Head for the hills, soccer-haters!

[keepngoal]

I can understand the complaints on 'faux' injuries. But in soccer a set play (ref calling the foul from the injury) has such an advantage, many over do it by flopping around. Besides the fact if a yellow is given that player really has to back off... like getting your fourth foul on basketball... don't we try to get that fifth foul on our opponents by acting a little?? anyway it is similar in soccer, over the top at times.. but the concept is same.

- keep.

 

[bigredqb7]

Ok, the one big problem I have with soccer is the stupidest rule in all of sports. That offsides rule is ridiculous. A person can be on side, not move, and all of a sudden be offside if the defense moves forward. They should use a blue line like hockey, maybe it would open the sport to more excitement.

Also, I cannot handle the fake injuries. It is just so annoying to watch someone acting like they have been shot in the nuts one minute and be prancing around 2 min later.

calling offsides the stupidest rule is just plain ignorant. if there was no offside teams would have players just stand by the goal and cherry pick the whole game. this rule has been around for over a century clearly meaning it is fair and good for the game. people saying it is a dumb just doesnt make sense, along with why american football is called football and football in america is called soccer

 

[soccercy]

It's really not all that stable. Prior to his death, Lamar Hunt really wanted to get out of the MLS. They flat out aren't making any money and the league is losing millions each year. Last I heard it was 350 million total.

Actually, you are wrong on this. Lamar Hunt owned more than one team, he wanted to get his stake down because that was necessary for the growth of the league, to have local ownership. Lamar Hunt met his wife at the World Cup, his son was the captain of the men's team at SMU. Soccer was a big part of his life. He wasn't trying to get out of it, he was trying to get more people involved.

 

[soccercy]

Good to see some old fashioned name calling!

I saw a program about balls on the History Channel (if I recall correctly) and they pointed out that some sports try to keep their ball the same through time (baseball) while some sports have utilized technology to improve their ball to make the game easier (soccer, golf, and bowling).

Hey, I have a question on the rules. The last World Cup (I think, if I remember correctly) there was a game that ended 0-0 but someone still "won" the game. How exactly does that work?

To say baseballs haven't been altered by technology to make the game easier is just naive. We've all seen the juiced ball era, and know that they can change how the ball flies by changing it's core, etc. Technology is a part of every sport.

 

[BryceC]

like getting your fourth foul on basketball... don't we try to get that fifth foul on our opponents by acting a little??

Let me know next time a basketball player gets taken off the court on a stretcher only to get up right away when they get off the field and reenter the game at the next timeout. There's a difference between "acting a little" and what happened at the world cup.

Why would we call football "American football" when 90% of the people talking about football in this country are talking about the game with the oblong ball.

 

[bigredqb7]

[/quote]Why would we call football "American football" when 90% of the people talking about football in this country are talking about the game with the oblong ball.[/quote]

im not saying we should call it american football, i was simply distinguishing the two in my post. it will obviously not be changed because it has been around for quite some time but they should have called it throwball or gridiron football

 

[cyclonenum1]

To say baseballs haven't been altered by technology to make the game easier is just naive. We've all seen the juiced ball era, and know that they can change how the ball flies by changing it's core, etc. Technology is a part of every sport.

So I am both ignorant and naive. I commend the "Modern Marvels...Balls" program to you. It clearly shows how some sports take great lengths to keep their ball the same through time and how some sports are using technology to make the ball easier to play with.

The reality of baseball is that the ball isn't juiced...the players are!

 

[brianhos]

calling offsides the stupidest rule is just plain ignorant. if there was no offside teams would have players just stand by the goal and cherry pick the whole game. this rule has been around for over a century clearly meaning it is fair and good for the game. people saying it is a dumb just doesnt make sense, along with why american football is called football and football in america is called soccer

Ignorant how? I understand the rule, I played organized soccer until high school so I get it. It is a ridiculous rule. It should be more like hockey with a dedicated line for offsides instead of a fluid moving line drawn between the two deepest defensemen. It just makes the game silly when the defense can see an attack starting and then move forward to draw an offsides, it takes a lot of the offense out of the game and significantly reduces the scoring chances. Because of this soccer/football is just plain boring. There is too much neutral zone time. Contrast it with hockey where there are scoring chances every minute, which keeps you interested and into the game.

 

[bigredqb7]

Ignorant how? I understand the rule, I played organized soccer until high school so I get it. It is a ridiculous rule. It should be more like hockey with a dedicated line for offsides instead of a fluid moving line drawn between the two deepest defensemen. It just makes the game silly when the defense can see an attack starting and then move forward to draw an offsides, it takes a lot of the offense out of the game and significantly reduces the scoring chances. Because of this soccer/football is just plain boring. There is too much neutral zone time. Contrast it with hockey where there are scoring chances every minute, which keeps you interested and into the game.

if there was a line dedicated to offsides then the back line of defense would never move because the strikers would stand on the line the whole game and not move until the ball came to them. however with the offsides that is there now strikers have to time runs and get in behind the defense using skill speed and tactics. the defense also has to use strategy when trying to set an offsides trap. to me the offsides rule is a great rule because it makes both teams use skill when trying to score and defend. having a non moving line would cause many players to stand in one place the entire game

 

[BryceC]

I don't mind the offsides rule, I understand why it is there and I understand the strategy of it. But it does drastically decrease scoring opportunities, so when you aren't a huge fan of the sport it just looks like they are kicking a ball around randomly.

