Chelsea player ratings at the Women’s World Cup: Norway, Lionesses on top

3. Semifinalists: Sweden and England

Jonna Andersson, Defence, Sweden: 5

Anderrsson made only one appearance in the Women’s World Cup, starting in a heavily rotated XI against the United States in the group stage finale which was basically a dead rubber. She scored an own goal early in the second half to give the USA a 2-0 lead, and was not seen off the bench again.

Millie Bright, Centre back, England: 6.5

Millie Bright is a proper Chelsea centre-back, right down to getting sent off in the semifinals and having to miss her squad’s final game of the tournament. Unfortunately for her and England, that final game was not the final itself, as England closed out their tournament in the third-place match.

Bright had been one of England’s most resolute defenders, playing the role in the traditional way that is out of favour in this era of “ball-playing centrebacks” but is still the way that wins games and tournaments for men and women alike.

The Lionesses needed Bright’s presence and physicality in that finale against Sweden. Bright, like her teammate Thorisdottir, often has a mistake in her. But seeing how easily Sweden bossed around England’s defence, they needed Bright to take a few overly physical risks in an attempt to stop the swarming Scandinavians.

Karen Carney, Forward, England: 7.5

Phil Neville criminally underused Karen Carney in this tournament. In explaining her retirement, Carney said “my body tells me enough’s enough.” Apparently Neville took this a bit too literally.

Every time Carney came on the pitch she showed the directness and quality England needed throughout much of the tournament. The Lionesses had some great performances and improved over their first six games, including the loss to the United States. But they could have improved more quickly and been in a better position to challenge the USA and Sweden if Carney had been brought in earlier and more often to propel the team forward.

Neville could have done more for England by doing more with Karen Carney. Her swansong tournament was a missed opportunity for the Lionesses.

Magdalena Ericsson, Left back, Sweden: 7.5

Many of the Chelsea FCW players called up to the Women’s World Cup play a different role for the Blues than the did for their national team, and many of them have played different positions throughout their club career. Ericsson is another of these, and her time as Chelsea’s centre-back helped her keep Sweden’s defence tight and narrow without being a restrictive low block.

Ericsson played her role as Sweden’s left back as a hybrid left back / left centre-back. This allowed her to easily swap marking responsibilities with Sweden’s midfielders as the play progressed, particularly if Ericsson had to come central to cover a gap before returning to her usual position.

Fran Kirby, England, Midfielder: 6.5, but with caveats

Phil Neville seems to have excelled with his personnel management, but as the tournament went on and in the days since England’s third-place game, some of his squad and tactical decisions look increasingly shaky.

Kirby seemed to go in and out of some of England’s early games, never really getting traction as so much of the play flowed around her through Toni Duggan and Jill Scott up to Ellen White, or on the other side through Lucy Bronze and Nikita Parris. But as England faced increasingly difficult opponents, the foolishness of the team bypassing Kirby became more and more apparent.

It’s as if they played like they didn’t need her when they did not, in fact, need her. But that boomeranged on them when they did need her and were not sure how to bring her into the play.

Kirby had her best game when England needed it most: the third-place match against Sweden. From her long dribble in the first 10 minutes to her goal to her perfect passes that no one seemed ready for, the disconnect between Kirby and the squad – which Neville seems to have permitted over the first six games – hurt them in the finale.

Carly Telford, Goalkeeper, England: 6.5

Telford offered a good option for England as she is quicker off her line than Karen Bardsley, which was important in a tournament where so many goals came off of set pieces and where England could have so many opportunities to start a quick counter from deep in their zone.

Unfortunately, Phil Neville’s adherence to playing out from the back and Telford’s apparent acceptance of the myth of the “ball-playing goalkeeper” nearly cost England several times.

Telford made enough quality saves to justify her starts, but once again, how Neville deployed the talent he had is one of the overarching questions on this Women’s World Cup.