UNC 2019

Discussion in 'Women's College' started by uncchamps2012, Dec 2, 2018.

  1. Number007

    Number007 Member

    Santos FC
    Brazil
    Aug 29, 2018
    sure , you can take it that way, but to make the call that kid has ice water in her veins from practice alone is a massive call. Its perfectly logical to question it. If she scored, you would be hearing the other side of it. Like i said earlier, Jones PK was just as bad but went in
     
  2. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #327 cpthomas, Dec 10, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2019
    I think the better statement would be, "It's perfectly normal to question it." Or maybe "ordinary" or "typical." I'm not sure, however, it's "logical" to question the decision by the coach who many believe is the best college women's soccer coach of all time whose teams have won 19 more College Cups than the next team. I think what's "logical" is to say he most likely made the right decision -- given his record, but it didn't work out. (Rather than thinking that because it didn't work out, he must have made the wrong decision. Sometimes, it just doesn't work out no matter how good the decision -- which is very hard for today's culture to accept.)

    Referring back to my Colleen Salisbury example, that was a Clive Charles decision. I hope no one will dispute that Clive and Anson are right up at the top of the all-time great coach list. And they both made a decision like this in comparable circumstances. Maybe the willingness to make a decison like this has something to do with their greatness.
     
  3. Bud Siegel

    Bud Siegel New Member

    UNC
    United States
    Sep 25, 2018
    I do not think anybody is questioning the careers of Charles and Dorrance, their respective brillance speaks in their records. However, my comment that I was mystified by the selection was based on what rationale was used in making that decision. I appeciate no coach has to explain his decision making to a fan, especially in a hindsight perspective, but it is perfectly normal to ask, Why.
     
  4. Soccerhunter

    Soccerhunter Member+

    Sep 12, 2009
    Well, it seems that there are a number of selections above to chose a possible "why" from. But unless we get an explanation from the horse's mouth (which you correctly state that a coach has no obligation to cough up for fans) we'll never know.
     
  5. jbs01

    jbs01 Member

    Oct 8, 2002
    carrboro
    As Bud Siegel has already said, what is being questioned is not the decision but the rationale or logic behind the decision. And asking this in no way is a negative reflection on Anson's (or Charles') incredible career - 2 back-to-back runner-ups for national champion in extraordinary high-level and close finals, not to mention 21/22 national championships! but, it is interesting (and, I hope instructive) to ponder how he came to that decision.

    Let's look at two very different but equally crucial decisions that led, ultimately, to the result.

    First, he decided to lead off with a player who was a co-captain, a 4-year starter (I believe), an anchor of the first team who had just played ~80-90 minutes and was, thereby, thoroughly familiar with field conditions, was an All ACC selection (3rd team, but still pretty good!) for this year, etc. I think I have a pretty good idea why he included her in the shootout list and even in the lead-off position. Even so, her shot was not the strongest and the keeper guessed right. So, not the desired result but I don't wonder how Anson arrived at this decision, even though I have no direct knowledge of his process.

    For his 6th choice, he chose a freshman who had played less than 90 minutes during the entire season, had not played in the previous 2 games and only 7 minutes in the one before them, had not played in this game, perhaps she had practiced pks, but don't think she had taken one in an actual game situation, etc. Unlike his choice for the lead-off pk-taker, I don't understand this decision. I would just like to know his thought process. The best guess I have read so far is that he had "money ball" type stats from practice on pks and she was 6th. Might be true, but would like to hear other possibilities. So, the question "what was he thinking" is a question, not an exclamation.

    It's all water over the dam now, but there might be the possibility of learning something from belaboring the point. There has been speculation in the past that UNC doesn't put a lot of attention (or time or effort) into pks. Don't know if this is true, but it might be worth looking closely at the videos of the pks - in slow motion if possible. The Stanford keeper "guessed" right more than the UNC keeper. Are there "tells" in the behavior of our keeper? (Foudy, I believe, mentioned that she seemed to be "opening her hips" just before the strike.) Seemed like most of the successes were clear instances of keeper guessing wrong and the pker placing the ball on the opposite side. On the other hand, the Stanford keeper guessed right 50% of the time with her 2 stops and her correct guess on Jones's strike but over running the shot. Are there tells in our strikers?

