[Viking_Guy]

And you could have said that after 18 minutes.

Stanford rode an early header by Maya Doms all the way to the finish.  It was not a great performance, except perhaps defensively.

Doms and Wesley started in place of Harber and Greubel, and Maya made the most of it.  Stanford played a lofted ball into the box that was headed up, then a Bruin on the far post made a bad mistake heading the ball back across the face of the goal in an attempted clearance.  Doms, all alone, launched herself at the ball, and from about 12 yards out popped it over Teagan Micah and just under the bar to give Stanford a lead 18 minutes in.

That was really the only offensive highlight for the Cardinal.  I don't know what happened; part of it was the Bruins, but definitely a larger issue was Stanford playing like they wanted to protect a one goal lead more than they wanted that second, especially in the second half.

The major issue was the midfield, and most specifically the connection between the midfield and the frontline.  Again and again, Stanford tried to work the ball through the midfield to the forwards, or up the sidelines.  And again and again, there were more Bruins there playing the ball than Cardinal.

Basically, it looked like Stanford was in a 4-1-4-1, with Briede in front of the backline and Haley up top.  UCLA was in a 3-5-2, with those five players clogging any passing lanes on the ground, Stanford's preferred route.  So Stanford would try to play out of the backline, and either directly or through Breide, the ball would go wide to Wesley or Pickett. They would look up to being marked by an outside mid, the passing lane inside being cut off by a central mid, and going back one of the forwards lurking around Breide.  And almost invariably, they would push the ball back through the backline and try to change fields.

Lather, rinse, repeat.  The only exceptions were when Girma brought it forward with her feet, or an occasionally dribbling foray by Pickett.  Other than that, a whole lotta nothin'.  Macario couldn't get the ball, because the three central midfielders kept pretty good track of her; she got it mostly in transition, and the Bruin midfield, especially Fleming, tracked back hard.

The one thing that was weird was that when Stanford did get some space wide, either Smith or Malatskey, almost invariably they cut inside.  I was BEGGING them to try to go endline and pull the ball back (and when it happened late in the first half, it was Stanford's best chance for a second; unfortunately, Sam Tran was in on the right, and she held up, expecting the ball at about the 10 yard line rather than the edge of the crease.)  But mostly, it was looping balls in.  Stanford is not that good in the air, especially 50-50 balls, which those looping balls invariably turn into.

Haley did what she could when she got the ball, which was not often, and she was immediately crowded.

UCLA, meanwhile, turned up the pressure after halftime, but Stanford's defense held firm.  Tremendous games from Girma, Pickett, and Breide trying to cover in front of them, in the face of Ashley Sanchez, Jessie Fleming, and our newest Bruin headache Mia Fishel, whose turn of pace tormented Sam Hiatt all night long.  Sam had a tough match, not only defensively but offensively; she hit a couple of very hopeful 30 yard balls on the ground heading forward that ended up in Bruin counterattacks.

The Bruins' best chance was when Sanchez split Girma and Hiatt late, but a lunging foot by Hiatt threw her off just enough to hit the bottom of the ball rather than as squarely as she wanted, and she sent it just high.

Mostly, it was a game of Stanford trying to work through the midfield, and UCLA intercepting and trying to counter.  A lot of back and forth, but limited dangerous chances (14 to 9 shots, 4 to 0 shots on goal - though UCLA had some very near misses, they didn't force a save.)

Not pretty, definitely not the Cardinal's best 90, but it got the job done.  Gameball to Girma, strong consideration for Pickett and Breide.

Two more things.  The officiating was... rather tilted.  Smith had a run up the middle, made probably a heavy touch, but was still running at the ball when she got clipped from behind.  No whistle; I presume the ref thought she had given up the ball, but she was still hit when the play was in front of her and close enough that she was going to influence it.  Some other calls seemed to come up powder blue more often than I thought was warranted.

Last thing.  Troy, if you're reading this, I'd like to offer one request for your commentary.  PLEASE put in a bit more coverage of substitutions, saying whose coming off and on the pitch.  Especially tonight, when the camerafolks tended to keep a very wide view of the pitch, it made it extremely hard to track who was on the field, and then I would notice, oh, it's Greubel out there, or Sam Tran, not Smith.  Stanford plays a lot differently once Haley comes off, and that's a valuable bit of info for your audience. The college substitution rules make those changes and those strategies really important; I thought Ratcliffe oversubbed a little in the first half late, but I reasoned he was trying to wear down the Bruins.

