Hard to tell by looking at the stands if it was truly sold out and thus the 25K attendance. Some sparse seating here and there. But then the concourses were absolutely packed with people waiting in 20 minute lines at the few concession stands open. So maybe it was that many.
I walked through some sections that looked 75% empty at around the 42nd min. Concourse was pretty empty then too. Loud side looked much fuller though.
Hmmm, I wrote the good ones on the back of that fortune ... where'd I put that ...... It just seemed like a 4-1 game I wish I felt as confident about Wednesday's game. I still think we win, I just won't be as beer-covered. Speaking of beer-covered, is someone teaching these newbies that you throw beer, not cups? 'Cause they seem to throw cups, which is ignorant and painful.
Two free kicks from way back in the defensive end. One out for a goal kick, the other into touch. FFS. But I still think starting him at RB was a good move. Let somebody else take those free kicks, though.
Was Kaka the reason for so many people in the stands? That's disappointing. To me, I mean, I was sitting there thinking that maybe people paid more attention to this team than I thought and turned up because, as everyone noted pre-match, this was a pretty important game for DC's playoff hopes. I hadn't even considered that they'd turned up to see Kaka. Oh well. That was a pretty good win and there was plenty to like. What has that, three or four passes inside the 18 on the first goal? While personally I don't ascribe to the whole "pass it in" mentality, it was nice to see DC comfortable enough in their opponent's penalty area that they took their time. The big downer was the Orlando goal. Sure, it was pretty irrelevant in the big picture, but how many goals have DC given up now when they are up a man? Three? Four? That's a problem. I also thought Orlando looked a little listless. I know DC can only play the team on the field and they convincingly got the job done, but I think Columbus on Wednesday will be a different story; similarly the last season game of the year against Orlando, if they're still in the hunt. Columbus on Wednesday will be interesting. I watched them play the Revs last night and I didn't think that either looked good. But Columbus counters very quickly and I could see that being a problem for DC.
Yeah, someone needs to talk to him. He's absolutely vital to the team and getting sent off would be hugely problematic. I thought maybe it was calculated, in that the ref wasn't protecting him and getting a yellow that way might have the side effect of making sure the ref knows that he (Acosta) is really being fouled, rather than diving (it would be a cynical soul indeed who retaliates after a dive). But as you mentioned, it really looked for the next 5-10 minutes that there was another yellow coming for him. In a heated playoff game, that's an issue.
There is no one on DCU who punishes those who foul our skill players. At times Boswell has played this role but as captain I guess he really can't.
Unless the refs protect Acosta by calling legit fouls, I don't have a problem with him playing with that edge. It would be nice to have an ABMOD or Aunger, but DCU doesn't -- the closest was Sarvas and he's now banged up -- so expect to see Acosta cautioned and maybe tossed from a game. Boswell can't play that role, because you don't want to be giving up free kicks near the penalty area.
Retaliation only works emotionally, but it's a dangerous game to play. Acosta tries to retaliate whenever he thinks he's been abused, even if the ref disagrees, but his retaliation is often so blatant that it's Acosta himself who risks being tossed. And if he is tossed, I'm blaming him for letting the team down. (I saw this happen with another hothead, Dema Kovalenko.) The posters above are suggesting that we need an enforcer, which simply means we want someone other than Acosta to risk being tossed. Just how does this benefit the team? I say just play the game. Acosta will get his share of calls and he doesn't need to retaliate. And Benny needs to caution him, because we need his skill set on the pitch.
I agree with you mostly. Except, I always thought the idea of an enforcer was a more naturally physical guy who could a) make a hard challenge without it necessarily looking like blatant retaliation and b) were better/more experienced in those fouls where they kick the hell out of guy, but it doesn't look so bad live and, somehow, the ref is debating on whether it even deserves a yellow.
Exactly, look at the shit Nocerino was getting away with on Saturday. Only when the doofus cocked his elbow and lashed out at Mullins when the ref was 5 feet away did he get carded.
Yeah, you'd think that a person would notice if a former world player of the year was playing right in front of them, but I didn't notice him until about 20 min in, when I said to myself, "Oh yeah, Kaka - is he playing? Which one is he?" If he is the reason anybody came, well... If it's obvious to us, it should be obvious to the coaches as well. One can only hope.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...vas-sidelined-several-weeks-with-knee-injury/ Sarvas out several weeks There is a section on Nicky's play as a right back. Other tidbits. Kasper to go to Buenos Aires late Oct early Nov to negotiate Acosta purchase Miami FC interested in Saborio
Also, Sarvas gets a yellow just for looking at people funny, so he definitely should not be the enforcer...
And Sarvas is out for awhile with a knee injury. If his replacement is Buescher again I don't see him as an enforcer in any way. Besides, he looks too angelic (but so did Aunger, the "Baby Faced Assassin"). Jeffery is much more likely to act the enforcer when he returns, but look how that worked out for us when he fouled close to goal and it cost us. So I remain convinced that however satisfying it may be to think of having a hard man retaliating for fouls on wee Acosta, it rarely works out and the downside is grim. I remember watching a match at the Plex when Dema Kovalenko thought he was being targeted and proceeded to earn two yellows (both well deserved) in rapid succession, leaving us to play with 10 men. I don't trust Acosta to be disciplined enough to ease up.
I know compromises have often have to be made with new stadiums but I have to say there is nothing I dislike more about the new stadium (at least what I know of it so far) than this crazy small capacity. 19K is nuts. I would have considered the minimum 24K. It makes me doubt that Team Machete has any interest at all in the long term.
3 points. High angles always make it look worse on television. 19,000 still doesn't fit the market, history, or potential. It's a mistake. I didn't get to the game until halftime because I drove up from Blacksburg immediately after the homecoming game. Somehow arriving late means I was rewarded with one of the giveaway shirts that went to the first 7,5000 in attendance.
Gripes about the absurdly small planned capacity at the new stadium? Take it to the Buzzard Point thread, pal. Actually, once you're over there, sign up for the "Too Little Buzz" society. We're going to have membership jackets made. P.S. Your concerns are legit.
My sense is that's almost a certainty that there will be more college football than we would like at Buzzard's Point along with some lacrosse which we probably wouldn't mind too much. Howard, Georgetown, American and Catholic all might want to play homecoming and post-season games there. Buzzard's Point would also be a good venue for Women's National Team games although, at 20,000, it's too small for Men's National Team games. The Spirit might want to use it for post-season games.