OT: World Cup

[DarthGrumpy]

I keep having dreams of the US tied in OT. Klinsmann reaches deep into his bag of tricks and inserts Julian Green(!!!) into the mix up front. The tired and slow footed Belgian defense can't keep up with his pace. The US starts to press the issue up front and JG eventually breaks through to poke one home on Thibault. The country goes nuts.

At this point, I wake up briefly, note the wet sheets, and comfortably fall back to sleep with a smile on my face. Could happen.

Before the tournament, I would have said the chances of Green playing any significant time was about as high as Spain not making it to the knock-out round. So at this point, anything can happen.

 

[Gurleyman]

If winning doesn't, what, then, would prove it was a good decision? It's like saying, "St. Joes missed its chance and Florida and Kentucky had bad games. It worked out, but let's not act like benching Calhoun and starting Giffey was a good decision."

If one of the attacking players we had on the bench made an impact. Giffey produced. So far, Johannson and Davis have given us absolutely nothing. Wondo didn't play long enough to rate. Germany was able to mark Dempsey out of the game since we didn't have any support. Belgium could probably do the same if someone else doesn't step up.

To be fair, I think a case could be made that Yedlin has done that - made the run that started the Dempsey goal against Portugal, although his cross was deflected by the first defender and just bounced in a good direction. But he is a right back that we threw up top for lack of better options.

 

[housekeys]

For what it's worth, JK 'very, very satisfied' with Bradley. I like that he has his guys back. You've got to appreciate JK's attitude.

http://www.espnfc.us/united-states/...sfied-with-michael-bradleys-play-at-world-cup

Really interesting stat in there:

According to FIFA's statistics, Bradley has covered more distance than any other player at the World Cup. The 23.6 miles he has run during matches are three-quarters of a mile more than any other player in Brazil, and nearly three miles more than the next American, Kyle Beckerman.

Very interesting. It tells me a lot of people are making predictions that are not supported by statistics but rather 'gut', and often a rehash of popular opinion. I suggest anyone with the time and interest to sift through the FIFA stat page you link to above, before making too many more predictions on what might happen going forward. An example, Netherlands fouls the most (68) - i.e most aggressive(?). Another example shots. The USA is on the bottom half of the shot attempts count, but is very efficient in that most are on target - i.e so going forward if we can create shot opportunities we tend to find the target and eventually score. Interesting also that the bottom half includes teams like USA, Chile, Costa Rica and Algeria who are still in, while the top half includes teams that are out of the knockout stage. And while I think Costa Rica is a legit favorite against Greece and might win, please stop regurgitating the idea that Greece is offensively handicapped given that they are in the middle of the pack in terms of shots and attacking. Yes, Greece has only 2 goals, but having played with 10 men in one game and hitting the woodwork 4 times the most of any team(tie) may have something to do with that.

 

[whaler11]

If winning doesn't, what, then, would prove it was a good decision? It's like saying, "St. Joes missed its chance and Florida and Kentucky had bad games. It worked out, but let's not act like benching Calhoun and starting Giffey was a good decision."

Well would Ghana scoring and the US 'losing' proved it was a bad decision? I don't see how when your binary result is predicated on what other teams that can somehow validate what you chose.

It's bad decision because it's a bad decision. If Seattle benched Wilson for the Super Bowl and they still won does that make it a good decision?

 

[intlzncster]

Very interesting. It tells me a lot of people are making predictions that are not supported by statistics but rather 'gut', and often a rehash of popular opinion. I suggest anyone with the time and interest to sift through the FIFA stat page you link to above, before making too many more predictions on what might happen going forward. An example, Netherlands fouls the most (68) - i.e most aggressive(?). Another example shots. The USA is on the bottom half of the shot attempts count, but is very efficient in that most are on target - i.e so going forward if we can create shot opportunities we tend to find the target and eventually score. Interesting also that the bottom half includes teams like USA, Chile, Costa Rica and Algeria who are still in, while the top half includes teams that are out of the knockout stage. And while I think Costa Rica is a legit favorite against Greece and might win, please stop regurgitating the idea that Greece is offensively handicapped given that they are in the middle of the pack in terms of shots and attacking. Yes, Greece has only 2 goals, but having played with 10 men in one game and hitting the woodwork 4 times the most of any team(tie) may have something to do with that.

They Netherlands pressures so hard up front that that is probably one of the main reasons they lead in fouls (I'm looking at you Arjen Robbin).

 

[intlzncster]

Well would Ghana scoring and the US 'losing' proved it was a bad decision? I don't see how when your binary result is predicated on what other teams that can somehow validate what you chose.

It's bad decision because it's a bad decision. If Seattle benched Wilson for the Super Bowl and they still won does that make it a good decision?

I see we are playing the same game. See my post above.

 

[intlzncster]

Before the tournament, I would have said the chances of Green playing any significant time was about as high as Spain not making it to the knock-out round. So at this point, anything can happen.

Yep. I'm still shocked that Italy, Spain, England, and Portugal are all going home early. If anyone bet that result before the tournament, they are either a liar, or a hell of a lot wealthier.

 

[whaler11]

Very interesting. It tells me a lot of people are making predictions that are not supported by statistics but rather 'gut', and often a rehash of popular opinion. I suggest anyone with the time and interest to sift through the FIFA stat page you link to above, before making too many more predictions on what might happen going forward. An example, Netherlands fouls the most (68) - i.e most aggressive(?). Another example shots. The USA is on the bottom half of the shot attempts count, but is very efficient in that most are on target - i.e so going forward if we can create shot opportunities we tend to find the target and eventually score. Interesting also that the bottom half includes teams like USA, Chile, Costa Rica and Algeria who are still in, while the top half includes teams that are out of the knockout stage. And while I think Costa Rica is a legit favorite against Greece and might win, please stop regurgitating the idea that Greece is offensively handicapped given that they are in the middle of the pack in terms of shots and attacking. Yes, Greece has only 2 goals, but having played with 10 men in one game and hitting the woodwork 4 times the most of any team(tie) may have something to do with that.

I'd be pretty careful referencing statistics off a small sample when
A: quality of opposition is all over the map
B: the formula for getting out of the group leads to different motivations relative to the utility of a draw

 

[whaler11]

In that situation sure. But, benching Calhoun and starting Giffey was clearly a good decision based on objective analysis.

There's a ton of factors that play into it. Sample size and luck being two of the biggest.

If the Heat benched LeBron for a game, and somehow managed to beat the Spurs, you couldn't claim it a good decision. Just pure luck.

Exactly. You can't judge the quality of your decisions or your process solely on outcomes.

If you take your rent money to the gas station and buy a ton of lottery tickets, winning doesn't validate stupid choices.

 

[housekeys]

What passion! Never seen this type passion for national anthems.

 

[whaler11]

Thank God we've got 4 days of games. Yesterday was tough.

 

[housekeys]

Did not know Pitbull coaches Chile?

 

[whaler11]

Well 15 minutes in Brazil looks ridiculously good. Neymar runs like he is shot out of a cannon.

 

[J187Money]

All I know is this:

I listened to the Ghana game while in the car heading from Wisconsin to Chicago.

I watched every minute of the other two matches.

I have never paid this much attention.

I enjoy this team and how hard they play. They have flaws but will fight. And I feel like Klinsmann has the right temperament for these guys.

As a very marginal soccer guy, I will watch the USMNT any time they play going forward.

 

[intlzncster]

What a match so far! This is how the world cup is supposed to be played .

 

[intlzncster]

All I know is this:

I listened to the Ghana game while in the car heading from Wisconsin to Chicago.

I watched every minute of the other two matches.

I have never paid this much attention.

I enjoy this team and how hard they play. They have flaws but will fight. And I feel like Klinsmann has the right temperament for these guys.

As a very marginal soccer guy, I will watch the USMNT any time they play going forward.

Atta boy jmoney. We'll wear you down yet.

 

[CTBasketball]

Man are penalty kicks a joke. That's like in basketball going 45 minutes, then having a best of 1, 1 on 1 for a tiebreaker. Dumb.

 

[housekeys]

Man are penalty kicks a joke. That's like in basketball going 45 minutes, then having a best of 1, 1 on 1 for a tiebreaker. Dumb.

Well actually, many games do, come down to free throws. Just ask Calipari why he did not foul UConn.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Not blaming Brazil at all; but, I do not like the rule on PK's when the keeper cannot move at all while the kicker can stutter step, wiggle, jump, etc. If the keeper can't move, the kicker should only be allowed to run to the ball and kick.

Anyway, good, intense game. I thought going into the tournament that Chile could be a landmine for Brazil.

 

[J187Money]

Atta boy jmoney. We'll wear you down yet.

The commentary does help here. I played the game when I was young but never really understood it. That was also in the 80s in the Midwest where I'm sure I wasn't taught properly.

 

[intlzncster]

The commentary does help here. I played the game when I was young but never really understood it. That was also in the 80s in the Midwest where I'm sure I wasn't taught properly.

You can't just go around mentioning that Midwest stuff man

 

[SubbaBub]

Man are penalty kicks a joke. That's like in basketball going 45 minutes, then having a best of 1, 1 on 1 for a tiebreaker. Dumb.

Not the best way for sure, but there aren't really any alternatives. They already tack on an extra 30 minutes. I think it helps if you appreciate the pressure on making every single PK. A save or a miss is a real punch in the gut. It makes for pretty good drama. The Chilean player who hit the post will unfortunately never live that down for the rest of his life. The Brazilian keeper is posing for his postage stamp as we speak.

 

[whaler11]

Outside of the first 15 minutes it's impossible to watch Brazil and see them winning the tournament.

 

[iri10]

Not the best way for sure, but there aren't really any alternatives. They already tack on an extra 30 minutes. I think it helps if you appreciate the pressure on making every single PK. A save or a miss is a real punch in the gut. It makes for pretty good drama.

I've heard some alternatives that seem pretty interesting (though given the glacial pace of change in soccer's rulebook, I doubt they'll ever see much daylight).

One of them was to have each shot done with one offensive player, one defensive player, and the goalie. So instead of a static shot on goal, it would be a more mobile thing with the offensive player starting from further out and needing to evade his defender. Maybe you'd also have a time limit / shot clock (30 seconds?).

Another was to put the penalty shootout before the 30 minutes of overtime. It would only come into play as a tiebreaker if the score was still tied at the end of the OT.

 

[intlzncster]

I've heard some alternatives that seem pretty interesting (though given the glacial pace of change in soccer's rulebook, I doubt they'll ever see much daylight).

One of them was to have each shot done with one offensive player, one defensive player, and the goalie. So instead of a static shot on goal, it would be a more mobile thing with the offensive player starting from further out and needing to evade his defender. Maybe you'd also have a time limit / shot clock (30 seconds?).

Another was to put the penalty shootout before the 30 minutes of overtime. It would only come into play as a tiebreaker if the score was still tied at the end of the OT.

I personally favor pks from the 18 (top of the box). That would be exciting as...