Soccer World Cup -06

[49 Cents]

[jpmeyer]

I wish I knew how to quit you.

[Gabethebabe]

Oh well. We´ll see again in two years. We deserve to be out. There was no moment in the Worldcup that I was thinking: damn we´re good. This could lead to something beatiful. We squeezed out two wins in the group of death more based on luck than anything else.

Even though you're talking about the Portugese team, the exact same goed for the Dutch team.

hhmmm. I was talking about the dutch team.

That picture of Ivanov has brought me to tears (from laughing)

[Moxlotus]

What was the deal with the Brazilians?  Are they the biggest pansies on the planet or are they just really good at faking pain?  It seemed like every 10 seconds a Brazilian was on the ground with agony in his face while he clutched something.

On another note, did anyone see the French player take a shot right in the groin and have to come out for a second?  Man, that looked like it hurt.

[dandan]

I think the Brazilians have a lot to learn before they can compete with the Dutchies and Portugese in terms of dying from the slightest touch (or the mere proximity of someone else). Having a player booked for diving by a good Slovak ref probably discoutraged them from trying it too much. Perhaps they thought they could win by playing football.

Seeing the French beat the Spanish gives me hope that the other team yet to wake up but still grinding out results, England might beat a far more exciting team, Portugal (that is when they actually play rather than role-play).

Germany - Argentina Home win, Germany win world cups at home. Argentina are good but Mexico showed that they are mortal
Italy - Ukraine    I think the Italians can win this one
England - Portugal I think dull will prevail over poor acting
Brazil - France  I think the French will disappoint a lot of people by stifling this game and the showmen of Brazil. Brazil were the better team back in 98 too but froze on the day.

[BigMac]

Germany - Argentina : I think the Argentinians will win. However, as these are the last two countries so far to have played good soccer in the championship, it is sad to see either go.

Italy -Ukraine : Italy will win, but here are two sides that beat opponents although they were the weaker side. Shows ye, good defending and good acting to get penalties can get you somewhere.

England - Portugal : I hope England wins this, if only to get rid of them oscar winning arses that do not belong in this championship anymore. I am fearfull that the English will drown against this team of actors though.

Brazil - France : Both teams have the potetial to perform well. Both have not done so far. Still hopefull that the Brazilians will go samba and so i choose to have them win this. Especially as the French were playing so very Italian to win over Spain, wait for a chance and make it. (which in itself is a good but not beautifull way to play)

For a Dutch guy to say this will not go well with my fellow Dutch but i am hoping that either Argentina (due to very good and beautifull soccer) or Germany (due to the Klingsman factor and the fact they actually play decent attacking soccer) will take the cup home. To me all other sides are to anti soccer or have a to high actor level. And as long as FIFA does not agree to monito judging those actors will keep deciding matches like the Italy one. If a referee would just go and see such an event on a monitor, and it is not as if the possibilities are not there (second referee on a monitor in contact with the main ref for example), those players will get away with that kind of behaviour without getting yellows for diving.

So the bottom line is, FIFA is giving actors the chance to perform at the highest level, i wonder how much that brings them on their Swiss bank accounts...

[Shock Wave]

Shows ye, good defending and good acting to get penalties can get you somewhere.

I find it funny how people generally single out one or two teams for their "diving". I hope you're all aware that every team employs simulation tactics. That's right, *every* team. Watch the games and you'll see it from players of every country. It's ridiculous to imply that a team has made it to where they are because of how well/often they dive. Fouls are part of the game, whether we're talking about pulling jerseys or simulating fouls. If you can't accept this you shouldn't be watching soccer.

[BigMac]

I accept that it is being done, what i do not accept is that some teams (always the same teams) get away with it, and some teams do not. So what i do not accept is that there are people paying lots of money to see referees make mistake upon mistake. I know all teams employ this tactics, some make an artform of it though, and as such i think it should be banned form the fields as it does nothing to contribute to beautifull soccer. And as far as i am concerned, this is a worldchampionship soccer and not a championship acting and diving.

So yes it is widespread, but that doesnt mean i have to like it.

[Shock Wave]

I accept that it is being done, what i do not accept is that some teams (always the same teams) get away with it, and some teams do not. So what i do not accept is that there are people paying lots of money to see referees make mistake upon mistake. I know all teams employ this tactics, some make an artform of it though, and as such i think it should be banned form the fields as it does nothing to contribute to beautifull soccer. And as far as i am concerned, this is a worldchampionship soccer and not a championship acting and diving.

So yes it is widespread, but that doesnt mean i have to like it.

Well, I certainly contend with your notion that some teams get away with it more than others. Every team is equally guilty of simulation and every team gets away with their fair share of bullshit. If all teams employ these tactics, but some team employ the tactics better than others, is it the *fault* of those teams that employ the tactics in a more advantageous fashion?

Pulling a player's jersey has nothing to do with beautiful soccer either, but it is a tactic that is employed and is *necessary* to win. Consider that these are not trivial games being played by kids in a park. This is the World Cup. Consider that these teams are not concerned with playing beautiful soccer, they are there to win. If the soccer is beautiful in the process, it is merely incidental.

I wouldn't suggest that you should "like it", but rather accept it, because fouls are part of the game and this will never change.

[Eddie]

This is why soccer sucks anyway. If I wanted to see diving, I'd be watching some womens diving team on the Olympics.

[Shock Wave]

This is why soccer sucks anyway. If I wanted to see diving, I'd be watching some womens diving team on the Olympics.

You think soccer is the only sport where fouls occur? By that line of reasoning, all sports suck.

[Eddie]

This is why soccer sucks anyway. If I wanted to see diving, I'd be watching some womens diving team on the Olympics.

You think soccer is the only sport where fouls occur? By that line of reasoning, all sports suck.

Nope, but there is a difference in the number of fouls. I don't see many in most Olympic sports for instance (leaving out fouls we can see like dope). Any sport that needs a referee (unless for keeping track of points like snooker or darts) is stupid. What's the point if you can't rely on fair play?

[Dante]

This is why soccer sucks anyway. If I wanted to see diving, I'd be watching some womens diving team on the Olympics.

You think soccer is the only sport where fouls occur? By that line of reasoning, all sports suck.

Try watching the NBA - out of all the American popular sports (i.e. not including soccer), it's far and away the worst officiating ever. 

The Sports Guy from ESPN sums it up well

Third, here's a theory on referees that I described in a blog last spring:

"I don't think the NBA fixes games, but they have one trick that they use for situations like this -- when they want a home team to win the game, they invariably assign the worst referees possible to that game for two reasons: Bad referees have a tendency to get swayed by the home crowd, and bad referees never have the stones to make a tough call on the road.

Considering I brought this up LAST spring, do you find any of this a little strange? Why aren't the best referees calling these games? Why do the worst ones always seem to get assigned to games in which it would be better for the league if the home team won? Why am I the only one who notices this stuff or seems to care? Why do I find myself watching these games and concentrating more on the one-sided officiating than some of Wade's spectacular plays? As my buddy House e-mailed on Monday morning: "I don't think I can take much more of NBA refs insisting on controlling the outcomes of the most significant games. The NBA is a disgrace and should be completely embarrassed. I hate this game

And that's coming from one of the last 19 NBA diehards -- I can only imagine what the casual fans thought after watching such a one-sided travesty. Look, we all love Dwyane Wade. He's fantastic. But there's absolutely no scenario in which a 2-guard should be attempting as many free throws as everyone on the other team. It's absolutely unfathomable. And here's what really kills me: If there's a Game 7, you KNOW they'll come up with the best possible officials for that particular game. So why wouldn't every Finals game work like that? We have seven possible games spread over 17 days ... they couldn't pick the best three or four refs and have them work every game, like how MLB picks the best seven umps to comprise the World Series crew? Why wouldn't that work? Is there a single reason you can come up with? Arrrrrrrrgh

I mean when I was younger (grade and high school, I'm almost 29 now), I LOVED the NBA, but as I watched the officiating morph from a "stars get more calls" to the "protect the stars on every play" mentality, I've lost a lot of love for the game since "drawing contact" seems to be a more highly rated skill than jump shooting.

