WeeNix
760
·
750
·
over 9 years

We do have quite possibly the best keeper in the world, or if not she must be top 3. Unbelievable save then.

Marquee
3.3K
·
5.1K
·
almost 13 years

Nayler has been amazing!

Phoenix Academy
140
·
180
·
over 9 years

Says something about our attacking options when you're one nil down and bring on a centre back. Knocking it long all day played to Canada's strengths. 

WeeNix
300
·
570
·
over 10 years

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

WeeNix
760
·
750
·
over 9 years

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

Sorry I take issue with this. It seems to be a common theme in here these days and I know this is a Phoenix forum but there is a point where fandom gets daft. 

Our improvement in terms of our players technical ability is due to a number of different factors and a wide range of coaches from one end of the country to the other. Coach education has improved rapidly over the last 15 years from what it used to be and there has been a collective lifting in standards.

Also and Im sure some who have never coached will disagree but the most important ages with respect to technical ability are 5 to 14 and thats where the majority of the groundwork is done. 

Our improvements are not because of one or two "finishing" academies.

Legend
2.3K
·
17K
·
almost 17 years

Ole fanboys really are the absolute worst.

Life and death
2.4K
·
5.5K
·
almost 17 years

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

I didn’t catch the Holland game but I couldn’t help thinking while watching today’s game that we look to be in danger of being overtaken by the rest of the world women’s game. I noticed in a couple of other games I saw (not involving us) that the quality of some of the players and teams were exceptional. When there weren’t that many quality women’s teams, we held our own on the world stage but I get the feeling it’s slipping. I’m not a great follower of women’s football so am I mistaken?
Phoenix Academy
120
·
250
·
almost 12 years

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

I didn’t catch the Holland game but I couldn’t help thinking while watching today’s game that we look to be in danger of being overtaken by the rest of the world women’s game. I noticed in a couple of other games I saw (not involving us) that the quality of some of the players and teams were exceptional. When there weren’t that many quality women’s teams, we held our own on the world stage but I get the feeling it’s slipping. I’m not a great follower of women’s football so am I mistaken?

No you're not...

One in a million
4K
·
9.5K
·
almost 17 years

Canada were too good, too fast. We did well to defend for so long, but just not able to hold the ball up to get some passing going. We spent all our energy defending, so nothing left to provide options when we had the ball. 
I thought Stott did very well.

WeeNix
760
·
750
·
over 9 years

Ray Hicks wrote:

[/quote]I didn’t catch the Holland game but I couldn’t help thinking while watching today’s game that we look to be in danger of being overtaken by the rest of the world women’s game. I noticed in a couple of other games I saw (not involving us) that the quality of some of the players and teams were exceptional. When there weren’t that many quality women’s teams, we held our own on the world stage but I get the feeling it’s slipping. I’m not a great follower of women’s football so am I mistaken?

No you're not...

I wonder if we are seeing the usual major nations starting to become dominant in womens football as well now.  We have had 10-15 years of doing really well relative to the state of the womens international team but many countries until relatively recently didnt take womens football seriously. I wonder if the grassroots level resources available in the usual main football nations is starting to kick in and womens football starts to grab some traction there. Are we looking at seeing our Womens team start to slide backwards slowly toward a similar standing as the AW's have? I think given the rapid growth of the womens game worldwide we are going to need some clever and innovative changes to our womens/girls grassroots games processes and setup. For a long time I have felt the womens side of the game here was showing the way, now Im wondering if what we saw with the mens U20 if the pendulum has swung.

Marquee
1.2K
·
5.5K
·
over 13 years

Not many youngsters in that Ferns line up. Needs Next Gen 

Phoenix Academy
120
·
250
·
almost 12 years

AlfStamp wrote:

Ray Hicks wrote:

[/quote]I didn’t catch the Holland game but I couldn’t help thinking while watching today’s game that we look to be in danger of being overtaken by the rest of the world women’s game. I noticed in a couple of other games I saw (not involving us) that the quality of some of the players and teams were exceptional. When there weren’t that many quality women’s teams, we held our own on the world stage but I get the feeling it’s slipping. I’m not a great follower of women’s football so am I mistaken?

