Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, June 02, 2014

OT: The Soccer Thread June, 2014

It’s go time!

June 12th Brazil v Croatia

June 13th Mexico v Cameroon, Spain v Holland, Chile v Australia

June 14th Colombia v Greece, Ivory Coast v Japan, Uruguay v Costa Rica, England v Italy

June 15th Switzerland v Ecuador, France v Honduras, Argentina v Bosnia-Herzegovina

June 16th Iran v Nigeria, Germany v Portugal, Ghana v USA

June 17th Brazil v Mexico, Belgium v Algeria, Russia v South Korea

June 18th Cameroon v Croatia, Australia v Holland, Spain v Chile

June 19th Colombia v Ivory Coast, Japan v Greece, Uruguay v England

June 20th Italy v Costa Rica, Switzerland v France, Honduras v Ecuador

June 21st Argentina v Iran, Nigeria vs Bosnia-Herzegovina, Germany v Ghana

June 22nd USA v Portugal, Belgium v Russia, South Korea v Algeria

June 23rd Cameroon v Brazil, Croatia v Mexico, Australia v Spain, Holland v Chile

June 24th Greece v Ivory Coast, Japan v Colombia, Costa Rica v England, Italy v Uruguay

June 25th Ecuador v France, Honduras v Switzerland, Bosnia-Herzegovina v Iran, Nigeria v Argentina

June 26th Portugal v Ghana, USA v Germany, Algeria v Russia, South Korea v Belgium

June 28th Group A winner v Group B runner up, Group C winner v Group D runner up

June 29th Group B winner v Group A runner up, Group D winner v Group C runner up

June 30th Group E winner v Group F runner up, Group G winner v Group H runner up

 

Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 02, 2014 at 10:03 AM | 9133 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: soccer, u-s-a u-s-a, world cup

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 10 of 92 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >  Last ›
   901. The Marksist Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:41 PM (#4725361)
Silly question: This is a bad result for Spain, right?
   902. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:42 PM (#4725362)
This is as stunning a result in a major sporting event that I can remember in a long time. Yeah the Super Bowl was a rout but that has happened with regularity over the years, elite soccer teams don't seem as likely to get demolished like this at the highest level. It's tempting to say "it's just one game" but I think this is a pretty strong signal that;

a. Spain aren't as good as we thought.
b. The Dutch are better than we thought.
c. All of the above.
   903. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:42 PM (#4725364)
Spain is now going to have to try to really hammer Australia, won't they?
   904. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:42 PM (#4725365)
Silly question: This is a bad result for Spain, right?


Yes. Chile is a good team, so advancement might come down to goal differential.
   905. Yardape Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:42 PM (#4725366)
Americans who have never played soccer, maybe. I have always been baffled by why these people even think it's a problem, let alone a really annoying problem.


The "problem" I have with it is that it bothers the OCD part of my personality that in some cases, it is literally impossible for the linesman to actually call it accurately (on a long pass, it's impossible for them to watch both the ball and the line at the same time). But in reality, that's not a huge factor and I can't think of a better way to handle the cherry-picking issue.
   906. zack Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:44 PM (#4725368)
Basketball doesn't have an anti-cherrypicking rule.

I was thinking of the 3 second rule.
   907. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:44 PM (#4725370)
Does it? Both (and hockey) have their own anti-cherrypicking rules, that's all it is.
basketball actually doesn't. there's a div III college in texas (grinnell?) that does really interesting things to take advantage of that.

and hockey's offsides rule is a physical line, not an imaginary mobile one. it also goes away once the puck goes in the offensive zone.

football's offsides rule ends at the start of play. if football had soccer's rule, the game would be set back 100 years. because the defense wouldn't bother to cover anything more than 5 yards down the field.
   908. The Marksist Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:45 PM (#4725371)
Man, Robben has a hell of a left foot, eh? /obvious
   909. Yardape Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:45 PM (#4725372)
but I think this is a pretty strong signal that;

a. Spain aren't as good as we thought.
b. The Dutch are better than we thought.
c. All of the above.


If those are true, it's also a sign that MCoA's stats model isn't that strong, either, since he had Spain as co-favourites with Brazil.
   910. tshipman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:46 PM (#4725373)
Yes. Chile is a good team, so advancement might come down to goal differential.


I think it's worse than that. Assuming Chile and Spain both beat Australia, Spain needs to outright win vs. Chile or they are out. Even if they win, they might be out on goal differential on the first hand, or if Netherlands really hates Spain, Spain might be out no matter what.

If Chile and Netherlands beat Australia, Netherlands controls whether or not it is even possible for Spain to advance.
   911. The Marksist Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:46 PM (#4725375)
Yes. Chile is a good team, so advancement might come down to goal differential.

Yeah, I was being facetious.
   912. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:47 PM (#4725376)
Bet United fans like the look of this van Gaal guy right now.
   913. zack Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:47 PM (#4725377)

a. Spain aren't as good as we thought.

I think blowouts have a lot less information in them that we commonly think.
   914. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:48 PM (#4725379)
football's offsides rule ends at the start of play. if football had soccer's rule, the game would be set back 100 years. because the defense wouldn't bother to cover anything more than 5 yards down the field.


Except if you view the snap as the same as the ball being kicked in soccer, it's pretty much the same thing.
   915. sardonic Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:49 PM (#4725380)
Holland are taking Spain behind the woodshed now
   916. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:49 PM (#4725381)
I am stunned that it's not 6-1 at this point. Geez, Spain is getting TONKED.

LOL@Torres.
   917. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:51 PM (#4725383)
Assuming Chile and Spain both beat Australia, Spain needs to outright win vs. Chile or they are out.


If Spain puts a drubbing on Australia and Chile loses by a few goals to the Netherlands and a close win against Australia and Spain and Chile draw it would come down to goal differential. Unless I missed something.
   918. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:51 PM (#4725385)
Spain looked reasonably good in the first half. Certainly they were the better team, if not by all that much. Then they gave up the second goal early in the second half and just seem to have completely lost their sense of self. They've been making terrible, low-percentage, poorly-placed passes the whole second half. It's crazy.

Ever since they went behind they've looked like Cameroon did this morning. And if you try to play tiki-taka and start missing a bunch of passes, you're going to get slaughtered on the counter.

LOL @ Torres
   919. AuntBea Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:51 PM (#4725386)
Spain have to regroup after this. The last 20 minutes of the game was a slaughter and they are very lucky the scoreline was not worse. Did the weather get to them? the whole team looked old and slow.

And Torres should not be allowed anywhere near the field for the rest of the tournament.
   920. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:52 PM (#4725387)
from the link in [900]:
When Newcastle drew 0-0 at Bury in February 1925, it came as the final straw. It was Newcastle's sixth goalless draw of a season that produced what at the time was an unthinkably low average of 2.58 goals per game. The football was boring, attendances were falling and the FA, for once, not only recognised that something needed to be done, but set about doing it.
how many goals per game are scored now?
   921. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:52 PM (#4725389)
Yeah, I was being facetious.


I know but I was just point out that even though they're Spain this might cost them advancement, which hours ago seemed like a ridiculous thing to say.
   922. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:56 PM (#4725393)
Except if you view the snap as the same as the ball being kicked in soccer, it's pretty much the same thing.
that sounds absolutely insane to me.

could you explain what i'm missing?
   923. tshipman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:56 PM (#4725394)
If Spain puts a drubbing on Australia and Chile loses by a few goals to the Netherlands and a close win against Australia and Spain and Chile draw it would come down to goal differential. Unless I missed something.


There's almost no chance that Chile loses by a few goals to the Netherlands. It's the last game of the group, and Netherlands is very likely to already be in. In addition, they seem to strongly dislike Spain. If Netherlands already has six points, I think they might be willing to let Chile win by 1, and I think they'd certainly be willing to allow a draw.
   924. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:56 PM (#4725395)
how many goals per game are scored now?

