so embarassing

Sorry for the long lay off in posting here. The ramp up of AYLSoccer, on which I'm a reporter has distracted me. AYL will be my primary posting location. But, I will also occasionally have offerings here.

OK, last night's match against Chivas USA has me despondent. I mean, it is one thing to lose a match but to play it close. It is another to be pummeled. RSL was pummeled totally. Rimando's play on the first goal was bizarre (some blame Stewart for that, but I see it as Rimando's fault, totally). Stewart was beaten in a foot race and that was terrible, but at least I can respect a team beating you on talent in that way. If that had been the first goal, then it wouldn't have taken the heart out of the team. Don't get me wrong, they played well in many ways, lots of frantic attacking in the second half. But, when you add it up, they defense was too porous and the finishing imprecise.

A 2-1 loss would have respectable. The 4-0 (really, it was 3-0, that last goal being a gimme from being nearly 10 forward) loss was just embarrassing.

And, the official not redcarding the foul that may end the career of Andy Williams was pathetic. Also uncalled were two penalties in the box that should have been PKs for RSL.

That brings me to my overriding point: Soccer needs two field officials. I am watching the Colorado-Dallas game right now where a hand-ball was not called that resulted in a goal by Colorado. The CR was at least 60 yards away. Who knows where the touchline official was, but the arm it hit was on the far side. A second CR would have been minimally 30 yards closer and on the other side of the player and probably seen it.

Bottom line: More accurate refereeing results, after a few months for players to adjust, in superior and more skilled play that infringes on the rules less. It is counter-intuitive, but has been demonstrated very well when basketball went to it a few years back.

People respond with greater adherence to rules when they know the rules will be fairly enforced and there is a high degree of being caught on infringement. Lacking either of those things and people break rules to the extent they can figure out ways to do it. They do it because they know the other guys are getting advantages from it. And, they do it because they know that they are unlikely to be accurately caught and will be mistakenly blamed in other cases, so why not break them?

Rant over, thanks for reading, comment freely.

Referees inconsistency documented

A study by a team of statisticians from across the world has found evidence for inconsistency and home team bias by referees in EPL soccer matches. The EPL is arguably the finest league of clubs in the world with, presumably, the finest officials in the world. If there is evidence of problems for that league, what does it suggest for the MLS? Certainly, the MLS should have at least comparable problems of inconsistency, probably worse.

The study looks to have a solid theoretical foundation, based on the concepts of 'criminal economy.' That is, what are the effects of increased surveillance and new rules (of enforcement, intervention, or definition of crime) on undesirable behavior? In this case, the undesirable behavior are the fouls being called by the officials. Inconsistency tends to produce more misbehavior because it is unclear if or when a given level of infringement will result in any particular sanction.

What is the solution? Probably, the solution is the same as has happened in NCAA (American college) basketball when there was a change to two on-court officials. There was a reduction in the total number of fouls called. The psychologist in me suggests that having an additional authority on the court should cause the officials to be aware that there is a peer who is in a position of judgment of the same event and to consider how they might call the play. Also, it will simply be easier to be consistent because a reduction in the average distance of referees from potentially infringing events. These natural effects should even out inconsistencies somewhat. Therefore, an additional field referee with equal rights and responsibilities should improve the quality of the game. Given the huge effects that any individual call can have on the game, particularly penalty kicks, this should make a big difference in the fairness of calls.

Some would suggest that adding another referee runs the risk of more fouls being called, inhibiting the flow of the beautiful game. But, note the actual effect in NCAA basketball, according to the above article, was a reduction in the number of fouls called. This, presumably, because players realized that they were more likely to be accurately caught when pushing the limits of the rules. If the same effect happened in soccer, we would see fewer interruptions for fouls, a more flowing and more fair game.

In a related issue, I also think that the keeping of time should move solely to the official now referred to as the 4th referee. They already decide on a 'minimum' amount of added time, why not have them decide when to call half and full time? This would reduce the number of issues the CRs need to deal with and increase their peer accountability and the game should improve through better refereeing.

U of U

So, DW and I went up to the U to watch the Utah women's team play UNLV for the Mountain West Conference championship, this afternoon. Utah is ranked 13th in the country by Soccer Times, 10th in the Adidas (USA Today) poll. We expected them to take care of business nicely. What we saw was a very chippy first half, so much that we nearly decided we had other obligations for the rest of the afternoon at half time.

But, we stayed, and were at least rewarded with a second half and extra time that at least looked like soccer with passes connecting on occasional diagonal runs, triangular passing, and well executed settling and footwork. But, there was a severe lack of attacking soccer, particularly by Utah. Utah would get the ball in front of the goal and just not attempt a shot. The feeling was of a team looking for perfection rather than opportunity. Granted, UNLV was packing the box with half their team, making any chance to find space seriously difficult.

There was a feeling of impending doom the entire game mainly because of the lack of taking opportunity by Utah. UNLV nearly scored on an own goal that Utah's skilled goalie just tipped over the net.

So, after full time, and 20 minutes of sudden death overtime, we were in penalty kicks. They went to 5-5 before Utah failed to score on the 6th attempt. UNLV converted their 6th to take the win. As it was, UNLV should have won on the 5th when Utah was blocked. But, the CR ruled the Keeper had come off her line early and allowed a second chance. I saw no evidence of the keeper leaving early.

So, there you have it. Utah loses. Utah will still go to the NCAA tournament, as will BYU. But, the MWC Championship slipped through their hands to land at the feet of UNLV, a team that did play better on Saturday.

RSL really needed a win

But, only took the draw. What this means is RSL is not in control of its own destiny for the finally match of the season at Chivas, USA. To advance to the playoffs, RSL must win and Colorado must lose. That is all.

Two Games to Go! Playoffs?

