*World Cup Game Discussion Thread* (SPOILERS)

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by MIJB#19

It's tough being denied a goal like the one where the Korean goalkeeper stopped it inside his goal. This is argument 4,530,431 for adding camera's in the goal to assist the referees.

I think this game is arguement 7,688,444 why Barthez ought to be sitting on the bench for Coupet...

[Crapshoot]

Barthez is a fvecking idiot - that is all.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Critch

Incidentally, did anybody see the French fan showing his cock before kickoff?

I know it's their national symbol, but I'm surprised he was allowed to get his cock inside the stadium, never mind get his cock out and wave it about.

It was a very nice cock, though.

I wasn't watching at the beginning, but Gawd, I hope you're talking about a rooster.

[Katon]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

I think this game is arguement 7,688,444 why Barthez ought to be sitting on the bench for Coupet...

It also shows quite nicely why Henry isn't a lone striker.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Katon

It also shows quite nicely why Henry isn't a lone striker.

Aye. Domenech is completely incompetent - this is an idiot who left out Guily, and took Boumsong instead of Mexes. There is stupidity, and there there is this guy.

[Critch]

I don't like the French team, but I'm feeling sorry for them in this one, the referee has been atrocious.

[ice4277]

Wow. The last 15 minutes of that game were as good as any in the tournament thus far. Great end-to-end stuff.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I wasn't watching at the beginning, but Gawd, I hope you're talking about a rooster.

Somebody had a rooster?

[MIJB#19]

Two goal win versus Togo and France still advances, but the group victory will likely go to the South Korea - Switzerland winner. Providing Togo shows up tomorrow and/or Friday.

[Solecismic]

Most won't be as over-dramatic as the announcers. Because of Togo's quality and situation with the players, France is almost certainly advancing. Their chances of winning the group are fairly slim, though, and that likely means a matchup with Spain in the round of 16. That would be quite the highlight for that round, though I'm still hoping for Germany/England.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Most won't be as over-dramatic as the announcers. Because of Togo's quality and situation with the players, France is almost certainly advancing. Their chances of winning the group are fairly slim, though, and that likely means a matchup with Spain in the round of 16. That would be quite the highlight for that round, though I'm still hoping for Germany/England.

Yeah - France v Spain could be awesome. England-Germany would bring out more WW II analogies from the English papers - that should be fun.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Yeah - France v Spain could be awesome. England-Germany would bring out more WW II analogies from the English papers - that should be fun.

Don't mention the war!

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I'm sorry, but you CAN'T say BOTH teams were there for the taking. That's silly. Only one team can be there for the taking because it means that the team is completely outclassed.

And I'm sorry, but when you got crushed by the Czech Republic and after Ghana's win realize you have a damned good shot of going on if you draw, you don't take a wild risk to go for the win, leaving yourself short in the defense, when you have one less player than the other side.

Tactics 101 is that you realize you are one down and being two down would almost guarentee a loss the way the Italians were coming on. You don't risk that.

But, of course, now Arena is yelled at for being too conservative. If he was too aggressive he'd get just as pummeled, probably even more, since we'd be completely out of it (practically if not technically). Its like he never led this team to a WC Quarterfinal 4 years back.

Both teams can be there for the taking when you have 10 on 9 and the game can go either way. Please stop arguing semantics with me anyway. The US could have won even with 9 and Italy could have won as well.

Tactics 101 is that you do not leave a sub on the bench when you have 9 guys running their asses off all game. Have you ever actually played 90 minutes of soccer? 90 minutes down a man or two? Of course all the commentators agree with me. But what do they know as well?

The US does not have a "damned good shot" now. We have a slim chance depending on if Italy wins and the US manages to beat a Ghana team that thumped the Czechs. The US is currently the least likely team in the group to advance.

[cartman]

I don't get that yellow card on Zidane. The Korean guy clearly stepped into his path.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by cartman

I don't get that yellow card on Zidane. The Korean guy clearly stepped into his path.

I thought the same, but the replay didn't really show it clearly. I'll be hoping France go through just to give him a more fitting send off, he was a great player in his day.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Most won't be as over-dramatic as the announcers. Because of Togo's quality and situation with the players, France is almost certainly advancing. Their chances of winning the group are fairly slim, though, and that likely means a matchup with Spain in the round of 16. That would be quite the highlight for that round, though I'm still hoping for Germany/England.

