Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surf is not overlooking BSC, so I’d expect a 2-0 Surf win, dominating the ball wearing out BSC in the Richmond heat and making the game look easy. Surf has a whole plan for arriving to VA early, go start breathing in the humidity and all, shoot…they have likely already arrived. Fortunately their playing style will help them to a 2-0 no frills win but any honest observers will agree BSC never has a chance but it won’t be a 10-0 or 6-0 or even 4-0 game. It’s too hot out there and it’s too competitive now for any teams to get Unioned!

rumor has it surf is practicing in the james river near tidewater drive to stay cool while still maintaining their resistance training. Beware if the surf

Those surf players are dirty.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surf is not overlooking BSC, so I’d expect a 2-0 Surf win, dominating the ball wearing out BSC in the Richmond heat and making the game look easy. Surf has a whole plan for arriving to VA early, go start breathing in the humidity and all, shoot…they have likely already arrived. Fortunately their playing style will help them to a 2-0 no frills win but any honest observers will agree BSC never has a chance but it won’t be a 10-0 or 6-0 or even 4-0 game. It’s too hot out there and it’s too competitive now for any teams to get Unioned!

rumor has it surf is practicing in the james river near tidewater drive to stay cool while still maintaining their resistance training. Beware if the surf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2010s Union had a roster of 15 through the season and two players left (did not travel to Seattle) so they were down to 13. No coach in their right mind goes to playoffs with 12 field players (one of the 13 is a goalie). Made sense to bring 2011s as subs. Had Brave 2010s not made playoffs at the last minute, Union would have rostered a few Brave players on their team for playoffs instead.

No one is saying they should not take additional players to add to the 12 players. But the issue is that those players were not fit to play as they were just coming from injury and the other player bearly made the 2011 team. There were other 2011 or 2010RL players that were in form, hence the favourtism, politics and an insult to those 2011/2010RL players and families. That is why the 2010 and 2011 parents are upset.

Well said and glad you included the 2010 RL. This poster has it is exactly correct.

Anonymous wrote:Surf is not overlooking BSC, so I’d expect a 2-0 Surf win, dominating the ball wearing out BSC in the Richmond heat and making the game look easy. Surf has a whole plan for arriving to VA early, go start breathing in the humidity and all, shoot…they have likely already arrived. Fortunately their playing style will help them to a 2-0 no frills win but any honest observers will agree BSC never has a chance but it won’t be a 10-0 or 6-0 or even 4-0 game. It’s too hot out there and it’s too competitive now for any teams to get Unioned!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we use Bethesda 10a as a measuring stick later this week. So Bethesda should lose maybe 8-0 if all is equal? Ok, maybe 7-0.

This is not a good comparison. Unlike Union, Bethesda has a much deeper bench (no 2011s on the team) and even with this, not everyone plays (only strong players get to play, coaches read the game and adjustments are made right away when there is a mismatch).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2010s Union had a roster of 15 through the season and two players left (did not travel to Seattle) so they were down to 13. No coach in their right mind goes to playoffs with 12 field players (one of the 13 is a goalie). Made sense to bring 2011s as subs. Had Brave 2010s not made playoffs at the last minute, Union would have rostered a few Brave players on their team for playoffs instead.

No one is saying they should not take additional players to add to the 12 players. But the issue is that those players were not fit to play as they were just coming from injury and the other player bearly made the 2011 team. There were other 2011 or 2010RL players that were in form, hence the favourtism, politics and an insult to those 2011/2010RL players and families. That is why the 2010 and 2011 parents are upset.

Well said and glad you included the 2010 RL. This poster has it is exactly correct.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2010s Union had a roster of 15 through the season and two players left (did not travel to Seattle) so they were down to 13. No coach in their right mind goes to playoffs with 12 field players (one of the 13 is a goalie). Made sense to bring 2011s as subs. Had Brave 2010s not made playoffs at the last minute, Union would have rostered a few Brave players on their team for playoffs instead.

No one is saying they should not take additional players to add to the 12 players. But the issue is that those players were not fit to play as they were just coming from injury and the other player bearly made the 2011 team. There were other 2011 or 2010RL players that were in form, hence the favourtism, politics and an insult to those 2011/2010RL players and families. That is why the 2010 and 2011 parents are upset.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the bargaining chip post. Parents complain, coaches play favorites, its not so simply as just let them play when there is so much bias and favoritism. This applies to Union 2010/2011 soon to be FVU but also many many other teams. You all know it.

I am sure coaches play favorites -- the better players. I really doubt there is much if any bias or favoritism on local teams and we have been in a couple of clubs. You do just let them play and stay out of the way. If they are good it will not matter. Let it be them and not you.

Anonymous wrote:How about we use Bethesda 10a as a measuring stick later this week. So Bethesda should lose maybe 8-0 if all is equal? Ok, maybe 7-0.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the bargaining chip post. Parents complain, coaches play favorites, its not so simply as just let them play when there is so much bias and favoritism. This applies to Union 2010/2011 soon to be FVU but also many many other teams. You all know it.

I am sure coaches play favorites -- the better players. I really doubt there is much if any bias or favoritism on local teams and we have been in a couple of clubs. You do just let them play and stay out of the way. If they are good it will not matter. Let it be them and not you.

Have you not been reading the previous posts. These players were unfit due to injuries so how are they better players? Its one thing if this was some local tournament and they are experimenting. This is at the the national level and hence the embarrasing 10-0 outcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the bargaining chip post. Parents complain, coaches play favorites, its not so simply as just let them play when there is so much bias and favoritism. This applies to Union 2010/2011 soon to be FVU but also many many other teams. You all know it.

I am sure coaches play favorites -- the better players. I really doubt there is much if any bias or favoritism on local teams and we have been in a couple of clubs. You do just let them play and stay out of the way. If they are good it will not matter. Let it be them and not you.