# Is Anyone Calling US Women's Soccer Team "Chokers"? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [July 18, 2011, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499 "2011-07-18T21:45:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/61 "2011-07-19T21:05:01Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Losing concentration and/or over thinking are synonymous with being scared? That’s news to me. > > Also, what about the claims of moral judgement? Losing concentration and concentrating too much are not synonymous with choking, in my experience. I mean, I think that’s a pretty good explanation of the difference of opinion. I don’t think that is the common usage of the word. I don’t think the OP makes sense under that understanding. And what about them? You aren’t sufficiently convinced, is the idea? I’m not going to try to prove to you what _you_ mean. It’s obvious to me that when most people call Karl Malone or Lebron or Peyton Manning or whoever else chokers, they aren’t saying that they think too much. They’re calling them cowards. Coward is a moral judgment. You’ve already responded to my saying choker = coward. I get that. ---
**Author:** ![markdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@markdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markdash)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/62 "2011-07-19T21:16:12Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > I don’t think it’s accurate or fair, but it is true that “choke,” like “chemistry,” is often invoked as an explanation for a mismatch between expectations and outcomes. That is, > _the team I said was way better didn’t win_ = _they choked!_ > rather than, > _the team I said was way better didn’t win_ = _I was mistaken, the other team was better_. But I would disagree with both of those assessments. Even if Team A is objectively better by all accounts than Team B, Team B can still beat Team A. Sports are weird like that. And it can all happen without any “choking,” just a funny bounce here or there. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/63 "2011-07-19T21:22:35Z")
Really strange and rare flukes and referee miscalls aside, I think the team that wins is _by definition_ the better team. Winning is the _objective_; under anything like normal circumstances, it doesn’t make _sense_ to say that the team that fails is “better” than the team that succeeds, at least on that day that matters. In short, playing the game _is_ the objective measure. ---
**Author:** ![markdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@markdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markdash)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/64 "2011-07-19T21:45:36Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > Really strange and rare flukes and referee miscalls aside, I think the team that wins is _by definition_ the better team. Winning is the _objective_; under anything like normal circumstances, it doesn’t make _sense_ to say that the team that fails is “better” than the team that succeeds, at least on that day that matters. > > In short, playing the game _is_ the objective measure. Well yes, clearly the team that wins was almost always better on that day. But that’s a big difference from arguments about team strength/weakness. The perception of “choking” is when a favored team loses to an underdog (even if both teams play well and the underdog happens to come out on top) or if a team is perceived to have a big advantage during the contest, then manages to lose. I could beat LeBron James in a game of 1-on-1 if I got super lucky and made a bunch of fallaway jumpers or halfcourt shots. Would anyone say that I was “better” than LeBron? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/65 "2011-07-19T21:46:31Z")
But I really doubt you believe in all the consequences that ought to stem from that. There is such a thing as the quality of a team that persists from game to game, right? And in a 7 game series that finishes 4-1 with three blowouts, it’s pretty clear that the winning team was the better team. But the other team won one. At the end of that game, I think you still know who the better team is. “They were the better team tonight” has its place as a sports cliche, but it’s not the same as “they are a better team.” And “we lost” isn’t the same as “we choked.” And if instead of a seven game series, the same teams played a one game championship, the lesser team could win that game. If you were a god capable of reiterating the same game over and over again, the better team would win the majority of the games, but not all, unless it was like professionals vs. schoolkids. And it wouldn’t necessarily be the case that the team that lost lost because they choked. It’s just some shit that happened. Or, think of it this way. Let’s say the US team was Rick Barry, and all it needed to do to win the final was make a figurative free throw. He’s a 90% shooter, almost. If he misses, there’s no way to tell, unless you’re a god who can make him do it again and again under the same circumstances, whether that was a choke, or just a thing that happens one out of ten times because the universe is a complicated place. Now make it a contest - a 90% shooter vs. a 75% shooter. The better shooter can lose some, and still be a better shooter. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/66 "2011-07-19T21:47:24Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > Really strange and rare flukes and referee miscalls aside, I think the team that wins is _by definition_ the better team. Winning is the _objective_; under anything like normal circumstances, it doesn’t make _sense_ to say that the team that fails is “better” than the team that succeeds, at least on that day that matters. > > In short, playing the game _is_ the objective measure. Why do the NBA, NHL, and MLB play 7 game playoffs? ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/67 "2011-07-19T22:29:31Z")
The US **has** a National Women’s Soccer team?:eek: Is that,y’know…_legal?_😕 ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2011, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/68 "2011-07-19T22:50:29Z")
Great post. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/69 "2011-07-20T00:40:39Z")
Sometimes the best team loses. You see games where you think if they played 5 times, they would win 4. But this was game 5. There are variables in every athletic contest. There are unlucky breaks, like hitting goal posts and deflecting out, bad calls and great bounces. I think the US team was a more talented team. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/70 "2011-07-20T01:10:50Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > IMO, It WAS a choke job. Why? Simple: the U.S. were a prohibitive favorite Not by anyone who’s been following women’s soccer. > [@spark240](#): > > Really strange and rare flukes and referee miscalls aside, I think the team that wins is _by definition_ the better team. You guys do realize that FIFA records shootouts as draws? Japan won the shootout and the Cup. The game itself was a draw. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/71 "2011-07-20T01:12:42Z")
Choking in this context I think means outplaying your opponent and losing anyway, or possibly playing well for most of the contest but then much worse at the end. In that sense the Patriots didn’t choke against the Giants in the Superbowl; the Giants legitimately outplayed them for almost the entire game. (Couldn’t let that stand uncontested, heh.) Regarding the meta-conversation about the term choking itself: > [@Baron\_Greenback](#): > > The only people who use the word “choke” in respect of any sporting event, are people who have never competed at any level in a sporting event. Hope this helps. Oh, and commentators looking for column inches or broadcast minutes I suppose. Professional tennis players – even highly ranked ones – are unusually upfront and candid about choking, specifically about matches they have choked. They use the term fairly freely. I believe I’ve heard Jason Taylor reference the Midnight Miracle as a chokejob by the Dolphins, and I’m pretty sure I’ve heard both Michael Strahan and Tiki Barber reference the 2002 wildcard loss to the 49ers as a chokejob. (That’s the one with the famously embarassing moment of Strahan pointing at the scoreboard just before the Giants’ 24 point lead evaporated.) > [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > There’s this notion that anybody who loses, if they’ve been previously determined to be “championship-caliber,” lost because they choked. That’s a fan thing, not a thing that happens on the field. “Choker” is this weird moral judgment that doesn’t mean you got beat, it means you actively gave the game away by being a coward or cowards. But shit. That was a good freaking team they played, whether they were recognized as one beforehand or not. If you want to say the three who missed their penalties were choking, I suppose you’re entitled. Maybe Lloyd only puts PKs over the bar when she’s afraid of the moment; I can’t really say. I’m inclined to say shit happens. Somebody loses when you go to PKs. Rewind time and play that match 100 times, and the US will win some and Japan will win some. > > For me, this idea that the whole team buckled under pressure and only lost because they were too _afraid_ to win, which is what I understand choking to mean (and I think I have as good a frame of reference on it as the rest of the people in the thread), just doesn’t match what I saw happening. Firing a rocket from the edge of the box that hits the crossbar or getting a cross in and redirecting it just wide or heading one just over on a ball from 50 yards out isn’t choking. They’re missed chances, and it’s fair to criticize them as such. I just don’t see how we can say fear of pressure had anything to do with it. Japan’s out there playing, too, and yet the ball kept getting onto US feet one way or another. I think this is off base. I don’t think it’s a fair representation of either of the definitions I’ve just proposed, either of which I think most people would choose as the definition they understand if given a multiple choice between them and cowardice. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/72 "2011-07-20T01:44:34Z")
> [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](#): > > The US **has** a National Women’s Soccer team?:eek: > > Is that,y’know…_legal?_😕 Misogyny is so funny. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/73 "2011-07-20T01:47:46Z")
Your first definition suggests that, if you lose a game, it’s better if you choked than if you didn’t. “Choker” would be a compliment, given that you didn’t win. I have never heard anyone use the word like that, and I would love to see a cite of anyone doing it. And most people would choose that definition over “cracked under pressure in a game they should have won because they were too weak to handle it”? I really doubt it, but I’d love to learn something new today. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/74 "2011-07-20T01:55:33Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Your first definition suggests that, if you lose a game, it’s better if you choked than if you didn’t. “Choker” would be a compliment, given that you didn’t win. I have never heard anyone use the word like that, and I would love to see a cite of anyone doing it. I can’t even follow this logic. Maybe untwist it a little for me? > [@](#): > > And most people would choose that definition over “cracked under pressure in a game they should have won because they were too weak to handle it”? I really doubt it, but I’d love to learn something new today. Why is “coward” not in your rephrasing? Trying to move the goalposts? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/75 "2011-07-20T02:02:35Z")
…yes. That’s what I was trying to do. I’ll stop now. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/76 "2011-07-20T02:03:22Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Why do the NBA, NHL, and MLB play 7 game playoffs? Because that’s the structure; that’s the event. Ultimately it’s arbitrary. (Yes, I think it’s an aesthetically better structure than a shorter series, but the reasons the World Series is seven instead of five, or nine or fifteen, aren’t really _baseball_ reasons.) In such cases, the statement about “winning the game” applies to the event as a whole. The 1960 Pirates were the better team, _according to the terms of the competition_. Because those terms _are_ the objective. If the '60 Series _had_ been nine or fifteen then maybe the Yankees would have been better on those _different_ terms. The 1986 Mets were the better team, whether you think Buckner “choked” or just wasn’t playing well enough. > [@Yookeroo](#): > > You guys do realize that FIFA records shootouts as draws? Japan won the shootout and the Cup. The game itself was a draw. I do realize that, though I think it’s a silly convention. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/77 "2011-07-20T02:06:33Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > Because that’s the structure; that’s the event. In such cases, the statement about “winning the game” applies to the event as a whole. :rolleyes: Lets imagine a competition in which they flip a coin after the first match to see if it’s best of 1 or best of 3. A wins the first game, but it was a fluke. They were clearly less skilled and athletic. You’re claiming that this coin flip is going to determine if they’re the better team or not? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/78 "2011-07-20T02:08:01Z")
It’s really a shame that sport has never been able to come up with a neutral, objective, quantifiable way to determine who played a game better, isn’t it? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/79 "2011-07-20T02:09:33Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > It’s really a shame that sport has never been able to come up with a neutral, objective, quantifiable way to determine who played a game better, isn’t it? 😉 First, the final score is usually, but not always, indicative of who played the better game. Second, playing the better game is not equivalent to being the better team, which is what **spark** is claiming. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499/80 "2011-07-20T02:16:20Z")
If you didn’t win, then you must not have played better, and if you didn’t play better, then you’re not demonstrably the better team. It’s pretty simple. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-anyone-calling-us-womens-soccer-team-chokers/589499.md?page=5)