No you're not...

I wonder if we are seeing the usual major nations starting to become dominant in womens football as well now.  We have had 10-15 years of doing really well relative to the state of the womens international team but many countries until relatively recently didnt take womens football seriously. I wonder if the grassroots level resources available in the usual main football nations is starting to kick in and womens football starts to grab some traction there. Are we looking at seeing our Womens team start to slide backwards slowly toward a similar standing as the AW's have? I think given the rapid growth of the womens game worldwide we are going to need some clever and innovative changes to our womens/girls grassroots games processes and setup. For a long time I have felt the womens side of the game here was showing the way, now Im wondering if what we saw with the mens U20 if the pendulum has swung.

You are exactly right: This has been coming for a while. More and more countries with greater finances, participation numbers etc are prioritizing Women's football. For example, In the last 10 years Women's football in Europe has exploded. How long before the South Americans stop dicking around and get serious? They don't like losing or being also rans in any football, so expect them to make major efforts to improve. Unfortunately, as a result, teams like NZ are on the slide...

Starting XI
2.3K
·
3.1K
·
over 11 years

Canada played pretty good. When we had the ball, passing accuracy, 1st touch and winning second ball was sub standard. According the the importance of the game this was overall very disappointing. Some credits for not giving up.

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

AlfStamp wrote:

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

Sorry I take issue with this. It seems to be a common theme in here these days and I know this is a Phoenix forum but there is a point where fandom gets daft. 

Our improvement in terms of our players technical ability is due to a number of different factors and a wide range of coaches from one end of the country to the other. Coach education has improved rapidly over the last 15 years from what it used to be and there has been a collective lifting in standards.

Also and Im sure some who have never coached will disagree but the most important ages with respect to technical ability are 5 to 14 and thats where the majority of the groundwork is done. 

Our improvements are not because of one or two "finishing" academies.

Ummmm. But based on the way the U20s men played, verus FFs this morning, would seem that the mens/boys programme is starting to produce more technical players, than the girls/womens setups. Of course far too early to say for sure.

One glaring difference between boys & girls programmes currently now is the academies. No girls at the Nix, and only a very small number I understand at Ole. 

Life and death
2.4K
·
5.5K
·
almost 17 years

How did the girls under 17s [was it?] play when they came 3rd in their world cup?

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

How did the girls under 17s [was it?] play when they came 3rd in their world cup?

Different to U20s boys.

Marquee
1.2K
·
5.5K
·
over 13 years

coochiee wrote:

AlfStamp wrote:

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

Sorry I take issue with this. It seems to be a common theme in here these days and I know this is a Phoenix forum but there is a point where fandom gets daft. 

Our improvement in terms of our players technical ability is due to a number of different factors and a wide range of coaches from one end of the country to the other. Coach education has improved rapidly over the last 15 years from what it used to be and there has been a collective lifting in standards.

Also and Im sure some who have never coached will disagree but the most important ages with respect to technical ability are 5 to 14 and thats where the majority of the groundwork is done. 

Our improvements are not because of one or two "finishing" academies.

Ummmm. But based on the way the U20s men played, verus FFs this morning, would seem that the mens/boys programme is starting to produce more technical players, than the girls/womens setups. Of course far too early to say for sure.

One glaring difference between boys & girls programmes currently now is the academies. No girls at the Nix, and only a very small number I understand at Ole. 

EXCEPT that the U20 men’s were, er, under 20 years old  

Whereas the Football Ferns had how many players under 20 on the pitch? One?

You’re comparing apples and oranges. 

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

Global Game wrote:

coochiee wrote:

AlfStamp wrote:

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

Sorry I take issue with this. It seems to be a common theme in here these days and I know this is a Phoenix forum but there is a point where fandom gets daft. 

Our improvement in terms of our players technical ability is due to a number of different factors and a wide range of coaches from one end of the country to the other. Coach education has improved rapidly over the last 15 years from what it used to be and there has been a collective lifting in standards.

