Disaster at 4A State Championship

From what I hear from everyone, it sounds like the fault goes around to everyone there.

The fourth ref should have immediately noticed that there was a substitution in without someone coming out.

The Wando coach should have kept track of her players coming on and off the field and not have waited to see if Lexington would do something before doing so herself.

The Lexington coach should have gotten up immediately and gone to the fourth referee and told them, calmly, that there are 12 opposing players on the field. (The impression I get, correct me if I'm wrong, is that the Lex coach stood at the sideline and just complained loudly, hoping the refs would notice).

The Wando players should have noticed they had an extra player and said something, especially the captains and even moreso the player that came in as it is usually required that they wait for their man to come off or be heading off before they run on.

The Lexington players should have noticed and immediately had their captain tell the center ref, calmly, "Hey, I think they have 12 players, when you get a chance, please count."

The center ref should have been paying attention at the substitutions to make sure that subs did not enter the field until the exiting player was identified and making their way from the field or off of the field entirely.

The sideline and center refs should have seen or heard the crowd and taken a quick moment to count, even if it was when the ball went out of bounds.

Unfortunately for everyone, it's hard to pay specific attention in the midst of an adrenaline filled game and even moreso at the end of the season's biggest game, whether you're winning or losing, and it's often hard to hear the crowd when you're focused on the game. Logically, to me, the answer would have been to add the minutes on the clock that were lost with 12 up (it sounds like it happened at the final substitution) and play them fairly eleven aside; but then I was not there and did not see what happened and how exactly the added player affected the game.

This is an awful cap to a great season for two teams and is something that will taint the championship for both the seniors that won and those that lost.

I too have plenty of experience losing games due to one crucial referee decision--or lack of one--however, as I remind the girls I coach now, you had 75 (or whatever number is appropriate) other minutes to put a score up on that board that would have negated the referee's mistake.

Soccer, unfortunately, is a game where, ultimately, all that really matters to win at the end of the game is that you scored more goals than your opponent did. If you can't get it done in the time you have, whether it's 50, 60, 80, or 90 minutes--or even overtime and pks--then you don't win. Knowing that, deep down, always sucked for me because it was hard to accept that we could have made sure that a mistake didn't lose us the game...but I always had to accept that it was true; we had shots we didn't connect, didn't take...defensive mistakes we did make, blocks we didn't get.

I applaud the efforts of both the Wando and Lexington players and all the time, energy, and passion they put into this season. Both were deserving of making it to the title game and I'm sure both sides played their hearts out. All I can say to them is to take heart in that you played 150% and you played with your heart. Whether you won or lost, dwelling on it won't help when (it sounds like, at least) there's nothing left that can be done.

Take pride in yourself and your team for playing hard. May your seniors move on to a memorable college experience with or without soccer, and may your underclassmen be fueled to success next season.

Let's bottom line this whole thing. Wando scored and Lexington didn't. Wando may have had an extra player on the field for a minute or two, but Lexington did too, he was wearing a blue coach's shirt and throwing water bottles! Coach Champ would never have brought the extra player to the refs attention if she had done it on purpose. We all know it was less than a few minutes she was out there. Lex had the other 70plus minutes to score! Be good sports, Lex, you had a great season and played a great game! He was all over the sidelines acting out WAY before the few minutes of controversy. I am proud of the way the Lex players responded to their coaches inappropriate behavior by pulling him off the field, it is a shame the kids had to take control of adults mistakes. I congratulate them on a great game. Your ball skills are excellent and I think the refs are responsible for letting the emotions get too out of control before they tried to get the game back under hand. Shame on the system for not having adequate officiating at this level of play. Let the girls enjoy their well deserved victories: the best two teams in the state of SC! I hope the adults will do a better job from here on out!!!!!!! Ridiculous!!!!!!!!!!!

yes for just that long it could make a different because we had free kicks and corners and to have 12 people marking up on our players, no there should only be 11, all of our players were marked and 2 was on the person with the ball. if we had that one person off thats one less defender it really could have made a difference and when wando had a free kick all our players would have a mark but for some odd reason the girl back post would be open

Yes, it COULD have made a difference, but in a 2 minute span the probabilities are very, very slim.

To hurst and whoever else may doubt them:

The lexington soccer girls DID shake hand after the game. You have no right to question their sportsmanship. Also, they are not responsible for their coach's actions; and just to clear things up even more, coach fryland did go back to wando's coach and shake her hand and apologize for the way he acted in the heat of the moment.

