Replay has RUINED all of the sports.
I know that some may be offended by this, but the sport of Soccer...
- Thread starter YourPittDanceTeam
- Start date
I always assumed this is why it's the most popular sport in the world. Anyone anywhere in the world can play it, as long as they have a ball.
I could be way off with this but I believe its popular around the world is because its cheap to play plus its cultural. In my opinion the game is kinda boring just like baseball can be, but baseball will always have a place here is because its our national pastime
I think you missed the sarcasm there lol.
I can remember standing in the elementary school gym - weird how some things stick with you and others don't - listening to Mr. Wadsworth (Ranger Dann you remember him!) tell us that we needed to start learning about this sport called soccer because it was way better than football and is going to be huge and take over America and that this guy Pele was awesome. That was probably 1979...any day now.
I get into International Level soccer (like US Women's and Men's and World Cup and Euro Cup)
But honestly, just don't have the interest or bandwidth to get into things like EPL or The German or Spanish Leagues.
I am not a soccer hater, but it is not my favorite cup of tea.
But honestly, just don't have the interest or bandwidth to get into things like EPL or The German or Spanish Leagues.
I am not a soccer hater, but it is not my favorite cup of tea.
I once watched a Super Bowl with a bunch of European kids – mostly British — and their suggestions for how to fix American Football were similarly sophisticated to your suggestions for how to fix soccer.
They were saying brilliant things like, “I don’t think the guy with the football should just run into the pile of bodies every time. Maybe he should try to run around them?”
Observations like that.
As I told them at the time, maybe spend a little bit of time actually learning the sport and then we can have a serious discussion about how to improve it.
I think there are areas in which soccer could be improved, but the offside rule is not a problem. The flopping is definitely a problem and that could be fixed by enforcing existing unsportsmanlike conduct type of rules.
The problem soccer has – particularly at the highest levels - is scoring is at such a premium and you are so unlikely to get a yellow card for embellishment. That means that the reward for embellishing anything close far outweighs the risk.
I think that could be solved very easily simply by expanding VAR. You just have an extra official in the booth and every time a guy goes down, he takes a look at it. If it’s close, you let things play out. However, if it’s a clear embellishment, you buzz down to the official, who promptly stops the game and issues a yellow card to the offending party. That would disincentivize flopping overnight and it would dramatically improve the game.
another way to do it would be to say that if they are forced to stop the game because of an injury to you, you must leave the game until at least the end of the half in which you were injured. That too would stop a lot of nonsense late in games.
There are other areas that are a little bit in the weeds where I think soccer could be improved.
Also, there are many areas in which American football could definitely be improved. In college football, for example, stopping the clock after every first down is the worst rule in sports. It does not benefit the game’s quality at all. I think it actually makes it a worse product and it puts the players at a greater risk for injury.
They were saying brilliant things like, “I don’t think the guy with the football should just run into the pile of bodies every time. Maybe he should try to run around them?”
Observations like that.
As I told them at the time, maybe spend a little bit of time actually learning the sport and then we can have a serious discussion about how to improve it.
I think there are areas in which soccer could be improved, but the offside rule is not a problem. The flopping is definitely a problem and that could be fixed by enforcing existing unsportsmanlike conduct type of rules.
The problem soccer has – particularly at the highest levels - is scoring is at such a premium and you are so unlikely to get a yellow card for embellishment. That means that the reward for embellishing anything close far outweighs the risk.
I think that could be solved very easily simply by expanding VAR. You just have an extra official in the booth and every time a guy goes down, he takes a look at it. If it’s close, you let things play out. However, if it’s a clear embellishment, you buzz down to the official, who promptly stops the game and issues a yellow card to the offending party. That would disincentivize flopping overnight and it would dramatically improve the game.
another way to do it would be to say that if they are forced to stop the game because of an injury to you, you must leave the game until at least the end of the half in which you were injured. That too would stop a lot of nonsense late in games.
There are other areas that are a little bit in the weeds where I think soccer could be improved.
