Girls Prep

[Unregistered]

The score was 5-0. No need for insults. It does not reflect well on Nobles parents.

It wasn't my comment, but I don't consider that much of an insult. I saw the same thing. I also saw that some Nobles players struggle to keep up with pace of play. These schools tend to have a pretty wide range of athletes on their rosters, so this is pretty common at private schools. Some teams just have a couple more skilled players at the top of their rosters that make a big difference in the scoreline.

[Unregistered]

Here's a tip for you. When a poster asks what happened with a 5-0 game, focus on the game or your own team and try to show some class. No one asked any of Noble parents' thoughts of Andover's players' abilities, conditioning and athleticism.

It wasn't my comment, but I don't consider that much of an insult. I saw the same thing. I also saw that some Nobles players struggle to keep up with pace of play. These schools tend to have a pretty wide range of athletes on their rosters, so this is pretty common at private schools. Some teams just have a couple more skilled players at the top of their rosters that make a big difference in the scoreline.

[Unregistered]

Here's a tip for you. When a poster asks what happened with a 5-0 game, focus on the game or your own team and try to show some class. No one asked any of Noble parents' thoughts of Andover's players' abilities, conditioning and athleticism.

Our team doesn't have a whole lot of chemistry, as you can see from one of the dads who loves to post. We have a prima donna or two, and it affects the whole team. Nobles has a deep bench. - Andover dad

[Unregistered]

Dont worry, I'm sure Nobles will choke in the playoffs again.

[Unregistered]

Reply was meant for post 284

Nobles had a lot more athletes. PA has a few talented players, but other than that, they don’t have much.

It wasn't my comment, but I don't consider that much of an insult. I saw the same thing. I also saw that some Nobles players struggle to keep up with pace of play. These schools tend to have a pretty wide range of athletes on their rosters, so this is pretty common at private schools. Some teams just have a couple more skilled players at the top of their rosters that make a big difference in the scoreline.

[Unregistered]

Here's a tip for you. When a poster asks what happened with a 5-0 game, focus on the game or your own team and try to show some class. No one asked any of Noble parents' thoughts of Andover's players' abilities, conditioning and athleticism.

Here's a tip for you: if you want to give lectures on showing class, make your comments to the person that you feel has made the rude comment. And if you don't want to hear observations on why a game that some thought might be competitive turned out to be 5-0, then don't ask. It wasn't 5-0 because one team played a 4-4-2 or because they had interesting set pieces or made creative runs to get scoring opportunities. It was 5-0 because of things like skill, depth, athleticism and perhaps conditioning.

[Unregistered]

Why all the fuss over Andover? They didn't beat a single team in the top half of the ISL.

[Unregistered]

I didn't ask about the game, so don't you go giving lectures either. Post 283 and 284 are unnecessary. When you play a good team, it forces the other team to chase the ball and players get winded. Saying PA only has a few talented players is not right to post any time (post 284). Teams have good and bad days, they win they lose, big deal.

Here's a tip for you: if you want to give lectures on showing class, make your comments to the person that you feel has made the rude comment. And if you don't want to hear observations on why a game that some thought might be competitive turned out to be 5-0, then don't ask. It wasn't 5-0 because one team played a 4-4-2 or because they had interesting set pieces or made creative runs to get scoring opportunities. It was 5-0 because of things like skill, depth, athleticism and perhaps conditioning.

[Unregistered]

I didn't ask about the game, so don't you go giving lectures either. Post 283 and 284 are unnecessary. When you play a good team, it forces the other team to chase the ball and players get winded. Saying PA only has a few talented players is not right to post any time (post 284). Teams have good and bad days, they win they lose, big deal.

I'm not responsible for either of those posts, but I'm curious about how people are expected to respond when someone asks about how the game went.

Do we want a response that says "one team scored 5 goals and the other team scored 0?" Where's the value in that? If it's a lopsided game, what do you want to hear - "they both tried wicked hard", "I'm sure that Andover was missing some great players," or "Nobles got lucky," when none of that might be true?

I'd be more concerned if a response mentioned #'s, or a particular position that was really weak, or naming initials of players that struggled. That stuff is way out of line.

