***Official 2022 World Cup Thread*** (1 Viewer)

[titusbramble]

Sounds about right

=================================

Paul Carr
@PaulCarr


#USMNTnow has a 45% chance to advance, per ⁦@FiveThirtyEight⁩ projections. It was 53% pre-tournament. In six previous World Cups under this format, 52% of teams with exactly four points advanced.

Yet the market still says they are more likely to advance than not

 

[chet]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

 

[NewlyRetired]

Sounds about right

=================================

Paul Carr
@PaulCarr


#USMNTnow has a 45% chance to advance, per ⁦@FiveThirtyEight⁩ projections. It was 53% pre-tournament. In six previous World Cups under this format, 52% of teams with exactly four points advanced.

Yet the market still says they are more likely to advance than not

It is all in the noise for me. I considered it 50-50 before the cup started, I still consider it 50-50.

Friday will clear things up a bit

If England beats the US by 4 and Wales wins by 3, the US is likely done.
If England beats the US by 2 and Wales wins by 1, I like the US chances to advance.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

that seems roughly fair. Maybe less wins and more draws? (like 5-25-70)...

Luckily, single game scenario makes that type of math kind of meaningless.

 

[Dr_Zaius]

Sounds about right

=================================

Paul Carr
@PaulCarr


#USMNTnow has a 45% chance to advance, per ⁦@FiveThirtyEight⁩ projections. It was 53% pre-tournament. In six previous World Cups under this format, 52% of teams with exactly four points advanced.

Yet the market still says they are more likely to advance than not

It is all in the noise for me. I considered it 50-50 before the cup started, I still consider it 50-50.

Friday will clear things up a bit

If England beats the US by 4 and Wales wins by 3, the US is likely done.
If England beats the US by 2 and Wales wins by 1, I like the US chances to advance.

Other than the US getting a result on Friday, the dream outcome is for Iran to beat Wales. Then as long as England doesn't smoke the US, the US just needs to beat Iran, and with Iran's horrible goal differential they'd be unable to play for a draw so they couldn't park the bus.

 

[NewlyRetired]

So the biggest concern for me at half I think came to fruition. My fear was that the US was not forcing its will on Wales in the first half but instead Wales was simply ceding possession by choice. I think the US may have looked artificially better than the were really playing due to the really odd Wales tactics.

Once Wales ditched the dumb tactical idea, the game became significantly more even and probably even favored Wales in the second half a little.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Other than the US getting a result on Friday, the dream outcome is for Iran to beat Wales. Then as long as England doesn't smoke the US, the US just needs to beat Iran, and with Iran's horrible goal differential they'd be unable to play for a draw so they couldn't park the bus.

I think Iran got caught up in the moment against England who played great.

I expect/hope for a MUCH stronger effort against Wales. I came in thinking Wales/Iran/US were all relatively equal, so Iran winning would not be the craziest thing in the world.

 

[The Z Machine]

I think Iran got caught up in the moment against England who played great.

Their goalie went out early with what looks like a broken nose. That doesn't help things.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I think Iran got caught up in the moment against England who played great.

Their goalie went out early with what looks like a broken nose. That doesn't help things.

agreed but I don't think the starting keeper saves any of the 6 goals. The back up did not make mistakes on those from what my memory recalls.

 

[The Z Machine]

The schedule sets up poorly for us. Wales wins and basically we need a point against England to avoid a mutual cooperation situation bw England and Wales.

England with 6 and Wales with 4 means a draw puts them both through.

-QG

Yeah, but I could see the English asserting their dominance over the island and wanting to knock Wales out.

 

[The Z Machine]

I think Iran got caught up in the moment against England who played great.

Their goalie went out early with what looks like a broken nose. That doesn't help things.

agreed but I don't think the starting keeper saves any of the 6 goals. The back up did not make mistakes on those from what my memory recalls.

You're right, but it's demoralizing to lose your starting goalie. Plus, it takes one of five subs off the table. They were getting thumped either way, though for sure.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Other than the US getting a result on Friday, the dream outcome is for Iran to beat Wales. Then as long as England doesn't smoke the US, the US just needs to beat Iran, and with Iran's horrible goal differential they'd be unable to play for a draw so they couldn't park the bus.

I think Iran got caught up in the moment against England who played great.

I expect/hope for a MUCH stronger effort against Wales. I came in thinking Wales/Iran/US were all relatively equal, so Iran winning would not be the craziest thing in the world.

I think @The Z Machine made a fabulous point in the other thread. Wales ran themselves ragged for this point. Bale played 100 minutes today which is more minutes than he has played in the last few months combined I think. The likelihood that he will be able to do so again on short rest against Iran is smaller due to his effort today.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

99 wins 1 draw
-QG

 

[NewlyRetired]

We have a bunch of the normal issues with youth on the team but the one item in our favor should be a faster recovery time. With Weah, Pulisic, Weston and Musah all looking to have some issues during the game, this will be put to the test this week to see how healthy they can get for Friday.