2.77 in the Premier League in 2014. It goes up and down a bit - and varies from country to country obviously - but the 2.5-2.8 range is pretty standard.
   925. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:57 PM (#4725396)
I think it's entirely possible Spain don't make it out of the group. The Dutch have to be favorites to win the group now, and Chile is really, really good. If Spain can only beat Australia by 2 they could end up going out on goal differential even if they play much better the next two games. Can't wait to watch Chile-Australia now.
   926. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:58 PM (#4725398)
again from the link in [900]:
That, realistically, is academic, for no linesman can make a snap judgment as to whether, say, it is upper arm or torso he can see protruding beyond the defender, but what the change did was to shift the benefit of any doubt yet further in favour of the forward.

to my eyes, that does not seem to be the way it's called.
   927. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:58 PM (#4725402)
could you explain what i'm missing?


Well, not exactly the same thing, but in both cases an offensive player can't be beyond a certain point when the play begins. It's just that in soccer it's a fluid bit of action rather than discrete, individual plays.
   928. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 04:58 PM (#4725403)
It's the last game of the group


I didn't consider that. I'm laughing at the thought of Van Gaal fielding a lineup with no defenders. Which obviously they wouldn't do.
   929. Textbook Editor Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:00 PM (#4725405)
Color me impressed, Holland. Just wow.
   930. Mefisto Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:03 PM (#4725409)
Wow. That's all I can say. Wow.
   931. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:04 PM (#4725410)
I'll just smugly note that I have Holland and Chile advancing from the group in my predictions back in #408.
   932. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:07 PM (#4725415)
again from the link in [900]
There are still pundits – and managers and players and fans – who ask what a defender is supposed to do in situations in which he would previously have stepped out and tried to play offside, or if a player is behind him in the box when a ball is played in. He is, of course, actually supposed to challenge for the ball. Why should defenders be allowed simply to step up? Just because they've done that for 80 years doesn't make it a God-given right.

okay, so this is what i'm saying.

change the rule, so that instead of the standard being the defender stepping up, it's the defender being flatfooted (or stepping up) when the ball is played behind him.
   933. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:07 PM (#4725416)
Except if you view the snap as the same as the ball being kicked in soccer, it's pretty much the same thing.


that sounds absolutely insane to me.

could you explain what i'm missing?


What sounds insane about that? There needs to be some kind of a trigger for the off-sides rule to be in effect.

I guess the question regarding off-sides is how would you change it? Unless you want to have out and out cherry picking (which would be boring as hell in my opinion) something has to be the trigger. Soccer obviously does not have a start/finish like a snap so the timing of the ball being kicked seems as logical as anything else.
   934. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:07 PM (#4725417)
http://cartodb.com/v/worldcup/brazil-croatia/#/2/24.5/-7.0/0

Heat map of tweets from the Brazil-Croatia match.

I need to stop drinking for an hour so I'll stay awake for Chile-Australia.
   935. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:08 PM (#4725418)
I'll just smugly note that I have Holland and Chile advancing from the group in my predictions back in #408.


I'll hope no one notices I had Spain and Chile.
   936. jmurph Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:10 PM (#4725420)
What a delightful game, I loved it.
   937. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:12 PM (#4725421)

change the rule, so that instead of the standard being the defender stepping up, it's the defender being flatfooted (or stepping up) when the ball is played behind him.


Off the cuff I think there is some logic to the idea that the defender can't just play an offsides trap that it has to be organic but I think trying to call it that way would be insane. Anytime you ask officials to read intent you just are opening up all sorts of chances for shenanigans.
   938. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:15 PM (#4725422)
   939. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:17 PM (#4725424)
Off the cuff I think there is some logic to the idea that the defender can't just play an offsides trap that it has to be organic but I think trying to call it that way would be insane. Anytime you ask officials to read intent you just are opening up all sorts of chances for shenanigans.
it's not intent, it's a physical state. being flatfooted isn't some nebulous idea, it's a real and observable thing. and as someone said, calling offsides is the primary duty of sideline officials, so if it makes things a little harder for them, who the hell cares; it's what they're there to do.

