http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/18/AR2005051801831.html Why. Knee. Farks.
Whiny, my ass. The Revs broke the rules....that is a legitimate complaint. The guy who scored the game winner shouldn't have been in the game. I'd be pissed too.
You want to be pissed? Fine. Be pissed. But filing a formal protest over a farking reserve league game? United has been the whiniest organization in the league since Payne started his "Oh, MLS doesn't want us to win every year so they're forcing us to break up the team, it's not fair" meanwhile they've won four titles. They can STFU.
Did you miss the part about "financial incentive" to win the game? Should the Revs get that money, and DCU lose that money, because the Revs broke the rules? If it's just a reserve league match and it doesn't matter, don't have rules and don't have financial incentives for the games.
Does anybody know the financial incentives for winning the reserve league? Who knew there were people adding up the combined minutes? If NE really did break the rules, what would the penalty be? Some sort of point deduction?
Gimmie a break! Never mind the fact that the Revs had no one else to put in (Nicol? Mariner?) and had their third-string keeper playing D the whole game. This whole thing is ridiculous. If you add up injury time tacked on the end of either half, you could likely find other players on either side who played a few over the 90 official minutes. Brad Feldman said it best--They should worry about teaching their players to protect a 3-1 lead instead of this kind of crap. Tom
Just to make this clear, I'm sure you know this Brian but others might not, that is the prize for the winner of the entire reserve season, not just this match. As for the Revs not having anyone else to put in......I find that odd since teams participating in the reserve game are allowed to travel their entire roster.
Re: Gimmie a break! 1. They really need to put a better mechanism in place to deal with injuries. I'm not bitching about the Revs, but I personally would rather see games called off than played with coaches on the field or with the rules set out at the beginning being broken. 2. I thought stoppage time didn't count in the 90 minutes. 3. Brad's right, but if they are going to put money on the table, the rules should be followed. Someone else (I think the Quakes) played a man down for the last few minutes because they didn't have any more subs.
Re: Gimmie a break! Larentowicz also played a minute or two in the main game, then went all 90 in the reserve match.
Re: Gimmie a break! So, the rules are there to be, I dunno, a general guideline then? I can agree that this looks petty, but there's still the issue that it's a rule on the books. And in this case it wasn't all that difficult to figure out -- Cancela played on Saturday, meant he couldn't go the entire game on Sunday. Pretty simple. Story (blurb, really) in the Post today mentions that DCU hustled Carroll off, realizing his garbage minutes on Saturday compelled them to take him off earlier than they'd've liked on Sunday. So, one can (possibly, depending upon your capacity for objectivity) see why DCU brass would raise the issue with the league. One of the issues this DOES raise is what kind of deal MLS teams have struck with PDL or perhaps A-League teams to fill up their roster if they are stuck like the Revs were this weekend. What you DON'T want a reserve system to do is create problems for the Club.
Folks. Obviously, there are problems with the reserve game system. It's apparent that there still is not enough depth to pull off these games with injuries and leaves of absence. Limiting player time is just not going to work. Sorry, there should be no financial incentive for winning this year. If possible, play the games to give the reserves more experience and allow injuried players to play back into the lineup. Under the current rules, DC had every right to file a complaint. Of course, maybe NE was using the metric system to keep track of time...
Re: Gimmie a break! I completly forgot about the guest player rule. Lalas played for the Quakes....he's not a roster player. So, because the Revs didn't take the proper precautions and secure a guest player to help fill out their injury-depleted roster the should be able to break the rule and win? Sorry....I'm not buying that.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=198688 Romo played in the Rapids vs. Chivas reserve game (take note that MLSnet has nothing about this game except the score). He played that night before...anyone remember what he did?
The rules should be followed. I think Chivas did the same this weekend playing Romo 90 min in the reserve game after he played in the full team match. You don't want this reserve setup turning into a joke. Each team should follow the rules.
Oh, and one more thing... The rivalry grows btwn NE and DC. This will most likely be ignored by the bulk of the fans, but don't think that Brad's comment won't raise the ire of (at least) DCU management. Given the circumstances, that quote can be characterized as pretty snarky. And I'm all for building rivalries, btw...
If you're winning 3-1 with 12 minutes to play, I don't care if the other team brings on Henry and van Niistelrooy... you have no one to blame but yourselves if you lose.
I'm glad they're treating the reserve league game with some sense of urgency. Maybe if the Revs treated practice games the same way there'd be a trophy in the cabinet somewhere
perhaps it would be best to up the total limit from 90 minutes to something like 110 or 120 minutes. It's silly that, as the rule is written, players like Carroll have to get subbed out of the reserve match because they picked up late 2nd half minutes in the league match. It also seems sillier if the Revs can get away with leaving Cancela on the field for the entire reserve match. Will be interesting to see what the result of the protest will be. Perhaps a reserve match replay is in order the next time United travels to NE.
We have four cups because take everything seriously, even the minutes in the reserve games. Other teams would do well to follow our example. Sachin
But what about when the Rev's or cheating Bob uses a player for 112 or 122 minutes? Doesn't the debate start again?
My understanding of the reserve league minutes was that players couldn't play a combined 130 minutes. Meaning going 90 in one game and 40 of another is fine. But apparently, not a minute more. But it does make it tricky because of stoppage - etc. Coaches are expected to sit on the sidelines with a timer, I guess. To invalidate a result because of a two-minute infraction does seem petty. In other reserve league matches this season already, I'll bet coaches have miscounted or left a player in just a minute longer - it just didn't happen to affect the match so much. These things need to be tweaked out in the first season of the reserve league. Of course the rules should be followed, but the spirit of the game should hold true as well. DC lost the game.