Kosar_For_President Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Well, they say a pictures tells a thousand words: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/germany-feels-bad-for-brazilians-after-ruining-world-cup-title-hopes-000911056.html Gay as hell. As a smart dude as you are I find it funny that you can't see why it is seen as a "gay" sport in the USA. Because the big 3 want you to think that way to have the already dwindling (not NFL) attendance and TV ratings to have their market share cut into to more. I thought you were smarter than that dude. What other reason do 5 billion people outside of the USA don't have the short vision like you fags do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 As a smart dude as you are I find it funny that you can't see why it is seen as a "gay" sport in the USA. Because the big 3 want you to think that way to have the already dwindling (not NFL) attendance and TV ratings to have their market share cut into to more. I thought you were smarter than that dude. What other reason do 5 billion people outside of the USA don't have the short vision like you fags do? Just playing Kosar, just playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 That's wrong. I'm also guessing you haven't watched or played in enough games to use the phrase "many cases". I have seen these games....and they are supposed to be the best of the best.....and in these games, the refs are constantly getting it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 I have seen these games....and they are supposed to be the best of the best.....and in these games, the refs are constantly getting it wrong. The world cup does not produce the best football. These teams are thrown together a few times a year to play, as opposed to the domestic teams that play together every day. Imagine there's a tournament in the offseason where each state picks a team of players from that state. They'll be NFL players, but because they don't get much time together, they can't really gel that well as a team. But still, everyone cheers like mad for their own state, because they're representing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 It punishes lazy and incompetent defenses, and rewards those that are well drilled enough to be able to hold a line. Example: you would traditionally have four defenders; the rule generally means that there needs to be at least one defender between you and the goal (assuming the goalkeeper is there) - or level with you; if you have your four defenders in a straight line, then all attackers must be behind the defensive line. If you have a crooked looking line - picture one of the middle guys being 2 yards ahead, for example - then the guy he is marking can have that 2 yards head start because the rest of the defensive line is in line with him, so he's onside. You are looking at if from the defensive point of view....from an offensive point of view, if an attacker can surpass a defender....you know...outrun him, then it should be up to the defender to keep up with the attacker. It is the attacker that is punished for the defender being slow and stupid. Without the offside rule in place, the striker can stand as far up the pitch as he likes, while the other team attacks, waiting for the keeper to get the ball and punt it to him... Yea, and I see nothing wrong...at all...with that. If a striker stands that far up the pitch...then you defend him. It is just like cherry picking in basketball. If a team leaves a guy back up court or back upfield, then that is one less person they have to pay defense....and usually the defense pays for that. But if a guy is going to cherry pick....then you cover the cherry picker. And if you have ever played basketball sometimes you know that the method of covering that cherry picker is with a forearm shiver. He will get the idea that he should not cherry pick. Side note: this isn't a part of the game that anyone would consider 'beautiful' - it doesn't take any real skill or talent to kick the ball as far as you can to get it to the attacker and then for him to score like that. When I'm playing 5-a-side, where there are no offsides, nobody really enjoys scoring those goals. It's not what you play for. What the fuck if the goalie? A potted plant? If you are going to have game decided by fucking stupid penalty kicks, then what you would get in your scenario is essentially penalty kicks that come in the natural course of action rather than through some end of game gimmick. Does no one really enjoy scoring penalty kicks? They would enjoy them as much if they came in the course of the game as much as at the end of the game. And in my scheme, you would truly, rarely ever need the gimmick of penalty kick decision making. Back on track...that meant that at least one defender (probably two) had to stay back with him, and that meant that the team as a whole became more split, and you would have defenders specialising in only defensive play. Now, with the rule in place, you can move everyone higher up the pitch, resulting in the evolution of defenders from purely destructive players to having the ability to take a full part in the offensive element of the game as well, becoming much more technically adept and thus improving the overall attacking quality of the team. So not only does the offside rule eliminate the boring goals, it also had the side effect of improving the quality of the game. Similarly, the elimination of the backpass improved the ball skills of the goal keeper since he couldn't just use his hands, while also cutting down on time wasting. I hope this helps you to understand the positive impact of the offside rule - if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Well put about the offsides rule. His assessment that it promoted lazy defense could not be more wrong. I've played defense my entire life, offsides is just another element I need to consider. Also, completely opening the game up and turning it into kickball would ruin it. But, like we've said before, his limited knowledge of the game isn't stopping him from trying to impose rule changes. Though it should, because he has no idea what he's talking about. Yep, all I am trying to do is to make it less boring. To infuse more offense. You could live with the game being more exciting. After all, baseball adopted the designated hitter, football adopted the no bump and run rule, basketball adopted the 3 point shot. But by all means, keep your archaic, boring rules. The WC will be over in a few days and no one, anywhere will have to talk soccer again for another 4 years....or at least until the Olympics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Damn straight. Men should not touch other men. If you absolutely have to, make sure it's a handshake. With gloves on, preferably. Thank god real american men play a sport where they dress up in spandex, wear a load of padding and wait for one man to reach under another man's ass and grab a ball before running for 20 seconds and then having a break. Perspective is everything. The perspective is that the object of football is to hit the other guy...all players on the field are allowed to hit all the other guys on the field, within certain limitations (like spearing and head shots)....The object of football is not to hit the ball as in other sports. Even in rugby where you can tackle the ball carrier, you are not allowed to hit the other guys on the field unless they have the ball (at least that is my understanding...that there is no "blocking" in rugby). Again, not so in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 The perspective is that the object of football is to hit the other guy...all players on the field are allowed to hit all the other guys on the field, within certain limitations (like spearing and head shots)....The object of football is not to hit the ball as in other sports. Even in rugby where you can tackle the ball carrier, you are not allowed to hit the other guys on the field unless they have the ball (at least that is my understanding...that there is no "blocking" in rugby). Again, not so in football. Yep, you have to actually use your brain to get the better of people in some sports... Suh SMASH!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 The world cup does not produce the best football. These teams are thrown together a few times a year to play, as opposed to the domestic teams that play together every day. Imagine there's a tournament in the offseason where each state picks a team of players from that state. They'll be NFL players, but because they don't get much time together, they can't really gel that well as a team. But still, everyone cheers like mad for their own state, because they're representing. OK, I can see that. It would be like taking any NFL team and matching them up against a hastily put together all star team. The team that has practiced and played together for years should have an advantage over the talented, but less organized all star team. It is one of the reasons that All Star games in the likes of hockey/basketball/football are usually poor displays of the best of each sport. (I suspect soccer would be the same). The one exception is baseball. So much of baseball is based on individuality. The essence of the pitcher against the batter doesn't really change whether it is a regular team game or an All star matchup. A great defensive play by a shortstop or an outfielder doesn't rely on the aid of the fellow defenders. Baseball is truly the beautiful game. Just the fact that there can be variances in the actual field of play from park to park is also something that differentiates baseball from most other sports. In one park you may have to hit a ball 400 feet down a foul line, where in other parks it can be as little as 300 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 The world cup does not produce the best football. These teams are thrown together a few times a year to play, as opposed to the domestic teams that play together every day. Imagine there's a tournament in the offseason where each state picks a team of players from that state. They'll be NFL players, but because they don't get much time together, they can't really gel that well as a team. But still, everyone cheers like mad for their own state, because they're representing. I wish they would condense the Champions League into a month similar to the World Cup. That would probably be soccer's best bet of catching America's short attention span. Play it right about now every year so the only competition would be baseball and a few tennis and golf tournaments and you'll get some great ratings across the pond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Yep, you have to actually use your brain to get the better of people in some sports... Suh SMASH!!! Actually, football is the game that perhaps needs the most intelligence because it requires the most coordination of effort of all the players on the field. As noted above, one beauty of baseball is the individuality of the sport, in football it is very much the opposite. Every person on an 11 man offense or defense have there assignments.....and that effort of, yes, smashing into the opponents requires brute force....it also requires more cooperative effort, more technique, more...intelligence to accomplish the results you want than most of the other sports. You often hear how