FSU 2022

Congratulations to Wrianna Hudson (2005G ECNL) on her commitment to continue her education and soccer playing career at Florida State University. #FlashClassOf2024#ChangingTheLandscape #FlashFamily pic.twitter.com/jNTpe75fRl

— WNY Flash Academy (@WNYFlashAcademy) October 16, 2022

 

Pretty absurd no call there. The unc player isn’t playing the ball at all. Just running past it to bring Onyi down hard as she’s driving in the box. I don’t know how that isn’t called.

 

I'm having a little problem reconciling what I saw during the game vs what everybody is saying happened on the no call. Lori Lindsey likes to create controversy, including suggesting things that are not PK's were supposed to be PK's. It feels more like FSU fans are reacting to the TV commentary on the play and not what they're seeing with their eyes. I'm willing to admit that my bias is playing a role here, but I need someone to attach a reason beyond just being bias. Where is the foul? Honestly?

1583463853551034369 is not a valid tweet id

#8 Moxley is step for step with Onyi in a perfectly legal shoulder charge. Arm is down, shoulder is leaning in, no reaching or pushing. #6 Elgin came from a front angle, got into position in front of Onyi with nearly enough time to come to a complete stop, plainly kicks the ball away with the side of her foot, and then had Onyi run into her.

We got multiple replays from different angles that all show the same thing. The commentators doubled down with a "no play on the ball" remark in the midst of the replay that clearly showed Elgin not only made a play on the ball but won it cleanly with her side foot.

This is in stark contrast to the sandwich Isabel Cox found herself in on UNC's PK shout roughly ten minutes before. No replay, no questions from the announcers ... because a 3-1 lead would have taken the air out of the game, and the announcers didn't want that.

 

OK, this is funny:



I'm with babs on this one. And I firmly believe that Carolina gets softer refereeing than the rest of us. Elgin got the ball.

 

I am with babs, too, it should not have been a pk.

 

I don't know if it's a PK or not: neither Onyi nor Moxley has control of the ball--they're both running side by side and chasing after it. It's silly to say that Onyi runs into Elgin; it's nearly the opposite. Onyi is running at near full-speed to control the ball when Elgin steps out in front of her, barely nips the ball with her foot and Onyi crashes into her. Elgin appears to touch the ball, which doesn't really change direction--but she also throws a body block into Onyi as the latter is trying to reach the ball. It may not be a foul because Onyi does not have the ball and a second UNC player is as close to it as she is, but Elgin certainly, in my mind, impedes Onyi's chance of getting to the ball. You can't just step out in front of someone who is running at near full speed.

 

in your next sentence

 

I want to make it clear that I think Florida State out played North Carolina and likely would have won if not for the missed chances that have been noted. That has happened to UNC this year vs UCLA, and again to a lesser degree against UVa and VT. In all three of UNC's losses UNC created the vastly superior chances in both quality and quantity, but they failed to put away chances that they should have in order to put the game to rest.

This is the first game this season that a team consistently outplayed UNC and controlled the midfield for the entirety of the game. The closest any team has come was UCLA who enjoyed the better play for maybe a third of the game. Comparatively, I do not think UNC enjoyed more than perhaps 10 or 15 minutes of good play vs FSU. That was mostly in the first half and I would not include Sentnors two big plays as part of stretches where UNC was playing well.

I will be honest I was not expecting it from FSU. The little I've watched the Seminoles play this year, when their games did not overlap, I was not impressed with both the midfield and the defense. The offense seemed to rely heavily on direct play and UNC has been really good this year dealing with that. This was by far a superior performance than anything I anticipated coming into this game, expecting the game to be closer to something UNC endured against Tennessee or UCLA. Something something the name brings out the best in the opponent, right?

Tar Heels fans have been mocked plenty for complaining about officials, notably this year after the non-call in the UCLA game. So I understand the ... frustration ... of having other teams fans come onto the thread and seemingly mock or rub salt in the wound of a still fresh loss. I certainly could have been more empathetic when presenting the gif and the explanation of why it's not a foul.