Can RSL make the playoffs? They are not locked out yet, even though only earning 1 point in Kansas City on the 30th. With Chivas and Colorado losing, RSL can even finish as high as 3rd place! RSL can be eliminated next week if it is 3 or more points behind both Chivas and Colorado after all the games are decided. It would appear that trailing by 3 points could still be surmounted, but it probably can't. A tie in standings with Colorado resolves against RSL. A tie in standings against Chivas probably resolves in Chivas's favor due to goal differential.

One important outcome for this week was Houston's clinching a playoff spot. That means there are only two spots left, 3rd and 4th place. All 4 remaining teams in the Western Conference are theoretically in the running for those two spots. RSL's single point against KC is also important. Due to Colorado failing to gain a point, it puts RSL only 2 points behind.

There are 81 different standings that can occur for the West after all the October 7 games are decided. Of those 81 outcomes, 27 result in RSL being eliminated from the playoffs. They can be condensed to the following: If RSL loses to Houston, it is eliminated if Colorado Wins or Draws; or if RSL Draws with Houston, RSL is eliminated only if Colorado wins. Another way of putting it is, win by Colorado puts RSL in a must win situation. Draw by Colorado puts RSL in a do not lose situation.

A win by RSL keeps them in the playoff hunt regardless of how any other team does.

A win by Chivas assures them of a playoff spot and prevents RSL from attaining 3rd place.

That's all from the math. What about the psychology?

Houston is our next opponent and they secured their playoff position on the 30th. There is every reason to believe that they will come in without as much motivation. I think the chances for gaining 3 against Houston on the 7th at home is very good, about 80%. RSL has shown it can score without Cunningham. Harris, while still looking clumsy at times, is definitely improving. When the play requires just one touch or when a body is not put on him, he has a high probability of making a solid play with the ball now. That was not true early in the season. Kreis has shown he can't be ignored, either.

Chivas' chances of pulling a victory are not high. They are at KC which is tied for the 4th playoff spot in the East. Colorado is in the same spot, except as host to the other team vying for the 4th Eastern playoff spot, NYRB. Both Chivas and Colorado are coming off loses. RSL can handle Chivas winning or losing, because losing puts them possibly in reach and winning makes them clinch a playoff spot. Either are OK, though I think we prefer Chivas to win. RSL really needs to have Colorado lose. A win by Colorado puts RSL in a must win situation on the 6th.

Assuming that RSL is not eliminated this week, what about the final week. Probably a win will be needed on the final week. Most of the 54 remaining standings outcomes going into the final week show RSL needing at least a win to advance, though a few show only a draw necessary. Thing is, we will be going to Chivas, which has two psychological elements of note. Firstly, they will have a good chance of having clinched their playoff spot. That will reduce their motivation. Indeed, the coach may even decide to sit their strongest players in anticipation of the playoffs. On the other hand, it is the original rivalry for RSL, the expansion rivalry. While not as important to them as the Galaxy, nor as important to us as the Rocky Mountain Cup, there is some extra flavor to the match. I think Chivas being let down due to (likely clinching) gives RSL about a 60% chance for a win that last week.

Therefore, I 'guesstimate' RSL's chances of making the playoffs, even from their current 5th place and disadvantaged tie break positions, to be about 40%. There are just a lot of ways for this to break right for RSL. Not bad, actually. Certainly could happen.

Analysis of Jamie Time

Clearly we've seen a qualitative change in games when Jamie Watson enters the game. Spark. Speed. Etc. Has this translated into outcomes? The effect of Jamie Watson entering games is unclear.

While the recent evidence of two wins with all goals occurring after Watson's entry (DC United & @ Columbus Crew), that is only suggestive.

One trend is clear: Ellinger is putting Watson into games at earlier times. Watson's first entry was in injury time. His most recent entry was the 61st minute. It has been a steady trend of earlier and earlier entries, at least, when he comes in, which has also increased in frequency. Indeed, for 5 of the first 6 matches, Jamie wasn't even on the roster to be eligible to be called upon. Since then, he's been on the roster for all but one match.

But, what is the measure of success? Wins? Draws? The record for games in which Jamie appears is not meaningfully different from the record for games in which Jamie doesn't appear.
With Jamie: 4-1-3 Without Jamie 3-4-7
While that looks promising, it is not different from chance variation.

What about goals per game, because Jamie appears to be an offensive spark? RSL has a mean goal rate of .013 goals per minute of play, approximately. Without Jamie in the game, that drops to .008 goals per minute and with Jamie in the game it jumps by a factor of about 3.5 to .027 goals per minute. However, the variability is so high that the difference is not statistically signficant, not even close.

Probably the most definitive thing that can be said is that Ellinger has increasingly trusted time to Watson, and more often.

More data is needed for us to mathematically validate the qualitative observation that when Jamie enters he gives a spark to the team and causes me to cry

More Jamie Time!

More Jamie Time!

While the spark of Jamie Watson wasn't obviously noticeable when he was subbed into the lineup in last nights victory over Columbus, there is no doubt that he was important to it. As the chances for RSL grew more dangerous, his name appeared on the announces lips more often or he was in the camera's view. Watson got dangerous touches and attracted attention.

It was Jamie Time!

Saw a statement by someone who had figured that with Watson on the field the team is many times more productive in terms of goals scored per minute of play.

I believe it, but maybe because I love the energy that lights up the field when Watson takes the stage.

But, it may also be an artifact of the fact that Watson rarely starts, usually comes in about the time that the team scores. Cause and effect can't really be established. We have temporal precedence, but not a definitely observed link between Watson's actions and the team's scoring outcomes (Watson has not scored many goals, nor does he have many assists).

Houston visits next... at least now, the season is interesting!

More Jamie Time!