Thorns FC: Doing business without the thrills

I don’t want to go on much about the Decision Day win in Houston.

Mostly because I don’t think it really says anything about the Thorns we don’t already know.

Sophia Wilson is, as my compa Richard Hamje has tried to get us to sing, a wizard and wears a magic hat?

Check.

The Houston Dash is a trashfire this season?

Check.

Despite that, through individual goofs or collective inattention Portland’s defense gave the trash pickers some decent looks at goal, which has been a problem this season?

Check.

And, speaking of business and thrills, did this match give us anything to reflect on regarding the last time we used this meme to talk about a Thorns match and, specifically, Denver’s head coach Nick Cushing’s description of the Vilahamn Thorns; “They don’t really move. They sit, wait for the turnover, and give it to a world class #9”? That might be the only real question worth really discussing, given that the only larger issue that the Houston match addressed was the who the Thorns would face in their away quarterfinal.

Let’s go back up and take the statements in order.

How’d the Thorns attack look?

Since we’ve been battering on about this for a while, it’s worth noting that the Thorns did, indeed, put together some genuine build-up progressions in Houston. Here’s what I jotted down;

15′ – Jayden Perry started the move with a tidy pass to Caiya Hanks, who fed Wilson on the attack. Wilson didn’t find anything, so tried to drop a pass back to Hanks. Hanks did a Hanks (nice pace, heavy first touch) but luckily the Houston clearance went out to Jessie Fleming. Fleming squared across the top of the 18 to Morgan Weaver…but Weaver shot tamely right at Jane Campbell.

24′ – Another nice passing sequence (Wilson on the turn to Reilyn Turner, who was tackled, but the loose ball ran to Nina Nijstad. Nijstad and Carolyn Calzada played a 1-2 before Nijstad tried to hit Marie Muller, who was) flagged for offside.

26′ – More progressive passing (Reyna Reyes to Wilson to Hanks to Wilson). Wilson’s shot was blocked out for a corner, which was passed around but ended in a Wilson shot way high.

34′ – Hanks run to the byline and cross in, Turner with a cute backheel flick to Wilson for the matchwinner, 0-1.

38′ – Fleming pressed a turnover, fed Hanks, whose shot was turned wide by Campbell.

40′ – Turner to Hanks, weak shot right at Campbell.

45+4′ – Hanks strong left channel attack finished with a tidy lead pass to Wilson as Turner put in a tempting weak side run. Wilson elected to shoot, Campbell blocked the shot wide, and the half ended as Portland recycled the ball around.

HALFTIME

46′ – Nijstad pounced on an awful Houston pass, fed Wilson, whose attack was closed down and whose heavy touch lost possession, but the clearance was recycled to Nijstad who fired over the crossbar.

54′ – Fleming to Nijstad to Wilson; another poor touch lost possession but forced a Houston clearance over the byline.

58′ – Hanks to Wilson to Weaver, whose cross was cleared over the byline. On the ensuing corner kick a recycled cross from M.A. Vignola landed on Perry’s head, but her strong downward header was just wide of Campbell’s left post.

61′ – A Houston free kick was cleared out to Pietra Tordin. Tordin fed Hanks, whose usual blistering attack was felled inside the Houston 18. After a long delay the tackle went to VAR, and the review produced a penalty award.

63′ – Campbell saved Wilson’s exceptionally poor penalty attempt, but, again, after some delay VAR wanted a word…
(What was kind of hilarious about this was that during the repeated replays of the attempt the ESPN+ announcers went over and over their assessment of Campbell’s movement before Wilson struck the ball, completely ignoring the screamingly obvious encroachment into the penalty arch by Lisa Boattin…)
…which ended with a Wilson 70th minute re-take and conversion, 0-2.

71′ – Weaver and Fleming pressed a turnover and fed Wilson, whose strong shot went just wide of Campbell’s far (right) post.

75-76′ – Wild rumpus started by an appalling Campbell short pass directly to Wilson, that included a Weaver shot (blocked by Campbell), a point-blank Tordin header (blocked by Campbell for the corner), which was recycled for a second corner (which was cleared away).

