# World Cup Efficiency



## twindadtodd (Jun 23, 2010)

Rate your efficiency at work in the midst of the World Cup. In between waiting for PE results and 3 games a day I'm useless...


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jun 23, 2010)

I've had the ESPN gamecast open and I've been listening to one match on ESPN Radio online whenever there is one on. It hasn't really hurt my productivity, but I'm definitely following it real-time.

I was pissed because I had training this morning during the USA match. Another guy and I went crazy when the US scored in stoppage time because we were both following the game on our phones.


----------



## goodal (Jun 23, 2010)

World cup?

Oh that soccer thing. Hasnt affected me much.

Cant call it a sport if it can end in a tie.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 23, 2010)

nothing like logging 90+ minutes for a nil - nil tie! Between that, the vuvuzelas, and the blatant, flagrant diving / flopping for penalties, how the adjective "beautiful" ever got taglined with this game is mindbottling.

Seriously, vuvuzelas aside, take away the pansy-ass diving these guys do &amp; maybe eliminate the offsides penalties to open up actual scoring, and the game could be watchable.


----------



## Paul S (Jun 23, 2010)

I wish I knew how to remove all the world cup related garbage on the Google news page. When will this thing be over?


----------



## akwooly (Jun 23, 2010)

Does soccer have a diving penalty like in hockey?


----------



## twindadtodd (Jun 23, 2010)

badal said:


> World cup?
> Oh that soccer thing. Hasnt affected me much.
> 
> Cant call it a sport if it can end in a tie.


That NFL tie game back in 2008...those guys must have been pissed when they realized they weren't actually playing a sport all these years. i forget the teams though...


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jun 23, 2010)

akwooly said:


> Does soccer have a diving penalty like in hockey?


Yeah. Yellow cards can be issued for taking a dive. The problem is there is only one referee on the pitch at any given time, and for him to see exactly what happened with every single foul is impossible. Sometimes the referees assistants on the sidelines (normally responsible only for offsides or out of bounds calls) will consult with the head referee on a call, but the head referee has the final say in all calls. I think they would do well to add one or two more on-field referees. It might get rid of some of the atrocious calls that are a detriment to the game (like the two disallowed goals for the US in the Slovenia and Algeria games where there were no fouls on replay at all).

Plus, once we are in the knock-out rounds, there will be no more ties. There will be another period of golden goal (sudden death) overtime, then penalty kicks until a winner is decided. That's when it gets really exciting. The group play rounds is just a round-robin tournament to decide who will move into the real tournament.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 23, 2010)

yeah its pretty bad when the announcers (of european persuasion) call some of the 'contacts' shameful performances, detracting from the game. Some of the atheletes respond by saying they're not trying to be role models - Fine, but could they make the sport any *gayer* (probably not a word) with this sh!t?! And the world wonders why americans in general don't embrace this "beautiful game". Probably cuz its gayer than a tree full of hummingbirds the way its played on the world stage.


----------



## ElCid03 (Jun 23, 2010)

wilheldp_PE said:


> akwooly said:
> 
> 
> > Does soccer have a diving penalty like in hockey?
> ...


People your National Team won its group for the first time since 1930! Be proud of this squad they overcame two terrible calls and are well on the way to making history.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jun 23, 2010)

Why did you quote me on that post? I do support the USMNT, and have been following the games as much as possible. I didn't make it to any qualifiers for this WC, but I went to 3 when we qualified for the 2002 WC.


----------



## Dleg (Jun 23, 2010)

I was not previously aware that a tree full of hummingbirds was gay.

(note to self - cut down tree full of hummingbirds in front yard)


----------



## cement (Jun 23, 2010)

I think that hummingbirds are pretty cool, and we plant flowers to attract them. does that make me gay?


----------



## Dleg (Jun 24, 2010)

According to EM_PS you're :f_115m_e45d7af:


----------



## pelaw (Jun 24, 2010)

Unemployed and enjoy my time watching soccer. Go USA !


----------



## Supe (Jun 24, 2010)

cement said:


> I think that hummingbirds are pretty cool, and we plant flowers to attract them. does that make me gay?



