Tak dneska super 1 třetina.Od druhe třetiny bylo Kladno živější,a vsi silou dotahovalo,a kolikrát to pekne smrdelo.Filip pochytal co mohl,na krásnej věšák Jardy nemel nárok,a gól na 6:3 byl od nich sakra stastnej,(odraz od ramene Zikmunda).3 třetinu ještě zkoušeli tlačit,a taky tlačili,ale uz jsme to pohlidali,i kdyz nekdy se štěstím.Na 6:5 tam bylo dost šanci,nastesti,to nedali.No sečteno,podrzeno,3 body super,i kdyz jsem trochu rozpacitej z výkonu nasich borců od stavu 6:1.
Snad se ponauci pro příště,protoze treba s Plzní,by se ten výpadek nemusel vyplatit.
S Plzní ve vší úctě asi nebudeme vést 6:1 ( i když bych si to přál), ale to by sem musela přivézt juniorku Já jsemse dneska nedíval, ale čistě za mě, měli jsme teď asi opravdu jednodušší soupeře, ZLín v totální neformě, Pardubice taky nic moc a Kladno budeevidentně otloukánek ligy a bude dobře, když to vzadu bude sichrovat, ať nemáme ještě hnedý trencle, stačí zelený. JE to začátek, kterej je sakra důležitej a kor pro tým jako jsme my, takže za mě super, kouká se na tu tabulku hezky. Chtělo by to získat aspoň bodík, dva v Olomouci, ale když si vzpomenu, jak se nám tam daří pokaždý, tak mám špatnej pocit, že přijde první letošní prohra, no kéž bych se mýlil. Ale jedu se tam mrknout na vlastní oči to zas joo..
No pokud by Kladno predvadelo to, co u nas od pulky zapasu, nemuselo by byt otloukankem. Byli jasne lepsi. Do Rachnovo golu na 6-1 akce stridala akci. A rikal jsem si, co jako Kladno chce s timdle delat. Ale pak se to total otocilo. Nase aktivita uplne vyhasla a Kladno melo jasne navrch. Zajimavy, jak se obraz hry dokaze obratit.
pOne: nj, dáš dva goly a jsi jinde, zatímco předtím jeden tahal pilku, pak najednou tahá druhej a ty nemůžeš naskočit na tenhle vlak zpátky, koncentrace musí být pořád 100%, nejsme tým profesorů hokejistů, takže holt s takovýma výpadkama musíme chtě nechtě počítat, ale je dobře, že se to stalo, vyhrát 8:1, mohli bychom mít nosánky možná mnohem výš, takhle chlapcům dojde, že makat musí non stop..
Theses: (1) You have old experienced players -> so, passive coaching is ok (because they should know the dangers); (2) you have more young inexperienced players -> there should be more active coaching; (3) the younger and less experienced the players, the more the coach should actively intervene during the game in dangerous situations.
A look at yesterday's match: The goal sequence was 1:0, 2:0, 3:0 (by the way: I wonder why Kladno put the pudgy dwarf into the goal), 4:0 ... break ... 5:0, 5:1, 6:1, 6:2 ... Do you see the changing of the match's momentum with this 6:2? ...and there were still 30 minutes on the clock. Time enough for Kladno to win this match. At this point I had the thought: 'Coach please take a timeout to make the team aware of the seriousness of the situation.' But that did not happen. Instead it went on with the 6:3 ... again an opportunity to take a timeout to shake the team awake, but instead ... 6:4! Kladno was back in the match and we needed a bit of luck to bring this match home with three points.
I think we could have made it easier for ourselves if the coaches had been more active by taking a timeout at the right moment, to react on the momentum of the match.
@Screepy: I agree with you, maybe it is better that the game went like this. The players would have learned less from an 8:1 and might have been euphoric. So the players actually see that they have to play concentrated for 60 minutes. So yesterday's lesson should be useful against better teams than Kladno.
@HawK71 And why they counted +/- points when it was powerplay? Maybe they forgot, that Kladno has powerplay.
But when they make mistakes like this, how can we believe in this oficial stats?
@Vosa1: Do not trust any statistics which you have not manipulated yourself! Joking aside: Many statistics have been added in the last few years. The amount of data that needs to be processed quickly is immense. So there will always be mistakes like this one. I think this data should only show 'who was on the ice', so this data from the powerplay will not be included in the official '+/-' statistics of the players. All in all, I am very happy with all the statistics on hokej.cz. Even if I could not watch the game, I can read a lot from the data there. But we can not believe everything what is written there in black or blue on white.
@Screepy: It is true, and we can enjoy the view. ... as long as we are still in the first rank. With the previous opponents the probability of nine points was not so low. It is very nice our team has implemented this for our team favourable match plan in this way. On the other hand the beginning of this season reminds me of Litvínov's season's beginning a few years ago - and we should make sure we do not get to the bottom, like Litvínov did back then. Again:
Let us enjoy this time!
@plasa: In the '+/-'-statistic only the goals count as '+' or '-' for the players on the ice (with the exception of the goalkeeper), if the goal is not scored in a powerplay or as a penalty shot. So the 6:4 is not a '-' for V. Eminger and no '+' or '-' for any of the players. But, it may count as '-' for the Radegast statistic...? Anybody, who has the rules of the Radegast statistic?
Komentáře
Snad se ponauci pro příště,protoze treba s Plzní,by se ten výpadek nemusel vyplatit.
(1) You have old experienced players -> so, passive coaching is ok (because they should know the dangers);
(2) you have more young inexperienced players -> there should be more active coaching;
(3) the younger and less experienced the players, the more the coach should actively intervene during the game in dangerous situations.
The goal sequence was 1:0, 2:0, 3:0 (by the way: I wonder why Kladno put the pudgy dwarf into the goal), 4:0 ... break ... 5:0, 5:1, 6:1, 6:2 ...
Do you see the changing of the match's momentum with this 6:2? ...and there were still 30 minutes on the clock. Time enough for Kladno to win this match.
At this point I had the thought: 'Coach please take a timeout to make the team aware of the seriousness of the situation.'
But that did not happen. Instead it went on with the 6:3 ... again an opportunity to take a timeout to shake the team awake, but instead ... 6:4!
Kladno was back in the match and we needed a bit of luck to bring this match home with three points.
@Screepy: I agree with you, maybe it is better that the game went like this. The players would have learned less from an 8:1 and might have been euphoric. So the players actually see that they have to play concentrated for 60 minutes. So yesterday's lesson should be useful against better teams than Kladno.
Was V. Eminger on the penalty bench or on the ice? …or do we have two V. Emingers now?
But when they make mistakes like this, how can we believe in this oficial stats?
Let us enjoy this time!
@plasa: In the '+/-'-statistic only the goals count as '+' or '-' for the players on the ice (with the exception of the goalkeeper), if the goal is not scored in a powerplay or as a penalty shot. So the 6:4 is not a '-' for V. Eminger and no '+' or '-' for any of the players. But, it may count as '-' for the Radegast statistic...? Anybody, who has the rules of the Radegast statistic?