So who's going to win the world cup?

[Scott of the Antares]

44 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

penalty shots are a horrible way to decide World Cups.

 

Agreed, but if these professionals can’t sort it out within 2 hours of play then they can’t complain really. As an Englishman, I know all too well the horrors of a penalty shootout:(

13 hours ago, koti said:

Frankly, I don’t find football interesting, never did...

Like most things, taking part is far more engaging than being a spectator:)

However, I can understand why you don’t find watching it interesting; your national team has been a bit of a wash-out this tournament;)!

 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Scott of the Antares

[swansont]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 A much better way to break the tie, IMO, would be to play 9 on 9 starting the overtime, then proceed to reduce it further every 10 minutes or so until someone scores...penalty shots are a horrible way to decide World Cups.

Or add a second ball.

[StringJunky]

11 minutes ago, swansont said:

Or add a second ball.

That would be fun, with  each team kicking off with a ball.

[Scott of the Antares]

Adding a second ball is the best idea I have heard. It would be mayhem lol

[dimreepr]

I just hope he's able to enjoy a full range of emotion when Brazil face England ().

[MigL]

Shootouts after extra time are just some or the rules.
Matches have also been decided by 'fair play' ( see Japan advance over Senegal )
And if all else fails, the dreaded coin toss can decide a game.

Still can't believe the Russians advanced over Spain.
The Spanish 'tic-tac' style of football needs to involve more shots on net.
Russia was the only team to score any goals in regulation time.
They even scored Spain's only goal, despite Spain having most possession.

( maybe Vladimir made a large payment to the crooks running FIFA )

[dimreepr]

I think a penalty shootout is the perfect, arbitrary, way to determine a world cup match. Any of the solutions above would still favour the stronger team and so negate the weaker teams only realistic strategy (level the playing field). If the strongest team can't outwit the weakest over 2 hours of play, they deserve the jeopardy.

[Janus]

22 minutes ago, MigL said:

( maybe Vladimir made a large payment to the crooks running FIFA )

I do remember a reading an article a while back that hinted that Russia being awarded as being the host for this World Cup was influenced by some " under the table" dealing.

4 hours ago, Scott of the Antares said:

Like most things, taking part is far more engaging than being a spectator:)

Even having had taken part at sometime can make being a spectator more engaging.    I wasn't much of a fan until after my daughter started playing youth soccer, and then a couple of years in, I found myself as assistant coach (Nothing will learn you a game better than trying to teach it to a group of preteen girls).   My daughter is even more of a fan, being a season ticket holder for the Portland Timbers, in the "Army" section (The group of supporters who stand and chant throughout the entire game.)

 

[zapatos]

19 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I think a penalty shootout is the perfect, arbitrary, way to determine a world cup match. Any of the solutions above would still favour the stronger team and so negate the weaker teams only realistic strategy (level the playing field). If the strongest team can't outwit the weakest over 2 hours of play, they deserve the jeopardy.

That's sort of fundamental to competition.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

That's sort of fundamental to competition.

As is:

22 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

the weaker teams only realistic strategy (level the playing field).

 

[John Cuthber]

Ok, so it seems the best option is to stop playing and toss coins to decide the winner.
That levels the playing field and removes any advantage you might have from actually being better at playing the game.

 

[dimreepr]

5 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Ok, so it seems the best option is to stop playing and toss coins to decide the winner.
That levels the playing field and removes any advantage you might have from actually being better at playing the game.

 

You seem to have missed the part where they play for 2 hours, first; surely a team game is as much about strategy as skill. 

[zapatos]

8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Ok, so it seems the best option is to stop playing and toss coins to decide the winner.
That levels the playing field and removes any advantage you might have from actually being better at playing the game.

Now that we are truly able to level the playing field I am anxious to begin my new career as a heavyweight boxer!

[John Cuthber]

21 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

You seem to have missed the part where they play for 2 hours, first; surely a team game is as much about strategy as skill. 

A strategy might be to defend furiously all game + make sure you are damned good at penalties.
It's not so much that I missed the bit about playing, but if the problem is that "the solutions above would still favour the stronger team" or that it is somehow desirable to "level the playing field" then the obvious thing to do is not actually play football.

