Have you ever watched a college or pro game and seen the way it is suppose to be played? Have some co-workers from UK and the always laugh at the way the HS game is played here. They say in other countries if you kick the ball up in the air it is a sign of a bad player and thay they get teased about it, you sould keep the ball on the ground and it is a passing game not a wrestling match.

 

That was a horribly disjointed and untrue statement. Pro players in all countries play the ball in the air all the time.

 

Second issue is what does that have to do with physical play? Pro women and college players both want their game called more like the men's game, they find it insulting that refs call a women's game differently based on gender.

 

That game last night would not even rank in the top 200 games I've seen for physicality. Quit trying to coddle these players. They are good skilled players that know when to play hard and how much is acceptable.

I'm with bothways good physical game just how the players like.Nothing chippy and some physical tackles by both sides. I'll say it again IT'S BIG GIRL SOCCER and if you dont think it's a contact sport maybe your daughter should play volleyball.

 

A ref told my son once after a hard foul in a basketball game, "son, basketball is a physical sport. If you don't like it, go pick up a tennis racket". :lol2: Applies to soccer as well.

Soccer is a physical game and requires some bumping and hands on. The referee will allow some give and take and it is up to the players to figure out just how much they can get away with before getting called out. This is not a game of tippy toe and dancing. It is a game of winning the ball and using the body to keep the opponent from winning it back.

8 district titles in 9 years is a pretty strong stat for Highlands.

 

Not sure how that relates to the game played last night, but boast on... everyone loves a gracious winner.

 

Because last night was yet another District Championship for Highlands?

Because if they had lost last night it would have "only" been 7 titles in 9 years - and still impressive.

Am I missing anything?

Because last night was yet another District Championship for Highlands?

Because if they had lost last night it would have "only" been 7 titles in 9 years - and still impressive.

Am I missing anything?

 

The 8 titles in 9 years post was made in response to my post about the silliness of arguing over who had more possession in this year's District final game. But sometimes its difficult for people to track the logic of their own posts, let alone the posts of others... SQUIRREL!

The 8 titles in 9 years post was made in response to my post about the silliness of arguing over who had more possession in this year's District final game. But sometimes its difficult for people to track the logic of their own posts, let alone the posts of others... SQUIRREL!

 

Don't flatter yourself. The response had nothing to do with your gibberish. I read that Highlands had 8 titles in 9 years. I repeated and was simply stating it to say that come post season Highlands is a strong contender. Nothing more nothing less.

Don't flatter yourself. The response had nothing to do with your gibberish. I read that Highlands had 8 titles in 9 years. I repeated and was simply stating it to say that come post season Highlands is a strong contender. Nothing more nothing less.

 

Well of course you are right Bosshog... Highlands is a strong contender post-season. Next time, if you simply leave out the quote to an unrelated point in a prior post it will be easier for all to follow. Actually, if you use the "reply with quote" feature and bold the portion of the prior post (Graham's article) that you want to refer to, then it makes it really clear. I hope this is helpful.

 

Good luck to both Highlands and NCC tonight!

Sir: thanks for the tutorial. See you tonight.