[muiron]

0-1 on New Maloney Field at Laird Q. Cagan Stadium.  Disappointing.  Big Game. Regular season finale. And a lost chance to hold on to all or a piece of the Pac 12 crown, which they've held for the last 5 years. 

But not unfair. I won't say that we deserved to lose, but we weren't the better team. We had long spells of poor passing, bad possession, and a sense of disorganization. We pulled it together for the last 15 minutes of the first half and, to some extent, in desperation time in the last 20 minutes of the second. Cal wasn't much better except for the first ten minutes of the second half, where they had the match's three best chances. 

Cal got their goal on a PK after our keeper, Andrew Thomas, came out in a one on one situation and got ball. But the keeper and the Cal player went into a heap as the ball squirted away. I haven't seen a replay and I'm not confident about the rules/standards for keeper/offensive player interaction, but my immediate reaction was "I hope that isn't a PK." Anyone else get a replay of it or have an opinion? Right now, I'm in the "could have gone either way, but not unfair." 

And, generally, I am definitely do not feel we were robbed by that call.  We just didn't play well enough in the other 89 minute and 55 seconds. Several players had subpar games; I think only Cam Cilley, a player I haven't noticed much until the last few games, seemed to me to have a better than average match. It was good to see Tanner Beason start.  He seemed a bit rusty but he wasn't a major part of the problem. Everyone seemed just a bit off.

Oh well, that might have cost us a top 8 seed (and hence the good chance of a second home match in the playoffs). We'll find out on Monday.

Tonight, the women start the tournament against 64 seed (and 238 RPI) Prairie View A&M. I expect that will wipe away some of the sour taste of last night - though not all of it.

[muiron]

0-1 on New Maloney Field at Laird Q. Cagan Stadium.  Disappointing.  Big Game. Regular season finale. And a lost chance to hold on to all or a piece of the Pac 12 crown, which they've held for the last 5 years. 

But not unfair. I won't say that we deserved to lose, but we weren't the better team. We had long spells of poor passing, bad possession, and a sense of disorganization. We pulled it together for the last 15 minutes of the first half and, to some extent, in desperation time in the last 20 minutes of the second. Cal wasn't much better except for the first ten minutes of the second half, where they had the match's three best chances. 

Cal got their goal on a PK after our keeper, Andrew Thomas, came out in a one on one situation and got ball. But the keeper and the Cal player went into a heap as the ball squirted away. I haven't seen a replay and I'm not confident about the rules/standards for keeper/offensive player interaction, but my immediate reaction was "I hope that isn't a PK." Anyone else get a replay of it or have an opinion? Right now, I'm in the "could have gone either way, but not unfair." 

And, generally, I am definitely do not feel we were robbed by that call.  We just didn't play well enough in the other 89 minute and 55 seconds. Several players had subpar games; I think only Cam Cilley, a player I haven't noticed much until the last few games, seemed to me to have a better than average match. It was good to see Tanner Beason start.  He seemed a bit rusty but he wasn't a major part of the problem. Everyone seemed just a bit off.

Oh well, that might have cost us a top 8 seed (and hence the good chance of a second home match in the playoffs). We'll find out on Monday.

Tonight, the women start the tournament against 64 seed (and 238 RPI) Prairie View A&M. I expect that will wipe away some of the sour taste of last night - though not all of it.

[DenverCard]

Muiron,

Your thoughts about the men's soccer game mirror mine.  Stanford looked off the whole game.  And Cal looked like the better team.  They held onto the ball better, and I didn't feel that their possession was unproductive, as I often regard UCLA's endless passing around the defense, and to some degree what Oregon State has begun to do.  Cal has often played a more aesthetically pleasing brand of soccer, but frequently not productive of goals.  Last night they put things together better than in recent memory.

On the PK, I believe it was a fair call.  The goalkeeper has no more right to trip a player in failing to gather that ball than a field player, and Andrew Thomas was late.  A bit reminiscent of his late arrival against an attacking SDSU player, which resulted in the player tipping the ball past him for a goal.  Perhaps a weakness in his game.

