Sat 5 Jul, 2008
|
|
|
|
WPAC: Argentina beat the US, qualify for 2006 World Cup  x56
 |
| Pan American Hockey Federation |
April 29, 2004 
Pan-American Hockey Federation
> Page Views 7335
By Graciela H. Ortiz, PAHF Media Officer
BRIDGETOWN, Barbados - The women's Argentine team qualified for the 2006 World Cup in Madrid, Spain, by defeating the United States 3-0 in the final of the second Pan-American Cup on Wednesday night at the Sir Garfield Sobers Sports Complex here.
Meanwhile, the US will play the World Cup qualifying tournament to take place in Azerbaijan (a country located between Iran and Russia, in Southernwestern Asia) in March 2006.
Though Argentina dominated the first half producing excellent goal options, specially through Soledad García, the US opposed a clever tactic to stop the Argentine advances.
Then, they distributed play well, moving the ball quickly to prevent to hold it for long.
The North Americans took advantage of the counter-attacks, producing also dangerous play well saved by Argentina's back row and keeper Paola Vukojicic.
Both teams went to half-time without scoring as the world champions could not break the US resistance.
Argentina showed, after half-time, why are they the current world champions, setting the pace from start to finish.
The South Americans opened the score early, two minutes after half-time, through Soledad García, who capitalized on a reverse cross from the left by Inés Arrondo.
Argentina gained the midfield, cutting the US playmaking system.
The national side back row moved up in the field pushing hard their rivals and showing their usual skills and talent.
Thus, they increased the lead to 2-0 through García, again, from a corner cross, in the 47th minute.
Two minutes later, another wonderful play by García finished in an accurate cross that Gulla connected for the 3-0 score.
>From the on, the world champions controlled the game until the end to gain the 2006 World Cup berth.
Luciana Aymar became the Most Valuable Player of the tournament, while Vanina Oneto was the top scorer with 10 goals.
The Best Goalkeeper of the Tournament was Netherlands Antilles' Charlotte Hartmans van de Rijdt.
Argentina: Vukojicic; Margalot, Burkart, Aicega, Ferrari; González Oliva, Aymar, Stepnik; Arrondo, García and Gulla. Also played: Oneto, Russo, Doreski, Hernández and Rodríguez. Coach: Sergio Vigil.
United States: Tran; Lingo, Beach, Larson, Jelley; Loy, Rizzo, Fuchs, Barber; McCann and K. Smith. Also played: T. Smith, Wooley, Fronzoni and Keller. Coach: Beth Anders.
Umpires: Claudia Videla (Chile) and Renate Peters (Germany).
Booking - Green: 13m, Larson (US).
CANADA WIN BRONZE
Canada demolished Uruguay 5-0 to take the third of the tournament yesterday.
The match was even during the first 20 minutes as Uruguay appeared organized, accurate and marking well.
But Canada started to dominate step by step until they opened the score through Stephanie Hume, in the 19th minute.
Uruguay continued pushing to get a short corner without consequences for Canada, but it had for themselves as Canada’s clearing off allowed a fast counter-attack through which Kelly Rezansoff increased the lead.
>From then on, Canada increased their dominance to net two more from Deb Cuthbert, in the 31st and 34th minute.
The Uruguayan fought hard after half-time preventing Canada to net. But a short corner gave the North Americans the 5-0, in the 56th minute.
Canada: Forbes; MacLean, Hunt, D'Abreo, Rushton; Jameson, Rezansoff, Taunton; Magnus, Cuthbert and Leslie. Also played: Simpson, Hume, Buker, Johnstone and Liu. Coach: Kimo Linders.
Uruguay: Fazzio; Bisignano, Ceretta, Chaira, Rebollo; Margni, Bueno, Carluccio, Raiz; Dupont and Casabó. Also played: Gibernau, Saquero, Tilve and Acquarone. Coach: Cristián González.
Umpires: Soledad Iparraguirre (Argentina) and Jun Kentwell (US).
Your opinion counts.
Rate this article or enter your comments below.
|
Opinions expressed here do not represent the official views of PlanetFieldHockey.com or its staff. Comments will be removed if they are considered offensive or of a personal nature.