What sounds insane about that? There needs to be some kind of a trigger for the off-sides rule to be in effect.
i'm not questioning the trigger, i'm questioning the other part of it. that's the part i don't like.
   940. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:22 PM (#4725425)
Ok, some people's reaction to a wonderful game is to discuss the offside rule. I guess I shouldn't hate them, they're obviously pitiable people. I'll just put them all on ignore.
   941. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:23 PM (#4725426)
it's not intent, it's a physical state. being flatfooted isn't some nebulous idea, it's a real and observable thing. and as someone said, calling offsides is the primary duty of sideline officials, so if it makes things a little harder for them, who the hell cares; it's what they're there to do.


Giving referees even more grey area to mess up is a bad idea.
   942. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:27 PM (#4725431)
Giving referees even more grey area to mess up is a bad idea.
it's not more grey area; it's a different grey area. and i'd argue it's actually less, since it would lead to fewer whistles, not more.
   943. ursus arctos Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:28 PM (#4725432)
Silver's model now has Spain with a 2% chance of winning the tournament, largely because the second team in this group is likely to face Brazil in the Round of 16.

If he's offering 50 to 1 odds, I would take those in a heartbeat.

I'm ever more convinced that he doesn't understand the sport or the dynamics of a tournament like this at all.
   944. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:30 PM (#4725433)
There are plenty of things that ought to be changed about the sport, including some rule tweaks.

The offside rule is nowhere close to the top of the list. It's a great rule that works really well, even with the occasional mistakes. I would like to see them give the officials better tools to call it correctly, but even that is not a particularly pressing concern.
   945. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:34 PM (#4725439)
It's great that casual fans watch the World Cup in droves but it's pretty annoying that people who don't watch the game except for the World Cup think they have ways to make it better.

I'm ever more convinced that he doesn't understand the sport or the dynamics of a tournament like this at all.


It's a small sample size. Sit back and enjoy it.
   946. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:37 PM (#4725442)
It's great that casual fans watch the World Cup in droves but it's pretty annoying that people who don't watch the game except for the World Cup think they have ways to make it better.

maybe you're just too close to the game to see that this would make it even better (less worse).

it's not like this rule has never changed, and it's not like i'm talking about getting rid of it completely.

i just think it's pretty shitty to reward defenders for not defending.
   947. tshipman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:38 PM (#4725444)
Silver's model now has Spain with a 2% chance of winning the tournament, largely because the second team in this group is likely to face Brazil in the Round of 16.

If he's offering 50 to 1 odds, I would take those in a heartbeat.

I'm ever more convinced that he doesn't understand the sport or the dynamics of a tournament like this at all.


I don't think a 2% chance of winning the tournament is out of line. They must win out to advance from group play, and there's a significant home continent advantage. I think that people understand that, but they underrate it.
   948. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:41 PM (#4725447)
i just think it's pretty shitty to reward defenders for not defending.

That's not what the rule does.
   949. Mefisto Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:42 PM (#4725448)
So, if you're del Bosque, what do you do?

Here's what I saw:

1. Costa was ineffective. Assuming no disciplinary action, I'd still sit him.

2. Not enough penetration from Silva or Iniesta. They could have used Pedro.

3. Azpilicueta didn't go forward very much, so they lacked width on the right.

4. Silva is a better player than Mata, but Mata might have been a better choice for this game. That's not to say Silva played badly; he didn't. His miss on the chance to go up 2-0 may have been crucial, but I'm not considering that. He just had nobody to link to.

5. Spain didn't really play tiki-taka, so is Xavi right for the game?
   950. Sunday silence Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:43 PM (#4725450)
Q: when is the last time Spain's been sent off like that?

A: 1588, I believe.
   951. tshipman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:47 PM (#4725454)
Q: when is the last time Spain's been sent off like that?

A: 1588, I believe.


/golfclap

1. Costa was ineffective. Assuming no disciplinary action, I'd still sit him.


Yeah, very questionable IMO to get away from their identity by starting Costa. I am very curious what they do for their next games.
   952. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:47 PM (#4725456)
They must win out to advance from group play, .

Chile haven't won against Australia just yet. There are no gimmes in the World Cup these days.
   953. ursus arctos Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:48 PM (#4725458)
Mefisto, I think that Costa unbalanced the attack.

