2010 World Cup Thread

[Exile on Waveland]

HUP HOLLAND!

 

If Germany wins tomorrow I'll be about as happy as I can be with the US's departure.

[hawkeyecub]

Completely random question I have while watching the World Cup, why don't players do that flip-launch pass on throw-in's more often?

[Billy_Buck]

For those of us who couldn't tune into the entire game: what's the verdict? Would USMNT have kept pace with Uruguay?

 

Also, kinda ironic that we have yet another controversial goal line call, though AFAIK the ref handled it properly in this case.

[dew1679666265]

Take it up with the NFL.

 

I don't blame Uruguay for doing what the rules dictated they should do. Any smart team would. Fix the rules so that cheating isn't the smart play.

 

I may have no idea what I'm talking about here since I didn't see the play, but isn't the penalty on a handball the automatic red card? So yes you delay the goal, but you're also playing a man down the rest of the game.

[Guest]

I read the thread before seeing the handball and would've guessed it would be much worse. I'm not so sure he couldn't have even headed it away. Not that it isn't a straight red and a PK, but starting on a whole "count the goal" crusade is crazy talk.

[bukie]

Completely random question I have while watching the World Cup, why don't players do that flip-launch pass on throw-in's more often?

Difficult to control, mostly. It's basically giving up a 50/50 ball when you are currently in control. Easier to set up a more precise cross off a short throw than throw in such a way that it goes exactly where you want across the field.

[shnsajax]

Completely random question I have while watching the World Cup, why don't players do that flip-launch pass on throw-in's more often?

Difficult to control, mostly. It's basically giving up a 50/50 ball when you are currently in control. Easier to set up a more precise cross off a short throw than throw in such a way that it goes exactly where you want across the field.

 

At this level you have one guy who can make the throw 35-40 yards. Edit: maybe not that far but 25+ yards.

[CubInOK]

Take it up with the NFL.

 

I don't blame Uruguay for doing what the rules dictated they should do. Any smart team would. Fix the rules so that cheating isn't the smart play.

 

I may have no idea what I'm talking about here since I didn't see the play, but isn't the penalty on a handball the automatic red card? So yes you delay the goal, but you're also playing a man down the rest of the game.

Yep. Of course, this red card was at the end of the game, so instead Uruguay will have to settle with playing the Netherlands without a guy who scored 49 goals in all competitions for a Dutch team last season, not to mention his 3 goals for Uruguay in this World Cup.

[shnsajax]

Why does espn keep saying Holland winning is a huge upset?

[bukie]

Why does espn keep saying Holland winning is a huge upset?

Because by American public perception (and World Cup Finals history) it is.

[shnsajax]

Why does espn keep saying Holland winning is a huge upset?

Because by American public perception (and World Cup Finals history) it is.

 

No its not. Perceived to be one of the top 3 teams in the world beating the #1 team?

[chuckywang]

How is what Uruguay did any different than intentionally fouling a person to not give up an easy bucket?

[bukie]

Why does espn keep saying Holland winning is a huge upset?

Because by American public perception (and World Cup Finals history) it is.

 

No its not. Perceived to be one of the top 3 teams in the world beating the #1 team?

I'm not sure John Doe American know much about the Dutch team. I think the bigger thing of the upset was that Brazil was out. But with the two teams playing in the quarters, one was going to be seriously disappointed with the result regardless.

[USSoccer]

I completely enjoyed Ghana choking miserably there. F them.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How is what Uruguay did any different than intentionally fouling a person to not give up an easy bucket?

 

How is it not the same as goaltending?

 

I don't know why people are acting like this is so unheard of.

 

In hockey, if a player is pulled down from behind on a breakaway with an empty net, the goal is awarded.

 

In baseball, if a player illegally tries to field the ball by throwing his glove or a piece of clothing at him, a triple is awarded. If the ball was going out of the park, a home run is awarded.

 

In football, if a team goaltends a field goal, 3 points are awarded. If they commit, in the judgment of the ref, a "palpably unfair act" to stop a touchdown, the touchdown is awarded.

[USSoccer]

How is what Uruguay did any different than intentionally fouling a person to not give up an easy bucket?

 

How is it not the same as goaltending?

 

I don't know why people are acting like this is so unheard of.

 

In hockey, if a player is pulled down from behind on a breakaway with an empty net, the goal is awarded.

 

In baseball, if a player illegally tries to field the ball by throwing his glove or a piece of clothing at him, a triple is awarded. If the ball was going out of the park, a home run is awarded.