In any case, kept the home streak and Pac-12 streak intact.  Next week will be a different kind of test.  Tonight, I was a bit concerned about the number of corners conceded, but as Troy mentioned, UCLA is something like 2 for 103 this year in goals off corners.  With Stanford's corner issues this year (the goal by Pepperdine, and a few other instances), it would be ill-advised to give up those kinds of chances in the mountains next weekend, especially against Kornieck and the Buffalos.

Phew.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

And you could have said that after 18 minutes.

Stanford rode an early header by Maya Doms all the way to the finish.  It was not a great performance, except perhaps defensively.

Doms and Wesley started in place of Harber and Greubel, and Maya made the most of it.  Stanford played a lofted ball into the box that was headed up, then a Bruin on the far post made a bad mistake heading the ball back across the face of the goal in an attempted clearance.  Doms, all alone, launched herself at the ball, and from about 12 yards out popped it over Teagan Micah and just under the bar to give Stanford a lead 18 minutes in.

That was really the only offensive highlight for the Cardinal.  I don't know what happened; part of it was the Bruins, but definitely a larger issue was Stanford playing like they wanted to protect a one goal lead more than they wanted that second, especially in the second half.

The major issue was the midfield, and most specifically the connection between the midfield and the frontline.  Again and again, Stanford tried to work the ball through the midfield to the forwards, or up the sidelines.  And again and again, there were more Bruins there playing the ball than Cardinal.

Basically, it looked like Stanford was in a 4-1-4-1, with Briede in front of the backline and Haley up top.  UCLA was in a 3-5-2, with those five players clogging any passing lanes on the ground, Stanford's preferred route.  So Stanford would try to play out of the backline, and either directly or through Breide, the ball would go wide to Wesley or Pickett. They would look up to being marked by an outside mid, the passing lane inside being cut off by a central mid, and going back one of the forwards lurking around Breide.  And almost invariably, they would push the ball back through the backline and try to change fields.

Lather, rinse, repeat.  The only exceptions were when Girma brought it forward with her feet, or an occasionally dribbling foray by Pickett.  Other than that, a whole lotta nothin'.  Macario couldn't get the ball, because the three central midfielders kept pretty good track of her; she got it mostly in transition, and the Bruin midfield, especially Fleming, tracked back hard.

The one thing that was weird was that when Stanford did get some space wide, either Smith or Malatskey, almost invariably they cut inside.  I was BEGGING them to try to go endline and pull the ball back (and when it happened late in the first half, it was Stanford's best chance for a second; unfortunately, Sam Tran was in on the right, and she held up, expecting the ball at about the 10 yard line rather than the edge of the crease.)  But mostly, it was looping balls in.  Stanford is not that good in the air, especially 50-50 balls, which those looping balls invariably turn into.

Haley did what she could when she got the ball, which was not often, and she was immediately crowded.

UCLA, meanwhile, turned up the pressure after halftime, but Stanford's defense held firm.  Tremendous games from Girma, Pickett, and Breide trying to cover in front of them, in the face of Ashley Sanchez, Jessie Fleming, and our newest Bruin headache Mia Fishel, whose turn of pace tormented Sam Hiatt all night long.  Sam had a tough match, not only defensively but offensively; she hit a couple of very hopeful 30 yard balls on the ground heading forward that ended up in Bruin counterattacks.

The Bruins' best chance was when Sanchez split Girma and Hiatt late, but a lunging foot by Hiatt threw her off just enough to hit the bottom of the ball rather than as squarely as she wanted, and she sent it just high.

Mostly, it was a game of Stanford trying to work through the midfield, and UCLA intercepting and trying to counter.  A lot of back and forth, but limited dangerous chances (14 to 9 shots, 4 to 0 shots on goal - though UCLA had some very near misses, they didn't force a save.)

Not pretty, definitely not the Cardinal's best 90, but it got the job done.  Gameball to Girma, strong consideration for Pickett and Breide.

Two more things.  The officiating was... rather tilted.  Smith had a run up the middle, made probably a heavy touch, but was still running at the ball when she got clipped from behind.  No whistle; I presume the ref thought she had given up the ball, but she was still hit when the play was in front of her and close enough that she was going to influence it.  Some other calls seemed to come up powder blue more often than I thought was warranted.