Luckily the US has an extra 9 hours to recover where as Wales (who looked cooked by the end) has to play much earlier in the day.

 

[Sammy3469]

Greg’s 3 big lineup decision: Weah, Ream and Sargent - I think all 3 worked out. Ream was great. Weah probably MOTM (or Adams). Sargent was involved in the goal and played decent. His header could have won it for us most likely but overall I thought he was decent.

Disagree. Sarge kills the press and never puts anything between the pipes. We seen this experiment time and time again, hope we try something different.

He did have the holdup play that allowed CP to get on the ball in the direct lead up to the goal. He's arguably the only 9 in the pool that pulls that play off and lets CP take the ball in stride at top speed.

 

[AAABatteries]

We are only a quarter done with the first round of matches and there’s already what I consider to be the story of the tournament - the added time is a breath of fresh air and one that both purists and occasional fans can agree on (I think). Kudos to FIFA or whoever made this call.

 

[NewlyRetired]

We are only a quarter done with the first round of matches and there’s already what I consider to be the story of the tournament - the added time is a breath of fresh air and one that both purists and occasional fans can agree on (I think). Kudos to FIFA or whoever made this call.

It is fascinating because we have been complaining so much about this in the various threads over the years. I was so sick of refs ignoring the obvious stoppages in play that I was ready to get rid of extra time entirely and just stop the clock. I don't know if this will remove time wasting in the sport like stopping the clock would but it is a middle ground I am willing to support.

If this is a mandate from FIFA to all the leagues, we will be better for it. I guess we will see once the leagues start back up whether this is adopted or not.

I heard nothing about this before the tournament started though so it is a pleasant surprise for me, and it is a sensible change by FIFA (those are words you don't hear too often in conjunction with each other )

 

[AAABatteries]

To give folks an idea - I think there’s been 66 minutes of added time in 4 matches. 16.5 minutes per game - that’s unreal numbers.

 

[NewlyRetired]

To give folks an idea - I think there’s been 66 minutes of added time in 4 matches. 16.5 minutes per game - that’s unreal numbers.

I long injury to the Iran keeper probably added 8-10 minutes to that number but even removing that, it is still much more than we usually see in a normal game

 

[AAABatteries]

To give folks an idea - I think there’s been 66 minutes of added time in 4 matches. 16.5 minutes per game - that’s unreal numbers.

I long injury to the Iran keeper probably added 8-10 minutes to that number but even removing that, it is still much more than we usually see in a normal game

Good point - take that out and you still get 14 minutes per game!

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

So the biggest concern for me at half I think came to fruition. My fear was that the US was not forcing its will on Wales in the first half but instead Wales was simply ceding possession by choice. I think the US may have looked artificially better than the were really playing due to the really odd Wales tactics.

Once Wales ditched the dumb tactical idea, the game became significantly more even and probably even favored Wales in the second half a little.

It looked to me that the US started to invite Wales on to them in the hope of getting a second on a counter. This isn't a crazy idea in the abstract, but it still strikes me as overthinking things when you've controlled the game by aggressively winning every second ball and covering every blade of grass in midfield.

My worry going forward is that the US has shown that it struggles to create chances in games they sometimes control. I expect them to control the game against Iran, but Iran has the most decisive player in the final third in Taremi.

 

[BassNBrew]

We are only a quarter done with the first round of matches and there’s already what I consider to be the story of the tournament - the added time is a breath of fresh air and one that both purists and occasional fans can agree on (I think). Kudos to FIFA or whoever made this call.

It is fascinating because we have been complaining so much about this in the various threads over the years. I was so sick of refs ignoring the obvious stoppages in play that I was ready to get rid of extra time entirely and just stop the clock. I don't know if this will remove time wasting in the sport like stopping the clock would but it is a middle ground I am willing to support.

If this is a mandate from FIFA to all the leagues, we will be better for it. I guess we will see once the leagues start back up whether this is adopted or not.

I heard nothing about this before the tournament started though so it is a pleasant surprise for me, and it is a sensible change by FIFA (those are words you don't hear too often in conjunction with each other )

I was shocked. The 4 added minutes in the USA 1st half was quite a surprise given no injuries that I can recall. The only non play time was the three yellows and one goal. I was expecting 1 minute.

 

[BassNBrew]

Greg’s 3 big lineup decision: Weah, Ream and Sargent - I think all 3 worked out. Ream was great. Weah probably MOTM (or Adams). Sargent was involved in the goal and played decent. His header could have won it for us most likely but overall I thought he was decent.

