Forbes Superville #8 King #5 Belgrave #4 Russell #2 (C) Cordner #19 Rice #16 Forbes #14 Mollon #12 Shade #3 Francois #11
This is how we started the match v. Argentina.
Back line: King was solid. Superville, Belgrave and Russell were not. Frankly doh see why Russell has the armband. Her play is incompatible with that responsibility.
Superville had fitness issues, but also failed to release and provide for Cordner and Rice effectively. Belgrave had unforgivable mental and decisional errors, and seems technically not ideal for this role. Russell had a positional error that was so glaring it almost resulted in a goal ... as her defence was quite rightly "stepping up", she was completely unmindful of the step, and actually took steps back ... yet once the shot went off, and was resolved, she proceeded to complain to her teammates, when she was the one at fault. However, Russell was more successful in connecting with the outside mid than was Superville. That said, she was also delinquent in providing sufficient cover for the marauding Laroquette; not to mention being squared up flat-footed without initiating a tackle (led to a goal). Success can't be had by having a flank defender as a spectator, especially that close to goal. Who played in that position during the WC campaign?
Anyhow, I think Russell can improve as the tournament progresses, but today versus the Colombians is probably NOT the time to venture that experiment.
King needs to communicate and assume the role as senior partner with Belgrave, if Belgrave continues in that role versus Colombia. She shouldn't.
If only one change in the defence has to be prioritized, Belgrave should be benched.
Midfield: Mollon was more expressive in the second half ... almost explosive. Quality. Pity we can't use her closer to goal. (This is also tied to the fact that the defender behind her can't get forward. Whatever happened to the modern-day full back?)
Cordner. Has quality, but we need to play balls into her with a greater respect for accuracy. Balls that meet her in her stride, not balls that stretch her lungs or balls played behind her. THEN we also need to take up roles in support of her movement. Cordner also ignited as the second half got going. Why wait? Get the woman the ball and ignited earlier in the game. She can unlock defences once she is in that zone.
Rice ... I detected a fitness issue that was probably made no better by the weather. However, she's a player that can grow into games, by managing her runs etc. I like the prospects and interchanging she offers with Shade. Possesses good game intelligence. However, was disappointed to see her quibbling with the ref (although she wasn't the principal offender). Looking for her to concentrate and bring others into the game.
On the day, Forbes was not one of the bright spots. Should be more imposing in shutting down the opponent and in reading and influencing the movement of Francois. Having Mollon to her right is to her benefit, not liability. Found that Mollon was often isolated and lacking sufficient options from Forbes on the inside. (Although the coach wanted to exploit the wings, center mids have also to understand that doesn't mean each and every play per se. Where was the variation? Where was Forbes combining with runs coming off the other flank?)
Under Waldrum, and on display in this match, was the issue of how do we get numbers forward, quickly, effectively to receive service in the box or generally dangerous areas. There's something wrong when bth of my outside mids are in such advanced positions that the players coming through the center don't seem like they will be available for service. How can we draw the opponent's back line out?
Tired of seeing Mollon tearing down one wing, Cordner tearing down the other, and the forwards not making leading runs (which would be different from just running forward!) Players in those central channels leh we do ah ting nah.
Forwards: Shade offered enough to merit continuity. Has the quality to change things on a dime. We need that. Also has determination in tight situations. Sufficiently good on the day, not spectacular.
Francois? For me the jury is still out on her, and that's probably not the most compelling case or assessment to make of an attacker leading the line. Thought she disappeared at moments and didn't ask questions of the ARG defence. If something isn't working, challenge the opponent differently.
In general, I think the combo of Rice, Shade, Francois and Forbes failed to ask these questions collectively ... but, to be fair, we did see moments of individuality making some difference.
Subs: None of them need any introduction. Hopefully we see more of them as senior contributors from here on in. Will reserve further comment for now. Ah done cause enough trouble as it is.