WC Play So Far

Well, let's think about it this way... in the NFL, there are, what, seven officials on the field at all times?

And three in basketball?

And four in baseball (five in the playoffs)?

Why is it that soccer only has one official with two line judges that really don't do much other than call offsides?

I realize there are potential problems with one official calling things tight and the other calling things loose, but really... those things ultimately work themselves out in football and basketball.

I think if FIFA wants to get real with fixing officiating, just sticking an extra person behind the goal isn't really going to solve the problem.

Would an extra official or two on the field help things? Maybe... just maybe.

there will definitely be some ego bruising in the process, but it's readily apparent that SOMETHING has to give... I don't know how 2 center refs would work, or if it would require one center ref and then a few "eyes in the sky" so to speak who communicated with the center guy. More refs involved does have the potential for more things being called correctly, or conversely just another human capable of missing the call. I think its time they start exploring how technology can help the officials make the correct calls, and do it in a way that doesn't add length/ruin the flow of the game. I know the MLS is willing to be a testing ground, and I'm sure others will as well.... Now if only we can get that Blatter relic off his throne...

And the line judges are able to spot fouls/transgressions in their lines of sight and alert the center official (hence the head pieces they all wear) oh yeah call things out of bounds... just for the record...

I'd be for more refs and some goal line technology. Calling offsides is always going to be subjective, and you're right calling flopping is tough at game speed. However, the refs are supposed to be in top shape with quick eyes. It's their job.

You can't compare football to other sports; it's apples and oranges. Plus the idea that having more refs and technology in sports means better calls or fairness isn't always true either. Case in point: Seahawks vs. Steelers Superbowl. Hurl.

PurplePrideTrumpet wrote:Adios, Diego:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hUvSMgwoA_vp93ZZWbLdeIqT3HWA

The USSF hasn't made a decision on Bradley yet, but now that Diego's available I'd watch out...

6 months too late...

I wonder if he left the tags on his suits...

The USA "Bob must go" crowd are rank amateurs. This is how it's done.

Maradona, if you recall, was offered another 4 years by AFA president Julio Grondona (also next in line to be head of FIFA), with impossible conditions sure to anger him. among them was that he couldn't have his long time crony Oscar Rugerri as an assistant.

He, of course refused and quit, and a "you can't quit me, i'm fired" round ensued. (probably just what Grondona wanted)

Friday, the #2 in the AFA, former coach Carlos Bilardo said the way was open for Maradona to return, sending shivers up the spines of folks already speculating on a new coach.

Today Ruggeri is quoted on TV as saying the 76 yr. old Grondona threatened to shoot him in the leg and Grondona's daughter would stab him.

http://momento24.com/en/2010/08/02/ruggeri-grondona-told-maradona-that-he-was-going-to-shoot-me/


Maradona will be on the same TV show where this all went down, next.

Is this fun or what?

Sepp says FIFA will consider eliminating draws from the Group stage. Games will be 90 minute and then PK's, or sudden death OT and then PK's.


http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/id/5463515/fifa-considers-doing-away-draws-world-cup?campaign=rss&source=twitter&ex_cid=Twitter_espn_5463515

I could see that, though I would maybe prefer it if they did it hockey-style in that the team that loses a PK would still get a point but the winning team gets the full three. Seems kind of silly to punish a team so harshly in the group stage for playing even soccer for 120 minutes and then losing in what amounts to a crap shoot.

If they scored it as you suggest, there would be more points awarded to the two teams for a PK win than for a legitimate win. That seems wrong.

Two points for a PK winner, maybe..

Geezaldinho wrote:If they scored it as you suggest, there would be more points awarded to the two teams for a PK win than for a legitimate win. That seems wrong.

Well, not really, because in that instance the team that loses in PKs is more deserving than the team that just simply loses.

Then again, I think it's also true that a team winning in PKs is less deserving than a team that just simply wins. So, two points for the winner would be fine by me.

If nothing else, it would help eliminate the arbitrary tie-breakers of goal differential and goals scored and coin flips and all that.

The other issue I see with awarding points for a pk loss is that it encourages conservative play. That's the same problem we have now with draws.

I thought the whole idea was to open the games up and make for better viewing.

I think another issue you might run in to by allowing for PKs and potentially OT is the relative indefinite time this would add. As of now the games all stay within that 2 hour range pretty nicely which makes for easy viewing and TV scheduling... That indefinite time could make it difficult to schedule while still allowing viewing of as many games as possible.

I guess it could be worked around, but I mean I adore watching soccer, but I also like that the game is all done under 2 hours.

Maybe they need to raise the mound for the forwards...

DaTruRochin wrote:

Maybe they need to raise the mound for the forwards...

..or give them frilly skirts to wear like they do for Football quarterbacks..