Home
Geek's guide to

frauenfussball

(in plain English)

links
 

Q: Isn't soccer low-scoring and dull?

Yes and no. It's is often low-scoring. It's not usually dull.

"It's end to end stuff, but from side to side"
- Trevor Brooking

Frequently Asked Questions

 A Short History of Women's Soccer


U.S. Colleges

A few colleges played club or intramural women's soccer as far back as the 1920s. By the 1950's, a large youth soccer movement had developed, and large numbers of girls participated. A law passed in 1972, often called 'Title IX', said that no school could receive federal funds if that school discriminated based on gender.

Though largely ignored at first, by the 1990s Title IX had become the driving force behind an explosive growth of women's college soccer.

The first varsity women's soccer program was at Brown University in 1977. An unofficial national championship was held in 1980. An official national championship was held by the AIAW (Association of Intercollegiate Athletics for Women) in 1981. The NCAA began sponsoring women's sports in 1982 and the first NCAA women's soccer championship was held that year.

For 20 or so years after 1981, women's college soccer was booming. A dozen or so new Division I women's teams were added every year. Divisions II and III, the NAIA, and the junior colleges also experienced dramatic growth.

Thanks, in part, to Title IX, women's college soccer was boooming and was the fastest growing intercollegiate sport, men's or women's, during the 1990s. The level of play improved dramatically, as did the competition.


The Big BOOOOM!!

(call it the Title IX effect)

In 1981, there were only 17 teams in the entire country playing Division I women's soccer. In 2005, there were well over 300 teams.

In all 3 NCAA divisions there were 77 teams in 1981. In 2005, in the NCAA and NAIA, there were well over 1000 teams.

The boom is about over. The growth in Division I sponsorship of women's soccer has slowed - for the simple reason that there are hardly any Divsion I schools left that don't already sponsor women's soccer.

 Early History

Women participated in mob games in the 12th century, and probably before, but there is little accurate record. Organized games for women date back at least to 18th century Scotland where an annual match between the married and single women would attract as many as 10,000 spectators.

 The First Golden Age

The modern game developed in the late 19th century and the women's game achieved a measure of popularity, with teams in England, France and Canada. That first 'golden age' of women's soccer came to an end in 1921, when the all-male English Football Association, perhaps threatened by the growing popularity of women's football, banned women's teams from their grounds, leaving women's teams with few places to play.

 Renewed Interest

A rebirth of the women's game began in the 1950's, as soccer became a popular game for girls, even in England.

Meanwhile, there was a massive youth soccer movement in the United States -- and girls were more than welcome, thank you.

An unofficial European Championship was held in Germany in 1957. During the 1960s, eastern European communist countries encouraged women to participate in sports, including soccer.

In 1969 the English FA lifted its ban on women's teams. By 1971, there was organized women's soccer in some 34 countries. An unofficial World Championship was held in Mexico.

 Official Recognition

The Women's World Cup

By 1991, 65 countries fielded women's teams, and FIFA staged an official Women's World Cup in China, although, at that time, FIFA was reluctant to use the term 'World Cup'. That first Women's World Cup was a tremendous success, with exciting games, a high level of play, capacity crowds, and a worldwide television audience.

In England, the English FA (Football Association) merged with the Women's FA and the organization which had dealt the crushing blow to the women's game in 1921 was actively promoting women's soccer, even if half-heartedly, at times.

A second women's World Cup was held in Sweden in 1995. Less successful than the first in terms of attendance, the second WWC did feature exciting games and a high level of play.

 The Olympics

A major breakthrough for women's soccer came at the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, where women's soccer was included as a full medal sport for the first time. Crowds were very good; the level of play was, as it had been in the Women's World Cups, very high. Several of the games were very exciting. The final, between the US and China, drew a crowd of 80,000 enthusiastic fans, the largest crowd ever to attend a women-only sporting event. The final, which the US won in dramatic fashion, was well played and exciting. Unfortunately, none of the games were televised in the US, although NBC did show small portions of the final.

The 1999 Women's World Cup

In 1999, women's soccer captured lightening in a bottle with the staging of Women's World Cup in the United States. FIFA's original plans had been conservative - a modest tournament to be staged in small stadiums on the east coast to reduce costs. Instead, the United States Soccer Federation, encouraged by the success of the 1996 Olympic tournament, made plans for a full-scale tournament in large stadiums across the country. It was a daring plan.

To say that it was a success would be an understatement. Early round games drew large crowds of so-called 'pony-tailed hooligans' (adoring teen-aged female fans of the U.S. team). US team practices drew wild crowds of thousands. The story was picked up by newpapers, TV stations and magazines across the country.

The final, which was played before a huge crowd in the Rose Bowl, turned out to be more a spectacle than a soccer game. The quality of play was low but the game was riveting nonetheless. TV ratings surpassed those of the 1994 men’s World Cup final (also held in the US but not involving a US team).

2000 Olympics

The 2000 Olympic tournament in Australia was another success although it was half a world away and attracted little attention in the U.S. The U.S. team suffered a heartbreaking loss to Norway (as they had in the 1995 Women's World Cup)

2003 Women's World Cup

The 2003 Women's World Cup was originally scheduled for China but was moved China to the United States due to the SARS epidemic. The U.S. fell in the semi-final. The tournament attracted nowhere near the attention that the 1999 tournament had.

2004 Olympics


top of page
 

the quest

The search for the true meaning continues.


"Undoubtedly, the initial appeal for the spectators was the novelty of seeing women play football and, at first, the crowds were inclined to be amused."

-Sue Lopez, writing about women's soccer in England during the First World War -from her book, women on the ball


"Ladies, I apologise unreservedly and wholeheartedly. I went to Wimbledon to watch England play Italy expecting to snigger. I went with all the usual male predjudices about soccer being 'unfeminine'; that girls would break down and cry if someone kicked them or if the referee was a bit nasty and did not allow a goal. I saw instead the best game of football I have seen since those famous Wolves managed by Stan Cullis terrorised Europe in the 1950s."

- John Morgan, columnist for the Daily Express, following a game in 1977


The search for the true meaning of women's soccer continues, a quest to understand why it is so alluring a phenomenon.

A TV commentator says, "Without being derogatory about the women's game...," then reveals a 'terrible truth' about women's soccer.

Yada, yada, yada.

A referee proposes a theory: "The only difference between women's and men's soccer is what they protect in the wall."

A coach explains: "The women are more such and such, while the men rely more on ..."


At a women's college game:

A man, asked what it all means, replies, "No one knows for sure."

Another says, "this would've been a good game for my daughters to watch"

"This is a good game for anybody to watch."

A high school boy yells: "Hey, those women are kickin' butt!"

My own initial amusement didn't last long. I'm over the novelty of it now. I'm hooked, and I'm not getting over it. I haven't found the true meaning but I have stopped looking for it.


Soccer

Anyone can play it. You don't have to be big, tall, muscular or agile.

You don't have to be male.

It is for all races, creeds and cultures. There is no age limit.

You don't need goals, or 22 players. Or a field. Or referees.

Or even a ball.

Kids play it in the streets with tin cans. One or twenty to a side.

... the point is that soccer is as fiendishly difficult as it is simple. First, you go out in a tearing wind and kick a round ball around, and try to get it to go where you want. Hell, you go out in a flat calm and try it. And now try it with big men striving all around you, with uncompromising phisicality, to stop you doing any such thing....It's no longer simple...And the average fan knows that.

So they're thrilled, at those rare moments when people get it right.

And the point is that, sometimes, the people who get it right are women.