Disagree. Sarge kills the press and never puts anything between the pipes. We seen this experiment time and time again, hope we try something different.

He did have the holdup play that allowed CP to get on the ball in the direct lead up to the goal. He's arguably the only 9 in the pool that pulls that play off and lets CP take the ball in stride at top speed.

Personally I think "hold up" play is over rated and the tallest midget syndrome. Any pro should be able to do this. I'd excel at hold up play since I can't create, can't dribble, and can't get into the proper position. Just give me the guy who can either get it between the pipes or can create a shot.

eta - The guy great at hold up play got selected to play right field in grade school.

 

[Sand]

Well that was disappointing, but the CBs are the weak link in the team.

Team played really well overall. When the game got ragged they could have used someone in the midfield to calm it down. We gave the ball away a TON in the 2nd half. Really stupid turnovers. But that's where a bunch of 22 year olds kind of bites you.

Defensive and midfield shape were good. The offensive touches were bad, bordering on awful. Luckily of the three or four good ones we strung two together for the goal. If we perform like that Friday it's going to be really ugly.

 

[Brew Swillis]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

FanDuel has US +500, England -185, draw +310. Without spending any time figuring out the hold and removing pro-US expected bias, figure in the neighborhood of 15 wins and 20-25 draws.

 

[Sand]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

99 wins 1 draw
-QG

That's overly pessimistic. I'd put it at 70/20/10.

 

[Tick]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

If we played them twice in World Cups, we'd have one win and one draw.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

The official was obviously bad, as I expected. Too quick with at least one of our early yellows and then allowed Wales to hack CP the entire match without nearly enough punishment. Just sucks when you KNOW teams are going to do that and the ref allows it.

As someone who has little rooting interest in the US team, I didn't notice anything egregious

I would say there were 3 egregious yellow card errors.

The first yellow on Dest was a joke. They kind of slid next to each other and barely even touched.

The non-yellow on the defender that just suddenly lowered his shoulder and bulldozed CP extremely hard for no reason.

The non-yellow on the defender that made no play on the ball and intentionally took out Aaronson's legs when he was pushing on a counter attack towards the end of the game (wouldn't have been a factor as he got subbed off right afterwards anyway, but still a terrible no-call).

 

[FreeBaGeL]

So the biggest concern for me at half I think came to fruition. My fear was that the US was not forcing its will on Wales in the first half but instead Wales was simply ceding possession by choice. I think the US may have looked artificially better than the were really playing due to the really odd Wales tactics.

Once Wales ditched the dumb tactical idea, the game became significantly more even and probably even favored Wales in the second half a little.

This is exactly what I was coming here to post. We got about an hour (45 mins plus halftime) of thinking we had turned some major corner and could now play possession ball against European clubs. But as it turns out it was really just a terrible tactical decision by the Wales coach, in the end.

If we played again there's no way he'd take that approach again and the game would probably look a lot more like the 2nd half.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

We are only a quarter done with the first round of matches and there’s already what I consider to be the story of the tournament - the added time is a breath of fresh air and one that both purists and occasional fans can agree on (I think). Kudos to FIFA or whoever made this call.

have freaking loved this change so much. It's about time.

I hope we see it in all the leagues going forward, but I'm going to guess when we see totally gassed players like the US/Wales game that people are going to start complaining about the games being too long for the players.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

If we played them twice in World Cups, we'd have one win and one draw.

there is no historical evidence for a take this hot

 

[El Floppo]

Greg’s 3 big lineup decision: Weah, Ream and Sargent - I think all 3 worked out. Ream was great. Weah probably MOTM (or Adams). Sargent was involved in the goal and played decent. His header could have won it for us most likely but overall I thought he was decent.

Disagree. Sarge kills the press and never puts anything between the pipes. We seen this experiment time and time again, hope we try something different.

He did have the holdup play that allowed CP to get on the ball in the direct lead up to the goal. He's arguably the only 9 in the pool that pulls that play off and lets CP take the ball in stride at top speed.

He's not. He rarely gets back to the ball 1st...he did well on that play, but it wasn't like he did anything more than getting there first this time and letting it bounce off him (happy to be mistaken and shown video of him intentionally redirecting it to CP). Haji is definitely better at it and sarge is no better than Jesus, IMO.

 

[Capella]

Best guess on how many wins the US gets if they hypothetically played England 100x? 10? How many draws? 20?

FanDuel has US +500, England -185, draw +310. Without spending any time figuring out the hold and removing pro-US expected bias, figure in the neighborhood of 15 wins and 20-25 draws.

We are +500??? Holy hell that’s something.

 

[Sand]

Dear Robert,

Please do the world a favor and lay down 5 on El Tri. We know you have it in you.

