2019 FIFA Women's World Cup

[creatorsgam]

SAAAAAAAAVE!

 

[ForCuseSake]

England and big game PKs...

LOL

 

[ForCuseSake]

Very happy for Naeher

 

[NailstheCusefan12]

Inject this game into my veins.

 

[creatorsgam]

2x yellow... deuces.

 

[creatorsgam]

Inject this game into my veins.

 

[ForCuseSake]

The ladies are too talented to take a page from the men's team. They've too frequently given the ball away to bunker back on defense this half. Not parking the bus but not playing to their strength, imo.

 

[creatorsgam]

 

[ForCuseSake]

Hey England,

Happy Fourth of July!!

(oh wait)

 

[DeGrozz]

Looks like the back foot was clipped. I didn’t see it first time.

The first two replays they showed made it look like a dive, but when they go the right angle on it, it was pretty clear.

That was a wonderfully played game by both teams up until England missed that PK. They fell apart that last 20 minutes or so. Tough to see that happen to them after playing such an even match up until then.

 

[DeGrozz]

Also, England a blowing PKs in big moments -- name a more iconic duo (hint: you can't)

 

[NailstheCusefan12]

 

[SWC75]

Rules are fine.

Go watch golf.

Where they change the rules sometimes. No game is static. they all became what they became because people were looking for a better way to do it. As was pointed out, the same people who think soccer could be done better are constantly re-examining the sports they look at all the time in the same manner. Bill James, in discussing baseball, has written about "The Beautiful Game" mindset and how it's the enemy of innovation. You can't stay "Hey! Everybody! The Women's World Cup is on and you really ought to watch it. But don't have any opinions on it!"

That said, the rules of the game are going to be decided by those who do follow it all the time and those that don't are going to have to accept it. I'm a veteran of suggesting the game would be better with no off-sides rule and basketball style fast breaks and with sudden death overtime. But both things were tried and soccer fans didn't like them as much as what they were doing and I accept that.

 

[creatorsgam]

Where they change the rules sometimes. No game is static. they all became what they became because people were looking for a better way to do it. As was pointed out, the same people who think soccer could be done better are constantly re-examining the sports they look at all the time in the same manner. Bill James, in discussing baseball, has written about "The Beautiful Game" mindset and how it's the enemy of innovation. You can't stay "Hey! Everybody! The Women's World Cup is on and you really ought to watch it. But don't have any opinions on it!"

That said, the rules of the game are going to be decided by those who do follow it all the time and those that don't are going to have to accept it. I'm a veteran of suggesting the game would be better with no off-sides rule and basketball style fast breaks and with sudden death overtime. But both things were tried and soccer fans didn't like them as much as what they were doing and I accept that.

The sport is doing just fine. I appreciate your opinion but I respectfully disagree.

No offsides? Gym class soccer. Rec ball. Kick it long and chase. No thanks. Tactics go out the window. As a former player that used to play up top on occasion, as well as a former wide midfielder, I loved trying to time the run/delivery to break the offside trap. Such a big part of the sport. As a current coach, I love scheming and coaching to break it.

Sudden death overtime is a tough sell. The amount of distance covered by a player over a course of 90+ minutes is insane. It doesn’t lend itself to sudden death.

It isn’t basketball. Scoring is meant to be difficult, and rewarded as such. Rules can be examined... but for now the world disagrees.

 

[Ghost]

England lost.

Sad.

 

[creatorsgam]

Sneaky good celebration. Pure ether.

Also a new avatar.

 

[DeGrozz]

Where they change the rules sometimes. No game is static. they all became what they became because people were looking for a better way to do it. As was pointed out, the same people who think soccer could be done better are constantly re-examining the sports they look at all the time in the same manner. Bill James, in discussing baseball, has written about "The Beautiful Game" mindset and how it's the enemy of innovation. You can't stay "Hey! Everybody! The Women's World Cup is on and you really ought to watch it. But don't have any opinions on it!"

That said, the rules of the game are going to be decided by those who do follow it all the time and those that don't are going to have to accept it. I'm a veteran of suggesting the game would be better with no off-sides rule and basketball style fast breaks and with sudden death overtime. But both things were tried and soccer fans didn't like them as much as what they were doing and I accept that.

SWC, I believe you are the best poster on this forum. I am pretty sure that I have previously stated that everything that you write up should be archived.

But this is part of the issue people have. I've seen you break down random seasons of Syracuse sports from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. You are a meticulous stat collector from basketball to climate change (I think that's you), and you bring up random episodes of long-forgotten TV series to remember them in great detail.

I randomly see you post about soccer. Yet when you did in this thread, it's talking about changing a core principle of the game.

