The FIFA Football World Cup 2018

[bilby]

Both Belgium and England should now, the way things have turned out, arguably want to lose tomorrow. Should make for a great game. Not.

Coming second in the group means definitely avoiding Brazil, Argentina, France and Portugal, and it paves the way for a second round and a quarter final against (supposedly) comparitively weaker opponents (instead of, potentially, against Brazil), albeit with a potential semi-final against Spain. No offence intended to the Swiss (who, along with Spain would be in the '2nd place in group G' half of the draw) who are in fact ranked 6 places above England.

Some English pundits are trying to say that maintaining a winning momentum is more important, but I'm not totally convinced. I am partly convinced.

I think your pundits have it right. The most difficult thing to achieve for all the big teams seems to be to get their acts together and they're not going to achieve that by aiming for a loss. And a win also provides a psychological glue. And even if you do try for a win, you might still loose. So possibly two birds with one stone. My two cents.
EB

I sort of agree, but it's nuanced. There will likely be several team changes regardless (the game is a bit of a 'dead rubber' and so key players can be rested) so psychologically, it would not dent the feeling that a full-strength team would do better. And, trying for a win but losing is not particularly confidence or momentum building either.

At the end of the day, I don't think either team will try to lose, but neither team is likely to go all out for a win either. It could be a dull game, but who knows?

Perhaps both teams will reverse their field positions, and try to score more own goals than their opponents

 

[Speakpigeon]

Perhaps both teams will reverse their field positions, and try to score more own goals than their opponents

I'm not sure if there's even a rule against scoring against your side. They could play to score and at the last minute send the ball in their own cage. Too obvious, perhaps? Sure, but if there's no rule?
EB

 

[bilby]

Perhaps both teams will reverse their field positions, and try to score more own goals than their opponents

I'm not sure if there's even a rule against scoring against your side. They could play to score and at the last minute send the ball in their own cage. Too obvious, perhaps? Sure, but if there's no rule?
EB

There's no rule - and if there was, how would it be enforced? Giving the other team a penalty kick would be rather counterproductive as a punishment for a team that actively wants to lose

 

[Speakpigeon]

French humour... Have a laugh.

First page cover of the magasine So Foot in France, just before the start of the World Cup...

http://www.sofoot.com/so-foot-157-456120.html


For those who understand enough French, at least...

Enjoy.

Need a clue?

Show

...just before the start of the World Cup in Russia...

Need another clue?

Show

...just before the start of the World Cup in Putin's Russia...

Alright, last one...

Show

...just before the start of the World Cup in Dear Leader Putin's Russia...

EB

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Some analysis I've read has suggested that Argentina just isn't a very good team. They probably have higher expectations than they deserve given Messi is on the pitch, but no matter how good the guy is it's a team sport.

I haven't been able to watch as much of the cup this go around as in 14'.. just weird match times. But did catch the Mexico, Germany, and a bit of the England game on the weekend. As always I've been wanting to watch Brazil play so hopefully they escape the preliminaries and one of their matches lands on a weekend.

Whenever Mexico plays America, they are the enemy and I hate them. When they play any other team, I cheer for them because they are a blast to watch. They showed all the weaker teams around the world that sometimes you can stay in the game with nothing but sweat, tears, gumption, hustle, and a fuck-ton of physical conditioning. You can see lots of the weaker teams (America included) following this basic model.

Yeah, Mexico... can cheer for them, but their fans are a bunch of wankers. Make Philly Eagle fans look not as assholeish.

 

[angelo]

The Aussies are out which leaves me no other choice than to barrack for the Poms. Go England!

 

[Speakpigeon]

Go the pom-pom boys!

I had to say that, of course.
EB

 

[laughing dog]

I admit to being slightly confused as to why S Korea's 1st goal was not deemed an offside offence. I have not seen any comment on this in the media, so perhaps it was clear cut and I am not appreciating something.

As I understand it, the goalscorer was in an offside position at the crucial point (when his team mate passed the ball forward) but it was not an offence because on the way to him, the ball hit a defender. My understanding was that that 'loophole' was only valid if the defender 'deliberately played' the ball.

I did not see the play. But I have refereed soccer/football for over 20 years in the USA. The loophole is "attempted to play the ball". The attempt need not be successful. If a defender swings his/her foot at the ball and deflects it, then the attacked should not be deemed offside.

That's what happened. Kroos (the german defender) tried to close his legs, the ball went between his legs and brushed the right one and went on to the South Korean attacker who was in an offside position.

In some ways, I think it's an odd rule.

