[muiron]

(NOTE - this is a copy of a post I just madd on Bootboard's Sears Board, on which I am not yet giving up. So, BobbK, you don't have to read it twice.)

Our winning streak has ended. Our undefeated streak continues. 

Stanford 1, Santa Clara 1, after double overtime. 

We scored at 42:08 on a solo run and shot from Sophia Smith.  Santa Clara answered with a rebound (or three) off a PK at 66:01, with a yellow attached for Kiki Pickett. (And I want to see the replay of that foul that led to the PK).

We played better and had 28 shots, 15 on goal, to their 10 shots, 5 on goal. We had 10 in overtime, compared to their 1. Their GK had 14 saves, at least six of them excellent. We kept knocking on the door but couldn't get through it.

Good, hard game. A little harder from Santa Clara than I would have liked. Yet the fouls showed 22 by Stanford, 13 by SCU, with 3 yellows to Stanford and 2 to SCU. Of our 22 (called) fouls, 15 came in the second half, including, of course, the PK.  The center ref seemed to be quite selective, giving them a (weak?) PK In the second half but refusing us two very plausible PKs in OT. 

And I just confirmed something I had speculated about. The center ref is Baldomero Toledo, a notoriously bad (from my perspective) MLS ref who regularly screws up Earthquakes matches. Having an MLS ref seems like a good idea; having Toledo as your MSL ref is like having 
Eddie Gaedel as your major league hitter. (Look him up - but, hey, at least he got on base). I have consistently hated to watch him ref the Quakes, even when he helped them. I'm gobsmacked that he's reffing Stanford soccer. 

Suffice it to say, we were not happy with the reffing. But it was not a (very) unfair result. SCU played very well - their keeper played spectacularly - and they managed, somehow, against the odds, to keep us out of the goal all but once. 

No Tierna - still on crutches. No Meech - not suited up though present. But the others played well. Just a tough, tough tie. 

OTOH, we'll still be number 1 (I think we and SCU were the only undefeated teams going into to this day and we're both undefeated coming out). We outplayed them. And we got a reminder that NCAA women's soccer is not all beer, skittles, and Cal Poly SLO. 

League play starts this Friday at the Q v Arizona. I suspect our team will be angry. 

Go Card!

[muiron]

(NOTE - this is a copy of a post I just madd on Bootboard's Sears Board, on which I am not yet giving up. So, BobbK, you don't have to read it twice.)

Our winning streak has ended. Our undefeated streak continues. 

Stanford 1, Santa Clara 1, after double overtime. 

We scored at 42:08 on a solo run and shot from Sophia Smith.  Santa Clara answered with a rebound (or three) off a PK at 66:01, with a yellow attached for Kiki Pickett. (And I want to see the replay of that foul that led to the PK).

We played better and had 28 shots, 15 on goal, to their 10 shots, 5 on goal. We had 10 in overtime, compared to their 1. Their GK had 14 saves, at least six of them excellent. We kept knocking on the door but couldn't get through it.

Good, hard game. A little harder from Santa Clara than I would have liked. Yet the fouls showed 22 by Stanford, 13 by SCU, with 3 yellows to Stanford and 2 to SCU. Of our 22 (called) fouls, 15 came in the second half, including, of course, the PK.  The center ref seemed to be quite selective, giving them a (weak?) PK In the second half but refusing us two very plausible PKs in OT. 

And I just confirmed something I had speculated about. The center ref is Baldomero Toledo, a notoriously bad (from my perspective) MLS ref who regularly screws up Earthquakes matches. Having an MLS ref seems like a good idea; having Toledo as your MSL ref is like having 
Eddie Gaedel as your major league hitter. (Look him up - but, hey, at least he got on base). I have consistently hated to watch him ref the Quakes, even when he helped them. I'm gobsmacked that he's reffing Stanford soccer. 

Suffice it to say, we were not happy with the reffing. But it was not a (very) unfair result. SCU played very well - their keeper played spectacularly - and they managed, somehow, against the odds, to keep us out of the goal all but once. 

No Tierna - still on crutches. No Meech - not suited up though present. But the others played well. Just a tough, tough tie. 

OTOH, we'll still be number 1 (I think we and SCU were the only undefeated teams going into to this day and we're both undefeated coming out). We outplayed them. And we got a reminder that NCAA women's soccer is not all beer, skittles, and Cal Poly SLO. 

League play starts this Friday at the Q v Arizona. I suspect our team will be angry. 

Go Card!

[BobK]

Don’t forget Hiatt’s injury. Other than that worth reading twice. Except we coulda won

[BobK]

Don’t forget Hiatt’s injury. Other than that worth reading twice. Except we coulda won

[muiron]

Don’t forget Hiatt’s injury.  Other than that worth reading twice.    Except we coulda won

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. 

Glad you reminded me of Sam's injury, but I think it is not likely to keep her out long. An elbow to the nose, which the center ref kept trying to explain to the coaches and and players as not a foul - in a way that seemed awfully defensive. I figure a broken nose at the worse (lots of blood) but, unless it triggered the coincussion protocol, probably short term (unlike ankles and knees).

BTW, Naomi Girma, true frosh center back, impresses and impressses. She belongs in there with Alana Cook, our great senior CB.

[muiron]

Don’t forget Hiatt’s injury.  Other than that worth reading twice.    Except we coulda won

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. 

Glad you reminded me of Sam's injury, but I think it is not likely to keep her out long. An elbow to the nose, which the center ref kept trying to explain to the coaches and and players as not a foul - in a way that seemed awfully defensive. I figure a broken nose at the worse (lots of blood) but, unless it triggered the coincussion protocol, probably short term (unlike ankles and knees).

BTW, Naomi Girma, true frosh center back, impresses and impressses. She belongs in there with Alana Cook, our great senior CB.

[Viking_Guy]

The injury to Hiatt really turned the game, in my opinion.  Prior to that, Stanford had been on the front foot consistently after the opening 15 minutes.  It didn't look like an elbow to me; looked like she jumped up as Sam went over her to head the ball away, and the top of her head crashed into Hiatt's face. But it again brought up the importance of "the spine" - that's two starters missing from the center of the pitch for Stanford, and it showed.  Goad, Briede, whoever they plugged in there, Stanford's midfield was not the same after Hiatt went out. Girma, OTOH, was spectacular - numerous complete stones, cut-offs, and tip-aways of the Bronco forwards.  They only scored because of a PK resulting from a freakishly lucky throughball tip.  Very few other chances really tested Jahansouz.

Thought the PK was a bit soft, but Kiki shouldn't have put herself in that position.  And the non-called foul against Macario in OT in the box was at least as worthy; felt like the referee was doing the "things in the box will not be called the same way as outside" metric.  And the level of acceptable contact varied widely throughout the match, both ways.

Jahansouz has a great initial save on the PK, and IMO was really let down by her defenders. The player who finally poked the ball in had come in UNMARKED on the backpost, while (it looked like DiBiasi, but it could've been another MF) sat outside her by a good three yards and didn't attack the ball.

The Cardinal had many more good chances - the header off the line by a Bronco defender on an open net, along with more than a few spectacular saves by the Santa Clara keeper.  But Stanford also kept hitting the ball right at her on good looks.  Sophia Smith converted one breakaway, but couldn't slot home another.  DiBiasi I believe tried to flick home a volley when she was wide open on the backpost in the first half, and hit it right into the keeper's chest, rather than laying out for a header as the ball came down.

The other reason we miss Xiao - she's one of the few players on the team not afraid to take a long shot.  WAY too many instances of trying to hit a perfectly weighted and placed throughball up the middle, rather than (A) shooting from distance, or (B) working wide and then across.  Stanford got way too vertical for large portions of the match.  When it works, as with Smith's goal and breakaway chance, it's spectacular - but it doesn't work often enough.  Would've much rather seen balls wide to the corners to pull the defense out and set up the cross.

And we're going to have to figure out that playing the ball back to Macario after she's passed it out of the three defenders guarding her is not the best way forward.

Ah well. I think they're still the best team in the country, but they really miss Tierna and Michelle.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

The injury to Hiatt really turned the game, in my opinion.  Prior to that, Stanford had been on the front foot consistently after the opening 15 minutes.  It didn't look like an elbow to me; looked like she jumped up as Sam went over her to head the ball away, and the top of her head crashed into Hiatt's face. But it again brought up the importance of "the spine" - that's two starters missing from the center of the pitch for Stanford, and it showed.  Goad, Briede, whoever they plugged in there, Stanford's midfield was not the same after Hiatt went out. Girma, OTOH, was spectacular - numerous complete stones, cut-offs, and tip-aways of the Bronco forwards.  They only scored because of a PK resulting from a freakishly lucky throughball tip.  Very few other chances really tested Jahansouz.

Thought the PK was a bit soft, but Kiki shouldn't have put herself in that position.  And the non-called foul against Macario in OT in the box was at least as worthy; felt like the referee was doing the "things in the box will not be called the same way as outside" metric.  And the level of acceptable contact varied widely throughout the match, both ways.

