World Cup appreciation thread - starts Sat June 6th

[YonicScrewdriver]

First England game is vs France and will be on BBC2 on June 9th.

C'mon you lionesses!

(Supporting other nations is also allowed!)

I was wondering if she was unsighted when it was struck, she seemed to react so late. Also seemed to have a wicked swerve on it.

I know, she seemed to be pretty close to the near post. She was flat footed and didn't get off the ground. Even half a step then a dive. It wasn't struck with any great power and from a long way out. She should have had plenty of time to pick it up

Well done BBC for billing tonight's game on their front page as 'Germany vs Norway' - no other qualifier

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/33109354

Congrats to Casey Stoney, former England football captain, who has been awarded an MBE. Also to Jo Pavey and Jordanne Whiley (wheelchair tennis doubles Grand Slam winner)

I enjoyed the Germany=Norway game.

England vs Mexico tonight!

France lost to Colombia so our chances of qualifying improved

Hooray!!!!!!

really pleased for Kirby. I thought she was England's best player throughout. Direct in good way and full of energy.

Great game - great to watch, some really impressive skill out there. I was very taken with Kirby too. Both great goals even if there was more than a hint of offside about the second!

(Embarrassed noises... my ex always said he thought I was a closet England fan, and much as it pains me to say it, I fear he may be right... I really got quite excited when Kirby's goal went in).

Back to the question of the pitch - even my 7 yo DS can see there's something really unfair about forcing the women to play on artifical turf (he was getting pleasingly outraged about it earlier). I presume the official reason was that it would just be too expensive to maintain real turf in Canada at this time of year... but how much of it comes down to Blatter et al just being sexist dinosaurs?

FIFA explained by saying it wanted all games in the tournament played on the same surface, and that surface would be the predominant one already in place in Canada.

So why go with artificial turf in the first place? Because in most cases, that's what was there. Many outdoor stadiums in Canada have artificial surfaces because the climate is so harsh for much of the year and the facilities are used for other sports, like American-football, where the difference between natural and artificial isn't considered as important a factor. Every Canadian American-Football League team currently plays its home games on artificial turf.

Perhaps most galling to the players is that one of the six host venues, Moncton Stadium in New Brunswick, opened in 2010 with a grass field but was forced to install FieldTurf last year to play host to World Cup games. Though that $1.5 million artificial surface meets FIFA requirements, it would prevent some other competitions, such as Paralympic track and field, from being held at the stadium. So the city of Moncton spent $500,000 to install a new grass field adjacent to the stadium for the other athletes affected by the change.

www.goal.com/en-us/news/12162/womens-world-cup/2015/06/03/12372022/womens-world-cup-turf-war-lingers-as-tournament-begins

Thanks, Canadian. That's interesting and annoying in equal measure about Moncton (and shows that the financial arguments are not as clear cut as FIFA might be pretending they are).

Last night's game (well, yesterday afternoon's second game for you I guess...) in Moncton was interesting to watch. At one stage one of the Mexican players went on a last ditch attempt to keep a ball in play, ran off the edge of the pitch because she was running full-pelt, and her momentum carried her off the edge of the artifical turf onto an odd patch of some other surface - you could see her really struggling to keep her footing when she hit this sudden slippery patch.

Bit late to the party, been wondering where there may be a thread!

Fabulous displays so far by the lionesses - just wish they could remember to play for the full 90 mins! Tactics have been spot-on haven't they? Laboured initially but that first half against Columbia was a joy to watch - one touch, slick, lots of movement and supporting each other. Steph Houghton at the back is a rock.
And no rolling around as if they've been taken out by a sniper when tackled.

Yeah - maybe the phrase should be "drama kings" instead!

I've watched some of the matches.

Some of the word choices made by the BBC TV commentators have been interesting from a feminist viewpoint. The commentators I've heard are men who usually commentate on men's English Premier League matches.

In one of the matches, a player was injured by a tackle 5 minutes before the end of the match, when all the substitutes of her team had already been used but her team were winning comfortably. A BBC TV commentator said that it would make sense for the manager to withdraw the injured player and finish the game with "ten men".

So, men as default, even when all the people on the pitch are women.

It may be easy to excuse this commentator's comment by saying it was a one-off unscripted and unguarded remark and done through habit etc. He may even have intended to say "ten women", but the point is he didn't say that. I'm not blaming him, I'm just reporting his words as an example of gender bias in the language of popular culture, affected by and affecting socialisation of the people who hear these biased phrases.

I think his choice of words should be compared to what would have been said if a tackle had injured a man during a men's football match. Due to "men as default" thinking, in society in general and football in particular, I think that there is zero probability of any commentator suggesting that a men's team should "finish the game with ten women".

Also heard a commentator make a point of saying "man marking - and it is still called man marking.."

First knockout game tonight vs Norway. C'mon lionesses!

I watched the England-Mexico match in the pub with DS and DD2. The TV wasn't on until I asked the manager if she could turn the England game on. DS was impressed with Fran Kirbys goal, agreeing that she had no time to organise her feet properly and had to toe poke the ball.

I think we've had the results we deserve. Against France we were too negative, and the coach has to be blamed for that. Eni Aluko in particular did not look comfortable playing on artificial grass.

And whilst I'm here, Go Lionesses :o

Yes I'd picked up on the "man down" thing, and looked at it a bit but.in terms of having the World Cup on BBC tv when the 'mens' U21 Euro champs not being so, it's a slip from them, which I have noooo doubt has been pointed out to him.

Game time.....

Hmm, need a bit more excitement second half please!

I think we're playing too much in front of them (when we get a chance). No getting down the sides and using Duggan's height from crosses or 'mini-Messi's' devilment.
But we're keeping shape well. And..we've maybe seeing the best Norway have, and we've accepted it with no score. I'd suggest a change fwd midfield to supply the forwards. Norway don't seem to defend well. Expert as I am.

Rachel Yankey agrees with me! I am seriously made up. We are being too negative and not playing to our strengths. We need to push up and get players forward.

Hopefully Sampson changes tactics at half time, otherwise I think we're done.

Maybe Greenwood should come on, on the left? Likes to get forward and no threat from Norway's right side?

All that is needed is one or two players making sure to be in the area into which Carney so ably lobs the ball, she did it a few times, but nobody was there to take it annoying armchair manager talking

A big step back compared with the last match. Hoping for a better 2nd half.

Jaevla!