Div 2 [VMSL Div. 2] Predictions, Results & Banter 2018/2019

[Canucks4Ever]

Sierra beat Shaheen today 3:2 and most likely secured a promotion (a point more than Serbia and a game in hand). Three more games for Sierra and 10-minute replay against VUFC Rangers (where Sierre leads 4:3).
Serbia would need to beat Sierra, Shaheen, and Greencaps and hope that Sierra does not win all their remaining games (13th Legion and 1 full game and 10-minute replay against VUFC Rangers).

And it looks like there was an absolutely insane finish to that Sierra/Shaheen match as well with Sierra getting an injury time winner before Shaheen were reduced to nine men BUT still then tied the game back up before conceding ANOTHER injury time winner!

View attachment upload_2019-2-10_12-53-19.png

A crucial win for Sierra for certain, though I am not sure that the outlook for promotion is as determined as you suggest.

Their one game in hand over Serbia is the 10 minutes needing to be finished off against VanU, which is set to resume with VanU having a free kick from six yards out to try and tie the game. If they do score and Sierra cannot rescue the match, then there game in hand is effectively neutralized as they will only be two points up on Serbia when the sides clash (assuming nobody drops points elsewhere). That would mean Serbia could vault them with a win, so likely still too soon to call this race.

In 2A, you would back Strikers to finally wrap up the title, after playing with there food for the last couple of weeks, with a win over relegation threatened Westside today, assuming the snow does not intervene.

 

[Canucks4Ever]

A huge game in Division 2B this weekend. Shaheen and Serbia both got their cup matches in last week, so while they wait for the field to catch up to them they will play their remaining domestic match up.

Shaheen's incredible loss to Sierra has all but ruled out promotion, but anything less than a win here would make it official. In reality though, anything but a Serbia win pretty much guarantees Sierra promotion. Shaheen have four players suspended as a result of that match with Sierra, including leading scorer Meysam Soltani. This is in addition to a player serving the second of a two match ban meaning the North Shore boys will be short staffed, missing at least five players. Certainly the deck is stacked towards Serbia, but this is why we play the games. Certainly the way Shaheen/Sierra ended proved that anything really can happen!

There is also a big relegation battle over in 2A with Bombastic hosting Westside. A win for Westside would all but assure Bomabastic will play in the crossover relegation playoff, but a win for the East Van side would see it get incredibly crowded at the bottom as we begin to run out of matches to settle this. It could potentially result in all sorts of pre-playoff, playoff scenarios. So worth keeping an eye on that one as well.

 

[FC Red Star]

In such a tight race for promotion (3 teams) it should never happen that one team has two games in hand this late into season (and after next match between Shaheen and Serbia there will be 3 games in hand for Sierra). Due to Division 2 cup games now it could happen that Sierra plays their games in hand late in April.

Was it really that hard to organize Rangers - Sierra game tomorrow or on Thursday? They would also play at the same time those 10 make-up minutes from the first game so there wouldn't be any games in hand left.

The league has to find way to replay abandoned and postponed games sooner.

 

[Canucks4Ever]

The league has to find way to replay abandoned and postponed games sooner.

I can see this argument and suggest you or someone else bring it up at the AGM. What sort of timeline would be appropriate? Within a week? Two weeks?

Likely easier said than done but certainly worth discussing. There are issues of field availability, etc, especially when it is outside of Vancouver where the VMSL has their own field permits that they can schedule for whatever they choose. Is it fair to force say a team from Surrey and a team from Richmond to play at Van Tech on a Wednesday because the home team cannot get a field on a week night?

Maybe. But that is the sort of thing that might get some push back.

Plus what about the team's training permits? If a team pays to share a field Wednesday or Thursday nights for training and then the league mandates that they have to play a make up game that night because their opponent botched the lights or through something else that was no fault of their own who compensates them for the fact that they now have to pay for a training session they cannot use? As opposed to just scheduling the match on the weekend at the end of the season?

That might just be a tough luck/cost of doing business factor for teams to consider, but you will need to get the majority of the membership to agree with that point of view.

Fortunately for Serbia and Shaheen in this particular case it does not really effect them too much. While it would no doubt be nice to know exactly where Sierra stands, it does not change the fact that this is a must win game for both teams.

 

[FC Red Star]

First of all, let me say that all this has nothing with Sierra (any team could be in that situation; none of this is their mistake). Sierra is the most consistent team in Division 2 (B pool) and they will deservedly be promoted (hard to believe they could miss this opportunity; everything is their own hands).

Anyway, I understand your argument about midweek make-up games, cost associated with it, etc.

How about making up cancelled/abandoned game the following weekend? Yes, that following weekend those two teams (playing a make up game) would have two games (i.e. regularly scheduled league game on Saturday and then a make-up game on Sunday) which should not be a big deal.