Jahansouz has a great initial save on the PK, and IMO was really let down by her defenders. The player who finally poked the ball in had come in UNMARKED on the backpost, while (it looked like DiBiasi, but it could've been another MF) sat outside her by a good three yards and didn't attack the ball.

The Cardinal had many more good chances - the header off the line by a Bronco defender on an open net, along with more than a few spectacular saves by the Santa Clara keeper.  But Stanford also kept hitting the ball right at her on good looks.  Sophia Smith converted one breakaway, but couldn't slot home another.  DiBiasi I believe tried to flick home a volley when she was wide open on the backpost in the first half, and hit it right into the keeper's chest, rather than laying out for a header as the ball came down.

The other reason we miss Xiao - she's one of the few players on the team not afraid to take a long shot.  WAY too many instances of trying to hit a perfectly weighted and placed throughball up the middle, rather than (A) shooting from distance, or (B) working wide and then across.  Stanford got way too vertical for large portions of the match.  When it works, as with Smith's goal and breakaway chance, it's spectacular - but it doesn't work often enough.  Would've much rather seen balls wide to the corners to pull the defense out and set up the cross.

And we're going to have to figure out that playing the ball back to Macario after she's passed it out of the three defenders guarding her is not the best way forward.

Ah well. I think they're still the best team in the country, but they really miss Tierna and Michelle.

VG

[oldalum]

Looking at the highlights video on Pac-12.com, the PK foul on Kiki was valid, not soft. And you're right, it was DiBiasi's mark who scored off the PK, Jordan inexplicably positioned herself wide of the goal and a few yards from her mark--who had the sense to hang out in front of the goal--instead of continuing to play defense. Had Jordan stayed between her mark and the goal, no score. Our second mental mistake on a PK (we encroached on one in an earlier game)

Seems like a lot of the time we played poorly, connecting passes to our opponent instead of to our teammates. Still, we had enough chances, need better finishing. Reminiscent of our loss 2 years ago when we did everything but score.

Hiatt was having a great game until she was injured.

Referee was very inconsistent and frustrating. Also didn't like how he kept letting SC's GK stall time away all game long, once warned her, but never stopped the clock and gave her a yellow.

[oldalum]

Looking at the highlights video on Pac-12.com, the PK foul on Kiki was valid, not soft. And you're right, it was DiBiasi's mark who scored off the PK, Jordan inexplicably positioned herself wide of the goal and a few yards from her mark--who had the sense to hang out in front of the goal--instead of continuing to play defense. Had Jordan stayed between her mark and the goal, no score. Our second mental mistake on a PK (we encroached on one in an earlier game)

Seems like a lot of the time we played poorly, connecting passes to our opponent instead of to our teammates. Still, we had enough chances, need better finishing. Reminiscent of our loss 2 years ago when we did everything but score.

Hiatt was having a great game until she was injured.

Referee was very inconsistent and frustrating. Also didn't like how he kept letting SC's GK stall time away all game long, once warned her, but never stopped the clock and gave her a yellow.

[M T]

In the broadcast, the live view of the foul that led to the PK was from the midfield, giving an angle where you can clearly see that Kiki kicked the ball before the Santa Clara player ran into her leg.  The video at PAC-12.com is from the end line where it isn't clear at all. (The view from the far end line is also not completely clear.  FYI, the SCU player doesn't touch the ball after Kiki kicks it to the left, even though the PAC-12.com view makes it look like she might.)  I have to say that I don't know soccer rules well enough to know what constitutes a foul.

Unfortunately, given 3 different camera angles, the PAC-12 channel didn't rewind any of them enough to confirm that the SCU player wasn't offside.   At the time the ball was fed to her, PAC-12 channel had some graphic up, and clearly the announcers were reading it until the camera cut back to the field just as the ball was being received.

Anyone else watch the game with the volume all the way down?  At least one of those announcers really seems to like the sound of his own voice, but I find it annoying as heck.

Kudos to Girma who kept in front of a SCU player to prevent a shot at an unprotected net after our GK made a bad mistake at 68:19.

[M T]

In the broadcast, the live view of the foul that led to the PK was from the midfield, giving an angle where you can clearly see that Kiki kicked the ball before the Santa Clara player ran into her leg.  The video at PAC-12.com is from the end line where it isn't clear at all. (The view from the far end line is also not completely clear.  FYI, the SCU player doesn't touch the ball after Kiki kicks it to the left, even though the PAC-12.com view makes it look like she might.)  I have to say that I don't know soccer rules well enough to know what constitutes a foul.

