Cristiane gets her fourth goal of the tournament, good header from a nice cross. Brazil lead 2-0.
Australia under a lot of pressure now.
Australia under a lot of pressure now.
So is this a goalkeeper error, or is she just too short??
I mean the crazy thing is VAR is instrumental in giving the wrong decision there. The lineswoman has flaggedThat's no goal for me. How is the attacking player not interfering? If she's not there then the defender does not do that.
And the ref confirmed it. I reckon the VAR system made the ref lose her nerve there.I mean the crazy thing is VAR is instrumental in giving the wrong decision there. The lineswoman has flagged
I definitely agree. The way she was positioned left her no chance to get to it in the end. But what I mean is, her positioning didn't allow for her to get there. She could've made a precautionary step to the right, as the ball was coming in. It went in fairly centrally for one of these crosses that miss everybody and go in. But that's where I'm wondering if I'm just thinking about male goalkeepers, where these crosses can fall in at the second post but would be kept out when they're rather central. Obviously after no one made contact, she stretched out as far as she could, and physically couldn't get to it anymore the way she was positioned.
Misread it like that and I don't care how tall you are (or how small the goal is) you're not stopping it.
Yeh I think you’re right, as the commentator said having the VAR officials call you up might make refs second guess their decision. That being said I’m still fully for VAR.And the ref confirmed it. I reckon the VAR system made the ref lose her nerve there.
I'd be happy if they stuck to the "obvious error" principle. There's nothing obvious that the ref did wrong there, it was a judgment call.Yeh I think you’re right, as the commentator said having the VAR officials call you up might make refs second guess their decision. That being said I’m still fully for VAR.
It was an obvious error in the way that she didn't actually "interfere" with play. Being a defender myself, I absolutely agree that the defender wouldn't have jumped, had the striker not made the run. That much is obvious. But the mental aspect isn't in the rules anymore as far as I'm aware. Had they bumped into each other as the defender was heading it, then she would've interfered.I'd be happy if they stuck to the "obvious error" principle. There's nothing obvious that the ref did wrong there, it was a judgment call.
That's an awful rule revision. I suppose we'll get used to it, but I hate it already.It was an obvious error in the way that she didn't actually "interfere" with play. Being a defender myself, I absolutely agree that the defender wouldn't have jumped, had the striker not made the run. That much is obvious. But the mental aspect isn't in the rules anymore as far as I'm aware. Had they bumped into each other as the defender was heading it, then she would've interfered.
Bad decisions are annoying, regardless of whether young women or rough looking men (just as young) are playing. But I don't think this decision was factually incorrect, as much as the rules regarding this are seemingly really dumb. I do think Brazil could've had a penalty at the end though.I don’t like these decisions from the referee. The last goal from Australia was incorrect. Good games ends up in tears because of incompetence. That’s not what these young women needs.
South Africa really got fecked over in the first game by two really unlucky pens and a red card resulting from those pens. I also think South Africa could cause an upset because of their quick forwards.Enjoyed that game which was probably the pick of the two games today. There could be a potential shock in the next game, China looked really slow against Germany and South Africa specifically down the right have a lot of pace and power. It should be an interesting contest.
It's a worthwhile debate but I just don't see enough advantages to having different pitch configurations for the women. I think it addresses a particular problem - which is basically that when amateur/semipro women are on TV, they sometimes look out of their depth. But actually, that's not about the pitch size, it's because they really are out of their depth against pro teams and teams with qualified coaches.Emma Hayes was talking about goal-size & pitch dimensions in the Times yesterday (behind the paywall, unfortunately).
Conversation worth having / and maybe relevant for lower levels & age groups I think she ended up heading towards.
FIFA's regulation for the WWC says:Dimensions
Length (touchline):
minimum 90m (100yds)
maximum 120m (130yds)
Length (goal-line):
minimum 45m (50yds)
maximum 90m (100yds)
Dimensions for international matches:
Length (touchline):
minimum 100m (100yds)
maximum 110m (120yds)
Length (goal-line):
minimum 64m (70yds)
maximum 75m (80yds)
Takes a bit of getting used to, the men's game is still obviously faster. But I love it now, honest effort and lots of skills. Also because players are not so physicaly strong it takes even more skill and endeavour to press and pass etc. Amazing improvements in the women's game in a short time.Players aren't decisive, always delaying stuff too long deciding the best option then it's all gone.
At least its not me this timeOops, autocorrect
Debating.