Japan USA World Cup final

[Ms. DICKINSON]

whine.exe

 

[ProfJohn]

BTW the lack of PKs would have made that last second red card mean something.

The Japanese girl committed one of the worst fouls in the game and in the end it meant nothing. That girl doesn't foul Alex and she had a perfect chance to win the game.

At the least they should change the rules to a red card on a scoring attempt is a PK instead of a free kick.

 

[Terzo]

Of course, if games went on to golden goal rather than PKs, it is quite likely we would have lost our game against Brazil.

 

[Cuda1447]

Of course, if games went on to golden goal rather than PKs, it is quite likely we would have lost our game against Brazil.

Yes, but we should have won that game in regulation anyway.

I agree, I don't like PK's. To much luck involved. Golden Goal or keep playing another 30 minutes.

 

[Sephire]

I will make sure I'm at the next Olympics for the Womens Soccer.

I need closure DAMNIT!

And Alex Morgan :sneaky:

 

[rcpratt]

Soccer isn't football or baseball, people. The rules are different because the sport is different.

At least this conversation isn't as stupid as the one I heard on sports radio yesterday, where a guy called in and complained about stoppage time, saying it could be anywhere from 10 minutes to 40 minutes (lolwut), nobody knows how long it's going to be (no, the amount of added time is very visible), and it's a mechanism for the referee to choose the winner and let them play until they get the result they want (yeah, okay). Then he went on to complain about the lack of golden goal, because, well, he didn't like it. And we didn't win.

PKs aren't perfect, but in a sport with limited substitutions you can't keep playing forever. And I completely disagree that it's bad for the sport. It wasn't bad for the sport in '99, it wasn't bad for the sport in USA/Brazil, and it wasn't bad for the sport yesterday. Although it was bad for the Americans.

 

[SP33Demon]

When I saw it going to PK's my first thought was that it was bad for the sport.

Imagine deciding the Super Bowl via field goals or PAT's.

They need to come up with something better, at least for championship games. Perhaps 10 min sudden death periods until someone scores.

Once the PK thing is gone teams will get more aggressive in trying to score. And they will either score or allow a quick counter attack score like the US did in last years world cup.

Plus a sudden death OT game is insanely exciting. My nieces high school team won a playoff game that way, was amazing with the girls running onto the field etc.

Yeah agree. And they could widen the O-zone on each side to give more of an advantage to aggressive offenses so teams cannot sit back and turtle. There are a plethora of ways to increase scoring instead of taking away sudden death OT.

rcpratt, I disagree. Even if subs ran out, that would make it even better. Remember infielder Wilson Valdez pitching in the 19th inning for the Phillies a couple months ago (and winning the game)? What about the 5OT hockey game in 2000 where the Flyers beat the Penguins at 2:35 in the morning after 92 minutes (7 hours after it started)? Or 2 NHL games that went over 100 minutes in the 1930's, think they worried about substitutions? And of course with no sudden death in baseball you wouldn't have this great moment in Tigers' history:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WV5oFj6zfI

All in all, it's great Japan won. That country really needed something good to happen after all they've been through this year.

 

[Gooberlx2]

1994, Brazil vs Italy in the final. In an epic moment of choking, Roberto Baggio takes the last PK and skys it, Brazil wins. The Rose Bowl erupts.

Fuck it, I love the drama PKs provide. Doesn't bother me at all.

 

[Mermaidman]

BTW the lack of PKs would have made that last second red card mean something.

The Japanese girl committed one of the worst fouls in the game and in the end it meant nothing. That girl doesn't foul Alex and she had a perfect chance to win the game.

At the least they should change the rules to a red card on a scoring attempt is a PK instead of a free kick.

A rule like that would add more subjectiveness to the refereeing.

It was a clever play by the Japanese player, akin to purposely fouling a player in the backcourt to prevent a 3-point attempt in the NBA. (i.e. Just a part of the game.)

 

[SP33Demon]

1994, Brazil vs Italy in the final. In an epic moment of choking, Roberto Baggio takes the last PK and skys it, Brazil wins. The Rose Bowl erupts.