Quote:

No soccer05 you need to get it right you cant cheat and win and yea it is unfortunate and i bet wando would be raisin heck over it if it was the other way around but lexington keeps track of their players and fryland is not a jerk and far from it he is a great coach and you dont know him so dont hate and lex pointed out the mistake b4 wando did and the wando was the one pulling the jersies and pushing and the ref def ignored it but if a lex player even thought about it the refs called it!!!!!! get your facts straight and your head out of your butt because it was the WANDO KEEPER that was taunting lex players and punching and kicking lex people in the box watch the video of the game when it comes out there's proof. and lexignton was praying we had to calm our nerves when you have horrible refs and you lose to a team who cheated there should have been time added on and no wando DOES NOT DESERVE THE STATE CHAMPIONSHIP!!! they are not worthy of the title. good job to the lexington girls for a well fought game yall should have won. and just watch out the pain train will be back next year chugga chugga chugga chugga choo choo

So angry...and hateful. I hope you and the girls do come back in 2008 and get that title. You've got all the motivation you need.

soccerball27.... never did I say that Wando outright cheated. What I said and what should have happened was that time should have been added on...PERIOD. But HS rules do not allow.

Now lets talk about holding people to a higher standard... I do not agree with coach's actions on either side (more later).

There simply is no recourse in SCHSL for referee behavior/performance

1-Foul language... what is definition? I have seen players red carded for using the word "freaking", yet someone drops the F bomb and nothing.
2- Accountability, who grades the referees? Assessors? the state USSF assessor is the one who screwed up in the game, during those 80 minutes it is his job...he is getting paid for performance. In the "real world" you or I would either get fired or demoted for incompetance. What about here?

3-Some of these refs are unable to keep up with play.

Tanverdi was drawn by the hard fought game he was viewing and forgot to do his job...Period.

Coaches have started practices one day too early and they are fired, what about here?

Lastly the rules, there is a reason FIFA rules are what they are, They are tried and proven.

enough with stupid OTs in season a tie is a tie, enough with the official clock on the scoreboard (ditto in college). (By the way why was time in every game in the season kept on the field but not the championship?)

There was a major screw up one for which they had no answer (10 minutes of discussion) would you not think it incompetent? They had to bring the SCHSL people to determine the outcome.

I believe that Wando did what they had to do. Lexington had the rest of the game to do the same they did not.

But as a stated before how do you tell the player that it may not have matter, you cannot...THIS IN NO WAY MEANS THAT WANDO CHEATED....PERIOD

COACHES.... Lex's coach got carried away and should have been a better leader, When he received the yellow his point that he was not happy was made, it is at this time that his leadership should have surfaced (easy from the stands)

Wando's....She did nothing wrong(?), she subbed to slow the game (I would the same). But when player X did not report to the sideline she should have made it a point to get her off the field. Some will say she did by telling the 4th official, but this was much later than the period of time that player was on the field.

End result

1- Wando is champion ....Period
2- Lex Coach is red carded for his antics... period
3- Wando coach should have been yellow carded for unsportman behavior
4- Mr Tanverdi returns the pay he received at the field...donate it to the North/South game if you wish
5- Mr Tanverdi is stripped of his assessor level
6- The officiating crew is removed from future (next year) playoff games
7- A more severe penalty should exist for the next occurence the correct call on the field simply is not enough to prevent future occurrences. The punishement is not fit for the crime.

It is now multiple years in a row with controversy in the finals. Irmo vs S.Aiken did it cross the line?

Or better yet.... Irmo vs Dorman... did the ball cross the line before time ran out? I am willing to bet if the center referee would have added time for every time he issued a yellow card, that one second would have created a tied game....but he is not allowed to add time.

This is not football (excuse me American football)or basketball where they have more breaks than my kids need to go to the bathroom in a long trip. The game is (1) meant to be constant movement and (2) full 90 minutes (or 80 or whatever time frame)

It is a player's game not a referee's game.

And by the way.... in this day and age of wireless everything, can you really tell me that there is no way for the center to stop the scoreboard clock when necessary instead of the one second lag between time keeper and ref.
Or simply do the right thing and put in his hands and he can tell the 4th official how much time he is adding on at the 2 minute mark (as is done everywhere else)

good stuff futbol(soccer) i think now we are all going in circles and never going to be resovled.
Wando people i think you need to understand the way they lexington people feel at this point. Think about how you would have reacted if roles where reversed. Their is going to be that resentment but congrats on the win

Lexington people need to congratulate their girls on an awsome season and not on attacking Wando!

I have my opinions on how it went down and its a dark spot on the whole season (and some players careers) and will be for a long time. Again i really think the SCHSL needs to look into this game and evalute thier officals!!!

At least there are worst things in life that can happen. Losing a loved one, living in a civil war torn country, heck - we just had a 3 year old fall out of a moving car and get run over and killed her in Anderson. Praise God we have the opportunity to play the game.

All of these accusations and allegations between the teams' fans serve no purpose except to harm the game of soccer. We should respect and applaud the efforts of all our athletes, no matter the results.

futbol and 2004 -

the problem with all that you say is two fold.

