Matildas The Matildas and the 2019 Women's World Cup Thread

[Wallaby]

Offside calls are dependent on whether the player has any effect on the play. The ref must have decided that Kerr being in an offside position had no effect on the events. Probably correct call because the ball went off the brazilian player before it reached Kerr and she could not have had any play on the ball.

Well - to take the other side, the defender only headed the ball because she was marking Kerr - who was in an off-side position (or had come from an off-side position). That's pretty clear 'influencing play'.

Like all rules, once you step away from black-and-white (or was it over the line or not), whatever interpretation is applied going to upset a proportion of fans.

 

[revo333]

Good win, however it's only the first one of the tournament and with Kerr telling the critics to 'suck on that' they would probably want to win 3-4 more matches now.

 

[drd23]

with Kerr telling the critics to 'suck on that'

That wasn't a performance worthy of that comment imo but I'll forgive her for being caught up in the moment of the comeback victory

 

[giggler99]

Gutty comeback! So proud of the girls this morning

 

[raven echo]

I don't think there were "haters" after the first performance but critics rightfully questioning the team and the tactics that were employed. Matildas are the public's darling and one of our more recently successful sports teams, so the criticism was probably a bit of a shock to what they're used to.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Good win, however it's only the first one of the tournament and with Kerr telling the critics to 'suck on that' they would probably want to win 3-4 more matches now.

I recorded the match (with work today I wasn't going to watch the match live) but given the context and no doubt the torrents of criticism that would come the Matildas' way if they hadn't won the match, I think it's fair enough. They will need to walk the walk, though. Jamaica won't be a walk in the park as they have some better than decent players that could threaten the Matildas if they let down their guard.

Some statistics to ponder. Australia's defeat of Brazil is Australia's fifth win on the trot against Brazil. It's the first time since 1999 that the Brazilians have conceded a goal in a group stage. It's also the first time the Brazilians have lost a group match since 1995. It's the most goals conceded by Brazil in their previous 13 group stage games combined. Monica's own goal was the second own goal conceded by Brazil at Women's World Cups ever, after Daiane against the USA in 2011.

Chloe Logarzo became the first Australian player to both score and assist in a Women's World Cup game since Leena Khamis achieved that feat in 2011 against Equatorial Guinea.

Marta extends her lead for most goals scored at World Cups, with 16, ahead of Germany's Birgit Prinz and US forward Abby Wambach, who both retired on 14 goals.

In terms of match stats, Australia dominated possession (57-43), the two teams were equal with shots at goal (11 apiece), Australia had more shots on target (five to three) and Australia had more corners (four to three).

 

[Dixie Flatline]

I don't think there were "haters" after the first performance but critics rightfully questioning the team and the tactics that were employed. Matildas are the public's darling and one of our more recently successful sports teams, so the criticism was probably a bit of a shock to what they're used to.

Been meaning to ask - who is that Matilda in your profile pick? Is it Raso?

 

[hey shorty]

Sam Kerr probably needs to shut her mouth and play.

Nobody hates these girls, we were just very disappointed they fell flat.

But what a performance in the 2nd half, still don't like the high line but we defended with more purpose.

 

[hey shorty]

And once again, we rise to the challenge of the big teams..... can we do so against Jamaica.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

In terms of the decision to give the own goal to Australia despite Kerr being off-side, the rule is as follows:

11.2: Offside offence​

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:​

• interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or​

• interfering with an opponent by:​

• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or

• challenging an opponent for the ball or

• clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or

• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an or opponent to play the ball

• gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:​

• rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar, match official or an opponent

• been deliberately saved by any opponent

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.​

A ‘save’ is when a player stops, or attempts to stop, a ball which is going into or very close to the goal with any part of the body except the hands/arms (unless the goalkeeper within the penalty area).​

In situations where:​

• a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12​

• a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence​

• an offence is committed against a player in an offside position who is already playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the offside offence is penalised as it has occurred before the foul challenge​

The important issue is highlighted. Obviously, VAR and the referee determined that Kerr did not make obvious action which clearly impacted on the capcity of the Brazilian defender or keeper to make a play on the ball.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Let’s at least wait til we’ve lost the Final before jumping to conclusions!

I deserve that. Played well in 2nd half.

 

[raven echo]

Been meaning to ask - who is that Matilda in your profile pick? Is it Raso?

Haha yeah it's Raso. Favourite player for a little while now.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Hilarious that a lot of US supporters are upset about Australia's win over Brazil and the manner in which the third goal was awarded. They're ones to talk.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Haha yeah it's Raso. Favourite player for a little while now.

Thought as much. Have a child who idolises Raso - wears a ribbon in her hair when she plays football (soccer) like Raso. Waited after the Cup of Nations game ended in Melbourne when Raso was a sub for her to come over and sign autographs and pose for photos, but Milicic's assistants put the subs through a number of post match drills and we had to eventually go back to our carpark before I was slugged a ridiculous amount for overstaying my booking. Hoping she plays W-League this coming season.

 

[SunGirl89]

Did we win the World Cup? What has Sam Kerr done to warrant her saying "suck on that"? The team played s**t against the Netherlands and Italy. Supposedly we are the #6 team in the world yet we lost to an Italian side that to be honest, did not look very good. Losing 2-1 flattered us.

So now we have a gutsy win against Brazil, albeit thanks to VAR and penalty decisions that both went our way.

