Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

World Cup thoughts without threads


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
208 replies to this topic

#151 nvalvo


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,952 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 05:35 PM

QUOTE (Warning Track Speed @ Jun 24 2010, 03:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
That is pretty good.

Do a lot of people film themselves watching television alone?


I heard Ira Glass interview a couple of writers for America's Funniest Home Videos on the This American Life about home movies </public radio nerdery> and those guys said that they see a ton of that. Fascinating, huh?

#152 Homa04

  • 5 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 05:56 PM

Most referees will only call a foul if one player goes down. So now everybody goes down if he thinks he got fouled to make sure that he gets the call no matter how hard the foul really was.

You also have to look in what situation the foul was committed. Often times it is just a way to let the time run out especially in the last 10-15mins.

FIFA also lowered the standards for a foul in the last 20 years to protect the players. If you look at matches from the 80s or earlier the fouls there are brutal. Tacklings which get you sent of today in a second may not even be called a foul in those days.

Though I hardly played the game in a competitive way it does hurt if you get knocked down at full speed. Not much contact is required to do that. The players don't only have to run but also have to control the ball with their feet at the same time. It just makes it harder if you get hit in such a moment. You also have to keep in mind that there are often just a few players on a team who bare the brunt of the fouls. Getting hit on the leg again and again in a 90 min game just takes its toll.

#153 dwightinright

  • PipPip
  • 1,292 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 06:13 PM

QUOTE (Jamoked @ Jun 24 2010, 04:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Fan's Reaction to Landon Donovan's Game Winning Goal
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jbn3rOPmR9w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jbn3rOPmR9w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
Set to the tune of Rudy.



The one in Davis, Ca, about 2:10 in is the best.

#154 jimc

  • 514 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 06:23 PM

Here's a very interesting article about "furbizia":

QUOTE
The word ‘furbizia’ itself means guile, cunning or astuteness. It refers to a method which is often (and admittedly) rather sly, a not particularly by-the-book approach to the performative, tactical and psychological part of the game. Core to furbizia is that it is executed by means of stratagems which are available to all players on the pitch, not only to one team. What are these stratagems? Here are a few: tactical fouls, taking free kicks before the goalkeeper has finished positioning himself, time-wasting, physical or verbal provocation and all related psychological games, arguably even diving.

...

Anyone can provoke an adversary, but it takes real guile (real furbizia) to find the weakest links in the other team’s psychology, then wear them out and bite them until something or someone gives in - all without ever breaking a single rule in the book of football. Foreign spectators normally witness this peripheral offensive with a sense of outrage.


The point of the article is to argue that there is a difference between cheating and, well, psychological warfare. But it also shows that the fact that diving is infuriating is at least sometimes its very point. There's a crucial difference to me between exaggerating to demonstrate that a foul has been committed and flopping when there was none. I sympathize with the referees: it requires bravery to call a foul when the player struggles to remain on his feet rather than "taking" the foul and going to ground.

#155 DukeSox


  • Rick Derris


  • 8,424 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 07:18 PM

fml...i thought i had read everything in this thread at work...

Edited by DukeSox, 24 June 2010 - 07:28 PM.


#156 Dummy Hoy


  • Angry Pissbum


  • 2,980 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 07:24 PM

QUOTE (DukeSox @ Jun 24 2010, 08:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Outstanding video!

Lincoln NE is the best, just for the kid who picks up his barstool, then when he puts it doen he grabs a beer and flings it in the air.



#157 filthywater49

  • 1,532 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 07:26 PM

Sometimes when I find something awesome or think of something really insightful, clever, or original to post, I get so excited that I rush into posting it without checking if it was already posted.

#158 Maalox


  • full of shit, and proud of it


  • 49,118 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 08:15 PM

QUOTE (jimc @ Jun 24 2010, 07:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The point of the article is to argue that there is a difference between cheating and, well, psychological warfare. But it also shows that the fact that diving is infuriating is at least sometimes its very point. There's a crucial difference to me between exaggerating to demonstrate that a foul has been committed and flopping when there was none. I sympathize with the referees: it requires bravery to call a foul when the player struggles to remain on his feet rather than "taking" the foul and going to ground.

Reading that, it strikes me that furbizia is one of those words like duende that really doesn't mean anything, but gets used all the time with a wink and a nod by people who act knowing but don't know shit like Peter Gammons. The word we are really looking for is il floppo.

All of this furbizia stuff seemed to do little other than distract the Italians from, you know, playing soccer. Maybe next time less furbizia and more notsuckia.

Europeans will philosophize about a parrot turd in a bowl of cereal if someone is around to listen.

#159 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 44,139 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 08:41 PM

This is awesome:



#160 Warning Track Speed

  • 488 posts

Posted 24 June 2010 - 10:26 PM

Sweet to see the "reverse angle" view of it. And again, what a throw by Howard to start the break.

#161 Norm Siebern

  • 2,838 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 06:24 AM

I don't know if this has already been posted somewhere, but this is an interesting article on the use of statistical analysis in soccer:

Alex Bream on "soccermetrics"

#162 Chemistry Schmemistry


  • has been programmed to get funky/cry human tears


  • 7,785 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 04:58 PM

Some numbers from the first round:

Europe: 15-14-10 (W-L-D), 6 teams out of 13 in knockout round.
South America: 10-1-4, 5 teams out of 5.
North/Central America: 2-3-4, 2 teams out of 3.
Asia/Oceania: 4-6-5, 2 teams out of 5.
Africa: 3-10-5, 1 team out of 6.

Points Earned:

9 - 2 teams, 2 in knockout round.
7 - 2 teams, 2 in knockout round.
6 - 4 teams, 4 in knockout round.
5 - 4 teams, 4 in knockout round.
4 - 9 teams, 4 in knockout round.
3 - 4 teams.
2 - 1 team.
1 - 4 teams.
0 - 2 teams.

Rankings:

I looked at the FIFA rankings versus the most-quoted ELO rankings.

Based on pure group standings, the ELO rankings were slightly superior (solely due to group B's performance by South Korea).

Based on individual match results, there were four decisions where FIFA rankings indicated one team was favored, and ELO the other. The higher ELO squad won three of those four.

Most surprising knockout participants: Ghana, Japan, Slovakia, South Korea.

Most surprising eliminations: France, Italy.

Most ridiculous road to elimination: Serbia (beat Germany, lost to Australia and Ghana).


Round of 16:

Uruguay (16 FIFA, 14 ELO) vs. South Korea (47, 23)
United States (14, 22) vs. Ghana (32, 41)

Brazil (1, 1) vs. Chile (18, 10)
Netherlands (4, 3) vs. Slovakia (34, 49)


Argentina (7, 7) vs. Mexico (17, 8)
Germany (6, 5) vs. England (8, 4)

Paraguay (31, 24) vs. Japan (45, 43)
Spain (2, 2) vs. Portugal (3, 11)


Interesting that we'll have four South American teams favored to be in the final 8, and three European teams guaranteed a spot. USA will be favored to beat Ghana, though that's the last African squad.


Goals:

101 total goals scored (1.05 per team per match).

7 - Argentina, Portugal (all in one match, 6 in one half).
5 - Brazil, Germany, Netherlands, South Korea.
4 - Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Slovakia, Spain, United States, Uruguay.
...
0 - Algeria, Honduras.

Conceded:

12 - North Korea.
6 - Australia, Denmark, South Korea.
5 - Cameroon, Greece, Italy, Nigeria, Slovakia, South Africa.
4 - France.
...
1 - Argentina, England, Germany, Netherlands, Paraguay, Switzerland.
0 - Portugal, Uruguay.





#163 fletcherpost


  • sosh's feckin' poet laureate


  • 6,578 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 09:21 PM

QUOTE (Maalox @ Jun 25 2010, 02:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Europeans will philosophize about a parrot turd in a bowl of cereal if someone is around to listen.


As gross generalisations go...that wasn't bad at all. However I am in Europe, yes Glasgow is still Europe and there isn't enough philosophising about anything. There's talk, yes, chit chat yes...but honest to goodness philosophizing. No. People just talk shite about shit they know fuck all about here, there and everywhere. You do it, we do it, they do it. Sundry ruminations followed by hollow utterances masquerading as widsom or at worst informed discourse are not the province of the moribund souls of any particular contintent.



#164 nickandemmasuncle

  • 149 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 11:16 PM

QUOTE (Bleedred @ Jun 24 2010, 02:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
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.


While I don't claim to have an iron-clad explanation, I think that there are some factors that clearly contribute. One is that a lot of these players come from abject poverty, at least as bad as you'd find in sterotypically rough areas in the United States. I'd guess that this causes many of them to develop an attitude wherein they'll do whatever they need to do (including trying to trick refs into making calls in their favor) to help their teams win games, because when they were rising through the ranks, if they didn't show enough value to their teams, it was back to a pretty miserable life for them and their families.

Another factor is that a lot of these players come from places where authority is blatantly corrupt and tries to screw everyone over unmerciful. (OK, actually, this is everywhere, but some places haven't realized it yet.) In any case, this causes many players to view referees (like other authority figures) as adversaries who need to be bested, rather than benevolent protectors with whom to cooperate.

Of course this isn't the full story--Im' sure there's not a strict correlation between poverty and acceptance of referee deception, and obviously, if you want to look at American sports, plenty of guys (not to put too fine a point on it, poor minority guys, and poor white guys, for that matter) come from difficult circumstances and have been screwed over repeatedly by authority figures, and yet they generally look down on trying to trick the refs in "unmanly" ways. So it's a complicated issue.

But still, I think that poverty and suspicion of authority are significant factors.

QUOTE (Bleedred @ Jun 24 2010, 02:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
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?


It's been suggested before. Still, I think this probably incentivizes violent play a bit too much.

#165 filthywater49

  • 1,532 posts

Posted 26 June 2010 - 12:34 AM

QUOTE (nickandemmasuncle @ Jun 25 2010, 11:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
While I don't claim to have an iron-clad explanation, I think that there are some factors that clearly contribute. One is that a lot of these players come from abject poverty, at least as bad as you'd find in sterotypically rough areas in the United States. I'd guess that this causes many of them to develop an attitude wherein they'll do whatever they need to do (including trying to trick refs into making calls in their favor) to help their teams win games, because when they were rising through the ranks, if they didn't show enough value to their teams, it was back to a pretty miserable life for them and their families.

Another factor is that a lot of these players come from places where authority is blatantly corrupt and tries to screw everyone over unmerciful. (OK, actually, this is everywhere, but some places haven't realized it yet.) In any case, this causes many players to view referees (like other authority figures) as adversaries who need to be bested, rather than benevolent protectors with whom to cooperate.

Of course this isn't the full story--Im' sure there's not a strict correlation between poverty and acceptance of referee deception, and obviously, if you want to look at American sports, plenty of guys (not to put too fine a point on it, poor minority guys, and poor white guys, for that matter) come from difficult circumstances and have been screwed over repeatedly by authority figures, and yet they generally look down on trying to trick the refs in "unmanly" ways. So it's a complicated issue.

But still, I think that poverty and suspicion of authority are significant factors.


Not to get all sociological on you, but it always gets really sticky and imprecise when making general statements or hypotheses about how individuals from different societies respond to a certain condition of life. It sometimes necessitates the assumption that regardless of culture or socialization, a large group of people will have the same or very similar psychosocial responses to a given stimuli, which is a really big and risky assumption. Your theory is interesting and there may be something to it, but we should be careful not to assume that the conception of what type of behavior is acceptable to achieve a certain objective doesn't differ between a poor person the United States compared to someone from China compared to someone from Poland etc. Every society has its own norms, mores, customs, and beliefs. These all profoundly effect what an individual will be willing to do to accomplish any objective.

Then again, I just brought this up to my girlfriend and she pointed out that poor people from two different cultures might oftentimes have more in common with each other than they would with middle-class individuals from their own respective societies, then she found an article from The Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology which argues that there exists a "pan-cultural values hierarchy" wherein basically all cultures are 83% similar in the values they hold, so I don't fucking know. I'm drunk.

Edited by filthywater49, 26 June 2010 - 12:42 AM.


#166 MentalDisabldLst


  • Prefers spit over lube


  • 13,727 posts

Posted 28 June 2010 - 11:07 AM



#167 MentalDisabldLst


  • Prefers spit over lube


  • 13,727 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 04:15 AM

Group Winners are thus far 5-1 in the round of 16. The lone group winner not to advance? USA.

edit: make that 7-1. Only the US won their group and failed to beat their group-runner-up opponent in the Round of 16.

Edited by MentalDisabldLst, 29 June 2010 - 03:46 PM.


#168 SoxFanInCali


  • has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of a scouse


  • 6,417 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 03:31 PM

QUOTE (Jamoked @ May 25 2010, 03:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This commercial is great, and apparently Nike is still holding out hope for Ronaldinho.


The curse of Nike?

Drogba - Out in the group stages
Cannavaro - LOL@Italy
Rooney - Scoreless, out in the round of 16
Ribery - LOL@France
Ronaldinho - Not even on the Brazil squad
Ronaldo - 1 goal against the worst team in the tournament, out in the round of 16

Edited by SoxFanInCali, 29 June 2010 - 03:34 PM.


#169 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,162 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 03:54 PM

Well..Pique and Iniesta are still around.

Cesc is a deity.

Landycakes and Howard broke how they should.

#170 Hendu's Gait


  • 3/5's member


  • PipPipPip
  • 7,918 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 04:23 PM

What was the reason that England and France were given the #1 seeds over Portugal (#3 FIFA ranking)? Seems that Portugal got porked, going into Brazil's (#1) group, and then paired with the #2 team in the Octo-finals.

I may be answering my own question here, but last time they were outside of top 6 was in October.

Personally, it would be more fair to have them in the US or South Africa/France groups.

Did FIFA want to give RSA and USA favorable draws for $ reasons? (Although on careful thought the RSA group doesn't have an easy team besides RSA themselves)

Edited by Hendu's Gait, 29 June 2010 - 04:27 PM.


#171 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,362 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 04:38 PM

France didn't get a #1 seed, RSA was the seeded team in their group.

Nice conspiracy-stoking. I will grant that the pairings for the Euro-playoffs were skewed to powers.


#172 BelgianSoxFan

  • 488 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 04:47 PM

QUOTE (Hendu's Gait @ Jun 29 2010, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What was the reason that England and France were given the #1 seeds over Portugal (#3 FIFA ranking)? Seems that Portugal got porked, going into Brazil's (#1) group, and then paired with the #2 team in the Octo-finals.

I may be answering my own question here, but last time they were outside of top 6 was in October.

Personally, it would be more fair to have them in the US or South Africa/France groups.

Did FIFA want to give RSA and USA favorable draws for $ reasons? (Although on careful thought the RSA group doesn't have an easy team besides RSA themselves)


The host and the top 7 in the FIFA rankings on October 2009 were in one pot, the other 3 pots were based on geography (Asia/North America,Europe and South America/Africa). It seems like a pretty fair way to do things.

#173 Zososoxfan

  • 1,524 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 04:59 PM

QUOTE (MentalDisabldLst @ Jun 28 2010, 12:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


This. Quality work.

#174 fawstahcu

  • 121 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 06:20 PM

Need a reason to root for Paraguay?

#175 filthywater49

  • 1,532 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 06:27 PM



#176 TheYellowDart5


  • Hustle and bustle


  • 8,601 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 06:54 PM

QUOTE (SoxFanInCali @ Jun 29 2010, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The curse of Nike?

Drogba - Out in the group stages
Cannavaro - LOL@Italy
Rooney - Scoreless, out in the round of 16
Ribery - LOL@France
Ronaldinho - Not even on the Brazil squad
Ronaldo - 1 goal against the worst team in the tournament, out in the round of 16

They replaced Ronaldinho with Robinho in the latest version of the ad (or at least, produced a separate Brazil one that they now show), so at least one headliner is still alive.

Nonetheless, can't imagine this is what Nike thought the future would be when they drew this ad up. Kind of ironic.

#177 ifmanis5


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,017 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 07:08 PM

Not just Nike players, almost all of the big names have either done nothing or are home at this point- Ribery, Henry, Buffon, Torres, Rooney, Ronaldo all came up small. Only Torres is still alive and that's only because his team is so good.

Germany v. Argentina and Brazil v. Netherlands feels like the real semi-finals to me.

#178 Hendu's Gait


  • 3/5's member


  • PipPipPip
  • 7,918 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 08:16 PM

QUOTE (BelgianSoxFan @ Jun 29 2010, 05:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The host and the top 7 in the FIFA rankings on October 2009 were in one pot, the other 3 pots were based on geography (Asia/North America,Europe and South America/Africa). It seems like a pretty fair way to do things.


Thanks to you and II.

Is ticket sales (needing to know the groups ahead of time) the reason that October was used, and not a month closer to the actual games?

