DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 The match is about the kick off on FSWC and RDS! Anyone here who doesn't have access to either of those want updates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulV Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 I have access to both but *I'd* like updates, the satellite has gone on the blink! Arrrgh. More bloody BodyBreak on FSWC... at least RDS has commentators on in the studio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by PaulV I have access to both but *I'd* like updates, the satellite has gone on the blink! Arrrgh. More bloody BodyBreak on FSWC... at least RDS has commentators on in the studio. What's going on? Now they've got Vancouver vs. Toronto!?!?! [?] [xx(] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket Robin Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 and network 54 is down so can't even ask on that board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket Robin Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 now they've moved to Montreal vs Richmond... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulV Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Any internet audio or match-trackers that anyone is aware of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Rocket Robin and network 54 is down so can't even ask on that board. That's why we have this board, more stable than Network54. [^] I wonder if they'll be able to re-establish the live feed from Vancouver at all. If not, perhaps they're at least getting it all on tape for later broadcast? I hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by PaulV Any internet audio or match-trackers that anyone is aware of? There are periodic updates on http://www.whitecapssoccer.com/. For at least the last 10 minutes they've had the following posted: "Whitecaps striker Niall Thompson forced the Montreal keeper into an acrobatic save to keep the game scoreless. We're into the last ten minutes of the half." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulV Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Thanks for the update. RDS has just started to show the Champions League Final(!), so I would assume they are not optimistic about re-establishing the signal on MTL-VAN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 Halftime: Vancouver 0 Montreal 0 "The Whitecaps and the Impact are scoreless at the half. The best chance came from Caps' striker Niall Thompson in the 35th minute when his shot forced the Montreal keeper into an acrobatic save." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 "The Whitecaps and the Impact are now in the second half. The game is still scoreless. Gordon Chin is into the game for Mario Jorge." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by PaulV Thanks for the update. RDS has just started to show the Champions League Final(!), so I would assume they are not optimistic about re-establishing the signal on MTL-VAN. RDS are such tools... Couldn't the show last week's game instead??? I don't think anyone tuned in to watch the CL final... Allez l'Impact! Allez les Rouges! Allons Ultras! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulV Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 It's back!...on RDS. FSWC still has the old MTL-Richmond game. Very odd. Anyway still nil-nil in the 50th minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted May 31, 2003 Author Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by PaulV It's back!...on RDS. FSWC still has the old MTL-Richmond game. Very odd. Anyway still nil-nil in the 50th minute. It came back on FSWC some time before the 63rd minute, which was when I tuned back in. Just curious, do you know exactly when it came back on FSWC? This game is scheduled to be repeated on FSWC next week, so hopefully they have the whole thing at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulV Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by DJT It came back on FSWC some time before the 63rd minute, which was when I tuned back in. Just curious, do you know exactly when it came back on FSWC? This game is scheduled to be repeated on FSWC next week, so hopefully they have the whole thing at that time. I discovered it back on FSWC by the 55th minute. It might have been on a bit earlier than that, but not much. 0-1 in the 85th minute (i.e. 1-0 for Montreal in FSWC format). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver Fan Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 The technical difficulties were due to a blown circuit.I was going to the washroom just before halftime and saw a crew of about 4 technicians working on the panel. You guys did not miss much.The game was dull and Vancouver could not muster much of an offence.Unless we get another striker(Carlo Corazzin)and players that can get the ball to them,we're going to have a hard time making it to the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver Fan Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Sigma I didn't see the game, but did Montreal sit back and hope for an opportunity on the counter attack? ------------------------- Sigma do toho! Yes,Montreal did couter attack a fair bit.Their goal did,however come off a corner.Our keeper claimed he was interfered with,but in all honesty a bigger keeper(Franks or Sutton)would not have had any trouble with the cross.Montreal beat Vancouver to most balls all night.In my opinion it was a battle of defense.Neither team attacked particularly well.Vancouvers backline played well for the most part but the differance in the game came down to goalkeeping.Although Vancouver barely tested Sutton,he appears a difficult keeper to beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Yes,Montreal did couter attack a fair bit.Their goal did,however come off a corner.Our keeper claimed he was interfered with,but in all honesty a bigger keeper(Franks or Sutton)would not have had any trouble with the cross.Montreal beat Vancouver to most balls all night.In my opinion it was a battle of defense.Neither team attacked particularly well.Vancouvers backline played well for the most part but the differance in the game came down to goalkeeping.Although Vancouver barely tested Sutton,he appears a difficult keeper to beat. I thought that Marques made 2 good saves in the second half and he was very good, except for the corner where he should have punched the ball away. Yeah, Sutton did look very good, specially in the air where he control his zone effectively. I would like to see him at a higher level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 dissappointed, but not surprised at the result. montreal has dominated us in vancouver over the years. plus, we had the demoralizing 1-0 loss to portland in portland the night before. what is up with the a-league sched? have games, saturday/wednesday. no other days. maybe sundays now and again. keep the sched the same. none of this back-to-back after a road game shiite. vancouver will be fine. our two best players were away. corazzin would be a great signing. there ain't gonna be any middle any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desigol Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 Mike Franks should be Vancover's keeper. Sure, only 2 years ago he was groomed to be Forrest's replacement. With Lars injured he should be on the Whitecaps side and fuighting for a place in the Senior squad. He's a better goalie than Zagar IMO. You don't win friends with salad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Desigol Mike Franks should be Vancover's keeper. Sure, only 2 years ago he was groomed to be Forrest's replacement. With Lars injured he should be on the Whitecaps side and fuighting for a place in the Senior squad. He's a better goalie than Zagar IMO. You don't win friends with salad! Is he Vancouver second keeper for now? I thought Marques was pretty decent but I'm sure Franks is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.