That's because once Wando got the lead they did not have to push forward. Irmo did not penetrate Wando's defense once, minus the goal on the set piece. They didn't force Wando's keeper to make very many tough saves and did not seem very dangerous. Dunbaker was the only one who did look dangerous at times. Wando got the lead, sat in, and occasionally made great runs forward. Meanwhile Irmo was frustrated by a hard and smart defense. Again, I did not see anything special from Irmo last night. Wando played smart, and was the better team.

HeTakesPictures, you're definitely an Irmo fan, so stop lying, because you take pictures doesn't mean you know anything about soccer. Obviously you can't see very well with your camara if the score was 3-1 and Wando out played them in the first half.

i know for a fact that he takes pictures is NOT an imro fan. i know for a fact that he takes pictures did not attend irmo nor did a member of his family. i alsoknow that he takes a mean picture. i have some of his work hanging in my office and home. and guess what? i dont have anything to dpo with irmo either. way to go wando.

HTP is a BC homer. (Let's face it, we are all homers for some team)

hats off to anyone taking those great photos at soccer matches. i've tried, it ain't easy figuring all that out in a fast paced sport....i leave my camera at home, too frustrating.

My hats off too, Sandman. Def some good shots that parents in the stands could only dream of taking. For the parents that want copies, I think they can get them for a small charge by going to the web site....much cheaper than buying a super Canon outfit. Thanks again HTP

thanks Spartan,

Click here for Pictures of the SC Boys High School Championship Matches

BTW: you can download any picture for free from this link, or sign in to Picasa/Google and it will allow you to order any print through your favorite photo processing lab.

Pssst, don't tell anyone...but if you need a higher than 1200x800 resolution picture, contact me at hetakespictures@hotmail.com and I can send you the full resolution picture.

Great shots. I'm jealous. Thanks for the link.

I've been reading what has been said the past few days and figured I would weigh in with my observations from the game.

Irmo came out flat... not each individual, but as a team they were on their heels for the first 10 minutes of the game.

1st Wando Goal:
Irmo allowed for a player (Hamilton) who is known for his heading ability to go unmarked on a long throw. Very poor job by the defending player in that instance.

2nd Wando Goal:
Player with loads of experience (Sullivan) made a rookie mistake.

The 1st goal didn't faze Irmo that much. They had gone down to CN earlier in the season and therefore knew that they could win even though they were down 1-0 to a good side. The 2nd goal was like a shot in the foot. Going down 2-0 in a Championship match is hard to overcome... but not impossible.

1st Irmo Goal:
Wando made the same mistake that Irmo did in leaving a player who is known for his heading ability (Seiverding) unmarked in the box.

Offside Call:
I believe it was a bad call made on Irmo's 2nd goal (Dunbaker). Initially he was in an offside position... but he recognized that, stopped his run, and allowed the backs to catch up to him. When the ball was played (Lunceford) Dunbaker was even with the defender to his back (watching the video confirmed this). Very unfortunate that a ref COULD have changed the outcome of the game.

One thing that Wando does well (which really helped them in the game) is their speed of play. You don't see any one of the Wando boys taking more than 1 touch to settle the ball and 1 touch to pass it. I have seen this both with their JV Squad and V Squad. Their coach does well in teaching them to play simple and quick.

Have to give credit to Irmo's Dunbaker for never giving up on the game. He gave the Wando defense all they could handle. If the rest of Irmo's team would've had that same desire we might have seen a different outcome.

Looking forward to next years season. Wando will undoubtedly be in the running for the Championship again as I hope Irmo will be as well. Would be nice to see a rematch of the two.

Offside call:
I was sitting right on the line. Connor was initially offside and got back onside before making a second (barely) offside move. The call could have gone either way, though I think the AR barely got it right.
Similarly, the handball call that set up Irmo's goal could have been interpreted as ball-to-hand, but wasn't. A free kick was awarded, and a goal was scored.
What decided the game was simple: Wando was better than Irmo between 7 and 9 p.m. on Saturday night. Period.
They're BOTH excellent teams.

OK...let me preface this by again by saying...I'm not an Irmo fan!!!!

I too was right on the line (not looking through my camera and looking directly into the eyes of the LR across the field), and I saw the same thing as SoccersAnswer.
I think Irmo should have gotten the goal. When I heard the "thud" of the kick, Dunbaker was onsides.

But then again, I also beleive the mugging in the box should have gotten Wando a PK.

It was a great game to watch!

Even if he WAS onside -- and like I said, it was close -- you guys presume that a no-whistle-play-on would have resulted in a goal. I've seen at least half a dozen times this year when a kid went 1-v-1 on a keeper and shot the ball high/wide or saw the shot saved.

To take it a step further, I wonder if the Wando defenders could have hustled back into the box and backed up their keeper if they hadn't stopped on the offside whistle. I assume there was a whistle (I didn't hear it in the stands) because a lot of kids stopped and it appeared even Dunbaker hesitated.
SoccerAnswer, I disagree on the Sieverding header. From my view, he was pretty well-marked but simply outjumped and overpowered his defender.

Agreed on the Sieverding header. Great play by both Lunceford and Sieverding, to read the situation correctly and restart a shade quicker than expected.

I actually was amazed the call WASN'T made on Wando's third goal. Not because it was or wasn't offside; but rather because several of Irmo's staff members were lobbying vigorously for the call.
As to consistency, you're talking two different ARs. It's not like the same guy missed (or made) both calls. If BOTH calls had gone Irmo's way, and had Connor actually finished, the score would have been 2-2.
One of the funnier comments I've read on this board regards hearing the "thud" of the kick while Connor was onside.
I mean, really?
The kid himself didn't even hear the whistle over the crowd. Darn, I should hear so well!
Anyway, to me, Connor Dunbaker was M-O-T-M for Irmo, whether he scored or not. He played hard throughout, even when some of his more renowned teammates did not.

"He played hard throughout, even when some of his more renowned teammates did not. " Backscreen 17

"that will just about cover the flybys!"- Goose

Too blunt, Coach?

Listening for the kick is what referees do too. When I am on the line as an AR, I always look for the offsides and listen to the ball. If you watch the ball get kicked, then turn your head, you are going to make the wrong call by assuming that the player was offsides. The AR's should be be even to the second to last defender, watching straight across the field, and should hear the kick happen. That is the way you are taught, to do it any differently is to do a disservice to all the players on the field.

Why doesn't Coach Savitz Bleach his hair too?

Good 1st post, SoccersAnswer! I'd have to agree with everything except for the "Rookie" mistake by Sullivan. That ball should have never been passed back to him. He had to play it at his feet right in front of the goal. It looked like he just whiffed a ball that was tough to play, travelling parallel to the goal with Wando's front line right on top of it. Wando's front line was way too fast to even think about passing a ball back that close to the middle.

Spartan seriously??? Sullivan tried to take a touch and distribute the ball in his own box with a defender running towards him. That is a rookie mistake! He easily could have one touch cleared the ball, regardless of whether or not it should have been played to him. He had time to clear it for sure. Everytime the ball was played to him after that he looked shaky and uncomfortable.

Not his strength. Good shot stopper. Occasionally spills the ball. Not comfortable or particularly effective with the ball at his feet.
...
And yes, I understand ARs listen for the "thud." I just question whether ANYONE could have heard it in the context of several players and many observers not even hearing the whistle.

It is curious, though, that such misfortune could strike a program with 5 starting keepers.

I guess Coach Savitz didn't learn anything from last year's mistake by moving Emmett to forward. He was extremely ineffective as a forward last year vs Northwestern, and did nothing on the left wing in this game. He is an amazing CM, not sure why Irmo again made him play a position he is far less effective in.

I could understand if you were getting dominated and making the lineup change quickly, but the goals were from a set piece and a terrible mistake by the GK, it wasn't like the midfield was getting abused. Moving Emmett to forward only gets him less involved in the game when you needed him to take over.

#8 for Wando was a standout, not surprising Irmo scored when he was out of the game.

#8 is senior defender Hiago Barreto, who was a real warrior.

that 3rd wando goal doesn't look good on the schsl tv.
camera angles can really mislead the offsides tho, just saying it looks way off...irmo certainly had their chances & blew it.

I'm an Irmo fan and can say that the Wando player was clearly onside on the last goal. Also agree that Dunbaker was on by the video but I was not in position to see it clearly live. the play by Sullivan on the second goal was not a difficult play for an experienced keeper.

It doesn't matter that Irmo has 5 keepers on it's varsity. Only one can play at a time and he was the one with the most experience.

The 5 GK question only matters in this context:
Are you actively developing a cadre of very good young keepers AND giving them a chance to gain valuable experience and playing time?
Or are you simply going with experience?
If memory serves, at one point earlier this season, someone surmised here that Irmo had 5 very good keepers, each of whom could start for most teams in the state.
My experience tells me that, ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, you go with experience. It also tells me that all things are SELDOM equal.