I note that Stanford's defenders tend to be more prone to boot long balls from the back than most teams, who prefer to maintain closer possession while advancing the ball.  The latter tactic creates more of a total team offense, whereas there is more of a division between defense and offense with Stanford. This seems to give our offensive players fewer chances, as they first have to win 50-50 balls and then put the offense in gear.

But mostly the team kind of stunk last night.  Many pointless give-aways.  They frankly looked less skilled than Cal (an issue -- individual ball skills -- that I have raised previously this year).  Surprising, given they always get highly rated recruits.

[DenverCard]

Muiron,

Your thoughts about the men's soccer game mirror mine.  Stanford looked off the whole game.  And Cal looked like the better team.  They held onto the ball better, and I didn't feel that their possession was unproductive, as I often regard UCLA's endless passing around the defense, and to some degree what Oregon State has begun to do.  Cal has often played a more aesthetically pleasing brand of soccer, but frequently not productive of goals.  Last night they put things together better than in recent memory.

On the PK, I believe it was a fair call.  The goalkeeper has no more right to trip a player in failing to gather that ball than a field player, and Andrew Thomas was late.  A bit reminiscent of his late arrival against an attacking SDSU player, which resulted in the player tipping the ball past him for a goal.  Perhaps a weakness in his game.

I note that Stanford's defenders tend to be more prone to boot long balls from the back than most teams, who prefer to maintain closer possession while advancing the ball.  The latter tactic creates more of a total team offense, whereas there is more of a division between defense and offense with Stanford. This seems to give our offensive players fewer chances, as they first have to win 50-50 balls and then put the offense in gear.

But mostly the team kind of stunk last night.  Many pointless give-aways.  They frankly looked less skilled than Cal (an issue -- individual ball skills -- that I have raised previously this year).  Surprising, given they always get highly rated recruits.

[Viking_Guy]

I second both of your reactions - my thought was the Stanford side's game had no "bite" to it last night - everything was slow, sloppy, and a bit uncoordinated.

On the PK - as a keeper, my sympathy would naturally lie with Thomas.  But I think the key to the call was that he came out with his legs into the Cal player while still not touching the ball with his hands - he came out knees/shins first while sliding past the ball waiting to gather it in with his hands.  If you hit the player before you're playing the ball, the PK should be given.

One other thing - I've rarely seen a match with so much whining at the center ref.  I'm sure he was not perfect, but it wasn't egregiously bad.  

And I'm not happy with one Cardinal player in particular, who seems to be taking the drama quotient of trying to draw fouls to a new level.

All in all, a fair result to a poorly played game.  The midfield, most especially, was almost useless.  It was nice to have Beason back, which may be the most important outcome, but they held out Hughes to keep him for picking up a fifth yellow and having to sit the first game in the post-season (I'm fairly sure cards reset after the regular season ends.)  Beason and Ludwick had in my recollection never played together as a center back pairing.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

I second both of your reactions - my thought was the Stanford side's game had no "bite" to it last night - everything was slow, sloppy, and a bit uncoordinated.

On the PK - as a keeper, my sympathy would naturally lie with Thomas.  But I think the key to the call was that he came out with his legs into the Cal player while still not touching the ball with his hands - he came out knees/shins first while sliding past the ball waiting to gather it in with his hands.  If you hit the player before you're playing the ball, the PK should be given.

One other thing - I've rarely seen a match with so much whining at the center ref.  I'm sure he was not perfect, but it wasn't egregiously bad.  

And I'm not happy with one Cardinal player in particular, who seems to be taking the drama quotient of trying to draw fouls to a new level.

All in all, a fair result to a poorly played game.  The midfield, most especially, was almost useless.  It was nice to have Beason back, which may be the most important outcome, but they held out Hughes to keep him for picking up a fifth yellow and having to sit the first game in the post-season (I'm fairly sure cards reset after the regular season ends.)  Beason and Ludwick had in my recollection never played together as a center back pairing.

VG