Page 4 of 45 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 889
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Sullivans Island, SC
    Awful news for Colombia. Falcao appears to be out of the World Cup.

    http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/16...-doubt?cc=5901

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
    Awful news for Colombia. Falcao appears to be out of the World Cup.
    I didn't even know that he played futball?
    Oh wait... wrong guy.


    -Jason :now, can someone arrange for Neuer, Schweinsteiger, or Ronaldo to get hurt? Just kidding!" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
    Awful news for Colombia. Falcao appears to be out of the World Cup.

    http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/16...-doubt?cc=5901
    And Group C becomes even more of a joke than it was already

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Perhaps of interest, a perspective on Colombia's chances still:

    http://colombiareports.co/falcao-dont-sleep-colombia/

  5. #65
    Even is on!


  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle
    I'm much less concerned about the offside call, and much more concerned with the poor play that led to two goals.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    Even is on!

    IMO, the single most important factor in keeping goal-scoring pretty low is what appears to me to be a near-universal default position among linesmen to bias the offside call in favor of the defensive line. It's as if a nose-hair in front of the nearest defender constitutes offside, ignoring other defenders and even the closest defender's actual position vis-a-vis the attacker.

    I suppose the offside call is the football equivalent of block-charge, in terms of difficulty getting it right. And certainly sometimes the linesman gets it wrong the other way, not calling it when the attacker was actually offside. But I'd be interested in hearing from those of you who've been footy mad longer than I on this issue.

    Ditto on another of my pet peeves: the wall being allowed to set up 8.5 yards away, creeping up to about 7 just before the ball is struck.

    And a third: the back-pass to the goalie. A noticeable % of the time, it leads to disaster. Whenever this particular disaster strikes, I cheer -- make that jeer -- madly. Admittedly, this 3d peeve, when "successfully" botched by back-passer, does produce more goals, so maybe I better get my priorities straight.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    IMO, the single most important factor in keeping goal-scoring pretty low is what appears to me to be a near-universal default position among linesmen to bias the offside call in favor of the defensive line. It's as if a nose-hair in front of the nearest defender constitutes offside, ignoring other defenders and even the closest defender's actual position vis-a-vis the attacker.

    I suppose the offside call is the football equivalent of block-charge, in terms of difficulty getting it right. And certainly sometimes the linesman gets it wrong the other way, not calling it when the attacker was actually offside. But I'd be interested in hearing from those of you who've been footy mad longer than I on this issue.

    Ditto on another of my pet peeves: the wall being allowed to set up 8.5 yards away, creeping up to about 7 just before the ball is struck.

    And a third: the back-pass to the goalie. A noticeable % of the time, it leads to disaster. Whenever this particular disaster strikes, I cheer -- make that jeer -- madly. Admittedly, this 3d peeve, when "successfully" botched by back-passer, does produce more goals, so maybe I better get my priorities straight.
    I've played soccer all my life, including for 11 years in Europe. I'm completely with you on #'s 1 and 2. I don't even think the issue is that offside is as ambiguous as charge/block, it's just that the default for many linesmen is to throw the flag if it's close. I see way, way more flags go up when they should stay down, than vice versa.

    I disagree on #3, though. It can lead to some tricky situations, and even goal scoring opportunities for the other team, but I'm generally in favor of it, both as a player and as a fan. That's assuming you have a keeper who can actually clear the ball, even with a forward charging at him. It also assumes your fullback plays a decent ball to the keeper (ie. doesn't just lay a lazy ball in his general direction, there's not a forward directly between the two, plays it when the keeper is ready for it, and doesn't blast a bouncing ball at him).

    That's a lot of caveats, but many teams do this dozens of time a game without issue. My bigger issue is defenders trying to dribble out of their own box in traffic, or trying to cross the ball across their own box.

