OT - Women's World Cup Day 3 - USA v Australia

Submitted by bacon1431 on

The USWNT takes on top 10 ranked Australia in their World Cup opener at 7:30 pm ET. Match will be on FS1, with coverage starting at 6:30. 

The Sweden-Nigeria match just finished. And for those that don't know, Sweden's manager was the USWNT manager in the previous World Cup cycle. Sweden and Nigeria are also in the US' group and it was a very entertaining match. 3-3 final, Sweden looked to be running away with it after a 2-0 lead heading into halftime. But the Nigerian women battled back and tied it up, only to fall behind once again. They equalized in the 87'. Very impressive for the team that is supposed to be the weakest in the group, espeically considering they rarely get to travel outside Africa due to lack of support. They are easily the most entertaining team I've seen in the WWC so far and they'll be tough to top in that department. 

US women will have their work cut out for them in this group and they can't take any match for granted. Things were looking shaky for the women before they won the Algrave Cup and optimism was raised once again. Then they had a poor performance against South Korea in their final WC warmup. 

Hope everyone is enjoying the tournament. It's wide open this year and several teams have a legitimate chance to win it, including the US. 

Also gotta say that FS1 is knocking it out of the park when it comes to in studio coverage. Had an all female panel on Saturday, but the men have started to contribute now. Every match is on TV and most are on FS1 or regular Fox. Credit to the network for putting this together and now I'm much more optimistic about when they cover the men's WC from 2018-2026. 

Wolverine Devotee

June 8th, 2015 at 6:03 PM ^

Michigan's very own Christina Murillo is on the Mexico WNT. She took off the 2014 season to train for this World Cup.

IMO, Michigan is gonna have an amazing season this fall when she returns to the team for her 5th year. 

FreddieMercuryHayes

June 8th, 2015 at 6:22 PM ^

From what I've read/heard, Nigeria has some great very athletic young attacking talent. So they may live and die by that. Hopefully the US' defense can handle it. Actually may be good that neither came away with 3 points.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

alum96

June 8th, 2015 at 6:28 PM ^

I hope no one was subject to that Germany Ivory Coast game.  Nothing much else was on so I subjected myself to it.  Looks like Belgium v US for men's.  Except there was no Tim Howard for Ivory Coast.

FreddieMercuryHayes

June 8th, 2015 at 6:53 PM ^

It was much worse than US vs Belgium even if US didn't have Howard. But honestly not unexpected. It was Ivory Coast's first World Cup going against the number 1 team in the world. There were destined to be some thrashing a this World Cup since they expanded the field. But it's necessary to take a few lumps when trying to grow the big stage. Heck, even Japan in their first World Cup in 2003 lost their opening game 6-0 to another first time World Cup team. And less then 10 years later, they're the reigning champs. But for anyone watching the US, they drew a tough group and there will likely not be any thrashings in US games.

South Bend Wolverine

June 8th, 2015 at 7:10 PM ^

As someone who splits time between supporting Sweden & the US in soccer, this is a big day for me.  The US side of my heart is happy with the result, because it puts the US in a great position.  The Swedish side, though (which was more prominent during that game), is livid.  Sweden was good in attack, especially on set pieces (2 goals from corners), but that had as much to do with Nigeria's bumbling goal-keeper, who hardly got her hands to a single set-piece ball all game.  The Swedish defense was horrendous, and in the 2nd half looked exhausted.  Over and over again sprinting Nigerian attackers left jogging Swedish defenders in their wake.  To be honest, Sweden was the team lucky to escape with a draw, not Nigeria.  If the game was 100 minutes instead of 90, Nigeria would surely have won.

Turning now (as we near kickoff) to my US affections, things set up great.  Neither Nigeria nor Sweden took a major initiative in the group.  Sweden's defense looks very exploitable, and Abby Wambach will have an absolute field day against Nigeria, who looked extremely vulnerable to set-pieces.  If the US can seize the initiative tonight, making the knock-outs in a strong position becomes a very achievable goal.

