|
Post by copakid14 on Jan 20, 2021 11:58:39 GMT -6
I was at the game and saw the game a tad different than what’s posted here. Just saying... W Maybe you should make an eye Dr. appointment. Or an appointment with a psychologist to help you unbiasdly put things into perspective. Dme(?) was very fair in their play by play of this game. 3 yellows on Shreve. 2 of which were in no way cards! Maybe 3 total foul calls on LCP. Poor reffing and a couple other unavoidable issues caused Shreve to lose to LCP. But it was a hard fought loss and win. Both TEAMS played their hearts out. 18-1 with the 1 being to a team that also fits in their 18! Not too shabby! Ready to move on but having watched the game a few times now, I decided to track fouls etc on the 2nd time through the game film. Final count: Loyola called for 6 fouls, Shreve 7 with I would say an average of 2-3 things I may have called for both teams that wasn't. It probably seemed like more since 4 of the 7 were called on one player. In regards to the yellow cards, having watched it back I believe that the yellows were given based on the nature of the tackles being from behind on promising attacking play. Stand alone foul in the middle of the field, probably not a yellow, tackle from behind with an attacking player either turning the corner near the edge of the box towards goal, yellow. One of the yellows could have also been for persistent infringement but I did not hear or get an explanation. There is a common misconception that referees should end the game with half the calls for one team and half for the other or it is not being called "even" or "consistent". In this case the foul calls were almost an identical number. In reference to the penalty kick mention or pulling a player down, it looked like the goalkeeper clearly came and won the ball and both players were shoulder to shoulder when they went down. Similar play to when Shreve keeper came out and made a good sliding save and our player fell over her with an extended leg in the air, not a pk for me on that one either. I was good with everything until the statement that "poor reffing and unavoidable issues caused Shreve to lose to LCP". Your assistant coaches coached a good game and were very quick to change to 3 in the back to press after the goal which is what they should have done. We made good adjustments from the first game that neutralized the two forwards in this game even though it forced us to sacrifice some possession in wide spaces because of it. I think you misinterpreted my message about the student sections being great. What I meant by that is not that they were yelling compliments and well behaved as I have no clue what both groups were saying. What I meant was that when you are playing in late Feb you see this type of environment come quarter/semi/finals. Last year in the finals we had hundreds of students calling my left back a ho for 80 minutes from 10 yds away from her. I'm not condoning it but you have to be able to process that kind of pressure and not crumble in the face of it. There was an administrator down in the front of the stadium once things began to get heated. It was a competitive game as was last night. Coach Lane is a good coach and Shreve has a good group of club players (which always determines how good you are in high school). No one is questioning that. They are good at what they do and their style of play. I don't like it and it isn't the style I try to get my team to play but I understand it and respect why that has been the style the last two seasons. It will have to be the style when you meet a Dominican/Mt. Carmel because they will play half court basketball around your penalty area like they did against us. I actually thought last night when Shreve played Byrd more straight up in the 2nd half they had the better of play then when they sat really low like in the first half. After Feb 2nd when we play Byrd I get to go back to cheering for all of our club kids and especially the ones I currently coach or have coached in the last few years. Should be a fun end to the season!
|
|
|
Post by dualdellortos on Jan 20, 2021 12:51:54 GMT -6
W Maybe you should make an eye Dr. appointment. Or an appointment with a psychologist to help you unbiasdly put things into perspective. Dme(?) was very fair in their play by play of this game. 3 yellows on Shreve. 2 of which were in no way cards! Maybe 3 total foul calls on LCP. Poor reffing and a couple other unavoidable issues caused Shreve to lose to LCP. But it was a hard fought loss and win. Both TEAMS played their hearts out. 18-1 with the 1 being to a team that also fits in their 18! Not too shabby! Ready to move on but having watched the game a few times now, I decided to track fouls etc on the 2nd time through the game film. Final count: Loyola called for 6 fouls, Shreve 7 with I would say an average of 2-3 things I may have called for both teams that wasn't. It probably seemed like more since 4 of the 7 were called on one player. In regards to the yellow cards, having watched it back I believe that the yellows were given based on the nature of the tackles being from behind on promising attacking play. Stand alone foul in the middle of the field, probably not a yellow, tackle from behind with an attacking player either turning the corner near the edge of the box towards goal, yellow. One of the yellows could have also been for persistent infringement but I did not hear or get an explanation. There is a common misconception that referees should end the game with half the calls for one team and half for the other or it is not being called "even" or "consistent". In this case the foul calls were almost an identical number. In reference to the penalty kick mention or pulling a player down, it looked like the goalkeeper clearly came and won the ball and both players were shoulder to shoulder when they went down. Similar play to when Shreve keeper came out and made a good sliding save and our player fell over her with an extended leg in the air, not a pk for me on that one either. I was good with everything until the statement that "poor reffing and unavoidable issues caused Shreve to lose to LCP". Your assistant coaches coached a good game and were very quick to change to 3 in the back to press after the goal which is what they should have done. We made good adjustments from the first game that neutralized the two forwards in this game even though it forced us to sacrifice some possession in wide spaces because of it. I think you misinterpreted my message about the student sections being great. What I meant by that is not that they were yelling compliments and well behaved as I have no clue what both groups were saying. What I meant was that when you are playing in late Feb you see this type of environment come quarter/semi/finals. Last year in the finals we had hundreds of students calling my left back a ho for 80 minutes from 10 yds away from her. I'm not condoning it but you have to be able to process that kind of pressure and not crumble in the face of it. There was an administrator down in the front of the stadium once things began to get heated. It was a competitive game as was last night. Coach Lane is a good coach and Shreve has a good group of club players (which always determines how good you are in high school). No one is questioning that. They are good at what they do and their style of play. I don't like it and it isn't the style I try to get my team to play but I understand it and respect why that has been the style the last two seasons. It will have to be the style when you meet a Dominican/Mt. Carmel because they will play half court basketball around your penalty area like they did against us. I actually thought last night when Shreve played Byrd more straight up in the 2nd half they had the better of play then when they sat really low like in the first half. After Feb 2nd when we play Byrd I get to go back to cheering for all of our club kids and especially the ones I currently coach or have coached in the last few years. Should be a fun end to the season! Good stuff here. Best of luck to the Flyers and Coach Matlock going forward. I am glad that we have been able to make this a game worth watching and talking about!
