FIFA Women's World Cup 2023

i♥city said:
The hosts are NZ not Australia. Yes the Aussies did miss Kerr but the Nigerian girls did play some good football today.
Click to expand...

Yeah both are hosts. I was a bit vague I guess, but NZ messed up the other day also, so it seemed to fit.

I thought Australia may have been quite good due to beating England pre-tournament, but it seems either that wasn't that big an achievement or Sam Kerr is that big a miss. Maybe both.

Expecting her to play against Canada half-fit and possibly worsen her injury.
 
BimboBob said:
Because other stuff I'd like to watch has been moved.
It's like the tennis. 2 BBC channels flooded for 2 weeks.

And because I like football.

I'm glad that the women's game is getting more professional and more young girls are getting into it but let's not get carried away, it's quite shit football wise. Especially in the WC. 16 good teams and 16 shit teams. They've gone big too early. The standard of the world's game is not great.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of other channels to watch
 
I don't follow women's football that closely. Close enough that I know the names and would watch England in the major tournaments but not closely enough to know realistic expectations. With Mead, Kirby and Williamson missing how big an impact is that on this England squad and what are their realistic prospects? The US seem to be more "beatable" than in previous years which is good.
 
mattcity5 said:
And tbf I've not watched that many of the games myself due to the kickoff times and work etc.

I've enjoyed watching the BBC highlights program each night as it's 24 minutes across 3 games. It works pretty well. No real analysis, just a catch-up of what's gone on.
Click to expand...
It's a good idea to watch the highlights 'cos yer don't see 'em highlighting passes to the goalkeeper from the halfway line! I'm taping each game and whizzing forwards to watch the goals, but then found it better to watch the snippets on the BBC.
 
mattcity5 said:
That's fair. I dunno exactly how I feel about it all. I think a 16 team World Cup could be a good quality competition, but that would be seen as a backwards move by FIFA, though they'd probably just be gutted that they'd make less money.

I can't quite put my finger on why. To some extent I'll go with that 'history' word. What I mean is, I always want City women to win. If they lost a cup final I'd be disappointed for a day maybe, but if the men lost I'd be gutted all summer. Its not necessarily about the quality - the men's team has clearly been shite at time - so I can only put that down to the connection I've established with the men's team over 45 years or so. Which is about 40 years longer than I've watched the women's team for.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough I've never considered the City women's team to have come near matching some of shite I've seen at Maine Road. The women can put together a stodgy, turgid performance against a poor side, but get the win in the end. If the fellahs did the same thing in the dark days of the early sixties I'd have been delighted.
 
supercity88 said:
I don't follow women's football that closely. Close enough that I know the names and would watch England in the major tournaments but not closely enough to know realistic expectations. With Mead, Kirby and Williamson missing how big an impact is that on this England squad and what are their realistic prospects? The US seem to be more "beatable" than in previous years which is good.
Click to expand...

I think it's screwed our slim chances tbh, but you never know. Forget the bookies, we're probably around 5th or 6th favourites really.

Defence has Jess Carter in for Williamson and she hasn't the composure, passing or leadership. Millie Bright is also some way from matchfit.

Toone is in for Kirby and while capable of a goal, at times goals missing and isn't quite as cultured or creative.

Kelly is in for Mead and is dangerous but hasn't had the knack of scoring that Mead had in the Euros, though I'm not sure Mead could have kept that up here tbh. A lot of what Kelly does doesn't come off, but she still often looks the most likely to create or score.

Other than that, Greenwood is left back now instead of Daly (sub CF) and Russo is starting upfront. Russo looks very cumbersome at times, but in the first game we were mostly just slinging aimless crosses in her direction in hope.

They need to do better in the second game tomorrow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.