A 0-0 draw might suggest a bore, but the reality is the opposite – the U.S.and England are two very good, very well-matched teams
So, what do we make of that? Nil-nil. All of the hype, all of the storylines, all 78,000 fans in Wembley for the highest-profile friendly in years, and the result was a game in which neither side found the back of the net.
The word "intrigue" will be thrown around a lot. It's a good cop out to describe what was, in abstract, a pretty boring game. The numbers back that up: 14 shots, four on target, one penalty call correctly overturned by VAR. This was billed as a battle between two serial winners, the top two teams in the world in FIFA rankings. The reality was, both sides seemed pretty content with a draw.
But still, things were happening. This sport is more complex than two teams settling for a result. At times, both sides played to win. Each manager set their team up looking to exploit weaknesses in their opponent. A bit more cutting edge, a moment of inspiration, or a massive blunder could have blown it open. Instead, what transpired at Wembley Saturday was two very good teams playing a fairly flawless game of football at the right times, but lacking the individual quality to make it anything other than a goalless draw.
Injuries played a role, with the Emma Hayes' USWNT without their attacking front three of Sophia Smith, Trinity Rodman and Mallory Swanson. So too did the relative youth on display. This was hardly a thriller. But there were still interesting elements to it all. Intrigue – yes, there's the word – was apparent. A 0-0 draw might suggest a bore. In actuality, the reality is the opposite: these are two very good, very well-matched football teams. For the U.S., there's little to complain about.
Getty ImagesThe basic idea
There were, indeed, tactics at play. Yes, it was a goalless draw, but the USWNT did have a plan to try to win this thing. It all starts with Naomi Girma. The center back is so efficient on the ball that Hayes can effectively design her build up play around her. Need someone to play an incisive pass between the lines? Sorted. Need a long-distance ping? No problem.
And that seemed to be the idea. England hit the ball long a lot. The U.S. won the resulting header. Girma picked up the ball, and another attack started. Positionally, it was all quite interesting. Sam Coffey, a stout defensive midfielder, didn't drop as deep as she might usually, while the full backs stayed wide. But the plan here was clear: shuffle the ball around the edges and then try to find holes in a compact midfield. Whether that was the idea from minute one is unknown. But the U.S. certainly adjusted to a well-drilled England defense. There wasn't going to be much playing through the middle here, so the wide areas were certainly available.
And at times, it worked a charm. When Girma shuffled the ball quickly, England lost its defensive shape. The U.S. outside backs picked the right opportunities to go forward, and created overloads – outnumbering the defense – on either wing. This is what good management looks like; respond to the bit that your opponent is good at by trying to find advantages elsewhere. In the end, it didn't quite work. But the intent was there.
AdvertisementGetty Images SportLynn Williams and the USWNT press
When the teamsheet was released, it appeared that Williams would play off the left, with Emma Sears – typically a No.9 – operating as a central striker. The reality was different. Williams played through the middle, while Sears occupied the right. Alyssa Thompson rounded out the attacking trio as a left winger.
And that all made sense, in its most basic form. Williams, despite being 31, has a valuable turn of pace, and her defensive instincts are certainly the best among the front three. Her remit was clear: press as soon as the England center backs get the ball. And it all worked rather well. Leah Williamson and Alex Greenwood barely had time to think when they received the ball, Williams barreling towards them. The result was a Lionesses team that likes to possess and build through the thirds often forced to play long, and give the ball back to the U.S.
This was particularly efficient in the early stages, when an England giveaway was recycled, shifted, and reworked. A passage of play – 30 seconds later – lead to Alyssa Thompson being given the best chance of the first half (it was well saved by England's Mary Earps).
Getty Images SportHoran playing further forward
Lindsey Horan has her critics. And that's fair. She has never been an excellent athlete, and, at times, she is frustratingly slow. Her ability to play as a center midfielder in high octane international contests that rely heavily on pace and athleticism can rightly be questioned. She's not that type of player, though. Instead, Horan is overtly European, a quick thinker with sublime technique on the ball.
Stick her in the Spain side, for example, and she would thrive. For the USWNT, her long term role isn't quite clear. It's one of Hayes' issues ahead of the 2027 World Cup.
And she took a stab at figuring her out on Saturday. Hayes used the Lyon midfielder in an interesting way. Horan played as the most advanced in a midfield three. For some stretches, she was basically a second striker, pushing high up the pitch and occupying the areas just behind Williams. In theory, it's an odd choice; she is neither quick nor particularly agile.
But Horan's eye for a pass and reading of the game is pretty much unparalleled in this U.S. side. On Saturday, it showed. Everything good seemed to run through her, those clever flicks and tricks opening spaces in the final third that were otherwise slammed shut.
One or two passes were overhit here – and there was a perhaps ill-advised attempt at a bicycle kick in the first half – but Horan made things happen in a game that otherwise lacked an attacking spark. Yes, she was often crowded out. Sure, she can try to do too much at times. Yet the idea, the usage of a footballer to unlock an opponent, was very much there.
ENJOYED THIS STORY?
Add GOAL.com as a preferred source on Google to see more of our reporting
GettyRose Lavelle suffers
There is, of course, a knock on effect. Hayes was always going to play a 4-3-3 – with three midfielders matched up against the Lionesses' trio. Numerically it made sense. The issue is, Lavelle and Horan prefer to play in much the same area.
Lavelle is a different type of player, but is at her best when making forward runs, her defensive responsibilities lightened while she roams into the final third. Instead, with Horan instructed to stay high, Lavelle was forced to play a little deeper, at times alongside the defensive-minded Coffey. In terms of numbers, it added up. Hayes knew there needed to be some sort of cover here – playing with just one deeper-lying midfielder would leave the U.S. vulnerable on the break against a side with blistering pace on the counter.
As Horan put it after the game, "Those two attacking midfielders [for England] are class. Stanway is one of the best in the world with the ball and Park on city is really coming up and doing well for England as well. I think we handled them well and imposed ourselves. We did well in the physical battle and showed our composure and how we can possess."
The result was a perfectly fine defensive shape, but the removal of the bits at which Lavelle is elite. Those signature forward runs and clever turns in the final third were nowhere to be found. Only later, when the U.S. showed a bit more attacking intent, did she manage to get forward a bit more. The result was as expected: the U.S. were far more dangerous, but England hit on the break a few times.
It's one of those interesting tactical things that Hayes will have to figure out. Having two elite footballers is always a good thing, but when they are at their best in the same spots, it leaves a manager with a problem.