Sorry to derail the soccer thread though....

[Shock Wave]

This is why soccer sucks anyway. If I wanted to see diving, I'd be watching some womens diving team on the Olympics.

You think soccer is the only sport where fouls occur? By that line of reasoning, all sports suck.

Nope, but there is a difference in the number of fouls. I don't see many in most Olympic sports for instance (leaving out fouls we can see like dope). Any sport that needs a referee (unless for keeping track of points like snooker or darts) is stupid. What's the point if you can't rely on fair play?

Fair play? You're kidding right? We're talking about human beings playing for millions of dollars. Even if they were playing for nothing, competition drives people to do whatever it takes to win. We have a referee to decide what is fair and what is not, and these people are human beings also. You have to take the good with bad instead of hoping for some hippie utopia where everyone does the right thing and cheaters don't exist.

[Godder]

One way to eliminate diving (which is a deliberate foul) could be to increase the penalty for diving (if a ref/linesman sees it, of course) to a red card for the offender and a penalty kick at goal (as opposed to a free kick). However, referees with increased power are more prone to match-fixing (always a possibility regardless), so it's a tough call either way.

Another option could be a judiciary with the power to cite and suspend offenders using video footage of games. Diving is a deliberate act, as is playing up (acting) something like tripping over someone already on the ground, so it's not as if the perpetrators can claim that they weren't intentionally cheating - it may not be drugs or taking cheap shots, but it's still intentionally breaking the rules of the sport.

[BigMac]

I wouldn't suggest that you should "like it", but rather accept it, because fouls are part of the game and this will never change.

So when playing in the worldchampionship magic youwould rather accept it than fight people playing dirty to win.

One way to eliminate diving (which is a deliberate foul) could be to increase the penalty for diving (if a ref/linesman sees it, of course) to a red card for the offender and a penalty kick at goal (as opposed to a free kick). However, referees with increased power are more prone to match-fixing (always a possibility regardless), so it's a tough call either way.

There allready is a fourth ref and that one actually has a monitor that can show you if a foul actually was a foul or not so a ref could have the information within half a minute and give the right penalty or a yellow to a diver. But the fourth ref has absolutely no bearing on the game whatso ever. It would be so simple and with the ammount of camera's on the fields nowadays and the millions that actually are at stake nowadays you would suspect them to actually make use of the availability of the possible techniques.

The NBA example only shows that when millions are at stake powerfull organisations will do everything in their power to make as much money as possible. When in the NBA a team in the finals wins with 4-0 there is three less games and so three less comercial income games. Basically this is just to make more money of of the common man.

[dandan]

I think a 'penalty kick' is a appropriate penalty for diving. If you dive and get caught, the defender gets to give you a kick. I'd pay good money to see Robben, Ronaldo (not the fattie), Figo, etc get kicked by defenders for diving. Obviously the severity of the kick should depend on how bad the actor appeared to be injured, but seeing as most chose to roll around on the floor as if pole-axed by hippo on steroids, I think it is do-able!!

[Gabethebabe]

So the bottom line is, FIFA is giving actors the chance to perform at the highest level, i wonder how much that brings them on their Swiss bank accounts...

You´re getting a little paranoid here.

BTW I think 'ze germans' will beat Argentina. Simply because they are germans.

[Jacob Orlove]

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that the winning team in each match will score more goals than the losing team.

[Shock Wave]

So when playing in the worldchampionship magic youwould rather accept it than fight people playing dirty to win.

That's a horrible example. In the Magic Worldchampionships, if you have a ruling issue, you'll probably have a judge that will listen to you (but this isn't always the case). In this situation, how do you plan on influencing the powers that be? Are you planning on rallying TMD to form a petition to FIFA against diving? lol.

Do you think that you're the first person to have this concern? Moreover, do you think that the common solutions in this thread have not been brought to the table before? This is not some trivial issue that FIFA has overlooked in order to ensure that referees have the power to decide matches. This is a complicated issue that does not have a simple solution.

