PatAg said:

---

Great header from Dest to Arriola, great cross to Morris, excellent service to Zardes who drives it in

---

Ban Cow Gas said:

---

I agree with the *****ing, but it's nice to be up 2-0. Both things can be true.

---

PatAg said:

---

who?mikejones said:

---

No regrets i didnt turn the game on

---

well , we're up 2-0 so

---

RealTalk said:

---

Guys, 2-0 is the most dangerous lead in soccer.

---

boogieman said:

---

Is it enough to just win tonight? Do we need a certain goal differential? What helps us advance to the next round?

---

PatAg said:

---

boogieman said:

---

Is it enough to just win tonight? Do we need a certain goal differential? What helps us advance to the next round?

---

im pretty sure we need to win both games and gain at least +2 in differential

---

boogieman said:

---

Is Canada tanking?

---

deadbq03 said:

---

PatAg said:

---

boogieman said:

---

Is it enough to just win tonight? Do we need a certain goal differential? What helps us advance to the next round?

---

im pretty sure we need to win both games and gain at least +2 in differential

---

Have they already played Cuba twice?

---

PatAg said:

---

I like Dest going for goal there, that pass would have been very difficult to make to McKennie compared to the opening he had on goal

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Brooks needs more apps. He's probably the worst so far tonight and that is crazy.

---

PatAg said:

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Brooks needs more apps. He's probably the worst so far tonight and that is crazy.

---

he's also physically dominating them when the ball is near them. was out hurt for quite some time until recently

---

PatAg said:

---

we need our resident ref to come in and explain what should have happened there

---

Quote:

---

Goalkeepers are allowed to handle the ball if the ball is played back to them by an action other than a kick or throw-in (such as a header), but defenders are not permitted to attempt to use a deliberate trick to pass the ball to the goalkeeper with a part of the body other than the foot to circumvent the rule. This would include flicking the ball up with the foot and then heading the ball back to the goalkeeper, or heading a ball on the ground that would otherwise be regularly playable with the foot.

If a player uses such a trick, they are cautioned for unsporting behaviour, and the opponents are awarded an indirect free kick from where the trick was performed. It is irrelevant as to whether the goalkeeper subsequently handles the ball or not.

---

RealTalk said:

---

PatAg said:

---

we need our resident ref to come in and explain what should have happened there

---

The ref got it right. You can't circumvent the rule by intentionally scooping the ball up in order to head it back to the goalie.

Quote:

---

Goalkeepers are allowed to handle the ball if the ball is played back to them by an action other than a kick or throw-in (such as a header), but defenders are not permitted to attempt to use a deliberate trick to pass the ball to the goalkeeper with a part of the body other than the foot to circumvent the rule. This would include flicking the ball up with the foot and then heading the ball back to the goalkeeper, or heading a ball on the ground that would otherwise be regularly playable with the foot.

If a player uses such a trick, they are cautioned for unsporting behaviour, and the opponents are awarded an indirect free kick from where the trick was performed. It is irrelevant as to whether the goalkeeper subsequently handles the ball or not.

---

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Man. Second time in a month I've seen the indirect free kick and I'd never seen it before that (other time was horrible back pass in a Leipzig game that the keeper had to swat away from goal).

To be fair, I've only been watching soccer regularly for 3 years or so, but still.

---

PatAg said:

---

I will say, there was a point we were complaining about why we were still just trying to build from the back after we sucked Canada upfield. About 5-10 minutes later we did start playing more direct, and had a ton of chances. I do wonder if that is from a Gregg direction or the players just did it.

---

PatAg said:

---

RealTalk said:

---

PatAg said:

---

we need our resident ref to come in and explain what should have happened there

---

The ref got it right. You can't circumvent the rule by intentionally scooping the ball up in order to head it back to the goalie.

Quote:

---

Goalkeepers are allowed to handle the ball if the ball is played back to them by an action other than a kick or throw-in (such as a header), but defenders are not permitted to attempt to use a deliberate trick to pass the ball to the goalkeeper with a part of the body other than the foot to circumvent the rule. This would include flicking the ball up with the foot and then heading the ball back to the goalkeeper, or heading a ball on the ground that would otherwise be regularly playable with the foot.

If a player uses such a trick, they are cautioned for unsporting behaviour, and the opponents are awarded an indirect free kick from where the trick was performed. It is irrelevant as to whether the goalkeeper subsequently handles the ball or not.

---

---

No i meant, should it have been a card for doing it. Why was the ball not placed where the foul occurred? So he didnt card the defender, and he moved the kick to the corner of the 6. Maybe he didnt know very well either

---