86′ – Weaver to Wilson to Weaver to Fleming, long cross cleared over for a short corner that led to a passing sequence that was eventually blown offside.

And that was that.

So, all tolled up:
Of the 14 “attacking opportunities” (if you lump the Wilson PK events (61st and 63rd minutes) and all the 75th to 76th minute action into one furball each) –
Good quality shots-on-target or goals: 5 (34′, 38′, 45+4′, 61′, 75-76′)
Poor quality shots-on-target: 2 (15′, 40′)
Good attacking sequences (including producing corner kicks) but no shots-on-target: 5 (26′, 46′, 54′, 58′, 71′)
Nothing really: 2 (24′, 86′)

Not too bad! Something like 36% of the attacking sequences were outright dangerous or goal-producing, and almost 86% of the attacking possessions produced some sort of decent outcome, even if nothing more than a poor shot on frame, which is on the shooters (Weaver in the 15th minute, Hanks in the 40th).

Though I should whack Wilson on the ear with a thorn for that initial PK miss. Had Boattin not saved her ass that would have been Wilson’s first PK miss of the season, and an exceptionally poor one, at that. Campbell isn’t the Campbell of her prime, but you can’t try that sort of soft poke within a body’s width of her, Sophia. Damn it, you know that. WTF?

But how about going the other way? Keeping in mind the whole “Houston = trashfire” issue, here’s what I saw;

3 to 5′ – Long Houston possession around the Portland 18, but nothing.

8′ – Kat Rader skinned Perry. Reyes tackled the ball way but was almost immediately pressed into a near-goal turnover that Avery Patterson blasted just wide of Mackenzie Arnold’s right post.

12-13′ – Same as 3-5′; lots of “attacking” possession but cohesive Thorns defending and Houston incapacity to find a final pass/shot to unlock.

32′ – Hanks booted the ball right to Rader. Rader’s pass found Sophie Schmidt, who fired tamely at Arnold.

44′ – Nifty left-flank passing sequence through the Thorns first two lines found Boattin dribbling at the left corner; her cross found Maggie Graham, whose hard high shot Arnold was forced to punch over her crossbar.

HALFTIME

49′ – Campbell played out of the back to Paige Nielsen. The Dash put together (what I hate to admit was) a fucking sweet forward passing sequence that blew right through the Thorns’ gut; Nielsen to Rader to Graham to Schmidt to Clarissa Larisey. Luckily for Portland Larisey shot weakly at Arnold.

52′ – Long pass out of the back; Perry pressed a turnover out of Rader (I think) but then passed directly over the byline. The ensuing corner was a nightmarish horror of loose ball-pinging inside the six until Perry cleared over the byline again. Whew..!

55′ – Another direct play, this time up to Boattin; she put in a good attacking run, drew the Thorns backline before squaring to Rader, but the Houston forward fired too high.

82′ – Direct again, this time to Kiki van Zanten, who passed out wide to an open Patterson on the run. Patterson’s cross skipped across the six, dangerously close to two unmarked Houston attackers, but neither van Zanten nor Kate Faase could quite get a forehead to it. Sure concession if they had.

90+1′ – Ugly Isabella Obaze pass-directly to Rader gave Rader an open square pass to Faase; her good attempt went barely wide of Arnold’s left post.

90+8′ – Another frightful Thorns unforced turnover; Arnold’s throw bounced off substitute Renee Lyles’ back to Rader. Cassandra Bogere stabbed and missed, Perry tried to clear the ball but only managed to set up Graham. Fortunately Graham shot directly at Arnold and the final whistle blew.