I think it's a 50-50 shot that England and Germany will meet. To add a third potential top game Brazil-Italy or Brazil-Czech Republic is hanging in the air.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by cartman

I don't get that yellow card on Zidane. The Korean guy clearly stepped into his path.

I don't get the entire cardfest at all. This is a once every four years tournament which happens to be the biggest sporting event in the world.

Why take focus away from the players and place it on the referees? FIFA made a monumental mistake in changing how the rules are supposed to be enforced.

It's similar to if the NBA suddenly decided to ask referees to call fouls or traveling once the final series began between whoever happens to be playing right now (too lazy to go to Sportsline and look).

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I don't get the entire cardfest at all. This is a once every four years tournament which happens to be the biggest sporting event in the world.

Why take focus away from the players and place it on the referees? FIFA made a monumental mistake in changing how the rules are supposed to be enforced.

It's similar to if the NBA suddenly decided to ask referees to call fouls or traveling once the final series began between whoever happens to be playing right now (too lazy to go to Sportsline and look).

I think its Edmonton and Carolina... or is that the other sport, ya know, Arena football

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Tactics 101 is that you do not leave a sub on the bench when you have 9 guys running their asses off all game. Have you ever actually played 90 minutes of soccer? 90 minutes down a man or two? Of course all the commentators agree with me. But what do they know as well?

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you coached a national squad in a World Cup or even a team in the top level of competition. Tactics 101 says when you are down to 9 men and have one less than your opponent, while in a tie game, you be cognizant of the fact that if a player gets injured, you need a sub to prevent being down 10 v 8 in a tie game. Especially when if you lose this game you have little to no chance of getting to the next round... while a tie keeps you in the hunt.

But, of course, you are coaching mastermind and Bruce Arena has never led his team to the quarterfinals of the World Cup.

The US does not have a "damned good shot" now. We have a slim chance depending on if Italy wins and the US manages to beat a Ghana team that thumped the Czechs. The US is currently the least likely team in the group to advance.

Beating Ghana and hoping for Italy to knock off the Czechs is a pretty damned good shot. Far better than if you are 10 v 8 and the Italians score to give you 0 points. Especially with the Czechs missing both strikers and a central defender. And, of course, the Ghana team that thumped the Czechs also managed to get thumped by the Italians. Different circumstances.

[tanglewood]

You could kinda see the logic of keeping the sub in hand by the Italian situation. Perotta went down around 70 mins or so and they had already made all their subs. For the rest of the match they just had to stick him on the wing as he moved around barely above walking speed and kept making simple passes sideways.

[tanglewood]

dola

I stil would have brought on Johnson though with 10 or 5 mins to go. Not for McBride, maybe for Donovan.

[Katon]

Even if the US beat Italy, it would still be bottom of the group and need a win (since whatever Arena did a 4-1 win wasn't going to happen). The difference between a win and a draw in terms of what's necessary to go through isn't as important as the difference between a draw and a loss. Giving a bit of a rest to a Ghana starter might've been a good idea, but avoiding defeat was the most important thing.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I don't get the entire cardfest at all. This is a once every four years tournament which happens to be the biggest sporting event in the world.

Why take focus away from the players and place it on the referees? FIFA made a monumental mistake in changing how the rules are supposed to be enforced.

It's similar to if the NBA suddenly decided to ask referees to call fouls or traveling once the final series began between whoever happens to be playing right now (too lazy to go to Sportsline and look).

Fifa is trying to make sure players are protected i think, hence the cards. Before the WC started, referees were told to treat elbows harshly (an example).

The problem in soccer with not booking players is that players can get hurt. Unlike the NBA where you're talking about technical violations, such as travelling or palming, bookings in soccer normally come about because of bad tackles. A booking ensures that a player has to be more careful with his future tackles, i.e. he can't be reckless anymore. This, IMO, is a good thing in theory.

However, referees are human and therefore they make mistakes (one of the reasons why having one referee cover a whole field seems silly to me, though I know linesmen do help somewhat). Some calls in the WC finals thus far haven't been great but that's part and parcel of soccer.

[Mac Howard]

The problem is that FIFA introduce these new interpretations into the World Cup and referees have no experience of them. The result is that we see considerably variation in application. Merk in the Brazil/Aussie game was calling a foul on every contact (not that he needs encouraging to do that) while other refs have continued to allow the game to flow. Punishment of time-wasting has also been high on some refs' list but not on others. With a one match suspension following two yellow cards this variability can be a problem.

