The U.S. can score by stringing passes together all over the field or going over the top to its three forwards. The constant high pressure usually breaks opponents down early and often. But the worry is that the pressure occasionally leaves the U.S. vulnerable to counterattacks.
Despite challenges from Europe’s best, the United States is poised to repeat its 1991 World Championship.
If you ask Finland, the U.S. women don’t have a chance.
Hey, if they can’t beat Denmark, only considered the third best team in World Cup Group C, what chance do they have against China, another group opponent, Norway, Sweden or Germany?
Well, fortunately for U.S. head coach Tony DiCicco, he doesn’t have to listen to Finland, whose player Sari Seppanen was quoted in the USA Today as saying that the United States has no chance of beating its Scandinavian neighbor. That, of course, was after the U.S. had just spanked the Finns in two friendlies.
If DiCicco wanted another opinion of Denmark’s championship aspirations, perhaps Norway coach Even Pellerud’s may be worth noting.
“They have improved a lot,” he said, “but I don’t think they can win.”
The U.S. will have its share of obstacles as it tries to defend its world title, won by beating Norway 2-1 at the 1991 World Championship in China. Still considered one of the five favorites to win the 1995 Cup, the U.S. has shown that it has trouble with Denmark and especially Norway, which has beaten the U.S. in five out of the six meetings since the China final (though the last game — a loss on penalties after tying 3-3 last March — is officially considered a tie).
The problems that Norway, Denmark and even teams like Brazil have given the U.S. are all things DiCicco and Anson Dorrance before him have been trying to correct. Quick counterattacks and long balls have often caught the U.S. flat-footed. Norway, in particular, has caused problems for the U.S. defense, pressuring the U.S. backs.
Since ’91, the U.S. has taken to using a more direct approach itself. While balls to the feet of its many attacking players are still the first option, every now and again the U.S. will loft a ball in the direction of the 5-10 Michelle Akers or the 5-8 Carin Gabarra.
“We’re a better direct team now,” DiCicco said. “Actually, you’re better playing that style now against other teams in the world … It’s not our first option, but it can be very effective.”
The team that will represent the U.S. in Sweden may be stronger than the one in China, but the draw did the U.S. no favors. The U.S. is in perhaps the most difficult group with Denmark and Asian champion China. The only “break” may come June 10, when the U.S. faces Group C foe Australia.
How the tournament works is this: There are three groups of four teams each. After round-robin play within each group, eight out of the 12 teams will advance to the quarterfinals, with the top two teams in each group and the two best third-place teams earning spots.
The U.S. and China should both qualify as the top teams in Group C, while Denmark may advance as a third-place team.
If the U.S. advances, it has a good chance of meeting the top Group A teams —
European champion Germany and host Sweden — in succession in the quarterfinals and then in the semifinals.
The U.S., Norway, Sweden, Germany and China are the major championship contenders, and Denmark’s a sleeper. Nine of the 12 teams from China ’91 return. The lone debutantes are England, Canada and Australia. Several teams have improved in the last few years, but the gap between the championship contenders and the field remains large.
U.S. combines experience and youth
The U.S. should be as prepared for the tournament as anyone. U.S. Soccer increased its support of the women’s program. The team trains at a residential training camp in Sanford, Fla., and most of the players are under contract to U.S. Soccer. The scheme is modeled after the successful pre-World Cup for the men’s team in Mission Viejo, Calif.
One of the advantages the U.S. had in ’91 was fitness. With the eventual final four teams having to play six games in 13 days this time, fitness will again be at a premium. Of all the teams in the tournament, only China has had the extensive training regiment that DiCicco’s women have undergone in Florida.
Until recently, the bulk of the competition took place abroad. In the last two years, the U.S. has traveled to Cyprus, Portugal (twice), Trinidad & Tobago and France. This spring, a series of domestic games were added as part of the effort to increase the women’s team’s visibility at home.
Along the road to Sweden, DiCicco pared down a long list of players to his final 20. There were a couple of surprises in Mary Harvey, giving the U.S. three goalkeepers, and Debbie Keller, who has played in only two full international matches.