Also, there are many areas in which American football could definitely be improved. In college football, for example, stopping the clock after every first down is the worst rule in sports. It does not benefit the game’s quality at all. I think it actually makes it a worse product and it puts the players at a greater risk for injury.
Last edited:
People who think that the offsides rule is a problem just look at those cases where a goal gets ruled out on a close call and think that if the rule didn't exist more goals would be scored. In fact, exactly the opposite is likely to be true. If there were no offsides rule then every team would have to leave at least one or two players, maybe even more than that depending on how the opponent was playing, permanently anchored deep in their defensive end. Because that would be the only thing that would stop your opponent from getting several one on one chances with the goalie every game.
The upshot of that would be fewer players in the attacking half of the field, which would mean fewer good scoring chances and fewer goals. It's the exact same thing that would happen in hockey if you took away offsides in hockey. Back in the day Wayne Gretzky was notorious for never crossing the center line to go into his own defensive end for whole shifts at a time. But he still couldn't cross the line until after the puck, so teams didn't have to have someone back standing next to him the whole time. If he could have gone all the way down the ice then a defender would have had to have gone back and covered him, because if they didn't he'd get a ton of one on ones with the goalies. Which would have put fewer players in the offensive zone, which would mean fewer goals getting scored.
I am not a soccer guy at all. I played it growing up till 8th grade and it was fun, but watching it is boring to me. For those that say "it is non stop action" I laugh at you. I find nothing, absolutely nothing exciting watching a person dribble a ball 50 yards uncontested which happens regularly every game. Just because the clock doesn't stop, does not mean constant action. There are long periods of no actual action.
If you like it by all means go for it, but to me it is a hard no.
If you like it by all means go for it, but to me it is a hard no.
This is not the same, but the same theory with hockey when people say they need "bigger rinks like international games". Well if people would pay attention to International hockey, whether Olympics or Euro Leagues or KHL, unless it is say Team Canada vs Team Korea, and the score is 12-0, the scores are lower?
Why? Bigger rinks, more room right? True, but it is also easier to push a power play out further from the slot (net front) and force more long shots. Teams also play more cautious 5 on 5 and again there is often more play along the perimeter and neutral zone than areas where goals are typically scored.
I am one of those people who does believe that the sport of hockey is much more entertaining when played on the larger an Olympic sized ice surface.
The larger surface allows for the more skilled players to display their skills and create a more entertaining game. Just one guys opinion though.
1. flopping is also cultural. spain and south america use it as a tactic. it's complex. it feels dirty to us but it's just part of the game in many places. "if you don't dive, you don't get."
how do you get rid of it? you don't. even VAR. you can't truly know how hurt someone is. there are clear ones here and there but most of the dings in the game you could see having some pain/injury. they could better police it, though. and should. but i don't see the problem with it. it's just another way of trying to get one up on an opponent. no different than pine tar, stealing signals, etc that you see in any sport.
2. first down time out rule: agree. worst rule in any sport. completely stupid. colleges seem intent on getting 4 hour games. games are way too long and that rule let's teams who have been "beaten" get a lifeline at the end of games.
Not even close! Soccer players are total wimps who would curl up in the fetal position crying like babies if they took one of the many hits a hockey player takes in the course of the game!
Put in a blue line instead of some BS moving offsides line.
The two games are far apart! One is exciting the other a bunch of candy-asses crying on the grass rolling around because someone gave them a look they didn't like!
Honestly, Finland has found the best solution on this issue with their 200 x 93 hybrid rink. There’s more room out there, but it’s still smaller than the traditional international ice surface on which players occasionally get lost.
Finland has enjoyed a TREMENDOUS amount of International success in recent years and they’ve also produced a ton of good NHL and European leagues types of players. Many around the hockey world credit their ice size to much of that success.
I have always felt that the best solution for the NHL would be to allow teams to build different sized rinks — within certain parameters.
In other words, your rink could be 200 x 85, as is the case now in North America; or 200 x 93, as they do in Finland; or even 200 to 100, as they do in the International game.