    Playing at the highest level and against the highest level opponents, UNC might consider putting a little more emphasis on analysis and preparation might payoff, especially if some unconscious signals might be uncovered.

    ps: interessting article on the probabilities of success in pk shootouts: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-chart-for-predicting-penalty-shootout-odds-in-real-time/
     
    blissett repped this.
  6. Respect the Game

    PSG
    United States
    Apr 17, 2019
    USA
    I hear ya, but the game is light years ahead since 2002 and 2005. The players are more technical and stronger and the game is faster. I think it was asking too much to put in a freshman that hadn't seen the field in such a big game (and there were other freshmen that may have actually kicked a good ball; it was an easy save). Macario took one; why didn't Pinto for UNC?
    It was a great game; each team gave everything. But because of the final UNC PK taker, it left you feeling much like when the Sopranos series ended. What??
     
  7. Fan 'O Soccer

    Fan 'O Soccer New Member

    Oct 7, 2013
    I saw a video yesterday of Dorrance's post-match press conference, though now I can't find the link. He did not address the questions of why he put Otto first and why he used Hansen, but he did say something about Wubben-Moy, implying that she'd not been put first because she had a preferred corner and had been scouted.

    Foudy's remarks about opening up the hips referred to the Stanford shooters. Dickey (and she confirmed this afterwards in the PC) was making the assumption that opening the hips (which essentially means turning towards the goal, I think) meant that a right-footed player would go left. She was basing her guesses on that apparent "tell." Foudy implied that the Stanford players were using it to make her guess wrong.
     
  8. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #333 cpthomas, Dec 10, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2019
    I agree it would be enlightening to hear why the coaches made the choice they did.

    But, until the coaches say otherwise, I think one goes with the most obvious explanation given the team is UNC: "The UNC statistical matrix [collected during practices conducted within UNC's 'competitive cauldron' environment] has never determined playing time ... [but] it winds up being an accurate predictor for who performs best during the season." The idea behind the statistical matrix system is that playing in UNC practices is like playing in games -- including how you performed during practice producing a "result" in the form of sheets being put on the bulletin board after practices showing the players' ranks during the practice on the different performance factors the UNC statistical matrix measures -- in other words, the coaches make the practices themselves very serious competitions at the highest level. It isn't that using the statistical matrix to make a decision like who will take the PKs always will produce the results you want. Anyone who understands how statistical systems work will know that. Rather, it's that using the system may produce better results, on average, than any other system (inclulding your own personal judgments) you can find -- and I'm pretty confident that Dorrance would use the best decision-making system he could find or evolve.

    One might say that perhaps UNC's statistical matrix, or its use of it, needs some re-thinking. But then, it's been a part of what UNC has achieved since the 1992 season, so it's hard to argue that on average it's not likely to be better than anything else we every day fans could come up with. It's relatively easy to say, for example, that it would be better to have gone with someone who had been a regular starter who had just played. But, as you have said, UNC did that with Otto and her PK was stopped, too. So, which is the better basis for a decision? The statistical matrix from competitive cauldron practices, that has been an accurate predictor for who performs best during the season, or the more familiar "who has been a regular starter who has just been on the field and ... [add any other appropriate factor we fans might come up with]." This, of course, is the kind of question that has been debated across many sports as well as in relation to many other fields.

    [The quote is from The Man Watching, Tim Crothers (Sports Media Group 2006), at page 96.
     