    We had a great discussion on DBR a few years ago of how the offside call could be changed, along with options for overtime situations / PKs. I'll see if I can find it.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    I disagree on #3, though. It can lead to some tricky situations, and even goal scoring opportunities for the other team, but I'm generally in favor of it, both as a player and as a fan. That's assuming you have a keeper who can actually clear the ball, even with a forward charging at him. It also assumes your fullback plays a decent ball to the keeper (ie. doesn't just lay a lazy ball in his general direction, there's not a forward directly between the two, plays it when the keeper is ready for it, and doesn't blast a bouncing ball at him).

    That's a lot of caveats, but many teams do this dozens of time a game without issue.
    Thanks for response. For now we'll probably agree to disagree, but I'll comment a little more. I do of course agree that the back-pass is standard play, and occurs frequently. But my view is that, given goals are so hard to come by [partly due to pet peeves 1&2], the defending team needs to be really careful not to give the ball away near the 18-yard box. And your caveats accurately depict the several ways a tricky situation can lead to a one v. one with the goalie. The number of times I see a defender make a bad pass, usually mis-hit and thus too slow, or fail to notice a lurking forward, is striking.

    What if 1% of the time this leads to a give-away goal? Does that make it a bad play, or good odds and thus a perfectly good play. Or maybe 0.5% of the time?

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    I've played soccer all my life, including for 11 years in Europe. I'm completely with you on #'s 1 [bias toward calling offensive player offside] and 2 [wall encroachment before a free kick]
    Hmmm...Reisen, were you a striker, by chance?

    Well, strike that, lol. My first question is, 'what is your tendency when refereeing?'
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    I don't even think the issue is that offside is as ambiguous as charge/block, it's just that the default for many linesmen is to throw the flag if it's close. I see way, way more flags go up when they should stay down, than vice versa
    It makes sense to me that the tendency would be to call offsides rather than not. Since goal scoring is at such a premium, the perception is that mistakenly allowing a goal has much more impact that mistakenly not allowing it...which, I believe, is also the reason why so many whistles are swallowed during infractions in the penalty box.

    *** Oh, while I'm at it, I should say the the #1, #2, and #3 pet peeves should all be diving! (Have you noticed my defensive bias yet? ) ***

    Anyway, I suppose one could argue that mistakenly allowing and mistakenly disallowing goals are equally impactful (each making a difference of 1 goal). Yet, they "feel" different when reffing. When in doubt, it feels much more equitable and right to keep a balanced sheet and make the teams clearly earn their marks.

    My perception is that the offside call has become somewhat more favorable to the offensive player over time...and I'm not happy with it. Take a look at the photo above. Although the feet were "even," the forward's body and momentum were already past the defender's. Imagine how difficult it is to defend someone who has a running start, facing the goal, whereas the defender has to turn and then accelerate. The only saving graces for defenders are positioning and timing (hence, making the game both physical and mental). No amount of positioning, though, will help the defenders if the referees become lenient on the timing. It would just be impossible to catch up to the offensive player. It would simply be a case of who can run faster (with the offensive player getting a head start). And, defenders, who are usually physically stouter, are likely to frequently lose such a race. If this were the case, the only way to combat the scenario is to stop the entry pass from being made in the first place. This is nearly impossible, though, as the space is too great on the soccer field to fully deny passing lanes from the midfield to a through-ball or ball over the top. The necessity of proper timing significantly aids in denying such passing. As a defender, it frequently made me mad when midfielders would 'hold' the attacking player from advancing, but wouldn't actually prevent the attacking player from picking out whatever pass he wanted to make. If the offensive midfielder has the opportunity to sit and wait for appropriate timing, they will surely be able to send in a favorable pass.

    The way I see it, is that more leniency in offsides would see the sport degrade into more of an under-10 style "boom ball," where the attacking third becomes a flat out foot race. It would detract from the strategy and cleverness of _both_ defense and offense.

    Regarding pet peeve #3, passing back to the goalkeeper, I agree with Reisen that this is fraught with peril, yet still a LOT more favorable than having the defender engage someone in a 1-on-1 battle. As the last line of defense, each mistake is magnified. If the striker makes a mistake in positioning, timing, or dribbling, everyone sighs and just resets. When the defender makes a similar mistake, a goal is scored.

