or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › Sports › 2014 FIFA World Cup Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014 FIFA World Cup Thread - Page 35

post #613 of 1211

Belgium are a bit of a funny one

 

In the early 70's the Dutch introduced a new brand of the game 'total football' where everyone could play any position and was totally comfortable on the ball (in theory). In the early 70's Ajax won three consecutive European Cups and Holland made the finals of the WC in '74 (should have won) and '78. For some reason, and despite their club teams like FC Brugges and Anderlecht being competitive with the likes of Eindhoven and Feyernord, the Belgians never really got going, despite coming under Dutch influence. Their best result came in '86 when with the likes of Scifo they fortutiously made a semi (someone unusual always seems to make the last four). Then about ten years ago the Belgians adopted Dutch academy methods and had another go. They started doing very well in the European age group competitions. These players are now mature and form the foundations of this team. They were many people's idea of the dark horses, but to me they look clumsy and burdened by expectation, possibly the result of not having really played with expectation before. I can't pay them any more damning comment than saying they've reminded me of England!

 

I honestly think they're there to be taken. From what I've seen so far, if the teams play to the level of form they've so far shown, America will beat them. I'm not sure the Belgains are handling the tag of favourites.

 

I honestly wouldn't say America are incapable of springing a surprise on Argentina either. America won't respect reputations, and they're another team who don't look to be playing as well as their myth suggests they are. Organisation and fitness can take you along way in the modern game, as Greece proved not so many years ago!

post #614 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by cipher View Post
 

I don't have time to read all this right now.  I am watching one of those footy ball games right now.  Go USA!  Plus this is all getting :offtopic:.  When someone shows me how interest here will actually affect the commercialism of the game in your neck of the woods I will agree with you.  I get your concern, but it is not really fair to us fans here either.

The key rebuttals are, as follows:

  • This isn't 1994, and the average American sports fan is no longer ignorant about soccer. Someone complaining today about how they need to make the goals bigger for more scoring, or why there aren't any timeouts, is usually a grumpy old man (typically a die-hard baseball fan) on the defensive, and no one takes his tired arguments seriously.
  • The hyper-commercialization of the sport commenced in the early 1990s, with the establishment of the Premier League and UEFA Champions League. The gap between the haves and have-nots in club soccer have accelerated unabated in the last two decades, and the top handful of clubs who regularly qualify for international play are really competing on a different level than the rest of their domestic competition.
  • American entrepreneurs who buy into European clubs see it as a license to print money, but for every American owner, there's a truckload of Arab sheikhs and Russian oligarchs who can throw unlimited sums of money on their personal status symbol. The latter (who encourage unsustainable spending practices by the clubs who don't have a bottomless well of resources) is far more damaging in the long term than the former (who value their investment above all else).
post #615 of 1211

I think they're all very fair points Chilli

 

The first issue left a deep rooted suspicion though regarding American attitudes towards the game that has never fully gone away. These proposals weren't the creation of an indvidual (I confess to never having heard of Shaugnessy) they were put forward in all seriousness by influential American television networks and organisers at the behest of sponsors, and caused constenation in some parts (I never took them seriously, but others did). Some networks even contemplated refusing to show matches as host broadcaster if they couldn't have their own way.

 

It left something of a mild resentment in some quarters though. Football is the world game. FIFA has more affiliated countries than the UN. The rest of the world have adopted the game for decades. Only America it seemed thought they should fundamentally rip up the whole nature of the game and rewrite it for their benefit, (4% of the worlds population) because their public wouldn't embrace it otherwise. I'm sure you can imagine what impression that left. Why should the rules be rewritten for a single country?

 

I do wonder if with hindsight 1994 came too soon, and might have caused more damage than good? It should have been an occasion for America to embrace the worlds sport, but instead they gave the impression of turning it round, and it felt more like football was being asked to embrace America. There's an old adage in football that no single player is bigger than the team, but in asking for (bordering on demanding) a whole new match structure, America got alienated, and once senses that perhaps they've never been fully forgiven (although it would be dangerous to read too much into some of the tournament awards handed by FIFA and their subsequent rejection of American bids as I'm very sure that other considerations are at play).