They weren't really set up for a target man, and he isn't really comfortable playing in another style (at least yet). He'd be more effective as a substitute in Plan B. Put Pedro in for him and go back to playing without and out and out striker. Have Mata ready to come on for Xavi if Xavi is in effective. Put JuanFran in for Azilicueta and De Gea for Casillas.
   954. Mefisto Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:53 PM (#4725460)
Primey for 950.

Yeah, ursos, that all sounds right to me. De Gea, in particular, seems the obvious starter in goal.
   955. tshipman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:55 PM (#4725461)
Chile's national anthem oddly lighthearted. Almost Gilbert and Sullivan-like.

Chile haven't won against Australia just yet. There are no gimmes in the World Cup these days.


This is a very good point. I will wait a couple hours to write Spain's epitaph.
   956. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:55 PM (#4725462)
Q: when is the last time Spain's been sent off like that?

A: 1588, I believe.


That's a pretty, uh, heady, joke. Well done sir.
   957. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 05:58 PM (#4725466)
A: 1588, I believe.

Maarten Tromp's victory in the Battle of the Downs 1639 is more topical.
   958. Sunday silence Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:01 PM (#4725467)
I want to take up Steagles point about the offsides rule but from a different tack.

As it stands now the rule is far too often creates a make or break situation in a game where there are really only a few chances to score. Nearly every game we see an offsides call that either: a) negates a great offensive chance or b) allows a cheap goal because offsides wasnt called.

We had two examples of that in the MEx/Cam game, and if Cam hadnt played so bad those two calls could have easily made it a draw or a loss for Mex. To me it's far too important a play to have it called so inexactly. the solution would be to make offside far more objective a standard. You would simply add a blue line sort of like hockey.

But it wouldnt be a line. It would be a semi circle that would conceivably touch the corners of the penalty box. How far out is the penalty box, 22 meters So this blue line/arc would be over 22' meter from the end line in the center of the field, and near the corners of the field it would be a bit closer, maybe 5 or 10 meters from the end line.

So it would be called just like in hockey when the ball leaves the foot, the attackers have to be in front of the blue arc. There's only one line that needs to be monitored. Not saw line of defenders that is constantly changing.

There could be long balls, that are sent to cherry picking attackers at say 28' in front of the end line near the center of the field. THat would be ok. There could also be balls near the corners, that maybe land 10' from the end line but just inside the side line That too would be ok and acceptable award for a great pass.

So there would conceivably be cherry picking but only up to about 25' out (and closer near the sidelines). I think would be fair.

I think you'd just get rid of the penalty box and make it synoymous with the blue line arc.

But it would offer far more objective approach to the call, the officials only have to look at one line One static line, that does not move. The current rule, because the line can be moved by the defenders themselves does seem rather insane to american eyes
   959. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:04 PM (#4725469)
You would simply add a blue line sort of like hockey.


The NASL did this in the 70s.
   960. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:12 PM (#4725471)
Running around like headless chicken in the box turns out to be bad.
   961. zack Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:13 PM (#4725474)
And I was just in the middle of typing how Chile hadn't done anything at all with the first ten minutes. Whoops.

You would simply add a blue line sort of like hockey.

I think there's a better argument for making hockey offsides more like soccer than the other way around. Both have their upsides and downsides, obviously.
   962. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:13 PM (#4725475)
That's game over. 2-0!
   963. tshipman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:14 PM (#4725477)
Chile haven't won against Australia just yet. There are no gimmes in the World Cup these days.


So, like I was saying, Spain must win out.
   964. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:14 PM (#4725478)
This is a very good point. I will wait a couple hours to write Spain's epitaph

Okay, now you can start.
   965. bunyon Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:22 PM (#4725483)
There is nothing wrong with the offside rule. If you want more points go watch basketball.
   966. Sunday silence Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:24 PM (#4725486)
when did Chile become a powerhouse? This is I guess my 6th world cup, and from memory it's always ARG and BRA and sometimes another So Amer team will upset but not be really strong.
   967. Sunday silence Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:26 PM (#4725487)
There is nothing wrong with the offside rule.


