OT: - World Cup 2018 | Page 8 | The Boneyard

OT: World Cup 2018

Really unlucky own goal for Iran. Especially after almost poaching one at the other end.
 
I must have jinxed it in a good way because that game became pretty enjoyable.
 
intlzncster said:
Really unlucky own goal for Iran. Especially after almost poaching one at the other end.
Expand ...

They got the fortune of winning on an own goal last game so evens out for them a bit.
 
intlzncster said:
This Iran Spain game blows. There's 15 Iranians back even though they started 11. Foul far enough away to make the free kick difficult and see how it all shakes out.

Adding more teams to the world cup will make it so much more of a garbage fest.

EDIT: been a little better now mostly due to Spain's quality
Expand ...

This was one of the problems with the sport that I mentioned to whoever was saying "soccer sucks" or whatever. The penalty for repeated fouling in the middle third is inadequate for the level of disruption, and benefit it provides to a defense.

Here's a fun fix. Any player behind the ball at the point of the foul must line up behind the ball when it is kicked. That would preserve some of the advantage that was lost.

Alternatively, automatic yellows for any one player who commits X fouls, like in Basketball.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Here's a fun fix. Any player behind the ball at the point of the foul must line up behind the ball when it is kicked. That would preserve some of the advantage that was lost.
Expand ...

Thinking outside the box here, how about zero points for a scoreless tie, 1 for any game ending in at least a 1-1 tie, and 3 for a win.
 
.-.
intlzncster said:
Really unlucky own goal for Iran. Especially after almost poaching one at the other end.
Expand ...
Ignoring Iran being offsides, the ref also missed a hand ball by and just before the guy kicked the ball in the net. Despite building a wall and playing 11 back most of the game, they had their chances. Surprisingly, a Persian friend acknowledged both points.
 
intlzncster said:
I must have jinxed it in a good way because that game became pretty enjoyable.
Expand ...
It only became decent because Iran had to score. The shame of it is, they actually looked good and had Spain back on their heels a bit. That game was horrible until Spain scored. Iran was going for a tie from the opening kick. I think if Iran tied the game they would've sat back again.
 
UConnTrumbull said:
I think he meant American-born versus immigrant population. But I can see how that can be misinterpreted.
Expand ...


I did not misinterpret his post.

If I recall correctly, based on his prior posts, AZHuskiePop is proudly second- or third-generation Italian-American.

Ask him who he roots for in games between Italy and the United States. Ask him who his parents rooted for. Ask him who his grandparents rooted for. The answers across the board are likely to be “Italia”.

To me, that’s fine. Pride in your heritage is important, and the positive influences of having a multitude of cultures are what make America great.

I also understand rooting for heritage over nationality in sports. Christ, I am 12th generation Anglo-American (my patrilineal ancestors settled in New Jersey in 1636), and, even still, part of me roots for England against the United States, albeit a very small part (say, 1/12th).


Back to discussing the World Cup…

What a weird World Cup this is—no United States, no Italy, no Netherlands—and hosted by a nation that corruptly purchased the tournament and is currently the highest scoring team.


The squads I support (in no particular order):

1) England—Without the US in the tournament, I revert to my heritage.

2) Brazil— My children are, matrilineally, first generation, dual-citizen Brazilian-Americans, both born in the US. My daughter doesn’t care about sports, but my son roots for Brazil over the US, and that’s fine with me.

3) Mexico—Any healthy rivalry in sports requires one to root for your conference, or, in this case, your region. Go CONCACAF!
 
navery12 said:
They actually haven't decided how to handle the automatic bids for 2026 yet
Expand ...
Officially no but it’s about 99% sure that all 3 will bet auto berths. USSF president said something along those lines.
 
The Aussie's looked really good against Denmark, had many chances to win today.
 
.-.
UConnTrumbull said:
Officially no but it’s about 99% sure that all 3 will bet auto berths. USSF president said something along those lines.
Expand ...

Main benefit is to Canada. I think USA would get in on its own, and Mexico almost certainly would. I wonder what happens to the other teams in Concacaf. That is all three of our slots.
 
France came out on fire. Perú settled down a bit. This one looks physical.
 
Jaker said:
The Aussie's looked really good against Denmark, had many chances to win today.
Expand ...

Didn't get to see my team play. Good to here they showed. Didn't expect much this world cup, as they're kinda between generations right now
 
Oh Perú how do you miss that.

That was a must.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Main benefit is to Canada. I think USA would get in on its own, and Mexico almost certainly would. I wonder what happens to the other teams in Concacaf. That is all three of our slots.
Expand ...

I imagine they'll have the same chance. So qualifying happens per normal where the top three go. But if any of the Home countries are not top 3,they get an additional exemption.

You can't have the others playing for nothing.
 
.-.
Inevitable goal for France. France is ridiculous up front.

Fun game so far.
 
Da_Aisijimo_Gou said:
Conveniently, the 2026 World Cup will add 16 participating nations for a total of 48 teams. More teams = more berths spread across regions.
Expand ...
This. Plus, I believe CONCACAF is increasing from 3.5 to 6.5 bids. So even if the three host nations take three of those allotted slots, the remaining countries will still have the present allotment to fight over.
 
intlzncster said:
Man that's absurdly watered down.
Expand ...
I agree 100%. I think the current 32-team style is perfect. The cream rises to the top, but there's still a lot of diversity and teams get 3 games in the group stage. In the 48-team Cup, 16 groups of 3 will only play 2 group stage games. I'm not sure if the winners only would move on for a classical 16 team knockout, or they further water down the process of the tourney with a 32-team knockout.
 
.-.
HTF did he miss that wide open goal. Almost like Argentina doesn't want to win
 
UConNick said:
I agree 100%. I think the current 32-team style is perfect. The cream rises to the top, but there's still a lot of diversity and teams get 3 games in the group stage. In the 48-team Cup, 16 groups of 3 will only play 2 group stage games. I'm not sure if the winners only would move on for a classical 16 team knockout, or they further water down the process of the tourney with a 32-team knockout.
Expand ...

They're watering it down. Top 2 teams from each group moves on and 32 teams will be in the knock out round.
 
intlzncster said:
HTF did he miss that wide open goal. Almost like Argentina doesn't want to win
Expand ...
It's amazing how all this attacking skill always seems to fail on the international stage. A team with Messi, let alone Agüero, Higuaín, Di María, Banega, and others should not be so inept offensively.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,370
Messages
4,568,716
Members
10,472
Latest member
MyStore24


Top Bottom