Japan beats Australia 1-0 to advance to semifinal against England at Women's World Cup

And absolutely deserved to win. Very skilful, technical and well organised - I hope they go on to win it.

Way to go, Nadeshiko ! That goal right at the end was exciting ! Their (Japan) passing was good all game, just couldn't make that final connection. The passing that won the game for them was Ichi . . . ni . . . san . . . shi . . . GO - O - O - O - O - O - AL ! ! ! Ganbarre, Nadeshiko ! .

Where are all the "sucker" experts and their analysis that the Nadeshiko were a spent force, would always be beaten on the next game, yada, yada, yada!

They may well not win it all; that is football!

Yet, nobody plays the "jogo bonito" like they do!

a very tight game. While Japan seem to be the better side, with the domination, their passing and their strong defense, Australia speed and physical play seem to overwhelm the Nadeshiko at times. I'm glad they scored within the 90 min and held on for the win.

GO JAPAN!!! GAMBARE, NIPPON!!! GAMBARE, NADESHIKO JAPAN!!! KATSU!

Well done. Japan has come a long way and the effort is paying off.

Ganbare nippon! ganbare japan! well deserved win. I know that japan can win the world cup and we are sure about that. now japan r going to be more confident

Both sides played well, very exciting game. I wish Australia could get thru as well, perhaps next Cup. It is interesting how Japanese girls are so skilled in soccer, and they don't even have a J-girls soccer league.

Well played to the young Matildas for fighting so hard against the Champions! They have put womens soccer in the news, which is very rare, and a great thing. 3 consecutive Quarter-Finals in World Cups - lets hope they go one better next time! Congrats to the Japanese ladies, Id love Miss Sawa to lift that cup again - but they will face a very tough task in the Semi though...

Near total domination by Japan, but with a total lack of willingness to shoot. Three or four times they had good opportunities to strike but continued to try to pass it in. I was starting to worry that the Aussies would sneak a counter attack goal but in the end the better team won.

Now they play England.

will now face england, my homeland against my adopted home. who to root for?

Ganbare nippon! ganbare japan! well deserved win.

taiga_123. Pump the brakes there a little will you please? Japan played well, but was the benficiary of an obvioulsy missed offsides call on their goal. ALL the commentators in the U.S., which has no axe to grind in this match, are saying as much. Was that not even mentioned there in Japan?

The best of Japanese athletics! You all deserve this!

@jerseyboy... Offside??? are you serious?

It's Europe vs. the New World / Orient

Well done Nadeshiko Japan. They were clearly the better side even if the goal was late and scrappy. The Matildas can hold their heads high however. They're a young team on the rise. Hopefully next time they can go a step or two better.

jerseyboy

ALL the commentators in the U.S., which has no axe to grind in this match, are saying as much. Was that not even mentioned there in Japan?

Obviously a comment not knowing what an offside is.

Good on the Japanese ladies, and no shame for Australia since they got further than they ever have. Best of luck to Japan in the next game, whomever it may be against (likely England, but I'm not going to be as assuming as other posters above).

@smith pretty sure this is the 3rd time Australia has made the qtr finals....

Aussieboy: And I'm pretty sure it says, even in the article, that "The Matilda's did a better job against Japan than past teams have", which would mean they went further than in the past, no? It also says, "The Matildas go home after making their deepest run in tournament history", and that in the last of such tournaments Japan's record is 4-0-1 in last five meetings, and 8-1-1 in the past ten games. So, I think it's not a stretch to say Australia got further than they ever have.

I hadn't seen the score for the Canada/England game until after my last post. Good on England for the win, and too bad for Canada, though I think a lot of people, if not most, didn't expect them to win. Sounds like it was a pretty tense finish.

German England final.

'a horrible turnover'

'a long header'

'a tremendous rush down the sideline'

Does anyone else get the feeling this reporter isn't used to writing about this particular sport?

Japan played well, but was the benficiary of an obvioulsy missed offsides call on their goal.

Wasn't even close to being offside.

As predicted, another step closer to the final match between U.S. & Japan. However, there will be no overtime or penalty scoring deciding the 2015 women world champion, this time around.

Japan is very quietly dominating each game and just sucking the life out of each opponent.

Germany vs. USA, England vs. Japan, both must watch matches.