[Unregistered]

Were you at the game? How about providing specifics of the game. A lot of teams post highlights of games, and they seem to provide some pretty good feedback. Putting down a team or players isn't worth posting at all. While you didn't make the post, saying that a team only has a few good players after watching one game isn't fair or accurate. That's what I took exception to, and I don't post on here often at all.

I'm not responsible for either of those posts, but I'm curious about how people are expected to respond when someone asks about how the game went.

Do we want a response that says "one team scored 5 goals and the other team scored 0?" Where's the value in that? If it's a lopsided game, what do you want to hear - "they both tried wicked hard", "I'm sure that Andover was missing some great players," or "Nobles got lucky," when none of that might be true?

I'd be more concerned if a response mentioned #'s, or a particular position that was really weak, or naming initials of players that struggled. That stuff is way out of line.

[Unregistered]

This seems like a no-brainer, but the difference between many teams is one or two high impact players that can consistently beat defenses and score. In MA, Nobles, Thayer, Tabor and Rivers all have at least one. Some have two. That's what separates them from the next tier down, which would be WA, BBN, Middlesex, St. Mark's, Andover, etc. The rest of the players on these "powerhouse" teams for the most part just good to very good.

[Unregistered]

I think you are underestimating the teams around those high impact players.

This seems like a no-brainer, but the difference between many teams is one or two high impact players that can consistently beat defenses and score. In MA, Nobles, Thayer, Tabor and Rivers all have at least one. Some have two. That's what separates them from the next tier down, which would be WA, BBN, Middlesex, St. Mark's, Andover, etc. The rest of the players on these "powerhouse" teams for the most part just good to very good.

[Unregistered]

My point is that its the high-impact players who create the blowouts. The teams around them are very good, but could they put the same sort of beatdown on some of these teams? Probably not.

[Unregistered]

Were you at the game? How about providing specifics of the game. A lot of teams post highlights of games, and they seem to provide some pretty good feedback. Putting down a team or players isn't worth posting at all. While you didn't make the post, saying that a team only has a few good players after watching one game isn't fair or accurate. That's what I took exception to, and I don't post on here often at all.

Fair enough. What kind specifics matter in a conversation like this (not trying to be difficult, just discussing) and what kind of information is kosher? I would say that a rough shot count would be good to know, #'s of corners, rough possession %, etc. Knowing whether one team had a big advantage on set pieces, whether field conditions (wind, field size, water) played a role, and the effect of substitutions would be good to know.

But if you know all that, and no one dares mention that half the team couldn't kick the ball with their left foot, or that the back line was incredibly slow, or that the gap in skill level was monumental, or that the forwards were too small to compete for balls, or the keeper was 5'2 (just examples: none of these were PA's issues) - do you really know what happened in the game?

Also, if the person at the game only saw a few good players on the field for a certain team, then that's their opinion based on what they saw that day. They could have had all sorts of injuries or illnesses that made them look worse than they typically are, but that's the same for any team.

[Unregistered]

Possession, tactical, technical, positives about a defense, midfield or offense, officiating, conditions, to name a few.

The score was 5-0. How about give credit to a team that played well on the day. Why mention anything else.

An opinion based on one game is not an informed opinion. Nobles lost to Tabor this season. Should I assume the players on Tabor are better athletes and more skilled than Nobles? Teams have good days and bad days, and Nobles is a strong team.

Fair enough. What kind specifics matter in a conversation like this (not trying to be difficult, just discussing) and what kind of information is kosher? I would say that a rough shot count would be good to know, #'s of corners, rough possession %, etc. Knowing whether one team had a big advantage on set pieces, whether field conditions (wind, field size, water) played a role, and the effect of substitutions would be good to know.

But if you know all that, and no one dares mention that half the team couldn't kick the ball with their left foot, or that the back line was incredibly slow, or that the gap in skill level was monumental, or that the forwards were too small to compete for balls, or the keeper was 5'2 (just examples: none of these were PA's issues) - do you really know what happened in the game?

Also, if the person at the game only saw a few good players on the field for a certain team, then that's their opinion based on what they saw that day. They could have had all sorts of injuries or illnesses that made them look worse than they typically are, but that's the same for any team.