Flowers are WAY gayer than trees, so that makes you a giant flamer. Didn't you know that?

As far as the soccer, go USA , but I'll get my fill watching the 15 seconds of highlights on ESPN. Any more than that, and it's like pulling teeth.


----------



## GTjoy (Jun 24, 2010)

twindadtodd said:


> Rate your efficiency at work in the midst of the World Cup. In between waiting for PE results and 3 games a day I'm useless...


So many people at my office were live streaming the USA/Algeria game and slowing down the whole network that we got an email from our IT department asking everyone to stop. 

It's not hurting my work TOO much. I would only stream the USA games and an occasional other game. I have it on in the background on one monitor, I don't watch it continuously - just sort of multi-tasking. I'd also check in on other scores somewhat frequently, but not watch them (like yesterday, to find out if we'd play Ghana or Germany next. BTW - Our path looks MUCH easier than England's. Whew!).

Regardless, it looks like I won't be allowed to do much of that anymore! Good thing the next game is on a Saturday.


----------



## Dark Knight (Jun 24, 2010)

World Cup? I could not care less.


----------



## Pau1 S (Jun 24, 2010)

I have decided to stop being such a woman and have discovered that soccer, a.k.a. real football, is the greatest sport in the world. It is so much more exciting than anything we play here in America.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Jun 24, 2010)

All gayness, hummingbirds, feminine hygeine products, and flowers aside;

I hate the vuvuzelas, it's annoying as hell hearing that in the background.

The highlights are okay to watch but other than that, I can't watch much more than 15 minutes of soccer.

That being said, you have to respect the endurance of the players, being able to run like that for as long as they do.

Some of the players' acting jobs to try and draw penalties are really gay.

Offsides in soccer is simply a penalty for outrunning your opponent, that is really gay.


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 24, 2010)

Chucktown PE said:


> Offsides in soccer is simply a penalty for outrunning your opponent, that is really gay.


Actually it's quite the opposite. It forces players to outrun the defenders rather than just camping out next to the goalie.

The flops are annoying, but as others have mentioned, it's a function of only having one official on the pitch to call all fouls. Sometimes A lot of the time they don't get it right. Penalties can be called on players for flopping, but they seldom are b/c it can be very difficult to determine if a player was taking a dive or legitimately fouled. A player in the England - Slovenia game was penalized for diving in their game yesterday despite replays clearly showing that the England player was elbowed in the face, so the bad calls go both ways. You may be asking yourself, why don't they use instant replay to get the calls right? Because one of the great things about soccer is the game never stops. You don't have an opportunity to stop play and do a review. So bad calls are going to happen and there isn't much you can do about it without drastically changing the game (for the worse in my opinion). I would be in favor of officials reviewing the game after the fact and assessing penalties (yellow/red cards) for flopping. I think you'd see a lot less diving then.

I understand why players do it. Since games are so low scoring any advantage to score has to be taken. Set pieces deep in your opponents territory are a huge advantage, so players are willing to take the risk of a penalty for that advantage. It's not being a pansy, it's playing smart.

The low score is what makes the games exciting. A game's outcome is almost always in question. A 1-0 lead is not safe until the final whistle blows. A 0-0 tie in the 91st minute of a game and an almost almost certain elimination from the world cup can turn around and be a 1-0 win, and winning first place in your group. That is what makes soccer exciting.


----------



## TouchDown (Jun 24, 2010)

USA ! USA ! USA !

But I haven't watched a game or part of a game yet. Just not a soccer fan.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 24, 2010)

cement said:


> I think that hummingbirds are pretty cool, and we plant flowers to attract them. does that make me gay?





Dleg said:


> According to EM_PS you're :f_115m_e45d7af:


Woah! its just an expression guys, sorta like queerer than a $3 bill (?) - shutting up now...



roadwreck said:


> Chucktown PE said:
> 
> 
> > Offsides in soccer is simply a penalty for outrunning your opponent, that is really gay.
> ...


