The Big Dance

[Mr.Right]

Just caught the highlight of Messiah's winner against Hobart. That is really tough for Hobart. That ball had to be dealt with better. Very unfortunate.

[blooter442]

What in the world is with the Buff State announcer and his "gooooooooooooooooooool" call?

[franklyspeaking]

Be happy there is an announcer, many have poor feeds and no sound.

[blooter442]

Be happy there is an announcer, many have poor feeds and no sound.

Au contraire — I'll take silence over that noise (in that particular instance). On the whole, though, I suppose you're right.

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

Was anyone else not that impressed w/ Lycoming throughout the season? Saw them 3 times and each time I thought the same thing; solid team with great athleticism but ZERO discipline. Although CWRU is a good side and is probably the best team in the country that is never ranked, that loss against them showed me what I had been thinking the whole time was in fact correct. I have been far from perfect with my predictions for the tournament, specifically with Rowan, but to me, this Lycoming side never had a shot.

Lycoming is very talented--and, as I pointed out, if they get a referee who lets them mug people without throwing cards and doesn't call many ordinary fouls, they can dominate a better team. This is clearly their style, and we have to assume it comes from the top. If however the fouls are being called (as apparently they were vs Drew), they aren't nearly as effective.

As you say, zero discipline. That's plainly obvious to anyone who studies the number of cards they receive (in games officiated competently), especially cards on the bench or individual players for bitching about appropriate calls that they seem to resent. Not to mention cards for outright fighting, such as that given to Tueno near the end of the game vs Drew. He is a splendid all-around player who can beat teams by playing well within the rules. So, why does he do that? It speaks volumes about team discipline and attitude.

Most good teams aren't like this, regardless of how physically they play. They accept that when they foul people, it's likely to be called, and if they take cheap shots they will probably find themselves on the sidelines pretty quickly. If officiating at D3 level were more consistent, even fewer good teams would be like this.

I want to start this post by saying I do agree with a majority of your post but I will point out that the officials could have doubled the foul count of that game. It was a poorly officiated game from all aspects of the game. I disagree with "zero discipline" comment though and judging that solely off card accumulation totals.   

Surprisingly it was Drew who lacked discipline and were the more aggressive team this time. And if you would like to say it starts at the top then look no further than the Drew HC who got a red card for dissent. I don't believe there were any cards for dissent on Lycoming in this match, only on Drew which happened twice. Fouls were pretty even in this game so to say one was more dirty than the other can't apply in this game. Drew also had more cards in this game.

Sure you can reference cards for dissent etc but I watched quite a few games of Lycoming this year and I do not really recall too many times they received cards for a "lack of discipline" as you phrase it. Did they receive cards for fouls? Of course and plenty of them but if I had to guess maybe only 3 or 4 cards for dissent all year at least from the from games I watched. That's fairly normal for most teams I watched around this region and throughout the country. Drew has 31 cards this year and Dickinson has 37 but nobody has complained about either of those teams or classified them as "borderline dirty." Why such a stigma for one team but not others that have similar card counts?

Lycoming had 37 cards this year and their opponents had 30 which is a similar ratio. They had 2 reds and their opponents had 3. Hard to say they were better or worst in that department compared to the teams they faced this year. For comparison, Lycoming had 36 yellow cards in 2016 which was their worst season in the last half decade, 43 in 2015 when they went to the 3rd round of NCAA's, 33 in 2014 when they lost in the conference finals, and 28 in 2013 when they went to the 2nd round of NCAA's. A majority of these cards come from playing a high pressure/intensity game and as a result of that they can get caught and foul the opponent and sometimes end up getting a yellow card. It's soccer, it's going to happen. To further emphasize this point, Lycoming isn't even in the top 20 in the country for # of cards this year and they played more games then most other teams. I have never really understood the arguments on this message board in terms of fouls and cards etc. I enjoyed the one post from earlier in the year which referenced OWU's coach (I think) stating that if they are losing in fouls they are most likely losing the game. It seems Lycoming plays to that mindset and there is nothing wrong with it or playing high pressure and physical. When it becomes dirty then complaining is justifiable but when they pick up a yellow for a hard tackle that they were half a second late for let's not get too carried away.   

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

Be happy there is an announcer, many have poor feeds and no sound.

Au contraire — I'll take silence over that noise (in that particular instance). On the whole, though, I suppose you're right.

Computers and phones still have mute buttons these days right? 

[blooter442]

Computers and phones still have mute buttons these days right? 

Quite familiar!