Last thing.  Troy, if you're reading this, I'd like to offer one request for your commentary.  PLEASE put in a bit more coverage of substitutions, saying whose coming off and on the pitch.  Especially tonight, when the camerafolks tended to keep a very wide view of the pitch, it made it extremely hard to track who was on the field, and then I would notice, oh, it's Greubel out there, or Sam Tran, not Smith.  Stanford plays a lot differently once Haley comes off, and that's a valuable bit of info for your audience. The college substitution rules make those changes and those strategies really important; I thought Ratcliffe oversubbed a little in the first half late, but I reasoned he was trying to wear down the Bruins.

In any case, kept the home streak and Pac-12 streak intact.  Next week will be a different kind of test.  Tonight, I was a bit concerned about the number of corners conceded, but as Troy mentioned, UCLA is something like 2 for 103 this year in goals off corners.  With Stanford's corner issues this year (the goal by Pepperdine, and a few other instances), it would be ill-advised to give up those kinds of chances in the mountains next weekend, especially against Kornieck and the Buffalos.

Phew.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

One other comment, or elaboration.

So the midfield is crowded, and your opponent is denying you balls through on the ground as best as they can.

What's another option?  Over the top.  Route 1.  The long ball out of the back.

UCLA was lining up with Madison Haley marked, and two other backs tucked in fairly tight.  There was GOBS of room in either corner, and Smith especially has the speed to run onto them.  

But Ratcliffe HATES that style of play.  

Tonight was a night where it could've worked.  Late in the game, our backline started to hit balls over the top into the corner.  At that point, they were mostly trying to clear their lines, and hoping to spin down the clock.  But Haley, Smith, Malatskey, Greubel, all ran onto those balls at difference points.

90% of the the time, Stanford's touch and talent can overwhelm an overmatched opponent.  But, when the opponent either has near-equivalent talent, or is willing to bunker in, maintain a very compact shape, and hope, the Cardinal have issues, because they will still try to pass out of and through it.

Troy's on-air partner, Chris Sullivan, actually called it out a bit obliquely.  Midway through the second half, he offered up a mild criticism of Stanford passing back into pressure.  That with UCLA pushing up, and 7 Bruins coming forward to press the ball, Stanford continued to try to play their ground balls out of the back, or through the backline.  There were some exceptions (Pickett hit a few long crosses to Wesley, for example), but for the most part, UCLA channeled Stanford to the sideline, relied on superior numbers in the midfield, and pushed Stanford to consistently work backwards, which then allowed the Bruins to push even farther forward.  Or led to some awkwardness, as when Hiatt tried to pass a ball on the ground from the top of the eighteen to a teammate standing back to goal at the halfline, only to have it intercepted and turned into a Bruin chance.

Girma bringing the ball forward a bit more aggressively is one potential response - forces a forward to drop with her, or other players to converge, opening up other spaces.  It nearly worked for UCLA's backs tonight a couple of times - our midfielders were slow to react to forays forward, in one case leading to a defender carrying the ball at our defense inside 30 yards with Malatskey vainly chasing her from behind.

But I would occasionally love to see Madison out wide against some of these defenses looking for a long ball in, instead of playing purely back to goal in the center of the pitch. She did it once tonight off a throw-in, and completely boxed her defender off the ball, leading to the Cardinal's best chance in the second half, as Haley squared the ball to Greubel, who slipped but fortuitously touched the ball through to Malatskey, who blasted a shot that was blocked by a sliding defender.

Again, safely through.  On to the mountains.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

One other comment, or elaboration.

So the midfield is crowded, and your opponent is denying you balls through on the ground as best as they can.

What's another option?  Over the top.  Route 1.  The long ball out of the back.

UCLA was lining up with Madison Haley marked, and two other backs tucked in fairly tight.  There was GOBS of room in either corner, and Smith especially has the speed to run onto them.  

But Ratcliffe HATES that style of play.  

Tonight was a night where it could've worked.  Late in the game, our backline started to hit balls over the top into the corner.  At that point, they were mostly trying to clear their lines, and hoping to spin down the clock.  But Haley, Smith, Malatskey, Greubel, all ran onto those balls at difference points.

90% of the the time, Stanford's touch and talent can overwhelm an overmatched opponent.  But, when the opponent either has near-equivalent talent, or is willing to bunker in, maintain a very compact shape, and hope, the Cardinal have issues, because they will still try to pass out of and through it.