Nobody likes to see cherry pickers, but where exactly does offsides end? It seems like its at the goal box - make it the midfield stripe and the game could get alot better.

Yesterday's game was pretty exciting - I do like the fact that the clock never stops &amp; these guys play balls to the wall the whole way thru - but the diving makes me wanna uke: , whether its in the NBA, NHL or whatever. Strategic I guess, but no less pathetic


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 24, 2010)

EM_PS said:


> Nobody likes to see cherry pickers, but where exactly does offsides end? It seems like its at the goal box - make it the midfield stripe and the game could get alot better.


Huh? :huh: What do you mean where does offsides end? It doesn't "end". If you are on your opponents side of the field then you can be offsides, period.

The rule is pretty simple. An offensive player has to be behind the ball or two defenders (one usually being the goal keeper) when the ball is last touched to be considered onside.

In this diagram the blue "player" would be offside b/c there is only one defender between him and the goal line.







The blue player in this diagram is onside b/c he is "behind the ball" (i.e. the ball is between him and the goal line).






You are allowed to be between the goal line and the last defender as long as you were onside when the ball was last struck. This means that if you are on the same plane or behind the defender when a ball is passed forward and you out run the defender to get the ball you are still onside. So in essence the rule means that in order to collect the ball before the defender you have to be able to outtrun him, rather than camping out next to the goalie for the whole game and having your teammates lob the ball forward to you.



EM_PS said:


> ...but the diving makes me wanna uke: , whether its in the NBA, NHL or whatever. Strategic I guess, but no less pathetic


Players in other sports dive to gain an advantage. They do it all the time in basketball to draw a foul. Have you seen Duke play basketball? Football players do it occasionally to draw pass interference calls. It happens in all sports, I think it's more prevalent in soccer b/c it's harder for the one official to get a good view of the play. In basketball their are three officials on a much smaller court. In football their are a half a dozen officials. Also the advantage gained by flopping in soccer far far outweighs the negatives. You will only ever see the offensive players flop in soccer. The defenders never go down. If they do they run the risk of giving up a goal. The penalty for flopping on the offensive end is maybe a yellow card and giving up possession of the ball deep in your opponents territory.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 24, 2010)

roadwreck said:


> EM_PS said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody likes to see cherry pickers, but where exactly does offsides end? It seems like its at the goal box - make it the midfield stripe and the game could get alot better.
> ...


this is exactly my point. Could you imagine in hockey, if a player couldn't get between the defense and the goaltender unless he has the puck!? People complain about the blue line or 'two-line pass' violations in that sport! Soccer should have a 'blue line' of its own, or really open up the game and only call offsides at the midfield line. Once the offense is 'onsides' (the defense side of field), there can be no offsides until ball goes back over midfield. Cripes, no wonder there is little to no scoring.

[edit] great visual aids, btw! :thumbs:


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 24, 2010)

EM_PS said:


> this is exactly my point. Could you imagine in hockey, if a player couldn't get between the defense and the goaltender unless he has the puck!? People complain about the blue line or 'two-line pass' violations in that sport! Soccer should have a 'blue line' of its own, or really open up the game and only call offsides at the midfield line. Once the offense is 'onsides' (the defense side of field), there can be no offsides until ball goes back over midfield. Cripes, no wonder there is little to no scoring.
> [edit] great visual aids, btw! :thumbs:


so you are arguing that soccer should be like hockey to make it more appealing to Americans? Last I checked, the NHL wasn't what I would consider a popular American sport.

in soccer a player can get behind the defenders and not get called for offsides so long as that player isn't involved in an ensuing play without getting back onside.

Little to no scoring makes the game that much more exciting. Every score is a big deal. One goal can make the difference and a goal can be scored at any moment. It keeps things interesting.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 24, 2010)

roadwreck said:


> so you are arguing that soccer should be like hockey to make it more appealing to Americans? Last I checked, the NHL wasn't what I would consider a popular American sport.
> in soccer a player can get behind the defenders and not get called for offsides so long as that player isn't involved in an ensuing play without getting back onside.
> 
> Little to no scoring makes the game that much more exciting. Every score is a big deal. One goal can make the difference and a goal can be scored at any moment. It keeps things interesting.


