The Official 2010 World Cup Thread

with the right interface a person could view something from multiple angles over and over and within 10 seconds, he wouldn't be using levers and pulleys.

Minutiae aside, it's very simple, dudes.

What we have now is not working. If chenGOD doesn't agree that the current state of affairs are disgraceful, then he is in a very tiny, infinitesimal minority who love to add a splash of WWF to their football.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:14 PM, Rambo said:

with the right interface a person could view something from multiple angles over and over and within 10 seconds, he wouldn't be using levers and pulleys.

And in the end, it still would come down to how one person interprets an event. how does that change shit? there are still people who argue that maradona didn't use his hand in 86.

fabiano said the touches on his second goal against whoever the fuck were not intentional. What the fuck.

what we have now Mirezzi has served the game well for years and years. Sure mistakes have been made, but so what? The NFL, NHL, NBA all still have mistakes made even with video replay involved.

As I said up thread - add some tech to allow to see if the whole of the ball has crossed the line. That's easy.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:17 PM, chenGOD said:

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:14 PM, Rambo said:

with the right interface a person could view something from multiple angles over and over and within 10 seconds, he wouldn't be using levers and pulleys.

 

 

And in the end, it still would come down to how one person interprets an event. how does that change shit? there are still people who argue that maradona didn't use his hand in 86.

 

Because in one scenario you have a person interpreting an event via multiple replays from multiple angles (if needed) and in the the other scenario you have one person interpreting an event from whatever position he happened to be at the time and only once.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:17 PM, chenGOD said:

As I said up thread - add some tech to allow to see if the whole of the ball has crossed the line. That's easy.

Okay, then, that's a start.

We're in agreement about the dead ball bit you mentioned, too.

I would ALSO like to see more stringent punishment for deeds committed on the field that were caught by the camera but not by the referee. E.g. - If you simulated egregiously, you're suspended. Spitting, etc.

If the ball is dead though, why shouldn't Rosetti be able to get a whisper in his ear about the offside Tevez?

It didn't cross the line at all...

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:21 PM, Rambo said:

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:17 PM, chenGOD said:

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:14 PM, Rambo said:

with the right interface a person could view something from multiple angles over and over and within 10 seconds, he wouldn't be using levers and pulleys.

 

 

And in the end, it still would come down to how one person interprets an event. how does that change shit? there are still people who argue that maradona didn't use his hand in 86.

 

 

Because in one scenario you have a person interpreting an event via multiple replays from multiple angles (if needed) and in the the other scenario you have one person interpreting an event from whatever position he happened to be at the time and only once.

And like I said, there are still people who maintain that Maradona didn't use his hand, after watching it from multiple angles.

In the premiership - macheda scored a goal that bounced off his stomach and hit his hand on the way in...loads of people said he handled it, loads said he didn't. After watching it from multiple angles, it's still hard to tell.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:23 PM, The Overlook said:

 

 

If the ball is dead though, why shouldn't Rosetti be able to get a whisper in his ear about the offside Tevez?

Consistency.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:28 PM, chenGOD said:

 

And like I said, there are still people who maintain that Maradona didn't use his hand, after watching it from multiple angles.

In the premiership - macheda scored a goal that bounced off his stomach and hit his hand on the way in...loads of people said he handled it, loads said he didn't. After watching it from multiple angles, it's still hard to tell.

 

we know people are going to disagree , no-one is saying that's going to stop. That still doesn't change anything though.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:17 PM, chenGOD said:

what we have now Mirezzi has served the game well for years and years. Sure mistakes have been made, but so what?

I fully appreciate what you say, but the fuck ups seem to be getting more and more crucial. Sure Ireland lost to France and England lost to Germany, and there is no way of knowing if replays would have changed either result. But I think the small farce, the small inconvenience of interrupting the flow of a game to get a crucial decision right is much more palatable than the whole hand wringing and fallout when an injustice is rewarded because they will not contemplate what most other sports simply have accepted and integrated.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:30 PM, Rambo said:

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:28 PM, chenGOD said:

 

And like I said, there are still people who maintain that Maradona didn't use his hand, after watching it from multiple angles.

In the premiership - macheda scored a goal that bounced off his stomach and hit his hand on the way in...loads of people said he handled it, loads said he didn't. After watching it from multiple angles, it's still hard to tell.

 

 

we know people are going to disagree , no-one is saying that's going to stop. That still doesn't change anything though.

Well if you know people are going to disagree with video officials, what does that fucking change with the current situation? You have people pissing and moaning about the cunting officials now, all video replays do in this situation is shift the focus of the anger.

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:32 PM, Conor74 said:

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:17 PM, chenGOD said:

what we have now Mirezzi has served the game well for years and years. Sure mistakes have been made, but so what?

 

I fully appreciate what you say, but the fuck ups seem to be getting more and more crucial. Sure Ireland lost to France and England lost to Germany, and there is no way of knowing if replays would have changed either result. But I think the small farce, the small inconvenience of interrupting the flow of a game to get a crucial decision right is much more palatable than the whole hand wringing and fallout when an injustice is rewarded because they will not contemplate what most other sports simply have accepted and integrated.

better training of officials then?

I gotta go out - thanks for the discussion - except for you Mirezzi you hateful Yank cockslurper

lol Who would have thought it. The only person in the entire world (apart from Sepp Blatter) who doesn't want video replays is a ref.

Instead of a replay for goaline situations, you could have a chip in the ball like they were saying they do in hockey. Ball crosses line between goal posts, light goes on, goal. No questions asked.

mexico played a great match. most of their long distance shots were brilliant.

mexico argentina was a fun game to watch

also @ this thread past few pages

it's only been a few hours and i'm already sick of the emphasis on the disallowed goal.

we were outplayed in this tournament, and in most of the others for that matter, and we've had countless world-class managers, and this one is certainly one of them, but our players just don't perform on the international stage.

yet they do perform in the premiership. when they're supported by world-class foreigners.

blurg. come on murray!

  On 6/27/2010 at 10:34 PM, chenGOD said:

Mirezzi, Hateful Yank Cockslurper

A bit elaborate for a title, innit?

what football needs:

1. blondes should be allowed to wear whatever sexy dress in the stadium they'd like, regardless of some hardly visible branding. commerce doesn't change or create laws.

2. no new balls for a world cup please

3. VIDEO REPLAY

and some other stuff

simple fact is: More english players in the premiership (cap foreign players in a team) or start looking for players in the championship or even league 1.

here is a quote from another forum, which i tent to agree on:

  Quote

e don't realise that gradually we are turning into Scotland. We used to laugh ten years ago when Celtic played Rangers with no Scottish players - and one or two playing champions league. Scotland had qualified for more world cups than any other nation in 1998. They have not qualified since - and anyone think they will soon? We are now at that spot. Name the English players who play regular champions league football who will be around in 2014.... Rooney.....Walcott.......err.... Premier league greed has been allowed to establish itself above English talent.

 

Capello. Should have realised if everyone wanted 4-5-1 it might have been better than Emille Heskey. And Johnson/Walcott had to be trickier and better wingers than Wright-Phillips and Lennon.

 

Players. Over paid over egoed tossers in the main. Terry thinks its his job to pick the team but can't judge a ball Karl Broadhurst would have got too. No intelligence, no passion - too slow at the back and limited in midfield. Lampard can shoot but thats it. No passing, no play-making, no dribbling. Just first time crossing and long crossfield punts. Boring and the tournament is better off without them. Time to assess who is around - Wiltshire, Rodwell etc and bin Lampard, Terry etc. They might have come from academies where they can show skill.

 

there was a time when english clubs had mostly english players.

we were poor on the international stage then, too.

  On 6/27/2010 at 11:27 PM, inteeliguntdesign said:

there was a time when english clubs had mostly english players.

 

we were poor on the international stage then, too.

Yeah, that argument Chris posted is nonsense. I've seen it before, from the Union Jack waving BNP types. What's the number of foreigners in the league have to do with anything?

Spain's national side are comprised of mostly Barca and Real Madrid players. Real and Barca have made abundant use of foreigners.

Germany do quite well and their league has plenty of foreigners. Brazil's league is terrible and guess what, none of their national side play there. Veron is the only Argentinian playing in the Prima Divera.

Can somebody explain the thinking on this? What would it do for England if they booted the foreigners out of the EPL? The quality of football would deteriorate, I can tell you that, and fans wouldn't have it.

when you want to find someone to blame, chose those who are the least like yourself, basically.

if, let's say, we were world class before the influx of foreigners came play, and then shit afterwards, then i'd at least give the foreign-players-downing-out-our-good players argument a bit of leeway. but it wasn't like that at all.

if you go for that argument you're basically arguing: "yeah we were fairly poor internationally before, but just as the foreigners came, our players were finally getting good, and the foreigners drowned them out." but you need to prove we have the decent talent in the first place.

I am not that familiar with how player development works in the EPL, but I'd imagine the teams have a large stock of talented English youngsters training in the hope to make the big team some day. If their spots are taken by hired guns from all over the world, then wouldn't it in turn hurt the potential and development of future players that would end up on the national squad?

Ahh, nothing like a fourth-yearly dose of reality!

Est. 1994

Still rests on the assumption that the EPL produces the quality of youngsters that could use that extra exposure to become world-class.

Besides, clubs have a incentive to develop these players: cash in transfer money and saving in having to buy new players.

Something that would change my opinion: are the youth national team(s) much better than their adult version in the world? Isn't there a youth world cup or something?

[edit] just national youth team

'sup