US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

4-1 over Norway. espn artical

[ QUOTE ]
"I feel like in this tournament -- from the time I came for the draw -- the U.S. was behind the eight-ball, because we had a very difficult group," coach Greg Ryan said. "I felt like each game was so under the gun. Each match became an elimination match for us."

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Ryan said the matter was being handled "internally" and did not say if Solo would return with the team.

Cat Whitehill, Solo's former roommate, said she had forgiven Solo, and she thought her teammates had, too.

"Anything is possible," Whitehill said. "We know what a great goalkeeper Hope is. She proved it during this World Cup. She's a good friend of mine, and I hope she will be able to do it."

Whitehill said switching goalkeepers was not the problem, but what followed was.

"There was a lot of emotions going into that Brazil game. There was just a lot going on, and we didn't handle it well," she said. "It was just handling the pressure that came with it, the semifinal game, listening to the media talk about the goalkeepers. There were a lot of surrounding things."

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Ryan's unusual move -- Solo was unscored on in almost 300 minutes in four World Cup games -- also puts his future in doubt. Ryan's contract expires at year's end, and he said after the match he wants to continue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

4-1 win! OMGZZZZ great decision to have Scurry in goal. This cements her as the greatest keeper in women's US soccer history.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

wait this isnt KY wrestling

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

honestly ryan deserves to be fired for his decision, but it is a huge no-no to publicly complain about national team members. Solo will be back in 4 years tho

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

Interesting comments from Whitehall. looks like the goalie switch did affect their mindsets.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

http://www.cnn.com/EVENTS/1997/star....ns.solo.lg.jpg

This Solo would do better in goal

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

Why did Solo get benched in the first place?

How bad was Scurry in the loss to Brazil?

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

Solo got benched because Scurry had a better win-loss record vs. Brazil.

Scurry allowed 4 goals. To be fair, one of them was an own goal.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Solo got benched because Scurry had a better win-loss record vs. Brazil.


[/ QUOTE ]

Solo has never faced Brazil. In addition to Scurry's track record against them, I think the U.S. mentioned something about her having the quick reflexes needed against tricky Brazilians.

I did not watch the game, but people I trust have told me that two of the goals she allowed were very soft, and that the own goal could easily have been avoided had Scurry properly called her teammate off.

-McGee

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

I think the coach screwed up, but he was really in a no-win situation. If he puts Solo in, they would have still lost, goal keeping isn't the only reason they gave up 4 goals. Let's say they lost 2-0 with Solo in goal. Then press and fans would have said, "ZOMG, whyd didn't that idiot play Scurry? She had a great record against Brazil and Solo had never faced them before, and Scurry was quicker, etc, etc!!!!!"

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Solo got benched because Scurry had a better win-loss record vs. Brazil.

Scurry allowed 4 goals. To be fair, one of them was an own goal.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, her job description still calls for her to stop own goals.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Solo got benched because Scurry had a better win-loss record vs. Brazil.


[/ QUOTE ]

Solo has never faced Brazil. In addition to Scurry's track record against them, I think the U.S. mentioned something about her having the quick reflexes needed against tricky Brazilians.

I did not watch the game, but people I trust have told me that two of the goals she allowed were very soft, and that the own goal could easily have been avoided had Scurry properly called her teammate off.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]


that's my take too.
At least a couple of those goals appeared to be VERY stoppable.

I had heard the same thing about the own-goal being avoidable also with a more vocal keeper.

And I had also heard that the team was really distracted by the whole goalie switch and pressure it put them under BEFORE the game.
Sportscenter was showing both goalies warming-up and talking about the controversial goalie-switch, etc etc.

Not nearly as many people were paying attention then but it was still being discussed and was out there.

Whether they would have been able to somehow beat Brazil or not nobody knows. But a ridiculous distraction created by their own coach was the last thing they needed. And this was only PART of why it was such a horrible decision.

