Quote from: Rcjh2245 on December 08, 2024, 09:27:36 PM

Quote from: NEsoccerfan on December 08, 2024, 09:03:19 PM

Quote from: Kuiper on December 08, 2024, 05:07:20 PMCross-posted from the Women's Soccer thread (which doesn't get many views)

NCAA Women's Championship game 2024

Wash U 3 - William Smith 0

William Smith did an admirable job holding Wash U off the scoreboard, but it always seemed a matter of time.  Wash U was just too strong, too technical, and too athletic for William Smith.  Once the dam broke, Wash U piled it on for a scoreline that makes it seem like total domination, even though really the 2nd and 3rd goals were scored a little over a minute apart with about 15 minutes to go.  Still, Wash U. could have done even more damage with a few crossbars and posts (and non-calls on a trip in the box) helping out William Smith.  William Smith almost got one back with a free kick that snuck past the wall and was kept out by a full stretch dive from the Wash U GK, but by that point it would have only been a consolation goal.  A VAR check in the 89th minute changed a yellow to a straight red and gave William Smith an advantage for the last 90 seconds, but they weren't able to capitalize.

I'm curious to hear from you all if there's a like-for-like comparison on the men's side for this, but WashU's leading goal-scorer and point-getter is Freshman Olivia Clemons (21G, 6A, 48P). She did not start a single game all year, was 11th on the team in minutes played (972 compared to nearly 2X the number of other starters), and did not make it to any of the AA teams.

Alem Duratovic as a sophomore with Kenyon scored 18 goals, 2 assists as a bench player; 0 starts. Not even conference recognition, let alone all-region or AA. Assume there's countless similar stories. What a great season for her though as a freshman. Amazing.

Great example. To give her and her team even more credit: she drew the penalty for the first goal in the final and scored the second goal. After losing in the championship last year. Wash-U completes an undefeated season, letting in only 7 goals all year. They were particularly dominant in the tournament, outscoring their opponents 15-1 and winning the semi and final each by a score line of 3-0. An incredible season for those women.

Quote from: Kuiper on December 08, 2024, 05:07:20 PMCross-posted from the Women's Soccer thread (which doesn't get many views)

NCAA Women's Championship game 2024

Wash U 3 - William Smith 0

William Smith did an admirable job holding Wash U off the scoreboard, but it always seemed a matter of time.  Wash U was just too strong, too technical, and too athletic for William Smith.  Once the dam broke, Wash U piled it on for a scoreline that makes it seem like total domination, even though really the 2nd and 3rd goals were scored a little over a minute apart with about 15 minutes to go.  Still, Wash U. could have done even more damage with a few crossbars and posts (and non-calls on a trip in the box) helping out William Smith.  William Smith almost got one back with a free kick that snuck past the wall and was kept out by a full stretch dive from the Wash U GK, but by that point it would have only been a consolation goal.  A VAR check in the 89th minute changed a yellow to a straight red and gave William Smith an advantage for the last 90 seconds, but they weren't able to capitalize.

I'm curious to hear from you all if there's a like-for-like comparison on the men's side for this, but WashU's leading goal-scorer and point-getter is Freshman Olivia Clemons (21G, 6A, 48P). She did not start a single game all year, was 11th on the team in minutes played (972 compared to nearly 2X the number of other starters), and did not make it to any of the AA teams.

Dear lord, today I am thankful for exercising restraint in not asking my friend who currently referees at a high level and has zero ties to anything related to d3 soccer to unobjectively opine on the VAR calls.

Quote from: mngopher on November 24, 2024, 05:18:04 PM

Quote from: NEsoccerfan on November 24, 2024, 02:23:55 PM

Quote from: mngopher on November 24, 2024, 12:36:00 PMAs a North region guy lost in all of this NESCAC love-hate I just want to point out that one of the biggest stories of the tournament really is that the 4th leading goalscorer of ALL TIME in D3 soccer (Nathan Donovan from UWEC) hasn't played a minute in this tournament and is done for the season. Yet, his team is in the final 8. If he played for a team further east this would be discussed more, but we in the north generally are stuffed into the same sectional and largely ignored. It's ok, we are used to it.

What a remarkable stat and kudos to both him and UWEC. While I'm well aware of the caveat that they pile on goals against some very questionable competition, you have to tip your hat to that much consistent production over four years. Needless to say I'll be cheering for them this afternoon.

A good example here of the lack of knowledge about north region teams. You are likely confusing them with UMAC member UW-Superior. UW Eau Claire has played a high quality schedule since starting their program in 2021.

My apologies. I thought I recalled an earlier post months ago talking about how a solid percentage of his/their goals over the last few years came against a few really bad teams.

