otello
Footballguy
plus so many subs.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
***Official 2014 World Cup Thread*** (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NewlyRetired
- Start date
Native
Footballguy
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I'm not sure why this narative is developing that soccer is the only sport where people complain. Try opening up an NFL game thread without multiple posts complaining about the referee. Or find a game thread for a nationally televised NFL game where a QB drew a 15 yard flag for lightly being tapped on the side of the head and see how many pages come forth from that rule. Or open up the march madness thread and count the number of times people complain about the reviews at the end of games taking way too long and giving teams free timeouts.
The major difference is that I've never see anyone in the aforementioned threads respond with "well just quit watching the sport then" as seems to be a repeated response here. The problem is that the soccer defense force (SDF) sees any slight against flopping as an attack on soccer and rushes to its defense with excuses ("technically that was more an embellishment than flop", etc) even as they say that they hate flopping in other posts. It reminds me of Alexi Lalas who will happily talk about how much he dislikes flopping but when Brazil wins the opening game on a horrific flop all he'll say about it is that it's a really smart soccer play.
People are going to complain about flops in soccer like they'll complain about weak roughing the passer calls in football. If the SDF would just let it go then a few people would complain about it real quick and everyone would move on. Instead it's "OMG THEY'RE CRITICIZING SOCCER I MUST ARGUE WITH THEM!!" and it turns into a 3 page fiasco instead.
I've really enjoyed the world cup and am planning on attending some local MLS games to try it out. I don't know why that precludes me from complaining about flopping in the same way that I, along with just about anyone else watching when it comes up, will complain about the ridiculous catch rules in the NFL.
The major difference is that I've never see anyone in the aforementioned threads respond with "well just quit watching the sport then" as seems to be a repeated response here. The problem is that the soccer defense force (SDF) sees any slight against flopping as an attack on soccer and rushes to its defense with excuses ("technically that was more an embellishment than flop", etc) even as they say that they hate flopping in other posts. It reminds me of Alexi Lalas who will happily talk about how much he dislikes flopping but when Brazil wins the opening game on a horrific flop all he'll say about it is that it's a really smart soccer play.
People are going to complain about flops in soccer like they'll complain about weak roughing the passer calls in football. If the SDF would just let it go then a few people would complain about it real quick and everyone would move on. Instead it's "OMG THEY'RE CRITICIZING SOCCER I MUST ARGUE WITH THEM!!" and it turns into a 3 page fiasco instead.
I've really enjoyed the world cup and am planning on attending some local MLS games to try it out. I don't know why that precludes me from complaining about flopping in the same way that I, along with just about anyone else watching when it comes up, will complain about the ridiculous catch rules in the NFL.
otello
Footballguy
Shall we keep this thread going for the next World Cup, which starts next month:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_FIBA_Basketball_World_Cup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_FIBA_Basketball_World_Cup
Mario Kart
Footballguy
You did kind of miss the point. The point I tried to make was that soccer is seen, by the masses, of being a soft sport. A sport with little to zero glory in it or that comes from playing it.
I am speaking as a teacher that talks with teenagers much of the year. Participation may be high at some levels but I would wager soccer participation is very low when it comes to the inner city and "bigger" cities in general. City schools around the country, I would like to see the stats on it if possible, but I would guess they are very low. Much higher participation in the south and/or where there is a large Latino(a) population.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
well yeah, inner cities don't have many soccer fields so there is a good reason why they don't play a lot of soccer.
But from a country wide perspective, there is no question the sport is played by a lot of people.
Eephus
Footballguy
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I think there is a large difference between complaining about a ref call (which is part of being a sport fan) and saying a sport sucks because of one issue or saying the sport can never catch on in the US because of flopping.
If people would say "that's a dive, the ref should have carded him" no one would care. But that is not how it goes for the most part unfortunately when some people watch soccer.
Last edited by a moderator:
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
Daniel Larusso played soccer, but karate proved more useful.
Short Corner
Footballguy
Given your past attacks on people it is evident that you (and some others) don't perceive a difference here at all.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Don't you live in Milwaukee? You've got a false impression. It's huge in the suburbs of course, but if you take a drive around to the parks in different parts of the city this fall you can easily find thousands of kids playing club soccer every weekend. Our biggest rec club (Kickers) has over six thousand member kids playing from micro to u-18. There are a dozen or more advanced or elite type clubs in the area. We have several great ethnic-based clubs such as the Croatians, Bavarians, Serbs and several Latino clubs, but soccer is also huge with the hip white kids on the east side, north shore and western burbs. Soccer is easily on par with football and basketball for the kids at high schools like Marquette, Pius, Whitefish bay, tosa east and Shorewood. In the inner city we have several great youth clubs and have a great resource in former usmnt player Jimmy Banks ( played in Italy '90, now coaches and still plays with the Bavarians) who is active in city youth soccer. The one thing we lack is a decent professional or semi pro team. Sine the Rampage went defunct (former team of Brian McBride) we're left with only the Wave, an indoor team. The closest options are the Chicago Fire and Madison 56ers (NPSL).Mario Kart said:
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
We argue about referee decisions and dives in the soccer thread constantly. It's kind of a situation like a little sister - big brother can bully her at home, but if any outsider kid so much as looks at her sideways, he's gonna get a beating.Short Corner said:
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I don't see it like that at all. We never in the soccer thread deal with any issues like these.
Scooby predicted this all before the WC started (which is why he snapped a couple of pages ago). He knew people were going to come in and say things like "the sport can never catch on in the US" or "all Americans hate this crap". I could have stipulated this point in the first few posts of the thread but I don't think it would have made any difference.
Unlike Scooby I want more people to like the sport. I go out of my way to research and answer as many questions in posts and in PM's as I can for people who are trying to learn about the sport whether being old or new fans as I learn new things myself that way. But I think the group that continues to play the same cards over and over again are a bit trolling.
El Floppo
Footballguy
I can't speak to other big cities in the US- but in NYC, soccer is everywhere. Every park and open stretch of anything has people of all ages- and not just fuzzy ferners- playing.NewlyRetired said:
I've seen a big, big uptick of kids especially playing and kicking around in the parks big and small. not organized, driven by their parents with orange slices playing, but just a few kids kicking a ball around and using whatever they find as goals. Most of these kids are white, and most of these kids are really good.
I do wish there was more "inner-city" (which of course reads as black-kids) outreach- as most of those kids are culturally really removed from the sport. But it's permeating the schools as a regular PE and lunch-time activity, so I'm hoping that a lot of these kids will pick up on the soccer culture by osmosis... and eventually be able to share at least a little with their kids.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
I didn't snap. Nothing reached a boiling point with me. When I think someone sounds like an idiot, I say so. When I think someone sounds like a bag of d****s, I say so. I'm not defending the game. The game doesn't need my help.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
It is good to hear you guys talking about the game moving into the cities more. That is a good sign for the future. This is another one of those areas that will take a long time and work but it is good to see the inroads being made.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
@ 2:48 Daniel takes a dive. This is why soccer never caught on in the USGood Posting Judge said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebIhzVlmGls
I think there is merit to both sides of the argument - but, generally speaking, both camps seem a bit dug into their positions. I think the SDF, of which I am probably a member, does get a bit overly defensive about the sport. I think the folks in here trolling, are exhibiting fairly typical bullying mentality - mock what you don't understand.
The reality is there is room in the world for both camps without ever having to cross paths.
I don't think anyone is ever going to be "made" to like soccer, or even persuaded to like soccer, by arguments made by the pro-soccer crowd. Its an acquired taste - obviously it appeals to a lot of people around the world, but it does not have to appeal to everyone.
For the non-soccer crowd - its ok if you don't like the sport. But, there is no need to bash the sport, or the people that do enjoy it. Maybe you are tired of people telling you that you should like it - but trust me when I tell you, we are tired of hearing why you don't like it. I'll make a deal with you - I won't tell you that you should like it, if you don't come in here and tell me why you think the sport sucks. I am ok with people not liking the sport.
For those that have a genuine curiosity - my suggestion is to follow the sport, with all its warts, for a bit. Just watch and observe - follow the soccer thread - but mostly watch some club games, or some USMNT games over the next cycle. You will either like the game in its current form, or you will not. Suggesting changes to make it "better" are not very productive to your enjoyment of the game - the game itself is too large (and corrupt) to make any sudden changes to attract new fans. Its already the most popular sport in the world, so the folks that run the sport are not inclined to make adjustments to appease a few million americans. There are lots of discussions around how to improve the game, including how to deal with flopping - but it is a fairly complicated, nuanced conversation that is best had once you have an appreciation for the game in its current form.
Last edited by a moderator:
El Floppo
Footballguy
My 2c:
The difference with the complaints that occur in other sport threads is that those are specific game-related arguments/complaints. As NR points out- this is one specific topic that has been repeated over and over and over and over about the entire sport... not a quibble over a specific call or play in a specific game.
People like myself who find baseball hugely boring to watch and even to play, or find the last 2 hours... I mean 50 seconds... of a basketball game ridiculous- I don't go into those threads and complain over and over and over and over for years and years and then get uppity when somebody gets snippy with me. I don't even bother going into those thread- because I don't care. Those sports have those issues, and I avoid the sport. And when I don't- I accept those issues as existing and just try my best to enjoy the rest of it.
I don't think I mind as much as NR and some others about people who ask about it in a way that seems to be trying to gain info, rather than irritation- sheik, ham, woz, and some others seem to be interested in the sport and get wrap their heads around the diving and embellishing. I'm trying my best to provide info ("it")- even if it's a broken record since day 1 of my time here (I only really started posting in the FFA because I wanted to talk about the 2006 WC). NR has done the same, as has the rest of this crew.
But yeah, the repeated questions, which mostly sound like indictments more than anything seeking info, get old.
And anybody coming into the this thread gleefully ####ting on the sport or the US team within minutes of the US team losing- well, #### you.
We've spent 4 years following and caring about this team as they battle their way to their spot in the WC... imagine me coming into your favorite NFL team's thread the second they lose in the playoffs and mocking you. Multiply that up- since you only had one season. This thread is as much about the USMNT as the WC- have some respect for those of us that care about that team.
El Floppo
Footballguy
it hates you too.
GASP (gutsy athletic soccer players)? NOTWEDA no-number 10- we're doomed -#######s?
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
Some last few English language tv numbers. I think this is where the numbers peak.
The bench mark for 2018 will be to be better than 2010 since I think the time slots will be similar.
[sOCCER ON THE AIR] The 2014 World Cup ranks as the most-viewed tournament ever on English-language TV as ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC combined to average 4,557,000 viewers, an increase of 39 percent from 2010 and 96 percent from 2006.
"ESPN doubled U.S. viewership since the 2006 World Cup and we set industry records for live event streams," said John Skipper, president of ESPN and co-chairman of Disney Media Networks. "We're proud of our role in helping to grow interest in the global game and our commitment to the sport remains strong."
The next two World Cups will air on Fox.
ESPN/ESPN2/ABC World Cup Audiences
YEAR RATING AVG. VIEWERS
2014 2.8 | 4,557,000
2010 2.1 | 3,273,000
2006 1.6 | 2,321,000
2002 0.7 | 1,043,000
The bench mark for 2018 will be to be better than 2010 since I think the time slots will be similar.
[sOCCER ON THE AIR] The 2014 World Cup ranks as the most-viewed tournament ever on English-language TV as ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC combined to average 4,557,000 viewers, an increase of 39 percent from 2010 and 96 percent from 2006.
"ESPN doubled U.S. viewership since the 2006 World Cup and we set industry records for live event streams," said John Skipper, president of ESPN and co-chairman of Disney Media Networks. "We're proud of our role in helping to grow interest in the global game and our commitment to the sport remains strong."
The next two World Cups will air on Fox.
ESPN/ESPN2/ABC World Cup Audiences
YEAR RATING AVG. VIEWERS
2014 2.8 | 4,557,000
2010 2.1 | 3,273,000
2006 1.6 | 2,321,000
2002 0.7 | 1,043,000
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand
Footballguy
I wonder if we'll ever see the same penetration in the urban centers, though. Soccer fields take up a lot of space. I don't know if we have the will (yet) to put down fields in expensive urban areas.
Europe has no qualms here. In Italy on Capri (some of the most expensive land in the world) they made room for a field there. Not sure if that would happen here.
El Floppo
Footballguy
won't happen in NYC. but there are fields here- a number of them close to "inner-city" housing (where land was cheaper)
eta: new fields won't happen... unless they're very creatively adaptive reuse projects (similar to some of the pier/water-side projects that have given us some new fields in the last 25 years)
Last edited by a moderator:
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
FreeBaGeL said:
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
You actually were very helpful to me this World Cup and I thank you for everything you helped me learn. I really do appreciate that. I just don't understand why yesterday, all of a sudden, you lumped me in to the trolling group. I think I may have mentioned flopping 4 times in this thread, and at no point did I ever say anything like "this is why the US won't ever follow soccer" or any other crap like that.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Soccer isn't going to change for you (generic you who insists on a bunch of rule changes before you'll watch). Learn to appreciate it for what it is or move along.
Spock is still a doosh but that's not limited to soccer threads.
Spock is still a doosh but that's not limited to soccer threads.
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
We got to 400 pages?
pats3in4
Footballguy
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
I always think of the place where they make money: The USMiNT. Even when I knew it meant the soccer team, I had a tough time figuring out what the letters stood for.
Ted Lange as your Bartender
Footballguy
There's your answer.
Nigeria is the Super Eagles
Cameroon is the Indomitable Lions
We'll be the Ninja Turtles
Yes. 100% This.Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
3 hours of watching 2 guys play catch?Native said:
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I don't think I lumped you with the trolls.
I asked a simple question of why do you keep repeating the same issue over and over again when you got explanations from multiple people weeks ago?
I jumped down Woz's throat more than I should have but I don't like reading the constant stuff that soccer can't be popular in this country because of this issue when every single possible item we have says that is not true. I think you jumped into the conversation right after Woz said this and maybe you got caught up in a reply that was meant more for Woz.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
What question do I keep repeating?
Also, as for the last part, I can see that. That might be my fault. Like I said, I appreciate all of the replies I had been getting from my questions. I think my enjoyment of this World Cup was definitely in line with more knowledge than I've ever had. And the ability to ask questions and get quick answers was great.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Mutant Ninja Turtles is about as American as you can get.
I endorse this nickname
-QG
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
GregR
Footballguy
Question for the soccer fanatics here. In football there are all sorts of analysis done on things like whether it's better to punt on 4th down or go for it from various areas of the field.
I imagine the same must be true for soccer with it being as big of a sport as it is worldwide. The aspect here that I keep coming back to is how often a team will be entering the opponent's third, in a position they could, at worst, take a stab at putting it in the box and see if something goes their way. But instead they reverse the ball, sometimes sending it as far back as their own goal keeper, and then have to work their way forward again. And they may lose possession before even reaching again the point they willingly gave up before.
Does anyone know of any studies that look at what the odds are for a team to score from these sorts of positions if they press forward even against non-ideal situations... vs what the odds are they score without losing possession if they reverse field like that?
I don't want to get bogged down in the reasons teams do this. That isn't the question. I'm wanting to know which choice has actually been shown by analysis to be most likely to result in a goal.
I imagine the same must be true for soccer with it being as big of a sport as it is worldwide. The aspect here that I keep coming back to is how often a team will be entering the opponent's third, in a position they could, at worst, take a stab at putting it in the box and see if something goes their way. But instead they reverse the ball, sometimes sending it as far back as their own goal keeper, and then have to work their way forward again. And they may lose possession before even reaching again the point they willingly gave up before.
Does anyone know of any studies that look at what the odds are for a team to score from these sorts of positions if they press forward even against non-ideal situations... vs what the odds are they score without losing possession if they reverse field like that?
I don't want to get bogged down in the reasons teams do this. That isn't the question. I'm wanting to know which choice has actually been shown by analysis to be most likely to result in a goal.
The Gator
Footballguy
I think you're referring to more teams doing this?
[FULL VERSION] Moyes crossing tactic Manchester U: http://youtu.be/zkiKcazMsTY
[FULL VERSION] Moyes crossing tactic Manchester U: http://youtu.be/zkiKcazMsTY
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
It is a great question. There has been a lot of research on this topic as soccer analytics are becoming more and more important as the old guard is replaced by younger minds running the playing side of the sport.
I can't point you to any specific studies online but if you enjoy this technical aspect of the sport, one of the best sites is Zonal Marking.
Here is his great write up on the final with plenty of stats, charts etc from the Opta tracking system
http://www.zonalmarking.net/2014/07/14/germany-1-0-argentina-aet-gotzes-extra-time-goal-wins-the-world-cup/#more-10857
Last edited by a moderator:
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I want the Copa in 2016 to be bigger than this thread, never mind 2018Like I said, time to fire up the 2018 threadWhere's NR at?-QG
One of the big wigs at Univision was just quoted saying he expects the Copa viewing numbers to surpass the WC 2014 numbers. I can't wait
sporthenry
Footballguy
Soccer seems to lag behind the rest of the major sports with regards to analytics. They probably need player tracking technology the most b/c their stats are lacking. B/c scoring is so rare, that somewhat limits traditional stats. And things like passing % or break ups/tackles is still very simplistic. I know there are some studies going on but on the whole, it doesn't seem near as advanced as baseball/basketball advanced stats.
I think some of the best studies will be those that go in depth about dangerous scoring areas. And build from there like crosses/passes into the area. I've seen some studies start to break this barrier.
As far as passing the ball back, often times, when you pass it back (not as far as the goalie) and around, the offensive team usually gains 10-15 yards as the defense gives up some space to try and retain shape. But I agree that passing the ball back 40-50 yards is one of the more frustrating parts, especially when it just results in the keeper essentially kicking it 70 yards for a 50/50 ball.
I think some of the best studies will be those that go in depth about dangerous scoring areas. And build from there like crosses/passes into the area. I've seen some studies start to break this barrier.
As far as passing the ball back, often times, when you pass it back (not as far as the goalie) and around, the offensive team usually gains 10-15 yards as the defense gives up some space to try and retain shape. But I agree that passing the ball back 40-50 yards is one of the more frustrating parts, especially when it just results in the keeper essentially kicking it 70 yards for a 50/50 ball.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
They have had player tracking for many years now. The tools track every single touch of the ball and every step a player takes
Here is just a sample of what they track for say Phillip Lahm in the final.
http://www.fourfourtwo.com/statszone/4-2013/matches/731830/player-stats/15207/OVERALL_02
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
For those that don't know, the Opta player tracking system started back in the mid to late 90's. The first time I heard about it was when Ruud Gullit mentioned it when he was coaching Chelsea.
I went and purchased an Opta yearbook at that time to see what it was and even then the stats were pretty impressive.
Remember also that while the links I have posted show a ton of data, this is only the public "free" data. The teams have accessed through paid accounts to much more in depth data.
When you see the assistant managers on the benches playing with tablets they are looking at the real time tracking information for the game.
I went and purchased an Opta yearbook at that time to see what it was and even then the stats were pretty impressive.
Remember also that while the links I have posted show a ton of data, this is only the public "free" data. The teams have accessed through paid accounts to much more in depth data.
When you see the assistant managers on the benches playing with tablets they are looking at the real time tracking information for the game.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
Although I'm not a fan, you might also enjoy the book, Soccernomics. I would say that soccer is probably at least as far along in statistical analysis as football. It is a bit behind basketball (IMO) and, like all sports, way behind baseball (for obvious reasons).
I'm probably the biggest critic of traditional crossing strategies on the board. I think too much has to go right in order to pull it off. Players need to be on the same page (on the fly) and the ball has to be perfect, normally with someone putting pressure on the crosser. There have been studies of the effectiveness of corners that show that they might even be -EV in terms of goals. Now a cross from the run of play has the advantage over a corner in that defenses are not set, but it also offers several advantages. The corner taker has far more targets, and he knows where every one of them are supposed to be. He can often get a free runner with the sophisticated picks that the attacking teams have practiced. If, even then, we're talking about at best a 1/10 chance, I just don't think that a lot of first time crosses in the box are a very good percentage play. Particularly when you allow for the fact that they leave your transition defense unset.
I'm probably the biggest critic of traditional crossing strategies on the board. I think too much has to go right in order to pull it off. Players need to be on the same page (on the fly) and the ball has to be perfect, normally with someone putting pressure on the crosser. There have been studies of the effectiveness of corners that show that they might even be -EV in terms of goals. Now a cross from the run of play has the advantage over a corner in that defenses are not set, but it also offers several advantages. The corner taker has far more targets, and he knows where every one of them are supposed to be. He can often get a free runner with the sophisticated picks that the attacking teams have practiced. If, even then, we're talking about at best a 1/10 chance, I just don't think that a lot of first time crosses in the box are a very good percentage play. Particularly when you allow for the fact that they leave your transition defense unset.
Similar threads