 

I'll take your word for the fact that appreciation is much better today than it was then. I believe it must be though, and 36 pages on this thread alone has to attest to something. I do remember sitting in a bar in New York in the mid to late 90's watching the womens world cup final though, and the level of knowledge for the games basic rules I encountered was shockingly poor, as indeed it was in the media. Now OK a bar is hardly conclusive proof of anything, but this would have been in the wake of 1994, and we're talking pretty basic rules

 

The rampant commercialisation as you rightly point out came about with Murdoch money on the back of an improbably successful world cup campaign for England in 1990. The seed was sowed and the Premiership came into existance in 1993. Jack Walker bankrolling Blackburn was the first to show the way, but as you say, the likes of Abramovich (who tried to buy Tottenham first) and more lately the Arab owners have pushed things into a different stratosphere. It has for the most part though been reckless spending rather than any attempts to tamper with the game that has consumed them (albeit a couple of owners have certainly tampered with the traditions of the clubs). I don't believe the American's are the biggest offenders though. Hull and Cardiff are two clubs currently embroilled in strife with an owner trying to mould things in their own image, whilst Portsmouth have suffered too. Come to think of it, Mohammed Al Fayed had a statue of Michael Jackson erected outside Craven Cottage (a much bigger act of vandalism) that's been removed now that he's sold up though

 

Personally, I've increaingly fallen out with the game, and whereas I used to make a 200 mile round trip to go and watch Leeds every other weekend I'd no more dream of paying the silly prices to pay these overpaid prima donnas now

 

So should America be given another chance at staging the World Cup in recognition that they're more likely to embrace it this time round on footballs terms? I'm much more inclinced to say Yes than No. I also think that football is on the road to swallowing itself, and whereas we might have railed at some of the Americanisations that have tried to be introduced (cheerleaders and players running out indvidually - its a team sport!!! you run out together!!!) these are comparatively small fry today

post #616 of 1211

OK. Team USA are 90/1 e/w to win the world cup

 

I've decided to back them!!!

 

The reasoning isn't as unsound as it appears. I already backed Germany at 7/1 ante-post so have a decent drag on that side of the draw

 

I reckon America beat Belgium on merit, which only leaves Argentina standing between them and a match up with one from Costa Rica, Mexico, Holland & Greece

 

If I believe they're already past Belgium (which I do) then 90/1 in a single match against the Argies goes forward, which is 45/1 on the place (final). Well Holland would be the team you feared most in that quad, but they're by no means certain to get past Mexico given how poorly European teams have been doing. Put it like this, you'd take 45/1 on the US every time against any of those four. And in any event, I've got a Betfair account so can always lay it back

post #617 of 1211

Geeeezus FarawaysFairways, are you re-writing the Bible or what? Holy crap man gettin little on the nutty side aren't we?

post #618 of 1211

I can touch type and so can fly stuff out if I choose to. I think it's bizarre however that you think a post with a few paragraphs is nutty. 

post #619 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarawayFairways View Post
 

I can touch type and so can fly stuff out if I choose to. I think it's bizarre however that you think a post with a few paragraphs is nutty. 

 

LOL just a few paragraphs? I counted 11 long paragraphs in just two of your posts. Seriously why babble on and on and on and on, about complete nonsense that nobody will read?

post #620 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motley01 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by FarawayFairways View Post

 
I can touch type and so can fly stuff out if I choose to. I think it's bizarre however that you think a post with a few paragraphs is nutty. 

LOL just a few paragraphs? I counted 11 long paragraphs in just two of your posts. Seriously why babble on and on and on and on, about complete nonsense that nobody will read?

I don't think this is fair, I have read his posts and I think these are some of the most interesting non-golf posts I have read on the forum!

Big thumbs up from me... I am a soccer fan though and the information is interesting! Keep it up @FarawayFairways
post #621 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu3baid View Post

I don't think this is fair, I have read his posts and I think these are some of the most interesting non-golf posts I have read on the forum!

Big thumbs up from me... I am a soccer fan though and the information is interesting! Keep it up @FarawayFairways

Yeah, I thought the wall of text was a bit much but after reading his posts they're quite interesting and make sense and edifying as well. An American vote here for @FarawayFairways. I think we're a bit too used to Twitter and berevity.
post #622 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post


Yeah, I thought the wall of text was a bit much but after reading his posts they're quite interesting and make sense and edifying as well. An American vote here for @FarawayFairways. I think we're a bit too used to Twitter and berevity.

