World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

Another rule I want to see enforced is the rule that states a player motioning for another player to receive a yellow card will earn himself a yellow card as well. That would help to do away with the huddling around referees.

Yeah I was telling the people I watched the game with that I wanted this rule.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

Also, the only person who can talk to the ref is the captain.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

Also, the only person who can talk to the ref is the captain.

That seems to be a popular suggestion. An argument against it though is what if your team has a goalkeeper as captain ? Wouldn't want him having to run to the other half of the pitch to sort something out with the referee.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

That seems to be a popular suggestion. An argument against it though is what if your team has a goalkeeper as captain ? Wouldn't want him having to run to the other half of the pitch to sort something out with the referee.

Captain and vice-captain can talk to the referee?

 

[joegrav]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

Soccer could use a hockey-style soul searching and opening up of the game. The quality of attacking play has gone out the window. Teams play too defensively and carefully in big games.

 

[pirate]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

I see the same thing in my kid's youth games. Only calls are when someone hits the ground - and maybe not then. I thought the game was supposed to be skill based. Not who can push the other guy around. Had a game against a Winnipeg team this AM, we had a younger player playing up with us. He's a Spanish exchange student and more skilled than anyone on the field, also smaller. He did next to nothing today cause the Canadian kids leaned on him all game, just pushed him off the ball. Unlike most Spaniards, this kid didn't dive all weekend .

Usually in youth games it is 'small kid gets the foul', but they do have to go down to get it...even if they initiate the contact, if they end up hitting the deck the bigger kid gets called for the foul.

My son's team is small and quick, half the games the other team comes out after half-time and suddenly are playing hockey or rugby...especially if the ref is inexperience, as they usually are for the younger kids.



also: all you needed to see is Pujol getting clocked by his own goalie and getting right up...imagine if that had been a player from the other team running into him, he'd still be writhing on the ground.

Maybe what they need is a bunch of NASCAR spotters up on top of the stadium with binoculars and access to the ref's earpiece...they just need to say "dive, never touched 'em" and the ref let's them play on...if they can direct a guy driving 180MPH in traffic they can help a world cup ref

 

[Patman]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

Soccer could use a hockey-style soul searching and opening up of the game. The quality of attacking play has gone out the window. Teams play too defensively and carefully in big games.

that's easy to say, but how do you do it? Soccer more than any other sport, likes to keep the rules of the game very solid and generally unchanging. The only thing that I can think of would be to take players off of the field (10v10, 9v9) and that will be a tough sell.

Another option would be to limit contact... but with contact on almost every play you would then have to call it on every instance and accept the pain that comes with. Another thing that won't go down easy.

 

[joegrav]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

that's easy to say, but how do you do it? Soccer more than any other sport, likes to keep the rules of the game very solid and generally unchanging. The only thing that I can think of would be to take players off of the field (10v10, 9v9) and that will be a tough sell.

Another option would be to limit contact... but with contact on almost every play you would then have to call it on every instance and accept the pain that comes with. Another thing that won't go down easy.

It's a tough thing to do.

One thing, a slight change in the offside rule - the entire body of the player needs to be in an offside position instead of just any part. It would also make for a lot less borderline offside whistles.

Also, I do think limiting contact would be good. I know, it's tough. But it was tough for hockey too. Get out a lot of this grabbing and hacking, while also cracking down heavily on diving.

Finally for the sake of human decency, add a 4th sub (and a 5th for extra time so that you can use your 4 and not worry about picking up an injury in ET).

The sad thing is we were having the same conversations after 2006 (right down to the new overtime rules, adding subs, and kvetching about the ball). The thing is, as soccer fans, we're pretty much nutty and diehard, and it's the results, not the quality of the play, that matters... so FIFA has no incentive to really change anything.

 

[JohnN]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

that's easy to say, but how do you do it? Soccer more than any other sport, likes to keep the rules of the game very solid and generally unchanging. The only thing that I can think of would be to take players off of the field (10v10, 9v9) and that will be a tough sell.

Another option would be to limit contact... but with contact on almost every play you would then have to call it on every instance and accept the pain that comes with. Another thing that won't go down easy.

I think the solution is with the governing bodies and referees, not the rules.

Soccer was almost unwatchable around 1990. Referees let a lot of things go. Very rough. Very defensive. How Maradona did what he did in that era is beyond me.

Soccer bigwigs realized the game had lost its beauty and started demanding more open, offensive minded officiating. Within eight or ten years, the game had really opened up.

In my opinion, the game has been slowly slipping back to the defensive mentality ever since. If the slide continues, we could be back to 1991 in four or five years.


A couple comments on the refereeing today. I would have liked to see the advantage played more often. Webb stopped play at least four or five times for no reason.

I didn't mind all of the cards today because they were deserved and there was no "continuation" to worry about. If this had been a Round of 16 game and these cards all carried over, I'd be angry, but without continuation it's okay.

 

[Greyeagle]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

Anyone know where countries display their World Cup trophies? Capital buildings? National musuems?

 

[blockski]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

that's easy to say, but how do you do it? Soccer more than any other sport, likes to keep the rules of the game very solid and generally unchanging. The only thing that I can think of would be to take players off of the field (10v10, 9v9) and that will be a tough sell.

Another option would be to limit contact... but with contact on almost every play you would then have to call it on every instance and accept the pain that comes with. Another thing that won't go down easy.

Well, like hockey, I don't think wholesale changes to the rules are really necessary - rather just changes in how those rules are enforced. The actual fouls don't need to change, it's more a matter of enforcement.

The one actual change I would make would be to add more eyes. End line officials, maybe a second referee, etc. If you combined that with after-the-fact cards for simulation, I think you could do a lot.

 

[sagard]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

It's a tough thing to do.

One thing, a slight change in the offside rule - the entire body of the player needs to be in an offside position instead of just any part. It would also make for a lot less borderline offside whistles.

This is so painfully obvious that it will never happen. The linesman would have so much of an easier time. Additionally I'd prefer mandatory subbing for those who can't answer a referees ten count when faking their injury.

Watching the guys cry every time someone stepped near them was just embarrassing.

 

[3W]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

As was brought to my attention on another board, congratulations to the only team to complete this year's World Cup undefeated:

NEW ZEALAND?!

 

[3W]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

My opinion of the World Cup Final in one sentence:

Spain had a lot of possession but nothing in the final third for 118 minutes, the Dutch were just plain violent and I nearly fell asleep in extra time.

The end.

Don't know if this will go down as worse than the all-time clunker finals in 1990 and 1994 (at least someone scored), but I'm sure somewhere in his dark LA lair, Jim Rome is probably cackling to himself.

 

[redwing77]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

3 things that stood out to me this World Cup:

1. Vuvuzelas are the worst thing that happened to sports fandom. And there are a LOT of bad things in this category.

2. I thought diving was a problem in hockey. Nevermind. We're good.

3. FIFA and their officials are corrupt morons. Officials made some seriously bad calls and FIFA said that they're incredible officials. Simply incredible.

 

[blockski]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

3. FIFA and their officials are corrupt morons. Officials made some seriously bad calls and FIFA said that they're incredible officials. Simply incredible.

There was some bad officiating, yes. But what do you expect - for FIFA to come out and publicly throw them under the bus?

The guys that screwed up didn't work any more games.

 

[joegrav]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

My two biggest revelations/discoveries from the World Cup:

1. Uruguay. Fun to watch. I love Suarez and Forlan, and having Uruguay succeed internationally feels right, like Navy becoming relevant in football again. I know who to root for in Copa America now w/ US not going.

2. The hilarity and entertainment that is British sports talk radio. Bookmark talksport.net/mediaplayer/media_player.asp?sListenLive=yes&c=&t=&preroll=on ... it's great. Especially after an England failure.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

My opinion of the World Cup Final in one sentence:

Spain had a lot of possession but nothing in the final third for 118 minutes, the Dutch were just plain violent and I nearly fell asleep in extra time.

The end.

Don't know if this will go down as worse than the all-time clunker finals in 1990 and 1994 (at least someone scored), but I'm sure somewhere in his dark LA lair, Jim Rome is probably cackling to himself.

Its actually amazing how the finals of soccer tournaments the country gets interested in are horrid affairs. The 94 Final, the 99 Women's World Cup final, and this latest edition. I know finals are rarely entertaining games but it seems like we've hit some real clunkers. At least this one had a dramatic winner that didn't involve PKs.

 

[The Rube]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

I'll admit that I watched at most an hour of World Cup, and that included the last half hour or so of today's game.

That being said, during the highlights of today's game, on Sportscenter, during one of the Netherlands' chances at a goal, there was a guy going on a 1-on-2, and he was harassed, although I don't think really fouled, and the Monday Morning QB's were asking themselves (paraphrased, although not by much):

MMQB1: He made a great effort, but do you think he should have gone down?
MMQB2: Yes, I think he should have, and get that red card.
MMQB1: I agree, but outstanding effort to keep his feet anyway.

That right there tells you all you need to know about this sport. That's *ing bull*. Contemplating whether or not to take a dive, so to speak, to draw a penalty? Embarrassing.

 

[blockski]

Re: World Cup Soccer XVII: There can only be ONE!!!11!!!

I'll admit that I watched at most an hour of World Cup, and that included the last half hour or so of today's game.

That being said, during the highlights of today's game, on Sportscenter, during one of the Netherlands' chances at a goal, there was a guy going on a 1-on-2, and he was harassed, although I don't think really fouled, and the Monday Morning QB's were asking themselves (paraphrased, although not by much):

MMQB1: He made a great effort, but do you think he should have gone down?
MMQB2: Yes, I think he should have, and get that red card.
MMQB1: I agree, but outstanding effort to keep his feet anyway.

That right there tells you all you need to know about this sport. That's *ing bull*. Contemplating whether or not to take a dive, so to speak, to draw a penalty? Embarrassing.

He was being fouled, the ref let him play advantage. If he would have gone down, he would have lost his breakaway chance but gained a free kick.

Think of it like a delayed penalty on a breakaway in hockey.

Forgive me for my distinction here, but there's a difference between going down when fouled and diving.