|
|
|
Post by tacklebox on Jan 20, 2021 15:57:38 GMT -6
The assistant coach for Shreve did an excellent job at the game. I never questioned her position or her ability. I only mentioned her in my comment pointing out that the “commentator” of the game may be biased in his reporting because she is his daughter. He should be biased and proud. Just as I am biased/proud towards/of LCP. That’s the reason a parent should not put themselves in a detailed commentary position of a game on the proboard if they can’t remove their emotional responses when reporting a game they have so much invested in. My commentary of a LCP game would be greatly biased and perhaps filled with some expletives. I know my limitations and would never open myself up to such criticism by exceeding them.
As for the student sections: I do not condone how mean and nasty BOTH of the student sections were during this game. Trust me, it will get much worse during playoffs. Kids in the stands at state had researched our players on social media and were yelling very personal insults at them. What does not help is having a player on the field run down the sidelines and flip the entire opposing team’s student section off. This is exactly what happened during this game and only incited the LCP students to get louder and more personal. Again, I’m not condoning nor making excuses for what happened. Just putting things in perspective.
In my opinion, it was a great game that got chippy both on the field and in the stands. I think that could have been expected given the rivalry between the teams and the previous game between the two. Both teams played very hard and should hold their heads up high. To say either game was won or lost because of the ref is a slap in the face to every player out on the field. Just my opinion, you may not agree.
Good luck to both teams as they near playoffs!
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Jan 20, 2021 21:11:31 GMT -6
W Maybe you should make an eye Dr. appointment. Or an appointment with a psychologist to help you unbiasdly put things into perspective. Dme(?) was very fair in their play by play of this game. 3 yellows on Shreve. 2 of which were in no way cards! Maybe 3 total foul calls on LCP. Poor reffing and a couple other unavoidable issues caused Shreve to lose to LCP. But it was a hard fought loss and win. Both TEAMS played their hearts out. 18-1 with the 1 being to a team that also fits in their 18! Not too shabby! Ready to move on but having watched the game a few times now, I decided to track fouls etc on the 2nd time through the game film. Final count: Loyola called for 6 fouls, Shreve 7 with I would say an average of 2-3 things I may have called for both teams that wasn't. It probably seemed like more since 4 of the 7 were called on one player. In regards to the yellow cards, having watched it back I believe that the yellows were given based on the nature of the tackles being from behind on promising attacking play. Stand alone foul in the middle of the field, probably not a yellow, tackle from behind with an attacking player either turning the corner near the edge of the box towards goal, yellow. One of the yellows could have also been for persistent infringement but I did not hear or get an explanation. There is a common misconception that referees should end the game with half the calls for one team and half for the other or it is not being called "even" or "consistent". In this case the foul calls were almost an identical number. In reference to the penalty kick mention or pulling a player down, it looked like the goalkeeper clearly came and won the ball and both players were shoulder to shoulder when they went down. Similar play to when Shreve keeper came out and made a good sliding save and our player fell over her with an extended leg in the air, not a pk for me on that one either. I was good with everything until the statement that "poor reffing and unavoidable issues caused Shreve to lose to LCP". Your assistant coaches coached a good game and were very quick to change to 3 in the back to press after the goal which is what they should have done. We made good adjustments from the first game that neutralized the two forwards in this game even though it forced us to sacrifice some possession in wide spaces because of it. I think you misinterpreted my message about the student sections being great. What I meant by that is not that they were yelling compliments and well behaved as I have no clue what both groups were saying. What I meant was that when you are playing in late Feb you see this type of environment come quarter/semi/finals. Last year in the finals we had hundreds of students calling my left back a ho for 80 minutes from 10 yds away from her. I'm not condoning it but you have to be able to process that kind of pressure and not crumble in the face of it. There was an administrator down in the front of the stadium once things began to get heated. It was a competitive game as was last night. Coach Lane is a good coach and Shreve has a good group of club players (which always determines how good you are in high school). No one is questioning that. They are good at what they do and their style of play. I don't like it and it isn't the style I try to get my team to play but I understand it and respect why that has been the style the last two seasons. It will have to be the style when you meet a Dominican/Mt. Carmel because they will play half court basketball around your penalty area like they did against us. I actually thought last night when Shreve played Byrd more straight up in the 2nd half they had the better of play then when they sat really low like in the first half. After Feb 2nd when we play Byrd I get to go back to cheering for all of our club kids and especially the ones I currently coach or have coached in the last few years. Should be a fun end to the season! On target, THANK YOU coach for acknowledging this point.
|
|