"Japan's goal was off-side"

Joke of the day.

As an Aussie who has been a Nadesko fan since I saw them play against the Matildas in Sendai 20 years ago here is my comment.

It was hot.

The height difference between the two teams was huge.

Japan won!!!!!

Towards the end of the game the Matildas looked drained and tired. Even sprinting looked like a struggle. This article talked about a scramble in front of the goal and the scramble was the Aussies trying to stay on their feet.

Nadesko are tough. And of course from here on it is anyone's cup with the Americans still hurting from loosing to Japan last time round.

But we, as spectators can look forward to some real drama

Thank you for your efforts, ladies , One and all.

The UK bookies are agreed on a Germany v Japan final with Germany to beat Japan. They are calling the Germany v USA semi much closer than the Japan v England game. England are by some distance the outside bet to win the tournament.

Nadeshiko Japan's dribbling technique, pin-point passing, team work, and discipline are truly world class. Their games have been a joy to watch. Would be great to see them play the US for all the marbles again. Go Nadeshiko!

Congrats again, Japan! I love the way these ladies play football, they are so well-organized and disciplined, have control over the ball possession and their tiki taka has proven most efficient even against physically dominant teams like the Aussies. The heat must have been brutal in the stadium so extra thumbs up for both teams' performances.

@Jboy, no, not offside. Read up on the rule. No in anyway or form offside, not even Jan Vertonghen offside.

I hope the Men's National team was watching this game. They sure could learn a thing or two from the women's team. Yes, it is amazing that this team plays so well considering there is not a league for these women to play in, though they play together 365 days a year and 12 hours a day!

On the offside "debate" jerseyboy is not completely off-base, there were claims at the time on the internet that the goal was offside. But if you watch the goal the correct call was in fact made. The reason for the dispute is that when the initial shot was taken Iwabuchi was in fact in an off-side position, but NOT involved in the play. That shot was blocked, then by the time the ball came through to her on the second try the Australian defenders had played her back into an on-side position. A good goal, but a difficult call to make and easy to see why some people thought it was offside.

garymalmgren: "Nadesko are tough. And of course from here on it is anyone's cup with the Americans still hurting from loosing to Japan last time round"

"Loosing"? Were they firing arrows at the Japan team?

@smith not a stretch but FYI the Matildas made it to the quarter-finals in the previous two World Cups where they were defeated by Sweden 3-1 in 2011, and Brazil 3-2 in 2007. I would not call it their deepest run but more a deep run that they have achieved twice before.

@jerseyboy... Offside??? are you serious?

Obviously a comment not knowing what an offside is.

"Japan's goal was off-side" Joke of the day.

@Jboy, no, not offside. Read up on the rule. No in anyway or form offside, not even Jan Vertonghen offside.

Just as I expected. Thanks for the laugh. I guess FOX Sports (the network carrying the matches here in the U.S.), as well as ESPN (the network that carries the World Cup here) are all ignorent of the rules as well. (Amazing, though that both have re-played the goal, with digital enhancement to clearly show the offense.) But, since you clearly do not know, nor have had explained to you, by the biased Japanese media the rules, let me educate you -- from Yahoo sports:

The Japan player was offside because there was only one defender between her and the goal when the ball was being played on goal. You might think the player only needs to be behind or even with one defender but the goalkeeper usually acts as the second defender. With the goalkeeper out attempting to make a save, the Japanese attacker was clearly offside. She was in between the last two defenders when the ball was shot on goal. If the first shot had scored her position would not have mattered, but since she became involved with the play on the rebound she should have been whistled for being offside.

Like I said. Well played, they deserved the win. But they benefitted from just one of the many poor calls/non-calls in the tournament. Which you'd know, if folks there were actually watching the tournament, and not just Japan's games.

Japan seems to have the most favourable draw in this tournament while Germany has the most difficult. C'mon, three world cup debutante in the group stage and against a debutante in the round of 16, so the match against the Maltidas in the quarter finals was the first time nadeshiko faced a non WC debutante in this WC. The FBI and DOJ need to step in and investigate, maybe senor Blatter influenced the draw.

jerseyboy

Each and everyone of us saw that is saying otherwise had seen the replay more then once. Don't really care what US broadcasters are saying either since they only televise once every four years or so while in Europe and Japan it's aired every week during season.

Jersey

Yes, your American ESPN "analysts" are a joke!

We have the English Premier League to watch every week, i.e. proper football.

Nobody in the Bundesliga or in La Liga thought there was a penalty.

You Americans can go back to watch sucker! And oh, re-learn the off-side rule, which any kid here in England knows fairly well.

Jboy, never knows when to quit, every dog man, woman and child says NO, but the boy says yes. What a joke. A boring one too. NOT offside. Not even by an mm, an inch or the membrane of a brain cell. Onside.

Correction:

Nobody in the major football leagues thought it was off-side (not a penalty!).

Mea culpa.

And to cap it all the Nadeshiko was just a masterclas for the Matildas.

No contest.

j-boy, learn the rules.

j-boy, learn the rules

bicultural -- I clearly stated the rule. So why don't you, Peeping_Tom, Tiring, UK993 and the other "proper football" snobs here tell me what is wrong in what I said. God its fun getting under your guys' skin. The defensiveness is simply mind-boggling.

Not taking anything away from Nadesheko victory but everybody is talking how Japan was masterclass but can't that be due to the opposition the Maltidas are not a household name in womens soccer. I think will make it to the finals due to the draw. If they had faced the type of opposition Germany has faced after the group they won't still be in the competition.

Readers, enough of this nonsense.

Jersey,

I actually do play football, as well as practice Shotokan.

There was NEVER, EVER an off-side because when the pass was made there were 2 Aussie defenders plus the Aussie goal-keeper behind the ball line.

This is for you;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4993924.stm

Great job, girls! Mana Iwabuchi, who scored the lone goal, was simply impressive. She's the youngest in the team, but her talent shows in her technique and handling skills. They showed some footage of her playing soccer when she was still in elementary school and you could see she already had it back then. A prodigy.

Looking forward to the match with England on Thursday morning. Should be a nail-biter.

There was NEVER, EVER an off-side because when the pass was made there were 2 Aussie defenders plus the Aussie goal-keeper behind the ball line.

Ball line has nothing to do with it in this case. The keeper was not behind Iwabuchi, so that means 2 other Aussies needed to be behind her to keep her onside. Its a stupid rule, in my opinion, but that is the rule.

Now, whether the 2 defenders were behind her or not seems questionable. Some still shots suggest Iwabuchi was offside by a a leg, but its not clear if they took the still at the right time, as it wasn't really a clean pass, and the 2nd defender was moving back as well.

Either way, the Aussies could hardly complain after just sitting back for almost the entire 90 minutes. The better team won.

therougou

When the shot was made by Iwashimizu and no Japanese players were behind the last two defenders then no off side is made. After that it was the Australian goal keeper who touched the ball so anyone can touch the ball at that point in which Iwabuchi shoved it between the goal posts.

therougou

Iwabuchi was not off-side.

Even if she had been (which she wasn't) she was not interfering with play!

A lot of people discussing here appear to have never heard of the rules changing 2 years ago!

There is now the concept of "active play" This debate clearly shows our American friends to be totally oblivious to this concept.

ANYONE can be in an off-side position if they want to.

Being off side is not an offence "per se", providing no pass is made to that person.

Check this link, with explanatory diagram from the BBC (above pasted already, clearly not read!)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4993924.stm

re: LostinNagoya, and kitzrow, although not professional per se, there is a J girls' (well, ladies') league.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._League

Congratulations on the win, absolutely.

The next match against England should be interesting to watch, but the heat factor at least could play into Nadeshiko's hands again. This kind of sweaty weather is typical in Japan and built into the genes.

@Triring

The point is that Iwabuchi did have a leg offside when the shot/pass was made, at least according to the stills out there.

@Peeping_Tom

Even if she had been (which she wasn't) she was not interfering with play!

You are not making any sense at all. She scored the goal! Interference has nothing to do with it.

Check this link, with explanatory diagram from the BBC (above pasted already, clearly not read!)

Nobody read this because you posted a broken link twice.

therougou

You are not making any sense at all. She scored the goal! Interference has nothing to do with it."

You've just stated it clearly. You don't understand what interfering in a play means!!!

There's a drawing (an idiot's guide) accompanying this article; unfortunately I cannot past it as welll.

"http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4993924.stm"

"Like most things in football, the offside rule is pretty simple - but there are a few situations that can make the calmest of managers blow their top.

The 'active' ruling for example. Players can be in an offside position but not be offside. It doesn't quite make sense at first, but let's stick to the basics first.

A player is in an offside position if, when the ball is played by a team-mate, they are nearer to the opposition's goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent.

From the graphic above, the second last opponent determines the line from where the offside area begins and can be anywhere in this half of the pitch.

The referee's assistant will make their decision based on this offside area.

All straightforward so far? This is where the grey areas start to make life a little confusing.

A change to the rule was introduced two years ago, which allows a player to be in an offside position provided they are not "actively involved in play".

It was designed to promote attacking football, but it is open to interpretation.

Fifa, world football's governing body, gives the following definition: "Interfering with play means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate." However, a player does not necessarily have to touch the ball to influence play. They are still offside if, in the opinion of the referee, they are judged to be: Interfering with an opponent If an attacker interferes with an opponent by either preventing them from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which deceives or distracts an opponent, then they are offside. Gaining an advantage If the ball is played into the penalty area and he plays the ball that rebounds to him off a post, crossbar or an opposing defender, then the attacker is offside as they have gained an advantage by being in that position. OFFSIDE ESSENTIALS Here are a few more things to remember. You can't be offside if: You receive the ball directly from a goal kick, a throw-in or a corner You are in your own half of the pitch You are level with the second last or last two opponents You are level with or behind the ball You are not actively involved in play, as explained above For any offside offence, the referee awards an indirect free-kick to the opposing team, to be taken from the place where the infringement occurred."

???Offside??? Anyway, great GOAL by Japan. Great result!

@peeping tom uve done enough to explain these amateur footballers how offside works. @therougou its simple, when the ball takes off a same team player is considered to be checked if defenders or any of their players are behind the line, not when the golie touches it off. besides iwabuchi received the ball before the defenders ran back. so u dont need to run offensive callings like "u dont make sence" or "ur broken link" but go google and learn some football

Proud of my countrywoman's efforts, brilliant game Matilda's, fell only very late in the game. The average age of the Aussie squad is 23, this is a good sign for their future. I think the accumulated efforts of the US & Brazil games finally took their toll too. Our defense was better than most predicted, our attack on goal & possession however (whilst we had some chances) were a lot more patchy compared to Japan. People also need to remember that although on average we are taller then the Japanese girls its far harder for a larger person to run around in the heat than a smaller person, & they sure had us running a lot, their control of the ball was excellent.

Credit to Japan, they deserve their victory. Oz v Japan are great games & I'm sure looking forward to more in the future. I know Australia will get there eventually, we are too damn competitive not to at some point.

Good luck to Japan for the rest of the cup. Given I have a German grandparent I'll be supporting the German girls for here on in :)

@Peeping_Tom

You still don't get it. "Interfering with play means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate." Iwabuchi scored the goal. Therefore she played the ball. Therefore she was offside.

@taiga_123

tom uve done enough to explain these amateur footballers how offside works

Tom has done nothing but confuse people with a broken link that proves exactly the opposite of what he is saying. I am just trying to clear up the air. How can you say a player isn't playing the ball when she scores the goal!

not when the golie touches it off.

Yes, we know that. But the goalie didn't pass it to Iwabuchi in this case. Her teammate did. It doesn't matter how many times the goalie touched the ball before that.

besides iwabuchi received the ball before the defenders ran back.

Before they ran back to their goal, yes. Which is why she would be offside!

@Rougou, as the famous song says, 'Let it go', you're just embarrassing yourself and taking up JT bandwidth!

therougou

Take a close at the vid again. When Iwashimizu took the shot there was the goal keeper and another defender standing in front of the goal mouth so Iwabuchi can't be in a off side position or she would have been in the goal. After that point on off side doesn't matter since it was Australia that touched the ball last before Iwabuchi pushed it in.

therougou

In an exam you would fail miserably.

YOU DON'T KNOW THE RULE!.

Worse still, you don't understand it.

Inferfering with the play ONLY occurs if a player ALREADY OFF-SIDE makes any of the things discribed on the link I posted.

