what you mentioned, she bottled two further VAR decisions in England's favour - a clear penalty, and a red card for an awful studs-up challenge that could easily have broken Steph Houghton's ankle at the end. I'm also bemused why VAR was not requested or used for the elbow in the first few minutes (clear red card) and the spitting incident (from the one decent camera view that was shown on TV it also looked intentional, although I guess we'll never truly know).

There's no way that kind of behaviour would have been treated so timidly by officials in the men's game - I guess because that kind of mass misbehaviour is less prevalent in the women's game, the ref was hoping that being lenient might mollify the Cameroon players a bit. Instead, it just made them even more belligerent. Unfortunately, in front of a huge global audience, the appalling behaviour and weak refereeing has really tarnished the women's game.

[Woodman 92]

Personally, I don't think the spitting was deliberate, though she didn't make any attempt 'not' to spit in the direction of the England player. 

The tackle at the end was poor.  One thing I've noticed is that there seems to be less 'contact' in the women's game, less physical tackling and any contact seems to result in a foul given.  I think because there aren't so many tackles, when one comes in like that, it is automatically assumed that deserved a red card.  You see tackles - or attempts to tackle - like that in the men's game quite regularly, though fortunately without high contact like that and a yellow card usually results.  I'm tying myself up in what I'm trying to explain, but I guess I'm saying I don't think it would have been a red card in the men's game.

[Mr Angry 1,544]

The behaviour of the Cameroon team was unacceptable but it is for FIFA to deal with, not another manager.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

4 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

The behaviour of the Cameroon team was unacceptable but it is for FIFA to deal with, not another manager.

More likely the useless FIFA will do something if as many raise the issue as possible. Like the referee tried during the game, FiFA could easily attempt to brush it all under the carpet and ‘move on’. This behaviour brought the sport to a new low for the women’s game and needs to have strong repercussions. 

Probably a minuscule fine and a warning then..

[TIL 1010 4,717]

9 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

The behaviour of the Cameroon team was unacceptable but it is for FIFA to deal with, not another manager.

Quite correct but i thought Phil Neville conducted himself very well and in no way did he do anything other than express an opinion on the match incidents having been asked his views.

[king canary 7,562]

2 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

More likely the useless FIFA will do something if as many raise the issue as possible. Like the referee tried during the game, FiFA could easily attempt to brush it all under the carpet and ‘move on’. This behaviour brought the sport to a new low for the women’s game and needs to have strong repercussions. 

Probably a minuscule fine and a warning then..

It is interesting if you watch the highlights Fifa posted on Youtube it doesn't contain the elbow, the penalty, the walk off, the spitting or the foul at the end. 

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

48 minutes ago, king canary said:

It is interesting if you watch the highlights Fifa posted on Youtube it doesn't contain the elbow, the penalty, the walk off, the spitting or the foul at the end. 

The cover up has begun. I take back my last sentence in the previous post, there’ll probably be no action taken at all. That’s why Neville was right to rant and should continue to do so.

Edited June 24, 2019 by Fiery Zac

[Surfer 1,547]

Neville was quite measured in what he said, and he precursor it with a comment that we were supposed to only comment about the game, BUT .......  I applaud him telling the truth, we need more of that honesty. 

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

Here we go again with VAR. 

USAs 2nd pen....is that a pen? Another subjective decision, VAR can’t clear it up

[Surfer 1,547]

The fix is in, the vast majority of TV based funding for women World Cup comes from US.

Can't have them losing....

 

The American commentators going wild about the bravery it took to score! 

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

The only good thing with that decision is the ref stuck with their original decision as VAR didn’t offer enough evidence to overturn. I’m surprised it was given in the first place but the ref seemed certain and unlike yesterday she’s certainly had control of the game and VAR is assisting, not attempting to run the game.

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

 If the on-field ref had given it I guess it’s the equivalent of ‘umpire’s call’ but IMO if VAR can’t clear it up it shouldn’t be given. I don’t see how it’s fair to get a penalty unless it is obvious.

It does seem that VAR - or rather the running of it - has been poor this tournament, it seemed far more smooth/less contentious in last year’s WC. 

Edited June 24, 2019 by Branston Pickle

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

10 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

 If the on-field ref had given it I guess it’s the equivalent of ‘umpire’s call’ but IMO if VAR can’t clear it up it shouldn’t be given. I don’t see how it’s fair to get a penalty unless it is obvious.

It does seem that VAR - or rather the running of it - has been poor this tournament, it seemed far more smooth/less contentious in last year’s WC. 

I agree it should be obvious but the ref obviously believed it was as she gave it on the pitch. If the ref hadn’t given it on the pitch, it would’ve been a check and then the ref would review it, creating more delays.

This is where a review based system like tennis or cricket would work. If the ref hadn’t given it, USA could call for a review and then presumably as there was no obvious reason to overturn it remains with the on pitch decision. If it was given, it is a pen unless Spain decide to review. Again with no obvious reason to overturn, it remains with the on pitch decision.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

The overall control of a game needs to remain with the referee. There are far too many subjective decisions to make for the footballing world to think VAR will take away all controversies.

USA vs Spain was an example of a referee in control of the match. No matter what your view on her decisions, she made subjective decisions and stuck with them. It was the opposite of yesterday where the referee let players dictate the flow of the match and then that influenced her decision making. She became scared of making a decision, with or without the help of VAR

Edited June 24, 2019 by Fiery Zac

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Yes, I think that’s the thing today - the ref’s initial call was to give a penalty so with ‘umpire’s call’ it would presumably remain given unless there’s good reason not to give it.

[Yellow Wal 314]

In many other sports the use of VAR for all decisions is relevant because the game is always stopping and then re-starting, notably with cricket and tennis but also with games like rugby which do not have long periods of play without stops.

We have not had a situation yet where a penalty has not been given and play continues for another couple of minutes without a natural stop. That play could result in a goal at the opposite end. Jordan Rhodes' goal against Villa was after 18 passes.

Imagine a goal like that being ruled out and a penalty being given against us!

The referee must be solely responsible for some decisions.

Just as we continually say, whilst watching games, "He should have scored then", we must also accept that referees make mistakes and we merely say, "He should have given that." 

Good players score goals, good referees give correct decisions. The players don't get a second chance, why should referees? As long as the decisions are unbiased the decisions should be accepted. 

Edited June 25, 2019 by Yellow Wal

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,776]

2 hours ago, Yellow Wal said:

We have not had a situation yet where a penalty has not been given and play continues for another couple of minutes without a natural stop. That play could result in a goal at the opposite end. Jordan Rhodes' goal against Villa was after 18 passes.

Imagine a goal like that being ruled out and a penalty being given against us!

There was a great example of this last season in the Serie A in the match between SPAL and Fiorentina. It's 1-1 in 72nd minute, Chiesa of Fiorentina goes down in the area. Over a minute later, SPAL score to go 2-1 up. Just as Fiorentina are about to kick off, the VAR has a word with the ref and tells him to hang on a few seconds, before the ref goes to check the video. It's a tight one and he takes a couple of minutes before deciding there was enough contact to give Fiorentina a penalty. Cue lots of arguing from SPAL players, before Veretout of Fiorentina finally scores the penalty seven minutes after the foul. Fiorentina go 2-1 up and score two late goals to win 4-1.

Ultimately, the ref probably made the right decision, but seven minutes between a foul happening and a penalty being taken is too long and needs to be streamlined.

Edited June 25, 2019 by Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man