Quote from: mngopher on November 24, 2024, 12:36:00 PMAs a North region guy lost in all of this NESCAC love-hate I just want to point out that one of the biggest stories of the tournament really is that the 4th leading goalscorer of ALL TIME in D3 soccer (Nathan Donovan from UWEC) hasn't played a minute in this tournament and is done for the season. Yet, his team is in the final 8. If he played for a team further east this would be discussed more, but we in the north generally are stuffed into the same sectional and largely ignored. It's ok, we are used to it.

What a remarkable stat and kudos to both him and UWEC. While I'm well aware of the caveat that they pile on goals against some very questionable competition, you have to tip your hat to that much consistent production over four years. Needless to say I'll be cheering for them this afternoon.

Ironically, watching the pre-game sportsmanship commercial montages 

Quote from: Dustin_Patrón on November 23, 2024, 05:08:48 PM

Quote from: Another Mom on November 23, 2024, 04:26:55 PM

Quote from: Dustin_Patrón on November 23, 2024, 04:18:20 PM

Quote from: Another Mom on November 23, 2024, 04:16:30 PMRe the Williams game. They seemed like they were playing for penalties. As much as people hate on Amherst for the way they play, the same could really be said of Williams. More trash talking and fouling than most other teams. It seems like a NESCAC thing.

part of the game, mom

Not really.  Glad to see it wasn't successful today.

Physicality, fouling, trash talk... characterize NESCAC soccer however you'd like, but today NESCAC soccer was successful, Mom.

NESCAC schools represented 8 of the initial 64 teams (12.5%)
They now account for 3 of the remaining 8 teams (37.5%)

The numbers don't lie, enough whining.

Hahah what a colossally douchey comment, Dustin. What you lack in class you amply make up for in math skills bud!   

Quote from: PaulNewman on November 20, 2024, 12:16:56 PM

Quote from: NEsoccerfan on November 20, 2024, 11:03:21 AM

Quote from: PaulNewman on November 19, 2024, 08:17:44 PM

Quote from: NEsoccerfan on November 19, 2024, 07:03:06 PM

Quote from: jknezek on November 19, 2024, 05:52:23 PMI question a "high level ref" who is looking at foot rotation and thinks white touches a ball that has zero deflection.  Either it's a different clip or your high level ref went to a NESCAC school and is looking for a reason to justify the call.

I'd defer to a current "high-level ref" who is grading refs based on video evidence such as this on a daily basis over a "former ref" such as you. And since you are alleging some sort of bias, he has zero affiliation with the NESCAC. Also, he knows that ref and does not speak highly of him on a personal or professional level, so no bias there either. As for me, I vehemently root against the NESCAC every chance I get.

The fact of the matter is that he is more qualified to speak on the play than any of us since we all have access to the same information yet he has the training and expertise. Now, for those who were at the game, they have more information and can more credibly make an assessment than he can. But they are also arguably the most biased.

Given that you said you thought it was a foul, and so many others did as well, I guess what is not clear to me now is what prompted you to refer the matter to the friend in the first place.

That's a rather silly question, so I'll answer it by asking you one as well. Have you ever in your 64 years felt confident about your layman's opinion on something, but still decided to sanity-check it with an expert?

Not that I can think of in a situation where I am absolutely clear on what I saw as were many, many others (and some of whom have a strong refereeing background).

Do you typically refer your initial, clear impressions supported by basically everyone else out for official review?

Not sure what 'layman' means here either. This was not a tricky, idiosyncratic close call...at least not for me..I saw no need for an expert opinion but we did have one from CSO already.  This was not like a tough block/charge call in bball or a close, debatable pass interference play in football.

You raised a lot of red flags imo. You're not a NESCAC fan. Your expert isn't a NESCAC guy. Your guy knows the ref in question, but...and you thought this supported the objectivity of your guy...your guy doesn't even like the ref. What? How were those little add-on details relevant? 

Thankfully, though, your expert finally confirmed what 95% of the laymen saw.

What a waste of time. As I said from the beginning, I should have known better than to disturb the echo chamber, which despite you denying it at the time you quite clearly proved my point by saying "clear impressions supported by basically everyone else".

Carry on!

Quote from: PaulNewman on November 19, 2024, 08:17:44 PM

Quote from: NEsoccerfan on November 19, 2024, 07:03:06 PM

Quote from: jknezek on November 19, 2024, 05:52:23 PMI question a "high level ref" who is looking at foot rotation and thinks white touches a ball that has zero deflection.  Either it's a different clip or your high level ref went to a NESCAC school and is looking for a reason to justify the call.

I'd defer to a current "high-level ref" who is grading refs based on video evidence such as this on a daily basis over a "former ref" such as you. And since you are alleging some sort of bias, he has zero affiliation with the NESCAC. Also, he knows that ref and does not speak highly of him on a personal or professional level, so no bias there either. As for me, I vehemently root against the NESCAC every chance I get.