Comments on this article
|
fan
04-29-2004 5:34 pm
|
Report this post
|
where r the goals
Personally I feel las leonas should have given the US a bigger goal difference. Congratulations to Beth Anders who seems to be doing a marvellous job with the US team.
|
|
mili
04-30-2004 11:58 am
|
Report this post
|
We are the champions..
SE VIENE ARGENTINA BICAMPEON!!
grACIAS CHICAS POR SABER DARNOS TANTAS ALEGRIAS, AUNQUE A ESTA NO SE LES DE TANTA CONSIDERACION...
|
|
fiasco
04-30-2004 12:43 pm
|
Report this post
|
world rankings
I wonder what this does to the rankings for FIH?
|
|
Canuck
04-30-2004 3:46 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
Does Canada stand any chance of being invited to the WCQ? Seems doubtful given their current ranking, but I'm sure someone knows the details.
|
|
Good Job?
05-01-2004 11:27 am
|
Report this post
|
The same result could have been gotten by a onts of others. We gotten this SAME result for how many pan ams games/cups?
to be 2nd place in the america's is nothing to hang your hats in the USA womens program. Keep in mind we have more girls/ladies playing than ANY other country in the WORLD.....who is charge of olympic development of the players?
The system seem very flawed and most sucessful program/ business would change something that is BROKEN. Not to do anything is will show the intelligence... or lack of.... USFHA leadership.
|
|
|
|
Re: Good Job?
05-01-2004 3:50 pm
|
Report this post
|
Finishing second in the America's is not the problem. ARG is the number 1 ranked team in the world. The reason USFHA needs change is because of the failure to qualify for the Olympics (again). Talk to outsiders about this team and they will tell you they have reverted to an old school team. Very mechanical and robotic in their play.
As for having the most people in the world playing FH... until people realize how poor the quality of the college teams are we will continue to think that this is the way to develop elite players. You can't have kids start playing the game in high school and expect to compete against the best. Unless you get a core group to play until they are 35. Starting young is the only way to make it work.
|
|
I'm sure
05-02-2004 12:11 pm
|
Report this post
|
Most NCAA college teams would beat the bottom half like Trindad and Tobago...
from what I seen I would put my money of the NCAA teams
|
|
Re: I'm Sure
05-02-2004 1:55 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
Who cares if an NCAA team can beat T&T? It's irrelevant. How is that going to get the US into the Oly's or the WC? The goal is to beat the 8-12 ranked teams in the world to get into the big events.
|
|
Defnitely Sure
05-02-2004 5:39 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
The Dutch,German,Austrailian U21 teams and 2nd third division clubs would beat this American team. You can also put your money on that.
|
|
usfha fan, I think
05-02-2004 7:12 pm
|
Report this post
|
recognition????
Sorry to switch gears on the subject matter of who is playing and why isn't the US developing forward? We all know why? Let's be realistic. OUr governing body of course.
Any how, why didn't ALL the retiring players get recognized at the final game in Barbados? Why is TF the only one who ever gets kudos, and for being what? The oldest player on the team? There were many others who lived through this nightmare with Beth, and Sharon T., who deserve alot more recognition than they received, which I beleive was nothing! Oh, I forgot TF didn't think it was all that bad. Another show as to what this organization is about! Favoritism, old school-ness, grey hair. Anyone bother to guess who is getting the under-21 job????
|
|
usfha fan
05-02-2004 8:27 pm
|
Report this post
|
Job
personally i think tracey will do very well as U21 coach - if she gets it. she knows the game better than most. did you see the applicant pool? calum giles, kate starre, bobby issar? not sure i would want any of these trusted with coaching the U21 team.
i did write if she gets the position for a reason. as far as I am aware the job has been put on hold for a while. part of the duties of the coach were to direct HS open and college open camp - duties given to someone else, direct b camp - again, given to someone else and also to direct fdic camp - again, given to someone else. from what i am led to believe ba and nc have contracts that expire 12/31/04. tracey griesbaum will take the team thru the JWC i think and then we'll see. i dont think the curent staff getting new 4 yr contracts is as sure as everyone thinks - not after some of the recent scenes anyway.
oh and finally - tiffany snow if you are reading, it was great to see you play with a smile on your face at SL after what you went through in auckland. you'll get your chance........
|
|
2 cents
05-02-2004 10:41 pm
|
Report this post
|
my2cents
u think tf retiring is a problem....? wait till u see who takes over when beth returns to odu....hahhhahaha!!
|
|
MyPOV
05-03-2004 4:34 pm
|
Report this post
|
Hockey in the US.
