Jump to content

World Cup 2010 Thread


csm725
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here's my complaint(s) about the World Cup:

1) Bad officiating for most games. It seem they are too happy to hand out yellow cards and ejecting players. Those players are usually impact-the-game type of players. Several goals being allowed/disallowed. Today was the latest example of terrible officiating when England scored a clear goal, but the Germans' goalkeeper was able to scoop it out of the goal and sent it back in play. Or how about the ref who disallowed USA's goal that could had won the game against Slovenia.

2) Players flopping on the ground, wasting time with "injury." If I had been playing, and I saw him faking it, I'll send him off the field with a crunching tackle for good measure. It'll make them think twice for faking it. That's shameful. That's something I don't see the women soccer team doing. I guess the women are more tougher than the men then.

Edit: I forgot to mention how entertaining it was to see France collaspe into chaos. Those guys seem to know one thing: soap opera.

Edited by Lance McKnight

Officially retired from this forum. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Flopping that people are doing in the World Cup is getting absolutely ridiculous. A guy won't even get touched and he will fall to the ground resulting in yellow card and even some red cards. THe sport is 50 % athletics's and 50 % Flopping its way out of hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. Another problem for me is:

Most of the big Euro teams (Brazil, France, Italy [we saw their success], Holland, etc.) are comprised of star players who have already peaked in skill. They have what they want and the problem is that the WC is no longer a question of national pride, rather a waste of time when most players would be vacationing. Any team that consists of young, promising athletes who want to prove themselves and make a name for themselves is doing great. An example is Germany. We saw their teamwork in their thrashing of England. Maybe the benefit of the doubt and Neuer's reactions saved them a goal but they have so many young players who want to shine. Also, Argentina: some great players, but I get the feeling Maradona is there for the show and so they can say, "We have Maradona." Kind of like an intimidation factor, you know. Also, some shots of him show some things: his two assistants always get up and whisper in his ear, proof that he has no control over the team, rather the professional and experienced assistants. Also, when Argentina score, everyone runs to embrace the scorer, and nobody hugs the supposed "coach", Maradona. Whenever his team scores, everybody seemingly runs away from him, and he just stands there pumping his fists. USA without Donovan is hopeless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a funny quote from a blog I was reading about the Germany-England game.

Of course, this will also be called some kind of karmic justice a nauseatingly infinite number of times in reference to England's extra time winner in their 4-2 1966 World Cup final victory over Germany that benefited from a generous goal-line call by the ref. This time, however, the ball was so far over the line that it really shouldn't be a question of judgment or technology. A computer would laugh if asked if that was a goal. Yet, the officials missed it and that will be a point of discussion for many tedious years to come.

Hiliarious, but so true.

CSM...One glaring weakness of the USA is the lack of a true striker. Donovan is not a striker, but he's a superb passer and seem to have the knack of being in the right place at the right time. If he had been playing with Beckham in the lineup (oh, that would had been a shot in the England's gut if that ever happened), then I think the game would had ben dramatically different. The defense of USA is similar to swiss cheese at times, and at another, they are outstanding. The biggest problem for USA is their tendency to give up goals too early in the match, and they have to fight, claw, and bite their way back in the game.

I got to agree though, that if we have 100% younger players who want to play for national pride, then by all means, replace them with the veterans. Those vets are making millions, and they don't need to be playing in the World Cup. Plus, it'll give those youth bragging rights, experiences, and above all, exposures they need.

Donovan is now reported to be courted by Manchester City football club. Oh boy, oh boy. :roll:

Officially retired from this forum. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever since the takeover, Man City are trying to buy their way into the Big 3 of England. It won't work. A team filled with stars never does. Great example is the Three Lions. With Terry, Lamps, Gerrard, Rooney, and more, who'd of thought they would lose so badly to an inexperienced (yet eager) German side?

Back on topic, the top teams on paper are definitely not the top-performing teams. Germany and Spain are going to meet in the semi's, no doubt (unless Messi comes up with something ;) ), and on the other side of the bracket, it's up for grabs. Germany are a force to be reckoned with...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Argies are going to win this WC, simply because of the striking power they have at their disposal - and Messi hasn`t even scored yet! Rooney could learn a thing or two from him.Messi might not score but he still gives the opposition plenty to think about - unlike Rooney who has been useless for the whole tournament.I bet Theo Walcott is glad he wasn`t picked now because he gets to avoid all the flak from the papers and had a nice holiday as well.

I agree about Maradona though. He`s just a pompous puffed up little person (can`t say what I really want to!) who is just there for show. He`s just damn lucky to have such a great bunch of players. Mickey Mouse could be their manager and they would still win matches. I doubt they listen to much Maradona has to say - they just go out and do their own thing - and it works.

Once again in the Argentina v Mexico match we had a ludicrous decision by the officials. The first Tevez goal was clearly offside,everyone saw that on the replay but the ref could not disallow the goal because the linesman never flagged for offside and the rules won`t let him change the decision. It just proves two things -

1 that it`s about time football dragged itself into the 21st century and started using goal line technology to help the officials and

2 - technology CAN be used without slowing the game down . Everyone knew in seconds that it was offside, all that was needed was the fourth official in the stands to get on the blower to the ref and tell him - end of problem.

