Yeah, that was the game where Wondo didn't start and Dawkins played forward. Since I think both Chavez and Salinas were out, that put Coralles and Ballouchy on the wings, neither of whom are attacking type of mids in the way that Salinas, Chavez, and Dawkins are. So at least for the 1st part of the match, the Quakes attack was pretty weak in that they didn't have their usual attack from the wings kind of schtick. They had the ball, but they couldn't figure out how to create chances with it.
There's your simple solution - the Chivas trade for Wondo and name him the player-coach. He gets his money - coach's $$$ aren't capped - and the Chivas double their goal total.
Lenhart had a clear shot at an open net so that was not a dive and if it weren't for the GK fouling or obstructing him and impeding his path to goal, he would have scored easily and Ricketts knew that when the call was made. Which forward in the world would take a dive when he has the chance to shoot and score an easy goal into an open net with no GK? That not only should have been a pk but a red card also!
Which forward in the world would pull half the shit Lenhart does? Anyway, on further review it wasn't a dive, in the sense that there was no contact. There was minimal contact and Lenhart let himself go to ground. Borderline. But with Ricketts making two idiotic plays in the same sequence, I'm not surprised the ref rewarded San Jose with the PK, and I don't think this should take anything away from Wondo's tying the record. Lassiter did manage his record in two fewer games and 233 fewer minutes played than Wondo. His scoring rate was significantly better than Wondo's (35.5% to 21.3%) and Lassiter only had 3 PK goals on the year (on 3 attempts), as opposed to Wondo's 5 PK goals (on 7 attempts). So all tie-breakers in this case probably still go to Lassiter. But still, a remarkable season for Wondo.
Come on! The bias towards Lenhart has got to stop and its really getting old. There isn't a forward in the world alive who wouldn't try to gain an advantage against an opposing team or who doesn't try to influence a ref's decision. Every coach, team and/or fan in the league dreams of a forward like Lenhart. He makes things happen and he is exceptional at what he does every time he steps onto the pitch. If you get to see him up close like I do at every training session, he is an incredible talent. However, which way you spin this thing, whether there was minimal contact or otherwise, there was a definite foul on that play and as the last man, the GK should have been red carded or at the very least yellow carded. Again that was a valid pk , and whoever doesn't believe this , doesn't understand the game.
He had an open shot at free goal w/ no GK! Don't know a forward who wouldn't want to score an easy goal like that.
I do check out Lenhart ever chance I get and he is a great guy. I really felt bad for him last year when he lost his dad.
I feel like this isn't the first time I've heard this defense of Lenhart. Wasn't there a game against Salt Lake last year or the year before when Salt Lake fans were claiming dive and San Jose fans were asking this same question?
Don't remember much about last year. Wondo went on 11 game streak w/out scoring a goal after he came back from USMNT Gold Cup and Lenhart left in July because he had to take care of family matters because his dad died a few months earlier. Then Bobby Convey was on the team and his presence didn't help the team at all. If anything IMHO, he hindered everyone's play....
It stops when he stops his douchebaggery. The "bias" toward Lenhart didn't just materialize out of thin air - it was a reaction to the things he's pulled and continued to pull. If you/he/the Quakes want the "bias" to stop, the solution is pretty simple. I don't. It was borderline, and as evidence you need look no further than today's ManU/Chelsea game, where Torres got sent off after going to ground easily under similar minimal contact. I think the refs respectively got it right yesterday and wrong today, but I can easily see both sides of the coin.
If you and others strongly feel this way, then by all means, you should try and stop him but not too many people have been able to or can. I'm sure by now with replays and whatever, there will have been evidence of "cheating" but the league has not done much and can't because there really is no provable evidence (as you and others seem to claim or want to believe) that he has been cheating. Either way, whichever way you look at it, a foul in the box is a pk and if he is the last man, its a red card! That is a FIFA rule.
Go ahead, cite the rule, I'll wait. Actually the rule is a red for a Denial of an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO). I haven't seen this play so I don't know if it applied, but a defender could wipe somebody out at the back corner of the box (against the end line) with nobody but the keeper behind him and it wouldn't necessarily be a red card, because there's no obvious goal-scoring opportunity from right on the end line. The USSF uses the 4 D's to judge if its a DOGSO; Defenders (number), Distance (to the goal), Distance (to the ball), and Direction. It sounds like he was the last defender, and it was in the area so distance to the goal was probably not an issue. But if the ball wasn't headed to the goal, or if the ball was too far in front of the attacker that he was unlikely to get to it then a red card wouldn't apply even as the foul and PK did.
My PDF doesn't open but when I was coaching in Italy, everyone knew/knows this. Its not a new rule Surprised you never heard of this. I mean unless you are looking at games played in the 70's & 80's. He had a clear shot at an open net if Ricketts didn't interfere.
There were still two defenders between Lenhart and the goal, which is why he chose to flop instead of playing through. It's also why no red card was given to the keeper.
He had an easy open and free goal so why would he deliberately flop as you say? You can think whatever, I don't and won't believe this...