|
|
Post by kokyu on Aug 10, 2016 10:09:37 GMT -5
Casey's defense and setting are crappy too.
|
|
|
|
Post by turk182 on Aug 10, 2016 10:10:07 GMT -5
Going to bad side down 10-5. Doesn't look good.
|
|
|
|
Post by floridaLOG on Aug 10, 2016 10:10:39 GMT -5
I don't understand why they allowed the challenge can anyone explain that
|
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 10, 2016 10:11:12 GMT -5
Both of them are. Casey guesses because he is slow. He also doesn't dig driven balls well. The past year or so, as Jake's block has become less and less of a point scoring force, they have made a corresponding drop in their finishes.
Casey needs someone who isgoing to score a ton at the net.
|
|
|
|
Post by turk182 on Aug 10, 2016 10:11:48 GMT -5
Btw, 200 posts in seven years has to be a record- right? Congrats to me!
|
|
|
|
Post by turk182 on Aug 10, 2016 10:14:20 GMT -5
Wonger just made a good point. The challenge system, being so new, is still flawed. In my opinion, no system should be "new" for the Olympics.
|
|
|
|
Post by trianglevolleyball on Aug 10, 2016 10:14:33 GMT -5
Casey and Jake should be looking good, points wise, by taking this to three- yes? After all, the gave Qatar the beat down in two. It's not about points, the commentators are wrong. It's whoever won h2h who gets ranked higher if two teams are tied. So Gibb/Patterson need the Qatar team to end up 1-2 rather than the Austrian one. And they'll still have to play a lucky loser match even if that happens. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 10, 2016 10:15:21 GMT -5
Watching Spain celebrate like Mike Dodd at Seal Beach over winning this garbage match is very funny. Especially because both teams probably make it through anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 10, 2016 10:17:48 GMT -5
Wonger just made a good point. The challenge system, being so new, is still flawed. In my opinion, no system should be "new" for the Olympics. The challenge system is dumb. In almost every match teams are using it as a de facto timeout. To the extent its needed at all (its not) give each team one that they only lose if they challenge unsuccessfully. Neither of those teams deserve to advance. |
|
|
|
Post by floridaLOG on Aug 10, 2016 10:17:51 GMT -5
is no one else mad about why the challenge was allowed??? They challenge a reach over (not a challengeable call), and it they challenged after play continued not right when it happened (also not allowed). It seemed the ref was communicating with someone via that mic so why did no one in the chain say wait a second on either of those points and say we cannot overturn the call? It was a huge momentum shift for the game and a two point swing. I'd be pissed if I was Patterson too.
|
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Aug 10, 2016 10:21:26 GMT -5
Casey and Jake should be looking good, points wise, by taking this to three- yes? After all, the gave Qatar the beat down in two. It's not about points, the commentators are wrong. It's whoever won h2h who gets ranked higher if two teams are tied. So Gibb/Patterson need the Qatar team to end up 1-2 rather than the Austrian one. And they'll still have to play a lucky loser match even if that happens. Nope, always about the points: In case of a tie in the pools (match points) during the round robin, the following rules will apply: Between two teams: The team with higher rally points ratio in the matches between all teams in the pool, is ranked higher. If a tie still exists by rally points ratio then the teams have the same position in ranking. Between three teams: If three teams have a tie in the main points, then the top teams are determined by the rally points ratio in the matches between the three tied teams. If a tie still exists then the teams have the same position in the ranking. Between four teams: The ranking is determined by the rally points ratio between all teams in the pool. If a tie still exists then the teams have the same position in the ranking. In the case of a tie in the pools (match points) at the end of the round robin, the following rules will apply: Between two teams: The team with higher rally points ratio in the matches between all teams in the pool, is ranked higher. If a tie still exists, then the tie is determined by the tournament seeding established at the General Technical Meeting (the better seed of the tied teams is the top ranked team, i.e. seed 6 is ranked higher than seed 7). Between three teams: Teams are ranked by the rally points ratios in the matches between the three tied teams. If a tie still exists then the teams still tied are ranked by the rally points ratio between all teams in the pool. If a tie still exists then the teams still tied are determined by the tournament seeding established at the General Technical Meeting (the better seed of the tied teams ranked higher, i.e. seed 12 is ranked higher than 13). |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 10, 2016 10:26:06 GMT -5
is no one else mad about why the challenge was allowed??? They challenge a reach over (not a challengeable call), and it they challenged after play continued not right when it happened (also not allowed). It seemed the ref was communicating with someone via that mic so why did no one in the chain say wait a second on either of those points and say we cannot overturn the call? It was a huge momentum shift for the game and a two point swing. I'd be pissed if I was Patterson too. That was definitely the turning point in the match but even so its hard to argue that you lost because a point you didnt deserve was taken away, when you go on to lose the 15 pt game by ten points. Lack of mental toughness by the US there. |
|
|
|
Post by bvbllr on Aug 10, 2016 10:34:23 GMT -5
So ranking between 2 teams is always based on points? Sets and H2H don't matter at all?
|
|
|
|
Post by BigTenVball on Aug 10, 2016 10:36:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bvbllr on Aug 10, 2016 10:37:16 GMT -5
Which would mean they will still advance if Austria wins - or if Qatar wins by quite a bit.
|
|