The genie is out of the bottle; it will not be put back in. The old myths have been proven wrong. A growing number of people are taking women's sports seriously.


top of page


MAC Hermann Award

College Player of the Year
1988  Michelle Akers (Central Florida)
1989  Shannon Higgins (North Carolina)
1990  April Kater (Massachusetts)
1991  Kristine Lilly (North Carolina)
1992  Mia Hamm (North Carolina)
1993  Mia Hamm (North Carolina)
1994  Tisha Venturini (North Carolina)
1995  Shannon MacMillan (Portland)
1996  Cindy Daws (Notre Dame)
1997  Cindy Parlow (North Carolina)
1998  Cindy Parlow (North Carolina)
1999  Mandy Clemens (Santa Clara)
2000  Anne Makinen (Notre Dame)
2001  Christie Welsh (Penn St.)
2002  Aly Wagner (Santa Clara)
2003  Catherine Reddick (North Carolina)
2004  Christine Sinclair (Portland)
2005  Christine Sinclair (Portland)
 

* Prior to 2002, separate MAC (Missouri Athletic Club) and Hermann Awards were given. The same player always won both awards. Prior to 1991, there was only a Hermann Award. Since 2002, the awards have been combined.

top of page


Division I Women's Soccer Championships

AIWA Championship
1981 North Carolina  defeated   Central Florida 1-0
NCAA Championship
1982 North Carolina defeated Central Florida 1-0
1983 North Carolina defeated George Mason 4-0
1984 North Carolina defeated Connecticuit 2-0
1985 George Mason defeated North Carolina 2-0
1986 North Carolina defeated Colorado College   2-0
1987 North Carolina defeated Massachusetts 1-0
1988 North Carolina defeated N.C. State 1-0
1989 North Carolina defeated Colorado College 2-0
1990 North Carolina defeated Connecticut 6-0
1991 North Carolina defeated Wisconsin 3-1
1992 North Carolina defeated Duke 9-1
1993 North Carolina defeated George Mason 6-0
1994 North Carolina defeated Notre Dame 5-0
1995 Notre Dame defeated Portland 1-0 overtime
1996 North Carolina defeated Notre Dame 1-0 overtime
1997 North Carolina defeated Connecticut 2-0
1998 Florida defeated North Carolina 1-0
1999 North Carolina defeated Notre Dame 2-0
2000 North Carolina defeated UCLA 2-1
2001 Santa Clara defeated North Carolina 1-0
2002 Portland defeated Santa Clara 2-1
2003 North Carolina defeated Connecticut 6-0
2004 Notre Dametied UCLA 1-1 (decided by PKs)
2005   Portland defeated UCLA 4-0
2006   North Carolina defeated Notre Dame 2-1
2007   USC defeated Florida State 2-0


DII, DIII, NAIA champions
top of page



Frequently Asked Questions

(with quotes from the quotes page)

Q: Isn't soccer low-scoring and dull?

Yes and no. It's is often low-scoring. It's not usually dull.

'It's end to end stuff, but from side to side'
- Trevor Brooking

'Zero-zero is a big score.'
- Ron Atkinson

Low scoring games can be quite exciting if there are a lot of scoring chances.

An inch or two either side of the post and it would have been a goal.'
- Dave Bassett

Solskjaer never misses the target. That time he hit the post.
- Peter Schmeichel

High-scoring games can be boring if they are one-sided.

'Winning's about playing football and scoring goals...'
- BBC Radio 4

It's real end-to-end stuff, but unfortunately it's all up at Forest's end.
- Chris Kamara

To be a great game, one of the teams has to score first
- Mark Lawrenson


Q: What if a game ends in a tie?

In many leagues, a game that ends in a tie is called a draw, and everyone goes home.

It's now 1-1, an exact reversal of the scoreline on Saturday.'
- Radio 5 Live

Well, either side could win it, or it could be a draw.
- Ron Atkinson


Q: Why don't they play overtime?

In many cases they do, particularly in the US.

Both sides have scored a couple of goals, and both sides have conceded a couple of goals.
- Peter Withe


Q: How are league standings calculated?

In nearly all cases, league standings are based on points, with teams getting 3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie and 0 points for a loss. Won/lost percentage is irrelevant.

One point from an away game is no longer considered a victory.
- Petter Rudi

This system is fair and very logical if you think in terms of points rather than wins and losses.

I would not be bothered if we lost every game as long as we won the league.
- Mark Viduka

 

Q: What does it take to win?

In nearly every case, you have to score at least one goal.

'In this sort of match, whoever scores the most goals wins'
- Portuguese commentator

Believe it or not, goals can change a game
- Mike Channon

As the saying goes, it's not how many shots you take that counts, it's how many go in.