Why does the US have the largest pool of women in the world, the most opportunity for hockey, and still no even qualify for the olympics? There is no club system. We all know this. I'm not saying anything new. This has been said many times before.
Setting up clubs in the US would encourage more people to play in general, men and women. I really feel that the more men that play in the US, the better the women will get. Call me sexist, or whatever you want. But everyone argues that guys shouldn't play on girls teams. Why is that? Bigger? Stronger? Faster? Guys are more natural athletes? Well then, if thats true, it would improve womens hockey to sometimes play against men's teams in their club scene.
I believe you have to be crushed before you can crush. The stronger the competition, the better women will be in the US. If I just hope that the USFHA isn't too scared that more men will like the sport and not be scared off by a kilt.
|
|
cannuck
05-03-2004 4:45 pm
|
Report this post
|
reality
You cannot compare NCAA teams with international teams. Granted the top 10 NCAA teams are good but to compare with weak Pan Am programs that lack money and infrastructure to develop their game is garrulous. International hockey is a whole other level.I'd like to see your NCAA teams or the US squad with their veters who all work in home depot to train extensively play with an Argentenian or Dutch U21 teams.
|
|
dave
05-03-2004 5:22 pm
|
Report this post
|
random comments
Who knows the game more... Kate Starre of Tracy Fuchs?
I don’t think it is even debatable.
People have demonized Kate Starre in America. Have any of these people ever talked hockey with her?
That being said both are better candidates than the current coach of the u21’s.
MyPOV, yep. I remember playing against women’s teams from u16 level up, always a good game for both sides, I wish the D1 teams here could do the same.
Cannuck..I also wish that they could play against some girls international teams, the worlds top u21 teams would show the US national team a thing or two.
i honestly believe that playing international u16 teams would be a humbling experience for most D1 teams, if not 16s 18s would for sure
|
|
Starre is awesome!
05-03-2004 9:08 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
I feel this would be the right choice. She know her hockey for sure . I feel USFHA are afraid of people like the one mention by "usfha fan" .the one mentions and many more would do a great job if ever given a fair chance.....do not hold your breath on that one!
|
|
Samantha
05-03-2004 9:25 pm
|
Report this post
|
above comments
More like Kate Starre has demonized herself......get it right! Regarding TF vs. Kate Starre et al......well, being a good player, and the key word is good.......well, doesnt make you a good coach.
|
|
Dave
05-03-2004 11:34 pm
|
Report this post
|
samantha
True, good players do not necessarily make good coaches.
if i am picking up what you are infering by 'the key word is good' in regards to playing i do think that she is a little better than good. if i picked it up wrong sorry in advance.
Though I don’t think that there are many players who can say that they have had the experience that a player like Kate has.
from what i know and have heard she does seem to be a good coach
you don’t hang around Ric Charlesworth and not learn a thing or two about coaching.
I have heard a lot of the stories regarding Kate in America, a lot of it seems to center around the fact that she has been out spoken and a critic of the usa residential program. I do accept that she might not have been in the best position to comment but I do think that she might know a little bit about a good residential set up.
However, this is not about personal issues, it is about who has the most knowledge and can best apply that to the position.
I think that she could do a very good job there if she would be allowed to.
|
|
usfha fan
05-04-2004 4:29 am
|
Report this post
|
an apology
to kate - sorry in my post i wrote the wrong name - I actually know kate fairly well and have to say that she would do a fantastic job. the only problem is with her is that she is australian! the usfha dont seem to of had a good rapport with australians......
once again sorry for the mis type.
|
|
mili
05-04-2004 11:23 am
|
Report this post
|
I can´t understand
USA is a rich country where sports can be develop in a succesfull way, so why don´t you have a good hockey team? It´s incredible thata having so many pitches, all the technology and a good money support you can´t be a elite team. HEre in Argentina, the poorty is extremily, so the ámateurs sports aren´t suportted a lot. The hockey team, train in poor conditions, the receive a salary (BECAS, i don´t know which is the apropiate word) which is about 250 dollars...althought, they are first ranking. They have passion and love this sport.
|
|
AZ Player
05-04-2004 3:14 pm
|
Report this post
|
Ways to save money!!!