Solo will be back on the team much sooner than 4 yrs. The coach will likely get fired but even if he isn't she is going to be coming back to the team right-away.
These things eventually tend to blow-over.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the coach screwed up, but he was really in a no-win situation. If he puts Solo in, they would have still lost, goal keeping isn't the only reason they gave up 4 goals. Let's say they lost 2-0 with Solo in goal. Then press and fans would have said, "ZOMG, whyd didn't that idiot play Scurry? She had a great record against Brazil and Solo had never faced them before, and Scurry was quicker, etc, etc!!!!!"

[/ QUOTE ]

No one with a brain would have said this. It's not like switching goalkeepers is a common practice. Solo hadn't allowed a goal in 300+ minutes; Scurry hadn't played in like 3 months.

-McGee

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

Solo is going to be back in goal right away.

Not only is she the best keeper they have, her presence will draw attention to the sport which is always a huge goal for USA soccer.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the coach screwed up, but he was really in a no-win situation. If he puts Solo in, they would have still lost, goal keeping isn't the only reason they gave up 4 goals. Let's say they lost 2-0 with Solo in goal. Then press and fans would have said, "ZOMG, whyd didn't that idiot play Scurry? She had a great record against Brazil and Solo had never faced them before, and Scurry was quicker, etc, etc!!!!!"

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would anyone say that? Goalies in soccer are a lot like goalies in hockey. If a goalie is hot and on form, you don't change them, and you take the results as they come to you.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

Ryan's contract will not be renewed. (A nice way of saying he was fired for being a Moran)

Solo will be back with the team and will have learned to not tell the truth to the press anymore. Because in this day and age God forbid that anyone tell us how they really feel or call out their idiot coach for being an idiot.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Solo got benched because Scurry had a better win-loss record vs. Brazil.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but every US women's keeper is going to have a great record against every team b/c the US pretty much rocks everyone else's [censored]. That didn't get her the start against Nigeria or England though, and it shouldn't have gotten her the start against Brazil.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Solo is going to be back in goal right away.

Not only is she the best keeper they have, her presence will draw attention to the sport which is always a huge goal for USA soccer.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah but what if it's an own goal?

I am kinda surprised this many dudes care about this event, I always thought it was a Girl Power thing. Anyway, I've always had this irrational thing for Julie Foudy even though she probably isn't that attractive. Plus I'm not sure if there's anyone other than Scurry left from the squad that won in '99. I thought I saw one or two familiar names.

Also, I saw Mia Hamm at a Cubs-D'Backs season opener once, she was in my section and rooting for her gaymo husband. Most of these soccer players seem to be centaurs because of the strong legs required, but she was wearing tight jeans and was H-O-T. She may have slimmed down a little after she retired. Hey Mia if you're reading this you can do better than that tool. Send me a PM for pics, stats, and roll.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the coach screwed up, but he was really in a no-win situation. If he puts Solo in, they would have still lost, goal keeping isn't the only reason they gave up 4 goals. Let's say they lost 2-0 with Solo in goal. Then press and fans would have said, "ZOMG, whyd didn't that idiot play Scurry? She had a great record against Brazil and Solo had never faced them before, and Scurry was quicker, etc, etc!!!!!"

[/ QUOTE ]

No one with a brain would have said this. It's not like switching goalkeepers is a common practice. Solo hadn't allowed a goal in 300+ minutes; Scurry hadn't played in like 3 months.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

No-one with a brain would say this, but that still leaves a dozen columnists and about a million fans.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

I don't really agree about that, but even if that were true, it's still not a lose-lose situation. If he leaves Hope in and they still lost and reporters/columnists keep asking "why not play Scurry there?!", he could answer, "because it'd be a dumb move. Hope's better. We got beat in midfield, not between the posts." And anyone who know anything about soccer would agree.

In this case, he has no defense. It was a completely retarded move.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

I don't follow women's soccer, because no one does, but no one would have critiscized <sp> the coach for not putting Scurry in with her better record against Brazil because no one follows soccer enough to know about her better record against Brazil. We only know about that stat because it was the coach's weak justification for such a terrible move.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

I don't think a single reporter or fan would have asked, "why didn't you start Scurry?"
Solo earned the spot as their top goalie and everyone understood this.