Yeah I have no problem with his posts and appreciate the contributions here, other than his dated opinion of the American soccer fan...:-P;-)  I have enjoyed reading the posts that I am able to spend the time to read.

post #623 of 1211
I think football can learn a lot from some American sports when it comes to respect for the refs and the financial part. The current economics in football are totally ruining it.

They are doing something about it with the financial Fairplay system but I don't think it will be enough.

Also flopping in football is getting more and more bizar. Video calls would be one thing I like to be brought over to football.

When I look at all sorts of professional sports I think football is really at a medieval level compared to the rest.

Ow I don't think a bigger interest from the states will change football as we know it because football does not take America that serious but please please please modernize the game because the state it is currently in is kind of a joke.
post #624 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by yrew View Post

I think football can learn a lot from some American sports when it comes to respect for the refs and the financial part. The current economics in football are totally ruining it.

They are doing something about it with the financial Fairplay system but I don't think it will be enough.

Also flopping in football is getting more and more bizar. Video calls would be one thing I like to be brought over to football.

When I look at all sorts of professional sports I think football is really at a medieval level compared to the rest.

Ow I don't think a bigger interest from the states will change football as we know it because football does not take America that serious but please please please modernize the game because the state it is currently in is kind of a joke.

I disagree, no modernization needed..

The game is perfect as far as I am concerned!

Joke is really on the people that don't appreciate a sport played by the vast majority of the world!
post #625 of 1211
The disrespect against the referee that is on display at times is something I'd can do without. For that to happen I think we need some modernization.
post #626 of 1211

Picking up on a few things then:

 

The issue of learning from American sports in terms of respect shown to the officials is an interesting one, but football does pretty well set the low point on this score

 

Personally I have a hell of a lot of sympathy for the sentiment on this one, as I hate dissent. I think one of the crucial issues here though is that a game like American football is very territorial and a team can be sanctioned meaningfully with penalty yards. It hurts. Rugby does the same. Only the captain is allowed to question a referee's decision, and even then it has to be in the spirit of asking for an interpretation of the laws so as to assist them in avoiding being 'pinged' again (they have laws in rugby, not rules). All players have to address the referee as "sir". Any back chat automatically generates a 10 yard loss of territory. Football did experiement with this, but it broke down quite quickly. Referees rarely enforced it, and being a much more fluid game, 10yds here and there made little difference. Put simply, it carried no penalty, and let's be honest, we routinely see players stealing something similar when recovering a ball for a throw-in. I wouldn't be averse to borrowing a bit from basketball though and having a second quasi penalty spot at 25yds or so for a direct free kick (a free throw line). The current penalty award of course is territory based, but anyone caught 'diving' or showing dissent anywhere on the pitch can have an award made against their team. To try and stamp this kind of thing out we need a meaningful sanction, and referees prepared to use it.

 

The issue of in-situ video referee's I'm not quite so certain about. In a perverse way, the controversial decision becomes engrained in the games folklore, and in some cases, notorious decisons become legends that endure for generations and add to the rich fabric. Historical injustices are always a good talking point, as many a German has told me re 1966 (they have a case). Perversely therefore, I'd suggest that the odd poor decision can help add to things in the long run. I'm still seething over a referee called Ray Tinkler from 1971!!!! Come to think of it, there's the guy from 1973 in Salonkia who got banned and never refereed again after AC Milan bought him for the Cup Winners Cup Final, and another blind French referee from 1975 who couldn't see Franz Beckenbauer trip Allan Clarke (not to mention the Lorimer goal that was disallowed). You see?

