UVA squeaks by New Mexico in Pks. The field was very wet with a steady drizzle most of the game. That made for some pretty unattractive soccer (that and the general lack of skill on the pitch) for most of the game. New Mexico had some nice possession and creative one-two combinations that gave them a few chances in the first half, one of which was nicely put away at the top of the box (#4) to tie the score. But they were useless in the second half and did not capitalize on the two chances that had to score. UVA had about 20 minutes in each half where they held the ball well and created some chances, but outside of Nico and Jeremy dribbling through people, and some nice service from Freeman, they could not combine at all most of the game. They scored the first goal of the game off a nice service that Littlefield (that kid can soar) headed down and Barlow cleaned up, striking it past the keeper from 6 yards. A strange substitution saw Christman leave the field in favor of Rosemblaum (sp) who was absolutely terrible, missing an open goal chip frm 30 yards after the keeper gave him the ball (he kicked the ground in the attempt) and then he blew a one on one and another golden chance. Everyone in the house was waiting for christman to come back on as he did ok when in, at least holding the ball. Everyone else was fairly non-descript, except for Ian Holder, who had the worst game of anyone I have seen in a long time playing for UVA. He was substituted by an equally inept freshman, Tierny, but Holder came back on to continue his poor performance and eventually botch his PK attempt. Pks saw several misses and good saves from the keepers. Good to see UVA advance as they were the much better of two average teams tonight.
Enjoyed the match despite the drizzle. I thought NM was very organized, and worked very well as a team. But they seemed a bit short in the pure talent department. Except for their number 10, who could dribble and was extremely fast. UVA started out a bit slowly, again with their "dump and chase" in the early going, lofting high balls into the attackling third from the midfield, which the generally taller NM players had little difficulty sorting out. Frequently in the first half even the defenders would send high balls to the midfield, which the midfielders time and time again would head aimlessly forward, right to NM, forcing UVA to defend, defend, defend. But, as they have other times I have seen them this season, UVA struck when you least expected them to, going up 1-0, as the above poster has noted. Not long after, NM after some nice combination play leveled the match at 1-1. I told my son at halftime I felt the game was UVA's to win, owing to their superior talent. To my admittedly untrained eye, I felt they needed to do three things to win the game. First, they needed to get Nico Colaluca out of the business of having to track way back to win balls in UVA's defensive third all the time. He needed to be more involved in the attack. He needed to run at the defenders and make them defend. Second, enough with the stupid, purposeless high balls out of the back all the time. They were 100% giveaways to NM and a total waste. They needed to play to feet. Third, they needed to make better runs off the ball. In the second half, they did the first two pretty well, and the third only somewhat better. As it turned out, they did not score again. However, I did notice 3 or 4 of the NM defenders really sucking wind at around minute 80, and most of their team seemed pretty gassed by the end of regulation. By contrast, the UVA side seemed to be feeling pretty well on the whole. The same held true through the extra periods. I took that as a good sign going into the PK's. Sure enough, more of the NM PK's were a little short on pace or less than optimally placed than were the UVA PK's. Wow, it was great to see PK's go my team's way for a change. UVA wins on the tiebreaker, and now goes on to play Duke for the third time in about a month. UVA has had a pretty good home field advantage this year, here's to hoping it holds true again on Saturday.
i agree that even though they continue winning, the style of this UVA team is really miserable to watch. there are some good players getting reduced playing time or no playing time at all that are much more skilled than those on the field, but it's not the method of the coaching staff to worry about style when they are getting results. i generally think it is still the nature of the college game that encourages boom ball, and inhibits a players skill development.
bring UVA to bloomington. what's all the hype for. they play in the ACC which only has 4 decent teams and out of this i believe that maryland is probably the best and has the deepest bench. Duke relies on too many freshman and sophs. Gelnovatch has put to much on his freshman and Wake, well they were wake in the tournament.
The odd thing is they always seem to start the first 1/3 or even 1/2 of each match (granted I have not seen all their matches) with the dump and chase, it never works, and then they realize, "Well, I guess we are actually going to have to play some soccer" and then they abandon the dump and chase for a more structuerd attack. Which, lo and behold, more often than not produces results. I don't understand why they do not stick with what works. If you are a soccer team, play soccer. Games might not go down to PK's that way.
Perhaps they use the long ball as a form of the "rope a dope". High balls over the top to spread out the defense a little and loosen things up and then "Boom" "Bam" before you know it they break you down with a nice attack combination.