    Respect the Game and Glove Stinks repped this.
  9. UNCway

    UNCway Member

    Jun 13, 2012
    I remember watching the Heels losing in Gainesville to UCF (I think), Amanda Cromwell's team then, in PK's in the 2011 NCAAs. Crystal Dunn, who had heroically tied the match--typically carrying the team on her back--walked up to take the first pk and I thought--nooooo!--what else do you want from this poor woman--she's exhausted! Let someone else start them. She made a poor kick and soon the season ended dismally. Then again they won the NC the next year. By the way, I think I remember hearing from my daughter that the players, maybe the captains, decided at that time who took the pk's--but that was years ago. I'll ask and report back. I feel bad for Taylor--such a rock for the Heels. It's so hard to win these championships! The 2012 team needed Dunn to get a fantastic late goal to tie Texas A&M (I think it was--memory's fading). Then Brie Heaberlin, who hadn't played in the game, came in to play keeper for the pk's only and just scared the bejesus out of the A&M shooters. Not only did they not score, they didn't even get one on goal. Okay, if I'm exaggerating someone correct me. She was fired up but not trash talking or strutting. The luck involved in that tough win was home field advantage. A&M was a 1 seed and UNC a 2, but someone in A&M's AD's office didn't apply to host the game because they didn't want to(?). Never heard a good reason, but the Heels didn't have to go to Texas anyway.
     
  10. Soccerhunter

    Soccerhunter Member+

    Sep 12, 2009
    OK...for all of the posters who have been wondering.... Anson was specifically asked about the selection of PK shooters. Pretty much as I expected he said that the team practices PKs on a regular basis and the keep records and the play the ones with the best records. Simple as that.
     
    Heeligan2 and blissett repped this.
  11. Norfolk

    Norfolk Member

    Mar 22, 2001
    The reason Salisbury took the PKs was that she wanted to and was very good at them technically and psychologically. Plus she is left footed which tends to mess keepers up a bit. The same is somewhat probably true for the UNC player. No doubt Dorrance asked her prior to the game if she wanted to take one and that she was good at them. It’s virtually impossible to replicate the pressure a player is under in a big game.
     
  12. Number007

    Number007 Member

    Santos FC
    Brazil
    Aug 29, 2018
    which just goes to show that you cant really practicing penalties because you cant replicate how the body and mind react to real pressure.
     
    blissett and ping repped this.
  13. ping

    ping Member

    Dec 7, 2009
    Which may be technically true but leaves us with little. Would anyone argue that practicing any aspect of the game (ex. passing, shooting, scoring, corners, defending, attacking, etc...) shouldn't be done because "you cant replicate how the body and mind react to real pressure." ? So we press on trying to replicate real game scenarios as much as possible knowing full well that we will often fall short.

    Easy to Monday morning QB everything, especially pk's. Championships come with a lot of hard work,skill, talent, strategy, but also some good fortune, especially in football where many would argue the margins are often so thin.
     
  14. Norfolk

    Norfolk Member

    Mar 22, 2001
    The top men’s pro’s do practice them technically and work with team psychologists to deal with the pressure. According to them, the most stressful part is the walk to the pk area.
     
  15. Number007

    Number007 Member

    Santos FC
    Brazil
    Aug 29, 2018
    Of course you practice everything and then the next level is being able to execute consistently under pressure. You can simulate say a press or defensive structure pretty easily. The penalty itself ( my opinion) is far more of a mental than technical excercise. Thats all Im saying. Its like holing 5ft puts. Technically no big deal but the putting green and the final hole of the Ryder cup to win are two different things.

    You learn about the pressure part by facing it and given this kids lack of play in pressure situations, hard to judge. Thats all Im saying and I think many people said it at the time as opposed to second guessing it.
     
  16. Soccerhunter

    Soccerhunter Member+

    Sep 12, 2009
    To cap off this 2019 Big Soccer UNC thread, shall we move away from the discussion of PK shooters selection? Sure, I understand the importance of selecting the right shooters, but we all recognize that Monday morning analysis of the PKs will not definitively make a case for the end result being different even if the last UNC shot had gone in.

    We can turn out attention to 2020, with the knowledge that the 2019 Heels had a season to be very proud of by any possible metric. So on to next year!

    And with best wishes to everyone for a fulfilling and happy new year!
     
    uncchamps2012 and derbarkasmann repped this.
  17. uncchamps2012

    uncchamps2012 Member

    Jul 9, 2011
    I think unc beat Baylor in pk’s in the round of 16 in 2012 , then BYU away in OT, then Stanford in double OT, then penn state 4-1 for the championship. They played BYU away unc was a 2 seed that year, which seemed like a gift at time.
     

Share This Page