    Yes, scoring goals in tough in soccer. But, paradoxically, that is the reason why it is necessary to support defenders, not a reason to take away their ability to function.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by bedeviled View Post
    Regarding pet peeve #3, passing back to the goalkeeper, I agree with Reisen that this is fraught with peril, yet still a LOT more favorable than having the defender engage someone in a 1-on-1 battle. As the last line of defense, each mistake is magnified.
    Maybe we're talking past each other a little on this issue. The choice I [think I] see is not between the defender back passing or engaging 1-on-1, but between turning toward the touch line and kicking it out or back passing. If back passing is too often fraught with peril, why isn't kicking it out more sensible, most of the time? I'm claiming that I frequently see the defender choosing to back pass, rather than choosing to kick it out.

    Precisely because I agree with your last sentence, the back pass seems too often reckless. Kicking it out does usually mean the opponent gets the throw-in closer to the goal than would be the case if the goalie receiving the back pass boots it upfield. But it doesn't seem accurate to describe kicking it out as fraught with peril.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    The Northwest
    Seven weeks!!!

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Figured this was the best place to put this...some of you have seen the new ESPN commercial, "I Believe," that showcases U.S. fans. Well, some of you may recognize the guy at the 0:18 mark and the voice that carries the commercial after that.

    Check out the Duke Basketball Roundup!

    2003-2004 HLM
    Duke | Mirecourt | Detroit| The U | USA

  14. #74
    And we're down to a 30 man roster:

    http://soccer.si.com/2014/05/12/jurg...ter-selection/

    Brian Straus seems to take issue with some of Klinsmann's selections, but I'm overall pretty happy with it. That includes Eddie Johnson's omission. 10 years ago, I had as high hopes for him as anyone, but I just don't think he's the answer at this point.

    The only omission I'm fretting over at all is Feilhaber, who I'm still a big fan of.

    I agree that getting to 18 players or so of the 23 man team is pretty easy, and, as always, it's those last 5 where you really have some debate. I'd like to see Mix included, as I'm also high on him.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Quote Originally Posted by blazindw View Post
    Figured this was the best place to put this...some of you have seen the new ESPN commercial, "I Believe," that showcases U.S. fans. Well, some of you may recognize the guy at the 0:18 mark and the voice that carries the commercial after that.

    Cool. Does it count as a cameo or starring role of you get only a few moments of screen time but a lot of scream time?

    -jk

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Quote Originally Posted by -jk View Post
    Cool. Does it count as a cameo or starring role of you get only a few moments of screen time but a lot of scream time?

    -jk
    Haha, they've made it into a 30 second spot (where I'm featured twice including leading off the commercial and voice throughout) and a 15 second spot (that also has me once and a me in a group shot). Others have referred to it as "my commercial" so I'm running with it!
    Check out the Duke Basketball Roundup!

    2003-2004 HLM
    Duke | Mirecourt | Detroit| The U | USA

  17. #77
    I have no major complaints about the squad. Personally, I would have excluded any players in midseason who I felt were longshots to make the Final 23 and contribute in Brazil and let them carry on with their club responsibilities.

    I guess that would mean Yedlin, Diskerud, and Davis out and probably some combination of Spector, Ream, Williams, Kljestan, and Agudelo in.

  18. #78
    I didn't mention it because it wasn't terribly unexpected, but Gooch didn't make the 30 man team either. Here is his reaction:

    http://soccer.si.com/2014/05/15/oguc...ann/?eref=sihp

    My take: I feel similarly about Gooch to how I feel about Eddie. Maybe I had higher hopes for Johnson, but actually liked Onyewu better as a player.

    Both are physical specimens, but I felt never really developed the finesse skills necessary to be superstars, and now in their 30's, are being replaced by younger players. Guys like Reyna were able to have longer careers by continuing to grow their skills really until the end, but I never saw Eddie do that, and Gooch seemed to regress a little (maybe due to injuries).

