ctbill........Watched the game, and was exited about the result...However...my den is a few steps from my kichen and I managed to make a pot of gravy with meatballs without missing a thing.... Maybe it will grow on me during the rest of the tournament......
Not knowing much about soccer, I thought USA played the last 20 minutes to protect the tie and did very little offensively...Am I wrong.......Also took IONA86 advice and watched the players he mentioned....Rooney reminds me of one of those hot heads we used to lock up every weekend on upper North Ave. ;D ;D ;D
ctbill........Watched the game, and was exited about the result...However...my den is a few steps from my kichen and I managed to make a pot of gravy with meatballs without missing a thing.... Maybe it will grow on me during the rest of the tournament......
Not knowing much about soccer, I thought USA played the last 20 minutes to protect the tie and did very little offensively...Am I wrong.......Also took IONA86 advice and watched the players he mentioned....Rooney reminds me of one of those hot heads we used to lock up every weekend on upper North Ave. ;D ;D ;D
Go Gaels!!!!!
Go Gaels!!!!!
OTer I think you're right about the last ten minutes, at least. A tie v. England is a very good result, given the firepower they have. They are a vg squad. And I think they, more than just about any other international side intimidate us the most, for a variety of reasons, mostly cultural. I'll leave it to GC and 86 who know more about soccer than I do. And those horns are just in Africa, so you don't hear them anywhere else if you watch.
I'll actually go 1 step further and say that pretty much the entire 2nd half the USA was playing conservatively and only pushing forward when they could do so without sacrificing their own end. Last 20 minutes they really hunkered down. Part of the reason for this was how poorly they played on defense in the first half. England was a quicker, more talented team and they were doing what they thought gave them the best chance for a good result. They pushed a couple of times and had some opportunities to score, but England is good and hard to penetrate. A tie against the eighth ranked team in the tournament is not bad. Having said that, if they are to advance far into this tournament the defense will have to get better. Good to see Onyewu running well, though he still seems to be missing something in his jumps. Oh yea, those annoying horns (Vuvuzelas) - kinda big kazoos are unique to South Africa - they were cute for the first game with the host nation playing, but I'm about to shoot myself now. At one point FIFA considered banning them. Now I wish they had.
Headline in today New York Post......."USA wins 1-1"
We always played to win, anything less was unacceptable....This type attitude is a testament to the deterioration of the American determination and pride.....I for one would have rather lost and gone down fighting then the defensive accept a tie position shown later in the game....What is next..satisfaction with keeping the score close.....Maybe they will give you a half a point for that........Sorry...not my style....
Headline in today New York Post......."USA wins 1-1"
We always played to win, anything less was unacceptable....This type attitude is a testament to the deterioration of the American determination and pride.....I for one would have rather lost and gone down fighting then the defensive accept a tie position shown later in the game....What is next..satisfaction with keeping the score close.....Maybe they will give you a half a point for that........Sorry...not my style....
Go Gaels!!!!!!
OTer, in this tournament you have to look at the Big picture. Its not single elimination yet, that's the next stage. We got a point against one of the best teams in the World. That's good for us. Its all strategery. Of course three points would've been better, and we almost had the second goal on Altidore's run in the second half.
Watched some of Slovenia v. Algeria this morning as they are in our group. One Algerian player got his second yellow card on a ridiculous and unnecessary hand ball in front of the Slovenian goal. Algeria forced to play a man short gave up a soft goal late in the match. Slovenia looks like a disciplined side and will be a tough test for us Friday.
Never was much of a soccer fan, but this thread, and you die-hard soccer fans have perked my interest....Decided to give it a try, and make a effort to watch them.....So far I have watched 4 games for a total of about 360 minutes of action....There have been exactly 5 total goals made, with two of the games ending in ties......I have a insistant ringing in my ears that I can't get rid of from the horns from hell....I am going to give it one more try with the 2 pm game between USA and England ...
Sorry guys, I need more action, scoring and a final game winner....I would hope they would find a way to increase scoring as the NHL did, and GET RID OF THE HORNS.....Nill Nill is not my thing.....
Can't wait until Basketball and its 3 point a minute pace as oppossed to soccer's 1 an hour..
JMO. but respect all others....
Go Gaels!!!!!!
Would love to see soccer eliminate off-sides except, for example, inside the box. The goalie can only handle the ball within the goal area.
I think you would see the type of game OT is looking for.
Yesterday's game made my point.
The game was decided by a fluke in the 40th minute - then 50 minutes of peek-a-boo.
Can you imagine if the NFL had a rule where the Receiver can not get behind the corner-back,safety ahead of the ball - back to 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Or, if basketball banned the outlet pass?
One of the great things about a perfect game in baseball is you have to get 27 outs without an error or fluke.
How much better is that game yesterday if the US, while packed in on defense, is always a threat of getting behind the English Defense?
Would love to see soccer eliminate off-sides except, for example, inside the box. The goalie can only handle the ball within the goal area.
I think you would see the type of game OT is looking for.
Yesterday's game made my point.
The game was decided by a fluke in the 40th minute - then 50 minutes of peek-a-boo.
Can you imagine if the NFL had a rule where the Receiver can not get behind the corner-back,safety ahead of the ball - back to 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Or, if basketball banned the outlet pass?
One of the great things about a perfect game in baseball is you have to get 27 outs without an error or fluke.
How much better is that game yesterday if the US, while packed in on defense, is always a threat of getting behind the English Defense?