That being said ... the gif I presented is incontrovertible proof that it was, in fact, not a foul. The rule book supports this not being a foul. Common sense supports this not being a foul. Player safety demands this not being a foul.

It is that last reason why I'm pressing so hard on this point. An official calling this a foul would set a terrible precedence. The first that comes to mind would be scenarios where defenders are shielding balls as they go out of bounds. Emily Fox tore her ACL on just such a play before the College Cup one year, an attacker crashing into her from behind in an effort to get to a ball the attacker did not have.

Onyi does not have right of way just because she's running fast. Players don't have to get out of her way. Defenders even have the explicit right to shield her from the ball without getting a touch, as long as the ball is in the area and she can establish position.

Can we please not argue against calls / non-calls that exist more than anything else to protect the safety of players. Please?

 

Just wanted to add a differing viewpoint to or clarification on a few things here, and will link the Laws Of The Game to highlight how much leeway there is for a referee's subjectivity.
https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct
I grabbed these from thefa, obviously. Was having trouble getting the NCAA version.

Your wording seems to imply that you are suggesting there was no infraction for "obstruction". Which can read differently than many of the other fouls. There should be credence given to the speed at which a person is running as that affects their "path". Each player running on the field creates a path and there are rules in which you can impede that path. A player does not need to get out of way of the player, but they can't move into it - given that the ball is not within playing distance (generally taken to be they could kick it from where they are). You can't draw a charge in soccer. Obstruction actually makes no case for the opponent playing the ball. So, her touching the ball is, according to the rules, irrelevant.
So, for me, obstruction doesn't apply since the contact occurred when both players were within playing distance of the ball, obviously since both played it.

That said, I would never say an incident where there is contact that knocks one player to the ground could ever result in incontrovertible proof that a foul didn't occur. Each referee will determine what they think is the normal amount of contact/force for a challenge, usually dictated by how play is going. Is it a really rough game, maybe they let more slide. For the opposite, maybe they call lighter fouls. The rules are somewhat set up to allow for this. If the referee deems impact during a challenge to be too great, then they should rule it a foul accordingly.

That said, I was fine with a no-call. I also would have been fine with a foul given. That one's up to him.

 

I didn’t notice the unc player getting the ball on first viewing. Makes more sense. We’ll take a pk for the keeper clipping Olsson though

 

I didn't imply it with my wording, I said it explicitly.

The incontrovertible proof that a foul didn't occur was video evidence that Elgin played and got the ball. The entire discussion about positioning, obstruction, shielding, and how Onyi ended up on the ground was academic at that point. A "what if" had Elgin not played the ball but shielded Onyi instead with the ball still in the area.

This is not a 50/50 call, this is not a "referee's discretion", this is not one referee might have a different opinion than another. It is profoundly bias and even borderline dangerous to suggest plays like this should be called, for reasons I have previously mentioned.

I've avoided pointing this out up to this point, but this discussion about what Elgin did is getting ridiculous. Why don't you look at what your own player did? Onyi was at full speed and in an arm battle with #8 Moxley. So she was somewhat out of control when she made a lunging studs up tackle on the ball that, had she been a fraction of a second late, could have caught Elgin's ankle and created a devastating injury.

This play was far closer to being a foul on Onyi than it ever could have been with Elgin. That's not bias on my part. The laws of the game can applied frame by frame in the replay.

and we'll take one for defenders tripping up Isabel Cox as she squeezed between them.

 

Babs, watch your replay again, the defender drops her shoulder as the contact with the opposing player occurs. Not only can this be a foul if the ref deems it, but could also be a card. If you're so worried about injury then maybe you should consider that kind of impact can easily cause a concussion. Likewise, if the ref thought the forward's cleats came up in a dangerous way, then that could be foul/card worthy. Being a ref is tough. Angles make a huge difference... I wouldn't get on them for a call they made, but certainly wouldn't imply there was no room for this to be called either way.

