Jill Ellis changed a host of minds when the US upset Germany. She can change them forever by beating Japan.
Neil W. Blackmon
Following the tremendous 2-0 US victory over world number one Germany Tuesday night in Montreal, thoughts on Sunday’s rematch of the 2011 World Cup Final with reigning World champion Japan, in Vancouver (5PM ET, FOX).
First, there is no joy without sadness and there is nothing to celebrate without something to forget, so it is worth remembering that there were moments, some very recent, when the US being where they are today, four days from playing in another World Cup final, seemed unlikely.
A World Cup Final didn’t seem likely when the US finished an all-time worst seventh in the Algarve Cup in 2014, leading to the surprising dismissal of manager Tom Sermanni. Sermanni had finished his first calendar year as American manager unbeaten, implementing tactical changes from the Sundhage tenure and capping a litany of new players in the process. Firing him for a poor result in a tournament where the US historically had experimented and tried new things seemed reactionary, and to be frank, still does. But Sunil Gulati and US Soccer didn’t trust Sermanni’s new vision for US soccer and while they stressed that the Algarve Cup wasn’t the lone reason for the dismissal, it is safe to suggest that wholesale change wasn’t something US Women’s Soccer was ready to embrace.
The US quickly tapped Jill Ellis, a longtime servant of US Women’s Soccer but one without international head coaching experience to replace Sermanni. This too, seemed reactionary, a “stand your ground” reversion to the old way of doing things and a foot stomp that the American way was still the best way to win- even if it hadn’t resulted in a World Cup trophy since 1999. Without much trial and error, Ellis implemented a system that seemed retrofitted for an earlier period of women’s soccer: a flat, empty-bucketish 4-4-2 that saw the Americans play very narrowly without much fullback support, almost entirely reliant on “route one”, direct long balls to legendary but aging forward Abby Wambach.
A wave of (by US Standards) poor results followed, and by December of last year, writers began to wonder if the US were good enough to even contend for a third World Cup championship, let alone win. There wasn’t ever a truly “rock bottom” moment, but when the US were humbled by France prior to the Algarve Cup, it certainly looked as if the Americans were only marginal contenders.
The US came back strong to win the Algarve Cup, avenging their defeat to France in the tournament’s final and gaining critical confidence in the process.
Kelley O’Hara’s inclusion since the quarterfinals has helped the US immensely.
“I’m sick of losing,” Carli Lloyd would say in the aftermath of the tournament. “I’m sick of all the naysayers out there saying, ‘You’re [only] second in the world, the U.S. is done, they had a horrible Algarve Cup last year.’ I’m a winner, and I want to go out there and win.”
And with Lloyd leading and wearing the captain’s armband, it was tempting to believe. The problem was that the gloom and doom was never far away.
Days after Carli Lloyd told the media she felt the “US were peaking at the right time” entering the World Cup, the team played a listless 0-0 draw in the final Send-Off Series match against South Korea, a World Cup side certainly but hardly a global power. And when the tournament did begin the following week, the Americans won a group dubbed “the Group of Death” but didn’t do it playing anything close to attractive soccer. They scored only four goals in the group stage, created limited chances, looked old and unimaginative in the final third and continued to appear too reliant on the aging Abby Wambach.
The knockout stages, primed as a time the US would show their best, began inauspiciously. The US staggered through the Round of 16, defeating Colombia by a highly flattering 2-0 scoreline. Even against China in the quarterfinals, with Wambach on the bench until late in the game, the Americans still managed only one goal. Sure, they created more chances, but there was a bit of “relative to what” involved in that and the Americans certainly hadn’t shown much to inspire confidence heading into a duel with juggernaut Germany. Yes, the Americans looked better with Morgan Brian in the midfield and Kelley O’Hara providing width and later punch off the bench, but the questions was “better relative to what?”
It was football for the pragmatists, not the poets.
Until the US vanquished the Germans.
The United States were better than Germany last evening and absolutely deserved to win the game.
There’s a temptation when a favorite loses a match late in a World Cup to suggest that they were unfortunate or they lost a game despite not being outplayed. For this, I blame soccer.
Soccer is eminently charming because in one 90 minute segment, anything can and often does happen, and the reality of that moves beyond the cliche. A team can dominate ninety minutes and lose, 1-0. The opposite can be true. It’s the ultimate sport for the underdog and egalitarian, the only sport in the world where a fourth division side can best a top division side, despite disadvantages in every other facet of club organization. Outspent by billions, woefully outmaneuvered in terms of facilities and upward mobility, one well-timed counterattack and determined, heroic defending and you are on your way. When these events occur, we simply say “Hey, that’s soccer”, or reference “soccer things” happening.
International soccer doesn’t always share those inequities, and when you reach the late stages of knockout rounds at a World Cup, you aren’t talking about David slaying Goliath. But the US win over Germany wasn’t remotely about “soccer things” or the favored Germans being unlucky.
Save the opening ten minutes of the first half and the first twenty of the second half, the US were better than the Germans in all facets of soccer. They looked better on the ball, more crisp moving the ball and more potent in attack. They defended, as they have all tournament, better. And they had, as they always do, the best goalkeeper. None of that is to say that the Germans didn’t also play well and have their chances. They did. But the US made more of the chances it had, as this graphic demonstrates.
https://twitter.com/MC_of_A/status/616048734598791170
The Americans thoroughly deserve to be playing in the World Cup final tomorrow.
