Scurry Vs. Brazil, Nobody Would Care If Hope Solo Wasn't Hot

By Ever Odessa, published Sep 28, 2007
Published Content: 346  Total Views: 181,759  Favorited By: 12 CPs
Rating: 3.2 of 5
Have you heard? The U.S. women's soccer team lost in the World Cup semi-finals to Brazil, 4-0. The loss comes after a controversial goalkeeper switch made by coach Greg Ryan.

The night before the game, Ryan decided to bench Hope Solo, the goalkeeper who essentially got the US to the World Cup semi-final round, for Briana Scurry, the goalkeeper who has (err, had) never lost to Brazil.

The Solo vs. Scurry Goalkeeper Debate

Pro Solo: The U.S. women's soccer team had won the last 51 games with Hope Solo in the net for 50 of those games. Hope Solo had not allowed a goal for the last 300 minutes of play. The U.S. is on a streak. Hope Solo is on a streak. Don't mess with a streak.

Con Solo: Hope Solo has never played against Brazil.

Pro Scurry: Briana Scurry has more experience and a winning track record playing Brazil. And according to Coach Ryan, Scurry was making the kind of saves in practice necessary to win against Brazil.

Con Scurry: Briana Scurry had not played a full game in the past three months.

Ultimately, Coach Ryan went with stats over streaks to many people's surprise and Hope Solo's disappointment. A disappointment Hope Solo hasn't had a problem expressing... along with every guy who has ever seen a photo or YouTube video of Solo (as seen here). Seriously, if Solo is the only soccer player you can name on the US women's soccer team, you really don't get an opinion about this.

Solo Being Solo

Anyways, I feel for Solo. With the way she had played recently, she deserved a shot defending the U.S. against Brazil.

But in an interview after the team's four nothing loss to Brazil, Solo had this to say about the goalkeeper controversy:

"It was the wrong decision and I think anybody that knows anything about the game knows that... there's no doubt in my mind I would have made those saves... and the fact of the matter is it's not 2004 anymore, it's 2007 and I think you have to live in the present and you can't live by big names, you can't live in the past, it doesn't matter what somebody did in an Olympic gold medal game in the Olympics three years ago, now is what matters and that's what I think."

Scurry Vs. Brazil, Nobody Would Care If Hope Solo Wasn't Hot

upset fans

Credit: Moazzam Brohi / EO

Copyright: Moazzam Brohi

Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 9 of 9
 
 
Half of Solo supporters don't even know who Wambach is. Look at the history of other athletes who have dissed teammates; few were ever supported by fans for doing so. & the W-Cup was not over; the last thing the US needed after losing to Brazil was to not medal. Being part of a team has nothing to do w/political correctness. Truly great goalkeepers know how to keep their cool & don't put their ego ahead of their team. Even Solo knows she shouldn't have dissed Scurry.

Posted on 10/11/2007 at 9:10:00 AM

 
Who is writing nonsense about Solo being supported because she's "hot"? Like we wouldn't support Wambach or Lilly if the coach had decided to bench them for no reason other than his brain is cracked? I'm sick of politically correct and "sensitive" BS in every walk of life, including sports. Yes, some diplomacy and tact might be useful even when you've been publicly screwed, but not when the coach's action is this egregious. Solo held her tongue till after the Brazil disaster. The World Cup was over, finished for the U.S. at that point. It didn't hurt a thing that she spoke then. The remaining game for third place was B.S. The Hope-bashers and luke-warmers are ignoring a lot of other things. Was Ryan really so shocked and outraged or was he delighted that Solo spoke up so he could divert attention from his stupidity? That's the reason he was so harsh, unless he's a total jerk--it made her action seem worse than it was. After all, it was so bad he had to demolish her, didn't h

Posted on 10/05/2007 at 5:10:00 PM

 
Zac- It's tough to generate offense when you go down early and the other team can play conservatively all game And not to menton the bogus red card at the end of the first half.

Posted on 10/01/2007 at 2:10:00 PM

 
EC - If you want to get technical, I was relaying the "debate"; & the "wins" under Solo is what fans were debating. But I do consider a tie a "win" b/c it's certainly not a loss; especially in goalkeeping terms. Next time, however, I'll be more specific to avoid confusing anyone. But the point was (& remains) the team's unbeaten streak w/Solo in goal. And so you don't have to ask; Yes, a team w/a "tie" is still "unbeaten". Perhaps to you such a record isn't amazing enough; but to most fans, it is.

Posted on 10/01/2007 at 4:10:00 AM

 
"The U.S. women's soccer team had won the last 51 games with Hope Solo in the net for 50 of those games." that is you "It was the first loss in regulation time for the U.S. women in the past 51 games and first-ever loss under Ryan." that is the quote you just provide a tie is not a win, is that correct?

Posted on 09/30/2007 at 1:09:00 PM

 
E.C. -- Quoting from the US women's national team official site: "It was the first loss in regulation time for the U.S. women in the past 51 games and first-ever loss under Ryan." So yes, I am saying their 51 game streak ended. And no, I'm not saying Solo's game is based solely on her looks.

Posted on 09/29/2007 at 7:09:00 AM

 
Interesting article. I don't know either way - but a loss is a loss.

Posted on 09/29/2007 at 6:09:00 AM

 
In your last paragraph are you saying that Hope's game is based solely on looks? And the U.S. was on an unbeaten streak, they hadn't won every game over the past 51, that would be purely amazing.

Posted on 09/28/2007 at 11:09:00 PM

 
perhaps the game would have been different if the US would have actually generated some offense.

Posted on 09/28/2007 at 1:09:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 9 of 9
 
Most Commented On