I am not a big-time soccer aficionado, but I do defend all sport. And the logic above is faulty in that just about ALL sports see a change in style down the stretch in game. How is "peek-a-boo" (and it was NOT for the entire 2nd half, as the Altidore attempt proved) different from other changes in style down the stretch of games? Football teams play a prevent defense and go into a 2-minute offense--completely different style from the other 48 minutes of the game. Basketball teams begin to use the clock more on offense, and foul relentlessly on defense when the game winds down. Hockey teams pull a goalie on offense and go into a shell on defense. Baseball teams sacrifice runners on offense, intentionally walk hitters when trying to preserve a lead.
Soccer is like my 4th or 5th favorite sport, but there is tremendous beauty in it. You spend 90 minutes working your tail off harder than in any other sport, looking for that perfect opportunity to score and win a game. From a mental perspective, I'd think this is far more grueling to be a part of than watching a 110-109 basketball game, or for football, knowing the last team who has the ball will probably win.
Finally, you can't question the true passion soccer invokes from countries around the world--from Ghana fans likely dancing in the streets endlessly after their win today, to the OVER-passion of Colombians murdering Escobar after his 94 blunder vs the US. No fair weather stuff here.
The greatest poster in the history of the MAAC as determined by THREE separate polls.
The game was decided by a fluke in the 40th minute - then 50 minutes of peek-a-boo.
Can you imagine if the NFL had a rule where the Receiver can not get behind the corner-back,safety ahead of the ball - back to 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Or, if basketball banned the outlet pass?
One of the great things about a perfect game in baseball is you have to get 27 outs without an error or fluke.
How much better is that game yesterday if the US, while packed in on defense, is always a threat of getting behind the English Defense?
I am not a big-time soccer aficionado, but I do defend all sport. And the logic above is faulty in that just about ALL sports see a change in style down the stretch in game. How is "peek-a-boo" (and it was NOT for the entire 2nd half, as the Altidore attempt proved) different from other changes in style down the stretch of games? Football teams play a prevent defense and go into a 2-minute offense--completely different style from the other 48 minutes of the game. Basketball teams begin to use the clock more on offense, and foul relentlessly on defense when the game winds down. Hockey teams pull a goalie on offense and go into a shell on defense. Baseball teams sacrifice runners on offense, intentionally walk hitters when trying to preserve a lead.
Soccer is like my 4th or 5th favorite sport, but there is tremendous beauty in it. You spend 90 minutes working your tail off harder than in any other sport, looking for that perfect opportunity to score and win a game. From a mental perspective, I'd think this is far more grueling to be a part of than watching a 110-109 basketball game, or for football, knowing the last team who has the ball will probably win.
Finally, you can't question the true passion soccer invokes from countries around the world--from Ghana fans likely dancing in the streets endlessly after their win today, to the OVER-passion of Colombians murdering Escobar after his 94 blunder vs the US. No fair weather stuff here.
Great points!
Many of the examples you cite above involve a risk-reward scenario.
The off-sides rule as currently configured removes many of the risk reward scenarios; and, as in yesterday's game, stifles athleticism simply by the nature of the rules and not the skill of the opponent.
The offside rules of soccer were responsible for yesterday's tie, not the athletic skill of the US squad.
I agree with you to a degree St. Louis - I think the offsides rule needs to be changed - it allows the defense to essentially cheat up and not have to play. The first thing they should change is counting the Goalkeeper as part of the defense - If a Goalkeeper wants to take a chance and run off his line to go after a ball he should not be rewarded. I hope I wasn't misunderstood. The U.S. was playing conservatively and not taking unnecessary chances, but they were looking for opportunities to score. You watch this tournament long enough and you will see a team or two completely stop playing offense and that really stinks. Won't be the U.S. though. They will go for the wins - just won't be stupid about it.
Hasn't this offsides rule been in existence since the beginning of the sport?
Let's change all offsides rules then. Let's have Alex Ovechkin hang out by the other team's goalie in hockey, and let's let 300-pound defensive linemen take off for the QB whenever they'd like. :-)
The greatest poster in the history of the MAAC as determined by THREE separate polls.
Yes, the offside rule has been in effect for a long time, as has been the "trap". Doesn't mean it's perfect. In Hockey there is a line, once you cross that line it is up to the defense to position itself correctly to stop the puck. In soccer a player can be 10 yards away form the goal with the defense in front of him when the entire defensive line pushes up just before a pass, thus pulling you offside. I realize this has become part of the strategy, but to me it's too easy on the defense. At one time the rule was three defenders in front of you. When they changed it to two goal-scoring immediately went up.
Hasn't this offsides rule been in existence since the beginning of the sport?
Let's change all offsides rules then. Let's have Alex Ovechkin hang out by the other team's goalie in hockey, and let's let 300-pound defensive linemen take off for the QB whenever they'd like. :-)
I take you back to my suggestion above - limit the offside rule to inside the box. That is 18 yards from the goal.
A lot of the problems with lack of scoring is that most coaches prefer to play not to lose - as opposed to playing to win. It is even more evident in the Group Stages. even when they get to the knockout round, some coaches would rather go to penalty kicks then open up their team's play and take the risk of allowing a goal.
As an Italian-American, I love supporting the Azzurri (second to the USA), but I could do without their catenaccio (the defensive system employed by Italy).
While the old NASL received grief over their rules, they had some good ideas to open up scoring. Bring back the 35 yard line for offside and give teams bonus points for goals scored. It makes more sense to do that than to decide games on penalty kicks.
To those who are still giving the World Cup a tryout just wait until the Group Stages are over and we get down to the Round of 16. The games will be better and the soccer will get better