at the risk of repeating: it too often results in good attacks being totally negated or cheap goals allowed, because it is quite difficult to call a line that is constantly moving.
   968. bunyon Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:33 PM (#4725496)
Then tweak how it's called. IMO, the game could solve a lot of problems with a couple more refs of various type. But making large changes because the refs aren't always good enough is, as seen in American pro sports, ineffectual and changes the game in unanticipated ways. For my money, offsides is way down the list of changes I'd make.
   969. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4725498)
The worlds greatest aerial threat, all of 178 cm.
   970. frannyzoo Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4725499)
Chile deserves this...they've been messing around the last 20 minutes.
   971. bunyon Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4725500)
Pretty header.
   972. President of the David Eckstein Fan Club Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:36 PM (#4725501)
Nice goal for Australia there. Chile has looked really sloppy at times so far.
   973. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:37 PM (#4725504)
Cahill scores a quintessential Cahill goal. Love that guy.
   974. Sunday silence Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:42 PM (#4725511)
Then tweak how it's called.


I suggest drawing a freakin line of the field so everyone is clear about where it is.

Just like the refs are now painting lines on the field for the free kicks. It's an objective standard.

I get the part about tradition, but this game disappoints me so often with its stupid calls that whatever tradition there is in the offside rule is not worth saving.
   975. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:44 PM (#4725514)

I suggest drawing a freakin line of the field so everyone is clear about where it is.


Too bad nobody listens to American crackpots.
   976. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:47 PM (#4725521)
I suggest drawing a freakin line of the field so everyone is clear about where it is.

Your suggestion would radically, fundamentally alter the game. And not in a positive way. The reason the sport is exciting is because it is fluid. The line has to move because it generates a push and pull of attacking and defending tactics. The argument has nothing at all to do with tradition.
   977. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:50 PM (#4725522)
I suggest drawing a freakin line of the field so everyone is clear about where it is.


The line is pretty clear: where the next to last defender is. The rest of us have no problem understanding it.

this game disappoints me so often with its stupid calls that whatever tradition there is in the offside rule is not worth saving.


The rule was tweaked nine years ago.
   978. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:51 PM (#4725523)
I think there's a better argument for making hockey offsides more like soccer than the other way around. Both have their upsides and downsides, obviously.
that's insane.
I get the part about tradition, but this game disappoints me so often with its stupid calls that whatever tradition there is in the offside rule is not worth saving.
yup. i get that it might be annoying for long time fans to have newbies come in here and point out obvious flaws in the sport that they've conditioned themselves to pretend don't exist, but there's a reason it keeps happening.

it's real, and it's obvious to anyone who isn't already in the tank.
   979. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:52 PM (#4725524)
it's real, and it's obvious to anyone who isn't already in the tank.


Let me tell you how I would make basketball "better" by changing rules to fit my desires, then go back to not giving a #### about it.
   980. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:53 PM (#4725525)
Your suggestion would radically, fundamentally alter the game. And not in a positive way. The reason the sport is exciting is because it is fluid of alcohol. The line has to move because it generates a push and pull of attacking and defending tactics. The argument has nothing at all to do with tradition.
FTFY

The rule was tweaked nine years ago.
then why the #### are you people so invested in the idea that it absolutely cannot be tweaked again?
   981. DA Baracus Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:54 PM (#4725528)
then why the #### are you people so invested in the idea that it absolutely cannot be tweaked again?


We're not. We're saying that it's fine as it is and that your suggestions won't make it better.
   982. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:55 PM (#4725530)
Let me tell you how I would make basketball "better" by changing rules to fit my desires, then go back to not giving a #### about it.
that doesn't make you right. it just makes you more likely to get your way.
   983. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:55 PM (#4725531)
I don't think a 2% chance of winning the tournament is out of line. They must win out to advance from group play, and there's a significant home continent advantage. I think that people understand that, but they underrate it.

I think they vastly overrate it.
   984. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:58 PM (#4725533)
I think the home continent advantage differs between the era with tough travel, and the era where Germany is building an entirely new resort to house their team optimally.
   985. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: June 13, 2014 at 06:58 PM (#4725534)
then why the #### are you people so invested in the idea that it absolutely cannot be tweaked again?
Because there's nothing wrong with the rule, just its application.
(edit, coke)
   986. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:01 PM (#4725536)
I think the home continent advantage differs between the era with tough travel, and the era where Germany is building an entirely new resort to house their team optimally.