[Falconer]

Just caught the highlight of Messiah's winner against Hobart. That is really tough for Hobart. That ball had to be dealt with better. Very unfortunate.

A first impression would lead one to say that the keeper dealt with that shot poorly, since it beat him to the short side, the opening wasn't very large, and the shot came from about 18 yards out. However, if you replay it (look for the clip in Messiah's recap), you can make a case that the keeper was at least partially screened from the shooter, so he doesn't react as quickly as you would expect from a skilled veteran on an excellent side (which he is). I think that's what happened.

[Falconer]

Not to mention that Ruiz Plaza's shot was a rocket, by far the best shot Messiah took all night. The keeper might have mishandled it even if he got to it. He should shoot more, IMO. He gets open looks from outside or just inside the box quite often, but rarely pulls the trigger. Obviously that shot was taken instinctively when he got a fortuitous bounce--right decision.

[oldonionbag]

Falconer - I agree wholeheartedly. That was an absolute rip! Watching it several times, I don't think the keeper stood a chance, even if he had a clean look. Tough way to lose for Hobart but take nothing away from the strike by Ruiz.

[Dave B]

Not to mention that Ruiz Plaza's shot was a rocket, by far the best shot Messiah took all night. The keeper might have mishandled it even if he got to it. He should shoot more, IMO. He gets open looks from outside or just inside the box quite often, but rarely pulls the trigger. Obviously that shot was taken instinctively when he got a fortuitous bounce--right decision.

I don't think that the GK had too much of a chance on that shot.  Like you said, it was a rocket.

The touch Hobart wants back is the one by the defender who sticks his foot out and basically gives Ruiz-Plaza a one touch pass.  He should have just cleared it OB to the far side.

[firstplaceloser]

Be happy there is an announcer, many have poor feeds and no sound.

Au contraire — I'll take silence over that noise (in that particular instance). On the whole, though, I suppose you're right.

I said this exact same thing LOL

[Flying Weasel]

Be happy there is an announcer, many have poor feeds and no sound.

Au contraire — I'll take silence over that noise (in that particular instance). On the whole, though, I suppose you're right.

Computers and phones still have mute buttons these days right? 

For those of us who are unable to watch the games in peace without distractions and interruptions (four kids 6 and under will do that!), having an announcer to listen to while having to turn your attention (and eyes) away from the game, maybe even go into other rooms, is very helpful.  Likewise when trying to multi-task.  You can always mute an announcer you don't like, but there's no way to listen to an announcer that doesn't exist.

The Buffalo St. announcer got overly excited any time it even looked like a player was going to try to shoot.  Name and mastery of Spanish suggested a Hispanic background and his excitability was consistent with the style of announcing that predominates throughout Latin America. He did great with (and seemed to derive great joy from saying) names like Ruiz Plaza, Alejos, etc. even if the abrupt change of accent isn't as smooth on the ears.  (side note: having lived in Brazil for several years, I've repeatedly experienced this in reverse where the Brazilian announcers break their native accent to say an American, English, etc. name leaving me both (a) impressed with the skill to accurately switch accents for a single word (name) while talking a mile a minute, and (b) finding it a little jolting to the ear.)  On the goal call, the announcer just seemed to be trying a little too hard to mimic the goal calls that you'd hear from announcers throughout Latin America.

I can only imagine what people have thought the few times I have stepped in to do play-by-play or color commentary for broadcasts.  Of course, I don't have a lick of training or education or background in this field, so going in I know I'm not going to measure up very well and can only hope that more people are thinking that "any announcer is better than no announcer" instead of thinking that "silence would be better than having to listen to this guy".

[blooter442]

For those of us who are unable to watch the games in peace without distractions and interruptions (four kids 6 and under will do that!), having an announcer to listen to while having to turn your attention (and eyes) away from the game, maybe even go into other rooms, is very helpful.  Likewise when trying to multi-task.  You can always mute an announcer you don't like, but there's no way to listen to an announcer that doesn't exist.

The Buffalo St. announcer got overly excited any time it even looked like a player was going to try to shoot.  Name and mastery of Spanish suggested a Hispanic background and his excitability was consistent with the style of announcing that predominates throughout Latin America. He did great with (and seemed to derive great joy from saying) names like Ruiz Plaza, Alejos, etc. even if the abrupt change of accent isn't as smooth on the ears.  (side note: having lived in Brazil for several years, I've repeatedly experienced this in reverse where the Brazilian announcers break their native accent to say an American, English, etc. name leaving me both (a) impressed with the skill to accurately switch accents for a single word (name) while talking a mile a minute, and (b) finding it a little jolting to the ear.)  On the goal call, the announcer just seemed to be trying a little too hard to mimic the goal calls that you'd hear from announcers throughout Latin America.