First this kind of childish unprofessional error by the referees (not counting players or keeping written records for substitutions) RUINS the integrity of the process. To your point, a coach puts a team on the field a day early and gets fired.

Second - while the league is clueless on this, they have reversed the red card on SV keeper and he plays tonight.

You can't do that and ignore this and claim you have it under control.

And make no mistake these are good athletes. The governing body needs to be much better at providing these athletes the environment they need to compete.

After reviewing the Lex-Wando game video multiple times, these are the facts:

1. At a Goalkick, Wando subs 2 players and only 1 came off the field

2. When the Referee blew the whistle to restart the play, there was 3:17 left on the clock

3. Apprx. 20 seconds later, Coach Champ realizes that there are 12 on the field and approaches the AR

4. The Lexington Coach was on the Bench and apparently not aware of the 12th player at this point

5. After Champ notified the AR, the Center Ref stopped the game clock at 2:06.

6. The video clearly shows that for 1:11 - One minute and Eleven seconds - Wando had one too many players on the field.

It is unfortunate that this occurred, but it was not of the duration that many have stated.

Let's focus on the positives - both teams played hard, and there were no injuries. Good luck to all the girls on both teams.

That is the first definitive statement on the actual time frame of the violation and the surrounding circumstances. If the violation lasted only 1:11, then there should not be such an uproar among all involved. The player was properly issued a yellow card. Any further argument should have ended there. That is not a sufficient reason for the Lex. coach to conduct himself to the extent that he received a red. All this over 1:11 ??
Did the Lexington team not have 89 other minutes in which to score?

Madness thank you for your comment that is about the time frame I had in mind all along 1.5 minutes. I still believe the circumstances a the time would most likely not change the outcome. But I still stand on my comments about accountability

FutbolMadness

you speak of the official SCHSL video tape?

needforspeed,

I DO have a right to question sportsmanship, whenever it is not properly carried out on the field. I didn't accuse LEX of not shaking hands, it takes two to tango.

As I disclaimed earlier, I wasn't at the match. If the post-game shaking of hands took place, I apologize, I'm off base. I had read earlier that it didn't happen.

I did see where the Lex coach congratulated the Wando coach later on. I understand there were a lot of emotions spent in that match. Better late than never.

After Lex Coach's public accusation (to his team) of Wando playing with 12 players for the whole half - and then letting his girls' believe it and say it to the press - He should issue a public apology and make sure The State paper print it as prominently as they did the original article.

What do you mean "public accusation"? The Lexington coach was talking to his team. If anybody should apologize here it's the Wando coach for not making sure the kids she sent in were matched by kids coming off the field. And maybe the officials for not doing the same. Getting upset at the State paper for getting facts wrong is like geting upset at the sun for rising in the east.

I understand the passions of all the Players & Supporters in this match, but the reporting by the 'STATE' flies in the face of what good journalism is all about. Just look at the HEADLINES of the articles, and please read and compare them both to the Society of Professional Journalists, CODE OF ETHICS. Steve Wiseman and his Editor at the 'STATE' are terrible jounalists and owe the South Carolina community an apology for their inflammitory reporting.

Tempers flare in Warriors' victory Class AAAA Girls' Soccer, Charleston Post Courier (subscription), SC - 17 hours ago

A dirty dozen?, The State, SC - 18 hours ago

Society of Professional Journalists, CODE OF ETHICS
Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice.

Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information. Journalists should:
� Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error.
� Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
� Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
� Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
� Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.
� Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
� Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
� Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
� Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect. Journalists should:
� Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
� Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
� Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
� Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.

Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know. Journalists should:
�Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
� Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
� Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
� Deny favored treatment to special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.

Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other. Journalists should:
� Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
� Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
� Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
� Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
� Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

Hurst,

How would you know if sportsmanship was 'properly carried out on the field' if you werent even there ??

And just to let you know, it was.

swimmer2,

You really don't know what you are talking about . . . you would be better suited to staying quiet before you are proved to be a fool.

Those of you who were at the game can answer my question....

Yes, we are talking about supposedly 1:11. However, what were the events prior to and during that 1:11?

Did Lexington have the majority of possession and then did the Wando sub situation allow Wando to get out from under the pressure and maintain possession of their own?

If we are only talking about 1:11, but my question is correct, then that 1:11 made a huge difference. For those of you who say "it's only 1:11", then please let your opponents play your team 12 v 11 for 1:11 of the game when the other coach feels it's needed.

A dirty dozen?, The State, SC - 18 hours ago

looks good to me

To Deahler -
See quote from article below:
-----------------------------------------
A dirty dozen?
Lexington cries foul after Wando uses too many players
By STEVE WISEMAN - swiseman@thestate.com

GERRY MELENDEZ/GMELENDEZ@THESTATE.COM
Lexington's Emily Adams walks away dejected after a tough 1-0 loss to Wando in the Class 4A soccer championship game at Eugene E. Stone Stadium on Friday.
Photo gallery | Girls soccer championships

The scoreboard showed Lexington High had an uphill battle for the final 69 minutes of Friday�s Class 4A girls state soccer championship game.