... and 80% of South American players live and play in Europe.
   987. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:07 PM (#4725540)
Australia sends in Shane McGowan.
   988. Baldrick Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:08 PM (#4725541)
FTFY

Okay. If you're just here to troll, can I suggest that you wait until the games are over for the day? I'm sure people will be happy to talk with you about your ill-considered ideas that have been gone over like seven billion times before. Because, hey, it's the internet. But maybe leave us free to actually talk about the game that we enjoy while it's going on?

Speaking of which, Australia really aren't very good, and Chile really ought to be doing more with the dangerous areas they're getting into.
   989. steagles Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:08 PM (#4725542)
Because there's nothing wrong with the rule, just its application.
(edit, coke)
jesus ####### christ, that's exactly what i've been saying.
   990. cmd600 Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:08 PM (#4725543)
I think the home continent advantage differs between the era with tough travel,


Wasn't there a study that shows most of the home-field advantage comes from having refs more likely to make a call in your favor? Could that extend past the home country to the home continent?
   991. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:09 PM (#4725544)
Cahill can only be stopped illegally.
   992. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:11 PM (#4725546)
Could that extend past the home country to the home continent?

The top European team are going to have as good support as the non-Brazil South Americans, though.
   993. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:12 PM (#4725547)
Cahill can also be stopped by making him offside.
   994. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:14 PM (#4725548)
One thing I'll say to steagles. I don't know if you ever played soccer but when I played I was a fullback and I know you said the defender "doesn't defend" when he is in the off-sides trap but I'll tell you that is HARD to get right. If you aren't working in a heavily practiced way in conjunction with your fellow back liners you are going to play someone onside and open your team up to a dangerous 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 situation.
   995. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:14 PM (#4725549)
WTF Chile.
   996. President of the David Eckstein Fan Club Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:14 PM (#4725550)
Chile rocking a bit
   997. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:14 PM (#4725551)
Nice save!
   998. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:18 PM (#4725553)
I'm not sure if Australia are better than expected or Chile are worse than expected.
   999. Swedish Chef Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:20 PM (#4725554)
Woah, a motivated use of the goal tech!
   1000. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: June 13, 2014 at 07:20 PM (#4725555)
I really wasn't expecting Australia-Chile to be so exciting. Hoping this to be a good omen for the rest of the Cup rather than the bad refereeing.
Page 10 of 92 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(482 - 1:31am, Oct 26)
Last: Robert in Manhattan Beach

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 4 OMNICHATTER
(864 - 1:20am, Oct 26)
Last: DFA

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(90 - 1:16am, Oct 26)
Last: DFA

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3811 - 12:24am, Oct 26)
Last: Howie Menckel

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(521 - 10:56pm, Oct 25)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogDave Dombrowski: Injury worse than expected, Miguel Cabrera 'is as tough as you can possibly be' | MLive.com
(30 - 10:52pm, Oct 25)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

NewsblogPhils' philospophy beginning to evolve | phillies.com
(14 - 9:05pm, Oct 25)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(396 - 8:40pm, Oct 25)
Last: Tom Cervo, backup catcher

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prospect Deven Marrero enjoying turnaround in Arizona Fall League | MiLB.com
(14 - 7:58pm, Oct 25)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogYost's managerial decisions make for extra-entertaining World Series | FOX Sports
(16 - 7:30pm, Oct 25)
Last: BDC

NewsblogGambling Bochy creature of habit when it comes to pitchers | CSN Bay Area
(5 - 6:56pm, Oct 25)
Last: Bug Selig

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1959 Ballot
(8 - 6:29pm, Oct 25)
Last: Chris Fluit

NewsblogMLB - Royals' Ned Yost keeps managing to win - ESPN
(12 - 6:15pm, Oct 25)
Last: Cat8

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(872 - 6:02pm, Oct 25)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(20 - 4:40pm, Oct 25)
Last: Baldrick

Page rendered in 0.9397 seconds
53 querie(s) executed