See, that would be the only fair solution (to play a make-up game as soon as possible). Waiting the end of the season and hope that make-up game(s) may not be even necessary to play is the worst solution and it looks that’s exactly what the league is doing.

What will happen, hypothetically speaking, if Sierra’s opponents (2 full games and 10 minutes of abandoned game so three games in hand) are not even interested in playing those make-up games at the end of season? VUFC Rangers and 13th Legion are pretty much safe from relegation and cannot be promoted so they could simply forfeit.

Potential scenarios like this one should be always in mind for the league if the competition is to have any integrity.

If you come back with the argument that it would be just plain ridiculous to organize the following weekend a 10 or 20-minute portion of the abandoned game then your argument would also speak volumes about the current rule re abandoned games (making up a portion of the game; missed minutes, etc.).

The first rule should be that if the game is completed (all 90 minutes) then the result stands irrelevant of the rule(s) of the game not being applied properly. The team that is absolutely sure that the ref broke the rule of the game should abandon the game and seek justice from the league. If the team continues playing the game then it forfeits the right to replay the game. If they abandon the game they risk losing 0:3 if they were not correct.

The second rule should be that if the game is abandoned due to severe weather conditions and if 2/3 of the game has been played then the result of the game at that moment should be registered as official result. If less than 2/3 of the game has been played then the game should be annulled (irrelevant of the score) and a completely new game replayed.
This rule could be also applied in situations where the game is abandoned for other reasons (i.e. that game Sierra - Rangers from November - if Sierra abandoned the game after 80 minutes due to the ref's mistake who was not following the rules of the game then the result 4:3 for Sierra would stand because 2/3 of the game were played; if the game continued and all 90 minutes were played then the result at the end would stand and Sierra could not protest the result 4:4).

 

[Big E]

Your hypothetical situation doesn't make any sense.

Both VUFC and 13th Legion are long standing teams in Div 2. Both are chippy, and take a lot of pride in their clubs. Besides, a game getting abandoned with 10 minutes to play? - sounds to me like both teams are eager to see each other again for 10 + 90 and settle a score.

VUFC will be eager, and able, to knock of Sierra. I wouldn't even put it past them to score a goal and make it 4 - 4 in that 10 minute replay. I'll bet a crisp 5$ bill that the 90 minutes that follow will showcase some red cards.

13th Legion will be more then capable of beating Sierra - and still have an outside shot at Provincials, albeit needing some help from all of the 2A teams.

Besides, a forfeiture costs a team like, $230. After all the snow and other BS, teams are gonna want to play.

Strong agree that "The league has to find way to replay abandoned and postponed games sooner.", when the snow starts falling and Vancouver Parks Board shuts down fields because of a cm of snow (last weekend) - not much you can do.

I'm gonna pull a @Canucks4Ever. Here's my prediction:
Serbia beats Shaheen this weekend.
VUFC loses the 10 minute replay to Sierra, but wins the next 90 minutes.
Sierra with a chance to win the league draws against 13th Legion.

It all this comes down to Sierra v Serbia to end the year, with an outright winner being promoted. Sierra will wonder how the hell they lost to the likes of Astros FC (who? they couldn't even score a goal against Serbia), and Serbia will be wondering how they managed to concede 5 goals in 22 minutes to BCT Hurricanes.

 

[soccer8]

The thrills and spills of div 2 soccer. I dont think sierra are as good as serbia in my opinion but we will see...

 

[lego3]

Sierra is actually a good team and the most consistent this season. Westside from Div.1 could have used a handful of guys from Sierra to help them this season and I dont understand why they didn't? Isnt the point of having an affiliate team is to be able to bring players up otherwise I dont really see the point of it?

@Canucks4Ever if Sierra gets promoted to Div.1 will westside make one team or have 2 teams in Div.1? If the decision to make one team then there will be an open spot in Div.1 so therefore the best second team would get promoted or maybe a playoff game between the 2 second place teams.

 

[Canucks4Ever]

Sierra is actually a good team and the most consistent this season. Westside from Div.1 could have used a handful of guys from Sierra to help them this season and I dont understand why they didn't? Isnt the point of having an affiliate team is to be able to bring players up otherwise I dont really see the point of it?

@Canucks4Ever if Sierra gets promoted to Div.1 will westside make one team or have 2 teams in Div.1? If the decision to make one team then there will be an open spot in Div.1 so therefore the best second team would get promoted or maybe a playoff game between the 2 second place teams.

I'll see what my sources say.

My guess would be they would have two teams. As you say, they haven't been sharing players this season so, presumably, they will continue to exist as separate entities next year. What I heard at the beginning of the season was that Sierra actually approached Westside about taking over the Division 1 spot, but wanted to continue to essentially run their own show/have operational control which was a non-starter (I believe Westside also turned down a similar proposal from VanU/UBC/Mosher). Hence them coming in at Div. 2, but with an eye to getting promoted. Sort of taking one shot at moving their entire BMSA set up to the VMSL and earning their way up to the level they feel they belong at. I don't expect that they left BMSA just to play in Division 2 (ostensibly that is already where they were in BMSA Premier playing in B Provincials, etc.).

