KASHIMA, Japan – One by one, players from the powerful US women’s national team descended from the soccer field into an empty stadium about 90 minutes east of Tokyo. They were headed both towards the locker room and towards an uncertain future in these Olympics.
To be honest, they didn’t look that powerful, not on Tuesday night and not in these Games, not yet. Instead, three pool games – a brutal defeat to Sweden, a rebound win against New Zealand and, this time, a pointless draw against Australia – qualified the US women for the knockout stage, but raised more questions than they answered.
The players who stopped by for interviews didn’t seem so worried. They cited the rapid turnaround between matches and the difficulty in dealing with three contrasting styles. They said that in the first week they have acquired a defensive discipline which should help them move forward. They used the same words, player after player, defining the draw “disciplined” and “professional” as if you read from the cue cards. And when Julie Ertz, the indispensable midfielder, was asked if that was where the team wanted to be right now, he replied: “Where you want to be is out of the first round, so yes.”
Afterward, two divergent reactions surfaced: how the world of football has seen the US team’s performance so far and how the team itself has reacted to its inception. In a way, it seemed like a function of the long and lasting success of the USWNT. The United States entered this tournament as the No. 1 of FIFA, the clear favorite, with generally wide margins. Before the defeat against Sweden, he hadn’t lost in 44 games, not since the away defeat against France in January 2019. He had triumphed in the last World Cup.
The teams they would like not competing in Tokyo seemed to strengthen the chances of the Americans. No France, third in the world. No Germany, second classified. No Spain, a growing global threat. The expectations for a team that had only lost four times since the 2016 Olympics – and only once in the past four years – were clear: gold medal or failure. The coach, Vlatko Andonovski, chose to fill the roster with veterans, familiar names.
Sweden has changed the narrative; the 3-0 obtained was described by Andonovski as “a bit of a shock”. Megan Rapinoe was more succinct on her journey through the mixed zone. “They kicked our asses, didn’t they?” he asked, his rhetorical question.
The United States followed that with a 6-1 of their own, against New Zealand, with the presence of First Lady Jill Biden. But line-up changes, stats, and an old-fashioned eye exam showed something else: if not desperation, at least cause for concern.
Their third match, against Australia on Tuesday, will take place in a strange scenario. A tropical storm has hit Japan, which means lower temperatures, rain and gusts of wind. A rare crowd for this Olympics – 1,000 children grouped together – cheered both teams. The signs around the stadium heralded it as “The Dream Box,” but this game was set up from the start to be conservative. If the United States simply secured a tie, they would advance. The same could be said for Australia. Due to the format of the competition, the United States was likely to move forward anyway, even with a loss. As it stands, the four points scored by the United States are the lowest he has ever achieved in an Olympic group stage, and second place marks the only time he has failed to win his own group since the first Olympic tournament. women’s football in 1996 (The United States went on to win gold in Georgia.)
Before the action began, Andonovski decided to leave center-back Abby Dahlkemper off the roster of the day, due to the rapid turnaround and his abnormal problems in the first two games. The United States needed to defend Sam Kerr, one of the best strikers in the world, without the security that Dahlkemper normally provided.
The United States nonetheless played an effective defensive style, dropping to a 4-4-2, as pointed out by former USWNT assistant Tony Gustavsson, who is now Australia’s manager. This already indicated a more cautious and less aggressive approach than usual.
After Australia hit the crossbar with a header, the United States had a chance to take the lead. In the 31st minute, striker Alex Morgan caught a nice cross from Kelley O’Hara and hit head on goal, only to be whistled for offside on a tight call. (He later said he believed he was also with the defender.) This offside luck has also happened four more times against New Zealand, meaning the USWNT have scored six goals in these Olympics and five goals canceled by the flag. offside.
But beyond that, the strike power that has become the US trademark was largely absent. In short, a few shots on goal. The United States wasted scoring chances with bad passes and were beaten by Australia, 61% -39%, unable to link together anything resembling meaningful possession.
The draw still pushed the Americans where they wanted, and there is still an opportunity to reach the ultimate goal and win Olympic gold. But an exchange seemed relevant later. It came from Morgan, who, spontaneously, called the style the US played on Tuesday “a tactical decision” from his manager. “It has become a professional game and keep going,” he said.
His words indicated that he agreed, like his teammates, to advance by doing what they needed and nothing more. But his body language and the pivot he invoked suggested something else. This is not the time to panic, not yet. But it’s time to consider that maybe, just maybe, the behemoth that is the USWNT isn’t quite the team it once was and has been, even recently.
More Olympic coverage:
.