Here is what has to sting the most for the US Women in their loss to Japan: they were the better team, AND they played the better game. Sports cynics will blame the American loss on their failure to capitalize on early opportunities, and their arguments would be most asanine.
I've written before about how ridiculous I find the "choke/clutch" theory of sports performance to be- the idea that winners are clutch where losers choke. I think winning is a practice of repetitive excellence that serves to minimize the risk of losing, and that winners are able to repeat success more often than all others. The problem, of course, is that the risk still exists. A pitcher can completely fool a hitter, and saw his bat off...and render a bloop single. A hitter can hit a ball perfectly square...and right at a fielder for a put out.
Actually, in a lot of ways, Sunday's game reminded me of a baseball game where one team has runners on base in several innings, and even gets line drives and hard hit balls with the runners on- but, for whatever reason, on that particular day, the hard hit balls go right to one of the fielders and the team doesn't get many runs. Meanwhile, the other team doesn't get a whole lot of chances, but of the handful of times they get a runner in scoring position, they get a bloop or seeing eye single, and they're able to scratch out a win. Does it mean they didn't deserve the win? No. They limited their mistakes, and put the ball in play. The problem with the cynics' logic is that they'll say the latter "capitalized" on their opportunities while the former team "squandered" them. And of course, the problem with this line of reasoning is that it's horse shit. Squandering would've been striking out or hitting weak grounders or pop flies. Capitalizing would've been ripping a double off the wall. I just can't, in good conscience, call a bloop RBI a clutch hit, any more than I can call a hard lineout a choke job. Both are lucky or unlucky, depending on the side. It's how the Royals have been able to take a few series from the Yankees. But it doesn't mean they've been better- or even that they played better in many of those games. It's just the law of averages- even if something has an 85% chance of succeeding, it fails 15% of the time. To say that the 85 were clutch and the 15 are chokes is quite disingenuous.
In Sunday's game, the US hit several balls on scoring chances the same way they did on scoring plays. They just didn't find the net. It doesn't mean they choked. What it means, is that the ball in a particular situation has a certain chance of going in (and usually, it's not a very high chance to begin with, hence, the low scores of most games). Japan's good chances could be counted on one hand, and they got 2 goals. The second one, although a good chance, a very lucky ball. Face it, US lost becuase none of their balls took a lucky bounce Sunday and one of Japan's did.
Let me put this a different way. Think the '99 team was clutch? Think the '11 group choked? Think about this. The '99 group would've lost in the quarterfinals. That's right. In '99, they had golden goal. That group would've lost to Brazil. Likewise, if this year's group had played Sunday's final under '99 rules they would've won. It's also worth noting that in 2004 and 2008, the Americans were badly outmatched and outplayed in the Gold Medal Final of the Olympics, and somehow came away with a win. So, if you feel cheated, remember that what goes around does come around. And, by the same token, the awful performance in PKs could just as easily have come- and the US having not missed, ever, was well overdue for a plethora of misses- in the quarters, as well. Such is the fine line between "success" and "failure".
PKs are are part execution, but they're also part luck. Sometimes the GK guesses right. That's what happened to Shannon Boxx. The Japanese keeper guessed left, and was correct. Boxx, to her credit, saw this, and tried to alter her shot back to the center, but the goalie was able to just barely get her foot on it. Did Boxx choke? How? How is her guessing wrong and Japan guessing right a choke, especially when Japan already knew which way she was likely to go? Lloyd didn't execute her shot well, but Solo was able to block one shot and get her hands on another (again, luck, as the ball just as easily could've gone out). Heath entered the game late, and perhaps, shouldn't have been shooting. She didn't get a good shot off, but again, the GK guessed right- if she moves the other way, the shot's good. Such is the insanity of PK shootouts- a blind guess can be the difference between winning a World Cup and losing in the quarters.
That's the thing about sports. We want to think that games are won by champions. Sometimes they're just played by champions, and decided by Fate. I'm not trying to take anything away from the Japanese side. In order to win, they were going to have to play a near flawless match- and catch a few breaks. Everyone makes mistakes, and the US made its share- so did Japan, and both sides took advantage. Had Japan played something less than their "A" game, they lose. Even playing their "A" game, the American's "B" game, most days, is good enough to win. That's what frustrating. America played its best game of the tournament Sunday. If the USA-Japan final played out exactly the same way as Sunday 100 times, the US would likely win between 80 and 90 of them. They just didn't get the bounce. But, then again, that's why we watch these games to begin with- every now and then we see something that breaks the odds.
