Pilots vs. Oregon State

Can anyone tell me why our roster is so small compared to other programs? Is that a money issue or a coaching/program style issue?

RipCityPilot wrote:Can anyone tell me why our roster is so small compared to other programs? Is that a money issue or a coaching/program style issue?

A little of both.

We've always had a comparatively small roster. Even though our program brings in a lot more money than others via the gate, we've got a lot less overall available from the university. Couple that with both our scholarships and our coaches costing more and you have the financial impetus to not bring in people who won't play.

As an advantage, that means more scholarship dollars per player, which can be a draw in the recruiting process. So can the potential for playing time, although it may be as competitive if not more so here than elsewhere.

I for one can't understand the reasoning for coming into a program as the fifth-best at your position with little to no scholarship money available and a low chance of even landing on the travel squad. All to wear a certain shade of blue or cardinal.

I'm not sure you can say we get less money from the university. The equity in athletics database shows we at least equal the PAC 12 schools, and we are fully funded.

We also were the First University in the country to have a dedicated soccer stadium, and with the current NCAA guidelines, we may forever have the best sight lines and close access to the players.

What we don't have is sources of funding outside of athletic scholarships for players. Many State schools can offer in-state tuition at a reduced rate, and Cal schools can offer free tuition for California kids who attend the state funded Olympic training center. These incentives are state law, which the NCAA has no power to govern, so the reality is we will never be leaders in roster size. Our nitch is making players better and giving the ones who come here better opportunities to shine.

Some of the roster size has to do with timing, injuries leading to red-shirts, and so on. We have one player who is a senior. Next year, we have 7 players coming in, in a stellar class. With 18 this year, that gives us 24 next year. I'm sure the coaches try to maintain a balance from year to year, but you can't always meet that objective.

Regarding the roster size, we played 13 player against UNC. For the field players, that comes out to 75 minutes each on average. UNC played 17 players, which comes out to 56 minutes per field player.

For Oregon State, we played 12, which comes out to 81 minutes average per field player. OSU played 16, which comes out to 60 minutes per field player.

I remember from my days playing that the average mid-fielder runs about 7 miles in a game. Not distance running, lots of wind-sprints combined with jogs. Our forwards check back a lot and our outside backs go forward a lot, so they run a lot too.

It's no wonder our players got tired against OSU. Hopefully, we'll get everyone back and be able to sub some more.

Camelli got dinged against UNC. I bet that's why she wasn't playing against OSU.

All White Kit's observations: http://www.allwhitekit.com/?p=10388

Out of curiosity, apart from any other missed or not-made calls by the ref, did anyone else recognize the blown call by the ref on a Kendall throw-in with about 5 minutes left in the game?

Kendall threw in from about half-way back in our defensive end of the field. Her throw went directly out of bounds. The correct call is for Kendall to take a new throw. But, the ref awarded a throw to OSU from the point of Kendall's throw.

Why? Well, the NCAA changed some rules this year related to stalling tactics by the leading team at the end of a game. One change gives the ref the discretion to award a throw to the team that is behind if the team that is ahead has a throw in and throws the ball out of bounds. This is because that is a potential stalling tactic.

I guessing the ref knew there was a new rule on throw ins and thought he could change who got the throw. But the rule only allows the change of who gets the throw if the bad throw is by the leading team. Anyone have the feeling the guy was over his head?

This is a tricky rule that is different in all jurisdictions. In high school, it automatically goes over to the opposing team. In FIFA, it is a do-over. All referees do games in all jurisdictions, so it's not surprising that a new rule on this situation in the first week of the season might be misinterpreted. All referees at Pilots' matches are assessed and the assessors are particularly attuned to rule changes, so I'm sure that any misinterpretation would not have gone unnoticed.

The NCAA changed the rule this year. It's not at the referee's discretion.

"28. 15.2 The Throw-In – How Taken
The thrower, at the moment of delivering the ball, shall face the field of play and part of each foot shall be either on the touch line or the ground outside the touch line. The thrower shall use both hands equally and shall deliver the ball from behind and over his or her head. The throw-in shall be taken from the point where it crossed the touch line, being thrown in any direction by a player of the team opposite to that of the player who last touched the ball. The ball shall be in play from the throw as soon as it enters the field of play. If, on the throw-in, the ball fails to enter the field of play before it touches the ground, the ball is awarded to the opponent at the spot of the initial throw-in. A goal may not be scored directly from a throw-in.
The thrower shall not play the ball a second time before it has been touched by another player.
Note: The player taking the throw-in may not use stickum or adhesive material of any kind (including gloves with an adhesive surface) to enhance the grip on a throw-in.
PENALTY—If the ball is improperly thrown in, the throw-in shall be taken by a player of the opposing team.
A.R. 15.2.a. A player taking a throw-in throws the ball so that it does not enter the field of play but passes outside the touch line or hits the ground before entering the field of play. RULING: The opponent shall be awarded a throw-in at the spot of the initial throw shall be retaken.
RATIONALE: This change requires a thrower to properly throw the ball into play or there will be a change in possession. There is no reason to reward a team for not properly putting the ball in play on a throw-in. It is intended to eliminate time wasting and gamesmanship."

Phew, man it's no wonder there are misinterpretations.

Here's to you NCAA:

UPSoccerFanatic wrote:Out of curiosity, apart from any other missed or not-made calls by the ref, did anyone else recognize the blown call by the ref on a Kendall throw-in with about 5 minutes left in the game?

Kendall threw in from about half-way back in our defensive end of the field. Her throw went directly out of bounds. The correct call is for Kendall to take a new throw. But, the ref awarded a throw to OSU from the point of Kendall's throw.

