What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official 2014 World Cup Thread*** (1 Viewer)

Combined ESPN and Univision ratings for the game yesterday got the same 18 share as the NBA finals.
Holy crap. That was a 4:00pm start.
Ratings share is the percentage of people watching TV at the time. So the two games got the same fraction of viewers, not the same number of viewers.
Ahh I misread that. That makes much more sense.

I expected number of viewers to be in the 2 million range yesterday (not including online).
Rating numbers: 5.1 for espn and 3.0 Univision
 
Combined ESPN and Univision ratings for the game yesterday got the same 18 share as the NBA finals.
Holy crap. That was a 4:00pm start.

And I have to imagine the online numbers were enormous.
Yeah. It's pretty awesome. And ESPN bumped it to ESPN2 for golf today. I've liked their commitment and coverage, but don't agree with that.

...and there are 32 people in this thread right now. Crazy.
Unless I am mistaken this game was not bumped. It was always scheduled for ESPN2.

It is likely contract related to the US Open.

 
Combined ESPN and Univision ratings for the game yesterday got the same 18 share as the NBA finals.
Holy crap. That was a 4:00pm start.

And I have to imagine the online numbers were enormous.
Yeah. It's pretty awesome. And ESPN bumped it to ESPN2 for golf today. I've liked their commitment and coverage, but don't agree with that.

...and there are 32 people in this thread right now. Crazy.
Unless I am mistaken this game was not bumped. It was always scheduled for ESPN2.

It is likely contract related to the US Open.
I consider that bumped. #### golf

 
Combined ESPN and Univision ratings for the game yesterday got the same 18 share as the NBA finals.
Holy crap. That was a 4:00pm start.
Ratings share is the percentage of people watching TV at the time. So the two games got the same fraction of viewers, not the same number of viewers.
Ahh I misread that. That makes much more sense.

I expected number of viewers to be in the 2 million range yesterday (not including online).
Rating numbers: 5.1 for espn and 3.0 Univision
This article says the overnights for ESPN were a 3.2

http://m.deadline.com/2014/06/world-cup-ratings-opener-brazil-croatia/

Do you have a link for the 5.-? The gap between a 3.2 and 5.1 is enormous for the final total viewers.

 
wdcrob said:
Nice call on the third. GDS was off when the defender played it.
Am I missing something?Cant be offside if the defender plays it.
This isn't from an official source, but it's how I understand it too...

Offsides is reset at every touch of the ball by the offense, and every intentionally directed touch by the defense. That is, if you are offsides, the ball is shot, hits a defender and bounces to you, you are still offsides, even if the defender is the goalie and in front of you. Further, even if the defender intentionally touches it, say by leaping up to attempt to head it, you will still remain offsides unless his touch is determined to be a controlled one.

The defender flicked it on, but never controlled it and GDS was offside when he did.
This is only if on the initial ball by the offense you were offside. On a corner, when the ball is played he wasnt off. The ball played by the defender does not make you offside.

 
wdcrob said:
Nice call on the third. GDS was off when the defender played it.
Am I missing something?Cant be offside if the defender plays it.
This isn't from an official source, but it's how I understand it too...

Offsides is reset at every touch of the ball by the offense, and every intentionally directed touch by the defense. That is, if you are offsides, the ball is shot, hits a defender and bounces to you, you are still offsides, even if the defender is the goalie and in front of you. Further, even if the defender intentionally touches it, say by leaping up to attempt to head it, you will still remain offsides unless his touch is determined to be a controlled one.

The defender flicked it on, but never controlled it and GDS was offside when he did.
But offsides never reset so we go by the last intentionally directed ball. Which was the corner. By that interpretation the goal is good.

 
Feel bad for the Mexican with a hammy despite myself. What a horrible thing to wait four years (all your life) and get hurt in the first game.

 
sorry but both Mexico goals should have been good. Cameroon's was called correctly.
I have been playing and watching the sport since the early 70's and I still don't know the correct ruling on deflections.
neither do most refs!

if you are offside on a shot and the ball deflects to you then you are off (seeking to gain advantage). If you are onside on the shot and it deflects to you, you are fine.

On the corner its very hard to be offside. Ball deflected by the defender can not play the offensive player offside

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the US was in Mexico's position right now with 2 good goals called back I would be pulling my hair out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Going to watch the 2nd half...

Pulling hard for Mexico here. When people ask why, I say that we in the US should hope to have such support for our team. They are passionate, travel well, and the depth of support runs deep there. I don't want them to win CONCACAF ever, but in the WC, I pull for them.

 
Even if a deflection by a defender could make you offsides, he wasn't offsides at the time of the deflection anyway. He was in-line and didn't get ahead of the line until after the deflection.

Mexico should have 2 goals and, forgotten in all this, Cameroon probably should have had a PK of their own.

 
Even if a deflection by a defender could make you offsides, he wasn't offsides at the time of the deflection anyway. He was in-line and didn't get ahead of the line until after the deflection.

Mexico should have 2 goals and, forgotten in all this, Cameroon probably should have had a PK of their own.
I havent seen a good replay yet on the potential Cameroon PK, but I didnt see anything that would make me agree despite the announcers agreeing with you. From what I've seen both players were jostling and cameroon had just as much of the mexico guy as vice versa. Wouldnt have given one there either.

but like i said, havent seen a good replay.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even if a deflection by a defender could make you offsides, he wasn't offsides at the time of the deflection anyway. He was in-line and didn't get ahead of the line until after the deflection.

Mexico should have 2 goals and, forgotten in all this, Cameroon probably should have had a PK of their own.
I havent seen a good replay yet on the potential Cameroon PK, but I didnt see anything that would make me agree despite the announcers agreeing with you. From what I've seen both players were jostling and cameroon had just as much of the mexico guy as vice versa. Wouldnt have given one there either.
http://gfycat.com/LastingDimpledAmericantoad

 
Even if a deflection by a defender could make you offsides, he wasn't offsides at the time of the deflection anyway. He was in-line and didn't get ahead of the line until after the deflection.

Mexico should have 2 goals and, forgotten in all this, Cameroon probably should have had a PK of their own.
I havent seen a good replay yet on the potential Cameroon PK, but I didnt see anything that would make me agree despite the announcers agreeing with you. From what I've seen both players were jostling and cameroon had just as much of the mexico guy as vice versa. Wouldnt have given one there either.
http://gfycat.com/LastingDimpledAmericantoad
so is the pk for the straight arm or for the cameroon player holding his arm.

Not a PK for me

 
Even if a deflection by a defender could make you offsides, he wasn't offsides at the time of the deflection anyway. He was in-line and didn't get ahead of the line until after the deflection.

Mexico should have 2 goals and, forgotten in all this, Cameroon probably should have had a PK of their own.
I havent seen a good replay yet on the potential Cameroon PK, but I didnt see anything that would make me agree despite the announcers agreeing with you. From what I've seen both players were jostling and cameroon had just as much of the mexico guy as vice versa. Wouldnt have given one there either.
http://gfycat.com/LastingDimpledAmericantoad
so is the pk for the straight arm or for the cameroon player holding his arm.

Not a PK for me
me either :shrug:

 
Going to watch the 2nd half...

Pulling hard for Mexico here. When people ask why, I say that we in the US should hope to have such support for our team. They are passionate, travel well, and the depth of support runs deep there. I don't want them to win CONCACAF ever, but in the WC, I pull for them.
Sorry I can't. The ef in Osama Osama chant. Just can't root for 'em.

-QG

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top