Mr. Yost

June 8th, 2015 at 7:43 PM ^

It was versus Korea...however, I thought maybe Korea was just loading the back end trying to get the draw.

Yet they look the same in this match, that said, I think Australia has just come out with a TON of energy and they'll settle in here shortly. This feels like a 1-0 half and a 2-0 victory when the Aussie legs give out later in the match.

Edit...I suppose there's the 1.

natesezgoblue

June 8th, 2015 at 7:50 PM ^

Same here. She may be a great soccer goalie, but as a person she's a pos. I would hope that she doesn't continue on the team after this.

Part of me says she isn't reprimanded the same because she's a female. If the same story was around Tim Howard, there's no way he'd be playing right now.

kgh10

June 8th, 2015 at 8:00 PM ^

Women's soccer is not a big revenue generating sport. They do not serve as such. As a female sports fan and (non competitive) athlete, women's sports were there to serve as an empowering reminder that we can achieve greatness and glory in sport and life. I strongly looked up to Chastain and Hamm when I was growing up and there was much to be proud of.

Maybe this is blunt but if our female athletes aren't there to produce revenue, they are there to be role models and for symbolism of female achievement in our country. If anything, female athletes should have a higher code of conduct than their male counterparts by virtue of this.

bacon1431

June 8th, 2015 at 8:18 PM ^

How about we just hold everybody to a high standard? You're essentially letting men off the hook because they generate more money. Should bank executives have a longer leash than fast food workers? Not in my opinion. 

Besides, it's not like the USWNT doesn't produce revenue. They produce a good amount, check the attendance stats for their matches. Where do you draw the line for behavior expectations and money produced?

And looking at crime rates by gender, men commit more transgressions than women so we really should be holding up men to a higher standard as boys are more likely to look up to men than women. 

kgh10

June 8th, 2015 at 9:04 PM ^

Actually I agree with you. I didn't explain my stance well. I guess I should say at least I can somehow explain why Adrian Peterson is welcomed to play seeing as he's one of the most financially valuable players in the league even if I disagree with his conduct. Solo doesn't bring much revenue (I'm taking multi millions - maybe USWNT makes a lot but nothing on par with arguably the NFLs top RB) or pride to the team she plays for, despite being the best keeper we have. Ultimately I can see a lot of angles to this conversation but personally I just want one of the few popular women's sports to not tolerate this type of behavior. There's enough to overcome without having a domestic abuser as a marquee player and sweeping her transgressions under the rug. If we want to equate the popularity of women's soccer to a feminist movement, it's extra hypocritical for them to tolerate it even more so than the NFL.

bacon1431

June 8th, 2015 at 9:15 PM ^

I would prefer no league - regardless of sport or gender - to tolerate behavior like that. A feminist movement doesn't need to advance by holding women to a higher standard than men. It needs to advance through the changing of hearts and minds by education and discussion. It's like saying that there will be less racism if black people were just "better." It's an argument that's been around for years and it's ridiculous. Black people have their own colleges, music, have reached the upper echelons of society through politics, education, medicine etc etc and there's still quite a bit of racism. We shouldn't hold women to a higher or lower standard than we do men. It's not extra hypocritical for them to let Hope Solo play whatsoever. 

kgh10

June 8th, 2015 at 9:43 PM ^

I did say if anything, regarding the subject of domestic abuse, Solo should be held to a higher standard. Meaning that she definitely shouldn't get away with it completely, which is what happened. She wasn't reprimanded at all, unlike the NFL with Rice and Peterson (even if their hands were forced). The NFLs MO has been entertainment and competition but I don't feel that's the same with female sports. That's certainly not how they advertise their leagues and purpose. And who was leading the charge against domestic abuse and violent rape culture if not the feminist movement? That's like a politician actively campaigning for drug crackdowns and getting caught with cocaine. Extra hypocritical or ironic whatever, it's extra absurd. I understand your argument but I disagree that it's the same as saying racism will end if black people were "better."