Again, purely speculating here, but I would think that should they end up not getting this one over the line there might be more player sharing etc. next season. Also you have to consider that Sierra are likely still mostly based out of Burnaby which makes for a bit of a trek out to the Westside and vice versa, so that might inhibit the teams co-mingling as it were.

 

[FC Red Star]

It is rather bizarre that the league scheduled Division 2 Cup games this weekend then mid-week (Wednesday) and then again on Saturday but no League make up games scheduled as of yet.
Obviously, make up games (any competition) can easily be scheduled mid-week when the League really wants it.

 

[dezza]

 

[Arch]

Done. Strikers 5-1. Little longer than it probably should have took but a deep squad is always needed. Looking forward to Provincials as the NK train knocked us out of the div 2 cup.

 

[SmartCoach]

Congratulations see u in Div 1 next season

 

[machel]

Done. Strikers 5-1. Little longer than it probably should have took but a deep squad is always needed. Looking forward to Provincials as the NK train knocked us out of the div 2 cup.

Congrats buddy!

 

[lego3]

Congrats to Strikers they were consistent from opening weekend till the last weekend. Good luck in div.1 next year!

 

[FC Red Star]

Anyone knows if there is any news re make up games in pool B?

By the way, what happens if Sierra and/or Rangers cannot field the same roster when they are finally scheduled to play 8 or 9 make up minutes from the first match? I guess the game would be registered 3:0 for a team that fields enough players. But, who knows for sure which players were on the field on Nov.7th at 81st minute? Who is going to make sure that exactly the same players are there to play those make-up minutes?

Honestly, the League screwed up big time in regards to that match. Either team could lose 3:0 if they cannot have at least 8 players from that day (Nov.7th). Does not really mean anything to Rangers because they are safe from relegation but Sierra's promotion could be in jeopardy. They could lose 3 points if they cannot field at least 8 players. Also, imagine Rangers do not have enough players and Sierra gets 3:0 win. What would Serbia and Shaheen say?

The league should revisit its decision re Nov.7th game. To try to field the same roster from Nov.7, 2018 more than four months later is ridiculous to expect for numerous reasons.
Either a new game (full 90 minutes) should be played (with current rosters) or the game should be re-registered 4:4 (let's not forget that the game continued after Rangers tied 4:4 on Nov.7th and all 90 minutes were played; Sierra protested the game after the match).

The league certainly could make that decision based on their own 4.4 rule especially when make-up minutes have not been played within 24 hours and when obviously both teams could not agree on a new date (otherwise make up minutes would have been already played). Rule 4.3 specifies that make-up time has to be done within 24 hours or on a day agreed by both sides. Again, what if one team (Sierra or Rangers) cannot agree now on a make-up time to be played? How the league is going to rule on that?

 

[Big E]

Anyone knows if there is any news re make up games in pool B?

By the way, what happens if Sierra and/or Rangers cannot field the same roster when they are finally scheduled to play 8 or 9 make up minutes from the first match? I guess the game would be registered 3:0 for a team that fields enough players. But, who knows for sure which players were on the field on Nov.7th at 81st minute? Who is going to make sure that exactly the same players are there to play those make-up minutes?

Honestly, the League screwed up big time in regards to that match. Either team could lose 3:0 if they cannot have at least 8 players from that day (Nov.7th). Does not really mean anything to Rangers because they are safe from relegation but Sierra's promotion could be in jeopardy. They could lose 3 points if they cannot field at least 8 players. Also, imagine Rangers do not have enough players and Sierra gets 3:0 win. What would Serbia and Shaheen say?

The league should revisit its decision re Nov.7th game. To try to field the same roster from Nov.7, 2018 more than four months later is ridiculous to expect for numerous reasons.
Either a new game (full 90 minutes) should be played (with current rosters) or the game should be re-registered 4:4 (let's not forget that the game continued after Rangers tied 4:4 on Nov.7th and all 90 minutes were played; Sierra protested the game after the match).

The league certainly could make that decision based on their own 4.4 rule especially when make-up minutes have not been played within 24 hours and when obviously both teams could not agree on a new date (otherwise make up minutes would have been already played). Rule 4.3 specifies that make-up time has to be done within 24 hours or on a day agreed by both sides. Again, what if one team (Sierra or Rangers) cannot agree now on a make-up time to be played? How the league is going to rule on that?

Out of curiosity were you actually there for the match when it was made 4 - 4, then protested by Sierra -- leading to all this mess?