I don`t think cameras should be used for every little decision though, that would be overkill. But for vitally important ones that decide on whether it`s a goal or not a goal they would come in very handy indeed. Trouble is Blatter is such a pig ignorant prat who is stuck in the past.

 

 

Please feel free to visit my Gallery on PDNFans

And my Alternatives to PDN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a great idea. Why don't they have a smart chip inserted in the ball, and sensors strategically placed along the pitch, and on the front posts of the goal? That way, the computer can monitor the ball movement, and if it's a goal, I don't care if it's a foot or in the back of the net, the computer would automatically report it as a goal. That'll free up the linesmen to monitor offsides and whatnots.

Officially retired from this forum. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...at least 5 Germans..' date='[/quote']

That's because of the wonderful Blatter. At least 5 homegrown players have to be on every team.

Also, he proposed for women to wear tighter shorts and shirts to "improve aesthetics". Pig.

http://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/England-just-got-trolled-2.jpg

@Frontcannon - Funny. And you can use the

[thumb]image url[/thumb]

tags to thumbnail-ify an image and it will display full-size when you click on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the one hand I can understand you but on the other: Football (or soccer, it depends on you :D ) is not a perfect sport and it shouldn't. If it would be, we don't need a ref on the fields. Just one man in a room full of TVs watching every scene and giving reasons - or better: a computer analysing every scene.... Incorrect decisions are one big part of football! This is what the people are talking about. Just remember the Wembly goal '66 ;) It's like Günter Netzer, German TV expert, said: "Football without incorrect decisions wouldn't be football. It would loose all of it's fire" (Do you get the sense of this German saying?).

There is no way I would agree to a man in a room watching TV`s to referee the game. The match could and should have a proper ref on the pitch making most of the decisions. Only when there is serious doubt as to whether the ball crossed the line for a goal or if the ref missed an obvious goal like with England should technology be used.

 

 

Please feel free to visit my Gallery on PDNFans

And my Alternatives to PDN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no way I would agree to a man in a room watching TV`s to referee the game. The match could and should have a proper ref on the pitch making most of the decisions. Only when there is serious doubt as to whether the ball crossed the line for a goal or if the ref missed an obvious goal like with England should technology be used.

I think that a simple sensor to tell whether the ball crossed the line is the only technology football (soccer) needs, so that the linesman can concentrate on offsides (ie Tevez's goal) and so that teams don't get eliminated because of an (idiotic) decision by and (idiotic) referee.

I'd be in favour of that :grin:

As would I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Blatter has been forced into a u-turn over technology and has apologized to England & Mexico for not introducing goal line technology before the WC . It`s only because he realised that he was the one being made to look an idiot though, and not the referees who made the mistakes . Can`t have that now can we ? So lo and behold he changes his tune and agrees to look into it. Blatter does nothing unless it is going to make him look good. He couldn`t care less really or we would have had an apology far sooner - not when he felt the need to do it to save his precious reputation.

The sooner he goes the better.

 

 

Please feel free to visit my Gallery on PDNFans

And my Alternatives to PDN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly off-topic, but I read this interesting blog on Yahoo about the term "soccer" and "football." Here in the United States, football is a game where 11 men versus 11 other men beat the tar out of each other to gain points by crossing into the end zone and resulting in 6 points. A field goal conversion is a worth point, unless you are trying for a field goal after exhausting 3 tries to get into the end zone, and it's worth 3 point. A two-point conversion is just that, a two-point conversion, and it only takes place after a touchdown. Now, the rest of the world, football is a game we all are watching at the moment on the grand stage of World Cup.

My question, after reading this blog, and *gasp* it was actually a term back in England, what should we really call it? Soccer or football?

Please, lets refrain from national pride and ego flexing, and just have a civil discussion.

I prefer the term football because it just make sense. Soccer doesn't.

Edited by Lance McKnight

Officially retired from this forum. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well frankly I couldn`t care less what it was called - soccer or football. To me it will always be football though simply because that`s what I`m used to.

One thing I have never understood is why Americans refer to their game as football when most of the time the ball is picked up and run with instead of actually kicked. And why is a touchdown a touchdown when the ball is never actually touched down anyway. The player just has to run past a certain point on the pitch. But hey who cares anyway? Live and let live I say.

 

 

Please feel free to visit my Gallery on PDNFans

And my Alternatives to PDN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I see it, the American football closely resembles rugby, and I think originally, it was soccer and somehow it evolved into what it is today. It is called touchdown because the ball doesn't always touch the end zone, it can be done by landing, running into the end zone, or even the ball breaking the plane of the end zone. I have seen old pictures of football, and the even the size and shape of the football changed over times. Back then, I think it actually was a lot like rugby by the shape and size of the ball, and it just kept changing until it is what it is today.

Officially retired from this forum. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...