Unfortunately, given 3 different camera angles, the PAC-12 channel didn't rewind any of them enough to confirm that the SCU player wasn't offside.   At the time the ball was fed to her, PAC-12 channel had some graphic up, and clearly the announcers were reading it until the camera cut back to the field just as the ball was being received.

Anyone else watch the game with the volume all the way down?  At least one of those announcers really seems to like the sound of his own voice, but I find it annoying as heck.

Kudos to Girma who kept in front of a SCU player to prevent a shot at an unprotected net after our GK made a bad mistake at 68:19.

[Viking_Guy]

OA--

You're right, the penalty was legit; just seemed like some of the tackles in the Santa Clara penalty area were just as questionable, especially in the OTs.

A couple of more thoughts: if Naomi plays this well, I could see Tierna moving back to defensive center mid, and pushing Hiatt further up the pitch.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but our midfield has not looked great in the last few games, especially in the center of the pitch; a whole lot of three-bounces long shots, and trying to hit a 30-yard perfectly weighted ball through three defenders.  Today, Santa Clara gave them acres of space to bring the ball up, because the Broncos were pushing up.  But they kept on going central and quick, or at most a slight diagonal ball, rather than work wide and bring more players into the attack.

Not quite sure why Gruebel is starting; she's good on the ball, and has a nice shot, but not very quick, and drifts central a bit too much, letting the Broncos keep the field narrow.  Macario and Smith working off of Haley feel much more dangerous.   

On Madison - I can't figure out if she's more physical than other players, or just gets called for it more often.  It really does feel like her defender can play her much more aggressively than the referees are allowing Madison to play.

Hoping that Hiatt is all right, and that Tierna and Michelle continue to heal.

VG

---

MT--

You're right, Jahansouz, while she had a great initial stop on the PK, didn't have her best game.  Beyond the misadventure at midfield, when she completely whiffed on a bouncing ball after coming 15 yards out of her box on a high arcing ball forward, there was a play in the first half when a ball was headed up from about 12 yards, and literally bounced about a yard inside the crease five yards in front of her with no one between her and where it came down, and she froze on her endline for a second or two, rather than coming to grab it out of the air.  Ended up in a chance for the Broncos.

The producer didn't seem to have a feel for soccer, or was, as if often the case, trying to do too many things as part of a short crew; often late coming back to the play, and trying for coach and crowd shots, or to pick out individual players the commentators are discussing, while the ball is out of frame and in play.  The play by play was Troy Clardy, who for the most part does a fine job.  And the color guy, Chris Sullivan, has some great observations, but (1) takes a lot of words to get there, and then repeats them a lot, and (2) extols a few players, and then constantly returns to them during the match.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

OA--

You're right, the penalty was legit; just seemed like some of the tackles in the Santa Clara penalty area were just as questionable, especially in the OTs.

A couple of more thoughts: if Naomi plays this well, I could see Tierna moving back to defensive center mid, and pushing Hiatt further up the pitch.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but our midfield has not looked great in the last few games, especially in the center of the pitch; a whole lot of three-bounces long shots, and trying to hit a 30-yard perfectly weighted ball through three defenders.  Today, Santa Clara gave them acres of space to bring the ball up, because the Broncos were pushing up.  But they kept on going central and quick, or at most a slight diagonal ball, rather than work wide and bring more players into the attack.

Not quite sure why Gruebel is starting; she's good on the ball, and has a nice shot, but not very quick, and drifts central a bit too much, letting the Broncos keep the field narrow.  Macario and Smith working off of Haley feel much more dangerous.   

On Madison - I can't figure out if she's more physical than other players, or just gets called for it more often.  It really does feel like her defender can play her much more aggressively than the referees are allowing Madison to play.

Hoping that Hiatt is all right, and that Tierna and Michelle continue to heal.

VG

---

MT--

You're right, Jahansouz, while she had a great initial stop on the PK, didn't have her best game.  Beyond the misadventure at midfield, when she completely whiffed on a bouncing ball after coming 15 yards out of her box on a high arcing ball forward, there was a play in the first half when a ball was headed up from about 12 yards, and literally bounced about a yard inside the crease five yards in front of her with no one between her and where it came down, and she froze on her endline for a second or two, rather than coming to grab it out of the air.  Ended up in a chance for the Broncos.

The producer didn't seem to have a feel for soccer, or was, as if often the case, trying to do too many things as part of a short crew; often late coming back to the play, and trying for coach and crowd shots, or to pick out individual players the commentators are discussing, while the ball is out of frame and in play.  The play by play was Troy Clardy, who for the most part does a fine job.  And the color guy, Chris Sullivan, has some great observations, but (1) takes a lot of words to get there, and then repeats them a lot, and (2) extols a few players, and then constantly returns to them during the match.

