September 23, 2007
Matilda’s World Cup
QUARTER FINAL
Australia 2 v Brazil 3
De Vanna 36′ Formiga 4′
Colthorpe 68′ Marta 23′ (pen)
Cristiane 75′
Brave, brave ladies!!! I take my hat off to the entire team for a wonderful display of women’s football and I thank you for showing the detractors that women’s football can be fast, skilful and entertaining. In many cases far more entertaining that some men’s football.
Now, will we see a women’s A-League?
Game Three
Australia 2 v Canada 2
McCann Tancredi
Salisbury Sinclair
The Matildas scraped through to the quarter final round for the very first time when captain Cheryl Salisbury equalised in injury time. Canada started the match scoring the second fastest goal in women’s World Cup history recorded at 32secs. The Matildas finished second in their group after Norway thrashed Ghana 7-2. The reward for our brave Aussie girls is to meet the winner of group D who at this stage looks likely to be Brazil.
Game Two
Australia 1 v Norway 1
De Vanna Gulbrandsen
Super sub Lisa De Vanna did it again after coming on at half time and giving the Matildas the equaliser against a very physical and skilful 4th ranked team Norway. Australia need only a draw with Canada in the final match to progress to the next round.
Game One
Ghana 1 v Australia 4
?? Walsh
De Vanna 2
Garriock
A good start for the Matildas and also an historical one as this was their first ever World Cup victory despite having appeared in the past two world cups. The score actually flattered Ghana as Australia had at least another 3-4 very clear and good opportunities.
Walsh & second half replacement, De Vanna was fast and stylish.
Saturday’s match will be a good test as their opponents are the world’s fourth team, Norway.
SBS will be broadcasting all of the Matilda’s group matches as well as the semi-finals & final.
The remaining schedule is:
Wednesday 26 September
1st Semi-Final
LIVE @ 9.50pm
Thursday 27 September
2nd Semi-Final
LIVE @ 9.50pm
Sunday 30 September
FINAL
LIVE @ 9.30pm
I’m amazed that there have been zero responses on this thread. Do you all have Fox (or whatever) and don’t watch SBS?
.
The Aussies have been great. Last night’s game against Norway was brilliant - a much better game than most EPL stuff. Terrible holes in the middle of the park but the skills these ladies have would put many men to shame. And some of the strikes - anyone see the Brazilian goals?
.
The Matildas to beat Canada and make the semis.
Comment by tasblue — September 16, 2007 @ 8:03 pm
Well the good news is that we got a draw against Canada are through to the quarters. The midfield, again in my opinion, were awful! Lost just about every 50/50 challenge and the distribution was awful on occasions.
.
How good is Sarah Walsh though? Brilliant! If you haven’t watched the Aussies then shame on you.
.
The bad news - we now play Brazil.
.
Live on SBS - not to be missed.
Comment by tasblue — September 20, 2007 @ 9:07 pm
What a game, we played exceptionally well for the majority of the match, until we equalised at 1 - 1, then went big kicks, gee i wish they had kept knocking the ball around and used the “free” right side a bit more, the midfield were good up until then. Congratulations to the girls, a great comeback, made all of us old farts at Shark Park jump and carry on. What an equaliser in extra time, reminds me of Man U v B Munich in 99 (never over until that fat lady sings). Great effort by the girls. Lets hope that they can go all the way (no Italy dive team there i hope)?
Comment by Kevin Considine — September 20, 2007 @ 10:59 pm
Haven’t SBS got the quarters as well, the “old farts” at Shark land will have to find it on Austar. Bugger, we had a great night tonight (even though we flicked it over to the cricket a couple of times), some have no taste?
Comment by Kevin Considine — September 20, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
Shocking decision to give penalty to Brasil. Offence outside the 18…player dives into the penalty area and decision given against Matildas. Even the Brasilian played looked very surprised. Free kick most definitely but NOT a penalty
Comment by Blackjack — September 23, 2007 @ 11:02 pm
Bugger, thought we should have had a penalty late, and missed that close range shot late. Great effort, big hearts and plenty of spirit, but probably outplayed most of match, but it was BRAZIL.
Comment by Kevin Considine — September 23, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
BJ
Contact started outside area, but the last contact was inside area = penalty.
Not sure about womens A league, but I understand there will be some form of a womens national championship in South Australia before years end.
Comment by sj — September 24, 2007 @ 12:39 am
and what guide to referees are you relying on there?
Comment by sj — September 24, 2007 @ 1:24 am
sj, I urge you to read this SMH article: Women’s A-League
IMO, a women’s national championships will do little to advance the womens’ game.
Comment by Blackjack — September 24, 2007 @ 2:15 am
bj - nothing new in that article.
in the absence of an A league for women, a national championship will at least give our better female players something to aim for, and to see where they are comparatively. There has been nothing for them for some time now. What states compete, and what players participate will be interesting to see, but still worthwhile from a tasmanian perspective. (in my view).
Comment by sj — September 24, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
Ideally a womens a-league would be good but I don’t think it would be financially viable. It would take a lot of subsidies and as a stand alone league it would no attract enough sponsorship. At the risk of sounding sexist, this is understandable as most people prefer to watch men’s sport rather than women’s. Justifiably so, the womens world cup has been entertaining but a lot of teams are lacking basic skills.
It’s a dilemma. With the lack of support comes the lack of financial support. Which means that development of the game is lacking and the game quality remains poor. Just a massive cycle…
Comment by 1878 — September 25, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
Women’s A league running as warm up to Mens A league, under the same club umbrella, wearing same strip etc, surely it could not harm the financial viability, in fact actually enhance it?
Comment by charlie white — September 26, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
Good thinking Charlie.
Comment by Tommy — September 26, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
charlie
you think gates would increase much? how much would the women be paid? any value to sponsors? would fox telecast? I think financial viability is exactly the issue that FFA will want to be sure about, and I doubt that it would stack up. (not saying i dont like the idea - but financially it would be very hard to make the case)
Comment by sj — September 28, 2007 @ 8:16 pm