Also and Im sure some who have never coached will disagree but the most important ages with respect to technical ability are 5 to 14 and thats where the majority of the groundwork is done. 

Our improvements are not because of one or two "finishing" academies.

Ummmm. But based on the way the U20s men played, verus FFs this morning, would seem that the mens/boys programme is starting to produce more technical players, than the girls/womens setups. Of course far too early to say for sure.

One glaring difference between boys & girls programmes currently now is the academies. No girls at the Nix, and only a very small number I understand at Ole. 

EXCEPT that the U20 men’s were, er, under 20 years old  

Whereas the Football Ferns had how many players under 20 on the pitch? One?

You’re comparing apples and oranges. 

Yeah did qualify my comments by saying too early to say for sure.

But if the increased skill/technical level of the men's U20s side was solely due to NZF's programmes, plus all the various junior coaches countrywide - and had little or nothing to do with Weenix & Ole - why ain't a similar crop of young talented female technical footballers starting to shine. 

If they were around Sermanni would be playing a few of them for sure.

Expect a bit of a generational change when Schmid names his next AWs squad, on the back of the U20s. He's alluded to it already.

NZF's Whole of Football Plan was released in 2011, 8 years ago now.  A great initiative, but you can't dismiss the academies as not having also played a major role with performance of the U20s.

Marquee
1.1K
·
7.6K
·
over 12 years

Forget any end result. Statistics generally show the stronger team. But in football not necessarily the wining team.. 

Marquee
1.2K
·
5.5K
·
over 13 years

coochiee wrote:

Global Game wrote:

coochiee wrote:

AlfStamp wrote:

Sancho wrote:

Just shows the technical ability of some of our players in key positions and how the quality of Womens game keeps growing further from the players we have. The mens teams used to be like this until the Phoenix and Ole started producing players that were comfortable in possesion. It might take a while until we see the results of female footballers getting the Ole or Phoenix type treatment that our male players recieved.

Canada were a class above, hopefully we can score some goals in the next game.

Sorry I take issue with this. It seems to be a common theme in here these days and I know this is a Phoenix forum but there is a point where fandom gets daft. 

Our improvement in terms of our players technical ability is due to a number of different factors and a wide range of coaches from one end of the country to the other. Coach education has improved rapidly over the last 15 years from what it used to be and there has been a collective lifting in standards.

Also and Im sure some who have never coached will disagree but the most important ages with respect to technical ability are 5 to 14 and thats where the majority of the groundwork is done. 

Our improvements are not because of one or two "finishing" academies.

Ummmm. But based on the way the U20s men played, verus FFs this morning, would seem that the mens/boys programme is starting to produce more technical players, than the girls/womens setups. Of course far too early to say for sure.

One glaring difference between boys & girls programmes currently now is the academies. No girls at the Nix, and only a very small number I understand at Ole. 

EXCEPT that the U20 men’s were, er, under 20 years old  

Whereas the Football Ferns had how many players under 20 on the pitch? One?

You’re comparing apples and oranges. 

Yeah did qualify my comments by saying too early to say for sure.

But if the increased skill/technical level of the men's U20s side was solely due to NZF's programmes, plus all the various junior coaches countrywide - and had little or nothing to do with Weenix & Ole - why ain't a similar crop of young talented female technical footballers starting to shine. 

If they were around Sermanni would be playing a few of them for sure.

Expect a bit of a generational change when Schmid names his next AWs squad, on the back of the U20s. He's alluded to it already.

NZF's Whole of Football Plan was released in 2011, 8 years ago now.  A great initiative, but you can't dismiss the academies as not having also played a major role with performance of the U20s.

One factor is more limited quantity of quality competition in the women’s game. This is why the Future Ferns Development Programme (an academy if you like) was established. Girls playing in boys leagues and a focus on getting them into pro environments offshore ASAP - with the assistance of NZF. But it’s only been up and running since 2015?