Many of the names are the same, though. Including Harvey, there are nine veterans of the winning ’91 team on 1995 roster. The frontline consists of three veterans: Akers, the leading scorer in China with 10 goals; Gabarra, the tournament MVP; and Mia Hamm, who was started in midfield last time and has since moved up front, replacing former team captain and current assistant coach April Heinrichs.
With its new “three-edged sword,” the U.S. should be a handful for most teams. In China, the U.S. outscored its opponents 25-5, causing some teams to rethink their defensive strategy. Most teams now play a 4-4-2.
Teams still may need to use an extra defender to help on Akers, considered by many to be the top women’s player in the world. The focus of most U.S. attacks at center forward, Akers is still an unstoppable goalscorer when healthy —
which has been a question since ’91. She has learned to deal with Epstein-Barr Syndrome, an exhausting condition that in the past has limited her playing time. She has played the bulk of several recent matches.
Gabarra looks to be in the same — if not better — form as in 1991, when she won the Golden Ball. Despite Akers’ obvious value, Gabarra may be the team’s most important player, as she often drops back and serves as a link between the midfield and the other forwards.
The addition of Hamm to the lineup as a forward in ’93 has given the U.S. another weapon to exploit. Heinrichs was an inspirational leader in ’91, while Hamm was used at outside midfielder. But Hamm, always a prodigious goalscorer and now a better defender, brings a dynamic and even faster element to the frontline.
“Mia Hamm has flashes of absolute brilliance,” said Dorrance. “Mia has the potential to tear a team apart. If Mia Hamm is on, forget it. No one can stop her.”
The midfield has the most changes, with Tisha Venturini and Tiffany Roberts replacing Shannon Higgins and Hamm. Venturini was the top college player of 1994, leading North Carolina to another NCAA championship last November. A tough and talented playmaker, she combines with Julie Foudy in the of the field.
Roberts is just as fast, if not faster, than Hamm. She is just 18 but has proven herself in 26 pre-World Cup matches.
While Roberts patrols the right side, Kristine Lilly returns on the left. Lilly is perhaps the top all-around player on the team. She shuts down most attacks on her side.
With only three in the back, the U.S. can be susceptible to a team playing with three forwards or attacking in numbers through midfield, so Foudy may have to play a little deeper to help out the defense. That can be trouble at times, as both Foudy and Venturini are apt to attack, leaving the middle vulnerable.
The three defenders are the ’91 trio of Linda Hamilton, Joy Fawcett and Carla Overbeck. Fawcett may be the top marking back in the world and is in as good a shape as ever. She displayed her fitness last July 31 when she played in the first match of the Chiquita Cup less than three months after giving birth to daughter Katelyn Rose.
Not much gets past Hamilton, a physical presence in the air and on the ground with her crunching tackles. If anything does, Overbeck is there to offer cover at sweeper. Overbeck may be the most valuable member of the team because she is the only sweeper on the roster, which includes only four pure defenders. The fourth is Thori Staples. The part-time starter has suffered from a nagging ankle injury but has played in recent games.
The quick, athletic Scurry is likewise reliable in the nets. She beat out the more experienced Harvey and Saskia Webber for the regular starting goalkeeper job in early 1994.
From Dorrance to DiCicco
One factor that could have been a major distraction to the U.S. women was the retirement of eight-year coach Dorrance, who stepped down last summer. Dorrance coached the team to its ’91 title and retired last year to spend more time with his family and with his North Carolina program.
But not much has changed with DiCicco at the helm. He was with the team in ’91 as Dorrance’s assistant/goalkeeper coach, and runs many of the same drills and practices that Dorrance did. He has even solicited Dorrance’s help to scout teams. Since DiCicco officially took over after the CONCACAF qualifying tournament last August, the U.S. has only officially lost once — 2-0 to Denmark in the 1995 Algarve Cup — and has a record of 12-1-1.
With a roster stocked with talent, DiCicco can’t go wrong. If Akers stays healthy and the young players hold up under the pressure of their first World Cup, the United States looks more than ready to go far in Sweden.
by Soccer America Associate Editor Dean Caparaz