Sierra loves to get upset about stuff -- and VUFC are a bunch of annoying feisty kids. If it was made 4 - 4 in the final couple minutes, I'll bet Sierra woulda lost it - but again, I'm curious to know if anyone knows the actual details of what happened in the last 10 minutes of that game.

 

[Canucks4Ever]

It will likely put @FC Red Star right over the edge to learn that, per the Excellent Site, the league has now put off playing the final 10 minutes of VanU against Sierra following their match this weekend.

In talking to sources this AM, apparently VanU have asked that the remaining minutes be played after the conclusion of all other league games??? I am not sure their logic. I am told that they are concerned about being able to field a team due to injuries and players having departed the club since, etc. since the original match. Apparently Sierra intend to protest this decision in hopes of having the 10 minutes played this weekend.

Again, not sure VanU's logic. Presumably, because the results do not matter to them, they will simply forfeit the game if it is not going to affect promotion. However, if Sierra need the points to decide who goes up, VanU will scrape a squad together in an effort to, for lack of a better term, "uphold the integrity of the competition", by playing the match. That's the only logic I can see given that it is in VanU's best interest to play the game as they are trailing 4-3 and presumably that result will stand if they don't field a team? The only other thing that makes some sort of sense is that there is a conspiracy with Serbia behind the scenes somehow??? Which would be made all the more crazy considering that VanU actually beat Serbia earlier this year and are one of the reasons that they need Sierra to drop points!

Out of curiosity were you actually there for the match when it was made 4 - 4, then protested by Sierra -- leading to all this mess?

According to what I was told by sources at the time, the final ten minutes were played without incident. The 4-4 goal was scored from the indirect free kick awarded to VanU when the referee erroneously sent off the Sierra GK for handling a back pass, which is a material misapplication of the laws of the game. Sierra protested the result stemming from the red card, arguing that their goal keeper could have potentially saved the free kick and, even if he did not, that they were denied the chance to try and score further goals by having to play with 10 men for the remainder of the match. The VMSL had the same incident occur (misapplication of the back pass rule leading to the incorrect sending off of a goal keeper) just a few weeks prior in a Masters game and had ruled that the appropriate remedy was to replay the match from the time of the incident with the same rosters. They were then bound by precedent to apply the same remedy to this match. I am told that, after protests were made to the league, the board reviewed their decision regarding the replays at (I believe) the December board meeting and determined that replays with original rosters was the proper remedy.

I had a memory of this happening a few seasons ago so I dug around in the archives and found this from Premier in 2016/2017:

Following the game the teams had to play 4 minutes that remained from the reverse fixture and it ended up being 9 men for Westside against 10 from Coquitlam as only players who were on the roster for the first match were eligible. Metro Ford held on despite some Westside pressure.

That game was incomplete due to I believe the lights going out in the original fixture and the results had a direct impact on Westside who were trying to get into Provincials at the time. So this scenario is not exactly unheard of. After several incomplete games this season (there have been 4 or 5 in addition to the VanU/Sierra match due to lighting, injuries requiring paramedics, etc.) it seems clear that the rules surrounding how to resolve these games will need to be fleshed out at the AGM to try and clarify things for future seasons.

 

[Macho Man]

You meet a lot of characters playing VMSL but shout out to Van U who manage to achieve a Premier standard of annoying shite during games. Their team is a dickhead factory

 

[machel]

It will likely put @FC Red Star right over the edge to learn that, per the Excellent Site, the league has now put off playing the final 10 minutes of VanU against Sierra following their match this weekend.

In talking to sources this AM, apparently VanU have asked that the remaining minutes be played after the conclusion of all other league games??? I am not sure their logic. I am told that they are concerned about being able to field a team due to injuries and players having departed the club since, etc. since the original match. Apparently Sierra intend to protest this decision in hopes of having the 10 minutes played this weekend.

At first glance it looks like a "wtf" decision to have the remaining minutes played at a later date but that's probably in the best interest for Serbia if VUFC is worried about not being able to field the same team that first played Sierra.

The league should revisit its decision re Nov.7th game. To try to field the same roster from Nov.7, 2018 more than four months later is ridiculous to expect for numerous reasons.
Either a new game (full 90 minutes) should be played (with current rosters) or the game should be re-registered 4:4 (let's not forget that the game continued after Rangers tied 4:4 on Nov.7th and all 90 minutes were played; Sierra protested the game after the match).

What would you expect Sierra to do? The ref fcuked up the call. Is Sierra supposed to just walk off the pitch with 10 minutes to play while leading 4-3 and then lose by forfeit?? Of course they have to protest after the game!
I understand that you want these 10 minutes played within a timely manner but it's also a huge pain in the ass to get both teams together for a lousy 10 minutes! These kinds of incidences have always been replayed on the teams next match against each other. I don't really see the need to expedite the process unless we're talking about at least 45mins to be resumed, or the games entirety as you expressed.