Women's FIFA World Cup

[bucksfan2]

That was a very entertaining game to watch. There is such a stark contrast in the talent level in women's soccer that it is fun to watch a game in which teams had similar talent levels. I thought the US played well, they dominated the game just couldn't get a goal in the 1st. They have struggled with this for the entire tournament.

As for the Julie Johnson yellow card, it was a poor play on her behalf to start, and she did deserve a yellow for pulling the German player down, but in the replay it looked like Solo was in perfect defensive position to make a short very difficult. I wonder if that was the reason a yellow instead of a red.

As for the Alex Morgan won penalty kick, the initial contact was just outside of the penalty area. However I wonder if the play would have been called a straight red had a penalty kick not been given because the German woman made an American Football play, not a futbol play.

I don't understand the substitutions that Ellis has made. Subbing Wambach in with a lead is contrary to what many coaches make, they usually go defensive not offensive in those situations. The same can be said about Leroux with only seconds remaining. It would have seemed when the US scored their second they would have gone defensive maybe keeping one player near the center circle.

[Chip R]

I don't understand the substitutions that Ellis has made. Subbing Wambach in with a lead is contrary to what many coaches make, they usually go defensive not offensive in those situations. The same can be said about Leroux with only seconds remaining. It would have seemed when the US scored their second they would have gone defensive maybe keeping one player near the center circle.

I'm guessing the Wambach sub was for sentimental reasons.

[dougdirt]

When I can't find your highlights on ESPN.com - you're doing something very wrong.

[M2]

As for the Julie Johnson yellow card, it was a poor play on her behalf to start, and she did deserve a yellow for pulling the German player down, but in the replay it looked like Solo was in perfect defensive position to make a short very difficult. I wonder if that was the reason a yellow instead of a red.

I think it was a makeup call. In the 1st half the German right back, Maier (who probably has scorch marks all over her body after that game), committed what should have been her second yellow and the ref didn't card her. Johnston was the U.S.'s "get out of jail free" call.

I don't understand the substitutions that Ellis has made. Subbing Wambach in with a lead is contrary to what many coaches make, they usually go defensive not offensive in those situations. The same can be said about Leroux with only seconds remaining. It would have seemed when the US scored their second they would have gone defensive maybe keeping one player near the center circle.

They really don't have any defensive upgrades on the bench. They had their best tackling and possession middies on the field. Wambach gave them some hold up play to finish the game. She can eat clock. Leroux was sent in to burn off some extra time and run for about 30 seconds. Also, pressuring Germany was working too well to get away from it. No way I'd have laid back.

[Chip R]

When I can't find your highlights on ESPN.com - you're doing something very wrong.

Since Fox is carrying the World Cup, I can see why you can't find the highlights on ESPN.

[Hoosier Red]

I'm guessing the Wambach sub was for sentimental reasons.

That's probably reason #1, but it made some strategic sense to me as well. Despite her declining form and fitness, she's still a force on set plays offensively and defensively.

It's sort of the opposite of bringing up a large central defender to get on the end of a corner kick offensively. Here the US brought in Wambach to get a head on an opponents corner kick and/or set play.

[dougdirt]

Since Fox is carrying the World Cup, I can see why you can't find the highlights on ESPN.

Fox carries baseball, football, golf, nascar.... and somehow ESPN still finds a way to show highlights.

When your sport is telling the absolute leader in the coverage of your sport that they can't show highlights, you're doing something very poorly.

[Hoosier Red]

I wonder if not being on ESPN is as big of a problem now as it used to be.
I can't imagine I'm the only one who hasn't watched Sportscenter for more than a minute or so for at least 5 years.

It's not out of dislike of ESPN, I just don't spend time waiting for Sportscenter to catch highlights.

[Hoosier Red]

Fox carries baseball, football, golf, nascar.... and somehow ESPN still finds a way to show highlights.

When your sport is telling the absolute leader in the coverage of your sport that they can't show highlights, you're doing something very poorly.