Someone astute enough to count the players on the field would have determined the real battle the Wildcats faced.

Wando captured the state championship with a 1-0 win, courtesy of Olivia Urig�s first-half goal and the team�s admitted use of an illegal extra player during the second half.

Wando coach Shannon Champ claimed the 12th player was in for less than a minute, but Lexington coach Chris Fryland � who received a red card for his vehement argument with the officials � told his players it was for the entire second half.
----------------------------------------------------

It is a real easy to act sophmorish and get into name calling. I made a pledge to LPAF yrs ago to not do that.

need,

Thanks for the correction. I apologize, I had bad information. Glad both teams got together to wish eachother well. Tough circumstances for all, great result for Wando. Upperstate will have to try and wrestle it back next year.

t6lrcam, AGF, P2W09, kick_ball, spacemanspiff

Any comments about your false statements?

I'm glad somebody has viewed the tape and noticed the 12 person was on the field for just over a minute. The assertion by the LEX coach and players that Wando played the whole 2nd half with twelve was a joke.

Umm swimmer find my "flase statements" then ill make a comment!!

Here you go kick_ball:

yours of 10:11 am

"From my vantage point the lexington bench did try to get both the RA and the center refs attention for along while. It was until the lex crowd noticed the 12 did the Wando coach then try get the RA attention."

Is the 20 seconds it took Coach Champ to speak to ref or the 1:11 it took the ref to stop play - "along awhile" ?

p.s.- what is a "flase"?

That was thought to be true only during the brief discussion while cards were flying and only because lexington coaches rightfully told 4th official he wasn't doing his job when he replied."there has been a legal exchange with each sub." Lexington coach replied "your telling me they've had 12 this whole half!" 4th official "of course not coach!" No further explanation was given. I think the State paper took a lot of liberty. Look at the quote the Charleston paper had from him total opposites. He did not say that to the girls after the game.

TrueFan,
I reached my conclusion after reading the Charleston article as well as State Paper. Here is quote attributed to Lex player
"A couple of Lexington players contended that Wando played almost the entire second half with 12 players on the field.

"The whole second half they had 12 players on the field, but we didn't give up," Allie Johns said. "It was 0-0 in the second half, so I'm proud of my team. It's tough to lose when you lose like that."
-------------------------------------------------------
It may be that both papers did not do a good job of reporting whole story. I know another poster knew code of ethics for reporters better than I .

I cannot believe all the false accusations the Wando girls have had to endure based on one minute and eleven seconds that the fourth referee took to watch the game instead of doing his job. Now that the truth is out, the Lex coach should do the right thing and publicly set the record straight.Have the false accusations publicly corrected. Let the Wando girls rightfully rise from the cloud of suspicion created unfairly. Without a public correction they will never have their rightful place as state champions. Lex is a great team! So is Wando! Please set the record straight and we will all look forward to a good, real season next year, without the drama.

Quote:

Those of you who were at the game can answer my question....

Yes, we are talking about supposedly 1:11. However, what were the events prior to and during that 1:11?

Did Lexington have the majority of possession and then did the Wando sub situation allow Wando to get out from under the pressure and maintain possession of their own?

If we are only talking about 1:11, but my question is correct, then that 1:11 made a huge difference. For those of you who say "it's only 1:11", then please let your opponents play your team 12 v 11 for 1:11 of the game when the other coach feels it's needed.

1:11 of 12 v 11 is not that big of a deal, and who is to say that it would be any different from the previous 68? I don't think it would have made a difference, BUT I do think my opinion is irrelevant and Lex should be given a chance to prove that things can be done in 1:11.

Quote:

What do you mean "public accusation"? The Lexington coach was talking to his team. If anybody should apologize here it's the Wando coach for not making sure the kids she sent in were matched by kids coming off the field. And maybe the officials for not doing the same. Getting upset at the State paper for getting facts wrong is like geting upset at the sun for rising in the east.

I've never seen the sun retract statements in the back of the "Local" section quite like I have the newspapers. Lex coach made a boo boo and got caught! Oh, lets pray for a time machine to speed us to C of the C's, and N/S.

Quote:

"From my vantage point the lexington bench did try to get both the RA and the center refs attention for along while. It was until the lex crowd noticed the 12 did the Wando coach then try get the RA attention."

Id like you to read it over and find the key words...."from my vantage point" That means that is how i interpted what happened... thats what i saw! alot of things where going on around me im sorry if my timing wasnt down to the seconds. I wasnt to concered with that at the moment.

I stand by what i said watching the wandos girls coach from the 1st row i might add. she was NOT the first person to try to call the 12th person to the refs attention. I never said she did this on purpose or that wando had 12 people the entire second half!

And yes 1:11 seconds is along time in a game where anything game happen in 5 seconds. It is especially along time when you are trying to get a refs attention to something like 12 players on a field near the end of a game you are trying to tie up!

Now i have not accused anyone of false statments, cheating, or just being idiots. Ive tryed to be civil at a time when emotions are hot. ive congrauted both teams on a good game and actually in one posted tried to bascially tell everyone to chill. please dont attack me like im talking bad about your school!

swimmer2,

Let's see - you get your information from a couple of newspaper articles. I LIVE with the captain of one of the teams on the field, who happened to be involved with the discussion that occured with the referees (and coaches). She also was interviewed (and quoted) by The State Newspaper. Somehow your information is FACT!?!?!!? I guess you are saying that newspapers are beyond reproach, and my daughter is a liar (talk about name-calling).

A Wando fan claims that they have viewed the tape, and it was only 1:11 that Wando was playing with 12 players - that has become a fact!?!?!? Well, I can tell you that a club coach mentioned to a Lexington fan that, "Wando has 12 players on the field". This Lexington fan - not a parent of anyone on the team (just like you) - claims to have looked at the clock at the time and there were 5+ minutes left in the game. Whose "facts" are truly facts?

I can tell you what is a FACT:

Wando 1
Lexington 0

End of story!!!

Then, you get on here and talk about "name-calling" while you hide anonymously behind a psuedonym and declare righteously who should apologize to whom based on YOUR interpretation of the facts! What a piece of work!!!

First and only post,
Wando wins 1-0
I do NOT believe it was done on purpose or that they played with 12 for the entire second half. I believe coach Champ is a wonderful coach, who would NEVER had purposely made an illegal substitution. Wando deserves the credit for winning. They played with intensity and we were unable to make proper adjustments at halftime. Give them the credit for tactically having 3, 4, 5 and sometimes 6 players behind the ball. We would have done the exact same thing in that situation. It�s disappointing that the last 5 minutes turned out the way they did, but I don�t believe it would have changed the outcome of the game.
Congrats to Wando�.You are State Champs!!!!!!!!!

I think Coach Fryland's post says it all and should be the last post for this thread.

Agreed.

I concur.

Thanks Coach Fryland.
I'll do my part to shut up.

Thank you Coach Fryland! As I stated before, I admire you and your players! We all get caught up in the game and things happen. You are a class act for speaking highly of Coach Champ and we appreciate your kind words. We are South Carolina! And your team and mine are the two best!!!!!!Thank you for allowing our team to enjoy our day and we now can look forward to a civil season next year.
Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Passion is good, reason is better. Thank you coach, we will be there cheering next year too!

Thank you Coach Fryland that should end the useless drivel.

ON A POSITIVE NOTE:

Congratulations to Lexingtons Kira Campbeell for being named Gatorade Player of the Year.

5/20/07

Lexington reaction was as ugly as it was inappropriate
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/may/20/lexington_reaction_was_as_ugly_as_was_inappropri/
Phillip M. Bowman, The Post and Courier

Quote:

This was the ugliest incident I've covered since I took over the high school beat at The Post and Courier in 1999. The High School League must examine its crowd-control procedures. Two bottles thrown from the stands is bad enough, and should equate into a strong police presence at next year's Weekend of Champions.

If this was the ugliest incident this reporter has ever seen since covering HS sports in the Charleston area then why did it take him eight days to write the column/article???

Seriously, if he was that passionate about it.....why did he wait? Is The Post and Courier a weekly or a daily?

Hurst66: The State newspaper sees an opportunity to sell newspapers and publishes a muck-racking article about the "dirty dozen." In it they rush in and interview 1-2 crushed and crying girls and out of paragraphs and paragraphs of statements select those that heighten the controversy.

The Post and Courier waits eight days before they publish a muck-racking article about two high school boys throwing two 12 ounce water bottles on the sideline of the field and some boys in blue and yellow body paint yelling "cheaters" after a game in which for some amount of time 12 players accidentally played against 11 players. The newspaper calls for a police presence to stop such horrific crimes from being perpetrated in the future; the author of this hard-hitting piece of investigative journalism almost swoons at the sheer insanity of it all.

Of all of the people who made mistakes in all of this, it feels as if the newspapers are the most reprehensible.

deahler: I've not before today posted on this subject; I thought pretty much everything had been said -- however, your post was pretty good in terms of using analogy to explain why some folks felt the way that they did. What I've particularly liked is that every post of yours has congratulated Wando -- that's particularly appropriate because in the end, Wando won -- everything else is just discussion. I'd like to add my own personal congratulations to Wando for playing a very hard-nosed and tough game and bringing home yet another win for what has become a leading 4-A program in South Carolina.

