2010 World Cup Thread

[Guest]

The average NFL football game in 2009 had 2.8 touchdowns and 3 field goals per game.

 

That's 6 scoring plays in about 3 hours.

 

The average NHL game is about 2.5 hours and has 5.7 goals.

 

Nobody ever complains that the NFL is low-scoring. But for the amount of time you are sitting there, you don't see that many scores.

 

I'm not sure where you got them, but your football numbers are wrong. 2.8 TDs and 3 FGs makes 28.6 ppg. The team average for points was 22.7 which means per game, you're getting 45.4, which is two touchdowns and a FG on average more than what your numbers say.

[USSoccer]

The thing about Slovenia is that they're not so much a bunker/counter side as a side that plays possum. They aren't fast. They sort of lull you to sleep and pick their spots. They'll concede possession for 55 minutes and then try to attack for 15.

 

Their back 4 are organized and their keeper is pretty good. In qualifying the scored 18 and conceded 4, but their group contained San Marino and Northern Ireland.

 

We have to be wary of them, but CONCACAF should have provided us with the experience in breaking down teams that park the bus, and the quality of our XI should keep us from overlooking the fact that they can be dangerous when they decide to play.

[wolf stansson]

They also have a Dempseyesque wild card in Koren. He's not as good, but he is capable of that same kind of unexpected play from nowhere which jives well with their style of lulling their opponent to the pace they prefer.

[shnsajax]

Chile looking dangerous so far. Good pace to this game to start out.

[biittner77]

I don't believe it's lack of scoring that makes soccer unapeealing to the US audience. I can remember when there used to be a professional indoor soccer league and there was plenty of scoring but it was still a fringe sport.

 

I think the real problem for Americans is that, until recently, the US team has never been very good. In America, we can get excited about team handball every 4 years if the US is winning or at least has a chance to win.

 

With winning comes people paying attention. Once people start paying attention they'll better understand the subtle things that make the game exciting. Baseball is a pretty boring game a lot of the time in terms of lack of scoring. But a low scoring game can still be exciting because of great defensive plays or dominating pitching performances. People that have seen a lot of baseball get that. There are lots of paralells in soccer, ie exciting moments that don't necessarily lead to scoring plays.

[biittner77]

As far as US- Slovenia goes, Slovenia has to play to win. If they tie the US and the US beats Algeria, the US would have 5 points. Assuming they can't beat England, Slovenia would finish with 4 points and won't advance. If they were to somehow tie both the US and England they still probably lose on total goals scored tie breaker.

 

So at some point they have to try to win the game. They didn't look very good against Algeria and this is a game the US really should win.

[wvcbxl]

As far as US- Slovenia goes, Slovenia has to play to win. If they tie the US and the US beats Algeria, the US would have 5 points. Assuming they can't beat England, Slovenia would finish with 4 points and won't advance. If they were to somehow tie both the US and England they still probably lose on total goals scored tie breaker.

 

So at some point they have to try to win the game. They didn't look very good against Algeria and this is a game the US really should win.

 

I'm confused by the reasoning of you guys - if anything, the Slovenia game is one the USA has to play to win. The draw against England gave you a shot at winning the group. Or do you really relish the thought of a second round tie against Germany?

I'm expecting a bunker-and-counter game from Slovenia, and a (tentative to begin with) play to win one from the USA. This, if anything, will be the true test for your best eleven.

[Banedon]

The local morning show host just said that the number one ringtone right now is the Vuvuzela Horn.

 

I can't verify that, but I might just punch someone with that ringtone.

[apete6]

The average NFL football game in 2009 had 2.8 touchdowns and 3 field goals per game.

 

That's 6 scoring plays in about 3 hours.

 

The average NHL game is about 2.5 hours and has 5.7 goals.

 

Nobody ever complains that the NFL is low-scoring. But for the amount of time you are sitting there, you don't see that many scores.

 

There's also a bunch of big hits and fast action on every play. In soccer, you get, what 10 shots on goal per game? That would be akin to having 10 passing plays and every other play was a run up the middle for 2 yards.

[biittner77]

I'm confused by the reasoning of you guys - if anything, the Slovenia game is one the USA has to play to win. The draw against England gave you a shot at winning the group. Or do you really relish the thought of a second round tie against Germany?

 

Of course the US has to win. The question is will Slovenia hunker down and try to grind out a tie. I don't believe they can afford to do that.

[ConstableRabbit]

I don't believe it's lack of scoring that makes soccer unapeealing to the US audience. I can remember when there used to be a professional indoor soccer league and there was plenty of scoring but it was still a fringe sport.

 

I think the real problem for Americans is that, until recently, the US team has never been very good. In America, we can get excited about team handball every 4 years if the US is winning or at least has a chance to win.

 

With winning comes people paying attention. Once people start paying attention they'll better understand the subtle things that make the game exciting. Baseball is a pretty boring game a lot of the time in terms of lack of scoring. But a low scoring game can still be exciting because of great defensive plays or dominating pitching performances. People that have seen a lot of baseball get that. There are lots of paralells in soccer, ie exciting moments that don't necessarily lead to scoring plays.

Agree.

 

Besides, is it really the actual scoring that makes the game exciting? I think its the scoring chances. That's when you get to see bending free kicks, guys flying into the box for headers, keepers diving, and everything else associated with "exciting" soccer. To me, a great shot off the post is almost as exciting as a goal.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

There's also a bunch of big hits and fast action on every play. In soccer, you get, what 10 shots on goal per game? That would be akin to having 10 passing plays and every other play was a run up the middle for 2 yards.

 

"Every play" meaning the 13 minutes out of the 180 you are sitting there that they are actually playing?

[TruffleShuffle]

"It’s a fair result,” Honduras defender Sergio Mendoza said. “We didn’t have a clear chance at goal. We knew we could lose this match, but qualifying out of the group is not impossible."

 

yeah, you only have to beat switzerland and spain, or beat switzerland and draw with spain and hope that spain draws their other two games, or chile loses to spain and draws with switzerland and you somehow beat them on goal differential. good luck with that.

[UMFan83]

I'm confused by the reasoning of you guys - if anything, the Slovenia game is one the USA has to play to win. The draw against England gave you a shot at winning the group. Or do you really relish the thought of a second round tie against Germany?

I'm expecting a bunker-and-counter game from Slovenia, and a (tentative to begin with) play to win one from the USA. This, if anything, will be the true test for your best eleven.

 

I think it just goes to show you the expectations that some people still have with the USA. Getting out of the group is seen as an acomplishment for many. 94 and 02 not 98 and 06.

Edited June 16, 2010 by UMFan83

[shnsajax]

I don't believe it's lack of scoring that makes soccer unapeealing to the US audience. I can remember when there used to be a professional indoor soccer league and there was plenty of scoring but it was still a fringe sport.

 

I think the real problem for Americans is that, until recently, the US team has never been very good. In America, we can get excited about team handball every 4 years if the US is winning or at least has a chance to win.

 

With winning comes people paying attention. Once people start paying attention they'll better understand the subtle things that make the game exciting. Baseball is a pretty boring game a lot of the time in terms of lack of scoring. But a low scoring game can still be exciting because of great defensive plays or dominating pitching performances. People that have seen a lot of baseball get that. There are lots of paralells in soccer, ie exciting moments that don't necessarily lead to scoring plays.

 

This is it right here. We are not a very gracious country when it comes to losing. The further exposure of the EPL and SPL are helping a lot. Club teams are becoming a household name now, and the Champions League gets solid ratings.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

This is it right here. We are not a very gracious country when it comes to losing.

 

Right because England and all the others are such gracious losers?

[shnsajax]

It must be nice to be a country with Torres and Cesc on the bench. Spain are f'in loaded.

[TruffleShuffle]

bad ruling by the referee there

[Banedon]

This is it right here. We are not a very gracious country when it comes to losing. The further exposure of the EPL and SPL are helping a lot. Club teams are becoming a household name now, and the Champions League gets solid ratings.

 

I think saying that the teams are "household names" is overstating it. Judging by relatives and co-workers, I'm a pretty sports obsessed person, and I can only probably name a couple of soccer teams. Hell, I could probably name more MLS teams than I could EPL or SPL.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think the real problem for Americans is that, until recently, the US team has never been very good.

 

The US isn't very good because the US doesn't care. Every kid plays soccer when he's 9, but nobody gives a crap about it by the time they are in high school. Many of my friends from out east played a lot more soccer than I did growing up, and none of them are the least bit interested in watching other people play it. They are die hard football fans, and basketball fans. There are a couple hockey fans, but none are futbol fans.

 

Sure, if they have success more people will pay attention, but it's not as if past successes, which have happened, ever actually amounted to anything. There are just far too many other lucrative and enjoyable sports for the best American athletes to play for soccer to be huge here. Most countries that are good at it have it as one of maybe 2 or 3 big sports, if that. Some countries are better at some of our sports, but with football, baseball and basketball dominating the landscape, and second tier sports like hockey taking a fair amount of athletes, then a whole bunch of fringe sports like track, tennis, swimming, golf, skiing/snowboarding and lacrosse, it's tough to build enough interest in soccer to compete against countries whose best athletes play that sport.

[wolf stansson]

Can we PLEASE stop filling this thread with why soccer sucks, why it's not huge in America or anything like this? Post about it in the soccer thread.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm not sure where you got them, but your football numbers are wrong. 2.8 TDs and 3 FGs makes 28.6 ppg. The team average for points was 22.7 which means per game, you're getting 45.4, which is two touchdowns and a FG on average more than what your numbers say.

 

Ooops, I see the mistake. I was glancing at pro-football-reference and only looked at the "passing" column and skipped the rushing touchdowns.

[jersey cubs fan]

Can we PLEASE stop filling this thread with why soccer sucks, why it's not huge in America or anything like this? Post about it in the soccer thread.

 

Okay.

well spain looks like they are boudn to score

[wvcbxl]

I'm confused by the reasoning of you guys - if anything, the Slovenia game is one the USA has to play to win. The draw against England gave you a shot at winning the group. Or do you really relish the thought of a second round tie against Germany?

 

Of course the US has to win. The question is will Slovenia hunker down and try to grind out a tie. I don't believe they can afford to do that.

 

Slovenia can afford to do as they please - they have no expectations of advancing whatsoever, contrary to the US...

[TruffleShuffle]

the swiss are going to have a hard time holding spain scoreless if they keep playing like this... spain have missed a lot of good chances and are too good to keep doing that.