We were sitting on that side.
Everyone in the stands where we were recognized the "blown call" by the ref.
Fans helpfully explained (what they believed to be) the correct call to the ref.
The ref was perhaps deaf, as he failed to acknowledge the helpful comments.

Dan No Yell wrote:

We were sitting on that side.
Everyone in the stands where we were recognized the "blown call" by the ref.
Fans helpfully explained (what they believed to be) the correct call to the ref.
The ref was perhaps deaf, as he failed to acknowledge the helpful comments.

It wasn't about objects that can be purchased in a hardware store was it?

Keeper is right, and I was wrong. I knew the rule had changed, but thought it only was to prevent time-wasting by the leading team. Well, it was changed to prevent time-wasting by the leading team, but it applies to both teams.

So, the ref got this one right.

DoubleDipper wrote:Phew, man it's no wonder there are misinterpretations.

Here's to you NCAA:

Actually that first paragraph reads a lot like the FIFA Law. FIFA breaks it into a list of bullet points so it reads easier, though.

PurplePrideTrumpet wrote:

DoubleDipper wrote:Phew, man it's no wonder there are misinterpretations.

Here's to you NCAA:

Actually that first paragraph reads a lot like the FIFA Law. FIFA breaks it into a list of bullet points so it reads easier, though.

As I read the FIFA instructions and guidelines to referees,
Law 15
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law%5f15%5fthe%5fthrow%5fin%5fen%5f47365.pdf
(PPT slide #15)

If the player throws the ball using the correct procedure and it touches the ground before entering the field of play, it is a restart by the same team at the same position.

If incorrect technique is used, the other team gets the restart.


No mention of time wasting.

I suppose it is possible the ball entered the field of play and curved out, but I didn't see that from the fur-lined seats. In any case, it would seem the AR would have called that with a happy flag.

If the ball entered the field of play and curved out, which could happen in a windstorm, and if that counts as a legitimate throw in, then the ref would give the ball to the opposing team where it went out. In the OSU-Pilots case, however, the ref gave the ball to the Beavers at the point from which Kendall threw it. This does seem consistent with the rule, although apparently not with FIFA's interpretation of the rule.

UPSoccerFanatic wrote:If the ball entered the field of play and curved out, which could happen in a windstorm, and if that counts as a legitimate throw in, then the ref would give the ball to the opposing team where it went out. In the OSU-Pilots case, however, the ref gave the ball to the Beavers at the point from which Kendall threw it. This does seem consistent with the rule, although apparently not with FIFA's interpretation of the rule.

The argument was being made that it was somehow consistent with FIFA guidelines and not NCAA rules by a ref who did both types of games.

I struggle to see how it was consistent with either rule if we were behind. Time wasting is not an issue for the team behind. Mostly not if they are even unless there was a great disparity, which I submit didn't exist. We lead in shots.


It reminds me of the Butch Cassidy line:

Percy Garris:
You morons... Nobody is going to rob us going DOWN the mountain. We have got no money going DOWN the mountain"

The problem is, the rule as written doesn't fit the rationale. The rule as written is absolute, "If you throw it out of bounds, the other team gets to take the throw in." The rationale has to do with preventing time wasting, which the Pilots definitely did not want to do.

Basically, whoever wrote the rule did a crappy job. They should have written that the rule applies only when the ref thinks the purpose of the out of bounds throw is to waste time or could be to waste time.

It's what happens when you get non-lawyers writing rules.

This thread needs to veer to a discussion about beer.

In the event other referee questions come up, below is a summary of rule changes the NCAA approved for fall sports from the NCAA.com website. I didn't bother including the section on cards.

In other rules changes for soccer, referees will have more discretion in the last five minutes of the game to manage the clock.

Specifically, the referee can determine whether to keep the clock moving if the team that is trailing commits a violation that warrants a card. Previously, the clock stopped while the official issued the card. However, the rules committee learned that the losing team sometimes uses this tactic to stop the clock in end-of-game situations. Conversely, if the team that is ahead purposely delays the restart after the card is given (as tactic to keep the clock moving), the referee can stop the clock.

The following rules will also be in effect this season:

• Any throw-in that does not reach the field of play will result in possession being awarded to the opposing team. Previously if the ball didn’t advance to the field of play, the player was allowed to retake the throw.

• Excessive celebration (such as rehearsed celebrations after a goal) has been added to the list of infractions that can merit a yellow card during play.

• Players will be allowed to wear technological devices during games. (Teams have begun to use such devices to track players’ heart rates and measure other physical effects for training purposes and to help coaches gage substitution patterns and other aspects of the game.) The data gleaned from these devices, though, may not be used during the game or intervals, unless verified as medically necessary.

• Coaches and staff may use electronic aids on the sidelines during games. However, the rules still continue to prohibit coaches from communicating with anyone via electronic messaging devices or phones during the game

Seems to me like a lot of this clock management problem could be done away with if they ditched the count down clock.... Or just adopting the FIFA rules.... It makes zero sense to have a completely different system, further it stymies referee development since NCAA games do not count toward FIFA certification.

DaTruRochin wrote:Seems to me like a lot of this clock management problem could be done away with if they ditched the count down clock.... Or just adopting the FIFA rules.... It makes zero sense to have a completely different system, further it stymies referee development since NCAA games do not count toward FIFA certification.

Yeah, the whole NCAA approach doesn't help the game or the players. It is a step back even from the club ball they played before they got to college.

They should ditch the clock, the substitution rules ( just have the six subs friendlies allow and be done with it), and all the goofy rules that grow out of it.

Or call it something besides soccer.

The funny part is, they spend all the time and trouble creating new bylaws and all that sort of thing for the game.... When there is already a major governing body that does the same thing already. It isn't like the US public is completely ignorant of the rules anymore, there is no need for a slightly different version of the same system.