Edited July 2, 2018 by John Cuthber

[dimreepr]

14 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

A strategy might be to defend furiously all game + make sure you are damned good at penalties.

How is that different to: defend furiously all game + make sure you're damned good at playing with, fewer players or two balls in play or accurately tossing a coin?

 

Edited July 2, 2018 by dimreepr

[swansont]

53 minutes ago, Janus said:

I do remember a reading an article a while back that hinted that Russia being awarded as being the host for this World Cup was influenced by some " under the table" dealing.

However, the USA's absence requires absolutely no appeal to conspiracy.

[Janus]

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

However, the USA's absence requires absolutely no appeal to conspiracy.

True, so true.

[Airbrush]

How about rather than penalty kicks to decide a tied match, play another 10 minutes or more with no goalies!

Anyone catch the last two matches?  Brazil played very well to eliminate Mexico 2-0.  Both Brazilian goals were beautifully assisted fast-break teamwork and the goals were simple taps into the goal.

Japan looked like they were going to beat Belgium by scoring 2 goals in the first 4 minutes of the second half.  Then Belgium came from behind using fantastic header goals to win 3-2.

Now my list of favorites based only on prior performance is:

Croatia 4-0-0

Belgium 4-0-0

Uruguay 3-0-0

Brazil 3-1-0

France 3-1-0

Russia 3-1-0

England and Sweden are even at 2-0-1

I never would bet on sports or anything else.  But I like to analyze soccer and US football based on numbers.

[StringJunky]

5 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

How about rather than penalty kicks to decide a tied match, play another 10 minutes or more with no goalies!

Anyone catch the last two matches?  Brazil played very well to eliminate Mexico 2-0.  Both Brazilian goals were beautifully assisted fast-break teamwork and the goals were simple taps into the goal.

Japan looked like they were going to beat Belgium by scoring 2 goals in the first 4 minutes of the second half.  Then Belgium came from behind using fantastic header goals to win 3-2.

Now my list of favorites based only on prior performance is:

Croatia 4-0-0

Belgium 4-0-0

Uruguay 3-0-0

Brazil 3-1-0

France 3-1-0

Russia 3-1-0

England and Sweden are even at 2-0-1

I never would bet on sports or anything else.  But I like to analyze soccer and US football based on numbers.

An English bookies, I noticed yesterday, put France and Brazil top then England

[MigL]

Respect to Japan for playing a well balanced game.
They defended well, and took the game to the Belgians offensively.
I would have loved them to have proven my predictions wrong by winning.

Belgium, one of the favorites, didn't impress by coming back to win in the last seconds.
For a team whose offense  is comprised of superstars from the Premier league ( Man City, Man U and Chelsea ), they should never have been down by two goals to begin with. They left their back door open defensively.

And if Japan can do that to them, what will Brazil do to them next game ?

If I was a betting man I would have bet France, right from the beginning.
Would really like to see an English miracle though.
After 52 yrs they've had a longer dry spell than the Toronto Maple leafs hockey team.

Edited July 2, 2018 by MigL

[Lord Antares]

 

[StringJunky]

Neymar's at it again with Mexico:

Quote

Yet the less attractive side of his game was also on display, as he writhed on the floor, seemingly in agony, after Mexico’s Miguel Layun had made the slightest contact with his ankle, before making an immediate and miraculous recovery. - BBC News

 

Edited July 3, 2018 by StringJunky

[MigL]

This will only stop once the officials start yellow carding the 'fakers' upon video review.

[StringJunky]

31 minutes ago, MigL said:

This will only stop once the officials start yellow carding the 'fakers' upon video review.

The could issue a 'drama queen' card. That would soon stop it.  

[DrP]

18 hours ago, swansont said:

Or add a second ball.

I guess there would be a loud horn blast and some trumpets sounding in the Multiball period of play with a man in a chipmonk suit running across the pitch with a flag that says MultiBall on it and the commentator would shout through the PA system...  "MUUULTI-BAAAAALLLL" -  5 extra balls would be fired onto the pitch from some kinda cannon, filled with the balls and glitter, bunting and ticker tape,  to random areas of the field. The cheerleaders would start to do acrobatics and the crowd would go wild.....    

......  stay away from our game of football American! lol