On to the semis: Cornell 12, Albany 11 (recap thread)

Started by ugarte, May 19, 2007, 04:13:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

Al DeFlorio

#30
May 20, 2007, 02:23:13 PM
[quote krose]Fred, I think the issue for me is the frequency of turnovers.

In a sport like hockey, where possession changes every 10 seconds, sudden death is clearly a good way to go: a team is unlikely to get more than one scoring chance on their first possession, and even that's very unlikely.
[/quote]
The combination of sudden victory and infrequency of turnovers often causes a real distortion of how the game is played in overtime.  Take, for example, the Bill Tierney approach:  If you win the face-off, you hold the ball for three-and-a-half minutes until less than 30 seconds remains on the clock before attempting a shot, figuring you're likely to get the ball back if you miss the net and in any case the other team won't have enough time to score.  Then, if you don't score, you do it all over again after the face-off starting the next overtime period.  Deadly for the audience--and crappy lacrosse, in my opinion.  

Let the teams play the game as it was meant to be played.  With two three-or-four-minute overtime periods, the incentive to hold the ball until the end is all but taken away.
Al DeFlorio '65

billhoward

#31
May 20, 2007, 02:34:21 PM
[quote Al DeFlorio][quote Rita]After last week's OT games, I was thinking, that maybe lax OT should be a full 5 minute OT and whoever is in the lead at the end wins (or do another full 5 min OT, then go to sudden victory). Goals seem to come rather "easily" in lax compared to hockey. However that OT period was very nerve wracking.
[/quote]
Couldn't agree more.  Used to be that way.  Two four-minute overtime periods, with a short break and change of direction in between.  Cornell won the 1976 championship over Maryland in OT, scoring four goals after Maryland scored the first.  Much fairer way to determine a winner.[/quote]
A mini-overtime, not sudden death, should be the rule again in lacrosse. Albany probably feels that way right now. We might have. Whoever wins that first OT faceoff has an advantage. Wonder if there are easily accessible stats as to how often in the NCAAs the OT faceoff winner is also the winner, even when not scoring on first possession.

billhoward

#32
May 20, 2007, 02:36:24 PM
[quote schoaff]I do remember that the Cornell goalie's parents were sitting next to me during that game (Schimoler or something?) and told lots of stories about him and there was a girl behind us with an incredibly grating Long Island Accent who seemed to randomly shout "LET'S GO ADELPHI!" every four or five minutes.[/quote]
Redundant.

David Harding

#33
May 20, 2007, 02:59:16 PM
[quote DeltaOne81][quote ugarte]Can someone please explain the 400 infractions that were called against Cornell on the faceoffs? Not individually, of course, just generally.[/quote]

I can't say I was watching too too specifically this game, but usually its just 'false starts', i.e. flinching/moving before the whistle. Unlike in hockey where that's a do-over, in lax its a procedure violation and the other team gets possession. That's what its been most of the year.[/quote]Do I understand correctly that these procedure violations are inclulded in the faceoff statistics and that this is a significant factor in keeping the Cornell percentage down?

ugarte

#34
May 20, 2007, 06:20:48 PM
[quote David Harding][quote DeltaOne81][quote ugarte]Can someone please explain the 400 infractions that were called against Cornell on the faceoffs? Not individually, of course, just generally.[/quote]

I can't say I was watching too too specifically this game, but usually its just 'false starts', i.e. flinching/moving before the whistle. Unlike in hockey where that's a do-over, in lax its a procedure violation and the other team gets possession. That's what its been most of the year.[/quote]Do I understand correctly that these procedure violations are inclulded in the faceoff statistics and that this is a significant factor in keeping the Cornell percentage down?[/quote]
I would assume yes - because I think that is the right way to go. If you are losing the faceoffs because you can't take them legally, you are losing the faceoffs.

ugarte

#35
May 20, 2007, 06:23:21 PM
[quote DeltaOne81]In a modest scoring sport, its always a tough call whether to go sudden death in a sport in OT. Low scoring like hockey and soccer are no-brainers. [/quote]

Sudden death is fairly new to soccer (futbol, in any event) and IIRC, there is still a non-sudden death two-period OT before the golden goal period. Which is then followed by the execrable shootout.

jtwcornell91

#37
May 21, 2007, 03:48:32 AM
[quote ugarte][quote DeltaOne81]In a modest scoring sport, its always a tough call whether to go sudden death in a sport in OT. Low scoring like hockey and soccer are no-brainers. [/quote]

Sudden death is fairly new to soccer (futbol, in any event) and IIRC, there is still a non-sudden death two-period OT before the golden goal period. Which is then followed by the execrable shootout.[/quote]

I think FIFA got rid of the "golden goal" and went back to playing a full (30 minute) OT followed by a shootout.

JasonN95

#38
May 21, 2007, 09:35:39 AM
[quote min]Glynn's GW goal made Sportscenter Top Ten plays (#8) tonight.[/quote]

And Glynn's OT winner was Chris Berman's #4 top play of the week on Sunday's Sportscenter.

Josh '99

#39
May 21, 2007, 12:54:52 PM
[quote JasonN95][quote min]Glynn's GW goal made Sportscenter Top Ten plays (#8) tonight.[/quote]

And Glynn's OT winner was Chris Berman's #4 top play of the week on Sunday's Sportscenter.[/quote]Annoying though he may be, Berman is always good at giving the Ivies some TV love.
"They do all kind of just blend together into one giant dildo."
-Ben Rocky 04

ebilmes

#40
May 21, 2007, 01:13:00 PM
Highlights from ESPNU. Haven't seen anything on YouTube.

http://broadband.espn.go.com/ivp/splash2?id=2876190

RichH

#41
May 21, 2007, 01:41:59 PM
[quote ebilmes]Highlights from ESPNU. Haven't seen anything on YouTube.

http://broadband.espn.go.com/ivp/splash2?id=2876190[/quote]

Yeah...too bad all the highlights are the player isolated shots.  The camera in this clip misses Glynn's goal because it panned right past him.  Would love to see the broadcast shot from up top.  Or better yet, a clip of the broadcast from about 10 seconds before Seibald's trail check until the end would be better.

Will's suggestion *cough* torrent *cough* would be marvelous.

schoaff

#43
May 25, 2007, 12:08:38 PM
[quote Al DeFlorio]Max scored seconds later, triggering the three-goals-in-19-seconds run that changed the tone of the game from us playing catch-up to them playing catch-up.[/quote]

Here's a mention of that game changing run from this week's game notes...

QUICK HITTERS -- When Max Seibald scored at the 14:13 mark of the third quarter to cut a two-goal deficit in half, it also triggered a 4-0 Big Red run and three of the fastest successive goals in NCAA history. Just 10 seconds after Seibald scored, the sophomore found Eric Pittard to tie the game at 7-7. It also is tied for 14th in NCAA history in fastest consecutive goals by members of the same team and the second-quickest in an NCAA game. Not to be outdone, just nine seconds later David Mitchell gave Cornell an 8-7 lead, the second-quickest time between goals in an NCAA game and the 13th fastest time between goals in NCAA history. When all was said an done, the Big Red scored three times in 19 seconds, an NCAA record for quickest time between three goals in regular season or tournament history.

ugarte

#44
May 25, 2007, 12:13:34 PM
[quote schoaff]When all was said an done, the Big Red scored three times in 19 seconds, an NCAA record for quickest time between three goals in regular season or tournament history.[/quote]
Wow. I was in awe as it was happening, but since the announcers didn't say anything I figured that it couldn't possibly be a record. Wow.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions