OT: World Cup 2018

[Paesano]

That line-up makes me more and more convinced that Croatia could advance pretty far on its side of the bracket.

Yeah, I am going to root for Croatia. What the hell...why not...

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

That line-up makes me more and more convinced that Croatia could advance pretty far on its side of the bracket.

Sometimes, a good team playing well as a team can go far. 77-74
Hrvatska's team is easy to support.

 

[auror]

England definitely won for losing.

538 top 8s on left bracket - 5.
538 top 8s on right bracket - 2 (including themselves).

 

[MadDogRevival]

Soccer’s popularity is unrivaled by all and it looks set to stay that way for the foreseeable future.

I don't really care about the soccer v. other debate.
All you need to play soccer is a ball, and for that reason alone, it will always be popular.

I'm more curious about how soccer today is doing versus soccer a few years ago.

 

[intlzncster]

I don't really care about the soccer v. other debate.
All you need to play soccer is a ball, and for that reason alone, it will always be popular.

I'm more curious about how soccer today is doing versus soccer a few years ago.

Ah, that's different. I obviously don't know about everywhere, but I remember reading that it's really come on in Africa over the last 10 years or so. The WC in South Africa was testament to that growth*. And you can see it in the quality of play of African teams. Though overall growth is limited by political, money, and infrastructure concerns.

*As corrupt as it is, FIFA still tries to put the tournament in growth areas at times. I think that's one of the reasons they put it in Qatar--to get middle east exposure. Combine that with a massive bribe or ten, and you've got the Cup in the middle of nowhere.

There's an inexorable spread of the game eastward. And the rise of Asia economically will only hasten football's growth.

There's already some noise about China potentially hosting a world cup (maybe even 2034). That's a massively underserved market they want to tap. Chinese were in the top 10 in tickets bought this world cup and they've only qualified once.

I actually decided to take a look and found this interesting chart. These numbers have likely exploded in the last five years as well. The last decade has seen absurd money come into football.

 

[UConnSwag11]

I don't really care about the soccer v. other debate.
All you need to play soccer is a ball, and for that reason alone, it will always be popular.

I'm more curious about how soccer today is doing versus soccer a few years ago.

Are you talking about soccer in the US or worldwide? Worldwide nothing comes close or will.


it's growing fast in the US but could be growing a lot faster. it's becoming more expensive for kids to play the game. Worldwide it's the "poor" sport because like you mentioned "All you need to play soccer is a ball, and for that reason alone, it will always be popular." Kids will use anything for a ball and goal and if they can't find anything they'll make a ball out of trash or play barefoot on dirt and rocks. Kids here do have it better than the kids mentioned. No kid here will play like that and also not many will have to. Also a lot of kids here would rather go play any of the three major sports instead of soccer as those sports are part of the culture here compared to soccer in other countries. Being a pro in any of the three sports here is big bucks

I found a comment that might help:

Played soccer for a long long time.

What he is referring to is the traveling & time investment (year-round) required by the institutionalized US system. Serious competitive club teams must both practice weekly & compete in tournaments usually 2-3 times a month. These tournaments are held all throughout the country. When I played I traveled to literally every state on the eastern half of the country; Detroit, Kansas City, Orlando, Atlanta, Maine, even on the national mall in DC.

On top of that there are league costs both indoor and outdoor, coach/management fees, the works. Soccer is expensive because its not as popular, the US is a pretty spread-out country, and you need to constantly travel long distances to compete (compared to the relatively densely populated Europe and S.A. cities, like Mexico City for example).

Ironically, the reason the US is inferior to most countries' soccer talent is precisely because soccer itself is not expensive at all, it's a cheap game to play - as you mentioned, you only need a makeshift ball and some sort of goal. Thus it is a perfect game for children in third world countries. To those kids it's practically the only option for sports - they dont have basketball hoops in their driveways, garages full of bats/balls/gloves/sticks, etc.

another problem is the US' approach to sports in general when combined with it being less popular;

- many children are often forced into a sport to occupy them, give them exercise, and possibly provide scholarship opportunites ... not because they like to play (re: the cliche piano lessons). soccer is most often the sport parents force on their kids because it is easily the most physically demanding sport - a sort of 'soccer will consume his energy & tire him out' attitude by the parents.

- there are no US soccer celebrities, soccer isn't flashy to kids

- schools do so very little to develop the sport compared to football, which is how football succeeds despite being a logistical nightmare sport to organize. high school & college football are the source of development, not private club teams.

- the national team has basically institutionalized the system to go through their manufactured channels (e.g. the Olympic Development Program [ODP]) which is a crock of **** that does nothing to help players, just filter talent. The end result is a bunch of selfish individual players forced to try to play as a team (which we all know doesn't work).

 

[intlzncster]

Are you talking about soccer in the US or worldwide? Worldwide nothing comes close or will.


it's growing fast in the US but could be growing a lot faster. it's becoming more expensive for kids to play the game. Worldwide it's the "poor" sport because like you mentioned "All you need to play soccer is a ball, and for that reason alone, it will always be popular." Kids will use anything for a ball and goal and if they can't find anything they'll make a ball out of trash or play barefoot on dirt and rocks. Kids here do have it better than the kids mentioned. No kid here will play like that and also not many will have to. Also a lot of kids here would rather go play any of the three major sports instead of soccer as those sports are part of the culture here compared to soccer in other countries. Being a pro in any of the three sports here is big bucks

I found a comment that might help:

Played soccer for a long long time.

What he is referring to is the traveling & time investment (year-round) required by the institutionalized US system. Serious competitive club teams must both practice weekly & compete in tournaments usually 2-3 times a month. These tournaments are held all throughout the country. When I played I traveled to literally every state on the eastern half of the country; Detroit, Kansas City, Orlando, Atlanta, Maine, even on the national mall in DC.

On top of that there are league costs both indoor and outdoor, coach/management fees, the works. Soccer is expensive because its not as popular, the US is a pretty spread-out country, and you need to constantly travel long distances to compete (compared to the relatively densely populated Europe and S.A. cities, like Mexico City for example).

Ironically, the reason the US is inferior to most countries' soccer talent is precisely because soccer itself is not expensive at all, it's a cheap game to play - as you mentioned, you only need a makeshift ball and some sort of goal. Thus it is a perfect game for children in third world countries. To those kids it's practically the only option for sports - they dont have basketball hoops in their driveways, garages full of bats/balls/gloves/sticks, etc.

another problem is the US' approach to sports in general when combined with it being less popular;

- many children are often forced into a sport to occupy them, give them exercise, and possibly provide scholarship opportunites ... not because they like to play (re: the cliche piano lessons). soccer is most often the sport parents force on their kids because it is easily the most physically demanding sport - a sort of 'soccer will consume his energy & tire him out' attitude by the parents.

- there are no US soccer celebrities, soccer isn't flashy to kids

- schools do so very little to develop the sport compared to football, which is how football succeeds despite being a logistical nightmare sport to organize. high school & college football are the source of development, not private club teams.

- the national team has basically institutionalized the system to go through their manufactured channels (e.g. the Olympic Development Program [ODP]) which is a crock of **** that does nothing to help players, just filter talent. The end result is a bunch of selfish individual players forced to try to play as a team (which we all know doesn't work).

My buddy in Brazil was telling me how it is there. He's like, none of the rich or even middle class kids there will ever be a pro player. Only the poor kids. All they have to do with themselves is play soccer in the toughest conditions. They become like soccer machines through repetition and willpower. One of the reasons Brazil is so good in soccer is that they have a population of 210 million people, the vast majority of whom are dirt poor.

 

[MadDogRevival]

The last decade has seen absurd money come into football.

Thanks for the chart - I'm really just interested in the last five years or so. That's the time period when the Internet/pocket super computer revolution is really taking its toll on traditional entertainment. How are Italian soccer TV ratings compared to 2 years ago? German? Iceland? Netherlands? Japan? World Cup viewership in the U.S. is down almost 50% since 2014. That's massive, and, while explained in part by U.S. soccer not getting in, time zones, and such, it's still huge. MLS TV ratings are also down significantly. People are turning away from conventional TV and sports in general (both good things, really).
My theory is that anywhere there is money there is going to be less interest in soccer going forward.
BTW _ are you not American?

 

[UConnSwag11]

My buddy in Brazil was telling me how it is there. He's like, none of the rich or even middle class kids there will ever be a pro player. Only the poor kids. All they have to do with themselves is play soccer in the toughest conditions. They become like soccer machines through repetition and willpower. One of the reasons Brazil is so good in soccer is that they have a population of 210 million people, the vast majority of whom are dirt poor.

yeah, I don't know if I've ever heard of a great Brazilian who didn't come from a favela. Even great European players have come from the slums

 

[UConnSwag11]

Thanks for the chart - I'm really just interested in the last five years or so. That's the time period when the Internet/pocket super computer revolution is really taking its toll on traditional entertainment. How are Italian soccer TV ratings compared to 2 years ago? German? Iceland? Netherlands? Japan? World Cup viewership in the U.S. is down almost 50% since 2014. That's massive, and, while explained in part by U.S. soccer not getting in, time zones, and such, it's still huge. MLS TV ratings are also down significantly. People are turning away from conventional TV and sports in general (both good things, really).
My theory is that anywhere there is money there is going to be less interest in soccer going forward.
BTW _ are you not American?

Speaking for myself when it comes to the MLS ratings is that the MLS is bad. They play on turf that I can't stand. They have a playoff system and no relegation which is laughable. They also have an MLS all-star game and used to due PKs like hockey. They're all generic players and play boring styles with no creativity. The best players it seems aren't from this country. Every game I've watched the ball is never on the ground and is always bouncing (might be due to the turf but it's bad). It's a worse style of the EPL

 

[Paesano]

Are you talking about soccer in the US or worldwide? Worldwide nothing comes close or will.


it's growing fast in the US but could be growing a lot faster. it's becoming more expensive for kids to play the game. Worldwide it's the "poor" sport because like you mentioned "All you need to play soccer is a ball, and for that reason alone, it will always be popular." Kids will use anything for a ball and goal and if they can't find anything they'll make a ball out of trash or play barefoot on dirt and rocks. Kids here do have it better than the kids mentioned. No kid here will play like that and also not many will have to. Also a lot of kids here would rather go play any of the three major sports instead of soccer as those sports are part of the culture here compared to soccer in other countries. Being a pro in any of the three sports here is big bucks

I found a comment that might help:

Played soccer for a long long time.

What he is referring to is the traveling & time investment (year-round) required by the institutionalized US system. Serious competitive club teams must both practice weekly & compete in tournaments usually 2-3 times a month. These tournaments are held all throughout the country. When I played I traveled to literally every state on the eastern half of the country; Detroit, Kansas City, Orlando, Atlanta, Maine, even on the national mall in DC.

On top of that there are league costs both indoor and outdoor, coach/management fees, the works. Soccer is expensive because its not as popular, the US is a pretty spread-out country, and you need to constantly travel long distances to compete (compared to the relatively densely populated Europe and S.A. cities, like Mexico City for example).

Ironically, the reason the US is inferior to most countries' soccer talent is precisely because soccer itself is not expensive at all, it's a cheap game to play - as you mentioned, you only need a makeshift ball and some sort of goal. Thus it is a perfect game for children in third world countries. To those kids it's practically the only option for sports - they dont have basketball hoops in their driveways, garages full of bats/balls/gloves/sticks, etc.

another problem is the US' approach to sports in general when combined with it being less popular;

- many children are often forced into a sport to occupy them, give them exercise, and possibly provide scholarship opportunites ... not because they like to play (re: the cliche piano lessons). soccer is most often the sport parents force on their kids because it is easily the most physically demanding sport - a sort of 'soccer will consume his energy & tire him out' attitude by the parents.

- there are no US soccer celebrities, soccer isn't flashy to kids

- schools do so very little to develop the sport compared to football, which is how football succeeds despite being a logistical nightmare sport to organize. high school & college football are the source of development, not private club teams.

- the national team has basically institutionalized the system to go through their manufactured channels (e.g. the Olympic Development Program [ODP]) which is a crock of **** that does nothing to help players, just filter talent. The end result is a bunch of selfish individual players forced to try to play as a team (which we all know doesn't work).

So much truth in there. My son and I were talking about the lack of progress in US soccer just yesterday. Everything you posted is true. But there is more. Soccer, like basketball, requires swag and an edge to be great. The great ones are a little cocky and also a little mean. They have a bit of a killer mentality. Soccer in the US is dominated by the country club athletes. Mommy and daddy are wealthy enough to afford the best training and competition for their kids. But no matter how much you train a country club kid, he will most likely never have that hunger and killer instinct. Very few are born with that as their first instinct and they won't get it at the country club. Being poor and having to overcome adversity breeds that hunger and poor kids are more likely to have a chip on their shoulder which leads to that killer instinct.

Our area is a perfect example. The best program is at the private high school. An executive VP at my company played soccer at Cornell and is in their "Hall of Fame". His kid was "so good" that he skipped his senior season to play on a semi-pro team. He is now playing at Cornell just like his daddy. That kid was never as good as everyone thought he was. I once watched a pick up game at the school and he was badly outplayed by a kid from Mali and a middle schooler who was from Columbia. But, somehow, this kid was anointed as "great". For all I know he may eventually be a US team caliber player. But he will NEVER be a world caliber great player. He lacks the intangibles just like most, if not all, the other country club kids. He, like his dad, has the personality of a stalk of asparagus.

 

[intlzncster]

So much truth in there. My son and I were talking about the lack of progress in US soccer just yesterday. Everything you posted is true. But there is more. Soccer, like basketball, requires swag and an edge to be great. The great ones are a little cocky and also a little mean. They have a bit of a killer mentality. Soccer in the US is dominated by the country club athletes. Mommy and daddy are wealthy enough to afford the best training and competition for their kids. But no matter how much you train a country club kid, he will most likely never have that hunger and killer instinct. Very few are born with that as their first instinct and they won't get it at the country club. Being poor and having to overcome adversity breeds that hunger and poor kids are more likely to have a chip on their shoulder which leads to that killer instinct.

Our area is a perfect example. The best program is at the private high school. An executive VP at my company played soccer at Cornell and is in their "Hall of Fame". His kid was "so good" that he skipped his senior season to play on a semi-pro team. He is now playing at Cornell just like his daddy. That kid was never as good as everyone thought he was. I once watched a pick up game at the school and he was badly outplayed by a kid from Mali and a middle schooler who was from Columbia. But, somehow, this kid was anointed as "great". For all I know he may eventually be a US team caliber player. But he will NEVER be a world caliber great player. He lacks the intangibles just like most, if not all, the other country club kids. He, like his dad, has the personality of a stalk of asparagus.

That's one of the reason Clint Dempsey is good. Came out of Nacogdoches. Not the nicest area. And while he is not elite, he's a very good player with a killer instinct.

This was also Landon Donovan's greatest weakness. Very skilled player who might have become elite with a mentality like Dempsey's.

 

[intlzncster]

Thanks for the chart - I'm really just interested in the last five years or so. That's the time period when the Internet/pocket super computer revolution is really taking its toll on traditional entertainment. How are Italian soccer TV ratings compared to 2 years ago? German? Iceland? Netherlands? Japan? World Cup viewership in the U.S. is down almost 50% since 2014. That's massive, and, while explained in part by U.S. soccer not getting in, time zones, and such, it's still huge. MLS TV ratings are also down significantly. People are turning away from conventional TV and sports in general (both good things, really).
My theory is that anywhere there is money there is going to be less interest in soccer going forward.
BTW _ are you not American?

With regards to TV ratings, I find it difficult to discern what's actually happening. So many people are cutting the cord. People are sharing logins. Illegal streaming. Legal streaming. Obviously, the US not being in it.

Soccer itself is often watched with crowds of people, whether in bars or squares or what have you, so I'm not sure how that impacts things.

I'm not sure I agree with the money aspect. I can see why you say that as an American (jaded culture with endless offerings). But it's so engrained in European and Latin American society, that it is cultural fiber, similar to baseball mid 20th century in the US. And of course, in most third world countries, the dream is very alive. The more money, the more exposure, the more opportunities, etc etc.

I'm American, but emigrated overseas. Living in the US at the moment tho.

 

[superjohn]

Speaking for myself when it comes to the MLS ratings is that the MLS is bad. They play on turf that I can't stand. They have a playoff system and no relegation which is laughable. They also have an MLS all-star game and used to due PKs like hockey. They're all generic players and play boring styles with no creativity. The best players it seems aren't from this country. Every game I've watched the ball is never on the ground and is always bouncing (might be due to the turf but it's bad). It's a worse style of the EPL

I haven't watched a ton of MLS but when I have I'm always struck by how much they suck compared to the Premier league and other leagues. A guy like Zlatan Ibrahimovic playing in the MLS seems like it would be like Durant playing in the D league or even the A10.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

That's one of the reason Clint Dempsey is good. Came out of Nacogdoches. Not the nicest area. And while he is not elite, he's a very good player with a killer instinct.

This was also Landon Donovan's greatest weakness. Very skilled player who might have become elite with a mentality like Dempsey's.

Dempsey & Donovan absolutely had/have different mentalities. On the other hand, both benefited by growing up playing with Latino (primarily Mexican) kids their own age and older. Dempsey luckily grew up tougher, Donovan not so much

 

[intlzncster]

Just thinking about it, the 'fair play' tiebreaker is the dumbest thing in history. Who was the idiot that came up with that one?

 

[superjohn]

Clint Dempsey is a badarse. You guys follow it closer than I do, how good do you think Christian Pulisic is and will be?

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Ah, that's different. I obviously don't know about everywhere, but I remember reading that it's really come on in Africa over the last 10 years or so. The WC in South Africa was testament to that growth*. ...

There's an inexorable spread of the game eastward. And the rise of Asia economically will only hasten football's growth.

There's already some noise about China potentially hosting a world cup (maybe even 2034). That's a massively underserved market they want to tap. Chinese were in the top 10 in tickets bought this world cup and they've only qualified once.

Africa: In addition to South Africa 2010's impact, Africa's relative increasing income, emerging & expanding middle classes by African standards, growing power access, and huge increases in internet access, mobile phone networks, and related use, etc. are significantly expanding viewership (TV + internet) and interest.

Asia: Similar to Africa. Yes, FIFA will absolutely give China an opportunity to host a future world cup even without bribes, Xi's massive support for the sport's growth (starting pre-primary school up to increasingly professional professional clubs, academies operated by invited European coaches, etc.).

Beyond huge #s of Chinese ticket buyers this world cup, note the Chinese sponsors. For example the massive Wanda Group (involved in malls, film production & all sorts of stuff in China, most east Asian & increasingly many other nations including some La Liga club), Hisense appliances (high quality), Vivo (great mobile phones, etc, NBA sponsor in China with Steph Curry, India's cricket premier league sponsor, etc.).

Besides games watched on CCTV, many sponsoring advertisers on Singaporean and Malaysian broadcasts I've watched are Chinese companies. Most westerners do not know the companies at all or know them well. With Xi's support for the sports growth, have no doubt the Chinese sponsors are allocating some RMB to soccer training in the schools, academies, etc.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Clint Dempsey is a badarse. You guys follow it closer than I do, how good do you think Christian Pulisic is and will be?

Pulisic: Very good, not bad arse Dempsey-like, but massively talented. Unlike Donovan who pussed out & ran home to sukc on his blankie, Pulisic has challenged himself & grown up with highly regarded Borussia Dortmund where he now plays regularly.

If Pulisic avoids injury, develops additional strength, and continues building his skills at a similar rate, he should be very successful. At 19, he's easily the best US men's player and attracts attention from other highly regarded European clubs.

 

[CardiacAndre7]

Clint Dempsey is a badarse. You guys follow it closer than I do, how good do you think Christian Pulisic is and will be?

He is, IMO, already the best USMNT player ever. This isn’t my opinion due to a disdain for the past generation, but Pulisic does what he does at a higher level than any past national team player. We have never had opponents focus on strictly one plyer like we do now with CP.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Just thinking about it, the 'fair play' tiebreaker is the dumbest thing in history. Who was the idiot that came up with that one?

Some FIFA fool. As I recall, FIFA introduced the Fair Play tiebreaker for this world cup evolved and surprisingly as part of FIFA's fair play initiative.

If Japan & Senegal had the same # of cards, the teams would have drawn lots to decide which nation advanced. Better or worse?

 

[intlzncster]

Some FIFA fool. As I recall, FIFA introduced the Fair Play tiebreaker for this world cup evolved and surprisingly as part of FIFA's fair play initiative.

If Japan & Senegal had the same # of cards, the teams would have drawn lots to decide which nation advanced. Better or worse?

I'd rather have them flip a coin than 'fair play'. But, really, there's a billion stats they could use to determine a victor. Everything is tracked now. Pick some stat that tells you who was more dominant, more aggressive, who took more chances.

 

[UConnSwag11]

Clint Dempsey is a badarse. You guys follow it closer than I do, how good do you think Christian Pulisic is and will be?

Seems to do better for club than national team. He seems to disappear when it comes to playing for the US. Hopefully he gets more talent around him immediately otherwise his talent will definitely be wasted

 

[BlueMAB]

Seems to do better for club than national team. He seems to disappear when it comes to playing for the US. Hopefully he gets more talent around him immediately otherwise his talent will definitely be wasted

Disappear??? He has 9 goals and 6 assists in 21 CAPs. Nobody else on the roster is even close to that kind of production per game. That's .43 goals per game.

For comparison, Dempsey (a forward not midfielder/winger) has 141 CAPs and 57 goals, or .40 goals per game.

Pulisic plays in a position where he gets less touches inside the box, but is still on pace to be our greatest player/scorer ever.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Disappear??? He has 9 goals and 6 assists in 21 CAPs. Nobody else on the roster is even close to that kind of production per game. That's .43 goals per game.

For comparison, Dempsey (a forward not midfielder/winger) has 141 CAPs and 57 goals, or .40 goals per game.

Pulisic plays in a position where he gets less touches inside the box, but is still on pace to be our greatest player/scorer ever.

Agreed. He's been phenomenal. His only downsides have come when he was frankly, the only guy the opposing was worried about. I've seen him triple teamed, just to keep the ball away from him, because the rest of our guys aren't dangerous enough. Somel of those 9 goals came on brilliant individual plays were he beat multiple defenders on his own. I can't count how many times he beat several defenders and laid a solid ball in for a teammate to blow the finish. His assists would be much higher with better surrounding talent.

 

[HuskyHawk]

So much truth in there. My son and I were talking about the lack of progress in US soccer just yesterday. Everything you posted is true. But there is more. Soccer, like basketball, requires swag and an edge to be great. The great ones are a little cocky and also a little mean. They have a bit of a killer mentality. Soccer in the US is dominated by the country club athletes. Mommy and daddy are wealthy enough to afford the best training and competition for their kids. But no matter how much you train a country club kid, he will most likely never have that hunger and killer instinct. Very few are born with that as their first instinct and they won't get it at the country club. Being poor and having to overcome adversity breeds that hunger and poor kids are more likely to have a chip on their shoulder which leads to that killer instinct.

Our area is a perfect example. The best program is at the private high school. An executive VP at my company played soccer at Cornell and is in their "Hall of Fame". His kid was "so good" that he skipped his senior season to play on a semi-pro team. He is now playing at Cornell just like his daddy. That kid was never as good as everyone thought he was. I once watched a pick up game at the school and he was badly outplayed by a kid from Mali and a middle schooler who was from Columbia. But, somehow, this kid was anointed as "great". For all I know he may eventually be a US team caliber player. But he will NEVER be a world caliber great player. He lacks the intangibles just like most, if not all, the other country club kids. He, like his dad, has the personality of a stalk of asparagus.

This reminds me of something I've seen in basketball. Watched a local youth tournament that my daughter's former school puts on. It has teams from Providence and the northern RI suburbs. So you've got an inner city team of 8th graders, and they face some suburban kids and the best player by miles is a 6th grade suburban kid playing on the 8th grade team. His dad was coach.

I was watching with the father of one of the kids on the Providence team, and he said, yeah, the kid has great ball skills, court awareness, passing, shooting, all of it...but he's not a great athlete. So in 2-3 years, he'll be passed by and probably play ball at a DIII college somewhere (which is what his dad did). He was right.

I think we see the same in soccer. Some kid, like the one you mentioned going to Cornell, gets coached up to such a degree and is perhaps quite smart, and understands the game early beyond he peers, and stands out. But he's not that fast, and he reaches his ceiling much earlier than other kids. We have to find a way to identify the kids who can become great, even if they aren't getting strong coaching early on.

 

[UConnSwag11]

Maybe the teams that tied can do a 30 min golden goal? After that PKS. If no golden goal straight pks?

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Maybe the teams that tied can do a 30 min golden goal? After that PKS. If no golden goal straight pks?

As an alternative to the fair play tiebreaker? When 2 otherwise tied nations are playing in 2 different cities, e.g. Japan & Senegal yesterday?

 

[Waquoit]

I'd rather have them flip a coin than 'fair play'. But, really, there's a billion stats they could use to determine a victor. Everything is tracked now. Pick some stat that tells you who was more dominant, more aggressive, who took more chances.

Winning while playing a cleaner game seems as good a stat as any.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Seems to do better for club than national team. He seems to disappear when it comes to playing for the US. Hopefully he gets more talent around him immediately otherwise his talent will definitely be wasted

Casper wasn't targeted/recruited by highly regarded, top European league teams, but Pulisic is no friendly ghost. Friendly they say, but rarely disappears and could easily jump to another such club team for massive dinero if he didn't appreciate Borussia Dortmund giving him an opportunity and building his highly visible and effective skills.