Hmmm. Okay, so:
Only 11 “attacking opportunities” compared to Portland’s 14 –
Good quality shots-on-target: 1 (44′)
Poor quality shots-on-target: 3 (32′, 49′, 90+8′)
Good attacking sequences (including producing corner kicks) but no shots-on-target: 5 (8′, 52′, 55′, 82′, 90+1′)
Nothing really: 2 (3-5′, 12-13′)
And we should probably add:
Houston attacks initiated by unforced Portland turnovers: 3 (31′, 90+1, 90+8′) compared to Portland attacks initiated by unforced Houston turnovers: 2 (46′, 75’76’)

Side by side:
Portland “dangerous or goal-producing” attacks – 5 of 14 (36%)
Houston – 1 of 11 (9%)
Portland “decent outcome” attacks – 12 of 14 (86%)
Houston – 9 of 11 (82%)
Portland “oopsie, shit!” generated opponent attacks – 3 of 11 (27%)
Houston – 2 of 14 (14.3%)

The Thorns did put together some promising attacking sequences – as opposed to just “insert-name-here-but-usually-Wilson”-hero-ball – which is excellent. That’s something we’ve wanted, and that the club has needed, for much of the season. Especially now that we’re in the postseason knockouts if the Thorns hope to advance they’re going to have to have Plans B and C for opponents who assign a player or players to live in Wilson’s pocket all match.

However, Houston – trashfire, remember? – managed to put together a surprisingly large number of similarly promising attacks the other way, and to a great extent were deterred from doing actual damage as much by their own ineptitude and/or their shooters going cold than through Portland’s team defending.

I emphasize “team” defending rather than picking on the backline.

We’ll get to it when we get to the comments, but the backline in general stuck together pretty well. The problems I saw were largely in midfield, between the back of the forwards and the space in front of the backline, where Houston was able to pick out teammates either for passing sequence buildup or pure long direct passes.

Washington is several orders of magnitude more talented individually and better organized than Houston, so if Houston can do that Washington sure as hell can, and we can’t rely on Rodman or Cantore or Santos missing the way Rader and Patterson did.

So, no, the Thorns didn’t just “…sit, wait for the turnover, and give it to a world class #9.” The tactical plan included some good, interconnected buildup and understanding. If the match showed that there was a continuing issue (and I think it did and there was) it’s that the Thorns 1) can be broken down by good passing and movement, and, particularly, 2) can be their own worst enemy with sloppy passing and unforced errors.

Against Houston that still won’t cost you.

Against Gotham…or Washington…or San Diego?

It sure as fuck will.

Short Passes

I’ve been holding on to this hoping that Carlisle-sensei would post, but it’s Thursday and no. I’ll do what I can with what I can find. First, here’s Sofascore’s “attacking momentum” plot:

As usual for a team playing a Vilahamn squad Houston dominated possession (57% to 43%) and passing (85% completion of 395 passes to Portland’s 77% of 290). So in that respect Portland did “sit” in the Cushingesque sense of the term.

The height of the blue pinnacles reinforces our attacking breakdown conclusions, though, that Portland brought more danger more often as well as more goals, of course. Much of Houston’s “momentum” was possession-without-much-purpose.

When you turn to the actual danger statistics you see that in even bolder relief. Houston put together only 14 shots to Portland’s 18, and only put 5 on frame to Portland’s 9. Sofascore awarded Houston 3 “big chances” to Portland’s 4, but Houston’s chances are credited with only 0.96xG to Portland’s 2.46.

Let’s go ahead and break down some more numbers.

Turnover and over.

Here’s how things are going;

Opponent – Venue (Result)	Turnovers
Washington – Away (W)	26
Seattle – Home (W)	11
San Diego – Away (L)	29
Kansas City – Home (W)	23
North Carolina – Away (D)	25
Angel City – Away (W)	22
San Diego – Home (W)	17
Chicago – Away (W)	32
Louisville – Away (L)	25
Angel City – Home (D)	No data
Bay FC – Home (W)	33
Kansas City – Away (L)	29
Utah – Home (D)	23
Louisville – Home (W)	21
Seattle – Away (L)	33
Denver – Away (L)	33
Gotham – Home (D)	23
Utah – Away (L)	17
Boston – Away (W)	17
Orlando – Home (W)	24
Denver – Home (W)	19
Gotham – Away (D)	21
Washington – Home (L)	23
Chicago – Home (D)	18
Orlando – Away (W)	22
Houston – Home (D)	20
Boston – Home (L)	33
Bay FC – Away (D)	35
North Carolina – Home (w)	23
Houston – Away (W)	27

Context is everything here. Purely in terms of the season the 27 turnovers (12 before halftime, 15 after) doesn’t look great. But while Portland was coughing up the ball so was Houston (25 turnovers, 11 before halftime, 14 after). So in terms of this match? Houston wasn’t (in general) able to pull much advantage out of these turnovers.