That's what people don't like. Every single poster, whether here or across 99% of the internet, who complains about soccer rules isn't the vast majority who celebrate the game. It's the people tune in for a few games per year and decide they want to change the core principle for everyone else and state an absolute. It's very hard to take people like that seriously.

 

[CanadianSU]

Imagine being offended over the tea cup celebration...

 

[samspann1]

Sneaky good celebration. Pure ether.

Also a new avatar.
View attachment 167419

Might just be my favorite sports celebration ever.

 

[ForCuseSake]

Where they change the rules sometimes. No game is static. they all became what they became because people were looking for a better way to do it. As was pointed out, the same people who think soccer could be done better are constantly re-examining the sports they look at all the time in the same manner. Bill James, in discussing baseball, has written about "The Beautiful Game" mindset and how it's the enemy of innovation. You can't stay "Hey! Everybody! The Women's World Cup is on and you really ought to watch it. But don't have any opinions on it!"

That said, the rules of the game are going to be decided by those who do follow it all the time and those that don't are going to have to accept it. I'm a veteran of suggesting the game would be better with no off-sides rule and basketball style fast breaks and with sudden death overtime. But both things were tried and soccer fans didn't like them as much as what they were doing and I accept that.

I believe it has more to do with the fact that soccer is a global game while football and baseball (yes, i know Latin America and Asia play baseball) are uniquely American games.

Our American sports promote bigger, faster, stronger athletes and over-coaching. It's produced a reactionary "there should be a rule for/against that" mindset that has driven much of the persistent tinkering with rules in sports in our country.

It's the part I like the least about football and a significant reason why I've never been a fan of baseball. I'm not as big a fan of games heavily influenced by coaches joysticking players; i'd rather watch athletes with skill, not officials or coaches, decide the outcome.

I'm all for periodically re-evaluating rules, and soccer has done this quite well, but only for further simplification.

 

[SWC75]

SWC, I believe you are the best poster on this forum. I am pretty sure that I have previously stated that everything that you write up should be archived.

But this is part of the issue people have. I've seen you break down random seasons of Syracuse sports from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. You are a meticulous stat collector from basketball to climate change (I think that's you), and you bring up random episodes of long-forgotten TV series to remember them in great detail.

I randomly see you post about soccer. Yet when you did in this thread, it's talking about changing a core principle of the game.

That's what people don't like. Every single poster, whether here or across 99% of the internet, who complains about soccer rules isn't the vast majority who celebrate the game. It's the people tune in for a few games per year and decide they want to change the core principle for everyone else and state an absolute. It's very hard to take people like that seriously.

Which was the reason for my final paragraph.

 

[Cheriehoop]

The sport is doing just fine. I appreciate your opinion but I respectfully disagree.

No offsides? Gym class soccer. Rec ball. Kick it long and chase. No thanks. Tactics go out the window. As a former player that used to play up top on occasion, as well as a former wide midfielder, I loved trying to time the run/delivery to break the offside trap. Such a big part of the sport. As a current coach, I love scheming and coaching to break it.

Sudden death overtime is a tough sell. The amount of distance covered by a player over a course of 90+ minutes is insane. It doesn’t lend itself to sudden death.

It isn’t basketball. Scoring is meant to be difficult, and rewarded as such. Rules can be examined... but for now the world disagrees.

My son played for a well known high school coach from South America. This coach absolutely hated overtime decided by penalty kicks - he used to turn his back from the action when his team was involved in them. He was adamant that it was a really bogus way to decide a soccer game and likened it to deciding a football game by having 5 players from each team line up to kick field goals.

 

[upperdeck]

Hockey has found that the 3-3 OT rules have really created a ton of fun and energy. Not sure how hockey could apply it our if dropping 3-4-5 players from the field would work but it sure could be tested.

 

[Alsacs]

Hockey has found that the 3-3 OT rules have really created a ton of fun and energy. Not sure how hockey could apply it our if dropping 3-4-5 players from the field would work but it sure could be tested.

This because American sports fans don’t like draws/ties. In soccer a draw gets you a point and since the sport has promotion/relegation a point is good for teams and fans.

Hockey fans complained about ties so the league changed the rules for regular season games overtime. In the playoffs they play 5 on 5 sudden death.

Soccer rules are fine. The extra time is only for knockout round matches or home/home playoff matches in club competitions.

11 on 11 is fine. If American sports leagues instituted promotion/regulation system ties wouldn’t be a problem.

 

[JoeSU]

Without offsides, the sport would be a couple people camping out in front of opposition goals and long balls being played up and over the entire game. It would be awful. No tactics.

The same reason there is an offside rule in hockey.