    Who knows... both of those guys were proven commodities, that I could have seen a different coach taking. If we have a poor Cup, they will likely have an argument that they could have helped. Hopefully Klinsmann knows what he's doing leaving them home.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    San Francisco
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    I didn't mention it because it wasn't terribly unexpected, but Gooch didn't make the 30 man team either. Here is his reaction:

    http://soccer.si.com/2014/05/15/oguc...ann/?eref=sihp

    My take: I feel similarly about Gooch to how I feel about Eddie. Maybe I had higher hopes for Johnson, but actually liked Onyewu better as a player.

    Both are physical specimens, but I felt never really developed the finesse skills necessary to be superstars, and now in their 30's, are being replaced by younger players. Guys like Reyna were able to have longer careers by continuing to grow their skills really until the end, but I never saw Eddie do that, and Gooch seemed to regress a little (maybe due to injuries).

    Who knows... both of those guys were proven commodities, that I could have seen a different coach taking. If we have a poor Cup, they will likely have an argument that they could have helped. Hopefully Klinsmann knows what he's doing leaving them home.
    I've been wanting to jump into this thread for a while, but had been too busy to do so until now. Anyway, I can't wait for the start of the World Cup.

    As for Gooch, I don't think it's fair to put him in the same boat as Eddie Johnson. Gooch improved tremendously from when he first emerged, reaching his peak at the Confed Cup in 2009 when he, Bocanegra, and the rest of the USA defense somehow managed to hold Spain at bay and reach the finals. That's when he also secured a deal to play with AC Milan. Then, a few months later he tore his ACL, was out for a year, suffered some set backs, and, unfortunately never was able to regain his old form. One of Bob Bradley's big mistakes in South Africa was rushing a rusty and out of form Gooch back to play a big role in the squad.

    In fact, because Gooch wasn't really fully fit and ready for World Cup competition in 2010 and because he was the victim of a bogus penalty call against Ghana in 2006, it is easier to overlook just how good he was for a while. He was always unlikely to ever become a truly world class defender, but for my money, his career highs are far beyond Eddie Johnson's, and I think his ACL injury and subsequent set backs were absolutely the reason he didn't find even more success.

    Also, I'm with you on liking Gooch more than Johnson from a personal standpoint.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Sullivans Island, SC
    Quote Originally Posted by COYS View Post
    I've been wanting to jump into this thread for a while, but had been too busy to do so until now. Anyway, I can't wait for the start of the World Cup.

    As for Gooch, I don't think it's fair to put him in the same boat as Eddie Johnson. Gooch improved tremendously from when he first emerged, reaching his peak at the Confed Cup in 2009 when he, Bocanegra, and the rest of the USA defense somehow managed to hold Spain at bay and reach the finals. That's when he also secured a deal to play with AC Milan. Then, a few months later he tore his ACL, was out for a year, suffered some set backs, and, unfortunately never was able to regain his old form. One of Bob Bradley's big mistakes in South Africa was rushing a rusty and out of form Gooch back to play a big role in the squad.

    In fact, because Gooch wasn't really fully fit and ready for World Cup competition in 2010 and because he was the victim of a bogus penalty call against Ghana in 2006, it is easier to overlook just how good he was for a while. He was always unlikely to ever become a truly world class defender, but for my money, his career highs are far beyond Eddie Johnson's, and I think his ACL injury and subsequent set backs were absolutely the reason he didn't find even more success.

    Also, I'm with you on liking Gooch more than Johnson from a personal standpoint.
    I agree completely that the injury hampered his development, but with one quibble: he ruptured his patella tendon, not his ACL. I think that's a notable distinction because it appears to me the ACL surgeries (ligaments in general, I guess) are much more common than the tendon ones (patella or Achilles). As such, I'd imagine that the timetable for recovery is much better established, as well. I don't have any medical knowledge to back that up...it just seems to be something I've noticed with Gooch being a prime example of my hunch. Anyway, I'd be interested it hear if anyone with a medical background has an opinion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •