In Canada's second game on North American soil under Carolina Morace, back in 2009, the team was outmatched against the Americans, barely registered a dangerous chance on goal and lost 4-0.
On Thursday night, in Canada's second game on North American soil under John Herdman, the team was outmatched against the Americans, barely registered a dangerous chance on goal and lost 3-0.
So that's progress, I suppose.
[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
Had it not been for a number of outstanding saves by Karina LeBlanc in the first half and Stephanie Labbe in the second, the score line could easily have been higher. As it was, Canada -- without veterans Christine Sinclair and Candace Chapman -- came away from the two-game "celebration series" against their cross-border rivals with a 1-1 draw and a 3-0 loss, in front of a pair of raucous, pro-Yank crowds in Kansas City and Portland.
That the pair of friendlies was labelled a "celebration series" for the hometown girls -- a few months removed from their runner-up finish at the Women's World Cup -- tells you all you need to know about what was expected here. The U.S. ran out a near full-strength lineup in both games, including talismanic striker Abby Wambach (three goals in the two games) and budding superstar Alex Morgan (who potted an injury-time stats-padder in the second game), while Canada's lineup was more experimental.
Herdman admitted to Nigel Reed prior to the series that the team was essentially picked for him by his support staff, considering he hadn't had met some of the girls, or even seen them play. Still, being the self-flagellating masochists that Canadian fans are, there's likely to be some amount of hand-wringing about two more losses for the women's national team, coupled with another tumble in the FIFA rankings (down to #9, from #8).
Clearly, then, it's time to fire Herdman. What, too soon? OK, then how about this?
I think the general feeling is that they want to bring back the physicality ... From what I've been led to believe and from what I've seen when I've studied the team is, that we have a really powerful team here that could probably impose itself some more
That was Herdman, prior to the series against the U.S. Ewww, physical play! That sounds like route one, ugly boot and chase! Pellerud redux!
Yes, former head coach Even Pellerud's name has become almost a punch line in Canadian soccer circles, hearkening back to some ostensibly bygone era where hoofing the ball up the pitch in the hopes that Sinclair could get on the end of it was the only approach. However, whatever the merits or flaws of his tactics may be, Pellerud did lead Big Red to a fourth-place finish at the 2003 World Cup, and a fifth-place finish at the 2008 Olympics.
Then, when he departed, we all -- supporters, media and players -- got wrapped up in the Morace cult of personality, touting as she was a beautiful, possession-oriented style that would supposedly take the Canadian team to the next level. For a while, in low-level competition, it seemed to be coming together. The team was fit, the passes were crisp and the goal production was coming in a variety of ways.
Then, on the big stage, the team froze. Zero goals from open play in three World Cup games, and zero points, proved that while you could take the girls out of the physical, direct game, you couldn't take the physical, direct game out of the girls.
And this is where Herdman comes in, left to pick up the pieces of Morace's reign quick enough to have the team ready for Olympic qualifiers on home soil in January of next year. Considering the circumstances, then, a 4-1 aggregate loss to the #1 team in the world, in front of their boisterous supporters and without a pair of key long-time contributors, is really nothing to sneeze at.
No one, Herdman included, believes the team should embrace an outright return to a direct style that relies on physicality. So the "Pellerud redux!" claims don't -- or shouldn't -- have any legs. Indeed, the universal plaudits heaped upon France at the World Cup show that a flowing style (the sort that Morace had, perhaps, envisioned that Canada was capable of) is the present and future of the women's game.
But Herdman is still largely working with a collection of players who just experienced the two-year roller-coaster under Morace -- and a few who remember the successes under Pellerud.
So his comments to Noel Butler this week, about what to expect going forward, hit just the right note:
They want to be seen as a powerful strong physical team on the world stage but most importantly that they can play ... It's just getting the balance between both styles really; physical and possession. Being able to pressure early, and use their physical prowess and at the same time, when we've got the ball, being able to settle on it and control the tempo.
As we found out at the World Cup, Canada isn't -- or at least, isn't yet -- the team that Morace hoped we could be. And the passage of time has shown we can no longer be what Pellerud wanted us to be. So what does Herdman think we ought to be?
"There's no point in me sitting here as a coach and describing my vision and philosophy," Herdman told Butler. "Because at the end of the day, it's (the players) as a group that are going to play the games."
Considering everything this team has learned, experienced and absorbed over the course of the past several years, perhaps it's time to find out -- conclusively -- just what kind of team Canada is, and can be.
The next chapter gets written against Costa Rica in Canada's opener at the Pan Am Games on Oct. 18.
.