That's why there was such a reaction when the move was announced.
And, as I said, this public and media reaction started when it was announced 2 days before the match.
The interview after the match was just a response to all the hype this had already been receiving and obviously it helped to inflate that hype significantly more.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

The first goal was actually deflected towards Scurry to make it a shorter distance, and she still missed. I can't judge how hard these things are to defend, but everything I saw and heard makes me believe that the shot would have been close undeflected, and after the deflection should have been a save for sure.

What really grinds my gears is watching all the TV-columnists defending Scurry by saying, "They lost 4-0, it didn't matter who was in goal!" The dynamics of a game change so much when there's a slight lead, and that's doubly so when the losing team is down a player. A 0-0 game in the 75th minute is nowhere near the same as a 1-0 game in the 75th, or a 2-0 game in the 75th, and being a player down exaggerates that considerably. I felt like all the idiots saying, "Brazil got 4 so it doesn't matter" woke up and were told they had to write something about women's soccer, and didn't really take the time to understand the sport or the context.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

It was a horrible move that had a very predictable outcome. I would like to thank coach Ryan for the free monies.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

rundown - completely agree.
Obviously it's incorrect to say that the U.S. would have actually won.
But the difference could have been far more than people realized.

If the own-goal could have been stopped, and I think it's possible although certainly not a guarantee...and if Solo can stop the 2 relatively soft goals that Scurry allowed then I think we have a completely different game.

And I also think the crazyness that surrounded the team afte rthe switch was announced was a terrible distraction for them and messed them up pretty bad.

But, in the end, Brazil is a pretty damn good team and is probably better than the U.S. regardless of the U.S. keeper as reflected by the final score in that game.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

When in doubt, always start the hotter player. How is this not obvious?

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

swapping the keepers had terrible effect on team morale. in womens sports emotions are far more important than in mens. women care about each other and who they are playing with. men just care if their teammate plays well.

the heightened emotions only intesified a situation with the most pressure these women have ever faced. mentally they fell off and its understandable. they had no experience in such a huge game vs such a skilled opponent. and then the coach adds a ton more scrutiny.

that was his main screwup. the skill difference between the 2 keepers is small. the chance of destroying team morale and confidence is huge and destructive.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

Why don't they make women's soccer players wear the same uniforms as the beach volleyball babes? Then I might watch.

As it stands now, I know nothing of this thread.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, I've always had this irrational thing for Julie Foudy even though she probably isn't that attractive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree and disagree. See your own comments about seeing Ms. Hamm in person. I have to think Foudy has the same impact, if not more so.

Oh, and Greg Ryan made an awful decision, plain and simple.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Solo is going to be back in goal right away.

Not only is she the best keeper they have, her presence will draw attention to the sport which is always a huge goal for USA soccer.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah but what if it's an own goal?

I am kinda surprised this many dudes care about this event, I always thought it was a Girl Power thing. Anyway, I've always had this irrational thing for Julie Foudy even though she probably isn't that attractive. Plus I'm not sure if there's anyone other than Scurry left from the squad that won in '99. I thought I saw one or two familiar names.

Also, I saw Mia Hamm at a Cubs-D'Backs season opener once, she was in my section and rooting for her gaymo husband. Most of these soccer players seem to be centaurs because of the strong legs required, but she was wearing tight jeans and was H-O-T. She may have slimmed down a little after she retired. Hey Mia if you're reading this you can do better than that tool. Send me a PM for pics, stats, and roll.

[/ QUOTE ]

I met/interviewed Mia Hamm near the end of her playing days and I was terribly disappointed. Cute face but god she was scrawny. Little bitty bird legs. Eck.

Re: US women\'s soccer takes 3rd. Scurry in Goal. Solo not in stadium.
 

RDH,

[ QUOTE ]
The first goal was actually deflected towards Scurry to make it a shorter distance, and she still missed. I can't judge how hard these things are to defend, but everything I saw and heard makes me believe that the shot would have been close undeflected, and after the deflection should have been a save for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pretty laughable. Maybe she could've saved it, sure. But keepers don't plan on own goals. If Scurry could've had any impact on that, it would've been to call the defender off. The defender shouldn't have sucked so bad.

Also, while searching for the own goal on youtube (taken down? wtf), I came across this. Obviously Hope would've saved the game.