 

In football, if a team goaltends a field goal, 3 points are awarded. If they commit, in the judgment of the ref, a "palpably unfair act" to stop a touchdown, the touchdown is awarded.

 

Because in those sports, you don't also have to lose a player the rest of the game and play permanently shorthanded.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Because in those sports, you don't also have to lose a player the rest of the game and play permanently shorthanded.

 

Fair point, but in soccer there still exists situations where that penalty is meaningless.

 

It's sort of like the old hockey rule loophole where a coach was down to a 5-on-3 but kept sending too many men on the ice in the closing minute anyway, because all they could do was blow the whistle when they touched the puck and put another guy in the box.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Because in those sports, you don't also have to lose a player the rest of the game and play permanently shorthanded.

 

 

Oh, and in rugby they can send you off with a red card, and they also award penalty tries when one team egregiously or repeatedly stops a try with illegal actions.

[Jon]

In football, a defensive back can grab onto a WR breaking away to prevent a touchdown and only get a pass interference penalty, nothing else.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

In football, a defensive back can grab onto a WR breaking away to prevent a touchdown and only get a pass interference penalty, nothing else.

 

Because you can't know for sure if the player was going to catch the ball. As has been said, football *does* award points for scoring plays prevented by unfair acts. Including a field goal about to go through that is knocked away illegally at the last second.

 

A soccer player about to get a breakaway = pass interference.

 

A ball about to go into the net != pass interference

[imb]

so kyle is the worst poster in the tv threads, baseball threads, hockey threads and soccer threads. quite the feat

[Jon]

In football, a defensive back can grab onto a WR breaking away to prevent a touchdown and only get a pass interference penalty, nothing else.

 

Because you can't know for sure if the player was going to catch the ball. As has been said, football *does* award points for scoring plays prevented by unfair acts. Including a field goal about to go through that is knocked away illegally at the last second.

 

A soccer player about to get a breakaway = pass interference.

 

A ball about to go into the net != pass interference

There's no realistic way that a player on the field in football can do something that results in an awarded touchdown. The rults are really only relevant if a non-active person does something, which isn't what happened in today's match.

 

Goaltending is another issue, but not one that applies to soccer since defenders are supposed to be there. Not the case in football (when the ball approaches the uprights) or basketball (when the ball is on the way down).

 

And to give the ref the discretion to just award goals is nothing like the power given to officials in football. It's clear what a palpably unfair act is in football. Not so with soccer. Do you award it when there's a flagrant handball a yard from the goal line? Two yards? Five? When the keeper takes someone down? And what about times when the ref thinks it would go in but it might have hit the post or when the ref thinks it might have gone wide but really it would have gone in?

 

The rule as is is really the most fair way of dealing with things. I don't think soccer needs to give the ref the power to award goals on judgment calls.

[Magnetic Curses]

on my high school team we had this guy from venezuela who did that in a game and got red carded, the goal counted, and the referee blathered on about ungentlemanly conduct for like 10 minutes while the 16-year old kid had to stand there and take it. get over it, buddy the kid was reacting.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

There's no realistic way that a player on the field in football can do something that results in an awarded touchdown. The rults are really only relevant if a non-active person does something, which isn't what happened in today's match.

 

That's fair, but then the field-goal rule is clearly similar.

 

Goaltending is another issue, but not one that applies to soccer since defenders are supposed to be there. Not the case in football (when the ball approaches the uprights) or basketball (when the ball is on the way down).

 

Distinction without difference. All three examples are players illegally defending an attempt to score. I think the baseball example is the most analogous: throwing your glove or hat at a ball leaving the park results in a home run being awarded.

 

And to give the ref the discretion to just award goals is nothing like the power given to officials in football. It's clear what a palpably unfair act is in football. Not so with soccer. Do you award it when there's a flagrant handball a yard from the goal line? Two yards? Five? When the keeper takes someone down? And what about times when the ref thinks it would go in but it might have hit the post or when the ref thinks it might have gone wide but really it would have gone in?

 

The rule as is is really the most fair way of dealing with things. I don't think soccer needs to give the ref the power to award goals on judgment calls.

 

How about just any flagrant handball by the last defender inside the six-yard box that stops a ball that was heading into the net.

 

Somehow, rugby, football, baseball, basketball and hockey get along with similar rules.

[shnsajax]

on my high school team we had this guy from venezuela who did that in a game and got red carded, the goal counted, and the referee blathered on about ungentlemanly conduct for like 10 minutes while the 16-year old kid had to stand there and take it. get over it, buddy the kid was reacting.

 

I hope that ref was then kicked out of the high school level.