WSL chat - but mostly United miscellaneous

[jojojo]

Sure, I can see it both ways, which is why I ended my statement with a question mark. Continuity -- with a good coach, of course -- certainly has advantages, but maybe having multiple coaches who have different strengths or emphases does too.

With respect to PTJ specifically, Emma Hayes said back in November that "her shot-stopping and her ability to cover the frame is second to none," but then added that "in terms of building-up with the team and connecting with the team, there is room for improvement." I don't know a lot about goalkeeper coaching, to be sure, but it seems plausible to me that different coaches might help her (or any keeper) develop different aspects of her game better than others.

The USWNT is my top priority when it comes to women's football, so I think about stuff like this a lot!

It was an interesting comment from Hayes. We're very much a play it around at the back team, but maybe not one that involves the keeper as much as some other teams do. Certainly not one that encourages the keeper to play as a sweeper/keeper in the way that Guardiolas City and some others do.

It's not really a style that I normally associate with the US women either though. But maybe I've got a selective memory based on matches I've seen in person or ones where I was definitely a partisan fan.

I guess what I'm wondering is if this is something that Emma Hayes is working on or if it's a long established national style (and part of US club football as well).

Or is really a distribution question about when/how to bypass the short option question that she's talking about and I'm just reading her comment wrong.

 

[Lobster11]

It was an interesting comment from Hayes. We're very much a play it around at the back team, but maybe not one that involves the keeper as much as some other teams do. Certainly not one that encourages the keeper to play as a sweeper/keeper in the way that Guardiolas City and some others do.

It's not really a style that I normally associate with the US women either though. But maybe I've got a selective memory based on matches I've seen in person or ones where I was definitely a partisan fan.

I guess what I'm wondering is if this is something that Emma Hayes is working on or if it's a long established national style (and part of US club football as well).

Or is really a distribution question about when/how to bypass the short option question that she's talking about and I'm just reading her comment wrong.

I'm afraid I don't know what Hayes meant by that either. I can say, though, that patiently building out of the back is definitely new to the USWNT under her; our style historically has been very direct. (For years it was mainly getting long balls to Abby Wambach, and later getting long balls to Alex Morgan.) So I think what she is looking for in a keeper is probably different from previous managers, and I don't know what that is any better than you do.

One possibility that occurs to me is that Alyssa Naeher, and Hope Solo before her, were always the "boss of the back" for USWNT, constantly shouting instructions to organize the defense. At United it seems to me that MLT is the "boss of the back," like Leah Williamson at Arsenal. Maybe the "communication" reference in Hayes' comment is related to that?

 

[jojojo]

I'm afraid I don't know what Hayes meant by that either. I can say, though, that patiently building out of the back is definitely new to the USWNT under her; our style historically has been very direct. (For years it was mainly getting long balls to Abby Wambach, and later getting long balls to Alex Morgan.) So I think what she is looking for in a keeper is probably different from previous managers, and I don't know what that is any better than you do.

One possibility that occurs to me is that Alyssa Naeher, and Hope Solo before her, were always the "boss of the back" for USWNT, constantly shouting instructions to organize the defense. At United it seems to me that MLT is the "boss of the back," like Leah Williamson at Arsenal. Maybe the "communication" reference in Hayes' comment is related to that?

It's that directness I was thinking of. I know it's early days with Hayes (despite the Olympics) but it sounds like that's a work in progress and the keeper is part of that.

In terms of being the leader of the defence. I can get what she's saying there. Phallon doesn't seem to be a shouter so how well she can marshall an unfamiliar defence I don't know.

I guess that's the problem for anyone coming into a national team as the new kid, especially as she didn't play for the US U21 national team. Telling strangers who are more experienced than yourself what to do doesn't come naturally to everyone.

 

[Demon Barber]

@Lobster11 and @jojojo - I get what you are both saying. I just think that PTJ is a complete goalkeeper, capable of playing any way a coach determines. The "vocal" element is an interesting one: Earps was more Schmeichel, whereas PTJ is more van der Sar - extrovert/introvert.

 

[Lobster11]

From all the interviews I've watched, Phall strikes me as very even-tempered and laid-back -- almost Zen-like. I have a hard time imagining her hollering at anyone!

 

[Lobster11]

It's that directness I was thinking of. I know it's early days with Hayes (despite the Olympics) but it sounds like that's a work in progress and the keeper is part of that.

For about two decades, the USWNT could beat almost anyone with sheer athleticism: speed, strength, and stamina. "Direct" was the way to go, especially getting balls in-behind to fleet forwards. For most of that time the only "ball skill" a keeper really needed was the ability to kick it as far downfield as possible, since more often than not we'd wind up winning possession in the attacking third. It was kind of a brute-force approach that worked because few other teams had the horses to match it.

In recent years, of course, things have obviously changed: The rest of the world is "catching up," and we can't count on winning games that way anymore. I think the team's failures under the previous manager (Vlatko Andonovski) were the result of failing to adapt to the changing international landscape as quickly as was necessary. Emma Hayes has now come in with the goal of replacing that old model with a system of her own, to allow us to keep pace with the rapidly improving competition. The fact that she was able to lead the team to Olympic gold in such a short time seems to me almost freakish, since she is clearly focused on a long-term plan that will make us unbeatable at the next WC. (Sorry, Lionesses.)

 

[Demon Barber]

The fact that she was able to lead the team to Olympic gold in such a short time seems to me almost freakish, since she is clearly focused on a long-term plan that will make us unbeatable at the next WC. (Sorry, Lionesses.)

You only won the Olympics because somehow we failed to qualify

 

[Lobster11]

You only won the Olympics because somehow we failed to qualify

Hey, it's not our fault that you guys can't decide whether you are "England" or "Great Britain." Y'all are gonna have to work that out yourselves!

 

[Demon Barber]

Hey, it's not our fault that you guys can't decide whether you are "England" or "Great Britain." Y'all are gonna have to work that out yourselves!

This is true. When Andy Murray won Wimbledon the English were ecstatic, yet he was Scottish. When he won the Olympics all English people were ecstatic because he was team GB. In practically every other sport, apart from F1, we English want the Scots to lose.

Edit: When I say "we English" I mean me!

 

[Lobster11]

@Lobster11 and @jojojo - I get what you are both saying. I just think that PTJ is a complete goalkeeper, capable of playing any way a coach determines. The "vocal" element is an interesting one: Earps was more Schmeichel, whereas PTJ is more van der Sar - extrovert/introvert.

In an article published this morning in The Athletic, Emma Hayes was quoted as saying this about PTJ:

“She’s very introverted, very quiet, and she’s got to build the relationships with the players around her because you have to build trust and connections,” Hayes told reporters last week. “She will do that little by little, but this will only be her third camp with us.

“She’s in contention to play one of these games but needs a bit more time to do those things.”

 

[Lobster11]

In other international news....

I watched the Lionesses' rout of Belgium yesterday and, well, wow. If this isn't the best team in the world right now I don't know who is.

In contrast, the USWNT will be fielding a ragtag unit, including numerous newbies and youngsters, that I don't think will be able to beat Brazil in our two upcoming friendlies (the first of which is tonight at 10:00 in the U.K., BTW). Not only are we a team very much in transition under Emma Hayes, but half of our most recent starting lineup is unavailable for various reasons -- including both center-backs, our best attacking midfielder, and two-thirds of the front line. Plus, we don't even know who our #1 goalkeeper is, as per the preceding discussion. It'll be fun to see some of the new faces, but it's not going to be pretty. I sure hope we won't have to face the Lionesses any time soon.

 

[Demon Barber]

In other international news....

I watched the Lionesses' rout of Belgium yesterday and, well, wow. If this isn't the best team in the world right now I don't know who is.

In contrast, the USWNT will be fielding a ragtag unit, including numerous newbies and youngsters, that I don't think will be able to beat Brazil in our two upcoming friendlies (the first of which is tonight at 10:00 in the U.K., BTW). Not only are we a team very much in transition under Emma Hayes, but half of our most recent starting lineup is unavailable for various reasons -- including both center-backs, our best attacking midfielder, and two-thirds of the front line. Plus, we don't even know who our #1 goalkeeper is, as per the preceding discussion. It'll be fun to see some of the new faces, but it's not going to be pretty. I sure hope we won't have to face the Lionesses any time soon.

I don't know about us being the best in the world - last night was a convincing performance, but I think it is the first time we have won by more than one goal in 11 matches (if I heard that right.) One thing that annoyed me - both Williamson and Bright came off, and neither Maya nor Turner got a look-in despite being at the heart of the best defence in the WSL.

Interesting comments from Hayes. She obviously read my post! I'll try to follow the USWNT tonight - good luck.

 

[Lobster11]

I don't know about us being the best in the world - last night was a convincing performance, but I think it is the first time we have won by more than one goal in 11 matches (if I heard that right.) One thing that annoyed me - both Williamson and Bright came off, and neither Maya nor Turner got a look-in despite being at the heart of the best defence in the WSL.

Interesting comments from Hayes. She obviously read my post! I'll try to follow the USWNT tonight - good luck.

Yes, I know. I follow the Lionesses almost as closely as the USWNT, and watched most or all of those games. They've certainly had some less-than-stellar showings over the past year, and even some poor ones -- but then one of those one-goal victories was against Spain. So let me revise my proclamation to say that when they play like they played yesterday, the Lionesses are (IMO) the best in the world.

I too was disappointed to not see MLT or MT on the field, but I think that just underscores my point: Two players "at the heart of the best defence in the WSL" can't even crack the England lineup. What does that say?

I'm honestly not at all concerned about the results of either of these USWNT matches, given that they are only friendlies and given our current state of transition and roster depletion. It didn't trouble me at all when we failed to win the She Believes Cup in February on home soil. (IMO this "tournament" is just a trio of friendlies dressed up in silverware.) For now the fun of being a USWNT fan is watching the ongoing evolution of the team in the Hayes era as it unfolds in real time. But talk to me again when we have to begin qualifying for the 2027 WC, by which time I expect us to be the best in the world.

 

[Demon Barber]

Yes, I know. I follow the Lionesses almost as closely as the USWNT, and watched most or all of those games. They've certainly had some less-than-stellar showings over the past year, and even some poor ones -- but then one of those one-goal victories was against Spain. So let me revise my proclamation to say that when they play like they played yesterday, the Lionesses are (IMO) the best in the world.

I too was disappointed to not see MLT or MT on the field, but I think that just underscores my point: Two players "at the heart of the best defence in the WSL" can't even crack the England lineup. What does that say?

I'm honestly not at all concerned about the results of either of these USWNT matches, given that they are only friendlies and given our current state of transition and roster depletion. It didn't trouble me at all when we failed to win the She Believes Cup in February on home soil. (IMO this "tournament" is just a trio of friendlies dressed up in silverware.) For now the fun of being a USWNT fan is watching the ongoing evolution of the team in the Hayes era as it unfolds in real time. But talk to me again when we have to begin qualifying for the 2027 WC, by which time I expect us to be the best in the world.

You'll be up there, with us and Spain

Back to Maya and Turner for a sec - Williamson and Bright are obvious starters, and rightly so, despite my bias, but to put Carter and Morgan on ahead of them is a travesty. I just feel this Chelsea, Arsenal, City bias in the England thinking - and yes I know Clinton and Toone both started. It will be interesting to see if Toone starts on Tuesday.

 

[Lobster11]

Following up on the topic of why Emma Hayes still doesn't think PTJ is quite ready to be the USWNT's #1:

In a post-match presser Hayes noted, as she has said before, how good PTJ is as a shot-stopper, but also repeated the caveat that she still needs to work on her interaction with the backs in building up from the back. She said that "we can't always kick long," which in fact we (USWNT) usually did in the Brazil match, and which I can understand. But then she said something that puzzled me: She said that PTJ is playing for a club (United) that typically does not emphasize patiently build up from the back -- the implication being that PTJ wasn't getting enough experience in this part of her game. I found myself thinking, "Have you actually watched any United matches?" (which I assume she actually has). I think it's true that we (United) have had some games in which we played more direct than usual, with more long kicks from the keeper, but....?

 

[AmarilloMike]

Following up on the topic of why Emma Hayes still doesn't think PTJ is quite ready to be the USWNT's #1:

In a post-match presser Hayes noted, as she has said before, how good PTJ is as a shot-stopper, but also repeated the caveat that she still needs to work on her interaction with the backs in building up from the back. She said that "we can't always kick long," which in fact we (USWNT) usually did in the Brazil match, and which I can understand. But then she said something that puzzled me: She said that PTJ is playing for a club (United) that typically does not emphasize patiently build up from the back -- the implication being that PTJ wasn't getting enough experience in this part of her game. I found myself thinking, "Have you actually watched any United matches?" (which I assume she actually has). I think it's true that we (United) have had some games in which we played more direct than usual, with more long kicks from the keeper, but....?

Let's be honest, our directness often comes from a long ball forward from Maya, not Phallon.

Anyway, the best mark of a team is one that can adapt to circumstances and opposition, not one that just plays one way.

 

[Lobster11]

Let's be honest, our directness often comes from a long ball forward from Maya, not Phallon.

Anyway, the best mark of a team is one that can adapt to circumstances and opposition, not one that just plays one way.

Agreed. Indeed, one of the long-standing criticisms of Skinner is that sometimes he seems to insist on playing "one way" and seems slow to recognize when it isn't working and that a different approach is called for.

With respect to this particular USWNT match, though, I think there are good reasons why Phall almost always chose to kick long rather than build up from the back: Brazil were clearly eager to bring an aggressive press and, perhaps more important, we were playing with a makeshift pair of center-backs with Naomi Girma and Tierna Davidson out with injuries. Trying to build from the back would potentially have been disastrous. Plus, Brazil's aggressiveness was leaving space open behind that could be -- and often was -- exploited by the long balls. I'm always reluctant to disagree with Emma Hayes, but it seemed to me that Phallon was making the right decisions given the circumstances.

 

[Demon Barber]

Following up on the topic of why Emma Hayes still doesn't think PTJ is quite ready to be the USWNT's #1:

In a post-match presser Hayes noted, as she has said before, how good PTJ is as a shot-stopper, but also repeated the caveat that she still needs to work on her interaction with the backs in building up from the back. She said that "we can't always kick long," which in fact we (USWNT) usually did in the Brazil match, and which I can understand. But then she said something that puzzled me: She said that PTJ is playing for a club (United) that typically does not emphasize patiently build up from the back -- the implication being that PTJ wasn't getting enough experience in this part of her game. I found myself thinking, "Have you actually watched any United matches?" (which I assume she actually has). I think it's true that we (United) have had some games in which we played more direct than usual, with more long kicks from the keeper, but....?

Interesting, and a bit disturbing. I respect Hayes as a coach, but she's got this totally wrong. Perhaps she's still smarting from the FA Cup semi-final defeat.

As @AmarilloMike says, United generally do not play long from Phallon, but rather it is Maya or Turner splaying the ball to Galton or Bizet, just as Maya used to do for Garcia.

Debut, good saves, clean sheet, confident - she deserves to be your number 1.

 

[Lobster11]

Interesting, and a bit disturbing. I respect Hayes as a coach, but she's got this totally wrong. Perhaps she's still smarting from the FA Cup semi-final defeat.

As @AmarilloMike says, United generally do not play long from Phallon, but rather it is Maya or Turner splaying the ball to Galton or Bizet, just as Maya used to do for Garcia.

Debut, good saves, clean sheet, confident - she deserves to be your number 1.

Totally agree. I just can't get my head around the idea that Hayes has "got this totally wrong." Until proved otherwise, I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she knows better than I do. That said, I suspect that she will allow the competition for the #1 to continue for a while, but that PTJ will eventually emerge as the top choice.

 

[Demon Barber]

England losing 3-1 in Belgium. Half-time subs - Jess Carter and Esme Morgan. Again. Still no Maya or Millie. Disgraceful. Toone hasn't got on yet either. The southern bias is becoming more blatant.

 

[AmarilloMike]

England losing 3-1 in Belgium. Half-time subs - Jess Carter and Esme Morgan. Again. Still no Maya or Millie. Disgraceful. Toone hasn't got on yet either. The southern bias is becoming more blatant.

All the more telling, (when fit) Alex Greenwood can barely get in the side despite being out best centre half.

 

[Demon Barber]

There is no right place to post this, but we've been having a chat here. USNWT 1-2 Brazil. Haught instead of PTJ. I know these are friendlies and so shouldn't read too much into them, but it seems odd that a goalkeeper is not given a second game to further impress. Thoughts @Lobster11?

 

[Lobster11]

Thanks for asking for my opinion.

Here's what Emma Hayes said in her post-match presser, in response to a question about why she made so many (7!) changes in the starting lineup for the second friendly against Brazil (as quoted by espn.com):

"If I only prioritized short-term success, of course I wouldn't make that many changes," Hayes said. "But I'm not making decisions for the short-term; I'm prioritizing the progress from expanding the playing pool to getting to see what these players look like in a really difficult match."

This is entirely consistent with everything she has said and done since she arrived here: She has a long-term plan for re-making the USWNT and the current priority is expanding the player pool. She hasn't said explicitly that this "long-term plan" is winning the 2027 WC, but I think we can safely assume it is.

In light of her current approach, I would have been shocked if she had brought 3 keepers into camp and only played one of them. If there is anything at all to read into this, it's that PTJ was the one who got to start first.

 

[Demon Barber]

Thanks for asking for my opinion.

Here's what Emma Hayes said in her post-match presser, in response to a question about why she made so many (7!) changes in the starting lineup for the second friendly against Brazil (as quoted by espn.com):

"If I only prioritized short-term success, of course I wouldn't make that many changes," Hayes said. "But I'm not making decisions for the short-term; I'm prioritizing the progress from expanding the playing pool to getting to see what these players look like in a really difficult match."

This is entirely consistent with everything she has said and done since she arrived here: She has a long-term plan for re-making the USWNT and the current priority is expanding the player pool. She hasn't said explicitly that this "long-term plan" is winning the 2027 WC, but I think we can safely assume it is.

In light of her current approach, I would have been shocked if she had brought 3 keepers into camp and only played one of them. If there is anything at all to read into this, it's that PTJ was the one who got to start first.

Thanks for your reply, and I think you are probably right. Both England and the USWNT are preparing for future competitions (do you have a Euros equivalent before the WC?)

 

[Lobster11]

Thanks for your reply, and I think you are probably right. Both England and the USWNT are preparing for future competitions (do you have a Euros equivalent before the WC?)

We have the "CONCACAF W Championship" every four years, which doubles (in part) as WC and Olympics qualifying. The next one is (or at least concludes) in 2026. In addition, 2024 saw the inaugural "CONCACAF W Gold Cup," which I suppose is intended to be roughly analogous to your Nations League tournament (?).

The reason that you folks on the other side of the pond don't know much about these is probably that, frankly, they are not very interesting tournaments because there simply aren't very many strong (women's) national teams in the Americas besides the US, Canada, and Brazil -- some combination of which usually face each other in the finals. I generally don't pay much attention to these beyond the USWNT matches. I'd much rather watch the Euros!

 

[Demon Barber]

We have the "CONCACAF W Championship" every four years, which doubles (in part) as WC and Olympics qualifying. The next one is (or at least concludes) in 2026. In addition, 2024 saw the inaugural "CONCACAF W Gold Cup," which I suppose is intended to be roughly analogous to your Nations League tournament (?).

The reason that you folks on the other side of the pond don't know much about these is probably that, frankly, they are not very interesting tournaments because there simply aren't very many strong (women's) national teams in the Americas besides the US, Canada, and Brazil -- some combination of which usually face each other in the finals. I generally don't pay much attention to these beyond the USWNT matches. I'd much rather watch the Euros!

Interesting. I thought there must be a women's CONCACAF, but we do not get any news about it here - well, those on social media might, but I am old school. It seems, from what you say, that you really don't have much competition. I'd have thought that Mexico and Argentina would be decent. I guess we are blessed over here with so many strong national teams.

 

[Lobster11]

Interesting. I thought there must be a women's CONCACAF, but we do not get any news about it here - well, those on social media might, but I am old school. It seems, from what you say, that you really don't have much competition. I'd have thought that Mexico and Argentina would be decent. I guess we are blessed over here with so many strong national teams.

Just for kicks I just checked the latest FIFA rankings. The top five CONCACAF women's teams are currently the US at #1, Canada at #7, Brazil at #8, Colombia (who I neglected to mention previously) at #21, and Mexico at #29. That's 5 teams in the top 30. In contrast, 10 out of the top 15 are from Europe.

I suspect that, if the situation were reversed, you would find a way to follow CONCACAF, and I probably wouldn't care about the Euros.

 

[jojojo]

One of those occasional glimpses into the finances of the WSL

It's very hard to get consistent financial data on the WSL clubs. Every club has different ways of reporting, different ground rules for what appears under the women's team costs and what slice of marketing income etc they get.

 

[Lobster11]

One of those occasional glimpses into the finances of the WSL

It's very hard to get consistent financial data on the WSL clubs. Every club has different ways of reporting, different ground rules for what appears under the women's team costs and what slice of marketing income etc they get.

This is interesting, thanks.

I don't know much about how this stuff works, but I'm inclined to think that agent fees (as a percentage) are probably fairly equal across the board, in which case these numbers should be more-or-less proportional to what each team paid out in compensation for players -- which is what I think we'd all really like to know. Do you think that's a safe assumption or are there are factors to consider in explaining why, for example Chelsea's number more than doubles the next-closest team (and more than triples United's)?

 

[AmarilloMike]

This is interesting, thanks.

I don't know much about how this stuff works, but I'm inclined to think that agent fees (as a percentage) are probably fairly equal across the board, in which case these numbers should be more-or-less proportional to what each team paid out in compensation for players -- which is what I think we'd all really like to know. Do you think that's a safe assumption or are there are factors to consider in explaining why, for example Chelsea's number more than doubles the next-closest team (and more than triples United's)?

Million dollar (or was it pound?) Naomi Girma will have a lot to do with it I expect. Pretty much all our transfers are freebies or 'undisclosed' (therefore small) fee.

 

[Lobster11]

Million dollar (or was it pound?) Naomi Girma will have a lot to do with it I expect. Pretty much all our transfers are freebies or 'undisclosed' (therefore small) fee.

I was wondering about whether (a proportion of) transfer fees would figure into these numbers. Those are paid from club to club, not from a club to a player, right? Do agents get a piece of transfer fees, or only whatever is paid to the player herself?

 

[AmarilloMike]

I was wondering about whether (a proportion of) transfer fees would figure into these numbers. Those are paid from club to club, not from a club to a player, right? Do agents get a piece of transfer fees, or only whatever is paid to the player herself?

Agents will absolutely be taking a cut somewhere along the way, yes. The higher the fee/salary/signing bonus etc, the higher the agent payout.

 

[jojojo]

This is interesting, thanks.

I don't know much about how this stuff works, but I'm inclined to think that agent fees (as a percentage) are probably fairly equal across the board, in which case these numbers should be more-or-less proportional to what each team paid out in compensation for players -- which is what I think we'd all really like to know. Do you think that's a safe assumption or are there are factors to consider in explaining why, for example Chelsea's number more than doubles the next-closest team (and more than triples United's)?

