San Jose Quakes at Columbus Crew (9/28) POST-Game Thread (R)

Discussion in 'San Jose Earthquakes' started by spejic, Sep 28, 2002.

  1. DGA57

    DGA57 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dublin, OH
    Re: Re: Clark "sucker punch"

    Like Adrian mentioned, the tackle was not from behind. It was at an angle with the right foot of Garcia going around Robinson's left side and getting him on the ankle (and may have touched the ball as well). It was a clear foul but nothing near to a yellow card. Considering the fact that Garcia was hammered three times by Quakes defenders as he was streaking upfield on the left side (and I think two of them were by Robinson), and the fact that Garcia was called for a foul in San Jose while getting hammered by Robinson or Russell, you can't possibly expect a yellow card for much less than these infractions.


  2. DGA57

    DGA57 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dublin, OH
    Thanks. If we could just convince some other people about that.


    You and all of us Crew fans.

    It was Conrad that shocked the stadium with that dribble. He probably shocked all of us when he missed that shot. And if you're referring to the late Cannon saves, the first one actually deflected off Agoos before going over the net. He did make an incredible save to take away a second McBride goal.

    We couldn't tell what happened when we saw it live at the stadium. But watching the tape delay last night, I can see that you've been influenced by the SJ commentators. Buddle snuck between Agoos and Cannon and got a shot off (there was a nice slow motion replay from the side that showed it very clearly); therefore you can't have a foul on the player as he played the ball, not the opponent. Cannon did his job and saved that shot by being almost on top of Buddle but he was unfortunate that the ball bounced sideways and sat there for McBride to finish.
  3. asdf

    asdf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 1999
    I get the impression that Agoos hasn't been 100% all year. Just a year ago is was awesome in MLS and solid on the national team. This year he was beatable in MLS and god-awful for the national team. Maybe he's just at the age where he has lost a step but I think the is more to it than that. Maybe his calf injury or something else or some combination of injuries has slowed him down all year.
  4. casbahman

    casbahman Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2001
    Location:
    Alviso, home of TiVO (a.k.a. Mecca)
    Well, since "ownage" isn't exactly scientific, I don't know if my opinion is any more valid than yours but I too thought the Quakes had much better of the run of play.

    Frankly, I think that the best team did not win because I still think that was the Quakes. But the better team did win because the Crew did what they needed to do in this series.

    While I'm disappointed in the loss, I'm glad for two things: 1) the Quakes came out playing with a lot of heart, something that seemed lacking of late; and 2) they played without bitching incessantly about the ref. It helps that the ref had a pretty good game but there was no over-the-top griping as we have seen in the last couple of games.

    Our loss, imo, was due to two things. First, the Quakes just could not finish. The chances, very good ones, were there but the golden touch that the forwards had at the start of the season just was not there. Second, and more alarmingly, the Quakes could not defend. Last season, and early this season, their games were characterized by a very organized defense. Even though they didn't have speed (this season or the last), they kept the opposition out of the goal through an organized effort in the back. That was not there this year (at least not late).

    In other words, they couldn't score and they couldn't defend. Doh! Brilliant analysis, no? The scoring thing, I'm not worried about. That will take care of itself (though I'd like to see DeRo get in there more as he was the reason for many of our offensive threats in the second playoff match). The defense thing, I am worried about. We are not going to get faster. So we have to get more organized. Also, something I noticed about halfway through the season, when games started getting harder for them, that they just didn't seem to be working hard enough. Marc said something similar in his post:

    To narrow this down, what I started to notice was that the boys just did not seem to be working as hard for each other. At the end of last season, at the team awards banquet that Club Quake threw, I mentioned during one of my spells on the microphone that I was proud of the effort because they played so hard for each other. They really defined "team". This season, coincidentally about the time they were eons in front of everyone in the standings, they just seemed to stop running. Midfielders would be holding the ball and it didn't seem like anyone was doing vigorous off-the-ball running to give them a passing lane. Therefore, the guy holding the ball would have to try to make a low percentage pass to get rid of the ball. I noticed this resulting in more turnovers and, seemingly, more fast breaks for the other team.