 

[brianhos]

This perfectly summarizes soccer to me:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhT4oACS7ec"]YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]

 

[bigredqb7]

watch this then
Video Manchester United V Roma - All the goals - manchester, united, roma, all, goals - Dailymotion Share Your Videos

 

[mapnerd]

Ignorant how? I understand the rule, I played organized soccer until high school so I get it. It is a ridiculous rule. It should be more like hockey with a dedicated line for offsides instead of a fluid moving line drawn between the two deepest defensemen. It just makes the game silly when the defense can see an attack starting and then move forward to draw an offsides, it takes a lot of the offense out of the game and significantly reduces the scoring chances. Because of this soccer/football is just plain boring. There is too much neutral zone time. Contrast it with hockey where there are scoring chances every minute, which keeps you interested and into the game.

If you're going to have a blue line in soccer, than you should have a bigger net in hockey, just to make it fair. Also, you should make the rink bigger. I think that both sports are just fine with their individual rules. I've seen plenty of hockey games where there are not scoring chances every minute.

Too much neutral zone time? How many hours of football have you watched where no one scores? Remember that a score of 14-7 is really 2-1. :wink0st:

 

[alaskaguy]

I was talking about the OLYMPICS...which is really the only "international" basketball we have ever cared at all about.

If you reviewed the rosters of the USA teams competing for the world championship you would see that there has been a major effort to put together the "best" NBA talent. And the results have been downright embarrasing. It may have been the case that the USA was dominant twenty plus years ago in basketball, but it is no longer the case.

Football is the only sport that I am aware of where the talent level is that much better in the USA than it is for the rest of the world. And of course that is because football is worshipped in this country where it gets much less attention world wide. But the table is turned for those sports that are worshipped else where (for example cross country skiing gets 50,000 plus crowds in Europe) where there is scant attention in the USA. Similarly, the countries that pay attention to certain sports dominate those sports.

It would be interesting to see how the USA baseball all-star team would compare for example to a Cuba all-star team.

 

[brianhos]

I was talking about the OLYMPICS...which is really the only "international" basketball we have ever cared at all about.

If you reviewed the rosters of the USA teams competing for the world championship you would see that there has been a major effort to put together the "best" NBA talent. And the results have been downright embarrasing. It may have been the case that the USA was dominant twenty plus years ago in basketball, but it is no longer the case.

The big problem with olympic sports in the US is the teams are not playing together for months/years before the games like other countries. The US could dominate in basketball easily, but the players do not have the time to play together before the games. Other countries have that team together for years before hand.

 

[BryceC]

watch this then
Video Manchester United V Roma - All the goals - manchester, united, roma, all, goals - Dailymotion Share Your Videos

This was all the goals in the last 10 years right? Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, I was joking of course.

 

[alaskaguy]

The big problem with olympic sports in the US is the teams are not playing together for months/years before the games like other countries. The US could dominate in basketball easily, but the players do not have the time to play together before the games. Other countries have that team together for years before hand.

Many of the best national teams are not unlike the US. They select players from various teams rather than playing together for "years". The US team is currently asking players for a three-year commitment, which is a longer commitment than most other countries require. Superstars Kobe Bryand, Dwyane Wade, LeBron James and Shawn Marion have publicly announced their commitment for the team.

In the 2006 World Championships, this team easily went through the group stage and went to the semi-finals, winning their games by an average of 25 points. However, against defending European Championship winner Greece, the US suffered a 101-95 defeat, putting in a dismal defensive effort (the Greeks scored 101 points and shot .625 for the game and resulting in the third consecutive failure of an US team to reach a final in international basketball. The team rallied for a win over defending Olympic champion Argentina (who had previously earned a win over the U.S in both the 2002 Worlds and the 2004 Olympics) to take home the bronze medal.

The bottom line is that the US is no longer the dominant force that they used to be in basketball.

 

[BryceC]

I agree they haven't had the success on the international stage in basketball, but the players flat out don't care. That's why they still can't get guys like Garnett to play on the team. They play basketball 8 months a year they don't want to play anymore for free.

Personally I wish they'd just scrap the pros thing and just get a bunch of good college players who couldn't quite make it in the NBA and are wanting to make a name for themselves somehow. That would be just as effective if not more when you consider just how little these guys care about international basketball.

"Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard."