The CardBoard
WSoc: It's over - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WSoc: It's over (/thread-5798.html)


WSoc: It's over - Viking_Guy - 10-07-2013

Two of the three impressive streaks by Cardinal women's soccer came to an end last evening, as they dropped their first conference game since 2008 and their first home match since 2006 (I think), losing 1-0 to Arizona State.

I had a really bad feeling about the game all day long, which was only exacerbated when it was revealed at gametime that starting freshman center back Maddie Bauer was sitting out for what was termed a minor injury.  Sophomore Maya Theuer, a highly recruited defender who hasn't been able to crack the rotation, came on in her place, and for the most part did a serviceable job.

But again, Stanford started in an absolute funk, getting outshot, outhustled and outgritted all over the pitch.  Other than Theuer, the lineup was the one I thought Ratcliffe should employ, with Verloo, Ubobagu and Uhl up top and LaBonta, Doll and Amack in the midfield.  But ASU employed a pressing 4-2-3-1, where the 3 attacking midfielders supporting the lone striker really cut down on Stanford's ability to possess the ball at the back, while not leaving much room in the middle except on the extreme flanks.  There's a reason it's become the formation of choice for a lot of high-level European teams in the past few years.

Beyond that tactical issue, there just seemed to be an overall lethargy: not chasing balls down hard, and especially not a lot of working hard to get back in supporting defensive positions off the ball.  ASU had a brobdingnagian shot advantage early in the game, and took the lead in the 24th minute or so on a really good shot that really seemed to be the result of the defense backing WAY too far up (the 4 defenders were all inside the area in a line, and the shooter got a clean look at a ball from about 23-24 yards out); they were so concerned about the Sun Devils' dribbling that they conceded a really good chance in the center of the field.

Even that didn't seem to wake them up.  Stanford played as if they were content to play at their current level of effort, the crowd was similarly comatose, and the game just went on.  There were some quality chances, but ASU's keeper came up big, and the defense was doing everything they could to take away Uhl and Verloo.  And Ratcliffe seemed content to simply try to sub new players into the same formation and system that was having trouble getting going against the Sun Devils' pressure with the starters.

In the last 20 minutes, Stanford finally seemed to wake up, but it was too little, too late.  They generated some quality chances, but Uhl sent a close range volley high, and missed a ball that the keeper just got a touch to on the back post.

It's hard to know who to call out.  Campbell played well; she had no real chance at the shot, and held up to ASU's initial charge.  The defense backed up too far on the goal, but only conceded one.  Really, the culprits seem to be an inability to adapt to what ASU's formation allowed, runs down the flanks and to the corner, combined with a real lack of energy from the midfield for most of the game.  Alex Doll may have opened up the competition to start at her position, having no real impact on the game offensively or defensively.  Amack was solid for most of the game.  LaBonta had some nice touch, but missed a really good chance from about 11 yards by trying to hammer the ball instead of shooting far post, ending up sending it right at the keeper.

Most troublingly, Chi seems lost.  She has some moments of brilliance with touch, but often times seems to want to give up the ball really early, instead of taking people on off the dribble, which is one of her strengths.  One of the commentators said that she thought Stanford was really trying to get her going by feeding her some balls, but she didn't do much with them, apart from the service that sprang LaBonta for the chance mentioned above.

All in all, a really sad way to end the long streaks, especially the homefield unbeaten streak - not to be beaten by a superior team, but by a subpar effort and a lack of flexibility.

Sigh.

VG


Re: WSoc: It's over - oldalum - 10-07-2013

Thanks VG for the expert analysis as usual. ASU seemed faster, tougher, and more disruptive than us. When they were on the attack they really moved. We turned over the ball too often on passes and first touches. We also did not put our good chances on frame. The Maddie Bauer injury may have been decisive; we were giving the attackers too much space, and there was at times some hesitation about who was going to guard who. At the game I wondered why Jane Campbell did not make any effort to block the shot that scored, but on the video I can see she had no chance to touch it and she knew it. Ratcliffe is going to have to figure out how to utilize Chi's talents; she is an incredible player and playmaker but has not been having the impact on games that she should.

Re: WSoc: It's over - 81alum - 10-07-2013

I saw the last half hour of the game and at first I was surprised that Stanford seemed to be playing rather quietly and without the sense of focus that they needed.  During the last 10 minutes they came alive and had several pretty good chances on offense that lifted my spirits--but none went through.  It does seem from the limited watching I have done that this team does not have the same chemistry as in prior years.

Re: WSoc: It's over - BobK - 10-08-2013

Check who we lost , check the ages of those who replaced our losses.   

Re: WSoc: It's over - Viking_Guy - 10-08-2013

Bob--

I agree, we've lost the spine of our attack in the last 2 years: Noyola, Zermuhlen and Press two years ago, Nogueira, Garciamendez, Quon and Taylor last year.  I was troubled last year by our reliance on Mariah's last-minute heading heroics in game after game, or Quon shifting up to the attack because we couldn't get enough pressure going forward.  That was in large part because the other two players in midfield in the 4-3-3 didn't provide a lot in front of Mariah, especially in linking the back line to the forwards.  But I hoped for one of two things, either the development of those players (or new arrivals) in the midfield, or a shift in formation to provide more midfield support.

But also, the best players in replacement roles have been the freshmen - Amack in holding midfield for Mariah, Bauer in central defense for Garciamendez.  Griffen has done well in the outside back role as a senior.  But in the midfield - Doll and LaBonta, as well as Hannah Farr, are experienced juniors.  Rosen is a redshirt sophomore.  Taylor McCann (whom I'm surprised we haven't seen more of) is a senior.  Those are the players who I hoped would take the reins a bit more.

I think one larger impact - no one has stepped into the "field general" role from those players.  When Mariah and Alina were on the field, you knew they were in charge.  Verloo may be trying, but it's difficulty to do it from the forward line.  That's one reason I was sort of hoping that Liedle would move inside to the holding midfield role - she seems to have the temperament for it, and her physicality would be a benefit.  And it would be really hard for the freshmen Amack or Bauer to do it early on (though I think Bauer was moving into that role, at least as far as the defense was concerned, which is the reason my anxiety spiked when she was held out of the game on Sunday).

Just some thoughts,

VG


Re: WSoc: It's over - 81alum - 10-14-2013

Well, it seems it is not only over, but it is also over, and it is also over.

Three losses in a row.  All in conference.  All at home. 

What the heck is happening?  I don't know enough about soccer to offer any intelligent analysis, but I know enough about our program to know that this is unprecedented in the last generation.  In five years we lost 0 games at home and 6 games total, and now we drop 3 games in a week.  The women must be devastated.  All one goal or overtime losses.

I feel like offering them condolences, although something tells me that this is a very talented team with a capable coach and that they will find a way to reclaim a successful season.

Re: WSoc: It's over - Farm93 - 10-15-2013

(10-14-2013, 10:02 PM)81alum link Wrote:What the heck is happening?  I don't know enough about soccer to offer any intelligent analysis, but I know enough about our program to know that this is unprecedented in the last generation.  In five years we lost 0 games at home and 6 games total, and now we drop 3 games in a week.  The women must be devastated.
If this was just a Women's Soccer thing, I think I could deal with it.  However, almost every Stanford autumn sports team is running at a multiple year low point.  Football is doing OK, but MXC, WXC, WSoc, WVB, MSoc even MWP are all unable to match their historical standards.

Once upon a time Stanford was a serious contender for at least 4 of the NCAA team championships held before the end of December (MXC, WXC, MWP, WVB).  This year Stanford will be at best a darkhorse for a couple of NCAA titles, but likely will get nothing (AGAIN) this fall.  Ugh!

Re: WSoc: It's over - BobK - 10-15-2013

WVB has lost 3 games.  They are to the # 1, 2,3 teams in the country. 

Big XC meet Saturday we shall see esp if a couple of men are healthy or redshirting. 

Re: WSoc: It's over - fullmetal - 10-28-2013

Anyone want to start a thread on the Director's Cup implications...? :(