Phoenix Academy
310
·
160
·
almost 7 years

I have watched both the Ferns WC games. On the positive side Sermanni has set them up tactically well on defense. They are hard to break down defending in a block of two banks of four. But apart from that and a couple of good attacking plays against Holland it is difficult to find many more positives.

Their game against Canada was really really terrible. They were poor, there is no other way to describe it. Technically deficient, tactically deficient on attack. They gave nothing to this game except dogged defense. At one stage late in the game the stats were flashed up. Ferns had 23% possession and had a pass success rate of 53%. Which means that nearly half their passes missed their targets. 

The Ferns and the AWs are now on a level footing. An AW team playing like that would be savagely criticised, and rightly so. The Ferns have got to take the heat just like anyone else. A considerable amount of resources have gone into this campaign. The AWS have been put on hold to help pay for this campaign. If there is not considerable improvement in the next game then i would be questioning the value of NZF's expenditure. 

Continually hoofing the ball down field and failing to hit team mates with simple passes even when not under pressure is inexcusable. It appears that bring on a defender for an attacker in the second half was more about keeping the goal difference down in the hope of squeezing into the next round as a third placed team. However other results have not gone their way and they could even miss out through that route.

You really would hope better for a team ranked top 20 in the world. At the very least being able to hold on to the ball for more than 10 seconds.

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

I think I read somewhere that FIFA do help pay for some of the pre WC build up games. I guess to ensure that countries like NZ hamstrung by geography, lack of funds etc still go in well prepared.

But yipe irks me that FFs will play min 11-12 games this year and AWs likely just once. If it was the reverse it would be a published scandal.

FFs need a big performance against Cameroon.

WeeNix
760
·
750
·
over 9 years

coochiee wrote:

I think I read somewhere that FIFA do help pay for some of the pre WC build up games. I guess to ensure that countries like NZ hamstrung by geography, lack of funds etc still go in well prepared.

But yipe irks me that FFs will play min 11-12 games this year and AWs likely just once. If it was the reverse it would be a published scandal.

FFs need a big performance against Cameroon.

Not sure why people have to head down the path of insinuating reverse sexism but just in case you havent noticed the fact the AW's havent played at all in the last few years already is viewed as scandalous. Heavily published. 

WeeNix
760
·
750
·
over 9 years

austin11 wrote:

I have watched both the Ferns WC games. On the positive side Sermanni has set them up tactically well on defense. They are hard to break down defending in a block of two banks of four. But apart from that and a couple of good attacking plays against Holland it is difficult to find many more positives.

Their game against Canada was really really terrible. They were poor, there is no other way to describe it. Technically deficient, tactically deficient on attack. They gave nothing to this game except dogged defense. At one stage late in the game the stats were flashed up. Ferns had 23% possession and had a pass success rate of 53%. Which means that nearly half their passes missed their targets. 

The Ferns and the AWs are now on a level footing. An AW team playing like that would be savagely criticised, and rightly so. The Ferns have got to take the heat just like anyone else. A considerable amount of resources have gone into this campaign. The AWS have been put on hold to help pay for this campaign. If there is not considerable improvement in the next game then i would be questioning the value of NZF's expenditure. 

Continually hoofing the ball down field and failing to hit team mates with simple passes even when not under pressure is inexcusable. It appears that bring on a defender for an attacker in the second half was more about keeping the goal difference down in the hope of squeezing into the next round as a third placed team. However other results have not gone their way and they could even miss out through that route.

You really would hope better for a team ranked top 20 in the world. At the very least being able to hold on to the ball for more than 10 seconds.

AWs put on hold to pay for this? Thats news to me. Is there some official word on this or some assumption doing the rounds?

Ive been watching football in NZ since the 60's and the mens U20's recent performances were the first time in 6 decades where I saw a national team with most of the players being praised for their technical abilities, most of the team playing with a level of flair and an approach which looked like the sort of football the big teams play with. Its also the first time where the mood of the supporting public was to notice and cheer for that style. Usually we are banging on about heart, character and hard working players. For the first time in 6 decades I have hope we might just be collectively heading down the right path. Sermani did have them well organised so the next step is that the way the mens U20s play becomes the way we demand all our teams play. One can only hope.

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

AlfStamp wrote:

coochiee wrote:

I think I read somewhere that FIFA do help pay for some of the pre WC build up games. I guess to ensure that countries like NZ hamstrung by geography, lack of funds etc still go in well prepared.

But yipe irks me that FFs will play min 11-12 games this year and AWs likely just once. If it was the reverse it would be a published scandal.

FFs need a big performance against Cameroon.

Not sure why people have to head down the path of insinuating reverse sexism but just in case you havent noticed the fact the AW's havent played at all in the last few years already is viewed as scandalous. Heavily published. 

Is it really though? Seems to be viewed mostly as this is just our lot.

That we belong in sharkhouse OFC, and that trying to be ambitious like Australia is just a waste of time, and not worth the effort.

That we have limited resources/funds, and that the senior men's team needs to suffer as a result mid point in a 4 year cycle.

That Chris Wood not playing in NZ for 2-3 years is just the way it is.

All a bit too defeatist to me.

WeeNix
760
·
750
·
over 9 years

coochiee wrote:

AlfStamp wrote:

coochiee wrote:

I think I read somewhere that FIFA do help pay for some of the pre WC build up games. I guess to ensure that countries like NZ hamstrung by geography, lack of funds etc still go in well prepared.

But yipe irks me that FFs will play min 11-12 games this year and AWs likely just once. If it was the reverse it would be a published scandal.

FFs need a big performance against Cameroon.

Not sure why people have to head down the path of insinuating reverse sexism but just in case you havent noticed the fact the AW's havent played at all in the last few years already is viewed as scandalous. Heavily published. 

Is it really though? Seems to be viewed mostly as this is just our lot.

That we belong in sharkhouse OFC, and that trying to be ambitious like Australia is just a waste of time, and not worth the effort.

That we have limited resources/funds, and that the senior men's team needs to suffer as a result mid point in a 4 year cycle.

That Chris Wood not playing in NZ for 2-3 years is just the way it is.

All a bit too defeatist to me.

Its been in the media (TV, radio, print and online media) a number of times, its frequently talked about here and in other footballing circles.  Its absolutely viewed by most as a scandalous.

Marquee
970
·
6.5K
·
over 11 years

AlfStamp wrote:

Ray Hicks wrote:

[/quote]I didn’t catch the Holland game but I couldn’t help thinking while watching today’s game that we look to be in danger of being overtaken by the rest of the world women’s game. I noticed in a couple of other games I saw (not involving us) that the quality of some of the players and teams were exceptional. When there weren’t that many quality women’s teams, we held our own on the world stage but I get the feeling it’s slipping. I’m not a great follower of women’s football so am I mistaken?

No you're not...

I wonder if we are seeing the usual major nations starting to become dominant in womens football as well now.  We have had 10-15 years of doing really well relative to the state of the womens international team but many countries until relatively recently didnt take womens football seriously. I wonder if the grassroots level resources available in the usual main football nations is starting to kick in and womens football starts to grab some traction there. Are we looking at seeing our Womens team start to slide backwards slowly toward a similar standing as the AW's have? I think given the rapid growth of the womens game worldwide we are going to need some clever and innovative changes to our womens/girls grassroots games processes and setup. For a long time I have felt the womens side of the game here was showing the way, now Im wondering if what we saw with the mens U20 if the pendulum has swung.

Needs more Deirdre Edge

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

Good article in today’s Herald on Canada game, with some honest comments from Sermanni about being clearly 2nd best to the world No 5.

Starting XI
2.9K
·
2.5K
·
over 5 years

Yes I thought Sermanni was very honest in his post game presser. The ferns didn't front up at all physically and it was disheartening seeing them pushed off the ball so easily. I do wonder if there was still some hangover from the deflating way they lost against the dutch. But you can't have any excuses at major tournaments like this.

In most sports you are only as good as your last game. Fortunately for the Ferns, they have one more chance to get there first ever win at a WC. But it's not going to be easy. Cameroon did a good job of frustrating the Canadians in there game, doing what the ferns couldn't do by getting in there faces and putting them off there rhythm. Be interested to see how the ferns deal with this approach, as our midfield is pretty light weight.

In Stott, Erceg and Naylor we have a world class defensive trio. It's a real shame that we can't back that up at the other end at the moment. You can't win matches if you don't score goals. So the pressure will certainly be on the front players in this next game. 

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Great result for the Ferns this morning with Scotland and Argentina drawing. Now the question is are they good enough to beat Cameroon by 2.

Cock
2.7K
·
16K
·
over 14 years

el grapadura wrote:

Great result for the Ferns this morning with Scotland and Argentina drawing. Now the question is are they good enough to beat Cameroon by 2.

Looking to squeak in via the back door.

Oddly enough, this team seems like its better than previous (and also less bluster and noise) but the results haven't exactly fallen their way.

Starting XI
550
·
2.4K
·
over 14 years

They might as well put out a 2nd string side and treat this game against Cameroon as a warm up to the Olympic Qualifiers. Other then the first game they never had a chance.

Phoenix Academy
240
·
360
·
over 10 years

Royz wrote:

They might as well put out a 2nd string side and treat this game against Cameroon as a warm up to the Olympic Qualifiers. Other then the first game they never had a chance.

They've already qualified for the Olympics

Starting XI
2.5K
·
2.4K
·
over 8 years

Royz wrote:

They might as well put out a 2nd string side and treat this game against Cameroon as a warm up to the Olympic Qualifiers. Other then the first game they never had a chance.

If we win by 2 we go through. We're a better side than Cameroon. What is this comment?
Starting XI
2.9K
·
2.5K
·
over 5 years

Both teams have the opportunity to go through if they win. So we should see a good open game. 

Starting XI
1.5K
·
4.9K
·
over 15 years

Several different permuations which would see the Ferns go through (good research by Andrew Voerman):

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/nz-teams/113579666/fifa-womens-world-cup-2019-argentina-comeback-boosts-football-ferns-chances

THE CONTENDERS [Six teams in the running for two spots]

Nigeria: 3 points, -2 goal difference, 2 goals scored, -8 fair play points
Argentina: 2 points, -1 goal difference, 3 goals scored, -3 fair play points
Cameroon: 0 points, -3 goal difference, 1 goal scored, -5 fair play points
Football Ferns: 0 points, -3 goal difference, 0 goals scored, 0 fair play points
Chile: 0 points, -5 goal difference, 0 goals scored, -5 fair play points
Thailand: 0 points, -17 goal difference, 1 goal scored, -3 fair play points

The Football Ferns will finish as one of the four best third-placed teams and advance to the round of 16 if they

– beat Cameroon by two goals.

– beat Cameroon by one goal while scoring at least three.

– beat Cameroon 2-1 without picking up -9 fair play points*.

– beat Cameroon 1-0 and Chile don't beat Thailand by three or more goals.

Trialist
9
·
22
·
about 7 years

I watched both games, and that one against Holland was one of the best games, I have ever seen against an opponent on that level.
It was really bad luck, losing that game in additional time with a very 'stupid goal' after such a nice performance, and Olivia Chance even hitting the crossbar. 

Of course, a team like the Ferns need a little bit of luck against a european champion, but all in all, that games was really even, until the end, when the Ferns has been left their energy. 

Well Canada than was a composition of a stronger Canada like in their first game and a very poor performance of the Ferns.

Today there is nothing more to say, they have a clear mission: Going out and beating Cameroon by 2, or 3:2, 4:3, ... 

I am pretty sure they have to leave Nigeria and Argentina behind them in the group of thirds, because after the US B-team has lived Chile and has won only by 3-0, Chile can polish their goal statistics against Thailand ... 

