|
Post by socalplayer on Mar 6, 2024 11:09:54 GMT -5
TKN lose in 3 ;( Taryn was too casual in the third. They could've won but Italy wanted it more. I hate that saying
|
|
|
Post by keeweekid on Mar 6, 2024 11:30:51 GMT -5
what can they do. Not play/enter and not go to Paris because they didn’t get enough points. It’s a system. And a process. My question is how many times can a team do that and not be heavily penalised or refused an entry? What’s the nitty gritty on the regulations. NED did the same to qualify for world champs it happens. Unfair to fans but not players who are fulfilling the remit and legislation. Everyone will adapt as the rules will to try and avoid this. Having more events to qualify means a team has to compete in both years relatively successfully to qualify (1999/2000 two Czech teams hardly played ahead of Sydney but qualified in 99. More or less) The solution keeps evolving…? Id say the problem is in what the tour is trying to solve. Instead of focusing on the stupid Olympic qualification system, focus on putting on a product that fans want to see. Is this the Aussies fault? No they are gaming the system in a way they know will be permitted. That said, what should happen is that whoever is in charge of the tour should step in and suspend them for a couple of months, and dock all their entry points to send a message. Seems like a solution would be a PUP status. I think the NFL has this term, Physically Unable to Perform. If a team can naturally qualify for the event based off of their rankings, but are unable to perform due to health yet want to meet the 12 entry quota, they could submit a PUP entry. They get credit for the event, receive no prize money, and get the lowest amount of points offered (in this case 340 points). But at least they leave an opening for a team that can perform/play. Without it, the alternative is this where they just show up and forfeit everything… Get last place and 340 points. Create a PUP list but only teams that would have naturally qualified can use PUP list. Win/win as the team gets credit for a tournament to count towards the 12 required, and the tournament is able to field a full field of teams. My guess is, it would rarely be used but beneficial in situations like this.
|
|
|
Post by beachcoach on Mar 6, 2024 14:05:33 GMT -5
Id say the problem is in what the tour is trying to solve. Instead of focusing on the stupid Olympic qualification system, focus on putting on a product that fans want to see. Is this the Aussies fault? No they are gaming the system in a way they know will be permitted. That said, what should happen is that whoever is in charge of the tour should step in and suspend them for a couple of months, and dock all their entry points to send a message. Seems like a solution would be a PUP status. I think the NFL has this term, Physically Unable to Perform. If a team can naturally qualify for the event based off of their rankings, but are unable to perform due to health yet want to meet the 12 entry quota, they could submit a PUP entry. They get credit for the event, receive no prize money, and get the lowest amount of points offered (in this case 340 points). But at least they leave an opening for a team that can perform/play. Without it, the alternative is this where they just show up and forfeit everything… Get last place and 340 points. Create a PUP list but only teams that would have naturally qualified can use PUP list. Win/win as the team gets credit for a tournament to count towards the 12 required, and the tournament is able to field a full field of teams. My guess is, it would rarely be used but beneficial in situations like this. like that solution a lot!
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 6, 2024 14:28:56 GMT -5
Id say the problem is in what the tour is trying to solve. Instead of focusing on the stupid Olympic qualification system, focus on putting on a product that fans want to see. Is this the Aussies fault? No they are gaming the system in a way they know will be permitted. That said, what should happen is that whoever is in charge of the tour should step in and suspend them for a couple of months, and dock all their entry points to send a message. Seems like a solution would be a PUP status. I think the NFL has this term, Physically Unable to Perform. If a team can naturally qualify for the event based off of their rankings, but are unable to perform due to health yet want to meet the 12 entry quota, they could submit a PUP entry. They get credit for the event, receive no prize money, and get the lowest amount of points offered (in this case 340 points). But at least they leave an opening for a team that can perform/play. Without it, the alternative is this where they just show up and forfeit everything… Get last place and 340 points. Create a PUP list but only teams that would have naturally qualified can use PUP list. Win/win as the team gets credit for a tournament to count towards the 12 required, and the tournament is able to field a full field of teams. My guess is, it would rarely be used but beneficial in situations like this. Perfect solution. Serves fans, players everyone. Really glad Esme got a win over Brazil. I am rooting for Joannnouk, but if they broke the virtual tie because of the Aussie forfeit that would have been pretty lousy. Now both sisters should advance
|
|
|
Post by lantern on Mar 6, 2024 14:55:51 GMT -5
TKN lose in 3 ;( Taryn was too casual in the third. They could've won but Italy wanted it more. I hate that saying Had a chance to watch game 3. TKN got off to a slow start then battled back to 10-10. Then 2 more to make it 12-10 and you think its over. After 12-10: Kloth serving error, Kloth hitting error, Kloth tight set that Nuss had to joust and ended up with a net touch, Kloth blocked on a good set from Nuss, then after a Nuss kill Italy sided out to win. Neither seemed to play with any fire, but the errorfest by Kloth gave away the game.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Mar 6, 2024 15:50:02 GMT -5
TKN lose in 3 ;( Taryn was too casual in the third. They could've won but Italy wanted it more. I hate that saying I agree, I have it on 100% authority that TKN wanted it more than ITA.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Mar 6, 2024 15:54:12 GMT -5
Had a chance to watch game 3. TKN got off to a slow start then battled back to 10-10. Then 2 more to make it 12-10 and you think its over. After 12-10: Kloth serving error, Kloth hitting error, Kloth tight set that Nuss had to joust and ended up with a net touch, Kloth blocked on a good set from Nuss, then after a Nuss kill Italy sided out to win. Neither seemed to play with any fire, but the errorfest by Kloth gave away the game. not exactly. Kloth's tight set was b/c Nuss' pass put Kloth into net touch danger and Kloth had to dig it out, so to speak. Getting blocked is not exactly an error either. I'm not disagreeing on the first two.
|
|
|
Post by houdini on Mar 6, 2024 15:57:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by burnabyjo on Mar 6, 2024 17:33:07 GMT -5
that's crazy, I didn't watch the game so don't know the context but seeing that Stam was 10 kills and zero errors in set 1 and continued to serve her for another 6k 0e in set 2? That's pretty ridiculous haha
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Mar 6, 2024 17:49:48 GMT -5
For how we spend 2 full seasons worrying about Olympic qualifying, it's really bizarre how hard it is to follow. Like, who is actually in the running for the last few qualifying spots? It's kind of easy to figure out who's there after the country quotas are removed, but then the varying # of tourneys played makes you have to look way down the list and do math.
Also, I see Brunner/Huberli are #3 for SUI right now - primarily due to only having 9 results. I assume they'll qualify easily once they show up to a few more Elite 16s, but it's hard to actually quantify (or figure out what the other two Swiss teams would have to do to overcome them). It's probably also a sad indictment that we're 6 months away from the end of the qualification period, and figuring out SUI #2 seems to be the only exciting result outstanding that matters?
|
|
|
Post by trianglevolleyball on Mar 6, 2024 17:59:38 GMT -5
For how we spend 2 full seasons worrying about Olympic qualifying, it's really bizarre how hard it is to follow. Like, who is actually in the running for the last few qualifying spots? It's kind of easy to figure out who's there after the country quotas are removed, but then the varying # of tourneys played makes you have to look way down the list and do math. Also, I see Brunner/Huberli are #3 for SUI right now - primarily due to only having 9 results. I assume they'll qualify easily once they show up to a few more Elite 16s, but it's hard to actually quantify (or figure out what the other two Swiss teams would have to do to overcome them). It's probably also a sad indictment that we're 6 months away from the end of the qualification period, and figuring out SUI #2 seems to be the only exciting result outstanding that matters? Yeah, totally bizarre that a couple country spots are the only interesting things. It’s partially a function of how both tours drop off heavily after the top 10 so no one really cares who sneaks in at 17. Also, I’d rather just see the three Swiss duke it out in a round Robin rather than their result be determined by who played the most/right tournaments.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Mar 6, 2024 18:28:03 GMT -5
For how we spend 2 full seasons worrying about Olympic qualifying, it's really bizarre how hard it is to follow. Like, who is actually in the running for the last few qualifying spots? It's kind of easy to figure out who's there after the country quotas are removed, but then the varying # of tourneys played makes you have to look way down the list and do math. Also, I see Brunner/Huberli are #3 for SUI right now - primarily due to only having 9 results. I assume they'll qualify easily once they show up to a few more Elite 16s, but it's hard to actually quantify (or figure out what the other two Swiss teams would have to do to overcome them). It's probably also a sad indictment that we're 6 months away from the end of the qualification period, and figuring out SUI #2 seems to be the only exciting result outstanding that matters? Yeah, totally bizarre that a couple country spots are the only interesting things. It’s partially a function of how both tours drop off heavily after the top 10 so no one really cares who sneaks in at 17. Also, I’d rather just see the three Swiss duke it out in a round Robin rather than their result be determined by who played the most/right tournaments. I know the IOC is trying to streamline the games. I don't think it would be bad if they limited the field to 16 teams per gender. 4 pools of 4 - Top 2 in each pool make the quarters. Would make pool play less boring/meaningless than it currently is, and would make qualifying more exciting too.
