As did the Japanese. Maybe I saw a different game, but the one I saw had good attempts on both sides but also a lot of poor finishing. People here seem to think the US wiped the floor with the Japanese. That is not indicative of the match I saw. The US were on top, but in football being “on top” doesn’t mean anything, I’ve seen many, many games go to another team “against the run of play”. No one in the UK seems to imply that it is choking. Phrases like “couldn’t convert their chances” are far more commonly used.
The argument Hoddle used was that a training ground cannot get close to simulating the pressure of the spot kick and as such it was pointless practicing. Allegedly, David Batty, the second England player to miss ultimately handing the game to Argentina, had never at any point taken a penalty in training.
If someone takes a shot in the middle of the game and it sails over the bar, hell, say even a penalty in the first half, is that also a “choke”? Sometimes people just screw up. There’s a very good argument that a lot of missed penalties are due to people over-thinking it, trying to place the shot too much. Many argue that it is just best to run up and tonk the thing.
When they screw up over and over in the biggest game of their lives, they will be accused of choking. It may not be true, but it is opinion, one that many experts agree with.
If they did this in an unimportant game, nothing would have been said. But this game brings enormous pressure, a choking pressure you have to overcome.They did not appear to overcome the stage .
Which experts are these? None of the news reports I have read mentioned choking. Could that be to do with them being neutral? Dare I say it, just better reporters? Maybe just not so black and white, realising there are shades of grey between winning and choking?
Except for their two goals earlier in the game, right?
I don’t understand how you can score a goal in the 104th minute, then because you let in the equalizer at 118’, all of a sudden the stage is too big. Wasn’t the stage “too big” all game long?
I think the term choke is usually applied to plays of significance at the end of a game. Missing two free throws in the first quarter is not choking, but missing them in the final seconds when you’re down 1 point is choking. And you are probably correct that choking is often the result of over-thinking.
It looked like it. They missed some easy shots all game long. Then in the shootout, it was even more obvious. They were clearly a better team. Yet snatched defeat from sure victory.
Giving up a one goal lead is not a choke because all it takes is, well, one goal, one kick, to equalize, so no choke on the main gameplay. I do think they choked in the penalty kicks and I will say it because it simply looked to me like they didn’t have confidence. Only Abby Wambach hit a confident convincing penalty, the others seemed to me like the players got a bit overwhelmed, whether it was physical or emotional I can’t say but the team did not choke, but it certainly seemed that certain players did.
And yes, I have heard plenty of folks talking about it as a choke. i thin it is getting the same kind of discussion on whether it was a choke or not as a mens team would.
But “choke” implies that you were ahead, and the pressure got to you, so you lost, right?
If a team were down 3 goals, made a furious second-half rally to draw even, then lost in penalties by mis-hitting a bunch of balls, would people say they choked? Probably not. It’s the perception that you are close to victory, and then something happens that prevents that. Instead of just ascribing it to “shit happens” or a normal event on the pitch, people try to give it all sorts of meaning, like the players were wilting under the intense pressure.
I would disagree with this. For example, say a closely contested basketball game came down to a tie game with an 85% free throw shooter on the line. 0.1 seconds left and all he needs to do is make 1 of 2. But he misses both and the team goes on to lose. Would you not say that guy choked? I certainly would.
Now how would you classify this famous 1994 Texas High School football game between Plano East and John Tyler. Plano East is down 41-17 with less than three minutes to play and manages a furious comeback and scores 4 TD to take the lead with less than 30 seconds to play, only to allow a TD return on the ensuing kickoff. Who choked?
IMO, It WAS a choke job. Why? Simple: the U.S. were a prohibitive favorite and blew two leads. The most recent widely known example I can think of is the Giants beating a 18-0 Patriots team in the Super Bowl.
You know, I thought about just asking what “choke” meant up front, but then I thought, no, come on, everybody knows what it means, why do you want to be all socratic in a conversation about sports.
You’re asking “why would anyone ever think” everything in that post you quoted, or what? You can pretend it’s blowing your mind if you like, but I’ve heard the word “choke” in reference to a sporting event probably about 10,000 times, and it is, the vast majority of the time, accompanied by just direct insults to the person’s character. It is really obvious to me - and obvious to almost everybody else, I think - that “failure due to pressure” is not a different accusation from “you were scared.” It’s weird to me that this bothers you. It seems like the entire point of having a word for this situation.
Look at the OP, even - “reviled,” “ridiculed,” “ugly word.” The argument was, I believe, that people are less willing to condemn women than they are men, because women get special soft treatment. The evidence was (the OP thought) that nobody’s calling the WNT chokers.
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.
I think we have determined that there is no clear definition of choking. There are those that are undoubtedly choke jobs (Giants losing to the Eagles last year). There are those things which are not choke jobs (98% of all sporting events) and then there is a gray area where people disagree because of the somewhat subjective nature of choking. (BTW, my dictionary here defines it as “to perform badly in a critical situation”…eh…still leaves open as to what is performing badly and what is a critical situation)
I think they choked.
The first goal from Japan was the US team being complacent and careless. The second wasn’t so much, but they still had a late lead and gave it up. The penalty kicks were just sad.