I think Sam Kerr needs to worry about her own performance and that of the team than thinking the team has achieved anything so far.

 

[raven echo]

Thought as much. Have a child who idolises Raso - wears a ribbon in her hair when she plays football (soccer) like Raso. Waited after the Cup of Nations game ended in Melbourne when Raso was a sub for her to come over and sign autographs and pose for photos, but Milicic's assistants put the subs through a number of post match drills and we had to eventually go back to our carpark before I was slugged a ridiculous amount for overstaying my booking. Hoping she plays W-League this coming season.

Haha I was at that game and considered hanging around for a photo and/or autograph after the drills but was on night shift and needed to get ready for work.

I’ll invest in a Raso jersey once they release a home kit I like again. Not a big fan of the current one at all.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Frank Bunn]

I recorded the match (with work today I wasn't going to watch the match live) but given the context and no doubt the torrents of criticism that would come the Matildas' way if they hadn't won the match, I think it's fair enough. They will need to walk the walk, though. Jamaica won't be a walk in the park as they have some better than decent players that could threaten the Matildas if they let down their guard.

Some statistics to ponder. Australia's defeat of Brazil is Australia's fifth win on the trot against Brazil. It's the first time since 1999 that the Brazilians have conceded a goal in a group stage. It's also the first time the Brazilians have lost a group match since 1995. It's the most goals conceded by Brazil in their previous 13 group stage games combined. Monica's own goal was the second own goal conceded by Brazil at Women's World Cups ever, after Daiane against the USA in 2011.

Chloe Logarzo became the first Australian player to both score and assist in a Women's World Cup game since Leena Khamis achieved that feat in 2011 against Equatorial Guinea.

Marta extends her lead for most goals scored at World Cups, with 16, ahead of Germany's Birgit Prinz and US forward Abby Wambach, who both retired on 14 goals.

In terms of match stats, Australia dominated possession (57-43), the two teams were equal with shots at goal (11 apiece), Australia had more shots on target (five to three) and Australia had more corners (four to three).

It was a good win but they got lucky with VAR for the last goal. And I don't think this Brazil team is as good as previous years. Their record coming into the tournament was

Brazil 1–4 United States
Canada 1–0 Brazil
England 1–0 Brazil
France 3–1 Brazil
England 2–1 Brazil
Japan 3–1 Brazil
United States 1–0 Brazil
Spain 2–1 Brazil
Scotland 1–0 Brazil

 

[drd23]

In terms of the decision to give the own goal to Australia despite Kerr being off-side, the rule is as follows:

The important issue is highlighted. Obviously, VAR and the referee determined that Kerr did not make obvious action which clearly impacted on the capcity of the Brazilian defender or keeper to make a play on the ball.

One could easily argue that Kerr's actions met the dot point above the one you highlighted - she was near the ball and her attempt to play at it impacted Monica's decision to attempt to head it away.

However given the Brazilian keepers s**t position on the Logarzo goal earlier, it's no guarantee the keeper would have stopped it even if Monica hadn't deflected the ball

 

[Dixie Flatline]

One could easily argue that Kerr's actions met the dot point above the one you highlighted - she was near the ball and her attempt to play at it impacted Monica's decision to attempt to head it away.

However given the Brazilian keepers **** position on the Logarzo goal earlier, it's no guarantee the keeper would have stopped it even if Monica hadn't deflected the ball

Kerr would have been found to have interfered with play if the defender next to her played the ball, but Monica was in front of Kerr and had a free header at the ball. Kerr might have influenced how the defender played the ball, but I don't think it could reasonably be said that Kerr made an action that obviously impacted on how Monica played the ball. It's just a dud header.

 

[stax on the mull]

Kerr would have been found to have interfered with play if the defender next to her played the ball, but Monica was in front of Kerr and had a free header at the ball. Kerr might have influenced how the defender played the ball, but I don't think it could reasonably be said that Kerr made an action that obviously impacted on how Monica played the ball. It's just a dud header.

Agree, while not having knowledge of the ruling, it seems like that was a common sense decision. Monica played the ball because she would have been aware that Kerr was in the vicinity, but Kerr being there didn't make her put the ball into her own net.

 

[SunGirl89]

Note to defenders: do not put the ball in your own net.

 

[Lebbo73]

Did we win the World Cup? What has Sam Kerr done to warrant her saying "suck on that"? The team played **** against the Netherlands and Italy. Supposedly we are the #6 team in the world yet we lost to an Italian side that to be honest, did not look very good. Losing 2-1 flattered us.

So now we have a gutsy win against Brazil, albeit thanks to VAR and penalty decisions that both went our way.

I think Sam Kerr needs to worry about her own performance and that of the team than thinking the team has achieved anything so far.

Over the years, those players who speak out against criticism before they achieve anything, usually fail.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Over the years, those players who speak out against criticism before they achieve anything, usually fail.

Kerr has achieved plenty.

 

[SunGirl89]

I have no problem with her being passionate, but her childish comment suggests that criticism of the team’s performance against Italy was unwarranted. If anything, most criticism for the last few weeks has been directed towards the FFA rather than the players.

I hope the team can improve, finish top two and then make the quarter finals. That is a pass mark. A 2nd round loss is a fail, a semi final would be an A.

 

[hey shorty]

Kerr has achieved plenty.

Not on the big stage she hasnt