I think the USFHA can save tonnes of money by having the women's team play practice games against the Men's National team. And the money that is saved can be injected into developing the club teams.
|
|
fiasco
05-04-2004 5:44 pm
|
Report this post
|
az player
I see a benefit for the women but
how would this be any use for the men?
they would have to spend money to gather the team and play the women so their budget would be affected no?
Plus its kinda insulting to the men
|
|
m
05-05-2004 10:13 am
|
Report this post
|
|
the same way that bobby riggs was insulted when he had to play billy jean king??????
|
|
Re: M...get a grip!
05-05-2004 11:36 am
|
Report this post
|
|
if you really thing the USA women would beat our US men your clearly out to lunch and just looking to start a rift....thanks for you dubious comment
|
|
Fiasco
05-05-2004 3:05 pm
|
Report this post
|
re M
No
Bobby Riggs who was 55 atthe time, wanted to play Billy Jean King, you think the men want to play the women?
Do you think the women would give the men a game if they really tried?
Maybe if the USA women played against a team of 55 year old men........
|
|
AZ Player
05-05-2004 4:18 pm
|
Report this post
|
I sure that the top women national teams, like Arg, Aus, etc can probably beat our Men's team on a good day. So if the women play against to Men's team, it will only make them better. You have to play against better teams in order to get better. It was a waste of money and time playing the pickup games against the Irish team.
I think it would of great benefit to hockey if both teams come together and help each other out.
|
|
Cintas
05-05-2004 4:58 pm
|
Report this post
|
AZ Player
How exactly is this helping the men?? By the way, your contention that the top women's teams could beat the US is ridiculous. They wouldn't come close. The physical differences are just to great. Ask the US women about their experience playing against Under 21 mens club sides in Australia.
|
|
hunsey
05-05-2004 8:07 pm
|
Report this post
|
USA women v men
Reality check.
USA Women were in Melbourne on a training camp before the Olympic qualifying tournament in Auckland. They played the Victorian Under 18 Men's team and lost 11-1. Granted it was only a practice match, but 16-18 year olds from one state of Australia?
Next day they played again and only lost 3-0 - played very defensively and therefore shut down the youngsters attack, but rarely challenged went into their attacking circle.
|
|
Davo
05-05-2004 10:15 pm
|
Report this post
|
US Setup
The problem in the US is the dominance of the college system and the failure of these colleges to develop the sport at the grass roots.
In Australia there are many University Clubs, that play in a club based competition and also send teams to compete at University Championships. These clubs also have junior programs to develop players from a young age. There is no requirement you must be a student or graduate of the institution.
In the US, it is going to be very difficult to shift the focus away from the college system, but making these teams responsible for development of the game would help. At the moment access to National Squads is the only bargaining tool that the USFHA has over the colleges. They should use it.
How about USFHA make it a requirement that to be selected in a national squad you must play for a club (or college team) that provides junior development (for men & women) and an opportunity to continue to play hockey after graduating. Those teams that don't to comply will have difficulty attracting players with ambitions to make national squads and their results will reflect this.
It may be short term pain, but long term gain for US Hockey.
|
|
Peter Jones
05-06-2004 1:05 am
|
Report this post
|
Advantages for women of playing regularly with / against men
A point to consider is that the top 2 women's teams at the USA Club Cup played recently were Boston Minutewomen and Big Apple Flickers. Both these teams play their hockey in close association with men's teams, and sometimes train in mixed settings.
Playing with and against men is certainly one way to help raise the pace of the women's game. The USA Women's Indoor team did very well on their tour of England and Scotland playing against a mix of men's and women's teams. I think most of the players would agree that they raised the tempo of their game in competing against the men.
Would games against the USA Women's national team help the USA Men? An occasional game probably wouldn't hurt, as the team doesn't get many chances to play competitive hockey in the Us, but the USA Men would probably gain more domestically from playing against an East Coast All Star team.