Because the World Cup has such a high profile FIFA seem to think it's the right time to do this but I question the wisdom of that.

[bhlloy]

It's not the cards for bad tackles I have a problem with. It's the petty, "technical" cards that are driving me insane. Examples - the Angola keeper getting a card for timewasting in the 46th minute, and Ronaldo getting a card for shooting a split second after the whistle when it was pretty clear he hadn't heard it. In a game where a card can easily get you suspended, these ticky-tack cards are insanity. And, exactly like Mac said, some refs are cracking down and some aren't.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by MIJB#19

I think it's a 50-50 shot that England and Germany will meet. To add a third potential top game Brazil-Italy or Brazil-Czech Republic is hanging in the air.

Personally I would love to see a Brazil-US game.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

It's not the cards for bad tackles I have a problem with. It's the petty, "technical" cards that are driving me insane. Examples - the Angola keeper getting a card for timewasting in the 46th minute, and Ronaldo getting a card for shooting a split second after the whistle when it was pretty clear he hadn't heard it. In a game where a card can easily get you suspended, these ticky-tack cards are insanity. And, exactly like Mac said, some refs are cracking down and some aren't.

Heh, I think these boil down incompetent referees rather than new applications directed by Fifa. Rules for time-wasting and kicking a ball after a whistle is blown have been in place for a long long time but, depending on the league matches you regularly watch, there is different in application.

Besides, I generally find the South American referees to be the dodgiest of the lot.

[Jaguars]

I wouldnt say Italy thumped Ghana. Ghana played them pretty tough.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

Personally I would love to see a Brazil-US game.

Obviously. And I think there's a good chance on that happening. Brazil-USA would be a relative big game (given both teams reached the 2002 quarterfinals), but not as big as Brazil-Italy, a rematch of the 1994 final and a game between 5-time and 3-time champions.

[Jaguars]

Originally Posted by MIJB#19

Obviously. And I think there's a good chance on that happening. Brazil-USA would be a relative big game (given both teams reached the 2002 quarterfinals), but not as big as Brazil-Italy, a rematch of the 1994 final and a game between 5-time and 3-time champions.

You can trust Italy doesn't want that rematch that soon.

[Blade6119]

Am i the only American who noticed we have yet to score this WC. Wasnt the goal against italy and own-goal? That scares no one?

[law90026]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Am i the only American who noticed we have yet to score this WC. Wasnt the goal against italy and own-goal? That scares no one?

It was an exceedingly bizarre own goal. But the US performance was a lot better. I wouldn't say they scare people but they probably regained some measure of respect.

Of course, that may not help much since they're up against Ghana next, who are probably feeling very confident.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I don't think Parreira has a choice. It has to be Robinho with Adriano. Brazilians have been clamoring for that pairing before the cup! Ronaldo would be a Hell of sub though.

How about Ronaldinho with Adriano? Let him play more of the role he plays with Barcelona, give him more freedom to do what he does well. We've not seen the best of him with him stuck in a more deep-lying left sided role. Then move Ze Roberto over to the left sided position to play much the same role he did for Bayern.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by law90026

Besides, I generally find the South American referees to be the dodgiest of the lot.

The two worst refereeing performances for me have been Rodriguez of Mexico for his England v Paraguay game and Archundia of Mexico for yesterday's France v South Korea game. Refereeing preformances where they weren't just overstrict but where they made a lot of calls in one teams favor.

How come CONCACAF sends only two Mexican refs? No US refs internationally rated?

I do think the refereeing has been pretty good so far, though.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

The problem is that FIFA introduce these new interpretations into the World Cup and referees have no experience of them. The result is that we see considerably variation in application.

Because the World Cup has such a high profile FIFA seem to think it's the right time to do this but I question the wisdom of that.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Why change the rules/interpretations right before your biggest tournament? I mean, you had months/years of qualifications and major tourneys' to try this stuff out and get both the refs and the players used to it.

And while we're on it, why change the ball right before the biggest tourney either w/ unpredictable results?

[wade moore]

As I continue my "I watch soccer only every 4 years" trend the same thing kills me...

The absurd acting and overexaggeration of injuries drives me insane... either the acting is just absurd b-level style acting or soccer players are complete wimps... I'm pretty confident it's the former.

*(I say this as a guy from Togo kind of bumps into the hip of a guy, and he falls down clutching his ankle and writhing in pain)*

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by moriarty

And while we're on it, why change the ball right before the biggest tourney either w/ unpredictable results?

Well, that's easy: $$

There is a reason they keep bringing out a new World Cup ball every tourney. Everyone has to have to new WC ball and the makers of the ball pay good money for that cash cow.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Am i the only American who noticed we have yet to score this WC. Wasnt the goal against italy and own-goal? That scares no one?

Not at all. My stance is that the US is dead in the water, and any advancement would be a complete miracle.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, that's easy: $$

There is a reason they keep bringing out a new World Cup ball every tourney. Everyone has to have to new WC ball and the makers of the ball pay good money for that cash cow.

While I have no doubt that is the case, it'd be nice if FIFA wasn't such a sell out.

Oh well...

[Celeval]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Not at all. My stance is that the US is dead in the water, and any advancement would be a complete miracle.

I don't quite know about that. While an effort like the Czech game would doom the US, there is a level of effort between the CR and Italy that would beat Ghana 1-0, particularly if Keller stays on form. Italy over the CR isn't a long shot... while it's not guaranteed by any means, I don't think it would be a miracle.

[wade moore]

Can someone that was watching and knows soccer explain what happened with that yellow card right at the end for the Swiss guy? I had the sound off, so I couldn't figure it out.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Can someone that was watching and knows soccer explain what happened with that yellow card right at the end for the Swiss guy? I had the sound off, so I couldn't figure it out.

I was watching with the volume down, but I think Vogel was booked for dissent.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by moriarty

While I have no doubt that is the case, it'd be nice if FIFA wasn't such a sell out.

Oh well...

HAHAHA! Wait, you were serious about FIFA not being a sell out?

[GoldenEagle]

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, that's easy: $$

There is a reason they keep bringing out a new World Cup ball every tourney. Everyone has to have to new WC ball and the makers of the ball pay good money for that cash cow.

They could have done that new paint scheme without changing how the ball was built. That was just plain stupid.

Watching this World Cup is reminding me why I only watch soccer once every four years. Between the refs, the playacting, and the rule/ball changes, I've got a big "meh" going on.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

They could have done that new paint scheme without changing how the ball was built. That was just plain stupid.

But how to justify a high price tag for simple a new paint job? The ball is actually pretty cool, and the higher scoring using it probably was enticing to FIFA as well (high scoring = good for ratings).

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Watching this World Cup is reminding me why I only watch soccer once every four years. Between the refs, the playacting, and the rule/ball changes, I've got a big "meh" going on.

Do you only watch the NFL, MLB, and NBA every four years, too? Because they all have those...bad refs/umps, playing up fouls/penalties, and changes to the game to promote more offense usually.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

But how to justify a high price tag for simple a new paint job? The ball is actually pretty cool, and the higher scoring using it probably was enticing to FIFA as well (high scoring = good for ratings).

Given the number of balls curving AWAY from the net, has it actually led to higher scoring? Most of the high scores I've seen have come from lousy defense, not a ball curving away from a goalie, and I've seen plenty of near-misses where the older ball would have been just inside the post / crossbar. All they've done is add a random element to the game. You want higher scoring, add a foot on all sides of the net, don't tweak the ball. Or do away with those ridiculous gloves the goalies are wearing; is there any limit on their size? I keep waiting for someone to come out with a pair of catcher's mitts on his hands...

[ISiddiqui]

Ukraine looks to get its game back in gear after the drubbing by Spain. Saudi Arabia is kind enough to help them out as it is 2-0 Ukraine at the half. They'll probably beat Tunisia as well and finish 2nd in the group to face the winner of Group G (Switzerland, South Korea, or France [Yes, France still has a shot ]).

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Given the number of balls curving AWAY from the net, has it actually led to higher scoring? Most of the high scores I've seen have come from lousy defense, not a ball curving away from a goalie, and I've seen plenty of near-misses where the older ball would have been just inside the post / crossbar. All they've done is add a random element to the game. You want higher scoring, add a foot on all sides of the net, don't tweak the ball. Or do away with those ridiculous gloves the goalies are wearing; is there any limit on their size? I keep waiting for someone to come out with a pair of catcher's mitts on his hands...

I dunno, I've seen a number of long range shots bending really nicely into the corner, like Frings shot in the 1st game of the tourney. It gives it a bit more knuckle-ball type of movement because of the lack of seams.

And making the goal bigger would probably be sacreligious, so playing with the ball is the next best thing.