|
|
Post by Tellme on Feb 27, 2004 21:39:34 GMT -6
This game's score is a little deceiving I think. As I watched, the difference between these two teams was Lapira and St. Martin's made immature mistakes. You could really tell that STL had the more mature players as they capitalised on every chance they had. Meanwhile, St. Martin's didn't. Lapira did his usual magic and won the mvp as a result. But two of the goals were just plain gifts from the St. Martin's goalie, and he should have come up with one of the other ones. All told, STL showed their maturity and as a result get another championship. If St. Martin's is losing as few people as the roster said, I would be shocked if they did not win the whole thing next year. Finally, I have to congratulate the STL sweeper on his game. He shut down the game, and could have been the mvp in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bish on Feb 28, 2004 0:31:22 GMT -6
I think it was mostly dominated by STL. The score is very accurate on how the game was played out. STL ran the game, except for a couple 5 to 10 minute spurts when St. Martin's had the ball on STL's half, hence the 1 goal they scored.
I predicted a blowout, and it was a blowout.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerplayer4 on Feb 28, 2004 11:06:54 GMT -6
I think it was mostly dominated by STL. The score is very accurate on how the game was played out. STL ran the game, except for a couple 5 to 10 minute spurts when St. Martin's had the ball on STL's half, hence the 1 goal they scored. I predicted a blowout, and it was a blowout. I completly disagree with that statement Catch. For one thing, I thought the 1st half was played out pretty even by both teams wth St. Martin's having two breakdowns. In the 2nd half St. Louis was given two gifts by St. M's goalie. And the last two goals were a result of the St. Martin's coach taking all of his starters out and STL coach left his starters in, resulting in two quick goals for STL. |
|
|
|
Post by Tellme on Feb 28, 2004 13:07:29 GMT -6
I agree with soccerplayer. The difference was STL didn't break down like St. Martin's did. The flow of the game was not totally in one direction. The St. Martin's goalkeeper made mistakes and in my opinion cost three goals. Then the last goal was against all subs, at least it appeared that way. I felt like the score really was deceiving because for probably the first 50 minutes it was pretty level.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bish on Feb 28, 2004 15:48:01 GMT -6
I don't think it's possible to say that a team didn't dominate most of the game when they scored 6 goals, and should have had probably 4 or 5 more. Sure St. Martins had some good runs, but St. Louis possessed the ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerplayer4 on Feb 28, 2004 18:51:38 GMT -6
Yes well what I'm saying is two of the goals were scored by STL's starter against ST M's bench and two other goals were completly the keepers fault so I am saying I think that the 6-1 score doesnt reflect how the game was played b/c I dont think STL completly dominated ST M as that score would compel you to believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bish on Feb 28, 2004 19:33:10 GMT -6
I never said completely dominated ;D . I said mostly dominated.
|
|
