[Viking_Guy]

Stanford is streaming the match on Facebook, with a single camera and two people, one of whom is obviously also working the camera. Not a whole lot of investment in production values.  Oh, and the "color" guy knows very little about the team - he actually called Stanford's keeper "Yahanaswaz", instead of Jahan-zeus (Jahansouz).

And that amateurish stream, while appreciated, is mirrored in the game.  It feels like a lot of our other soft games - letting the other team sit back, not physically challenging, trying to beat a packed-in defense by threading passes through 5 defenders in about 15 yards of space, or taking 30 yard shots off-balance.  And that scares me.

Meanwhile, Auburn, running a 4-2-3-1 which has been the nemesis of Ratcliffe's 4-3-3 forever (taking away all the space in the offensive midfield, 6 people behind the ball all the time), has had a couple, but only a couple, forays forward.  The problem for Stanford is those forays are releases where the Tiger forward ends up running 1v1 with Cook or Davidson - 1 slip or one bad back pass, and she's in alone on the keeper.

Other than that, I would say the ball has spent about 70% of the first half in the Auburn end, but they have six people and a keeper in a compact formation - there is no room to get through, and little room to shoot.  Stanford's trying to go through the air on set pieces, and they had one good header by Cook on a corner kick, but in general, they're not very strong off the ground.

PLEASE, score early, because I'm not feeling really confident right now.

Key indicator: we outshot Auburn 17-2.  Of our 17 shots, 5 were on goal.  Of Auburn's 2, both were on goal.  That's an indicator that they're getting pretty good looks in their limited chances.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

Stanford is streaming the match on Facebook, with a single camera and two people, one of whom is obviously also working the camera. Not a whole lot of investment in production values.  Oh, and the "color" guy knows very little about the team - he actually called Stanford's keeper "Yahanaswaz", instead of Jahan-zeus (Jahansouz).

And that amateurish stream, while appreciated, is mirrored in the game.  It feels like a lot of our other soft games - letting the other team sit back, not physically challenging, trying to beat a packed-in defense by threading passes through 5 defenders in about 15 yards of space, or taking 30 yard shots off-balance.  And that scares me.

Meanwhile, Auburn, running a 4-2-3-1 which has been the nemesis of Ratcliffe's 4-3-3 forever (taking away all the space in the offensive midfield, 6 people behind the ball all the time), has had a couple, but only a couple, forays forward.  The problem for Stanford is those forays are releases where the Tiger forward ends up running 1v1 with Cook or Davidson - 1 slip or one bad back pass, and she's in alone on the keeper.

Other than that, I would say the ball has spent about 70% of the first half in the Auburn end, but they have six people and a keeper in a compact formation - there is no room to get through, and little room to shoot.  Stanford's trying to go through the air on set pieces, and they had one good header by Cook on a corner kick, but in general, they're not very strong off the ground.

PLEASE, score early, because I'm not feeling really confident right now.

Key indicator: we outshot Auburn 17-2.  Of our 17 shots, 5 were on goal.  Of Auburn's 2, both were on goal.  That's an indicator that they're getting pretty good looks in their limited chances.

VG