I think I would make for a more interesting sport at the NHL level because it would make home ice advantage much more pronounced. I used to love seeing teams have to adjust when playing on the smaller surfaces in Boston, Chicago and Buffalo. It was a more interesting game then, IMHO.
However, as much as I’d love to see it, I don’t think it will ever happen.
For me...indoor soccer is so much more entertaining than outdoor soccer. More fun to play i would think too. Paul Child. Stan Terliki
Well, obviously FIFA and the major domestic leagues agree with your assessment. Otherwise, they would have moved much more aggressively than they have to address it.
I do believe though that most North Americans see that as a barrier to embracing the sport — for precisely the cultural issues you raised earlier.
It feels like cheating to many of us in a way that feels different than sign stealing, hand checking, etc.
Also, I do believe that expanded VAR would likely reduce that phenomenon by a substantial amount. However, as you said, it doesn’t appear to be a big deal to most of the soccer world.
Incidentally, I also believe that stricter clock rules would disincentivize a lot of the flopping. If every single second lost during a flop and subsequent histrionics is later restored, there’s really less incentive for players to act like they were struck down by a sniper every time a player from an opposing team comes within a few feet of him.
Personally, I like soccer and watch it a fair amount. It is my fifth favorite sport, I’m not a die hard by any means. Also, I don’t favor many changes to it. However, I long preached for the need for replay on goals and I think a flop crackdown would also make the game better for everyone.
I haven’t seen indoor soccer played anywhere in 35-40 years. Is there still a pro league?
Personally, I think it is to soccer what the Arena Football League is to the game of football.
I think he missed the sarcasm also.
Soccer’s problem is that it is all activity with no results.
I guess you never had a child that played travel club soccer. Not a cheap date. Now high-end AAU basketball, that is a cheap sport for the participants to play. Cost zero for the kids. Might even be a few dollars in it for the parents.
My son follows Chelsea so we've been watching all their games. On tomorrow.
Having said that I still struggle to stay involved. Sometimes it feels like a whole lot of time with a whole lot of nothing.
That's always been my argument. Instead of stoppage time, when the game stops because someone is laying on the ground "dead" simply stop the clock. That's what the US high schools and colleges do. And then when the clock gets to 45 or 90 the horn sounds and the half ends.
You want to roll around on the ground and act like you are really hurt when you aren't? Fine, have at it. When your tantrum ends we'll start the clock back up and continue the game. Same with substitutions. Stop the clock. You want to slowly walk off the field while moving your arms to pretend like you are really jogging, great, more power to you. When you finally manage to make your way off the field and the sub comes on we'll start the clock back up.
All the gamesmanship does seem to be an ingrained part of the culture of the game though, so it isn't going to stop any time soon.
Your point is well taken. But is it really worse than watching a collegiate football game get stopped repeatedly for pre-snap penalties? Or having a game held-up for 5 minute breaks while officials watch replays - and the refs still blow the call?
Every sport has its flaws. Followers of soccer accept its flaws and appreciate the sport’s innate beauty. Few - if any - sports offers the opportunity for individual, on-the-fly creativity that soccer does.
And unlike other sports, you won’t see any out-of-shape professional soccer players.
Again to each their own. But who cares if there are what you are referring to as out of shape athletes. I am assuming you are singling out linemen and a few select baseball players. Their craft does not require being slim, it requires heft. I do not see why being in your opinion of being in shape matters. They are in plenty of good enough shape for the job that is required of them.
Why stop the clock at all?
I say only for set plays until touched .
subs? Hell if hockey can jump over a board onto ice with skates - they can jog off a flat field
Soccer should have a goal worth 6 points and add a field goal for 3 points, then they would equal scoring in some football games. Can’t be worse that the Pitt Utah bowl game or NFL games where all the scoring is by field goals. I frequently dvr my football games and begin watching a little later. I can watch entire game in less that 1/2 hour. There is only about 15-20 minutes of actual play in a 3 hour NFL game. And the players only play less than half of that. Football should have mostly running clock with very little time between plays. It would be like constant 2 minute drill. Clock time would be longer of course but action non stop with no punts and no standing around.
I have a son who played soccer in the ACC years ago(Maryland). I never appreciated soccer before he began playing the game. With the conditioning required and the athleticism required, I really learned how to appreciate the game. One has to have some knowledge of how soccer is played to watch and like the game. Just think of someone watching our football and not knowing the rules or understanding how the game works. Many Europeans laugh at our football while trying to watch when there is 20 minutes of action in 3 hours of time.
I have a son who played soccer in the ACC years ago(Maryland). I never appreciated soccer before he began playing the game. With the conditioning required and the athleticism required, I really learned how to appreciate the game. One has to have some knowledge of how soccer is played to watch and like the game. Just think of someone watching our football and not knowing the rules or understanding how the game works. Many Europeans laugh at our football while trying to watch when there is 20 minutes of action in 3 hours of time.
Last edited:
Not being argumentative, I notice that you didn't defend the ridiculous stoppages in play that have made football a chore to watch. It's gotten so bad that during one replay stoppage, a person can leave one's seat and run to the concession stand, buy a soda, and be back in their seat before play resumes. (This is indeed possible...I've done it.)
I don't think so. Not always. Now, when you have a Canadian team with Crosby, McDavid, Bergeron, MacKinnon, Burns. etc....vs say a Russia with Ovy, Geno, Panarin, Tarashenko, etc.....the sport is great on NHL ice or big ice. The best hockey I ever saw was the 1987 Canada Cup, played on NHL ice. Lemieux, Gretzky, Messier, Bourque, Coffey, etc...vs the Soviets with Fetisov, Larionov, Makarov, etc.... 3 straight 6-5 games, 2 of them in OT.
Much of the big ice, you take say Team Norway vs Team Finland, it will be a 2-1 game with little chances
IMHO this problem could be instantly resolved if the dubiously "Injured" player were forced to remain off the field (with no replacement) for a certain amount of time (say 5-10 minutes?). If the teams was forced to play short, it would go a long way toward eliminating the dives that we all hate.
I'd take your example one step further. When we watch competition as you described (above), it also reflects that hockey can be one helluva exciting sport without the "obligatory" fighting that takes place.
I know that some of this board will vehemently disagree, but if I was the King of Hockey, I'd instantly banish fighting. There are other sports that offer fighting, so why not keep the team sports pure and free of it?
it's getting unwatchable in a stadium. at home, i can go check the board, get a sandwich, break up my boys' fighting, etc. but it's dreadful being at the game.
I agree with you. 10 years ago I was the guy that watched football from Thursday to Monday. Now I never watch any Thursday/Monday unless it is a team I root for (Pitt/Army/Steelers). I still love HS football so I go to that. Then Saturday I watch Pitt and maybe another big game then Steelers on Sunday. The main reason is the pass happy offenses, lack of defense, and the stoppages.
My point is everyone acts like soccer is constant action because the clock don't stop. I disagree, I think the pace is so slow there might as well be stoppages. I bet if you added all the actual action in soccer and football, there would be more total seconds/minutes of action in football. Like I said how often do you see a player dribble a ball for 50 yards. Or a team pass back and forth uncontested. Happens a lot in soccer.
FWIW - Pulisic came in as a sub today vs Liverpool and almost immediately scored 2 goals. Chelsea still lost but he's terrific.
They talk about athletes who "have a motor". If a "motor" is what separates the very good from the good, then Pulisic has a rocket engine.
Actually he scored one and set the other up with an exquisite run between two defenders followed by a pass that was perfectly placed to be in between the last defender and the goalie, giving his teammate essentially a tap in.
Oh, he was definitely terrific, but he didn't score both goals.
I discovered this kid when he was 17. Been fun to follow him, but I seem to have dropped soccer for a while last year.
Fighting is completely over the top ridiculous when it is that contrived "goon vs goon" like that settles anything. But man, on those now even really rare occasions like the 2012 Pens/Flyers series where everything was legit.....it just builds into the next game and so on.
