The Kansas Comet
Footballguy
Sorry Z, rooting for Chile here (my dad was born and raised in Santiago). Regardless of the score, I just hope it doesn't go to PK's.¡Vamos Vinotinto!!!!!!!!
Sorry Z, rooting for Chile here (my dad was born and raised in Santiago). Regardless of the score, I just hope it doesn't go to PK's.¡Vamos Vinotinto!!!!!!!!
They only have themselves to blame. They wasted so many good chances, especially early in the match (and that Wambach one at the end of extra time would have been so sweet to see converted), Buehler committed a cardinal sin of defending on Japan's first goal, and the first three PK takers were lousy. It was there for the taking and they let it slip away, twice.No idea why, but I just watched the highlights of the penalty kicks. That was just pathetic. Way to go U.S.![]()
Brazil goes 0/4 and they're out of the Copa America. Doesn't REALLY matter, they'll be in the Confederations Cup....but it makes for a much more exciting Copa with both Brazil and Argentina going out in the quarterfinals...
really enjoying this tourney thus far. I'm going to miss watching Messi but should be even more interesting with the dominant nations going home.Agreed. Forlan was masterful during the last World Cup. The manner in which he handled the ball with such an amazing touch was a beautiful thing to watch.And Brazil. I'd rather watch players I know.Pulling for Uruguay now I guess. Big fan of Forlan, Suarez and Lugano.not for me. I'd much rather have ARG still in it.
Anyone think shootouts are the proper way to finish a game?

This has driven me CRAZY for years!Yes, can anyone defend or explain the way a soccer game is decided after a tie in regulation in these big games??Why oh why do they decide a World Championship on penalty kicks?
One of the worst ways to win or lose a game that took away from how great regular and extra time really was.One of the best games I have seen in a while.
POST AGAIN!!!!Chile is attacking.Now a save by the keeper, Chile getting frustrated.What a un-####### believable sequence. How did Chile not score?!?!
LOL except for the straight red. Is he one of their better players? Terrible foul by him.What composure from Venezuela to finish like this (assuming they don't blow it in the last 2 minutes).
I'm not a soccer guy, but I would prefer playing until there is a winner. I would add substitutions as the game went on, though.This has driven me CRAZY for years!Yes, can anyone defend or explain the way a soccer game is decided after a tie in regulation in these big games??Why oh why do they decide a World Championship on penalty kicks?
One of the worst ways to win or lose a game that took away from how great regular and extra time really was.One of the best games I have seen in a while.
I don't get it!! It's a sport that flaunts the conditioning and wearing down aspect of their game with nonstop play just 3 substitutions, YET when it comes down to a tie (after OT) they decide it with penalty kicks??!!?? This does NOT determine the best soccer team or refect the game itself.
They said they have gone back and forth with the golden goal (like hockey the first goal in OT wins). What was wrong with that?? Have it just like hockey score in OT it's over.
The overtimes are stupid. One goal should finish it. Here is a sport that is dominated by ties YET they have an overtime that allows ANOTHER TIE! They play out the 30 minutes!! Hey you already had 90 minutes to prove yourselves so if the other team scores in OT it should be over. You lost. Don't get the continuation and ANOTHER second chance at all.
AND why not just play it out no matter how many overtimes it takes?? The sport that thrives on conditioning should embrace that. It would be awesome, it would epic to keep going no matter how long it takes!
Well soccer guys??
I'm not a soccer guy, but I would prefer playing until there is a winner. I would add substitutions as the game went on, though.This has driven me CRAZY for years!Yes, can anyone defend or explain the way a soccer game is decided after a tie in regulation in these big games??Why oh why do they decide a World Championship on penalty kicks?
One of the worst ways to win or lose a game that took away from how great regular and extra time really was.One of the best games I have seen in a while.
I don't get it!! It's a sport that flaunts the conditioning and wearing down aspect of their game with nonstop play just 3 substitutions, YET when it comes down to a tie (after OT) they decide it with penalty kicks??!!?? This does NOT determine the best soccer team or refect the game itself.
They said they have gone back and forth with the golden goal (like hockey the first goal in OT wins). What was wrong with that?? Have it just like hockey score in OT it's over.
The overtimes are stupid. One goal should finish it. Here is a sport that is dominated by ties YET they have an overtime that allows ANOTHER TIE! They play out the 30 minutes!! Hey you already had 90 minutes to prove yourselves so if the other team scores in OT it should be over. You lost. Don't get the continuation and ANOTHER second chance at all.
AND why not just play it out no matter how many overtimes it takes?? The sport that thrives on conditioning should embrace that. It would be awesome, it would epic to keep going no matter how long it takes!
Well soccer guys??