It's funny how there's an attempt at a self-imposed censorship of a discussion of the game. I think I understand it; emotions run high and people tend to become very critical and accusatory very quickly. And yet there are some fairly interesting things that have come up that I find absolutely fascinating. Since I've never flinched from making folks angry at me on this message board, I thought I'd raise a few of them.

I believe that the role of the referees has been understated, not overstated. Wando scored off of a header from a free kick rising from an assessed penalty. It was a very, very nice play on Wando's part. However, I find it amusing that so many people in the endless debate of precisely how much time was played 12v11 (i.e., an attosecond, 1:11, 4:00, 40:00, the greater part of the season, a geological era, etc.) fail to account for the fact that in a single second a referee made a decision that a foul occurred and that in just a few seconds a score occurred from a free kick. Trying to assess a probability in what in essence is a "discontinuous function" seems at best an incredibly arduous task. (Note: I heard today that Drogba scored in stoppage to lead Chelsea to a 1-0 win over Manchester United -- it seems strange to me that this could happen when no one scored in the first 90 minutes.

)

That brings me back to the role that the referees played in this match. The referees appeared to decide very early that they were going to "let them play" which resulted in a very physical match. Nothing wrong with that. However, the referees then appeared to make random calls, in a non-biased but deeply weird fashion, on some physical play not not on the majority of the physical play. This occurred against both Lexington and Wando. I've seen this again and again this season -- rare is the referee that allows a physical game and then doesn't succumb to the desire to assess random penalties that can't be explained in light of all of the previous non-calls made. I'm actually beginning to believe that particularly in high school the referees would be better off calling games a bit more tightly from the beginning and focusing on being consistent. The referees in this match weren't terrible -- they were just inconsistent -- and thus inserted themselves entirely too much into the match rather than helping the players understand what was being called and why it was being called by being repeatable in their decisions.

With this said, Wando defensively played a very, very smart game. Wando's coach was interviewed by the Lexington newspaper and she noted that a primary factor was that she made a decision before the game to always play at least 1-2 players on one of Lexington's players. It worked fabulously; while there were any number of attempted assists by that player Lexington could not capitalize. What I think was equally important was that Wando's players played a very smart game given the refereeing that they were seeing -- they played much more aggressively on defense in their midfield and less aggressively as the ball got closer to their goal. This resulted in Lexington having few dangerous set plays. On the set plays that Lexington did have, the team did not execute as well as they have been doing. While the headlines all scream about 12v11, the real story of this game wasn't that -- and it wasn't even Wando's very nice score on the free kick (a glancing header by Olivia Ureg) -- it was why Lexington couldn't score and what Wando did to prevent Lexington from scoring.

Finally, with respect to the criticism of various coaches and players, I think that too many folks are proving themselves incapable of empathy. Wando's coach did exactly what she should have done both in terms of strategy and in terms of coaching her team. Yes, some amount of time went by when there was a 12v11 situation. That was the fault of the referees, not Wando's coach. She coached a wonderful game. Lexington's coach did exactly what he should have done in response to what occurred -- if he hadn't have gotten a red card for strenuous argument in the situation his team was in it would have been a mistake -- it was his job to go up to the line, and beyond it, in passionate advocacy for his team and some sense of equitable fairness. The players from both teams shook hands after the match. Not sure how much more can be expected from the coaches and the players.

The blue and yellow painted high school boys should not have thrown the two half-empty 12-ounce water bottles onto the sideline. While I don't feel that their offense rises to the felonious heights that the Post and Courier reporter did, they still shouldn't have done it.

Congratulations to Lexington, who acquitted themselves rather well for their first 4-A final appearance. Unlike Wando, Lexington doesn't have a history of great women's soccer. It's going to be tougher, not easier, for them next year -- the many seniors that are graduating have played critical roles and will absolutely be missed.

Congratulations to Wando, the 4-A state champions.

Chico,

It's muckraking, not "muck-racking".

Believe me, I know my yellow journalism!

I am also on record congratulating Wando on their sate cup win.

A point I intentionally did not bring up in the past discussion is alluded to by Chico.
-Drogba scores in added time and beats Man U.
-Man U scores 2 goals in 4 minutes of added time and beats Bayern who lead 1-0 most of the game a few years back.

Although I feel that had the game been 11v11 that Wando most likely would have won, I cannot help but to think that when Lexington was mounting pressure for the equalizer,the 10-15 minutes it took for the referee crew to sort out the issues took the "wind out of the sails". Most likely those 10 minutes did more hurt than the extra man.

Wando played a very good strategic game, and although I had not seen them play before they did exactly what they needed to do.

Time should have been added on...PERIOD....Thus my thread on the refs.