Thoughts and comments?
|
|
Mr. Reality
05-06-2004 10:20 am
|
Report this post
|
Milli
Milli,
You answered the question yourself. This country is rich with many pitches. Because of this the people in charge are in it for money not the game. Look at all (most) of the NCAA coaches, what are they trying to accomplish. Well they want a winning program. They practice and prepare to beat each other therefore keeping the level of play low and only an innovatoin by a coach that wins consistently causes the rest to raise their game. I would bet that if you asked most players in this country who the world champions are they wouldn't know. They don't practice and play to beat Argentina if they did the US would have a dominant program just because of the number of players we have. For example that is why the ACC and Big ten are the best. The coaches in those conferences have to compete against the best every game so they all raise their game. The other conferences struggle like the Big East because they only play a few good teams every year. The focus here is getting alot of girls playing for scholarships, that way the parents think nothing of spending 4-500 dollars at a college coaches camp that teaches you nothing. The next problem is futures, A great idea but unfortunately it has grown into nothing more than a giant national camp program that takes in just about anyone. The addition of the weker players causes the entire system to underperform there is no incentive for the girls to train harder because the USFHA will not kick you out if you don't perform they just keep making it bigger and watering down the talent. Finally after college because of the ridiculous hours the girls spend playing hockey they quit playing the coaches in college have made them hate it. Later in lif late 20's they miss it and come back but because the facilities are too busy muilking the cash cow for money the adults have limited opportunities.
Bottom line is that there are very few players in the USA who play because they love the game, most use the game for an education and then leave. The most passionate players are the foreign born adults who form club teams, the NAPL is a great example of where the passion for hockey is just look at NY, Boston, Phila., and DC these folks love hockey. The good news is that there are some passionate boys and girls playing adn we have to hope that they continue and help grow the sport. If not the sport will die as lacrosse takes over as the next best sport behing soccer, footbal, basketball, baseball/softball, and volleyball.
If funding got yanked from the USFHA the sport would grow and you would quickly see a diference, but tight control by the USFHA has killed the sport.
|
|
realism
05-06-2004 11:41 am
|
Report this post
|
I agree with cannuck
I am field hockey player and I was wondering if I could work at Home Depot, so I could train extensively. Americans get a grip,your programs aren't as good as you think.
|
|
Fiasco
05-06-2004 3:02 pm
|
Report this post
|
AZ player
your assertion that the top women's teams could beat the US men is ridiculous.
The speed that the men can generate cannot be matched by any women's team let alone power and creativity.
I too have seen junior boys teams crush women's nats in the double digits. Right before the Barcelona Olympics U21 Ontario crushed the Olympic bound womens team by 20 goals
|
|
Applying
05-07-2004 8:57 am
|
Report this post
|
TO: USFHA FAN(I THINK)- 2 CENTS & STARR IS AWESOME
Hi Guys - Why don't we start a club. We can call it "THE WANNA BE'S". USFHA would definitely be the Pres. since she/he has the best qualifications - we can recruit others. the qualifications have to be Jealousy (experience in that is a must). Negative criticism;naming people and groups. Im sure we can train people to be just like us, the meaner , the better. You three would be a great success. You have the next 4 yrs to be a non-supporter of the USA team - who will you choose to pull apart? Good Luck.....
|
|
Hockey cocky
05-07-2004 10:37 am
|
Report this post
|
US WOMEN VS US MEN
HA, forget the US women playing their men,thats just wasting the time of the men. For serious preparation,let them play U21 international teams,men or women. And for the record the record, their men should do the same. The women playing their men is not such a bad idea,lots of countries do it. But I figure if u are gonna learn, learn from the best.
|
|
Wansbo
05-07-2004 10:54 am
|
Report this post
|
AZ player
The difference between Men and womens hockey is a quantum leap. I havent yet seen a woman flick a ball 60 plus yards down the field nor hit a ball as hard as a man. The Kiwi women and Aus women have at times played in one of their state/City mens leagues as a build up to Olympics/World Cups . The women can hold their own against the very bottom mens clubs losing 2 or 3-1. Against the top clubs the score was close to 6 to as high as 11.
in the early 90's the US women had a 4 nation tournament at East LA.
They scrimmaged against a team of so cal guys mostly on the wrong side of 30 and got beaten on 4 seperate occassions . After we scored the first 3 or 4 goals we threw the ball around the back ...we didnt knock the women over physically just passed quicker ran faster and shot more accurately ...nothings changed since Dyan shand scored 6 past Germany in 1936 ..score more goals than the other guys.