one man having a breakdown in their assignment can ruin an entire play. Its true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Brazil certainly did nazi that one coming. Anyone? Anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Actually, football is the game that perhaps needs the most intelligence because it requires the most coordination of effort of all the players on the field. As noted above, one beauty of baseball is the individuality of the sport, in football it is very much the opposite. Every person on an 11 man offense or defense have there assignments.....and that effort of, yes, smashing into the opponents requires brute force....it also requires more cooperative effort, more technique, more...intelligence to accomplish the results you want than most of the other sports. You often hear how one man having a breakdown in their assignment can ruin an entire play. Its true. I wouldn't say football requires the most intelligence. The thing about football is all of the positions are so different. You can't just take the most positive aspects of each and call that football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Yep, all I am trying to do is to make it less boring. To infuse more offense. You could live with the game being more exciting. After all, baseball adopted the designated hitter, football adopted the no bump and run rule, basketball adopted the 3 point shot. But by all means, keep your archaic, boring rules. The WC will be over in a few days and no one, anywhere will have to talk soccer again for another 4 years....or at least until the Olympics. Removing offsides in soccer is a much bigger change than the ones you mentioned. The rest of the world and a good bit of America find the sport plenty exciting already. I find baseball incredibly dull and slow. I could think of ways that would make it more exciting for me, but it would completely change the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 I wouldn't say football requires the most intelligence. The thing about football is all of the positions are so different. You can't just take the most positive aspects of each and call that football. In soccer you are often required to do someone else's job. A counter attack might result in a forward having to do some defending, or a defender may suddenly find himself through on goal. There's nothing close to the level of specialisation you have in the NFL, where you wouldn't ask a WR to suddenly play guard for a minute because the starter couldn't make it up the pitch in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 My cousin is stationed in Germany and sent this to me: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Best so far for me: http://youtu.be/IynteMtSBxo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 In soccer you are often required to do someone else's job. A counter attack might result in a forward having to do some defending, or a defender may suddenly find himself through on goal. There's nothing close to the level of specialisation you have in the NFL, where you wouldn't ask a WR to suddenly play guard for a minute because the starter couldn't make it up the pitch in time. Uhmm, right. The NFL is a far more specialized game. That is why I say the intellect in football must be at a high level. Each of those "specialists" have their own tasks to perform, but they must be performed in concert with what each of the other specialists are doing out there in order for the entire team to perform properly and to make a play come off as designed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Removing offsides in soccer is a much bigger change than the ones you mentioned. The rest of the world and a good bit of America find the sport plenty exciting already. I find baseball incredibly dull and slow. I could think of ways that would make it more exciting for me, but it would completely change the sport. Every single pitch of a baseball game could result in some significant action, be it from a home run to a strike out. Every pitch is mano a mano. The hardest skill in any sport I know of is to hit a round ball with a round bat. I mean, what changes could you suggest to make the game more exciting? Tossing the ball underhand? Playing in kilts? Using a golf ball? Please, tell us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Every single pitch of a baseball game could result in some significant action, be it from a home run to a strike out. Every pitch is mano a mano. The hardest skill in any sport I know of is to hit a round ball with a round bat. I mean, what changes could you suggest to make the game more exciting? Tossing the ball underhand? Playing in kilts? Using a golf ball? Please, tell us. Steroids and HGH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Every single pitch of a baseball game could result in some significant action, be it from a home run to a strike out. Every pitch is mano a mano. The hardest skill in any sport I know of is to hit a round ball with a round bat. I mean, what changes could you suggest to make the game more exciting? Tossing the ball underhand? Playing in kilts? Using a golf ball? Please, tell us. Percentage wise, it's harder to save a PK. Idk. I find the sport so incredibly boring to begin with I'd have to make massive changes. Ummm... Allow contact and allow guys on the field to block the runner on the way to the base. Make it like crazy kickball and allow an unlimited number of players on each base. Collisions at every base. Still playing when there is a light drizzle... Adding more athletic elements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Uhmm, right. The NFL is a far more specialized game. That is why I say the intellect in football must be at a high level. Each of those "specialists" have their own tasks to perform, but they must be performed in concert with what each of the other specialists are doing out there in order for the entire team to perform properly and to make a play come off as designed. Not every position in football requires one to be a great tactician. Not every person needs to be perfect each play. Plays happen in soccer too, they're just on the fly and with a smaller number of players involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 Percentage wise, it's harder to save a PK. Idk. I find the sport so incredibly boring to begin with I'd have to make massive changes. Ummm... Allow contact and allow guys on the field to block the runner on the way to the base. Make it like crazy kickball and allow an unlimited number of players on each base. Collisions at every base. Still playing when there is a light drizzle... Adding more athletic elements OK then, why don't we just allow soccer players to grab, tackle, punch, kick each other with no penalty. In fact, lets change soccer so that the motherfuckers can use their hands. After all, after our brains the single most important thing about human beings is that we have hands. (the answer is: they have already done that, it is called Handball and is mostly played in Europe. It is essentially soccer held on a smaller court with a softball sized ball) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 Not every position in football requires one to be a great tactician. Not every person needs to be perfect each play. Plays happen in soccer too, they're just on the fly and with a smaller number of players involved. Yea, like basketball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 For you soccer fans, if you like the way that game was decided yesterday, please go to your bathroom, look at yourself in the mirror and say "I am looking at a fucking Retard". Because that is what deciding the most important tournament in the sport is with penalty kicks: Retarded. If you enjoyed that, please go to your local geneticist and have yourself tested for Down's Syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 Yea, like basketball. Yeah, pretty much. More elaborate, but pretty much the same basic concept Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 This really needed a new thread? Hopefully someone can merge. Anyway, have a read through this, it details a load of ideas. Which would you be in favour of? http://www.penaltyshootouts.co.uk/alternatives.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 This really needed a new thread? Hopefully someone can merge. Anyway, have a read through this, it details a load of ideas. Which would you be in favour of? http://www.penaltyshootouts.co.uk/alternatives.html Here is the quote from that article that I like best: One notable exception occurred in semi final of the 2006 World Cup when the Italian team believed that they would lose to the Germans in the penalty shoot-out. They threw everything at the Germans, hitting the post and bar in the first two minutes of extra time and played with an exciting reckless abandon that eventually saw them get goals in the final minutes of extra time. This semi-final was frenzied, exhilerating football that recalled an earlier game in the tournament, Australia vs Croatia, in which only the winner would progress to the next stage. Sadly, this game is remembered by most people for Graham Poll's refereeing blunders, but this was another helter-skelter ride and probably the best game in the competition. I believe that if you played by the rule that a game was won by scoring the "Golden Goal", it would vastly increase the excitability and the efforts of the teams involved. Until a goal is scored, no one wins. That would lead to urgency on the part of each team to score. It would cause them to be aggressive and attack the goal. Laying back and playing patty cake like these teams seem to do sucks the life out of the game. You say guys would get tired? Too damn bad. Guys get tired playing hockey....and eventually that "tiredness" may lead to a breakdown in a defense and a score. So, good, let them get tired. The team that is most aggressive, in the best shape should win. Again, it is done in NHL hockey, it should be done here....at least in the elimination rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 You watch a handful of games every four years, you know nothing about "the life of the game". I would be for the 30 like it is now, then a 30 golden goal. They'd have to allow more sub's for the last period though. Like an extra 3 or 4. You can't play indefinitely though without risking injury. Well, there's always a risk, but that would be an unnecessary increased risk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 You watch a handful of games every four years, you know nothing about "the life of the game". The exciting part of the game from my viewpoint is when a team is attempting to attack the goal. From just watching these games I can tell you that they don't do that 95% of the time. I would be for the 30 like it is now, then a 30 golden goal. They'd have to allow more sub's for the last period though. Like an extra 3 or 4. You can't play indefinitely though without risking injury. Well, there's always a risk, but that would be an unnecessary increased risk If hockey players who play a lot tougher, more physically demanding sport, can do it these preening pansies can do it. Actually, as far as I am concerned they should have a liberal substitution policy for the entire game....like basketball, football, hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.