Becky Sauerbrunn has led an incredible US defense in Canada. They are why the US are in a final.
And a historically good defense is why.
Before the tournament, I wrote a piece on why Becky Sauerbrunn’s tournament would track and dictate the success of the US tournament, and that’s been the case in Canada, as a tremendous performance by Sauerbrunn and the emergence of her CB partner, Julie Johnston, have led the Americans to the final. The US have conceded just one goal– in the first half of the first game, and Johnston is a Golden Ball finalist (award given to the best player at the tournament.) While Johnston’s play has earned the headlines and award nominations, Sauerbrunn has been even better, as the graphic in the tweet below demonstrates.
https://twitter.com/richardfarley/status/616706354183450624
Since Sauerbrunn was left off the Golden Ball list, the praise for her play has been effusive, featured in articles like this one by Jeff Carlisle and this one by Bobby Warshaw that are supporting evidence for my pre-tournament article. Good columns like these help put the US defensive performance in Canada in perspective. So do facts.
Italy won the 2006 World Cup on the back of two dominant CB’s and an elite goalkeeper, relying on bits of individual brilliance from the likes of Luca Toni, Andrea Pirlo and Francisco Totti to produce goals. They were never overwhelming in possession and often times content to concede harmless possession, remaining compact and organized and denying legitimate goalscoring chances. They conceded only two goals in winning the World Cup, and neither came directly from the run of play (an own goal against the United States, a Zidane penalty).
I’ve drawn the comparison between that Italian side and the Americans since prior to the quarterfinals. Behind the dominance of Sauerbrunn, JJ, Krieger, Kling and Solo, the US have conceded only once, in the first half of the first game. And other than against Germany, they’ve rarely been threatened. They haven’t scored an immense amount of goals, relying on the brilliance of Megan Rapinoe, Carli Lloyd and Lauren Holiday to create scoring chances. It hasn’t always been attractive, but you don’t have to play beautifully when you defend historically.
In many ways, the Italy 06 comparison falls short. After all, until the quarterfinals against China, the US had cut out pressure and eliminated clear chances without a holding midfielder, while the Italians had the bulldog Gennaro Gattuso marshaling and destroying things in front of the Italy back four throughout their run in Germany. Morgan Brian has helped the US attack, to be certain, by giving the US teeth in midfield where they’d often been overrun. But she’s not a holding midfielder by trade, and for better and worse, she’ll never be Gattuso. That makes the performance of the Americans in Canada arguably more impressive: Sauerbrunn and company have dominated, and done so without a bulldog in front of them.
Ayi Miyama and Japan are plenty of good enough to beat the US in Vancouver. Just as they did in Germany.
But Japan are the World Champions, and fully capable of beating the United States. Just like they did last time.
The United States beat Japan in London at the 2012 Olympics to capture the Gold Medal. Carli Lloyd scored twice to give the Americans immediate revenge in the aftermath of World Cup Final heartbreak. So in that respect, the United States is not seeking immediate revenge Sunday against Japan. In fact, it’s Japan playing that card heading into the final, saying the failure to win the Gold in London has left them plenty motivated to become only the second team in Women’s World Cup history to repeat as champion Sunday evening.
The Nadeshiko’s effort to defend will rely as ever on a stingy defense and an ability to appear comfortable in close games, particularly when they score first. Japan was pushed and perhaps fortunate against England in the semifinal, to be sure, but prior to that they were previously untested, save thirty difficult minutes holding a one goal lead against the Swiss in their World Cup opener.
Japan hasn’t been as solid as the Americans in the back, but center backs Azusa Iwashimizu and Saki Kumagai have been excellent when called upon and goalkeeper Ayumi Kaihori is very capable, despite at least one very soft goal conceded in the tournament (against Holland).
Further, it will be critical for the Americans to score first. The Yanks haven’t had to chase a game all tournament, and aren’t really built to do so. Japan, meanwhile, made winning by a goal fashionable before the United States tried it in Canada and should they get a lead tomorrow, they’ll be terribly difficult to break down afterwards. That means the US defense must keep their heads on a swivel early, as Japan probe for an early lead. Japan midfielder Aya Miyama has replaced 2011 star Homare Sawa as the team’s leading playmaker,and has created 22 chances during the tournament while captaining the side. That number bests Germany’s Anja Mittag (15) for tops at the Women’s World Cup, and she’ll be the focal point for Japan Sunday night. Just as Megan Klingenberg had to play a monster game to stop Germany’s forays down the US left flank Tuesday, Al Krieger, lined up with Miyama, will have to play well for the US to be champions Sunday.
In the end, the Americans are saying all the right things. They are rallying behind Jill Ellis, who was under fire from media and fans alike until the US upset the Germans Tuesday in Montreal. They are playing for Abby Wambach, their veteran leader in her final games with the national team, trying desperately to send international soccer’s all-time leading scorer off a World Cup champion. And whether Japan buys the storyline or not, they are playing for revenge, to make even and just a 2011 final they felt rightfully belonged to them. They are playing, above all, for their own part of history. For a third star.
Neil W. Blackmon is Co-Founder of The Yanks Are Coming. He can be reached at nwblackmon@gmail.com and you can follow him on Twitter at @nwblackmon.