VG

[81alum]

Thanks Viking Guy!  I posted in another thread that I was waiting for your analysis!  I'm pleased that I wasn't too far off with my own ill informed thoughts.

This was the first game I have watched this year.  Sophia Smith is a revelation.   To think she has not attended a college class yet!  She is going to be fun to watch over the next four years.

I thought the foul that led to the Santa Clara penalty kick was legit, but I thought we seemed slow and unprepared to deal with the rebound.  It seemed to me that Santa Clara deserved that one.

On the other hand,  I did think that we were fouled late in the game in the penalty box and was incensed that it wasn't called.  The calls seemed inconsistent to me at the time.  Glad I wasn't imagining it.

It was so frustrating at the very end of overtime when we had two fabulous opportunities and some corners and could not convert them.  

I was reminded again why soccer sometimes frustrates me--while it can happen with other sports, it seems to happen with soccer more often--that your team can outplay the other team and not be rewarded.  On the other hand, winning 29 in a row isn't too bad.

[81alum]

Thanks Viking Guy!  I posted in another thread that I was waiting for your analysis!  I'm pleased that I wasn't too far off with my own ill informed thoughts.

This was the first game I have watched this year.  Sophia Smith is a revelation.   To think she has not attended a college class yet!  She is going to be fun to watch over the next four years.

I thought the foul that led to the Santa Clara penalty kick was legit, but I thought we seemed slow and unprepared to deal with the rebound.  It seemed to me that Santa Clara deserved that one.

On the other hand,  I did think that we were fouled late in the game in the penalty box and was incensed that it wasn't called.  The calls seemed inconsistent to me at the time.  Glad I wasn't imagining it.

It was so frustrating at the very end of overtime when we had two fabulous opportunities and some corners and could not convert them.  

I was reminded again why soccer sometimes frustrates me--while it can happen with other sports, it seems to happen with soccer more often--that your team can outplay the other team and not be rewarded.  On the other hand, winning 29 in a row isn't too bad.

[muiron]

The Santa Clara goalkeeper, Melissa Lowder, is the same one who was so spectacular in their victory over us in the NCAAs two years ago - and even in our defeat of them last year. Thank god she's a senior - expect perhaps in the tournament (and I hope not there, unless in the finals), we won't see her again. 

I still can't get over the fact that Baldomero Toledo was reffing this game. He is SUCH an AWFUL MLS ref - for all the reasons we saw yesterday. BTW, anyone believe we committed 15 fouls in the second half to Santa Clara's 4? They outfouled us 5-4 in the first half and 5 to 2 in OT but it almost feels as though Baldomero wanted to even up the match. Grumble.

[muiron]

The Santa Clara goalkeeper, Melissa Lowder, is the same one who was so spectacular in their victory over us in the NCAAs two years ago - and even in our defeat of them last year. Thank god she's a senior - expect perhaps in the tournament (and I hope not there, unless in the finals), we won't see her again. 

I still can't get over the fact that Baldomero Toledo was reffing this game. He is SUCH an AWFUL MLS ref - for all the reasons we saw yesterday. BTW, anyone believe we committed 15 fouls in the second half to Santa Clara's 4? They outfouled us 5-4 in the first half and 5 to 2 in OT but it almost feels as though Baldomero wanted to even up the match. Grumble.

[oldalum]

In the broadcast, the live view of the foul that led to the PK was from the midfield, giving an angle where you can clearly see that Kiki kicked the ball before the Santa Clara player ran into her leg. 

Kudos to Girma who kept in front of a SCU player to prevent a shot at an unprotected net after our GK made a bad mistake at 68:19.

thanks for the analysis, I'll check the broadcast recording I made. From the highlights video, it looks like Kiki did not touch the ball. 

Girma was excellent throughout the game.

[oldalum]

In the broadcast, the live view of the foul that led to the PK was from the midfield, giving an angle where you can clearly see that Kiki kicked the ball before the Santa Clara player ran into her leg. 

Kudos to Girma who kept in front of a SCU player to prevent a shot at an unprotected net after our GK made a bad mistake at 68:19.

thanks for the analysis, I'll check the broadcast recording I made. From the highlights video, it looks like Kiki did not touch the ball. 

Girma was excellent throughout the game.

[troyc]

Anyone else watch the game with the volume all the way down?  At least one of those announcers really seems to like the sound of his own voice, but I find it annoying as heck.

Thank you for watching! We had a lot of fun calling a high-quality, high-drama match.

Troy C

[troyc]

Anyone else watch the game with the volume all the way down?  At least one of those announcers really seems to like the sound of his own voice, but I find it annoying as heck.

Thank you for watching! We had a lot of fun calling a high-quality, high-drama match.

Troy C

[Viking_Guy]

Troy--

Hey, at least we're equitable - we criticize the announcers as well as the officials. :)

Speaking as someone who works in media production, at least tangentially, could you tell me the average number of crew you work with at soccer matches?  Speaking as someone who's watched Stanford soccer in every format and with every level of staffing from single camera livestream with no commentary via a laptop to the College Cup (and even a nearly fixed single camera at some Pac-12 venues), it's always interesting to know what support you guys have.

And thanks for your enthusiasm for the sport.

VG

Anyone else watch the game with the volume all the way down?  At least one of those announcers really seems to like the sound of his own voice, but I find it annoying as heck.

Thank you for watching! We had a lot of fun calling a high-quality, high-drama match.

Troy C

[Viking_Guy]

Troy--

Hey, at least we're equitable - we criticize the announcers as well as the officials. :)

Speaking as someone who works in media production, at least tangentially, could you tell me the average number of crew you work with at soccer matches?  Speaking as someone who's watched Stanford soccer in every format and with every level of staffing from single camera livestream with no commentary via a laptop to the College Cup (and even a nearly fixed single camera at some Pac-12 venues), it's always interesting to know what support you guys have.

And thanks for your enthusiasm for the sport.

VG

Anyone else watch the game with the volume all the way down?  At least one of those announcers really seems to like the sound of his own voice, but I find it annoying as heck.

Thank you for watching! We had a lot of fun calling a high-quality, high-drama match.

Troy C

[oldalum]

The producer didn't seem to have a feel for soccer, or was, as if often the case, trying to do too many things as part of a short crew; often late coming back to the play, and trying for coach and crowd shots, or to pick out individual players the commentators are discussing, while the ball is out of frame and in play.  

boy you've hit on my big pet peeve with Stanford W Soccer broadcasts (which I otherwise love): the producer/director lingering FOREVER on someone who just did something but is now doing nothing, or a player or coach the announcers are mentioning but is now doing nothing--while live action is going on which we can hear but can't see. Could they use a box in the corner, or at least a split screen, so those of us who would prefer to watch the soccer game can continue to do so? It happens too often that they have to suddenly cut back to a player in the process of scoring, when you have no clue how she and the ball got into that position. I also wish we could get a decent wide field replay of offside calls or non-calls so we can try to judge them for ourselves. I'd also like fewer tight shots of the players on ball to the exclusion of the other players who are one pass away; save those shots for replays.

[oldalum]

The producer didn't seem to have a feel for soccer, or was, as if often the case, trying to do too many things as part of a short crew; often late coming back to the play, and trying for coach and crowd shots, or to pick out individual players the commentators are discussing, while the ball is out of frame and in play.  

boy you've hit on my big pet peeve with Stanford W Soccer broadcasts (which I otherwise love): the producer/director lingering FOREVER on someone who just did something but is now doing nothing, or a player or coach the announcers are mentioning but is now doing nothing--while live action is going on which we can hear but can't see. Could they use a box in the corner, or at least a split screen, so those of us who would prefer to watch the soccer game can continue to do so? It happens too often that they have to suddenly cut back to a player in the process of scoring, when you have no clue how she and the ball got into that position. I also wish we could get a decent wide field replay of offside calls or non-calls so we can try to judge them for ourselves. I'd also like fewer tight shots of the players on ball to the exclusion of the other players who are one pass away; save those shots for replays.

[Viking_Guy]

That's the thing for me, OA - I think they are limited by the size of their crew - it appears to be 2-3 fixed camera positions (midfield and even with the top of each box) and one field level handheld.  I wonder if the some of the cameras are remotely operated from the truck, rather than with live camerapeople.  That often leads to delays, as live camerapeople are looking at the field as well as their viewfinder, while remote operation only sees what the camera is pointed at currently.

And again, a tremendous improvement over the old "student with an IPhone" quality of livestreams, though they had their charms. But hey, what are fan boards for without kvetching?

VG

[Viking_Guy]

That's the thing for me, OA - I think they are limited by the size of their crew - it appears to be 2-3 fixed camera positions (midfield and even with the top of each box) and one field level handheld.  I wonder if the some of the cameras are remotely operated from the truck, rather than with live camerapeople.  That often leads to delays, as live camerapeople are looking at the field as well as their viewfinder, while remote operation only sees what the camera is pointed at currently.

And again, a tremendous improvement over the old "student with an IPhone" quality of livestreams, though they had their charms. But hey, what are fan boards for without kvetching?

VG

[muiron]

The producer didn't seem to have a feel for soccer, or was, as if often the case, trying to do too many things as part of a short crew; often late coming back to the play, and trying for coach and crowd shots, or to pick out individual players the commentators are discussing, while the ball is out of frame and in play.  

boy you've hit on my big pet peeve with Stanford W Soccer broadcasts (which I otherwise love): the producer/director lingering FOREVER on someone who just did something but is now doing nothing, or a player or coach the announcers are mentioning but is now doing nothing--while live action is going on which we can hear but can't see. Could they use a box in the corner, or at least a split screen, so those of us who would prefer to watch the soccer game can continue to do so? It happens too often that they have to suddenly cut back to a player in the process of scoring, when you have no clue how she and the ball got into that position. I also wish we could get a decent wide field replay of offside calls or non-calls so we can try to judge them for ourselves. I'd also like fewer tight shots of the players on ball to the exclusion of the other players who are one pass away; save those shots for replays.

That's not just Stanford W Soccer broadcasts - it's ubiquitous in US coverage of all soccer. The personal side presented, assuming the audience doesn't understand or care about the sport. We watched the World Cup through June 24 in the UK, then came home. God, we wished we could get the British announcers back (even though I think everyone got just one feed during the games, but it was a better feed than we get in the US.) 

I DON'T need to see a player whose shot got gathered by the keeper slowly jog back to position while the keeper has punted the ball away. Somewhere. 

More generally, I wish we could get a fuller view of the field but that seems to be a universal feature of tv coverage, maybe because a full field view is a) technically difficult and b) makes the players look very small. But being at a match is so much better than watching on tv because (among other things) you can see how all 22 players are set up.

[muiron]

The producer didn't seem to have a feel for soccer, or was, as if often the case, trying to do too many things as part of a short crew; often late coming back to the play, and trying for coach and crowd shots, or to pick out individual players the commentators are discussing, while the ball is out of frame and in play.  

boy you've hit on my big pet peeve with Stanford W Soccer broadcasts (which I otherwise love): the producer/director lingering FOREVER on someone who just did something but is now doing nothing, or a player or coach the announcers are mentioning but is now doing nothing--while live action is going on which we can hear but can't see. Could they use a box in the corner, or at least a split screen, so those of us who would prefer to watch the soccer game can continue to do so? It happens too often that they have to suddenly cut back to a player in the process of scoring, when you have no clue how she and the ball got into that position. I also wish we could get a decent wide field replay of offside calls or non-calls so we can try to judge them for ourselves. I'd also like fewer tight shots of the players on ball to the exclusion of the other players who are one pass away; save those shots for replays.

That's not just Stanford W Soccer broadcasts - it's ubiquitous in US coverage of all soccer. The personal side presented, assuming the audience doesn't understand or care about the sport. We watched the World Cup through June 24 in the UK, then came home. God, we wished we could get the British announcers back (even though I think everyone got just one feed during the games, but it was a better feed than we get in the US.) 

I DON'T need to see a player whose shot got gathered by the keeper slowly jog back to position while the keeper has punted the ball away. Somewhere. 

More generally, I wish we could get a fuller view of the field but that seems to be a universal feature of tv coverage, maybe because a full field view is a) technically difficult and b) makes the players look very small. But being at a match is so much better than watching on tv because (among other things) you can see how all 22 players are set up.

[troyc]

Troy--

Hey, at least we're equitable - we criticize the announcers as well as the officials. :)

Speaking as someone who works in media production, at least tangentially, could you tell me the average number of crew you work with at soccer matches?  Speaking as someone who's watched Stanford soccer in every format and with every level of staffing from single camera livestream with no commentary via a laptop to the College Cup (and even a nearly fixed single camera at some Pac-12 venues), it's always interesting to know what support you guys have.

And thanks for your enthusiasm for the sport.

VG

Thank you! Crew size varies from show to show, depending on the profile of the event...I'd say we had perhaps 15-20 on site Sunday? And there were more support staff back in San Francisco. Being an old radio guy, it has always amazed me how many moving pieces there are in TV production, and how many people it takes to put on a show. Super-grateful for their efforts...I just try not to screw it up!

Troy C

[troyc]

Troy--

Hey, at least we're equitable - we criticize the announcers as well as the officials. :)

Speaking as someone who works in media production, at least tangentially, could you tell me the average number of crew you work with at soccer matches?  Speaking as someone who's watched Stanford soccer in every format and with every level of staffing from single camera livestream with no commentary via a laptop to the College Cup (and even a nearly fixed single camera at some Pac-12 venues), it's always interesting to know what support you guys have.