The rule changed occurred in 2016 in order to increase scoring in the game. The change makes the application of rule much more judgmental because referees are supposed to take the skill of the players into account. So, the same play which may be judged onside at that the World Cup may be judged offside when youth in a local league are playing because the skill level of WC players is assumed to much greater.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That's what happened. Kroos (the german defender) tried to close his legs, the ball went between his legs and brushed the right one and went on to the South Korean attacker who was in an offside position.

In some ways, I think it's an odd rule.

The rule changed occurred in 2016 in order to increase scoring in the game. The change makes the application of rule much more judgmental because referees are supposed to take the skill of the players into account. So, the same play which may be judged onside at that the World Cup may be judged offside when youth in a local league are playing because the skill level of WC players is assumed to much greater.

Now you mention that, I recall a coworker bringing that up a year or two ago. He refs as well. He wasn't particularly pleased with it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So Brazil faces off against Mexico after all, and it appears that if you want to get to the finals, Belgium and England might want to lose their game.

On one side there is Uruguay, Ronaldo's Portugal, France, an anemic Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico.
On the other, there is Spain, Russia, Croatia, Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland.

2nd place in Group G gets the later half of the bracket.

 

[bigfield]

My team's out, so soccer is back to being extremely fucking boring.

 

[laughing dog]

That's what happened. Kroos (the german defender) tried to close his legs, the ball went between his legs and brushed the right one and went on to the South Korean attacker who was in an offside position.

In some ways, I think it's an odd rule.

The rule changed occurred in 2016 in order to increase scoring in the game. The change makes the application of rule much more judgmental because referees are supposed to take the skill of the players into account. So, the same play which may be judged onside at that the World Cup may be judged offside when youth in a local league are playing because the skill level of WC players is assumed to much greater.

Now you mention that, I recall a coworker bringing that up a year or two ago. He refs as well. He wasn't particularly pleased with it.

It can make for confusion. The AR is not always in position to see if defender attempted to play the ball, so the flag goes up. Once the flag goes up, the expectation by the defending team and its supporters is that there is an offside. And in most matches, there is no VAR available. In fact, in most matches below the top level, there are no microphones either. So, it can get messy.

 

[angelo]

Poland 1 Japan 0

Senegal 0 Columbia 1

 

[TSwizzle]

My team's out, so soccer is back to being extremely fucking boring.

My team (USA) were never in it !! USA would have made it out of the group easily.

I watched the last ten minutes of the Germany game. Comical error for the second goal. But the game was lost before then.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Perhaps both teams will reverse their field positions, and try to score more own goals than their opponents

I'm not sure if there's even a rule against scoring against your side. They could play to score and at the last minute send the ball in their own cage. Too obvious, perhaps? Sure, but if there's no rule?
EB

There's no rule - and if there was, how would it be enforced? Giving the other team a penalty kick would be rather counterproductive as a punishment for a team that actively wants to lose

Hmm... Exactly fucking annoyingly so.

So, here we have this apparent problem that teams may choose to play to loose a match. That's unfair to the public and all living things in general.

So, why do they not just give the right to choose their next opponent to the winner? Sounds fair enough... Why isn't that the rule?
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

So Brazil faces off against Mexico after all, and it appears that if you want to get to the finals, Belgium and England might want to lose their game.

On one side there is Uruguay, Ronaldo's Portugal, France, an anemic Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico.
On the other, there is Spain, Russia, Croatia, Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland.

2nd place in Group G gets the later half of the bracket.

The difference between the two groups doesn't appear so clear cut to me. I would consider the possibility that the Belgium coach's comment on not playing to win might be a misleading effort to comfort the English side, and then play to win.
EB

 

[rousseau]

There's no rule - and if there was, how would it be enforced? Giving the other team a penalty kick would be rather counterproductive as a punishment for a team that actively wants to lose

Hmm... Exactly fucking annoyingly so.

So, here we have this apparent problem that teams may choose to play to loose a match. That's unfair to the public and all living things in general.

So, why do they not just give the right to choose their next opponent to the winner? Sounds fair enough... Why isn't that the rule?
EB

Well the goal is the World Cup, not a semi-final win, so one way or another you're going to meet with the other side. Granted the odds of randomness allowing you to slip in a world cup win at the end are better if you actually make it to the final, but if you're that worried about the opposition of one half, your odds for the final aren't too good.

There's that and the fact that it becomes a precedence issue. If side A is noticeably better, why can't the winners of side A jump over to side B too. And who gets to choose to do that when everyone is competing within different groups?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

What, no word on Japan in with 4 yellows to Senegals 6?

 

[bilby]

Well, England successfully got beaten by the Belgians, so now the English tabloids will not be satisfied with anything other than them bringing home the cup.

 

[whollygoats]

Heh...footies...Brits "successfully got beaten".

Tally-ho!