Sincerely,

All of us

 

[jabarony]

So the biggest concern for me at half I think came to fruition. My fear was that the US was not forcing its will on Wales in the first half but instead Wales was simply ceding possession by choice. I think the US may have looked artificially better than the were really playing due to the really odd Wales tactics.

Once Wales ditched the dumb tactical idea, the game became significantly more even and probably even favored Wales in the second half a little.

This is exactly what I was coming here to post. We got about an hour (45 mins plus halftime) of thinking we had turned some major corner and could now play possession ball against European clubs. But as it turns out it was really just a terrible tactical decision by the Wales coach, in the end.

If we played again there's no way he'd take that approach again and the game would probably look a lot more like the 2nd half.

Please explain this. Are you saying Wales just essentially let the US retain possession on purpose? Is this a fact or just something you think was occurring based on what you saw?. What was the goal of this strategy? Thanks.

 

[Mjolnirs]

[NEXTA] Budweiser will give the winning country all the beer prepared for the QatarWorldCup2022 worth of €75 million. It is also expected that the company will sue FIFA for breach of contract​

I don't see this an incentive for any countries ... well, maybe for Saudi Arabia, Iran and Qatar.

 

[NewlyRetired]

So the biggest concern for me at half I think came to fruition. My fear was that the US was not forcing its will on Wales in the first half but instead Wales was simply ceding possession by choice. I think the US may have looked artificially better than the were really playing due to the really odd Wales tactics.

Once Wales ditched the dumb tactical idea, the game became significantly more even and probably even favored Wales in the second half a little.

This is exactly what I was coming here to post. We got about an hour (45 mins plus halftime) of thinking we had turned some major corner and could now play possession ball against European clubs. But as it turns out it was really just a terrible tactical decision by the Wales coach, in the end.

If we played again there's no way he'd take that approach again and the game would probably look a lot more like the 2nd half.

Please explain this. Are you saying Wales just essentially let the US retain possession on purpose? Is this a fact or just something you think was occurring based on what you saw?. What was the goal of this strategy? Thanks.

There are times a team will choose to cede possession if they feel the can set a low block defensively, suck the opposing team in deep and then try to hit them on a counter. This tactic is usually employed when one team is significantly weaker than their opponent but not always.

Wales was not significantly weaker by any stretch, but they still employed a low block but had zero ability to perform any sort of fast break.

At half time, the Wales coach dumped that idea since it was clearly not working and replaced his fastest player with his biggest player and stopped ceding possession and played the game straight up, which changed the entire complexion of the game in the second half.

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

WAKE UP SLEEPYHEADS WE GOT A CRAZY ONE BREWING HERE!!!

 

[encaitar]

Just woke up and turned on the tv to see Saudi Arabia working on the craziest upset ever. This is insane.

 

[Desert_Power]

I turned it on at the start of the second half. Almost just switched it off due to the awful announcers.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Had this crazy dream about the Argentina game....very vivid even posted in this thread about it....





-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

A good point about the Saudi team here

-QG

 

[The Z Machine]

Saudis must have been 10-1 dogs in this match.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I think Arg was -700

-QG

 

[brun]

Wow!

 

[jabarony]

So the biggest concern for me at half I think came to fruition. My fear was that the US was not forcing its will on Wales in the first half but instead Wales was simply ceding possession by choice. I think the US may have looked artificially better than the were really playing due to the really odd Wales tactics.

Once Wales ditched the dumb tactical idea, the game became significantly more even and probably even favored Wales in the second half a little.

This is exactly what I was coming here to post. We got about an hour (45 mins plus halftime) of thinking we had turned some major corner and could now play possession ball against European clubs. But as it turns out it was really just a terrible tactical decision by the Wales coach, in the end.

If we played again there's no way he'd take that approach again and the game would probably look a lot more like the 2nd half.

Please explain this. Are you saying Wales just essentially let the US retain possession on purpose? Is this a fact or just something you think was occurring based on what you saw?. What was the goal of this strategy? Thanks.

There are times a team will choose to cede possession if they feel the can set a low block defensively, suck the opposing team in deep and then try to hit them on a counter. This tactic is usually employed when one team is significantly weaker than their opponent but not always.

Wales was not significantly weaker by any stretch, but they still employed a low block but had zero ability to perform any sort of fast break.

At half time, the Wales coach dumped that idea since it was clearly not working and replaced his fastest player with his biggest player and stopped ceding possession and played the game straight up, which changed the entire complexion of the game in the second half.

Thanks!

 

[brun]

The timing would suggest acting but nope, nailed in the head by the keeper's knee.

 

[encaitar]

That guy is knocked out. Knee straight to the face. Ouch.

Zero doubt that Saudi Arabia is putting 100% on the field defensively right now.

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

Yikes

 

[QuizGuy66]

Whistle should blow no earlier than 105 minutes

-QG