Two thoughts about UVa's style of play. First, in the ACC final, I came away impressed with both sides willingness to hold the ball and attack. Both Maryland and Virginia showed, for college soccer, a high amount tactical acumen and technical ability and it was pretty attractive stuff. So, I have little dounbt UVa can play good looking football, as the Euros say, at times. Second, is that playing pretty soccer hasn't done Gelnovatch a whole heck of a lot of good in the post season. One first round loss, then a run to the final where they outplayed a good UCLA team but couldn't put the ball in the hole followed by three straight quarterfinal upsets followed by two years where they lost their first game. Combined with losing so many players to P40, Gelnovatch - and he's on record as saying this - changed his tack in recruiting and instead of going for the high-end youth national teamers who play pretty soccer and get gobbled up by the pros, he took a more, let's call it an Indiana approach, and got good soccer players who are strong athletes and know how to win. It sometimes comes at the expense of esthetics, but in college ball it works in the post season and I think Gelnovatch has built a team that can battle through the tough NCAA games. Some will say it's sad that they have to sacrifice pretty soccer to advance since Bruce Arena showed you can play great looking soccer and still lift trophies. But for whatever reason, that style of play wasn't working for Gelnovatch and he adjusted and is now able to gut out a few tough wins when it counts. Saturday will be a good test of this. And don't get me wrong. It's not all kick ball that UVa plays. As noted above, they can still play pretty soccer at times. But, they'll opt for results over style when needed.
Quote: Originally Posted by rtiemens ....again with their "dump and chase" in the early going, lofting high balls into the attackling third from the midfield, which the generally taller NM players had little difficulty sorting out... i agree that even though they continue winning, the style of this UVA team is really miserable to watch. there are some good players getting reduced playing time or no playing time at all that are much more skilled than those on the field, but it's not the method of the coaching staff to worry about style when they are getting results. i generally think it is still the nature of the college game that encourages boom ball, and inhibits a players skill development. This team can play as good as any uva team i've seen but chooses to play boom ball instead and when theyre not they dribble too much leaving some of the more talented guys to sit the bench. This is gonna hurt down the road when it comes to recruiting players who used to come here to develop. Part of this is theyve been starting Will Hall on the bench lately. They put him in at the half and he definitely changes the way they play. Put him and some of the other guys in to start and play through the middle. Hell, with John Hartmen, Tuman, Oliver and Freeman we know we can play out out of the back. "Soccer Tom Perhaps they use the long ball as a form of the "rope a dope". High balls over the top to spread out the defense a little and loosen things up and then "Boom" "Bam" before you know it they break you down with a nice attack combination." Guess this is possible.
Good point, this may well have been their intent. If so, as executed it left a lot to be desired, and was at least last Saturday counterproductive. All those high balls just resulted in UVA doing a lot of extra defending, especially when they were too high for the mids who would just aimlessly head again upfield right to a NM player time after time. One other thing comes to mind. I mentioned Nico, who in the second half got on track and really started to take guys on on the dribble. Gave NM fits, and made some nice passes into space. But too often, I felt, often he had to resort to back passes because his teammates were not making runs off the ball, or when they did, they were not very good ones. I don't know if I saw a UVA player make a diagonal run into the attacking third all night long. Most of the time they would *stand* in space, asking for the ball (only to be closed down once they got it) instead of running into space. If Nico and others had some better passing options, again it might not have gone down to PK's. But, all that aside, it has been well said by other posters that at the end of the day, UVA keeps finding ways to win. They did that again Sat night, and we went home wet but happy. The boys are in shape, and ran hard for 110 minutes, and they were amazingly fresh for the pk's and I really think that was the difference in the tiebreaker. Travel was no doubt a factor for NM, several of whom, as I said, were really gassed at the end of regulation.
Regarding guys who stayed on the bench . . . I wonder why UVA #6 sat out this game? Haven't seen him for a couple games, since the one (I forget who it was against, maybe Davidson) when he was a terror on the flanks. Just blew by people like they were standing still, resulting in at least one goal, as I recall.
Yea, I would be interested as to what happened to him. Kirk Dinnall, I think thats his name. He has been in the national pool in the past, as recently as last year I thought? Maybe not. He definitly has been a consistent starter at UVA for the past three years, but it looks like he hasnt been seeing any game action recently. Anybody know why?
Dinnall must be hurt because he's been a Gelnovatch favorite his entire spell at Virginia. Here are his career stats, which show he's been a regular his first three years and usually a starter. YEAR - GP/GS -- G/A 2004 - 10/7 -- 1/1 2003 - 20/19 -- 0/2 2002 - 18/8 -- 1/3 2001 - 20/12 -- 0/3
I was impressed with their play when they were at Clemson. The play of UVa, St. Louis, Coastal, etc. over the past three years has been encouraging. I watch college soccer because it's all that is available to me but lately it has also be atractive in it's own right.
So Dinnal is out for the year, or is there a possibility he might make an appearance in the Duke game or subsequent rounds assuming UVA advances?