|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 7, 2012 17:25:56 GMT -5
basically at this point, you'd think the team mentally has assumed Thompson will be the setter. To do otherwise would be poor preparation.
as to what the US team 'leaks' out regarding Berg for gamesmanship, that's secondary.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Aug 7, 2012 18:23:56 GMT -5
After the match, McCutcheon said he was "still optimistic" about Berg. Depends on how the word "still" is parsed, however, as to how encouraged one might be by this. He also said he was "very happy" for Thompson and that she "played great." See: www.fivb.org/viewPressRelease.asp?No=36434&Language=en
|
|
|
Post by vball20 on Aug 7, 2012 18:28:23 GMT -5
I think the connection between Thompson and Hooker is way off. Also Thompson set some very tight balls to the left-sides.
I'm still not confident with Thompson setting.
|
|
|
Post by austintatious on Aug 7, 2012 18:44:17 GMT -5
I think the connection between Thompson and Hooker is way off. Also Thompson set some very tight balls to the left-sides. I'm still not confident with Thompson setting. Understand the concern, she will not be Lindsay but she just needs to be Courtney. We have a tendency to judge every play of a reserve instead of the overall performance. LIndsay probably makes the same number of non-perfect sets but we don't notice it as much because we focus on the game. When a replacement is in, her less than stellar plays tend to be noticed more. Go CT, do great.
|
|
|
Post by Sbilo on Aug 7, 2012 18:52:41 GMT -5
"Team USA confirmed their intention to go for Olympic glory in London by cruising to a quick 3-0 win over the Dominican Republic showing great consistency and quality even though they were missing their regular setter and captain Lindsey Berg, who is nursing an injury but will be back in action for the semis. The USA will be challenged there by Korea that anchored by their star Kim Yeon-Koung edged Italy 3-1 (18-25, 25-21, 25-20, and 25-18) to return back to the top four after claiming bronze back at the Montreal Games in 1976." www.fivb.org/viewPressRelease.asp?No=36439&Language=enSo?
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Aug 7, 2012 18:56:06 GMT -5
"Team USA confirmed their intention to go for Olympic glory in London by cruising to a quick 3-0 win over the Dominican Republic showing great consistency and quality even though they were missing their regular setter and captain Lindsey Berg, who is nursing an injury but will be back in action for the semis. The USA will be challenged there by Korea that anchored by their star Kim Yeon-Koung edged Italy 3-1 (18-25, 25-21, 25-20, and 25-18) to return back to the top four after claiming bronze back at the Montreal Games in 1976." www.fivb.org/viewPressRelease.asp?No=36439&Language=enSo? The FIVB does not know this....they are just inferring.
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Aug 7, 2012 19:15:54 GMT -5
I think the connection between Thompson and Hooker is way off. Also Thompson set some very tight balls to the left-sides. I'm still not confident with Thompson setting. Let's be honest. while Hugh's probably the best U.S. National Team coach ever, he rolled the dice in his decision to take CT over Glass, gambling that he would only need CT for the double sub role which she seemed to be better suited. Gotta say I'd feel more comfortable with Glass taking over for an injured Berg given what she's done for the NT in a starting role the last several years. While it seems like I'm second guessing him, I'm not since I thought he made a reasonable gamble that Berg would not get hurt and the team would benefit more by bringing CT. But let's hope either Berg can go or CT rises to the challenge or there will be some questions.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Aug 7, 2012 19:43:57 GMT -5
That's why Hugh is given the responsibility that he is given. Make the call.
Sent from my iPad using ProBoards app
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Aug 7, 2012 19:53:34 GMT -5
Let's be honest. while Hugh's probably the best U.S. National Team coach ever, he rolled the dice in his decision to take CT over Glass, gambling that he would only need CT for the double sub role which she seemed to be better suited. Don't think it's that simple or clear cut - if you're looking for a plug-n-play replacement for Berg, that's Thompson, not Glass.
|
|
|
Post by Reach on Aug 7, 2012 20:27:50 GMT -5
Ohh lord. Leave Glass out of this. What has Thompson done that is bad or questionable. She set a fine match, connected well with the middles, better than Berg has, and hasn't been as good with Hooker. I think we'll see some improvement with those sets to Hooker by the next match. Communication is all it takes. Courtney can do anything. But by all means, keep saying she can't do it, because she tends to always prove the nay'sayers wrong!
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Aug 7, 2012 20:31:52 GMT -5
We should leave Glass out of this.. it's not fair to her, or the setters at the OGs.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Aug 7, 2012 20:34:49 GMT -5
I think the connection between Thompson and Hooker is way off. Also Thompson set some very tight balls to the left-sides. I'm still not confident with Thompson setting. Let's be honest. while Hugh's probably the best U.S. National Team coach ever, he rolled the dice in his decision to take CT over Glass, gambling that he would only need CT for the double sub role which she seemed to be better suited. Gotta say I'd feel more comfortable with Glass taking over for an injured Berg given what she's done for the NT in a starting role the last several years. While it seems like I'm second guessing him, I'm not since I thought he made a reasonable gamble that Berg would not get hurt and the team would benefit more by bringing CT. But let's hope either Berg can go or CT rises to the challenge or there will be some questions. What kind of "questions" will there be? That hardly makes sense. When you got in your car this morning and drove to work you rolled the dice that you wouldn't get hit by a tractor trailer and killed on the highway. Given the information you had at the time, that was a very reasonable assumption. What would have been entirely unreasonable, given the information you had at the time, would have been to sit in the car in your driveway and call your boss to say, "I've decided not to come to work today because I might get in an accident on the way there". If the team gets swept in their next match I won't have "some questions" about the choice of backup setter. More like "some questions" about how a TEAM with this level of ball control and attack/block potential failed to rise to the occasion as a team. I hope you are not planning to socialize the successes but individualize the blame? Let me ask everyone -- if Thompson sets the rest of the way to a Gold medal, are you going to jump on VolleyTalk and praise Hugh's roster choices (including that of backup setter) with the same intensity that you'd post "some questions" about his choices if they don't win Gold?
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Aug 7, 2012 20:50:43 GMT -5
I hatre it when people play the "what if" game. The die is cast, whatever happens will happen, you can't live your life worrying over what could have happened and beat yourself or Hugh's head with what if's.
I am sure San Diego would have liked a do-over with the Ryan Leaf choice, or Portland with the Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan pick, but they got over it. Some people here need to do the same.
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Aug 7, 2012 21:19:24 GMT -5
You must have not spent much time in Portland - not sure they are over the Sam Bowie pick yet. This is a message board for fans of a sport. Part of what fans do is ask the "what if" questions and sift through the pros and cons of various coaching decisions. There is nothing wrong with that and the players and coaches are all professionals who can handle the scrutiny on some stupid message board.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Aug 7, 2012 21:43:19 GMT -5
You must have not spent much time in Portland - not sure they are over the Sam Bowie pick yet. This is a message board for fans of a sport. Part of what fans do is ask the "what if" questions and sift through the pros and cons of various coaching decisions. There is nothing wrong with that and the players and coaches are all professionals who can handle the scrutiny on some stupid message board. There's nothing wrong with discussion, but to me it's the tone of your comment, not the content. You want to just have a nice simple discussion about the roster? No problem - had at least a dozen threads about that over the past six weeks. But perhaps you don't realize that your post didn't sound like someone just wanted to have a whimsical little Internet chat to pass the time. Instead it sounds a lot like someone who sees a chance to preemptively establish their I-Told-You-So position for later activation.
|
|