No where did i state or argue this. Truthfully I'm learning in this discussion about a game i know little about. I am simply saying that it would be more appealing to _me_ (I certainly don't speak for all of America), if the game of soccer / football was faster paced with breakout plays allowed and more actual scoring. Penalizing players for getting ahead of the defense and making them jump back in with the 10 others on offense for some kind of united frontal attack of the goal just really makes for a boring watch (again, my opinion). its a bit like watching a car race (or even an _american_ football game) where no passing is allowed. A 7-6 game to me would be much more satisfying of a sports experience than a 1-0 match any day (or a 0-0 tie!), but thats just me. Little to no scoring makes the game lame - agree to disagree


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 24, 2010)

EM_PS said:


> Truthfully I'm learning in this discussion about a game i know little about. I am simply saying that it would be more appealing to _me_ (I certainly don't speak for all of America), if the game of soccer / football was faster paced with breakout plays allowed and more actual scoring. Penalizing players for getting ahead of the defense and making them jump back in with the 10 others on offense for some kind of united frontal attack of the goal just really makes for a boring watch (again, my opinion). its a bit like watching a car race (or even an _american_ football game) where no passing is allowed. A 7-6 game to me would be much more satisfying of a sports experience than a 1-0 match any day (or a 0-0 tie!), but thats just me. Little to no scoring makes the game lame - agree to disagree


I don't think you can say that many offensive players have to "jump back onside" in most situations. If the ball is being played towards a goal, the defenders are all falling back towards the goal anyway, making offsides almost irrelevant. Really the only time offsides comes into play is when an offensive player gets behind the defenders before the ball has been passed forward. Again, it's a strategy that the defenders can employ to keep the opponent away from their goal. It's a strategy which can be very risky b/c if the ref or linesman doesn't call the offensive player offsides you have now created a one on one situation for your goalie.

You'll have to take my word for it that it's a fun sport to watch and to play. That doesn't mean you'll enjoy it, and that's okay.

I think if American's start winning matches in the world cup (on a regular basis) more and more people will find the sport enjoyable. It probably doesn't help that the world cup is only played every 4 years. That's a long time to go for people in the USA to not have any meaningful soccer to watch.


----------



## snickerd3 (Jun 24, 2010)

wow, the world cup is only year 4 yrs. you learn something new everyday.


----------



## NCcarguy (Jun 24, 2010)

what's a world cup? a great big jock strap?


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 24, 2010)

NCcarguy said:


> what's a world cup? a great big jock strap?




What's a super bowl? A great big toilet?


----------



## Road Guy (Jun 24, 2010)

I had mexican for lunch yesterday and I asked them to change the television channel to somethign other than soccer (after I had received the food of course  ) I did not get a pleasant response to my joke...


----------



## Dleg (Jun 24, 2010)

roadwreck said:


> NCcarguy said:
> 
> 
> > what's a world cup? a great big jock strap?
> ...


Well done... :appl:


----------



## twindadtodd (Jun 24, 2010)

Little to no scoring makes the game that much more exciting. Every score is a big deal. One goal can make the difference and a goal can be scored at any moment. It keeps things interesting.


----------



## ElCid03 (Jun 24, 2010)

wilheldp_PE said:


> Why did you quote me on that post? I do support the USMNT, and have been following the games as much as possible. I didn't make it to any qualifiers for this WC, but I went to 3 when we qualified for the 2002 WC.


I meant nothing negative at all. I was trying to give you an "amen"! Must have been playing my vuvuzela too much that day.

Landon Donovan for president.....think about it America.


----------



## Dark Knight (Jun 25, 2010)

Road Guy said:


> I had mexican for lunch yesterday and I asked them to change the television channel to somethign other than soccer (after I had received the food of course  ) I did not get a pleasant response to my joke...


Next time go there wearing a jersey with Uruguay colors. Then let us know if there is a difference. I hope Argentina beats them really good.


----------