But.

There’s “turnovers” and “fucking turnovers!”. In this match the Pointing Finger of Awshit is directed right at Arnold. The hit-her-own-teammate-in-the-back-twenty-yards-from-her-own-goal 98th minute hairball is the worst of her five-and-a-half giveaways, but several other short goal kicks or punts were scary. Vignola and Nijstad were the Next-biggest Losers with three each, but Obaze (who booted only once) had the next-worst giveaway, the 91st minute pass that set up Rader and Faase.

But Houston is a trashfire, so, okay then.

Press!

Twenty-ninth (and final regular season) match tracking the press. I counted either a 1) turnover (either from a tackle-for-loss or a mishit forced pass), or a 2) forced retreat or drop-pass that killed off a progressive action, as a pressing “win”.

Both sides began pressing aggressively; Portland more often (51 attempts to Houston’s 39) but much less successfully (24 wins (47%) with only 3 forced turnovers to Houston’s 26 wins (66.6%) with 9 ball-wins).

After the break I suspect the Portland coaches told the squad to sit in, so Portland’s pressing dropped to 22 attempts but those efforts were better organized (14 wins (63.6%) and 4 ball-wins). Portland had so little second half possession – there was a lot of neutral, just-pinging-around-and-up-in-the-air going on – that Houston was hard up to catch a Thorn to press (27 presses, 15 wins (55.5%) but 8 forced turnovers).

Match time	Dash presses (wins)(%)	Thorns presses (wins)(%)
0-45+5′	39(26) (66.6%)	51(24) (47%)
45-90+8′	27(15) (55.5%)	22(14) (63.6%)
Match Total	66(41) (62.1%)	73(38) (52%)

My thoughts:
1) Watching this the Thorns post-halftime tactical changes (likely directed from above, but probably also affected by the three halftime substitutions – Tordin for Turner, Weaver for Muller, and Vignola for Calzada) really jumped out. Before the break it was the usual “one Thorn at a time” sort of press, afterwards seeing two Thorns descend on the Houston player in possession was much more common.
2) Both clubs had some pressing success in generating attack, although there were enough unforced giveaways that the effects were probably close to a wash.
3) The most noticeable difference was that Houston’s better organized press was much more effective at taking the ball away (as opposed to turning it back) so it tended to be better at breaking down Thorns buildups, whilst Portland, when the forwards and AMs pressed and missed, opened up space for Houston to pass or run through.

Here’s the running tally:

Match (Result)	Opponent Press (Success)	Thorns Press (Success)
Washington Away (W)	40(27) (67.5%)	69(41) (59.4%)
Seattle Home (W)	61(30) (49.1%)	35(20) (57.1%)
San Diego Away (L)	33(22) (66.6%)	88(40) (45.4%)
Kansas City Home (W)	26(15) (57.6%)	43(23) (53.4%)
North Carolina Away (D)	35(22) (62.8%)	56(26) (46.4%)
Angel City Away (W)	52(37) (71.1%)	61(32) (52.4%)
San Diego Home (W)	45(71) (63.3%)	45(80) (56.2%)
Chicago Away (W)	68(34) (50%)	97(51) (52.2%)
Louisville Away (L)	101(70) (69.5%)	62(35) (56.4%)
Angel City Home (D)	No data	No data
Bay FC Home (W)	59(34) (57.6%)	59(37) (62.7%)
Kansas City Away (L)	52(29) (55.7%)	34(20) (58.8%)
Utah Home (D)	99(55) (55.5%)	60(31) (51.6%)
Louisville Home (W)	55(31) (56.3%)	28(13) (46.4%)
Seattle Away (L)	67(46) (68.6%)	66(35) (53.0%)
Denver Away (L)	46(24) (52.1%)	53(27) (50.9%)
Gotham Home (D)	60(32) (53.3%)	58(86) (67.4%)
Utah Away (L)	86(61) (70.9%)	70(38) (54.2%)
Boston Away (W)	84(55) (65.4%)	83(44) (53%)
Orlando Home (w)	94(57) (60.6%)	87(55 (63.2%)
Denver Home (W)	87(55) (63.2%)	60(32) (53.3%)
Gotham Away (D)	42(34) (80.9%)	90(49) (54.4%)
Washington Home (L)	43(30) (69.7%)	64(35) (54.6%)
Chicago Home (D)	42(27) (64.2%)	54(33) (61.1%)
Orlando Away (W)	38(29) (76.3%)	39(23) (58.9%)
Houston Home (D)	20(11) (55%)	43(23) (53.4%)
Boston Home (L)	36(20) (55.1%)	53(23) (43.3%)
BayFC Away (D)	42(25 (59.5%)	81(40) (49.4%)
North Carolina Home (W)	59(30) (50.8%)	95(42) (44.2%)
Houston Away (W)	66(41) (62.1%)	73(38) (52%)

Corner Kicks

Nine. Four in the first half, five in the second. One short, six long, two “line drive” low-height long deliveries.

Time	Taker	Short/Long?	Result
27′	Muller	Line drive	Into the near edge of the scrum, cleared back to Muller; her cross to Wilson produced a shot, but well over the bar.
39′	Muller	Long	Into the scrum and cleared, and a Thorns foul turned the ball over.
45+5′	Muller	Long	Into the pack again and cleared out all the way to midfield.
45+5′	Muller	Line drive	As you’d expect, to the near side of the scrum, cleared, and the half ended.
54′	Fleming	Long	Cleared to Wilson on the far side. Her shot was blocked easily and cleared away.
58′	Fleming	Long	Campbell got up and boxed it wide but Wilson settled. Her shot was easily blocked and cleared.
76′	Fleming	Long	Into the pack, pinged around, cleared, recycled, cleared over the byline for…
77′	Fleming	Long	Into the scrum, cleared.
86′	Fleming	Short	…to Lyles. Passed around until an offside flag on a hopeful cross in turned the ball over.

The sheer number reflects the persistence and success of the Thorns attack. The few actual chances created (Wilson’s 27th minute miss was really the only clearcut chance) reflects the low productivity from the setpieces this club works.

I think we really need to do a deep dive into this after the season ends.

Player Ratings and Comments

Wilson (+9/-2 : +10/-5 : +19/-7) Given the brace and the usual hard work it’s kind of impossible not to hand Wilson Woman of the Match. This is a match I’d sure love to have some individual player xG and xG-on-target numbers for, though. Wilson is credited with taking 9 of Portland’s 18 shots, and putting 4 of the squad’s 9 on frame. That’s a lot of work to produce 1.5 goals (half a goal deduction for the initial PK fiasco that, luckily for her numbers the encroachment erased).

So not truly Grand Cru vintage Wilson. But “fuck, good enough for Houston” Two-Buck Chuck sort of Wilson, and that was, indeed, good enough,

Turner (45′ – +8/-1) I’ll repeat what I said last week; Turner is a damn gifted attacker. Great movement, field vision, passing. Perfect little heel-flick on the first goal.

The final touch remains shooting and scoring, and posting blanks against Houston didn’t help. I agree with Carlisle-sensei that there’s a genuine talent here. I disagree that her emergence is inevitable. I think Turner needs to put in some more work. If she does…well, we’ll see.

Tordin (45′ – +7/-1) All the same positives plus that silky first touch and putting up a couple of shots (especially the 75th minute header; truly vicious, point-blank rocket that Campbell had to dig deep to block away).

Hanks (70′ – +12/-5 : +2/-0 : +14/-5) Hanks’ pace is a huge weapon, and was critical in forcing the foul and PK in Houston. She has a nice eye for a teammate and her passing is often creative. Her touch, however, is still clunky as often as not, and the danger of her shooting comes and goes. This match was a perfect example; nothing in the 11th minute, much better in the 38th, lame and soft again in the 40th, then the run and foul in the 61st.

If – if – she can put it all together at the same time? We’re looking at a genuinely terrifying Temwa Chawinga/Trinity Rodman-grade winger. Would I like to see that? Would I like free beer? Y’think..?

Lyles (20′ – +4/-3) Hard to say. Nothing awful, but nothing particularly outstanding. Saw out the win as fresh legs, so, fine. Still don’t see anything but pure depth at this point.

Fleming (+5/-2 : +8/-2 : +13/-4) Solid, workaday sort of match from Fleming; it looked to me like Houston was a “Fleming Day”, and the Sofascore numbers make a case for that on defense:

Fleming is a big part of protecting the centerbacks and stabilizing the midfield, tracking back (obviously, that’s a DM’s job) but also linking up to the forwards, since while I hear Tordin and Turner (and Moultrie when she’s healthy) described as a “#10” I don’t really see Vilahamn’s tactics as using a true 10. Instead his DMs often provide that kind of linkup play and chance creation, and that was surely what Fleming did in Houston, as looking at…

Nijstad (83′ – +2/-2 : +3/-1 : +5/-3) …shows.

Nijstad’s turn to take the afternoon off, eh? Well, it works, so, fine.

Bogere (7′ – +3/-1) As Lyles; fresh legs, saw out the win. That’s fine.

Muller (45′ – +3/-1) and Weaver (45′ – +5/-2) I’m not really sure what to say here. For one, these two seem like the oddest of odd couples, and the way they were used in this match seems counterintuitive. But a harder look suggests otherwise.

Weaver, the former-winger still recovering from horrific leg injury repairs, would seem like the natural choice to start a road match where going up early seems essential, then Muller, the former-fullback with attacking chops, seems like the perfect up-a-goal-at-halftime replacement. Instead? Vilahamn used them precisely backward of that.

In the run of play I don’t see Muller’s name much. Recycled a corner kick to Wilson but otherwise it’s all first half setpiece deliveries, and we’ve covered those. After halftime Weaver is a bit more visible; involved in the 58th minute buildup, winning a press with Fleming’s help in the 71st minute, taking a shot in the 75th (but a poor one – I handed her a minus for it) and part of another nice piece of attacking passing in the 86th minute.

Sadly, the thing that jumps out at me is how badly her injuries (and the difficulties she suffered during the rehab) have destroyed Weaver’s attacking effectiveness. Of her PMRs three of Weaver’s five pluses are defensive; of her minuses two of three are defensive.

So, yes. These two players have become much closer to one another; Muller – because as a fullback she has fallen further down the depth chart – has become an “attacking defensive” piece. Weaver – because her legs are so fucked up – has become a “defensive attacker”.

I’m not sure if this qualifies as a piece of brilliant adaptation by the Swedish chef, or a “what else can you do?” forced acceptance of a hard reality.

Reyes (+5/-0 : +1/-2 : +6/-2) Let’s start here; the Thorns backline kept their second clean sheet in a row, locked in the win, and held Houston to less than an expected goal. That’s good!

One thing to add here; I’m genuinely curious whether, and if so how much of, this defensive sturdiness shows the effect of “technical consultant” Becky Sauerbrunn. Phuoc Nguyen wrote a whole piece about that over at Stumptown, crediting ‘Brunn with the club’s solid defensive performance against The Damned Courage.

All I can do here is throw in the question I asked in the comments on that piece:

“…since Sauerbrunn’s hiring was announced at the beginning of September (9/3) was Carolina here – nearly two full months after she began consulting with the technical staff – the first actual match that she worked with the backline? If so, then brava, ‘Brunn! The DMs and backs worked well keeping Carolina in front of them (okay, we’re going to memory hole Ijeh in the 70th minute…) and isolating Sanchez.

But…not the Bay FC draw before that? Or the loss to Boston here before THAT?

Don’t get me wrong. I WANT ‘Brunn to be the master craftsperson behind that cohesive and effective defensive match, and see more of that going forward. But…what happened between matchdays 27 and 28, and matchday 29? Was it ‘Brunn? And if so, what happened between 9/3 and 10/23 to keep her from bringing that awesomeness sooner?”

Given that, again less a couple of scary moments, Houston away looked defensively solid. Is this the master craftswoman at work?

I guess we’ll see this Sunday.

Perry (+3/-3 : +4/-4 : +7/-7) Perry was the Little Girl with The Curl in Houston. When she was good she was very, very good. When she was bad (like ballwatching in the 49th minute) she was pretty horrid.

Obaze (+4/-2 : +2/-1 : +6/-3) Obaze was Mostly Good, and luckily that was enough to see off Houston. Frankly, neither Carolina nor Houston has really tested this centerback group. Washington is likely another matter.

Calzada (45′ – +1/-1) and Vignola (45′ – +3/-2) I didn’t see a huge difference watching this match, but Sofascore’s raters sure did. Here’s how they looked to the folks there:

The reason I find this so intriguing is that it looks like the difference in the Sofascore crew’s ratings is almost entirely based on the difference between the two fullbacks going forward. Vignola is credited with an expected assist (0.44 xA) that Calzada lacks, as well as two key passes and two “big chances created”.

Defensively, though, they’re practically a wash; each is credited with one “recovery”, Vignola has a couple of ground duels won that Calzada doesn’t but also one missed tackle while Calzada didn’t attempt one.

So I think this goes back to the respective concepts of “what does a fullback do?” I’m old, and still think of fullbacks as defenders first and foremost. But modern fullbacks aren’t just asked but expected to push up; Vignola did, Calzada didn’t, so the former gets roses, the latter thorns from the Sofascore crew.

Interestingly, though I’d have thought that Reyes would do better there, when I look at my PMR for her none of her pluses are for attacking (and one of the minuses is for a passing turnover) so okay then.

Arnold (+2/-1 : +1/-5 : +3/-6) The numbers here are a bit deceptive. Purely in goal Arnold wasn’t a “net -3” keeper. But some of those minuses..!

Of her pluses two are for coming out and taking dangerous crosses/passes, and the other is for the 44th minute turn over the bar. That’s fine so far. Two of her minuses – the one in the first half, and one in the second – are for poor passes; not horrific, but poor enough to be troubling.

But three of the other second half minuses are:
52′ – Arnold did very poorly on a Houston corner kick that dropped inside her six-yard-box. The ESPN+ announcers babbled about her coming out to claim the delivery, ignoring that two Houston players and one of her own defenders (Perry) were between her and the ball. But once it skipped through Arnold misplayed it clumsily and was fortunate that Perry booted it clear before one of the many Houston attackers poked it past her.
85′ – Mishit a ball trying to clear it; fortunately nobody was close enough to play it.
90+8 – The ridiculous throw we’ve mentioned.

So against Houston shooting – which was sparse and poor – Arnold wasn’t a problem. But her distribution – never a strong point – was kind of a hot mess, and she made some really boneheaded mistakes, mistakes as in “I’d expect a U-23 keeper to know better” sorts of mistakes.

Coach Vilahamn: This is sort of a “Thorns – Level 2 unlocked” thing.

Beating Carolina here got his squad into the postseason. Now beating Houston there got the club in as good a position as possible (with the note that his and their previous stumbles had put them in a position that, unless Utah wins it’s quarterfinal, means the Thorns have to win three on the road to Do A Gotham this season) going into the quarterfinal.

Does this change my mind on our gaffer? Not really. His strengths and weaknesses are unchanged from when the season kicked off.

Win three on the trot and bag a Championship?

Then we can talk.

But until then, this club is not in any different place than a tired old farmer with three more pigs left to slop.

And the first trough looms this coming Sunday.