Troy's on-air partner, Chris Sullivan, actually called it out a bit obliquely.  Midway through the second half, he offered up a mild criticism of Stanford passing back into pressure.  That with UCLA pushing up, and 7 Bruins coming forward to press the ball, Stanford continued to try to play their ground balls out of the back, or through the backline.  There were some exceptions (Pickett hit a few long crosses to Wesley, for example), but for the most part, UCLA channeled Stanford to the sideline, relied on superior numbers in the midfield, and pushed Stanford to consistently work backwards, which then allowed the Bruins to push even farther forward.  Or led to some awkwardness, as when Hiatt tried to pass a ball on the ground from the top of the eighteen to a teammate standing back to goal at the halfline, only to have it intercepted and turned into a Bruin chance.

Girma bringing the ball forward a bit more aggressively is one potential response - forces a forward to drop with her, or other players to converge, opening up other spaces.  It nearly worked for UCLA's backs tonight a couple of times - our midfielders were slow to react to forays forward, in one case leading to a defender carrying the ball at our defense inside 30 yards with Malatskey vainly chasing her from behind.

But I would occasionally love to see Madison out wide against some of these defenses looking for a long ball in, instead of playing purely back to goal in the center of the pitch. She did it once tonight off a throw-in, and completely boxed her defender off the ball, leading to the Cardinal's best chance in the second half, as Haley squared the ball to Greubel, who slipped but fortuitously touched the ball through to Malatskey, who blasted a shot that was blocked by a sliding defender.

Again, safely through.  On to the mountains.

VG

[oldalum]

Even with my limited soccer knowledge, I too noticed at the end of the game how easily we were able to control the ball with long kicks downfield toward the corner. One thing that helped this work was that the kicks were diagonal, not straight down the field, giving Smith and Haley time to run onto them. 

UCLA uses a lot of give-and-goes to advance the ball by dribbling, they are fast and skilled and it works much of the time. We used to do more of that, but not as much now--maybe because we only have a few players fast enough?

I agree that the officiating looked increasingly one-sided as the game went on. Several times our kicks went awry because we had been shoved from behind or the side by a UCLA player (this happened to Haley multiple times); those should not be turnovers. There was also one offside call by the side ref in front of the Stanford bench (important because Haley had run onto a long goal kick, or free kick, I don't remember which, well ahead of any defender and would have had a decent chance to score), and our players who were looking along the same line as the side ref were just looking at each other open-mouthed in shock (to their credit, I guess, they didn't say anything to the ref).

Probably not as evident from the broadcast, but that was the best soccer atmosphere I've ever been in at the Q. A small but organized group of students has been coming to games and cheering and pounding a drum. For UCLA they brought reinforcements and clapped and yelled cheers throughout, and they had the full crowd join them a lot.

[oldalum]

Even with my limited soccer knowledge, I too noticed at the end of the game how easily we were able to control the ball with long kicks downfield toward the corner. One thing that helped this work was that the kicks were diagonal, not straight down the field, giving Smith and Haley time to run onto them. 

UCLA uses a lot of give-and-goes to advance the ball by dribbling, they are fast and skilled and it works much of the time. We used to do more of that, but not as much now--maybe because we only have a few players fast enough?

I agree that the officiating looked increasingly one-sided as the game went on. Several times our kicks went awry because we had been shoved from behind or the side by a UCLA player (this happened to Haley multiple times); those should not be turnovers. There was also one offside call by the side ref in front of the Stanford bench (important because Haley had run onto a long goal kick, or free kick, I don't remember which, well ahead of any defender and would have had a decent chance to score), and our players who were looking along the same line as the side ref were just looking at each other open-mouthed in shock (to their credit, I guess, they didn't say anything to the ref).

Probably not as evident from the broadcast, but that was the best soccer atmosphere I've ever been in at the Q. A small but organized group of students has been coming to games and cheering and pounding a drum. For UCLA they brought reinforcements and clapped and yelled cheers throughout, and they had the full crowd join them a lot.

[troyc]

Last thing.  Troy, if you're reading this, I'd like to offer one request for your commentary.  PLEASE put in a bit more coverage of substitutions, saying whose coming off and on the pitch.  Especially tonight, when the camerafolks tended to keep a very wide view of the pitch, it made it extremely hard to track who was on the field, and then I would notice, oh, it's Greubel out there, or Sam Tran, not Smith.  Stanford plays a lot differently once Haley comes off, and that's a valuable bit of info for your audience. The college substitution rules make those changes and those strategies really important; I thought Ratcliffe oversubbed a little in the first half late, but I reasoned he was trying to wear down the Bruins.

Thank you for that. I wasn't as diligent in staying on top of subs as I normally am, something I noticed myself in real time. I'd like to blame the head cold I've been battling all week. Yeah, that's it.....

Zero shots on goal for UCLA? Really?

