LAX TV/Streaming Action for Feb 4-6

[nyclax]

this went from "winnable game for vermont" to getting bodied really quick. 13-3 duke in the second half, did not love the way vermont completely folded. i think that about does it for their top 20 case. you've gotta to better than that to stay in the rankings. in hindsight that slow first half for duke was clearly more from having to play two games in three days than from anything vermont was doing specifically.

 

[JeremyCuse]

this went from "winnable game for vermont" to getting bodied really quick. 13-3 duke in the second half, did not love the way vermont completely folded. i think that about does it for their top 20 case. you've gotta to better than that to stay in the rankings. in hindsight that slow first half for duke was clearly more from having to play two games in three days than from anything vermont was doing specifically.

Duke defensively just clamped down despite getting killed at the X. Vermont offensively struggled mightily

 

[ClvrUsrnm]

Duke defensively just clamped down despite getting killed at the X. Vermont offensively struggled mightily

Should’ve gone through McCormack on every possession.

 

[SkyTopBus44]

this went from "winnable game for vermont" to getting bodied really quick. 13-3 duke in the second half, did not love the way vermont completely folded. i think that about does it for their top 20 case. you've gotta to better than that to stay in the rankings. in hindsight that slow first half for duke was clearly more from having to play two games in three days than from anything vermont was doing specifically.

Poor shots and big saves by Cornell in 1st certainly helped

 

[Cuse All-In]

Too bad we couldn't have gotten UVM's fogo to transfer - he is picking up where he left off last year.

 

[Hoo's That]

I am thoroughly annoyed that we do not get to play Duke and UNC twice this year, which one would expect.

You'll get to play them twice in 2023 and 2024.

 

[DoctahLexus]

You'll get to play them twice in 2023 and 2024.

Oof. Now that interests me less with the young talent they have.

 

[DoctahLexus]

Not sure if anyone saw the play in the UVM Duke game that Dan Artesia is referencing here, but it was absolutely perfect example of how terrible the current dive rules are and he is spot on with his comment here. It is literally giving defense incentive to put both goalies and the diving player in unsafe situations. The people who make the rules are just not that smart I guess.

 

[DMVCuseLax]

 

[wgdsr]

Not sure if anyone saw the play in the UVM Duke game that Dan Artesia is referencing here, but it was absolutely perfect example of how terrible the current dive rules are and he is spot on with his comment here. It is literally giving defense incentive to put both goalies and the diving player in unsafe situations. The people who make the rules are just not that smart I guess.

it was a bad call. refs are claiming it's easily the most difficult rule to adjudicate, but they're not doing themselves any favors here. they're just going to get goalies hurt giving the uvm player a 1 minute.

to earn a 1 minute, you have to "deliberately" make contact with the keeper. he was shoved for the penalty not once (the penalty?) but twice making it impossible to stop his momentum. crappy call.

that said, a foul to prevent a goal for a 30 seconds is plenty of incentive already. if the O player makes any contact with the goalmouth for any reason whatsoever, goal is wiped. which is dumb as it is.

 

[DoctahLexus]

it was a bad call. refs are claiming it's easily the most difficult rule to adjudicate, but they're not doing themselves any favors here. they're just going to get goalies hurt giving the uvm player a 1 minute.

to earn a 1 minute, you have to "deliberately" make contact with the keeper. he was shoved for the penalty not once (the penalty?) but twice making it impossible to stop his momentum. crappy call.

that said, a foul to prevent a goal for a 30 seconds is plenty of incentive already. if the O player makes any contact with the goalmouth for any reason whatsoever, goal is wiped. which is dumb as it is.

Exactly. Refs are making judgements on the severity of contact throughout the game. They were definitely watching the ball carrier. They really couldn't tell that his movement into the goalie was totally caused by the other player? It honestly doesn't seem like a more difficult task than when they see a guy trying to sell a call and go "is that guy flopping or did he really get pushed in the back?" That is something they are doing all game long as well.

 

[wgdsr]

Exactly. Refs are making judgements on the severity of contact throughout the game. They were definitely watching the ball carrier. They really couldn't tell that his movement into the goalie was totally caused by the other player? It honestly doesn't seem like a more difficult task than when they see a guy trying to sell a call and go "is that guy flopping or did he really get pushed in the back?" That is something they are doing all game long as well.

not the 1st time on this call. had a convo with 2 top officials on one of them last year and besides the "it's tough", the read was -- "you're putting yourself in that position so a foul to run you into the goalie can also be on you". i don't agree that's how the rule should be "interpreted" and i don't believe they understand that they're making it more dangerous, not less. if that's how we're doing things, get rid of the dive.