Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
You know why LOL. Only reason why they allowed that FCV 2004 team to play the VDA 2004 team last weekend was they thought it would be an easy game. Well, that backfired. VDA was way more organized, technical and had way more opportunities to score. Honestly, watch the film. VDA 2004 owned that FCV 2004 team, can you imagine what the VDA 2006 team would do?
I think "owned" is a little optimistic, LOL. FCV had three goals which got called back. When was the last time you saw that? VDA has some very good players, FCV has some very good players. I'd say it was a hard fought game, and the top teams should be playing each other more often in the area. It was a fun one to watch.
All due respect, it doesn’t count if you continually slam a goalie with the purpose of knocking the ball out her possession. One of which should have been a straight red. With that aside, it was good game with good players.
Spoken like someone who hasn't seen the film. Score legitimately was 3-0. One reversed goal could be argued as a foul.
post the film? you can say this over and over again because there is no way for anyone to "watch the film"!!
Sock Puppet
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
You know why LOL. Only reason why they allowed that FCV 2004 team to play the VDA 2004 team last weekend was they thought it would be an easy game. Well, that backfired. VDA was way more organized, technical and had way more opportunities to score. Honestly, watch the film. VDA 2004 owned that FCV 2004 team, can you imagine what the VDA 2006 team would do?
I think "owned" is a little optimistic, LOL. FCV had three goals which got called back. When was the last time you saw that? VDA has some very good players, FCV has some very good players. I'd say it was a hard fought game, and the top teams should be playing each other more often in the area. It was a fun one to watch.
All due respect, it doesn’t count if you continually slam a goalie with the purpose of knocking the ball out her possession. One of which should have been a straight red. With that aside, it was good game with good players.
Spoken like someone who hasn't seen the film. Score legitimately was 3-0. One reversed goal could be argued as a foul.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
You know why LOL. Only reason why they allowed that FCV 2004 team to play the VDA 2004 team last weekend was they thought it would be an easy game. Well, that backfired. VDA was way more organized, technical and had way more opportunities to score. Honestly, watch the film. VDA 2004 owned that FCV 2004 team, can you imagine what the VDA 2006 team would do?
I think "owned" is a little optimistic, LOL. FCV had three goals which got called back. When was the last time you saw that? VDA has some very good players, FCV has some very good players. I'd say it was a hard fought game, and the top teams should be playing each other more often in the area. It was a fun one to watch.
All due respect, it doesn’t count if you continually slam a goalie with the purpose of knocking the ball out her possession. One of which should have been a straight red. With that aside, it was good game with good players.
Spoken like someone who hasn't seen the film. Score legitimately was 3-0. One reversed goal could be argued as a foul.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
You know why LOL. Only reason why they allowed that FCV 2004 team to play the VDA 2004 team last weekend was they thought it would be an easy game. Well, that backfired. VDA was way more organized, technical and had way more opportunities to score. Honestly, watch the film. VDA 2004 owned that FCV 2004 team, can you imagine what the VDA 2006 team would do?
I think "owned" is a little optimistic, LOL. FCV had three goals which got called back. When was the last time you saw that? VDA has some very good players, FCV has some very good players. I'd say it was a hard fought game, and the top teams should be playing each other more often in the area. It was a fun one to watch.
All due respect, it doesn’t count if you continually slam a goalie with the purpose of knocking the ball out her possession. One of which should have been a straight red. With that aside, it was good game with good players.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“There’s no place like FCV, there’s no place like FCV, there’s no place like FCV”
Yes there is...Metro United
Where is Metro based out of??
Anonymous wrote:“There’s no place like FCV, there’s no place like FCV, there’s no place like FCV”
Yes there is...Metro United
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Unsure how the PP stretched from 2004 VDA to asking what a team two years younger would do (2006s)...? Game was between two good 2004 teams and doubtful of a younger team just barnstorming an otherwise very talented '04 FCV team. Stay humble
The last four or so post have been about the 2004s....no?
Yes, they were, I'm asking why was some 2006 team brought in to discuss beating a good FCV 2004 team? That was my question...
Anonymous wrote:It’s almost the 1 anniversary of Loudoun’s heist stealing money mostly from low income families. But at least they’re creating champions for life though 🤑
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Unsure how the PP stretched from 2004 VDA to asking what a team two years younger would do (2006s)...? Game was between two good 2004 teams and doubtful of a younger team just barnstorming an otherwise very talented '04 FCV team. Stay humble
The last four or so post have been about the 2004s....no?
Anonymous wrote:Unsure how the PP stretched from 2004 VDA to asking what a team two years younger would do (2006s)...? Game was between two good 2004 teams and doubtful of a younger team just barnstorming an otherwise very talented '04 FCV team. Stay humble
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
You know why LOL. Only reason why they allowed that FCV 2004 team to play the VDA 2004 team last weekend was they thought it would be an easy game. Well, that backfired. VDA was way more organized, technical and had way more opportunities to score. Honestly, watch the film. VDA 2004 owned that FCV 2004 team, can you imagine what the VDA 2006 team would do?
I think "owned" is a little optimistic, LOL. FCV had three goals which got called back. When was the last time you saw that? VDA has some very good players, FCV has some very good players. I'd say it was a hard fought game, and the top teams should be playing each other more often in the area. It was a fun one to watch.
All due respect, it doesn’t count if you continually slam a goalie with the purpose of knocking the ball out her possession. One of which should have been a straight red. With that aside, it was good game with good players.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
You know why LOL. Only reason why they allowed that FCV 2004 team to play the VDA 2004 team last weekend was they thought it would be an easy game. Well, that backfired. VDA was way more organized, technical and had way more opportunities to score. Honestly, watch the film. VDA 2004 owned that FCV 2004 team, can you imagine what the VDA 2006 team would do?
I think "owned" is a little optimistic, LOL. FCV had three goals which got called back. When was the last time you saw that? VDA has some very good players, FCV has some very good players. I'd say it was a hard fought game, and the top teams should be playing each other more often in the area. It was a fun one to watch.