One other thing.... it is my understanding that none of the painted boys threw bottles.
I am sure it was a lex fan or two who were showing their displeasure, also from my vantage point if the intent was to hit someone then they are horrible athletes because it was not a great distance. It was certainly a lack of class and should not be accepted behavior. As far as the Charleston paper.... I do not recall this gentleman being present at the Carolina cup were the behavior of some of the Wando supporters was questioned (personally I see nothing wrong with drums and horns), specifically when it came to congratulating the opponent after a loss. Booing from the stands or refusing to shake hands while calling your opponent "white trash" could both be construed as sour grapes.

Hurst66: I should have known better; I was a dip-head (mis-hyphenation intended!)

futbol(soccer): I made an assumption about the "painted boys"; I knew the bottles came from that general area and just assumed. I apologize. My parents came to their first soccer game to see their granddaughter and accidentally initially sat among the boys; I moved them "safely"

away and thus could only observe from a distance.

My point was that I felt that the behavior doesn't quite rise to the level of the gang activity ascribed to some high school sporting events in our state -- and yet this guy is calling for a police presence to stop what I guess was the wanton emotional damage done by those two 12 ounce half-filled water bottles and the chants by the crowd. Again -- I don't condone what (apparently) the students did -- but it seemed rather tame to me even if I compare it to what went on 30 years ago when I was playing high school sports.

I found it interesting that I understood more about the game from reading "The Lexington Chronicle" (a weekly newspaper) than I did reading "The State" or "The Post and Courier."

As an FYI, the Lexington Chronicle said that four minutes were played 12v11. I have not a clue as to where they got that number. I honestly don't think it matters whether it was 1 minute, 4 minutes, or 40 minutes. However, I am confused as to the actual number -- here's my amazingly bad recollection.

With 12 minutes to go, Lexington moved a midfielder from midfield to forward. Wando had been marking that player with 1-2 players during the game. You could see a lot of initial confusion as Wando players adjusted. At the 10-11 minute mark, I turned to my spouse and told her to note that there were 6 players almost constantly on the back line defensively. At some point, and I honestly don't recollect when it was, Sam Decker (a former Lexington player) tapped my shoulder and told me I should count the number of players on the field. Stupidly, I counted 11 but didn't include the keeper in my count (note: I never said I was the deepest carrot in the patch.) At what seemed to be a more than a few minutes later (and I stress "seemed"), I saw both the Lexington coach and Wando coach trying to get the referee's attention. Then all heck broke loose.

Please note that I am not refuting anyone regarding how much time actually was spent playing 12v11; I honestly don't have a clue. My sense of time was distorted as I grew increasingly frustrated by Wando's excellent defensive strategy and their superb execution of that strategy (note: I mean this completely and utterly as a compliment.)

I would love to buy a video copy of the game; will anyone be selling them this year?

And again...while this is all an interesting discussion...none of it matters in terms of who won that game. Congratulations again to Wando...

being in the same section as the "painted boys" i am aware of who threw the bottles while i wont say who it was i will say the where quickly repremanded by the entire student section! then as good measure one of the LHS principle came down as did SCHSL officials. Both while telling the students to calm down also told the "painted boys" they knew it wasnt them.... while this is not deathly important information i thought i would let everyone know. also i believe if that writer thinks that lexingtons fans where inappropriate i suggest he make the trip up to Gaffney for a football or basketball game!!

So he can see more inappropriate things?

ok - 13 pages of posts and still no info from anywhere on why the state league would look at reverse the red card for Spring valley's keeper and not do anything to investigate this and determine the referees acted correctly and correctly assessed penalties when the 12th player was discovered.

guardrail22 -- The SCHSL did contact the officials of the Spring Valley / Wando 4A Lowerstate Championship match and determined that since the Wando player had received a yellow card on the same play that the SV goalkeeper (Jenkins) received a red, that the call was a bit severe and should have rightfully been a yellow.

Floriday: I took it to mean that "kick_ball" didn't believe that what occurred was that hideously inappropriate, particularly in context of current high school athletic events.

guardrail22: For many, I think this is just painful "water under the bridge."

To anyone/everyone: I've found out that the SCHSL didn't contract out the taping of any of the state championship games. I'm willing to pay (both for the medium and for your effort in recording it) for a recording, in any format, to have a record of Lexington's first 4-A state championship appearance ever.

Chico,

Have you searched youtube? Maybe somebody put up on this site.

Great idea; I'll try it!

Okay...I'm back. Other than lots of news coverage by TV stations (note: I'm jealous -- the Charleston TV stations do a much better job than the Columbia ones!) I couldn't find anything.

Again -- let me stress -- in these days of tight budgets and the like -- I am willing to pay for this if anyone has a video of the game.