I guess I'll take a stab at this, because a lot of people probably won't.First of all, I don't think you'll find too many people outright defending the extra time/PK setup as it currently stands - but I will say that I'm not against the concept of PKs deciding a championship game. Having played a handful of 120-minute games myself (when I was in better shape), I can tell you that the game honestly devolves into something different by that point. Yes, I agree that the sport and its fans pride themselves on being high-endurance athletes, but soccer is unlike the rest of the sports in that you get absolutely no break. Obviously I'm not knocking hockey, baseball, etc., and I realize that those sports (namely hockey) are insanely difficult to play, but players in those sports aren't playing non-stop the entire time. I haven't played those other sports at a high level, so I can't really compare them, but even the best athletes aren't going to be able to keep going for much longer than 120 minutes.This has driven me CRAZY for years!Yes, can anyone defend or explain the way a soccer game is decided after a tie in regulation in these big games??Why oh why do they decide a World Championship on penalty kicks?
One of the worst ways to win or lose a game that took away from how great regular and extra time really was.One of the best games I have seen in a while.
I don't get it!! It's a sport that flaunts the conditioning and wearing down aspect of their game with nonstop play just 3 substitutions, YET when it comes down to a tie (after OT) they decide it with penalty kicks??!!?? This does NOT determine the best soccer team or refect the game itself.
They said they have gone back and forth with the golden goal (like hockey the first goal in OT wins). What was wrong with that?? Have it just like hockey score in OT it's over.
The overtimes are stupid. One goal should finish it. Here is a sport that is dominated by ties YET they have an overtime that allows ANOTHER TIE! They play out the 30 minutes!! Hey you already had 90 minutes to prove yourselves so if the other team scores in OT it should be over. You lost. Don't get the continuation and ANOTHER second chance at all.
AND why not just play it out no matter how many overtimes it takes?? The sport that thrives on conditioning should embrace that. It would be awesome, it would epic to keep going no matter how long it takes!
Well soccer guys??
What about increasing the size of the goal by a few feet each overtime?I've heard different ideas that aren't bad - allow more subs in overtime, allow previously subbed out players to re-enter, etc. - along with some (IMO) silly ones - remove a player every few minutes, etc.
I have no problem with PKs. Was involved in two that went that far, won one and lost one--scored in both. By that point, it's as much mental as physical and it's not an easy walk from the center circle.I guess I'll take a stab at this, because a lot of people probably won't.First of all, I don't think you'll find too many people outright defending the extra time/PK setup as it currently stands - but I will say that I'm not against the concept of PKs deciding a championship game. Having played a handful of 120-minute games myself (when I was in better shape), I can tell you that the game honestly devolves into something different by that point. Yes, I agree that the sport and its fans pride themselves on being high-endurance athletes, but soccer is unlike the rest of the sports in that you get absolutely no break. Obviously I'm not knocking hockey, baseball, etc., and I realize that those sports (namely hockey) are insanely difficult to play, but players in those sports aren't playing non-stop the entire time. I haven't played those other sports at a high level, so I can't really compare them, but even the best athletes aren't going to be able to keep going for much longer than 120 minutes.This has driven me CRAZY for years!Yes, can anyone defend or explain the way a soccer game is decided after a tie in regulation in these big games??Why oh why do they decide a World Championship on penalty kicks?
One of the worst ways to win or lose a game that took away from how great regular and extra time really was.One of the best games I have seen in a while.
I don't get it!! It's a sport that flaunts the conditioning and wearing down aspect of their game with nonstop play just 3 substitutions, YET when it comes down to a tie (after OT) they decide it with penalty kicks??!!?? This does NOT determine the best soccer team or refect the game itself.
They said they have gone back and forth with the golden goal (like hockey the first goal in OT wins). What was wrong with that?? Have it just like hockey score in OT it's over.
The overtimes are stupid. One goal should finish it. Here is a sport that is dominated by ties YET they have an overtime that allows ANOTHER TIE! They play out the 30 minutes!! Hey you already had 90 minutes to prove yourselves so if the other team scores in OT it should be over. You lost. Don't get the continuation and ANOTHER second chance at all.
AND why not just play it out no matter how many overtimes it takes?? The sport that thrives on conditioning should embrace that. It would be awesome, it would epic to keep going no matter how long it takes!
Well soccer guys??
I've heard different ideas that aren't bad - allow more subs in overtime, allow previously subbed out players to re-enter, etc. - along with some (IMO) silly ones - remove a player every few minutes, etc. I think the real bottom line is that FIFA strives for a reasonable overtime that doesn't change the way they want the game to be played - which is the way they have it now, 3 subs (keeping the emphasis, like you said, on endurance), keep it simple 11v11, etc. Any more than 120 minutes without making changes to the substitution rules is really pushing it.
Golden goal - I don't really have an argument for this. I don't mind the game the way it's played now (I think it allows for more drama), but I can see why others would disagree.
PKs - I don't have much of a problem with PKs being the game-decider. I don't really see how it's a worse solution than two worn-down teams hoofing it forward in the 170th minute, hoping that the other team's defender collapses from exhaustion to lead to a goal. If one team deserved to win, they would have done so before PKs - that's how I look at it - and 2 hours is plenty of time to do so.
I guess those are my thoughts. I wouldn't be upset if the rules were changed, but I honestly don't hate PKs like a lot of people do.
What about increasing the size of the goal by a few feet each overtime?I've heard different ideas that aren't bad - allow more subs in overtime, allow previously subbed out players to re-enter, etc. - along with some (IMO) silly ones - remove a player every few minutes, etc.
great ideaI think I've only played in 1 game that went to PKs, and I actually scored the game-winner as the 6th shooter, IIRC. We were shooting first, I scored mine - poorly taken, but the GK guessed the wrong way - and their guy missed it for our win. There's no longer walk than that walk toward the net.Our league championship game last year was decided on PKs, but I was out of the country on vacationI have no problem with PKs. Was involved in two that went that far, won one and lost one--scored in both. By that point, it's as much mental as physical and it's not an easy walk from the center circle.

VERY VERY smart foul.
Ranks along the lines of the player in the last WC handing the ball off the line. You're right at the end of the match and you may be out but your team is still kicking.As always, if you don't finish your chances early you will regret it later.I'd change it to two 20 minutes extra time periods, add one more sub per team, make them sudden death, and then end with PKs after that.I guess I'll take a stab at this, because a lot of people probably won't.First of all, I don't think you'll find too many people outright defending the extra time/PK setup as it currently stands - but I will say that I'm not against the concept of PKs deciding a championship game. Having played a handful of 120-minute games myself (when I was in better shape), I can tell you that the game honestly devolves into something different by that point. Yes, I agree that the sport and its fans pride themselves on being high-endurance athletes, but soccer is unlike the rest of the sports in that you get absolutely no break. Obviously I'm not knocking hockey, baseball, etc., and I realize that those sports (namely hockey) are insanely difficult to play, but players in those sports aren't playing non-stop the entire time. I haven't played those other sports at a high level, so I can't really compare them, but even the best athletes aren't going to be able to keep going for much longer than 120 minutes.This has driven me CRAZY for years!Yes, can anyone defend or explain the way a soccer game is decided after a tie in regulation in these big games??Why oh why do they decide a World Championship on penalty kicks?
One of the worst ways to win or lose a game that took away from how great regular and extra time really was.One of the best games I have seen in a while.
I don't get it!! It's a sport that flaunts the conditioning and wearing down aspect of their game with nonstop play just 3 substitutions, YET when it comes down to a tie (after OT) they decide it with penalty kicks??!!?? This does NOT determine the best soccer team or refect the game itself.
They said they have gone back and forth with the golden goal (like hockey the first goal in OT wins). What was wrong with that?? Have it just like hockey score in OT it's over.
The overtimes are stupid. One goal should finish it. Here is a sport that is dominated by ties YET they have an overtime that allows ANOTHER TIE! They play out the 30 minutes!! Hey you already had 90 minutes to prove yourselves so if the other team scores in OT it should be over. You lost. Don't get the continuation and ANOTHER second chance at all.
AND why not just play it out no matter how many overtimes it takes?? The sport that thrives on conditioning should embrace that. It would be awesome, it would epic to keep going no matter how long it takes!
Well soccer guys??
I've heard different ideas that aren't bad - allow more subs in overtime, allow previously subbed out players to re-enter, etc. - along with some (IMO) silly ones - remove a player every few minutes, etc. I think the real bottom line is that FIFA strives for a reasonable overtime that doesn't change the way they want the game to be played - which is the way they have it now, 3 subs (keeping the emphasis, like you said, on endurance), keep it simple 11v11, etc. Any more than 120 minutes without making changes to the substitution rules is really pushing it.
Golden goal - I don't really have an argument for this. I don't mind the game the way it's played now (I think it allows for more drama), but I can see why others would disagree.
PKs - I don't have much of a problem with PKs being the game-decider. I don't really see how it's a worse solution than two worn-down teams hoofing it forward in the 170th minute, hoping that the other team's defender collapses from exhaustion to lead to a goal. If one team deserved to win, they would have done so before PKs - that's how I look at it - and 2 hours is plenty of time to do so.
I guess those are my thoughts. I wouldn't be upset if the rules were changed, but I honestly don't hate PKs like a lot of people do.
You're being very short-sighted. The Japanese let us win WWII so they could install nuclear reactors around their country that would eventually release nuclear contaminants into their atmosphere due to a massive earthquake/tsunami combo just in time to turn their women into super-soccer players in order to win the 2011 Women's World Cup!'dickey moe said:Well, we still won WWII.
I realize there is a whole thread on this that I should probably comment in, but I don't find her attractive at all. :XHope Solo comes across as being a giant #####, in interviews IMO. And she isn't that hot- 6.5.
fixedMilan vs Vancouver starting on ESPN 2 now.
fixedMilan vs Vancouver starting on ESPN 2 now.

fixedMilan vs Vancouver starting on ESPN 2 now.
3rd jersey?No, I'm pretty sure this is their standard away jersey this year.fixedMilan vs Vancouver starting on ESPN 2 now.3rd jersey?
How bout Nasri?Aguero is likely going to Man City, especially if Tevez is gone. Both deals look to be close to completion. My Atleti should get 40+m€ for him. Forlán looks to be staying put.
Dont believe it. I can see him going to Barca/Real or Chelsea, but not City. With Tevez looking to leave, it would be very surprising if Aguero heads there.Aguero is likely going to Man City, especially if Tevez is gone. Both deals look to be close to completion. My Atleti should get 40+m€ for him. Forlán looks to be staying put.