|
|
|
Post by ajm on Mar 6, 2024 19:05:54 GMT -5
For how we spend 2 full seasons worrying about Olympic qualifying, it's really bizarre how hard it is to follow. Like, who is actually in the running for the last few qualifying spots? It's kind of easy to figure out who's there after the country quotas are removed, but then the varying # of tourneys played makes you have to look way down the list and do math. Also, I see Brunner/Huberli are #3 for SUI right now - primarily due to only having 9 results. I assume they'll qualify easily once they show up to a few more Elite 16s, but it's hard to actually quantify (or figure out what the other two Swiss teams would have to do to overcome them). It's probably also a sad indictment that we're 6 months away from the end of the qualification period, and figuring out SUI #2 seems to be the only exciting result outstanding that matters? Yeah, totally bizarre that a couple country spots are the only interesting things. It’s partially a function of how both tours drop off heavily after the top 10 so no one really cares who sneaks in at 17. Also, I’d rather just see the three Swiss duke it out in a round Robin rather than their result be determined by who played the most/right tournaments. I disagree that the SUI and GER spots are the only interesting things. I'd say spots 15-17 are very much still up for grabs among at least a half dozen teams. Moreno/Alvarez, Placette/Richard, McBain/Pavan, Paulikiene/Raupelyte, Ahtiainen/Lahti, Gruszczynska/Wachowicz, Hermannova/Stochlova, and the Klingers are all still very much in the mix but none have their spots locked up. Plus, if Placette/Richard get in on points the French will be able to give their host country spot to Chamereau/Vieira. None of those teams who entered Doha qualified for the main draw, just another sign that those final spots are very likely going to come down to that last event in Ostrava.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Mar 6, 2024 19:08:59 GMT -5
Yeah, totally bizarre that a couple country spots are the only interesting things. It’s partially a function of how both tours drop off heavily after the top 10 so no one really cares who sneaks in at 17. Also, I’d rather just see the three Swiss duke it out in a round Robin rather than their result be determined by who played the most/right tournaments. I disagree that the SUI and GER spots are the only interesting things. I'd say spots 15-17 are very much still up for grabs among at least a half dozen teams. Moreno/Alvarez, Placette/Richard, McBain/Pavan, Paulikiene/Raupelyte, Ahtiainen/Lahti, Gruszczynska/Wachowicz, Hermannova/Stochlova, and the Klingers are all still very much in the mix but none have their spots locked up. Plus, if Placette/Richard get in on points the French will be able to give their host country spot to Chamereau/Vieira. None of those teams who entered Doha qualified for the main draw, just another sign that those final spots are very likely going to come down to that last event in Ostrava. How do I get that from looking at this? www.fivb.com/en/beachvolleyball/rankingwomen
|
|
|
Post by pelican on Mar 6, 2024 19:12:09 GMT -5
Yeah, totally bizarre that a couple country spots are the only interesting things. It’s partially a function of how both tours drop off heavily after the top 10 so no one really cares who sneaks in at 17. Also, I’d rather just see the three Swiss duke it out in a round Robin rather than their result be determined by who played the most/right tournaments. I know the IOC is trying to streamline the games. I don't think it would be bad if they limited the field to 16 teams per gender. 4 pools of 4 - Top 2 in each pool make the quarters. Would make pool play less boring/meaningless than it currently is, and would make qualifying more exciting too. But then if you still have spots allotted so that every continent gets a team in, you're probably making one group (whichever one ends up with an African team) much weaker than the others. I personally can't stand all this "streamline the games" nonsense. Just rotate between truly huge cities that can handle a gigantic event without having to build tons of new venues (Paris, London, LA, Beijing, Tokyo) and don't worry so much about trying to trim the Olympics down.
|
|