Phoenix Academy
280
·
350
·
over 8 years

Big Pete 65 wrote:

Several different permuations which would see the Ferns go through (good research by Andrew Voerman):

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/nz-teams/113579666/fifa-womens-world-cup-2019-argentina-comeback-boosts-football-ferns-chances

THE CONTENDERS [Six teams in the running for two spots]

Nigeria: 3 points, -2 goal difference, 2 goals scored, -8 fair play points
Argentina: 2 points, -1 goal difference, 3 goals scored, -3 fair play points
Cameroon: 0 points, -3 goal difference, 1 goal scored, -5 fair play points
Football Ferns: 0 points, -3 goal difference, 0 goals scored, 0 fair play points
Chile: 0 points, -5 goal difference, 0 goals scored, -5 fair play points
Thailand: 0 points, -17 goal difference, 1 goal scored, -3 fair play points

The Football Ferns will finish as one of the four best third-placed teams and advance to the round of 16 if they

– beat Cameroon by two goals.

– beat Cameroon by one goal while scoring at least three.

– beat Cameroon 2-1 without picking up -9 fair play points*.

– beat Cameroon 1-0 and Chile don't beat Thailand by three or more goals.

on that last point, Anne-Marie Keighley is currently listed as the ref for the Chile-Thailand game.  Hopefully it doesn't come down to NZ win 1-0, Chile 2-0 up in the 89th minute, 50/50 penalty decision ... FIFA normally avoids those sorts of headlines.  

WeeNix
880
·
960
·
about 7 years

reubee wrote:

Big Pete 65 wrote:

Several different permuations which would see the Ferns go through (good research by Andrew Voerman):

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/nz-teams/113579666/fifa-womens-world-cup-2019-argentina-comeback-boosts-football-ferns-chances

THE CONTENDERS [Six teams in the running for two spots]

Nigeria: 3 points, -2 goal difference, 2 goals scored, -8 fair play points
Argentina: 2 points, -1 goal difference, 3 goals scored, -3 fair play points
Cameroon: 0 points, -3 goal difference, 1 goal scored, -5 fair play points
Football Ferns: 0 points, -3 goal difference, 0 goals scored, 0 fair play points
Chile: 0 points, -5 goal difference, 0 goals scored, -5 fair play points
Thailand: 0 points, -17 goal difference, 1 goal scored, -3 fair play points

The Football Ferns will finish as one of the four best third-placed teams and advance to the round of 16 if they

– beat Cameroon by two goals.

– beat Cameroon by one goal while scoring at least three.

– beat Cameroon 2-1 without picking up -9 fair play points*.

– beat Cameroon 1-0 and Chile don't beat Thailand by three or more goals.

on that last point, Anne-Marie Keighley is currently listed as the ref for the Chile-Thailand game.  Hopefully it doesn't come down to NZ win 1-0, Chile 2-0 up in the 89th minute, 50/50 penalty decision ... FIFA normally avoids those sorts of headlines.  

Anne-Marie Keighley won't be influenced by anything other that what she sees as the correct decision. 

Phoenix Academy
310
·
160
·
almost 7 years

NZ 1 Cameroon 2. Kiwis go home!

Weird sort of a game.NZ started the game with a defensive five across the back, three in midfield and Gregorious and White up front. Hardly the sort of setup you would expect when you need to win a game by two goals.

To be honest NZ struggled to produce anything much for the first 75 minutes. The shots on goal at that stage was Cameroon 18 NZ 4. Then Cameron scored. After that NZ played with more urgency(finally) They actually got more people forward. NZ scored...actually it was an OG. A routine ball was lobbed towards the goal and the Cameron centre back spectacularly shanked the ball into her own net off her shin. After that it was end to end as each side went for the win. Why NZ waited for over an hour to up the attacking tempo is beyond me. The Cameron forwards were superior on the ball and could have scored many times but last ditch defending saved NZ. Finally well in to injury time one of their forwards dribbled the defense and score...end result NZ goes home. 

The Ferns have a long long way to go at this level. Their skill level is way lower than nearly every other team. Still a work in progress and maybe time for a few younger players to get a look in. I would give them 3 out of 10 for the WC. 3 games, 3 losses and no goals scored(apart from the OG)

You’ll need an account to join the conversation!

Sign in Sign up