    Fwiw, I think that if they played more for each other, especially in the middle of the field, they would have been able to keep their shape better in back because the defenders would not have to spend as much time scrambling.

    Swims, you just can't resist popping off can you? I doubt we'd hear from you at all if you had lost the series. Just when I think Swims is starting to make an intelligent comment...

    - Darrin


  5. FlashMan

    FlashMan Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2000
    Location:
    'diego
    Club:
    --other--
    Country:
    United States
    I've seen the last four Quakes game in their entirety.

    The sad - and ironic - part is the Quakes largely outplayed their opposition for vast stretches of every one of these games, yet the Quakes lost all four. A very frustrating way to finish the season.

    At least I got to go to my first Quakes game at Spartan Stadium this year, the season finale v. the Galaxy, certainly one of the top three soccer matches I've ever seen on American soil, so it wasn't all bad...

    It'll be a long offseason...
  6. Albany58

    Albany58 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 1999
    Location:
    Concord, CA USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    If I had called you and your ilk every filthy expletive deleted that I know, I would have still been on higher moral ground than any of you.
  7. swims

    swims Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 1999
    Location:
    a van down by the river
    Take it easy on that shoe, Albany. You may need it later to beat your wife.

    That's what you get for thinking, but no, I can't resist, and no, we didn't lose the series.

    Odd usage of the adjectives 'best' and 'better'. So if we win the cup this year will we become a 'good' team? Were DC and the Metros 'superb'?

    I'll give you #1, and yes, your team did alot less bitching, but the ref/s had a good game? We aren't using game one as the measuring stick now, are we? While he seemed comfortable with set pieces, there were more uncalled fouls during the run of play than in any other recent professional match that I can recall. The ref was consistent in his non-calls (unlike the surreal calls in game one), fell for, in my recollection, no obvious dives, and didn't appear to favor one team over the other, but he won't be reffin' any WC matches next go 'round. Oh, wait a minute, are you using the phrase 'pretty good' the same way you use 'better' and 'best'?
  8. elainemichelle

    elainemichelle New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Just reeks of class, doesn't it folks?
  9. Albany58

    Albany58 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 1999
    Location:
    Concord, CA USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    Sure does. I stand in awe.
  10. casbahman

    casbahman Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2001
    Location:
    Alviso, home of TiVO (a.k.a. Mecca)
    Well, no need to comment on that one, it speaks for itself.

    It has become glaringly clear that humor is not your strong suit. I'm now convinced that witty jibes are not your forté either.

    I have a hard time telling if you are interested in an actual discussion or simply want to trade snide remarks. Assuming the former, I'll explain.

    The Quakes are a better team. They proved that by accumulating more points during the regular season than the Crew. Further, since the Eastern Conference is inherently weaker (for proof, look at the Crew's point total, you would have earned 5th place in the west), and since teams tend to play teams in their conference more than the other conference, the Quakes accumulated more points while playing tougher teams than the Crew.

    Hence they are a better team than the Crew.

    But, since the regular season means nothing once the playoffs start, you begin to decide things in a very short series. As I'm sure you know, in soccer, the best team does not always win. Who wins is whomever executes better during that short set of games. The shorter the series, the greater the chances of wackiness because you cannot recover if you lose a couple games or have an off night (as opposed to the longest series teams play in, the regular season). The Quakes were off. To the Crew's credit, they were not.

    Hence the Crew were the better team in this series.

    I'm using MLS officiating as a whole. This guy was no Collina but he'll do.

    Like I said, witty jibes are not your forté.

    Darrin
  11. swims

    swims Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 1999
    Location:
    a van down by the river
    Obviously, logic isn't your strong suit.