I know these pics are probably not easy to look at, but I would imagine there has got to be a Wando parent or maybe a Wando school representative or videographer, if not a Lexington parent who filmed most if not all of the big game. In one of the pics there is a man filming the trophy, but that may have been just a TV station. Maybe contact the Wando coach also.
http://www.wandohigh.com/athletics/gsoccer/gsoccer.htm

Quote:

guardrail22 -- The SCHSL did contact the officials of the Spring Valley / Wando 4A Lowerstate Championship match and determined that since the Wando player had received a yellow card on the same play that the SV goalkeeper (Jenkins) received a red, that the call was a bit severe and should have rightfully been a yellow.

Since the red card that took the SV keeper out should have only been a yellow, why not go back and play the last minutes of that game with him in goal, too.

>>[GSDad] Since the red card that took the SV keeper out should have only been a yellow, why not go back and play the last minutes of that game with him in goal, too.<<

You know...quite seriously...after understanding that having too many players on the field is only a yellow card with a free kick in the middle of the field...I'm not sure why it wouldn't be a pretty good strategy for coaches in each game to put an extra player on the field underneath the notice of the referee...seems like the risk/reward is pretty darned good.

Chico,

I have a friend and former teammate of mine in New Jersey who employs this strategy quite often, usually against his arch-rival. He never does it when he's up a goal, only when he is down a goal and needs to score.

Why does he do it? Precisely as you have indicated, because the reward far outweighs the risk.

Ah, but there is such a thing as persistent infringement of the rules.....another yellow....and so therefore...1 plus 1 = 1 (red). But then, that just puts you back to level # of players.

A couple of measures that should be taken against my friend from New Jersey:

1. Opposing coach should alert the ref prior to the match that this little trick has been used before. Be on the lookout for it and give the captain a yellow and the coach a red.

2. If the ref should notice this, wait until the ball is relatively close to the offending team's goal before blowing the whistle and carding the captain & coach. The restart will then take place in a very dangerous area (could result in a goal from the free kick).

I brought this up earlier in the thread, but in the final with a 4th official whose80% of his job is to ensure the proper substitution of players why do I have to tell him.

It brings to mind the corner kick trick play a U11 team did in state cup for which the referee was completely unprepared and awarded an indirect kick to the opposing team. The coach was told that in the future he should tell the ref that he "uses trick plays because U11 just do not do this kind of things". If it is within the rules why does anyone have to say anything to the ref?

Of course in your case it is dirty trick, But that is what the ARs should be doing.

Little tricks, subterfuges, etc. can be disciplined as
-is guilty of unsporting behaviour
-persistently infringes the Laws of the Game

What was the trick the U-11 team used? We had one used against our U-11 team where the player went to kick a corner but called a teammate to kick it instead. As the first player ran onto the field into the box, he barely touched the ball. Our team didn't react and the second player came over and had control of the ball and dribbled in on goal. Half of our players were not ready; fortunately the keeper was.

This works in HS�once on each team�BUT you better tell the official before the match. . .

GSdad .... That is the one...by rule the ball only has to be touched by the player, to be live.

G&B....I assume you are joking...if not ...WHY?

Thats not a trick, of course. Its just stategy. Totally legal to do it all game long.

I am NOT joking�refs will stop the play because most don't know. . .

Then the whole effect is ruined.

We ALWAYS told the refs before matches; and ref responses to the info were VERY revealing.

You are dead on about warning the refs. How all of this is interpeted is an amazing thing.
This would make a great new topic thread. All the great/terror there is to have a game so large and rules so thin. You gotta love the trust and gamesmanship in all of it.
Check out this scenerio...In the rules or even laws there is nothing concerning a defensive wall. There is the 10 yard rule, as well as rules concerning encroachment and taunting.
During a match I was once warned against setting a (jumping)wall against a free kick. Now I know this is a technique as old as the hills. I disagree with the official but if you read the book he can make an arguement.
Amazing stuff isn't it?

Professional officials/professional calls...

England's National Team was notorious for pulling stunts on short corners. It caught opponents off balance a few times but, I never saw an offical raise a flag.

I have often wondered what the ruling would be for a rugby type lifted player to receive a throw-in.

Would that be a scrummage at the place of the knock-on unless ahead of the dead-ball line. Yeah that would be interesting to see.
How about a chicken-fighter style mob in the box on a corner.

Oh, lord...what are you going to be teaching our JV's next year?

Just to clarify for non Charleston paper readers. Phil Bowman's high school column only runs on Sunday. Why it didn't run 2 days after final I do not know, but next chance was a week later.

Quote:

During a match I was once warned against setting a (jumping)wall against a free kick. Now I know this is a technique as old as the hills. I disagree with the official but if you read the book he can make an arguement.
Amazing stuff isn't it?

One of the funniest things I ever saw was in an English National Team friendly, where the Brits set a four man wall with linked arms against a 30 yarder. The ref moved them back, and once they were placed the Brits started jumping. As soon as the ref turned his back they (still linked)all took three large hops forward. They got away with it and blocked the kick as well. I guess they would have claimed loss of balance or some such if they had been caught.