World Cup LD

[FunKay the Inevitable]

Costa Rica were terrific, Uruguay were poor and petulant. That really blows the group open. I have a 9 AM flight tomorrow and I'm giving this a go at 11. C'mon the Italians!

 

[Blade]

Just saw the Costa Rica/Uruguay highlights. I'm very glad that Campbell is an Arsenal player. Really hope we keep him in London this season, see what he can do in the PL.

In other news, I've never been more neutral about a match than right now.

Edit: The Italian national anthem is so... Italian.

It sounds like they're singing about how they're going to down a bottle of good wine, drive cross country in a fast car, then bang your girlfriend all night.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

Thank you England for reminding me about this

Edit - Lulz, the only 3 people currently viewing this thread are all Scots. Bless ye MCMG and FunKay

 

[Барбоса]

England have started okay, aside from Rooney, who has been dire.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

Can't help but feel that Italy just exploited England's obsession with stopping Pirlo for that goal

 

[Blade]

Well, this game has suddenly sprang to life!

 

[klunderbunker]

The one thing I'll never understand about soccer: why don't they just stop the clock? It seems to just make things more complicated later on for extra time.

 

[Blade]

Only an Arsenal physio could get injured during a match -_-

The one thing I'll never understand about soccer: why don't they just stop the clock? It seems to just make things more complicated later on for extra time.

Well, do you stop the clock for every single stoppage? For throw-ins and free kicks as well as injuries and goals? There are times when teams take quick throw-ins or freekicks, which would mean the clock would be stopped for longer than the game was actually inactive. Plus, in an intense or fast-paced game, the referee could likely forget to stop the clock when needed.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

The one thing I'll never understand about soccer: why don't they just stop the clock? It seems to just make things more complicated later on for extra time.

Because arguing about the amount of extra time that should be added is too much fun. See: time, Fergie

 

[klunderbunker]

Only an Arsenal physio could get injured during a match -_-



Well, do you stop the clock for every single stoppage? For throw-ins and free kicks as well as injuries and goals? There are times when teams take quick throw-ins or freekicks, which would mean the clock would be stopped for longer than the game was actually inactive. Plus, in an intense or fast-paced game, the referee could likely forget to stop the clock when needed.

Whenever play is stopped for whatever reason. It's done in football and basketball with ease but it's too complicated here? Have a referee in a booth only in charge of stopping the clock if it's too hard for one guy to do it.

 

[Blade]

Whenever play is stopped for whatever reason. It's done in football and basketball with ease but it's too complicated here? Have a referee in a booth only in charge of stopping the clock if it's too hard for one guy to do it.

I just think, for the faster paced matches, stopping the clock for every stoppage would be impractical

 

[Loveless]

For the love of god can someone fucking mark Pirlo? I cant remember 1 tackle on him.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

For the love of god can someone fucking mark Pirlo? I cant remember 1 tackle on him.

They're maybe worried that if they get too close to that beautiful bearded Adonis that they may kiss him rather than kick him. Bloody gorgeous so he is.

 

[Барбоса]

For the love of god can someone fucking mark Pirlo? I cant remember 1 tackle on him.

Getting Rooney to do his fucking job on the left is of even more importance right now.

 

[Gelgarin]

Sulk and play a bit shit until you're moved to center forward. Solid plan.

 

[Барбоса]

And still play poorly.

 

[Loveless]

Getting Rooney to do his fucking job on the left is of even more importance right now.

Or y'know, play someone who actually belongs on the left and can track back.

Playing 4-3-3 against width is suicide.

 

[Барбоса]

It wasn't really 4-3-3. It was a 4-2-3-1 that was designed to revert to 4-5-1 when on the defensive.

Of course, it can leave you more open to width in exchange for more threat going forward but Rooney was horrendously bad in the first half. Left Baines to fend for himself and then rather inexplicably Welbeck did the same for the second goal.

Personally, I would have dropped Rooney but while Hodgson has made some brave choices with his squad, he is not that brave. He might still be United's best player but he has rarely been England's best.

 

[klunderbunker]

I just think, for the faster paced matches, stopping the clock for every stoppage would be impractical

Why? The actions are the same and you only stop it if the ball goes out of bounds or for a goal or an injury etc. It works fine in basketball: stop it when it goes out of bounds, start it again when it touches a player back in bounds, as in when it's being thrown back in to resume play.

It has to be better than ending a match on what the referee thinks is the appropriate amount of time left. I'd hate to think a championship is won or lost because of an approximation.

 

[Blade]

Why? The actions are the same and you only stop it if the ball goes out of bounds or for a goal or an injury etc. It works fine in basketball: stop it when it goes out of bounds, start it again when it touches a player back in bounds, as in when it's being thrown back in to resume play.

It has to be better than ending a match on what the referee thinks is the appropriate amount of time left. I'd hate to think a championship is won or lost because of an approximation.

Does basketball have instant free kicks or the advantage rule? If the advantage rule is played, but then the attacker loses the ball a few seconds later and the referee calls the play back for the free kick, does time get taken off since the attempted advantage play is now wasted time? Or do the seconds remain wasted on a play that's been cancelled by the ref.

What about when quick free kicks are taken, and then called back by the referee? Does the clock start when the free kick is taken even if it's about to be retaken a few seconds later? Because how is the timekeeper supposed to know that the referee is about to make the team retake the free kick?

There's also that time in a world cup match a few tournaments ago where England thought they'd scored, but they hadn't and the ball was still in play, so the opposition scored. 9 out of 10 timekeepers would've stopped the clock after England's non-goal.

Mistakes made on an approximation are much easier to deal with than mistakes made on an objective timekeeping system.

 

[Gelgarin]

It allows the referee some leeway to end the game at an appropriate moment. Basketball and hockey are six seconds from a score change at all times - football is not. It also keeps things flowing and mildly discourages time wasting.

Additionally, the current system works fine when Alex Ferguson is locked away, and change for its own sake is dumb.

 

[Loveless]

No Drogba? Bit of a strange choice against a small team

 

[Blade]

As an Arsenal fan, I can't believe I miss Gervinho...

 

[Alastor]

It would make the game last 20mins longer.

Also American sports have time limits on offensive possessions that football doesn't. Makes the game 'faster' but also more dead ball situations to keep time. Football can flow for minutes without a dead ball situation or seconds before one.

 

[klunderbunker]

Does basketball have instant free kicks or the advantage rule? If the advantage rule is played, but then the attacker loses the ball a few seconds later and the referee calls the play back for the free kick, does time get taken off since the attempted advantage play is now wasted time? Or do the seconds remain wasted on a play that's been cancelled by the ref.

What about when quick free kicks are taken, and then called back by the referee? Does the clock start when the free kick is taken even if it's about to be retaken a few seconds later? Because how is the timekeeper supposed to know that the referee is about to make the team retake the free kick?

There's also that time in a world cup match a few tournaments ago where England thought they'd scored, but they hadn't and the ball was still in play, so the opposition scored. 9 out of 10 timekeepers would've stopped the clock after England's non-goal.

Mistakes made on an approximation are much easier to deal with than mistakes made on an objective timekeeping system.

I'm not sure what the advantage rule is.

As for redoing kicks, if you're going by basketball rules, they sound like free throws so no, the clock wouldn't be running.

You hear about mistakes with the clock probably at a less frequent pace in American sports than that actually. If you do, it's rarely more than half a second either way.