    The regular season merely functions as a prelude to the postseason. For the better part of the season the West was the strongest division, but right now, now that everything is ('was' in your case) on the line, who would you rather face, Dallas or Chicago? LA or New England? (Oops, sorry, you couldn't beat either of them right now could you?) The Crew or any other team? Racking up points early in the year only means that a team happens to be hitting on all cylinders right out of the gate. That wasn't too surprising for the league's reigning champs was it? And what good did it do? You ended up falling to second in your own division and getting sweeped in the first round of the playoffs. And let me emphasize the phrase 'falling to second.' With the commanding lead you guys had built up, what excuse can you offer for such a colossal choke job? Is that what 'better' teams do? Granted, the Crew sucked farm animal testicles early in the season, but we went from dead last in the league to nearly winning the division, to most recently smacking the reigning champs down in a quite convincing manner. And if it really takes numbers and statistics, what is the year 2002 combined record for the Crew/Quakes games? SJ the 'better' team? I think not.


    Your defense is problematic, your midfield shows signs of weakness, and your big name players failed to put balls in the back of the net in big games this year. And what about your bench? Who, other than DeRosario, comes off of the bench to cause other teams fits? Can you honestly call a team the 'better team' when it has no depth?

    The Crew, on the other hand, while displaying some of the same flaws I just noted above (but we should all note, never displaying said flaws against your team), have what is probably the deepest bench in MLS. We lose our old defender, Clark? Stick Torres in there. Harkes out to injury? Oughten fills in just fine. Perez not producing? Martino is chomping at the bit. I could go on, but you get the picture. Seriously, what did you think when you guys made your substitutions in game two and then we made ours? Every player on our bench, if not a legitimate starter in his own right, has significant playing time under his belt and can be counted on to play a large role on the field at a moment's notice.

    The Crew fifth in the West? I'd take us to do just fine in the West, thank you. We are matched up against the Western Division champs in the Open Cup final (oh yeah, how come you guys aren't playing for that championship either?) and I feel good about our chances there too.

    But, if you want to stick with the elusive, 'We are the better team' line, whether or not it jibes with reality, go right ahead. If your team's coaching staff goes along with you on that one, we'll punk you next year too.
  12. soccerbone

    soccerbone Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    Location:
    Los Altos, Ca
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    Actually swims our team is the better team as the standings at the end of the regular season would mean that we were second, the Crew was fifth and LA won the 2002 MLS CHAMPIONSHIP......

    IF we were playing anywhere else in the world. As the end of the season standings stand with no playoffs. The only playoffs any other country's club is involved in would be the equivalent to our open cup.

    Besides all that, pound for pound, with all our players available and healthy(and all distractions aside), not only do we have depth on our bench, but our team is simply more talented (something you would see if you were that much of a soccer fan).
  13. casbahman

    casbahman Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2001
    Location:
    Alviso, home of TiVO (a.k.a. Mecca)
    Dude, that is a slam dunk. I'd take Chicago in a heartbeat. LA or NE is a closer call but again, I'd rather face NE. We had way more success against NE this season. You have to come up with harder questions than that.

    Actually, yes it is surprising because, even though we were the reigning champs, I think most San Jose fans would say that the Quakes were not the best team going into the post season last year. I would have said (and did at the time) that LA and Chicago were both better teams. We just clicked on all cylinders at the right time. In addition, we hit our chances. The whole post season, we were able to score early goals. That meant that opponents had to attack us to even the score. Coming our after us meant that teams could no longer bunker (you should know about that as the Crew hid in both games this year), leaving them vulnerable to our quick counter attacks. Hence our success.

    Going in to the Crew series last season, I was not confident because the Crew had always achieved success against us. We won because of early scores. The longer the games went on without us scoring, the better things would have become for the Crew.

    You seem to forget the lead you had and the fact that you guys "fell to second" when you lost a critical late season match, giving the Revs the opportunity to pass you. Remarkably similar to the Quakes. The critical difference? Like I so *logically* argued earlier, we fell to second in a tougher division. Odd how facts seem to interrupt your argument, eh? And you were flowing so well...