I don't what the mix of fees from contract renewal work and fees for transfers will be - it will be heavily weighted towards transfer fees though. Chelsea tend to spend a lot on transfers and they pay high wages so spending at least twice as much as their rivals makes sense.

Arsenal seem to do well on free transfers. City brought in several new players last year to replace an ageing team.

United spend more on transfer fees that most, partly because we've lost experienced players on frees and we've had to buy in replacements. But as you can guess from the agent fee comparison, we're not big spenders compared to our rivals.

 

[Demon Barber]

I think I read that Chelsea spent $1.4m on two transfers in January. Frankly, that's outrageous. We know that they, Arsenal and City outspend us by a long way, so all things considered, we are not doing too badly. And yes, (vile) agents get a percentage of sign-on fees, so the figures posted by @jojojo make sense.

 

[jojojo]

A bit on the Championship clubs. Bristol City, who've been promoted/relegated a couple of times in the last few years are at 34k on this list.

The London City Lionesses are the real wildcard in the pack. Well financed, but by private investors rather than a men's PL/Championship team.

 

[Demon Barber]

A bit on the Championship clubs. Bristol City, who've been promoted/relegated a couple of times in the last few years are at 34k on this list.

The London City Lionesses are the real wildcard in the pack. Well financed, but by private investors rather than a men's PL/Championship team.

And it does seem that London City are heading for promotion to the WSL as a result. The other teams you mention seem to rely on loans.

 

[jojojo]

The "World 7-a-side Football" group is scheduled to have its first ever tournament in Portugal on the 21st-23rd May. It's a private prize money event and the initial prize money is £3.9m per mini-tournament. Jennifer Mackesy who co-owns Gotham FC and is a minority shareholder in the Chelsea women's team is putting up the money.

Why am I telling you this?

Well it's strongly rumoured that United may be there. Final details won't be confirmed until after the WCL semifinalists (as the WCL finalists won't be taking part in this) - so I don't know if United's participation assumes that at least one WSL club will be in the WCL final.

It's an 8 club tournament and the winners get £1.9m - no surprise to see that United would like to be there...

 

[Demon Barber]

The "World 7-a-side Football" group is scheduled to have its first ever tournament in Portugal on the 21st-23rd May. It's a private prize money event and the initial prize money is £3.9m per mini-tournament. Jennifer Mackesy who co-owns Gotham FC and is a minority shareholder in the Chelsea women's team is putting up the money.

Why am I telling you this?

Well it's strongly rumoured that United may be there. Final details won't be confirmed until after the WCL semifinalists (as the WCL finalists won't be taking part in this) - so I don't know if United's participation assumes that at least one WSL club will be in the WCL final.

It's an 8 club tournament and the winners get £1.9m - no surprise to see that United would like to be there...

Interesting. What would your United 7-a-side team be, assuming all are fit and none need a rest?

I'd go with:

Phallon
Riviere. Le Tissier
Clinton. Miyazawa. Toone
Terland

Damn - I want Galton in there too!

 

[jojojo]

Interesting. What would your United 7-a-side team be, assuming all are fit and none need a rest?

I'd go with:

Phallon
Riviere. Le Tissier
Clinton. Miyazawa. Toone
Terland

Damn - I want Galton in there too!

In honesty I've not watched enough 7-a-side football to know how it works. I'm only familiar with it as a training format.

In general terms for training - it's fast, everybody sees a lot of the ball and has to be good on the ball, space is in short supply. But an actual tournament is also different because of the unlimited squads, rolling subs. I don't even know where rules (on headers say) diverge from 11 a side.

I'm intrigued to watch it. I used to love the occasional (men's) pro 5-a-side tournaments I've seen but this is different again. I hope we do play!

 

[FlexoRodriguez]

Ooh, city draw with Everton, meaning we have a 7 point lead over them with 3 games to go. Just need a draw or better in the derby to secure CL next season. Squeaky!