#179 Hendu's Gait


  • 3/5's member


  • PipPipPip
  • 7,918 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 08:19 PM

QUOTE (fawstahcu @ Jun 29 2010, 07:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Need a reason to root for Paraguay?


Nice Iphone bumper(s).

#180 bosox4283

  • 2,571 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 09:32 PM

QUOTE (Hendu's Gait @ Jun 29 2010, 09:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Nice Iphone bumper(s).


**Both sets sort of NSFW.

More pics of her here:

http://www.marca.com...elme/index.html

More:

http://www.marca.com...dial/index.html


Edited by bosox4283, 29 June 2010 - 09:34 PM.


#181 jon abbey


  • Shanghai Warrior


  • 17,401 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 09:51 PM

So presumably South America will get to send more teams in 2014? How pissed must the 6th place team in SA (Ecuador) be right now? SA didn't even get five full spots this time, their 5th place finisher (Uruguay) had to survive a playoff with Costa Rica to qualify.

#182 idontlikecricketiloveit

  • 127 posts

Posted 29 June 2010 - 10:29 PM

QUOTE (jon abbey @ Jun 29 2010, 10:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So presumably South America will get to send more teams in 2014? How pissed must the 6th place team in SA (Ecuador) be right now? SA didn't even get five full spots this time, their 5th place finisher (Uruguay) had to survive a playoff with Costa Rica to qualify.
CONMEBOL has had the half spot for a while. In the 24 team format they got 3.5 spots and currently they get 4.5. The 4th/5th placed team used to play the Oceania winner (almost always Australia) but they changed it this time to the 4th placed CONCACAF team, as Australia now plays in Asia.


#183 ifmanis5


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,017 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 06:32 AM

2 days without footy sad.gif

#184 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,362 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 08:00 AM

QUOTE (jon abbey @ Jun 29 2010, 10:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So presumably South America will get to send more teams in 2014? How pissed must the 6th place team in SA (Ecuador) be right now? SA didn't even get five full spots this time, their 5th place finisher (Uruguay) had to survive a playoff with Costa Rica to qualify.
I' think they already would get an extra spot. Brazil gets an auto-bid has host nation, which leaves 9 countries playing for 4.5 spots.

Africa got an extra spot by having the host nation, but Africa also has something like 55 members. Would South America get an extra bid even though it only has 10 members?

Edited by Infield Infidel, 30 June 2010 - 08:08 AM.


#185 Zomp


  • Turkey Virgin


  • 8,257 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 08:26 AM

Its amazing how good of a player Robinho is when he is actually trying on a team and not worried about where he'll play next.

If you can get him in the right situation (though after stints at Madrid and City, I'm not sure where that is) he could be one of the buys of the summer.

With City signing Silva and setting their sites on more strikers, I can't imagine him staying.

#186 Vinho Tinto

  • 3,707 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 08:49 AM

QUOTE (ZompFoShomp @ Jun 30 2010, 09:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Its amazing how good of a player Robinho is when he is actually trying on a team and not worried about where he'll play next.

If you can get him in the right situation (though after stints at Madrid and City, I'm not sure where that is) he could be one of the buys of the summer.

With City signing Silva and setting their sites on more strikers, I can't imagine him staying.


Andy Gray made the best observation about Robinho: He's a guy who has to be on the right team tacticaly and socially. He's never going to respond well playing for a club or fanbase that spends a majority of his stay pointing out his flaws, especually when he feels like he is playing well. It's not that he needs to be above criticisim, but he does need to feel the love.

I'm not sure what club in Europe would be the right fit. Assuming he's still getting paid that bloated salary, his options will remain limited. He's a primadonna, but I'd still love to see him play on the wide left for my team.

#187 trekfan55


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,587 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 09:53 AM

QUOTE (idontlikecricketiloveit @ Jun 29 2010, 10:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
CONMEBOL has had the half spot for a while. In the 24 team format they got 3.5 spots and currently they get 4.5. The 4th/5th placed team used to play the Oceania winner (almost always Australia) but they changed it this time to the 4th placed CONCACAF team, as Australia now plays in Asia.


What I do not like out of this arrangement is that it screws the American Continent out of a spot.

While it looks disproprtional, giving CONMEBOL more than 5 possible spots would esentially render the whole playoffs meaningless. However, if Asia, Oceania, CONCACAF, and CONMEBOL have playoffs, I would rather see it be CONCACAF vs. Oceania and CONMEBOL vs. Asia.



#188 idontlikecricketiloveit

  • 127 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 10:57 PM

QUOTE (Infield Infidel @ Jun 30 2010, 09:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I' think they already would get an extra spot. Brazil gets an auto-bid has host nation, which leaves 9 countries playing for 4.5 spots.

Africa got an extra spot by having the host nation, but Africa also has something like 55 members. Would South America get an extra bid even though it only has 10 members?
Oh that's right. Brazil being the host will get an automatic spot. But are you sure about the remaining 4.5 spots? There is a precedent. In France '98 Brazil auto-qualified as winners, and the top 4 teams went through (so that made it 5 teams from CONMEBOL) and there was no playoff.


#189 God's Cop


  • Your friendly neighborhood CuntyBollocks


  • 690 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 11:37 PM

QUOTE (ifmanis5 @ Jun 30 2010, 07:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
2 days without footy sad.gif


And none on Sunday. WTF?

#190 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,362 posts

Posted 03 July 2010 - 11:08 AM

I might barely understand the reporting on Univision, but i sure do prefer watching the reporting on Univision

#191 Nick Kaufman


  • protector of human kind from spoilers


  • 8,371 posts

Posted 03 July 2010 - 04:13 PM

The documentary on the final goal scorers playing now on ABC looks very good.

#192 SoxFanInCali


  • has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of a scouse


  • 6,417 posts

Posted 03 July 2010 - 05:30 PM

QUOTE (TheYellowDart5 @ Jun 29 2010, 04:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
They replaced Ronaldinho with Robinho in the latest version of the ad (or at least, produced a separate Brazil one that they now show), so at least one headliner is still alive.

Nonetheless, can't imagine this is what Nike thought the future would be when they drew this ad up. Kind of ironic.

And as soon as they change the ad, Brazil goes out. It's Dan vs. Dave all over again.

#193 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,362 posts

Posted 03 July 2010 - 06:50 PM

Only Uruguay stands in the way of a European side winning the Cup on non-European soil for the first time

#194 MentalDisabldLst


  • Prefers spit over lube


  • 13,727 posts

Posted 04 July 2010 - 06:04 AM

Absent Suarez's debateably heroic actions, South America might have brought 4 teams to the quarters and gone 0-4.

#195 DLew On Roids


  • guilty of being sex


  • 12,192 posts

Posted 04 July 2010 - 10:11 PM

After digging a bit into FIFA's culture of corruption, I'm convinced that the reason FIFA hasn't embraced video replay is because no one in Sepp Blatter's family has an equity stake in a company that would benefit from it.

#196 DLew On Roids


  • guilty of being sex


  • 12,192 posts

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:03 AM

This site has a graphic showing the countries where each team's players, um, play club football: http://flowingdata.c...ld-cup-players/

There's also a comparison to 1994 which is pretty striking.

#197 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,362 posts

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:16 AM

QUOTE (DLew On Roids @ Jul 6 2010, 09:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This site has a graphic showing the countries where each team's players, um, play club football: http://flowingdata.c...ld-cup-players/

There's also a comparison to 1994 which is pretty striking.
Thanks!

Roll over to link on the site - http://www.estadao.c..._jogadores.shtm

and it has a multi-media graphic where you can check each country individually, and all the Cups since 1994.

Of the ~750 players in this WC

117 play in England
84 in German
80 in Italy
59 in Spain
47 in France
33 in Holland

For the US (in country/overseas)
1994 15/7
1998 16/6
2002 11/12
2006 11/12
2010 4/19

edit- there's at least one mistake, Beckham wasn't on the Galaxy in 2002

Edited by Infield Infidel, 06 July 2010 - 08:33 AM.


#198 Fiskian Pole Shot

  • 386 posts

Posted 06 July 2010 - 06:36 PM

Larissa's going to do it anyway.

http://www.huffingto...o_n_637063.html

Such a sweet girl, bless her. She loves her country so much.

#199 ypioca

  • 4,289 posts

Posted 08 July 2010 - 08:00 PM



#200 Fiskian Pole Shot

  • 386 posts

Posted 09 July 2010 - 02:57 PM

Michel Platini had a heart attack, brought to a hospital in Johannesburg.

http://www.mirrorfoo...icle521713.html