The Official 2010 World Cup Thread

You gotta love Argentina , they are allowing students get to school AFTER the game , without consequences.

Joyrex , you Mexican , weren't you like a Texan 3 months ago?

  On 6/2/2010 at 7:28 PM, Fred McGriff said:

when do you pee when watching a soccer match? i require commercials to go pee.

You go before the game , half-time , and then after the game.

  On 6/2/2010 at 7:24 PM, dr lopez said:

if you're right then we are free from J.P dellacamera who is a dunderhead who knows nothing about how to comment on the sport. he thinks that saying "Bocanegra gestures to pass the ball but instead starts to dribble" is quality match commentating. I can deal with harkes then. and rae, mccoist, healy and martin tyler i all approve of with much vigor. shame theres no andy gray

I think Andy Gray might be part of the studio crew. I just hoped they don't have Alexi Lalas and Giorgio Chinaglia again (although Chinaglia makes me laugh, admittedly).

  On 6/2/2010 at 7:28 PM, Fred McGriff said:

when do you pee when watching a soccer match? i require commercials to go pee.

This is a very good question. Of course, the easy answer is DVR. If you are like me and can't stand not watching something live (to the second), you hold your pee until half or full time.

  On 6/2/2010 at 7:10 PM, Joyrex said:

Well, my avatar lets you all know where I stand, even though it's unlikely they'll make it to the finals...

tomorrow Italy v Mexico.

  On 6/2/2010 at 4:59 PM, Fred McGriff said:

drinking hard

Amen

  On 6/2/2010 at 7:28 PM, Fred McGriff said:

when do you pee when watching a soccer match? i require commercials to go pee.

You just go on the park

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbHE9OWjQY0

realised that needed a spoiler =)

  On 6/2/2010 at 7:00 PM, The Overlook said:

 

International football is not without its problems. In fact, it's grossly scandalous, with referees that make NBA refs look legit, no video replay, etc. However, as a spectator sport, even on TV, there is something breathtaking about the sort of physical skills involved in the sport AND the fact there are no annoying beer commercials disrupting the story of the match every three minutes.

 

i will never support video replay in football. the whole idea can fuck right off. Having done my fair share of officiating, refs do the best they can. Unless you've actually ever officiated a match, you have no idea what it's like out there. Sometimes they make mistakes, but any human does. How many mistakes do players make a match?

Having video replays needn't be seen as an attack on the ref. It's helping them out.

Feeling cheated or getting a win you really shouldnt have are hugely enjoyable and emotive unifiers.

Some people argue that bad ref calls are part of the game, that football would lose some of its charm if things like video replay were introduced, i disagree, while it is true that we're used to having these things happen every now and then (more like in every single game) I don't see how losing this quirk is in anyway comparable to unfair wins/losses.

i think the idea that you can lose a world cup final - something that only comes round once every four years and something that even 99% of professional footballers will never experience - on a wrongly awarded goal or a decision that the whole world can see was incorrect within about 2-3 seconds of it happening is mindboggling.

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:15 AM, Jonas said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1JY7fWNCqc

 

There is a theory Moebius..........

Video decisions are a construct of rolling news and saturation of TV football, it holds no real relevance to most people playing or watching of a Saturday.

In fact even the entire stadium can watch it on a big screen immediately after it happens, it's surreal. Spock would be having spasms.

While video replay is great for fan amusement (it also shows how often commentators get it wrong), adding them in to officiating decisions would slow the game down, and would still not ensure 100% accuracy.

Video is great for this kind of shit though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-kQM-AlSPU

I'd have it for the crucial decisions. Would barely slow the game down at all with the right technology.

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:30 AM, Rambo said:

In fact even the entire stadium can watch it on a big screen immediately after it happens, it's surreal. Spock would be having spasms.

Where does this happen? About 8 years ago they tried it for less than a season i think, then they realised the riot starting potential.

you could have it like in american football that a team can ask to review a fixed number of plays. it wouldn't slow down stuff like goals scored, or penalty kicks awarded, maybe it would complicate offside rulings, but offside is a dumb rule and someone should've come up with an alternative already, but a lot of people opposed to this for the "it's part of the game mentality" which i'll never understand.

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:45 AM, Dirty Protest said:

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:30 AM, Rambo said:

In fact even the entire stadium can watch it on a big screen immediately after it happens, it's surreal. Spock would be having spasms.

 

Where does this happen? About 8 years ago they tried it for less than a season i think, then they realised the riot starting potential.

usually it is forbidden to show even stills of past plays on stadiums. but every now and then the stadium crew does it anyway.

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:45 AM, Dirty Protest said:

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:30 AM, Rambo said:

In fact even the entire stadium can watch it on a big screen immediately after it happens, it's surreal. Spock would be having spasms.

 

Where does this happen? About 8 years ago they tried it for less than a season i think, then they realised the riot starting potential.

I've been watching matches where it's happened plenty of times. Even if it had never happened in the history of football it'd still be irrelevant though because it could be done.

england to lose to USA first round

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:41 AM, Rambo said:

I'd have it for the crucial decisions. Would barely slow the game down at all with the right technology.

what qualifies as a crucial decision? A handball that prevents a through ball that could have led to the winning goal? A foul on the edge of the penalty area? Offside? Henry's handball?

It's fucking bullshit. Stop fucking with the game, let the players play.

(i still love you rambo. wewyow weyow weyow derby county)

LOL fucking LOL j.p. morgan (the investment firm) predicts England to win the World Cup.

L to the fucking OL

  On 6/3/2010 at 6:30 AM, chenGOD said:

LOL fucking LOL j.p. morgan (the investment firm) predicts England to win the World Cup.

 

L to the fucking OL

LOL,

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:46 AM, GORDO said:

you could have it like in american football that a team can ask to review a fixed number of plays. it wouldn't slow down stuff like goals scored, or penalty kicks awarded, maybe it would complicate offside rulings, but offside is a dumb rule and someone should've come up with an alternative already, but a lot of people opposed to this for the "it's part of the game mentality" which i'll never understand.

offside is a dumb rule? really? i don't know if having a couple players on each side of the pitch cherrypicking for a long ball would be any better. what alternatives do you have? offisde is an important part of the game and a well timed sprint by a player makes for an exciting situation.

If anyone doesn't understand or value the offside rule they should not be discussing football matters. End of.

  On 6/3/2010 at 5:30 AM, chenGOD said:

  On 6/3/2010 at 4:41 AM, Rambo said:

I'd have it for the crucial decisions. Would barely slow the game down at all with the right technology.

 

 

what qualifies as a crucial decision? A handball that prevents a through ball that could have led to the winning goal? A foul on the edge of the penalty area? Offside? Henry's handball?

 

It's fucking bullshit. Stop fucking with the game, let the players play.

(i still love you rambo. wewyow weyow weyow derby county)

Nah i know what you mean. I think the captain should be allowed to challenge 3 decisions a match and then there's no danger of it getting out of hand. They do something similar if not identical in rugby i think.