Even if by a miracle Iwabuchi was off-side originally, by that time she WAS NOT INTERFERING WITH PLAY, EVEN IF OFF-SIDE. SHE COULD HAVE REMAINED THERE FOREVER, and the ref could not blow the whistle for off-side because she WAS NOT INTERFERING WITH PLAY.

By the time she receives the pass and scores she had been put into play AGAIN by no less than 2 Aussie defenders plus the goal-keeper.

Your statement that by scoring she interfere with play only shows four things:

1) You don't play football.

2) If you do play, you don't know the rule (I find it difficult to believe).

3) You are not willing to admit you're wrong and learn.

3) You are just embarassing yourself.

therougou

Inferfering with play ONLY occurs if a player ALREADY OFF-SIDE makes any of the things discribed on the link I posted.

Even if by a miracle Iwabuchi was off-side initially, at that time she WAS NOT INTERFERING WITH PLAY.

EVEN IF ON AN OFF-SIDE POSITION, SHE COULD HAVE REMAINED THERE FOREVER, and the ref could not blow the whistle for off-side because she WAS NOT INTERFERING WITH PLAY.

By the time she received the pass and scored she had been put BACK into play AGAIN by no less than 2 Aussie defenders plus the goal-keeper.

jerseyboy: ALL the commentators in the U.S., which has no axe to grind in this match, are saying as much (offside). Was that not even mentioned there in Japan?

Well, it certainly wasn't mentioned in Australia, and they did have an "axe to grind in this match". I think that pretty much says it all on that theory.

"Well, it certainly wasn't mentioned in Australia"

Well, it WASN’T mentioned ANYWHERE ELSE, other than America; apparently!!!

If American football, i.e. sucker "experts" don't know the off-side rule, is there is any hope for American posters on this site?

There was no off-side, never in a million years.

@Triring

Take a close at the vid again. When Iwashimizu took the shot there was the goal keeper and another defender standing in front of the goal mouth so Iwabuchi can't be in a off side position or she would have been in the goal. After that point on off side doesn't matter since it was Australia that touched the ball last before Iwabuchi pushed it in.

The keeper was out trying to block Iwashimizu, so I don't know how you can claim she was in the goal mouth. Below is a still from when Iwashimizu passed the ball. You can see Iwabuchi's leg was ahead of even the 2nd defender. That makes her offside. Now, It was a bang-bang play as the defender was moving towards the goal, so I could see how the video could confuse you. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIigNX9UMAAR0yn.jpg:large

@donkusai

Well, it certainly wasn't mentioned in Australia, and they did have an "axe to grind in this match". I think that pretty much says it all on that theory.

It shows Aussies know even less about soccer than Americans, which is about correct I guess. No, in all honesty, it happened so fast it was hard for anyone to question the play, and I can't blame the ref if it was the wrong decision. But the freeze-frames do show it was questionable.

@Peeping_Tom

There was no off-side, never in a million years.

Here it is for you again: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIigNX9UMAAR0yn.jpg:large

The keeper was out trying to block Iwashimizu, so I don't know how you can claim she was in the goal mouth. Below is a still from when Iwashimizu passed the ball. You can see Iwabuchi's leg was ahead of even the 2nd defender. That makes her offside. Now, It was a bang-bang play as the defender was moving towards the goal, so I could see how the video could confuse you. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIigNX9UMAAR0yn.jpg:large

Obviously like all says you have zero knowledge. Off-side position is decided when the pass/shot is made not when the other touched the ball. The picture you had posted is 5 seconds after the entire ordeal not at the point Iwashimizu had made the shot.

@Peeping_Tom

When the pass which led to Japan's goal was made, Iwabuchi was no longer in an off-side (assuming she had been) because there were 2 defenders and the goal-keeper beyond her, placing her back into the game.

Take another look at the pic and tell me how there were 2 defenders and a keeper beyond Iwabuchi. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIigNX9UMAAR0yn.jpg:large

Keep it coming. You are giving me a good laugh.

Or maybe you are convinced you know better than everyone here in the UK, France, Germany, Spain, i.e. the whole of Europe where absolutley NOBODY even mentions the possibility of a penalty????

Hah, how many people do you know in those countries that even care about women's soccer? You really think they are going to question a call this close after Japan dominated the entire match? Even Japanese bloggers admit she was offside. Nobody else says it because nobody cares about the matter.