The fact of the matter is that he is more qualified to speak on the play than any of us since we all have access to the same information yet he has the training and expertise. Now, for those who were at the game, they have more information and can more credibly make an assessment than he can. But they are also arguably the most biased.

Given that you said you thought it was a foul, and so many others did as well, I guess what is not clear to me now is what prompted you to refer the matter to the friend in the first place.

That's a rather silly question, so I'll answer it by asking you one as well. Have you ever in your 64 years felt confident about your layman's opinion on something, but still decided to sanity-check it with an expert?

Quote from: jknezek on November 19, 2024, 05:52:23 PMI question a "high level ref" who is looking at foot rotation and thinks white touches a ball that has zero deflection.  Either it's a different clip or your high level ref went to a NESCAC school and is looking for a reason to justify the call.

I'd defer to a current "high-level ref" who is grading refs based on video evidence such as this on a daily basis over a "former ref" such as you. And since you are alleging some sort of bias, he has zero affiliation with the NESCAC. Also, he knows that ref and does not speak highly of him on a personal or professional level, so no bias there either. As for me, I vehemently root against the NESCAC every chance I get.

The fact of the matter is that he is more qualified to speak on the play than any of us since we all have access to the same information yet he has the training and expertise. Now, for those who were at the game, they have more information and can more credibly make an assessment than he can. But they are also arguably the most biased.

Quote from: PaulNewman on November 19, 2024, 05:58:27 PM

Quote from: NEsoccerfan on November 19, 2024, 05:50:30 PM

Quote from: PaulNewman on November 19, 2024, 05:40:10 PMWas there any comment about the Messiah player on the ground motionless?  A bunch of folks observed the play live and a bunch of us have watched the video, both from the game and the clip, and the vast majority think it was clearly a foul.  The defender never got close to the ball, and poor touch or not, he knocked the player to the ground (and not with a shoulder to shoulder challenge).  And it is obvious that the play created a major advantage for Williams.  This not a case that needs to be sent to a forensic lab to figure out what happened.

Apologies for sharing! I should have known better than to disturb the echo chamber with a different, albeit qualified opinion.

Send him the full video.

"With the full video I have a foul, charging or tripping.

But this decision assumes the Williams player #21 does not poke the ball with his right foot to his teammate. If he plays the ball, the ball is obviously within playing distance and it becomes a fair challenge. It's not a push, it's not a hold, it's not anything else.

The referee has a significantly better angle and proximity to determine whether the ball was played. From the camera angle we have, it's impossible to tell with certainty."

Quote from: PaulNewman on November 19, 2024, 05:40:10 PMWas there any comment about the Messiah player on the ground motionless?  A bunch of folks observed the play live and a bunch of us have watched the video, both from the game and the clip, and the vast majority think it was clearly a foul.  The defender never got close to the ball, and poor touch or not, he knocked the player to the ground (and not with a shoulder to shoulder challenge).  And it is obvious that the play created a major advantage for Williams.  This not a case that needs to be sent to a forensic lab to figure out what happened.

Apologies for sharing! I should have known better than to disturb the echo chamber with a different, albeit qualified opinion.

Quote from: stlawus on November 19, 2024, 05:34:42 PMVery unpersuasive.  We all saw it with our own eyes.

Sure, but "we all" aren't high-level referees. I'm not saying his word is gospel or anything, and I too thought it was a foul when I first saw it, but hearing another perspective never hurts.

I have a friend who referees at the college and pro level (he actually reffed the d3 semis a couple of years back), so I sent him the clip, and this was his response:

"I don't like where the clip starts because it doesn't give the full context to how that challenge is made. Did the messiah player make a bad touch before the contact? Was it a mis-hit pass before the contact? Does the Williams player play the ball with his right foot and change the direction of the ball (passing it to a teammate)? The clip cuts in too close to when contact occurs to really appreciate the movement of the ball before and after the challenge.

That being said, if we're getting hyper technical, I don't initially see a foul by White. It looks like it's a bad touch or a hospital ball that forces the blue player to go right, except the white player then has position on the blue player and doesn't make any clear fouling action. He shields the ball and possibly plays it with his right foot, and contact appears to be created by the blue player.

I could make an argument for a foul too. But this isn't a great clip for a clear answer based on timeframe and camera angles, so I'm comfortable trusting the referee's judgment.

Looking at it more and more there appears to be a rotational change after the white player's right foot is near the ball. I think he plays the ball."

Omg....I'm sorry.  If I knew that I forgot.  Thanks for mentioning.

https://www.yursfuneralhomes.com/obituaries/st-charles/justin-blake-stanko/


[/quote]

No need to apologize, PN. I was simply paying tribute to who - by all accounts - seemed like a great kid gone too soon.