I can only imagine what people have thought the few times I have stepped in to do play-by-play or color commentary for broadcasts.  Of course, I don't have a lick of training or education or background in this field, so going in I know I'm not going to measure up very well and can only hope that more people are thinking that "any announcer is better than no announcer" instead of thinking that "silence would be better than having to listen to this guy".

I think this is mainly what I was trying to get at. I understand it can be very helpful to have things on in the background, as it's not possible to watch every second of every game -- I am quite guilty of switching tabs when it seems like there's nothing going on, and use the announcer to know when I should be getting back. (Of course, I've missed goals, as sometimes they happen quicker than the announcer can say, and I take full responsibility for that.) So I am grateful for announcers in those circumstances.

That said, I've heard this Buff. St. announcer before, particularly on his call of the goal from the Rochester game, and it just seems that he is trying wayyyyyyyyyy too hard with the "golllllllllllll" schtick, and it seems that he does so in other clips. Considering these are usually the highlights that are presented, rather than run-of-the-mill commentary, perhaps my perspective is distorted and he isn't like that all of the time, but perhaps you can see where I'm coming from. And while all of this might make me sound like a "get off my lawn" curmudgeon, I promise I do like to see people having fun on broadcasts, and I recognize one person's idea of fun may be different than others. I would even say that the call is funny (if I had to hear it just once). That said, there are certain things that I'd rather tune out, and this is one of them (perhaps a moot point since Buff. St. is out).

[rudy]

For those of us who are unable to watch the games in peace without distractions and interruptions (four kids 6 and under will do that!), having an announcer to listen to while having to turn your attention (and eyes) away from the game, maybe even go into other rooms, is very helpful.  Likewise when trying to multi-task.  You can always mute an announcer you don't like, but there's no way to listen to an announcer that doesn't exist.

The Buffalo St. announcer got overly excited any time it even looked like a player was going to try to shoot.  Name and mastery of Spanish suggested a Hispanic background and his excitability was consistent with the style of announcing that predominates throughout Latin America. He did great with (and seemed to derive great joy from saying) names like Ruiz Plaza, Alejos, etc. even if the abrupt change of accent isn't as smooth on the ears.  (side note: having lived in Brazil for several years, I've repeatedly experienced this in reverse where the Brazilian announcers break their native accent to say an American, English, etc. name leaving me both (a) impressed with the skill to accurately switch accents for a single word (name) while talking a mile a minute, and (b) finding it a little jolting to the ear.)  On the goal call, the announcer just seemed to be trying a little too hard to mimic the goal calls that you'd hear from announcers throughout Latin America.

I can only imagine what people have thought the few times I have stepped in to do play-by-play or color commentary for broadcasts.  Of course, I don't have a lick of training or education or background in this field, so going in I know I'm not going to measure up very well and can only hope that more people are thinking that "any announcer is better than no announcer" instead of thinking that "silence would be better than having to listen to this guy".

I think this is mainly what I was trying to get at. I understand it can be very helpful to have things on in the background, as it's not possible to watch every second of every game -- I am quite guilty of switching tabs when it seems like there's nothing going on, and use the announcer to know when I should be getting back. (Of course, I've missed goals, as sometimes they happen quicker than the announcer can say, and I take full responsibility for that.) So I am grateful for announcers in those circumstances.

That said, I've heard this Buff. St. announcer before, particularly on his call of the goal from the Rochester game, and it just seems that he is trying wayyyyyyyyyy too hard with the "golllllllllllll" schtick, and it seems that he does so in other clips. Considering these are usually the highlights that are presented, rather than run-of-the-mill commentary, perhaps my perspective is distorted and he isn't like that all of the time, but perhaps you can see where I'm coming from. And while all of this might make me sound like a "get off my lawn" curmudgeon, I promise I do like to see people having fun on broadcasts, and I recognize one person's idea of fun may be different than others. I would even say that the call is funny (if I had to hear it just once). That said, there are certain things that I'd rather tune out, and this is one of them (perhaps a moot point since Buff. St. is out).

I appreciated the guys enthusiasm. Not dull at all like many announcers I have heard.  I hate total silence..put a friggin mic on the field at least if no  commentator.  And clearly the goal call was from his Hispanic heritage. Hear that all the time watching the Spanish soccer games. Good fun. Also considering neither team.playing was the home team he did his best to get the names of the players on both sides.