I agree with you that it's poor strategy if FIFA/Fox is in fact preventing ESPN from showing highlights.
My concern isn't with what they're missing out on, but rather the little that is gained.
I should also note that ESPN has itself been pretty petty when it comes to showing leagues/competitions where they do not have a contract to carry it. (NHL and NASCAR spring to mind)

[Chip R]

I agree with you that it's poor strategy if FIFA/Fox is in fact preventing ESPN from showing highlights.
My concern isn't with what they're missing out on, but rather the little that is gained.
I should also note that ESPN has itself been pretty petty when it comes to showing leagues/competitions where they do not have a contract to carry it. (NHL and NASCAR spring to mind)

It's probably FIFA/Fox but ESPN shows a lot of soccer so they would be doing the fans who watch the soccer they show a huge disservice.

[bucksfan2]

The Olympics and NBC do the same thing. You can't find highlights of the events on ESPN. The same can be said about big time prize fights, ESPN has analysis but not highlights. I don't think it does any of the networks any good, Fox may want the rights, but highlights on SportsCenter can drum up more interest.

Does Wambach remind anybody of Andy Carroll at this stage of her career? Tall, striker, useful in short bursts, but a liability when forced to play the entire game?

[Chip R]

The Olympics and NBC do the same thing. You can't find highlights of the events on ESPN. The same can be said about big time prize fights, ESPN has analysis but not highlights. I don't think it does any of the networks any good, Fox may want the rights, but highlights on SportsCenter can drum up more interest.

Sure, but Fox probably isn't interested in ceding the highlights to SportsCenter since they have a highlights show of their own. If they start going to Fox for World Cup highlights, perhaps they will start going there for baseball, football, basketball, etc. There's no law saying ESPN is the only network that can show highlights.

[Hoosier Red]

Sure, but Fox probably isn't interested in ceding the highlights to SportsCenter since they have a highlights show of their own. If they start going to Fox for World Cup highlights, perhaps they will start going there for baseball, football, basketball, etc. There's no law saying ESPN is the only network that can show highlights.

I'm sure that's what they're thinking. It just strikes me as poor strategy. I don't think people going for highlights really function that way anymore. Anyone wanting to watch "World Cup highlights" will go to a site where they can get them 24 hours per day on demand. I think the average person watching Sportscenter is a generic sports fan who simply wants to know what sports choices are available.

In other words, I'm guessing you'll get more crossover to your WC broadcasts from people who are watching Sportscenter, than you'll get to your Sports Highlights show by not distributing World Cup highlights.

[Hoosier Red]

The Olympics and NBC do the same thing. You can't find highlights of the events on ESPN. The same can be said about big time prize fights, ESPN has analysis but not highlights. I don't think it does any of the networks any good, Fox may want the rights, but highlights on SportsCenter can drum up more interest.

If I remember correctly, NBC ceded a certain number of minutes to release Al Michaels from his non-compete clause.

Does Wambach remind anybody of Andy Carroll at this stage of her career? Tall, striker, useful in short bursts, but a liability when forced to play the entire game?

My friend made a good analogy, he said she's like Late Late career Shaq. Still a physical freak, still bigger and stronger than most of the opposition, but unable to convert anything that is not put perfectly in place for her.

5 years ago, if you put a ball anywhere within a meter on 1 side or the other, she's hammering it home. Now, she'll hammer a ball home if you put it exactly where she's jumping to But can't correct for anything not exactly on point.

[IslandRed]

That's probably reason #1, but it made some strategic sense to me as well. Despite her declining form and fitness, she's still a force on set plays offensively and defensively.

I think it was also what M2 said re: holdup play. When they subbed her for Rapinoe, they kept the same formation, just moving Morgan over and putting Abby in the middle. Since everyone else was playing behind the ball, somebody had to be the outlet for clearances and it takes a physical presence to win balls in the air and hold off defenders long enough for help to arrive. That helped them keep possession after fending off the German attacks.

As for the TV thing and exclusive rights to highlights and such -- it's FIFA. Every World Cup, every time, either gender. Good luck trying to tell those guys anything about anything.