[Toad]

[Yare]

As someone who has officiated soccer for a number of years, I'm going to say that the penalty for diving (a mandatory caution in addition to the corresponding indirect free kick) is right where it belongs, as long as officials actually follow through with this policy.

In my opinion (and not in the opinion of the rules), diving falls more into the "cheating" category than the "foul" category, so to simply award a kick is not sufficient.  At the same time, however, sending off a player would be excessive for a couple of reasons.  Referees would be hard pressed to actually enforce the violation at this level.  When the dive is an especially believable one, officials will seriously second guess themselves about showing the red card.  There is nothing worse in the mind of an official than giving an undeserved red card, including allowing a "questionable" goal.  This possibly stems from the personal nature of the red card: a goal is against an entire team while a red card (though it does effect an entire team) is directed at one specific player.  Regardless, sending off a player is not something that can be done hastily.  Aong this line, if diving is a red card only offense, then a number of close cases may just go completely unpunished.  Consider a situation where a player dives "somewhat" on a play that wasn't that crucial to the outcome of the game.  If the referee blows the whistle for that particular violation, then to not give a red card would not be within the laws of the game; the opposing team would be hopping mad.  Additionally, this would not be received well by the powers that govern officials.  If, on the other hand, the referee chooses to let play go on, then a violation of the rules was left unchecked, which is obviously not the desired situation.

Hence, the yellow card rule gives the referee enough flexibility to be able to make the call confidently and punish the violation at an appropriate level.  Beyond this, it allows room for officiating mistakes, so that this one call will not change the entire outcome of the match inappropriately.  Honestly, it really embodies the concept of the yellow card: you can still play even though you screwed up badly and you can also still play in the off-chance that I happened to screw up.

Regarding this violation being a penal foul, I suppose I could see it.  However, this would not be consistent with the other rules.  All contact fouls, excluding impedement (obstruction), in addition to handling are penal (direct kick) offenses.  All other fouls, including misconduct that is not a foul, are non-penal (indirect kick) offenses.  While this is not a compelling reason by itself to not change the diving rule, it is useful in putting things in perspective.

If you have any officiating questions, I can try to answer them.

[Komatteru]

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that the winning team in each match will score more goals than the losing team.

Obviously a graduate of the John Madden school for sports analysis.

[Moxlotus]

Rooney--you are a dumbass

Portugal's offense--you guys blow.  80 minutes up a man and you can't score a goal.

Ricardo--holy shit you are a good keeper

[Nazdakka]

Rooney--you are a dumbass

Portugal's offense--you guys blow.  80 minutes up a man and you can't score a goal.

Ricardo--holy shit you are a good keeper

Christiano Ronaldo is complete scum :-/

[Shock Wave]

Rooney--you are a dumbass

Portugal's offense--you guys blow.  80 minutes up a man and you can't score a goal.

Ricardo--holy shit you are a good keeper

Christiano Ronaldo is complete scum :-/

Love him or hate him, the guy is a damn good socer player. He's just a kid. He is the future of portuguese football, and one of Europe's best.

[Chill79]

Now that France dropped Brazil,i think the final will be Germany-France,0-0 after 120min,3-4 after kicks and France takes the cup...

[MarkPharaoh]

As someone who has officiated soccer for a number of years

USSF?  What grade level?  Just wondering, never actually meant another licensed referee through Magic before

[Yare]

As someone who has officiated soccer for a number of years

USSF? What grade level? Just wondering, never actually meant another licensed referee through Magic before

I did USSF for about 3 years.  I was grade 7.  I did Region I Snickers and Region I ODP also.

[UR]

Wow... that Argentinian coach sucked. What do you do when you are 1-0 up? That's right... take of all your good strikers and put in some mid-fielders while leaving Messi on the bench. YAY! That way, you are sure to lose against Germany because they ALWAYS score in the last 10 minutes. NO EXCEPTIONS.

We had a Dutch coach who substituted our best player on the field... we fired his ass after that. I suspect the Argentinians will do the same.