Not really sure why you think calling this would make the game more dangerous. Because then defenders would be forced to play some "let them go defense"? God forbid you think it'll cause more forwards to go all out trying to get to balls when they're down a goal in the dying minutes? Has been happening, will continue to happen, regardless of what way one call in one match goes.

 

Her arm is down by her side, her body stays upright, her foot stays planted and she's leaned into the contact with her shoulder as she is taught and as the rules demand. It is the picture perfect definition of a legal challenge.

You can't just make up rules because you don't like what happened. Position. A touch on the ball. Correct technique for contact with another player. Elgin could not have played this any better, and it is wild bias beyond belief that you're trying find some fault in her play in the same sequence one of your own players makes a dangerous studs up challenge that could have significantly hurt Elgin.

Also, the more I watch this as you suggested the more I'm noticing a delay between when the contact occurs and when Onyi accelerates to the ground. It appears more and more to me that minimal contact was made between Elgin and Onyi, but Onyi tried to exaggerate it by flinging herself to the ground.

This is getting silly. You embarrass yourself more and more with every reply. What's next? You're going to try and suggest Elgin left her elbow at that height hoping to connect it to Onyi's face?

I'm done with the charade. Let us hope these two teams don't have to face each other again so the two most entitled fan bases in the ACC don't have to hear each whine about how good officiating was actually bad.

I'm currently making a highlight gif package for this game on my twitter account. It should be done and up sometime this week.

 

Goodness, I hope they're not taught to tackle like that. I played for 10+ years and was never coached to tackle like that. And the rules demand nothing of the sort. That's them, linked above, in their entirety.

The rules don't tell you how to tackle, just what not to do. And it's literally the referee's discretion to apply the rules as the ref sees fit. Law #5, the Referee. Unlike #12, this one's pretty clear... No rules being made up. Linked and referenced in fact. Only thing in this thread being made up is the idea that the rules demand you tackle some way or that there are picture perfect definitions of a legal challenge.

And, just to reiterate something, I was fine with the call. I was agreeing with you and linking the rules as evidence for it not being obstruction. Though, I admit, I did leave the opening for the ref to interpret the rest of the rules as he saw fit. As is always the case.

 

Having spent a good part of my professional life in a political environment, I have concluded that "Power Corrupts" is not a warning about a tendency but rather a law comparable to a law of physics. (About this, I am 100% serious.) In the soccer world, I have concluded that "Being a fan corrupts perception about referee calls" likewise is not a warning about a tendency but rather a law.

 

Looks to my eye that FSU's game against ND today is for a 1 seed. UCLA and Bama seem solid to receive one and think UNC has prbly done enough and certainly if they win today. Could be an important pick up if Chris Henderson's projections play out. He has FSU as a two seed matching up against UVa as a three seed. Pretty big drop off in competition between them and likely four seed matchups FSU would see on the 1 line. Can't know for sure obviously, but some added incentive to get the revenge win today!

 

Looking at the numbers I have, you are exactly right.

 

Hoping for a win tonight! Go Noles!!!

 

Headed to overtime. Heckuva game so far. Albert from ND… my goodness.

Is Olivia Garcia hurt?

 

Good win by FSU. Pensky has these girls leaving it all on the field despite everything that happened off the field. However, FSU as a program right now is at an inflection point. FSU still has enough talent to win the ACC this year and make noise in the NCAA tournament, and still enough talent compete at a high level next year. But even this talent isn't up to par with FSU standards. We have seen cracks this year. After that it gets a little dicey. Can Pensky seal the cracks or does the titanic sink I'm saying this because FSU has yet to have a single 2024 commitment. This is a warning sign as recruits don't like instability and it's showing. UNC, Stanford, and Duke are having their pick of kids that under normal circumstances would have heavily considered FSU. Reilly Jackson, who's game is tailor made for FSU, committed to Duke. If Pensky can hold it together next year, recruiting may pick back up with the 2025 class. If the wheels fall off the team next year then we may be looking at a multi year rebuilding project ala Notre Dame. If you fall off that upper echelon it's really hard to get back there especially with the torrid pace that competitors like UNC and Stanford are recruiting at the last few cycles.