 

A quick thanks to some of the supportive posters too. I think the issue here is that different people have different capacities and appetites for engagement. Personally I really don't regard 11 "long" paragraphs (they weren't long incidentally) over two posts as being too much of a stretch. It amuses me slightly though, actually it doesn't, it upsets me a bit if I were honest, when people demand to have things shortened for them, with the explanation of how can you possibly expect people to read things. If you don't want to read it, or find it too much of an exertion to do so, then don't. I can't recall having ever intervened on any board anywhere to complain about people posting simplified superficial content that neither informs me of anything, nor provokes thought. There's always twitter for that, as someone has correctly pointed out. If you allow 140 characters to become your reference point though, most communication will suffer eventually, and before anyone says otherwise, that's a generic observation of society and its sleepwalking into a moronic morass of morphine

post #627 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu3baid View Post


I disagree, no modernization needed..

The game is perfect as far as I am concerned!

Joke is really on the people that don't appreciate a sport played by the vast majority of the world!


The Unites States really needs to get a great football team, and we have the talent. Unfortunately much of the athletic talent we have goes to American football. Unfortunately, American football will never really gain popularity in other countries, because it is just too complicated. It is hard to follow players and understand what they are doing at any time. First of all, you can't see their faces.

 

Football is much easier to follow because the rules are relatively simple, and when someone gets a card, it's usually pretty obvious.

 

If the American football fans disagree with what I am saying, I would challenge them to watch British Cricket match for 6 hours and try to figure out what is going on. This is the feeling any newcomer to football gets. The only reason why I attended football games is for the food, I eventually learned many of the rules through food assimilation. Same with Cricket. B-) 

post #628 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by yrew View Post

The disrespect against the referee that is on display at times is something I'd can do without. For that to happen I think we need some modernization.

 

We need a menaingful sanction, not a technological solution that slows the game up and will ultimately rely on lip reading to arbitrate over

 

Very simple solution and it would cut it out within weeks:

 

Instead of yellow carding the offender, issue a yellow card against the team. The oppositions manager is then asked to nominate the player he wishes to receive the caution, irrespective of their involvement. Footballers are fond of telling us that they "win and lose as a team" well lets extend it a bit further then and punish or reward them as a team. This in effect transfers the responsibility to all team members to police each other, and when your top scorer, captain, or most influential player is sent off because of the petulant behaviour of another player, teams would soon get the message and cut it out straight away

post #629 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarawayFairways View Post

We need a menaingful sanction, not a technological solution that slows the game up and will ultimately rely on lip reading to arbitrate over

Very simple solution and it would cut it out within weeks:

Instead of yellow carding the offender, issue a yellow card against the team. The oppositions manager is then asked to nominate the player he wishes to receive the caution, irrespective of their involvement. Footballers are fond of telling us that they "win and lose as a team" well lets extend it a bit further then and punish or reward them as a team. This in effect transfers the responsibility to all team members to police each other, and when your top scorer, captain, or most influential player is sent off because of the petulant behaviour of another player, teams would soon get the message and cut it out straight away

I like this idea. With modernization I definitely did not only mean more technical solutions. Implementation of new rules would definitely benefit the game.

Another terrible thing is slow play. I'd like to see something done about that as well.
post #630 of 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarawayFairways View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by yrew View Post

The disrespect against the referee that is on display at times is something I'd can do without. For that to happen I think we need some modernization.

We need a menaingful sanction, not a technological solution that slows the game up and will ultimately rely on lip reading to arbitrate over

Very simple solution and it would cut it out within weeks:

Instead of yellow carding the offender, issue a yellow card against the team. The oppositions manager is then asked to nominate the player he wishes to receive the caution, irrespective of their involvement. Footballers are fond of telling us that they "win and lose as a team" well lets extend it a bit further then and punish or reward them as a team. This in effect transfers the responsibility to all team members to police each other, and when your top scorer, captain, or most influential player is sent off because of the petulant behaviour of another player, teams would soon get the message and cut it out straight away

Interesting solution, but I wouldn't agree to that as it is just too penalizing in my opinion..

Then again at what point do you give such a card? When someone other than the captain says a word to the ref? Or do you do it when someone touches the ref? What kind of touch? Any touch or must there be malicious intent..?

Maybe another variation where the team still gets the penalty, but it makes that person have to sit out 10 minutes like a hockey penalty box..

I know that last one would never get accepted either.. I have a very simple one.. First you quantify what makes up a penalty of disrespect to the ref and then let it be under the refs discretion to give a yellow or red card accordingly!

Again some great posts my friend!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sports
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › Sports › 2014 FIFA World Cup Thread