Troy C

[troyc]

Last thing.  Troy, if you're reading this, I'd like to offer one request for your commentary.  PLEASE put in a bit more coverage of substitutions, saying whose coming off and on the pitch.  Especially tonight, when the camerafolks tended to keep a very wide view of the pitch, it made it extremely hard to track who was on the field, and then I would notice, oh, it's Greubel out there, or Sam Tran, not Smith.  Stanford plays a lot differently once Haley comes off, and that's a valuable bit of info for your audience. The college substitution rules make those changes and those strategies really important; I thought Ratcliffe oversubbed a little in the first half late, but I reasoned he was trying to wear down the Bruins.

Thank you for that. I wasn't as diligent in staying on top of subs as I normally am, something I noticed myself in real time. I'd like to blame the head cold I've been battling all week. Yeah, that's it.....

Zero shots on goal for UCLA? Really?

Troy C

[oldalum]

Just watched the broadcast and great job as usual Troy! And please compliment your director on all the wide angle shots, that was terrific.

[oldalum]

Just watched the broadcast and great job as usual Troy! And please compliment your director on all the wide angle shots, that was terrific.

[Spiny_Norman]

VG, what did you think of the result in Berkeley on Friday - Cal 3, USC 0?

[Spiny_Norman]

VG, what did you think of the result in Berkeley on Friday - Cal 3, USC 0?

[BostonCard]

Last thing.  Troy, if you're reading this, I'd like to offer one request for your commentary.  PLEASE put in a bit more coverage of substitutions, saying whose coming off and on the pitch.  Especially tonight, when the camerafolks tended to keep a very wide view of the pitch, it made it extremely hard to track who was on the field, and then I would notice, oh, it's Greubel out there, or Sam Tran, not Smith.  Stanford plays a lot differently once Haley comes off, and that's a valuable bit of info for your audience. The college substitution rules make those changes and those strategies really important; I thought Ratcliffe oversubbed a little in the first half late, but I reasoned he was trying to wear down the Bruins.

Thank you for that. I wasn't as diligent in staying on top of subs as I normally am, something I noticed myself in real time. I'd like to blame the head cold I've been battling all week. Yeah, that's it.....

Zero shots on goal for UCLA? Really?

Troy C

Think maybe one of our defenders might merit a POW award for that? (I know, you voted for one A couple of weeks ago; it’s just shocking that the best defensive team in the PAC-12 doesn’t have one)

BC

[BostonCard]

Last thing.  Troy, if you're reading this, I'd like to offer one request for your commentary.  PLEASE put in a bit more coverage of substitutions, saying whose coming off and on the pitch.  Especially tonight, when the camerafolks tended to keep a very wide view of the pitch, it made it extremely hard to track who was on the field, and then I would notice, oh, it's Greubel out there, or Sam Tran, not Smith.  Stanford plays a lot differently once Haley comes off, and that's a valuable bit of info for your audience. The college substitution rules make those changes and those strategies really important; I thought Ratcliffe oversubbed a little in the first half late, but I reasoned he was trying to wear down the Bruins.

Thank you for that. I wasn't as diligent in staying on top of subs as I normally am, something I noticed myself in real time. I'd like to blame the head cold I've been battling all week. Yeah, that's it.....

Zero shots on goal for UCLA? Really?

Troy C

Think maybe one of our defenders might merit a POW award for that? (I know, you voted for one A couple of weeks ago; it’s just shocking that the best defensive team in the PAC-12 doesn’t have one)

BC

[martyup]

The fact that we have the best defensive TEAM in the Pac-12 but have not had a defensive POW is, maybe, a good indicator of excellent teamwork.

[martyup]

The fact that we have the best defensive TEAM in the Pac-12 but have not had a defensive POW is, maybe, a good indicator of excellent teamwork.

[Viking_Guy]

Spiny--

I was a bit shocked by the margin, but looking at the recaps, it feels like SC might have let their frustrations at the soccer gods get the best of them. 

First Cal goal, midway through the second half, was Abi Kim driving the endline and laying the ball back.  McKeown then hit the crossbar for the Trojans, who ended up outshooting the Bears.

I think the big breaking point was the second goal - early in the second half, Cal gets a corner, and SC's keeper misses a chance to clear - her touch on the ball drops right to the feet of a Cal player, who slams it into the open net.  The third was also off a rebound from a set piece.

More generally, it feels like Cal.s strongest suit, defense, took away SC's, Hocking and McKeown up front.  Then Cal took advantage of their breaks, and SC didn't.

Scoreline just proves soccer can be fickle.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

Spiny--

I was a bit shocked by the margin, but looking at the recaps, it feels like SC might have let their frustrations at the soccer gods get the best of them. 

First Cal goal, midway through the second half, was Abi Kim driving the endline and laying the ball back.  McKeown then hit the crossbar for the Trojans, who ended up outshooting the Bears.

I think the big breaking point was the second goal - early in the second half, Cal gets a corner, and SC's keeper misses a chance to clear - her touch on the ball drops right to the feet of a Cal player, who slams it into the open net.  The third was also off a rebound from a set piece.

More generally, it feels like Cal.s strongest suit, defense, took away SC's, Hocking and McKeown up front.  Then Cal took advantage of their breaks, and SC didn't.

Scoreline just proves soccer can be fickle.

VG

[oldalum]

Girma the Pac-12 defensive player of the week. Well-deserved.

[oldalum]

Girma the Pac-12 defensive player of the week. Well-deserved.

[BostonCard]

Girma the Pac-12 defensive player of the week. Well-deserved.

Finally.

[BostonCard]

Girma the Pac-12 defensive player of the week. Well-deserved.

Finally.

[muiron]

Gotta say, I think you were a little harsh. UCLA is a team with impressive talent - and actually better recruiting classes than ours in recent years, as incredible as that seems. They had zero shots on goal - and really only one good opportunity, which Sanchez hit high. We had four shots on goal, plus two near misses from Cat and one from Madison. 

I do think they went into a defensive mode for most of the second half,  certainly by the 70th minute, after weathering a ferocious UCLA charge in the ten minutes just after halftime. But that gave us counterattack possibilities that we were willing and able to take - they just didn't go in. (Soccer is a tough game.) 

Paul got a win against a team with as much talent as ours. Yes, a second goal would have been great but our defense made sure we didn't need it. My biggest question is how in the world has UCLA lost four matches (and tied Pepperdine, which ruined our unblemished season)? 

Go Card! 

[muiron]

Gotta say, I think you were a little harsh. UCLA is a team with impressive talent - and actually better recruiting classes than ours in recent years, as incredible as that seems. They had zero shots on goal - and really only one good opportunity, which Sanchez hit high. We had four shots on goal, plus two near misses from Cat and one from Madison. 

I do think they went into a defensive mode for most of the second half,  certainly by the 70th minute, after weathering a ferocious UCLA charge in the ten minutes just after halftime. But that gave us counterattack possibilities that we were willing and able to take - they just didn't go in. (Soccer is a tough game.) 

Paul got a win against a team with as much talent as ours. Yes, a second goal would have been great but our defense made sure we didn't need it. My biggest question is how in the world has UCLA lost four matches (and tied Pepperdine, which ruined our unblemished season)? 

Go Card! 

[oldalum]

It's easy to forget how incredible these athletes are, and I think UCLA's talent level cannot be overstated. A local player a year ahead of my daughter was the best I've ever seen, then or since, in youth soccer: strong, fast, determined, incredibly skilled with the ball. She had "sticky feet" like Jordan Morris--could maneuver with the ball at high speed around and through opponents. At her elite club she played up 3 years. She's now a senior at UCLA and has yet to play meaningful minutes. That in her fourth year she can't even get on the field for some sub minutes just boggles my mind.

[oldalum]

It's easy to forget how incredible these athletes are, and I think UCLA's talent level cannot be overstated. A local player a year ahead of my daughter was the best I've ever seen, then or since, in youth soccer: strong, fast, determined, incredibly skilled with the ball. She had "sticky feet" like Jordan Morris--could maneuver with the ball at high speed around and through opponents. At her elite club she played up 3 years. She's now a senior at UCLA and has yet to play meaningful minutes. That in her fourth year she can't even get on the field for some sub minutes just boggles my mind.

[oldalum]

My biggest question is how in the world has UCLA lost four matches 

well they lost at Santa Clara 2-0, one of which was an own goal. Lost to Cal 2-1. Real head scratcher is the 3-0 loss to Arizona, but UCLA was missing Teagan Micah and Jessie Fleming for that one. The fourth loss was to us, no shame there!

[oldalum]

My biggest question is how in the world has UCLA lost four matches 

well they lost at Santa Clara 2-0, one of which was an own goal. Lost to Cal 2-1. Real head scratcher is the 3-0 loss to Arizona, but UCLA was missing Teagan Micah and Jessie Fleming for that one. The fourth loss was to us, no shame there!