Until the US women ( and Men) build a solid CLUB program instead on this NCAA college crap the US women will continue to finish 12th in the World in Womens and in the 20's for the Men ( the mens program has its own set of problems) . Hockey needs to be played 6 months a year in a league competiition to allow the game to grow.
There are 2 many OLD school wome administrators running Hockey in the US with Sharon Taylor being one of them . The game starts with young kids Sharon ( she doesnt like watching young kids play) dveloping skills at 8 or 9 instead of 13 or 14 .
|
|
mili
05-07-2004 1:47 pm
|
Report this post
|
thank you
for your answer..and good luck. i want to tell you something, one part of the training to the last world cup to argentina, was playing against man´s teams, they where under 21 or 18. The timing, and the fast of they help argentina to improve some aspects.
|
|
R. Lee Ermey
05-07-2004 1:54 pm
|
Report this post
|
Wansbo
How do you know that Sharon doesn't like watching young kids play? Where does that leap of logic come into play? Is there something to this? DO YOU WANT YOUR MOMMY?????
|
|
Lufbra
05-07-2004 3:57 pm
|
Report this post
|
Wansbo - Read
Wansbo - I cant comment on most of your post but I can suggest that if you want a girl who can flick the ball 60 yards down the field and hit the ball as hard as most guys then you should come and watch Lufbra play sometime. We have a girl who plays at the back who is famed for her huge aerial passes, hard hitting and all round great play. Oh yes and did I mention she was the 2nd top scorer in the Nat League this year? How did she score her goals? As far as I am aware she dragflicked them at speeds that would embarrass most men. Her name? Caroline Steel..... And you know what the ironic thing is? Shes American!
|
|
Wansbo
05-07-2004 10:39 pm
|
Report this post
|
R Lee Ermey
Sorry Mastermind..she mentioned she didnt like watching little kids play in front of 10 or 12 people at Calcup last year .
A major part of the problem when the President of USFHA doesnt realise why so many other countries are so far ahead of US hockey players by playing the game at 8 or 9 instead of picking up a stick at 13 in Junior high .
As for DO YOU WANT YOUR MOMMY..grow up you little toad we're talking Hockey which is obviuoly something you know Nothing about .
|
|
Sharon who?
05-08-2004 5:41 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
take her at Pat hayes atn send them to a new land
|
|
Dartmouth Fan
05-08-2004 10:05 pm
|
Report this post
|
Lufbra
You want to know the real funny thing. Caroline Steele doesn't even get a look for the national or Jr national teams, and she never did. That is why the USFHA s*&(*, I have seen her play at Dartmouth and even though her coach was accussed of giving her an illegal stick she is still a great player. I would bet better than many who were eligible for diferent camps over the years. Anyway it is interesting to see how a good college player does when she is finished. WE DONT NEED THE USFHA JUST PLAY !!!
|
|
Careful
05-09-2004 9:41 am
|
Report this post
|
To Dartmouth Fan
Dartmouth fan - you might want to get your facts straight about Carolyn Steele. She WAS not given an illegal stick, nor did anyone complain that she had been. She graduated long before the happenings of this past season. She used a Grays megabow.
As far as the stick goes that was used by Dartmouth - having been on the receiving end of Rebecca Stuckers flicks all I can say to those who whined is go out and coach your kids how to do the skills. someone thought of an idea that you didnt and can probably coach a skill that you cannot. The stick was not illegal, in fact I believe that it will be in a certain stick manufacturers range in 2005.
I believe the coach in questio now has a website at www.dragflicking.com - if this is not him then I apologise.
|
|
USAFieldHockey
05-09-2004 10:20 am
|
Report this post
|
Re: Davo & Wansbo
I'm not sure how this logic all started, but the NCAA has never been the program by which grassroot programs were ever established.
If you look at any other sport in the United States, football, basketball, volleyball, softball, baseball, soccer, swimming, track & field, gymnastics, ice hockey, etc., etc., you will not find the NCAA behind the grassroot support.
Support for such programs has and must come from private national programs such as the USFHA. National programs like the USFHA are the governing bodies that are responsible for developing and promoting their sports and all grassroot programs must start here.
As for the comment of DARTMOUTH FAN, "we don't need the USFHA..." Yes we do, but we need it to do what it was intended to do, develope a grassroot system that is "NATIONWIDE" and not primarily based on the east coast. Develope coaches and players. And, most of all, promote their product.
If hockey in the USA is to survive amongst the compitition of other sports, it needs to take a page from their play book... promote your product, get national support through developement of a nationwide grassroot system/program and stop using the university system for something it was never intended to be, a developement or recruit program for the USFHA.
|
|
Wansbo
05-09-2004 11:49 pm
|
Report this post
|
USA Field Hockey
USA
Thanks for your thoughtful comments re NCAA and USFHA.
I reread my rant and dont think it refers to NCAA acting as a grassroot organisation for hockey, rather it faults USFHA on gearing our programs to the college ranks (NCAA) rather than building a club program such as in Holland,Germany,UK and Australia. I agree that we need a NGB that will be supportive and foster the infrastructure coast to coast that you talk about..problem is USFHA hasn't been that type of organisation. Too many jolly Hocekjy sticks types with minimal understanding of the way the game is played and developed around the globe. It is assinine to play a 10-12 week season in the fall in the US and expect to compete with countries where the season is 28-30 weeks with mid week league games a substantial part.
Maybe we should form a rebel organisation (such as American TKD) and fight for the betterment of US hockey and force USFHA to make fundamental change . Sharon Taylor is part of the problem not the solution and the rampant chronyism is sickening.
Stepping back there are always hockey politics in all parts of the globe ask 5 hockey players from every country who should be in their national team and you will discover at least 5 players who have been robbed by their exclusion.
Wansbo
|
|
Sorry !!
05-10-2004 9:40 am
|
Report this post
|
RE: Careful
Ooops, sorry! I thought this stick thing had gone back, either way the skill is amazing and I apologize if I offended. I will check out the web site. It is innovators like this that the USFHA needs, not the go along to get along crowd.
Thanks for the info.
|
|
z
05-10-2004 3:42 pm
|
Report this post
|
GRASSroots development
The best thing anyone could do for hockey in the USA would be to get it off grass - particularly at underage level. (I don't mean to offend the grass playing nations, I'm sure your grass is considerably better - most of the grass used for hockey in the USA is not fit for playing football/soccer never mind hockey).
Playing on grass (in the USA) makes the game slow and removes a lot of the skill turning it into a very unattractive game, particularly to watch. Moving away from grass would improve the pace and skill level making it more attractive, helping to recruit and keep more players. Tactics would change, exposing players to hockey that bears a greater resemblance to international hockey i.e. not a "see whose sweeper can hit the ball the farthest" game. Players might enjoy the game more.
I know people play sport for various different reasons but how many of the girls playing in the USA are truly passionate about the game? Without passion you will never develop an international standard of game. Improving the enjoyment and attractiveness of the game will help to get more people turned on to it, which more than just playing helps to breed passion - something that appears to be sadly lacking in hockey in the USA.
|
|
USAFieldHockey
05-10-2004 8:00 pm
|
Report this post
|
Re: Wansbo
Thanks for your reply, I hope I didn't misread what was in your post, maybe this will clarify my thinking...
My comments to your 5/7 post were in respons to your statement "ncaa crap"... I think the NCAA is a vital program for young US athletes and has its place in their developement, what I don't think is that it should be used as a recruiting or developement program for the USFHA or the National team, the two programs should always reamain focused on their individual missions.
The NCAA offers student athletes the opportunity to play a sport they are passionate about and recieve some financial help with there tuition. If these same athletes choose to take their playing careers to the next level, it is an individual choice and opportunities for those athletes are available.
Go Team USA!
|
|
jonboag
05-10-2004 8:32 pm
|
Report this post
|
HA -
First of all "HA," it would benefit you to enroll in a basic english grammar course. What the heck does "mosted" mean? As for your assumption, "ask anybody what they truly think of him and his coaching," I would like to accept that invitation.
I have been fortunate enough to discuss the game of hockey with the person you refer to, and, to be quite honest, I have found him highly motivated and enthusiastic about the game. In my opinion, and it is MY opinion, he has been very helpful in explaining new theories about the game and is always willing to share ideas. In addition, not only does he share, but he listens as well.
Recently, he has taken some flack over an acceptable stroke that, had anyone else taken the time to develop, would have been acceptable. Let us face the reality of hockey - we complain that our national team cannot compete with many of the top international teams, as they do not have the techniques that teams such as Australia, Holland, and even Spain have acquired. Well, what type of players are on the U.S. National team? Collegiate players... thus, why not expose them to the reality of the game at a higher level.
So, if the person you continue to criticize is teaching his players to play at a level above, why not applaude him and compete at a higher level. Isn't that what we in hockey hear time and time again? However, if your beef with this individual is personal, it doesn't belong here and I for one, do not wish to read such trash. If nothing else "HA," be professional!
|
|
Davo
05-10-2004 10:17 pm
|
Report this post
|
USAFieldHockey
True, you do not see the college system behind the grassroot developement of the game in Football, Soccer, Basketball etc. But you do see the organisation which is behind the highest domestic standard in the country supporting the grassroots level. Is there a domestic competition in the US that is better than the NCAA?
I'll repeat my statement, that while the focus of US Hockey is on the college system, hockey will fail to prosper nor will the US compete internationally at level they are capable of.
The colleges have the best resources and suck up the most funding available for hockey, unlike all the other sports you listed. The so called "best" coaches and artificial turfs are readily accessible through the college system where you can only play for a limited amount of time. The ability to play at a good standard for ten seasons or more, like most successful countries with domestic leagues, does not exist in the US. There is nowhere to go once these players have left the college system with a standard that is as or better than what they have just been playing. This effects the depth and quality of the National team.
Yes, in most sports the colleges act as a stepping stone in player development. In hockey they don't as the standard is not good enough and worse the next step is of a lower standard (domesticly). There are numerous examples of 16 and 17 year olds playing national leagues in Holland, Germany, Spain, Australia and England. They develop quickly and the next step to international games is not so large. The same cannot be said of 18-20 year olds playing in the college system.
Shift the focus or accept what this second rate system delivers.
|
|
USAFieldHockey
05-11-2004 10:40 am
|
Report this post
|
Re: Davo
I think we're on the same page as to what needs to be done to improve hockey in the US with the one exception, it is not the NCAA, or college systems responsibility to do this, that responsibility lies with the USFHA, its governing body AND its members.
If hockey is to grow and prosper in the US it MUST develope a program by which young athletes are exposed to the sport at an early age, the program MUST be developed at a NATIONAL level and not primarily focused in the northeastern portion of the country. The USFHA must reinvest funds in the program to develope a solid grassroots system that would encourage the construction of turf playing fields and youth leagues throughout the US
Until a system is put in place that builds from the ground up, Hockey in the US will always struggle for survival.
|
|
former player
05-13-2004 6:55 am
|
Report this post
|
Coaching
Your idea of a grassroots system is definitely ideal. What about coaching? Most people who write on any of these post say there are no really good coaches in the US and that our national team coaches should be foreign, so where would the coaches for this grassroots system come from? Maybe as a grassroots system gets developed, not only will the players improve, the coaches will improve too.
|
|
USAFieldHockey
05-15-2004 2:03 pm
|
Report this post
|
Re: former player
You are correct... the grassroots system not only improves the playing level, but will develope coaching as well, in the same way that soccer improved in the US some 20 years ago. At that time soccer was little known, but by developing a strong youth program, the sport attracted foriegn coaches and players to get involved in the developement of our young soccer players, as the "leagues" grew, more and more parents became involved as coaches, referee's, board members, etc.. Coaching developed from this resource of parent "volunteers" who learned from their "new american" counterparts and in time, the international sport of soccer became a national sport... while field hockey may never grow to this level, we will never know until we start at the begining and put together a STRONG US Youth program that developes not only the player but public support of the sport .
In order to be successful, the youth program must truly be a NATIONAL one... if not, field hockey will never receive the recognition it deserves.
|
|
former player
05-19-2004 4:26 pm
|
Report this post
|
re:USAfieldhockey
Thanks for your comments...I definitely agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
HOME | FEATURES | CLUBHOUSE | CAMPS | LINKS | ABOUT US | STORE | ADVERTISE
Use of this site is subject to certain Terms & Conditions.
|
|
|