And thanks for your enthusiasm for the sport.

VG

Thank you! Crew size varies from show to show, depending on the profile of the event...I'd say we had perhaps 15-20 on site Sunday? And there were more support staff back in San Francisco. Being an old radio guy, it has always amazed me how many moving pieces there are in TV production, and how many people it takes to put on a show. Super-grateful for their efforts...I just try not to screw it up!

Troy C

[oldalum]

You do a great job! It's the director/producer's (I don't know what they're called) decisions on what to show and when that often frustrate me. I actually prefer fewer cameras: when there are more, they feel like they have to use them, usually to the detriment of the soccer fan viewer. Less is often more in soccer.

[oldalum]

You do a great job! It's the director/producer's (I don't know what they're called) decisions on what to show and when that often frustrate me. I actually prefer fewer cameras: when there are more, they feel like they have to use them, usually to the detriment of the soccer fan viewer. Less is often more in soccer.

[M T]

Troy, thank you for your announcing.  I can only imagine how much preparation it takes, and how much concentration & moxie it takes to be on that stage for 2 hours no matter what comes up.   I stand by what I said though, but obviously that's a personal opinion.  I definitely do appreciate that you check in on what the fans (at least this set of fans) are talking about.

---

The issue about the live feed not following the action is not just with soccer.  I find that the PAC-12 coverage of water polo has the same problem.  Water polo,  even more than soccer,  is sometimes measured in seconds from a good play at one end to a score at the other.  There is no time to show replays full screen.  That's for leisurely games like baseball, football, golf, tennis, etc.  (Even basketball has lots of non-playing time compared to water polo.)   I sorta understand that the PAC-12 crew has little experience with water polo (and I'm very grateful that they are getting some more experience), but after a few years, I was hoping they'd be getting more comfortable with it.    I like the idea of an inset (for either live or replay) if it is felt that a replay is really necessary.   

Personally, I am very thankful for TiVo that lets me do replays when I want.  What TiVo doesn't do is to show other camera angles.  I appreciate it when the video provider can do replays from other camera angles.

Hmmm... I believe many live events are delayed about 5 seconds to allow blipping forbidden words.  I wonder whether there's any real reason not to use a, say, 2-minute delay in "live" broadcasts to allow the production team time to overlay graphics or replays or even ads, knowing that if something important happens, the feed stays live (well, delayed) on the play.   Yes, the announcers have to be with one or the other (or, split, if there are 2 announcers--one can be covering the live feed, while the other covers the inserted material).  (Btw, I notice that on SF Giants games, the announcer's audio feed is apparently delayed about 0.25 seconds less than the video (and field audio), as you'll hear the announcers call a pitch or a play before they can possibly know it.  I think I see it in football sometimes too.)

[M T]

Troy, thank you for your announcing.  I can only imagine how much preparation it takes, and how much concentration & moxie it takes to be on that stage for 2 hours no matter what comes up.   I stand by what I said though, but obviously that's a personal opinion.  I definitely do appreciate that you check in on what the fans (at least this set of fans) are talking about.

---

The issue about the live feed not following the action is not just with soccer.  I find that the PAC-12 coverage of water polo has the same problem.  Water polo,  even more than soccer,  is sometimes measured in seconds from a good play at one end to a score at the other.  There is no time to show replays full screen.  That's for leisurely games like baseball, football, golf, tennis, etc.  (Even basketball has lots of non-playing time compared to water polo.)   I sorta understand that the PAC-12 crew has little experience with water polo (and I'm very grateful that they are getting some more experience), but after a few years, I was hoping they'd be getting more comfortable with it.    I like the idea of an inset (for either live or replay) if it is felt that a replay is really necessary.   

Personally, I am very thankful for TiVo that lets me do replays when I want.  What TiVo doesn't do is to show other camera angles.  I appreciate it when the video provider can do replays from other camera angles.

Hmmm... I believe many live events are delayed about 5 seconds to allow blipping forbidden words.  I wonder whether there's any real reason not to use a, say, 2-minute delay in "live" broadcasts to allow the production team time to overlay graphics or replays or even ads, knowing that if something important happens, the feed stays live (well, delayed) on the play.   Yes, the announcers have to be with one or the other (or, split, if there are 2 announcers--one can be covering the live feed, while the other covers the inserted material).  (Btw, I notice that on SF Giants games, the announcer's audio feed is apparently delayed about 0.25 seconds less than the video (and field audio), as you'll hear the announcers call a pitch or a play before they can possibly know it.  I think I see it in football sometimes too.)