    This will be Yallop's biggest off-season question. I don't think it was a choke job. I think it was opponents adjusting to the way we play. Knowing we get early goals, they play bunker defense. Knowning we have a good midfield that holds possession well (and chokes off the other team's scoring opportunities well), opponents started going over the top straight to their forwards. This was where the Quakes were inadequate - they could not successfully quash those chances and their lack of speed became a liability. This is exactly what the Crew did and why they won the series. This is exactly what opponents did and why the Quakes came back down to earth during the regular season.

    You call it a choke job, I call it opponents learning how to play the Quakes. It always happens in sports. The champs become the team to beat and opponents adjust the way they play to cancel out the champs strengths and analyze the champs weaknesses to try and take advantage of them.

    'Nearly'. I like that. Just like L.A. - 'nearly the champs'. What has it done for them? Nothing. Like a friend of mine used to say when we were kids: "Almost only counts in horseshoes and handgrenades". Not to mention, once again, you went from last place to "nearly" first place in a weaker division. In the east, where first and last place are separated by 6 points, coming back from last place isn't that hard, there are fewer points to make up. A couple breaks don't go your way and you could just as easily be out of the playoffs entirely. Bottom line: your point about "nearly" being first place is irrelevant.



    "Smacking the reigning champs down"? Dude, you won 2-1 and 2-1. That is hardly a smack down. Last season you lost 3-1 (at home) and 3-0. That was a smack down. This season, the Crew won. They performed when they needed to. The Quakes did not. Congrats. But a smack down? Get real. You were outplayed but won. That is soccer.

    Other than the midfield being weak, I'd agree with your first assessment. So what? As for our depth, you are again not in control of the facts. The reason we've been able to stay in the running this season *is because* of our depth. We've had players all season playing as starters who were actually bench players last season. They've had to do this because of long term absences/injuries. Check out these players who missed significant playing time: Agoos, Donovan, Russell, Lagos, Dayak. Then we lose Mulrooney late to a broken ankle and Ekelund looks to be running on 7 cylinders. That is half of our lineup, all of whom were starters in our championship season last year. Others have filled in admirably but they aren't the starters. In spite of all of this, we finish in second place (in the league, not just our division as the Crew did). Now that is depth.


    Darrin
  14. swims

    swims Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 1999
    Location:
    a van down by the river
    Soccerbone, pound for pound the Quakes just have more weight on the bench. Funny, you mentioned the Open Cup and I just got my order form for the Open Cup finals. Anyone need tickets?


    And Casbahman, you certainly have more time to put in this than I do, what with your team now being in the offseason, but try to keep from contradicting yourself so much. According to you your team outplayed us yet failed to produce, Frank Yallop's biggest question is why did his 'better' team choke, yet the team didn't choke, your team's play was surprising early in the season, yet you were the reigning champs. Almost doesn't count, but you flaunt your second place standing in regular season play, you are in a stronger division but there's not much competition from the top to the bottom of it, other players filled in but aren't starters, yet that is somehow construed to be depth, oh, excuse me... depth... Logic 101 this ain't.

    How's the rebuilding going? Who do you think you'll take in the draft? How will season ticket sales go now that the Quakes are back to not being able to win a post season game? How embarrassing will it be when LA has their new soccer facility and you are still playing in Spartan Stadium? With the tech sector falling through the Nasdaq's floor will you ever find a real owner, instead of an 'operator'? And until then, if it ever happens, how secure can you be that you will even have a team? You guys have bigger worries than trying to convince me that black is white, and I have to go harrass some Revs fans. You know the Revs, right? They're that team you'd rather face than LA if, in fact, you were still in the playoffs.
  15. casbahman

    casbahman Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2001
    Location:
    Alviso, home of TiVO (a.k.a. Mecca)
    Since you don't really seem interested in debate and since I'm tired, I quit. You get the last word Swims.

Share This Page