Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
World Cup thoughts without threads
#101
Posted 19 June 2010 - 12:47 PM
#102
Posted 20 June 2010 - 07:19 PM
ESPN and Univision have games available On Demand. Univision has the Mexico games in HD. If you want to see Raymond Domenech stress out at the highest picture quality possible - here's your chance.
#103
Posted 20 June 2010 - 11:20 PM
#104
Posted 21 June 2010 - 12:15 AM
These guys? Pretty sure that's Iniesta, Fabregas, and Pique.
#105
Posted 21 June 2010 - 05:51 AM
#106
Posted 21 June 2010 - 06:27 AM
No, he's awesome.
The greatest footballer ever debate more or less has two sides: Pele or Maradona. You can tell an awful lot about someone's footballing philosophy based on who they choose.
#107
Posted 21 June 2010 - 09:00 AM
The greatest footballer ever debate more or less has two sides: Pele or Maradona. You can tell an awful lot about someone's footballing philosophy based on who they choose.
I'm originally from B.A. so it's pretty obvious where my loyalties lie, but are you getting at Pele (team player) vs. Maradona (individual genius) or something else?
I've said since before the tournament that Maradona would be a good WC manager because he knows the pressure these players are under and his presence takes some of that pressure off. The fact that he's gotten the lineups and substitutions mostly right (still pissed that Cambiasso and Zanetti aren't in SA) only makes this squad more fearsome.
Unrelated but, does anyone have news about Samuel?
#108
Posted 21 June 2010 - 09:09 AM
Ozzie Guillen's long-lost twin brother. In a good way. I'm rooting for them.
#110
Posted 21 June 2010 - 10:30 AM
"Instead, the finger is beginning to be pointed in the direction of the "Fifa family"."
This happens at the Olympics all the time. Tons of tickets get held back for sponsors who then don't show up. It sucks for fans but this isn't a problem that's exclusive to FIFA.
"The organisers' insistence on the use of credit cards and the internet to purchase tickets has discouraged people in countries where access to these means of payment is relatively less."
This is just mind-blowing to me. I realize it's easy to be critical now but how in the world did FIFA ever think this was a good idea? Total failure to account for fundamental cultural differences.
#111
Posted 21 June 2010 - 12:15 PM
#112
Posted 21 June 2010 - 05:37 PM
Best was like something from another planet for a short time.
#113
Posted 21 June 2010 - 10:14 PM
Passing information, players heat maps, actual formation, player tracking, for every single game. I imagine this is right up SoSH's alley.
#114
Posted 21 June 2010 - 11:43 PM
Passing information, players heat maps, actual formation, player tracking, for every single game. I imagine this is right up SoSH's alley.
This is really cool. Thanks!
#115
Posted 22 June 2010 - 12:30 PM
http://soccernet.esp...o...5901&ver=us
#116
Posted 22 June 2010 - 12:30 PM
#117
Posted 22 June 2010 - 09:06 PM
IT. IS. SUPERB. WATCH IT.
#118
Posted 22 June 2010 - 10:19 PM
Like Nick says, don't miss it.
#119
Posted 23 June 2010 - 06:48 AM
I've said since before the tournament that Maradona would be a good WC manager because he knows the pressure these players are under and his presence takes some of that pressure off. The fact that he's gotten the lineups and substitutions mostly right (still pissed that Cambiasso and Zanetti aren't in SA) only makes this squad more fearsome.
Unrelated but, does anyone have news about Samuel?
Pele is a team player. He's also got a lot of the qualities a lot of people want in a hero - he seems personable and happy all the time, he works as an ambassador. He's also totally corporate.
Maradona is an individual genius, and he's also totally mercurial, unreliable and a little unsavory. The cocaine, the hanging out with Camorristi, the pretty sordid post-football life until he got clean and lost weight. But he's also got a lot more of a rounded public personality than Pele ever had, he's dipped his toe in management and he's reached heights Pele never quite reached. Maradona dragged Napoli to titles in Serie A, and he captained Argentina to a World Cup where he was the dominant figure. Pele never did those.
It's a fascinating debate because a lot of people who pick Maradona tend to trend towards alternative views and ideas about football. I prefer Maradona, but I totally admit I prefer him because of matters really relating to his off the pitch manner and attitude rather than anything particularly relevant onfield, with the exception of Maradona's role in the 1986 World Cup.
It's genius defined in two different ways. In 1970, Pele received a ball which had been played by Clodoaldo, Gerson, and Jairzinho. He then stops and stands totally still thinking what he will do before laying it off casually to Carlos Alberto. In 1986, Maradona beat five men by himself. It's like how you take coffee.
Edited by Spacemans Bong, 23 June 2010 - 06:55 AM.
#120
Posted 23 June 2010 - 08:06 AM
Great fucking pub. This is where a bunch of us met Fletcherpost, watched soccer, and got drunk as skunks when he came stateside.
#121
Posted 23 June 2010 - 08:59 AM
IT. IS. SUPERB. WATCH IT.
I have it recorded. I can't wait to watch it.
#122
Posted 23 June 2010 - 09:40 AM
#123
Posted 23 June 2010 - 06:39 PM
I've got a Che t-shirt, he has a Che tattoo! We're like soulmates!
#124
Posted 23 June 2010 - 07:05 PM
#125
Posted 23 June 2010 - 08:20 PM
This year's World Cup is working out like WW2 - France has forfeited, the USA turned up late, and England is left to fight the Germans!
#126
Posted 23 June 2010 - 11:49 PM

I'm not sure what it is about this that I love so much, but this is so fucking great.
#127
Posted 23 June 2010 - 11:51 PM
There's probably 2,000 more people sitting around that guy with their midddle fingers up. What am I missing?
#128
Posted 24 June 2010 - 12:20 AM
There's probably 2,000 more people sitting around that guy with their midddle fingers up. What am I missing?
I think it's a combination of the fact that they aired it on television and the shit-eating grin on the guy's face despite the fact that his team had basically been eliminated from the tournament by then. It warms my heart.
Edited by filthywater49, 24 June 2010 - 12:24 AM.
#129
Posted 24 June 2010 - 12:38 AM
#130
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:02 AM
There's probably 2,000 more people sitting around that guy with their midddle fingers up. What am I missing?
I'm giving you the double middle right now.
#131
Posted 24 June 2010 - 04:41 AM
that rocked.
#132
Posted 24 June 2010 - 09:32 AM
#133
Posted 24 June 2010 - 11:41 AM
#134
Posted 24 June 2010 - 11:54 AM
Thanks for that.
#135
Posted 24 June 2010 - 12:19 PM
#136
Posted 24 June 2010 - 12:27 PM
Fucking awesome.
In comparison, John Harkes is the flea this man picks off his dog.
#137
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:13 PM
In comparison, John Harkes is the flea this man picks off his dog.
This is an absolutely sincere question. For those of you who love soccer (and I confess that I am not a huge Soccer fan, but I am loving the world cup), how do you reconcile the great skill, strength, physicality and artistry of these admittedly great players, with the pathetic, "diva-ish" attitudes they all seem to have, and as importantly, the outright fraudulent approach to "injuries" during play? The fact that it is apparently part of the game to try to deceive the officials (some of whom are as bad as NBA officials) into making game-changing calls sullies an otherwise excellent sport for me If I see another player down from sniper fire, only to rise 30 seconds later and boom an 80MPH kick, it will be the 100th time this tournament.
I know that a player can receive a yellow card for faking an injury, but that is a tough call for an official unless he sees exactly what happened. What about a rule that sends off a player for some period of time, putting his team a man down (1, 2 or 3 minutes might make sense), if he stays on the field for more than 20 seconds, or if he is required to be taken off by stretcher?
#138
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:32 PM
I take it that you object when a catcher tries to trick the ump into calling a ball a strike by framing it with his glove, or when an outfielder makes a dubious on the hop catch and holds up his glove as though to indicate it was clean?
#139
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:45 PM
As stated above, something like this happens in a lot of other sports. But most of us (at least in the United States) don't try to reconcile it. We hate it and believe the game would be better off without it.
#140
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:53 PM
Completely uncompelling and non-persuasive. Clearly you don't appreciate matters of degree. The closer, apt analogy IMO is when a defender flops on an offensive foul call in basketball. Even then, the official is typically within 5 feet, not 30 yards, of the play, and the offensive player is never at risk of being thrown out of the game or sent off for the following game. The person who took the charge is also not writhing in agony and rolling around the court as if somone just hit him in the head with a meat cleaver.
Edit: spelling
Edited by Bleedred, 24 June 2010 - 01:55 PM.
#141
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:54 PM
Well said.
#142
Posted 24 June 2010 - 01:56 PM
#143
Posted 24 June 2010 - 02:06 PM
Edit: spelling
How about in the just completed NBA finals when Rondo pushes Artest, who reacts like he had been hit by a truck? Rondo gets a technical foul (yellow card) and everyone laughs about it in the press conference later. It's annoying to see and frustrating to deal with, but the culture of North American sports is ingrained in us and these annoyances don't get blow up like they do here, with a sport many of us watch occasionally and don't fully understand the appeal of.
As a super casual fan here, and a fairly lazy person in general, I'd also guess that this embellishment is a tactic to get a few seconds breather since there are no timeouts to stop the action otherwise. Yeah side outs, corner and goal kicks, along with goals will halt things for a minute or two, but lying on the turf for 45 seconds gets your guys a breather why not do it?
#144
Posted 24 June 2010 - 02:33 PM
I know that a player can receive a yellow card for faking an injury, but that is a tough call for an official unless he sees exactly what happened. What about a rule that sends off a player for some period of time, putting his team a man down (1, 2 or 3 minutes might make sense), if he stays on the field for more than 20 seconds, or if he is required to be taken off by stretcher?
As a diehard fan, I'm all for this, with the exception that if a sub is made for a "fallen" player, no time playing a man down is required. I'd also do away with the injury-etiquette bullshit. If you're hurt, stay down and have the ref whistle the play dead. It's noble to have this gentlemanly aspect to the game, but the game is big business now and there are few gentlemen if any, playing it professionally at this point.
#145
Posted 24 June 2010 - 02:47 PM
A much better analogy. Two differences (and maybe it's just magnified because I'm watching Soccer for the first time): 1. More often than not, the Soccer foul doesn't rise to anything close to the reaction made by the player. There has to have been 20 times so far that I've seen in this world cup where a player looks like he has been stabbed with a knife, only for the replay to show he is so full of shit. The Artest/Rondo thing is somewhat of an aberration, and the technical unusual. 2. In the Artest/Rondo example, I would argue that the ref simply made a bonehead decision about a situation that unfolded right in front of him, which may or may not have been affected by Artest's fakery. In Soccer, the officials are often making reactive calls because distance between them and the purported foul forces them to somehow rely on the "victimized" players reaction. Still, you make a good point.
#146
Posted 24 June 2010 - 03:36 PM
Have you played any competitive soccer? I ask honestly, because I have not, but can see how if I were running at full speed and got tripped, tangled, or tackled it would hurt like a mofo. Hell, in the NFL if a receiver/db get tangled up like that it's a penalty 9 times out of 10. You make a fair point about distance and reaction, but if, like you said, refs in the NBA can't figure out what is/isn't a foul from a few feet what chances does a ref have from 25 yards? Faking seems a natural outcome to try and gain tactical advantage, not one I approve of nor want to see but that goes for the four corners offense, prevent defense, neutral zone trap, and many other strategies that add nothing to the beauty of the game itself.
FWIW, I love the idea of any player who is on the ground for more than a few seconds has to clear to the sideline before rejoining play. Probably a million reasons it doesn't work but to my noob eye it would get guys up a heck of a lot faster.
#147
Posted 24 June 2010 - 03:58 PM
Set to the tune of Rudy.
#148
Posted 24 June 2010 - 04:52 PM
#149
Posted 24 June 2010 - 05:08 PM
Do a lot of people film themselves watching television alone?
#150
Posted 24 June 2010 - 05:33 PM
But sometimes it does, or even exceeds it.
Both Dempsey and Demerit received stitches *during* the Algeria game. I don't recall that either player received a free kick, although Demerit may have. Dempsey, remember, was elbowed in the face in the box, a play that could easily have led to a sendoff and a penalty.
Demerit barely seemed to flinch, and I didn't realize he was hurt until ESPN showed him with blood all over his jersey.
ETA: the point, which is that sometimes it's hard to detect even very rough play. The ref totally missed the Dempsey play, which may have been totally accidental.
Edited by nvalvo, 24 June 2010 - 05:36 PM.