'That's football Mike - Northern Ireland have had several chances and haven't scored, but England have had no chances and scored twice.'
- Trevor Brooking

Time of posession sometimes counts for very little.

'Hodge scored for Forest after 22 seconds - totally against the run of play.'
- Peter Lorenzo


Q: What are formations and systems of play?

They are team strategies.

They didn't change positions, they just moved the players around.
- Terry Venables

Hearts are now playing with a five man back four.
- Alan McInally

To learn more, read a a few books and watch a few hundred games. You will either become hooked or fed up.
You may conclude that there is considerably more to the game than strategies, tactics and systems. There is a thing called 'magic', which is similar to what some call creativity.
I defer to a coach who posted the following to the women's soccer mailinglist (used without permission):

"Soccer is a team sport filled with individual player decisions. You train players to be skillful, and if their decisions are bad to help them see better options so they can become better decision makers in games. Many coaches don't bother to see if their players are making a decent decision. They want the player to make their decision in certain situations - that doesn't make a player creative. Sometimes a good decision may be to be selfish at a particular time and space. ----- I have seen so many teams play a perfect team game, and lose to teams that are not trained as well, but have some players who know when and when not to give up the ball, and can finish a chance."

And I have seen teams totally dominate virtually every aspect of the game except the one that counts: the score.

And I have heard them say: "We outplayed them but we lost."

That always amuses me.


Q: How does women's soccer differ from men's?

After years of observation I have concluded that:

Women's soccer is played by women.

Men's soccer is played by men.

Most of the other differences people think they see are figments of their imaginations, with one notable exception: PACE - Men are bigger, stronger, faster, so the pace of men's soccer is considerably faster. The difference in pace can be quite startling. But once you adjust to the pace, the games are the same.

 

Q. Aren't women's motivations different from men's?

This seems to be true, as a generalization, and it may affect how women are coached. But it does not affect how the game appears to a spectator. What women do in the course of a game is pretty much the same as what men do, regardless of motivation. What it takes to win a game is pretty much dictated by the game. The strategies and tactics are the same; skill levels are comparable; and women's soccer is as exciting as men's.

top of page


Women's Soccer Champions

   
NAIA
1984   St. Mary's (CA)
NCAA Division III
1985 Westmont
1986   Rochester 1986 St. Mary's (CA)
NCAA Division II
1987 Rochester 1987 Berry
1988   Cal. St. Hayward 1988 William Smith 1988 Pacific Lutheran
1989 Barry 1989 UC-San Diego 1989 Pacific Lutheran
1990 Sonoma State 1990 Ithaca 1990 Berry
1991  Cal St Dominguez Hills  1991 Ithaca 1991 Pacific Lutheran
1992 Barry 1992 Courtland St. 1992 Lynn
1993 Barry 1993 Trenton St. 1993 Berry
1994 Franklin Pierce 1994 Trenton St. 1994 Lynn
1995 Franklin Pierce 1995 UC-San Diego 1995 Lynn
1996 Franklin Pierce 1996 UC-San Diego 1996 Simon Fraser
1997 Franklin Pierce 1997 UC-San Diego 1997 Mobile
1998 Lynn 1998 Macalester 1998 Azusa Pacific
1999 Franklin Pierce 1999 UC San Diego 1999 Westmont
2000 UC San Diego 2000  The Col. of New Jersey  2000 Simon Fraser
2001 UC San Diego 2001 Ohio Wesleyan 2001 Westmont
2002 Christian Brothers 2002 Ohio Wesleyan 2002 Westmont
2003 Kennesaw State 2003 Oneonta State 2003 Westmont
2004 Metro State 2004 Wheaton (IL) 2004 Lindsey Wilson
2005 Nebraska-Omaha 2005 Messiah 2005 Martin Methodist
2006 Metro State 2006 Wheaton (IL) 2006 Lindsey Wilson
2007 Tampa 2007 Wheaton (IL) 2007 Martin Methodist



Division I champions
top of page



Links

External links:
Pages below are either
under construction or obsolete
(the links probably won't work)