Fuck it, I love the drama PKs provide. Doesn't bother me at all.

Is a PK indicative of a team's collective talent? Nope. That's why the NFL changed their OT rules so at least both defenses get their shot to make a play. PKs aren't dramatic IMO and have nothing to do with a team's talent (passing, playing sound defense) other than each team's goalie that gets lucky on a guess. Guess right, you make the stop. Guess wrong, they score. Yes, the biggest soccer game in the world is decided in this manner (if tied). It's not skill.

 

[abaez]

1994, Brazil vs Italy in the final. In an epic moment of choking, Roberto Baggio takes the last PK and skys it, Brazil wins. The Rose Bowl erupts.

Fuck it, I love the drama PKs provide. Doesn't bother me at all.

I was at that game. You could literally hear a pin drop in the stadium as Baggio lined up for his kick. When he went high everyone in the entire stadium went bonkers. It was the loudest thing I have ever heard.

 

[sdifox]

Is a PK indicative of a team's collective talent? Nope. That's why the NFL changed their OT rules so at least both defenses get their shot to make a play. PKs aren't dramatic IMO and have nothing to do with a team's talent (passing, playing sound defense) other than each team's goalie that gets lucky on a guess. Guess right, you make the stop. Guess wrong, they score. Yes, the biggest soccer game in the world is decided in this manner (if tied). It's not skill.

Penalty comes into play AFTER 30 min of extra time. It has to be decided somehow.

The thinking is you cannot miss a penalty. This puts enormous pressure on the kicker and some choke.

Being able to stay focused enough to put the ball past the goalie is not an easy task.

Standing in goal and looking at your whole team depending on you to stop the presumed goal is not easy either.

 

[rcpratt]

A lot more goes into saving a PK than just guessing one side of the other. If a keeper is blindly guessing on every PK they're doing it wrong.

 

[SP33Demon]

Penalty comes into play AFTER 30 min of extra time. It has to be decided somehow.

The thinking is you cannot miss a penalty. This puts enormous pressure on the kicker and some chock.

Being able to stay focused enough to put the ball past the goalie is not an easy task.

Standing in goal and looking at your whole team depending on you to stop the presumed goal is not easy either.

Enormous pressure? You kick left and the goalie guesses right, you score. While I understand that you are saying the kicker still has to kick it in, this is essentially a coin flip that takes minimal skill. It'd be as dramatic as a "stolen base-off" in baseball and seeing the runner stumble/trip which allows them to be thrown out. And I wouldn't watch that crap either. Two people displaying 1 minute aspect of a game does not equal team skill.

 

[sdifox]

Enormous pressure? You kick left and the goalie guesses right, you score. While I understand that you are saying the kicker still has to kick it in, this is essentially a coin flip that takes minimal skill. It'd be as dramatic as a "stolen base-off" in baseball and seeing the runner stumble/trip which allows them to be thrown out. And I wouldn't watch that crap either. Two people displaying 1 minute aspect of a game does not equal team skill.

After 120 minutes, there isn't much gas left in the tank to run around some more, penalty is the best option left.

 

[SP33Demon]

After 120 minutes, there isn't much gas left in the tank to run around some more, penalty is the best option left.

After 120 minutes that's where conditioning and genetics come into play. Why doesn't anyone watch boxing anymore? Because it has 12 rounds which is a walk in the park for modern athletes who hardly break a sweat. Gone are the days when boxers fought until a KO such as Harry Sharpe vs Frank Crosby in 1892:

At a total time of 5 hours, 3 minutes, 45 seconds, the Crosby/Sharpe fight is one of the longest bouts of all time. It proved to be so long, in fact, that the referee didn’t even last the full duration. Supposedly, the fight’s ref was fighting a cold by taking the occasional pull from a flask of liquor. According to boxing lore, the man passed out in the 65th round, leaving Sharpe and Crosby to fight their last 12 rounds with no officiating.

Athletes today are too pampered and soccer's PK is a good example. God forbid they should have to run for another 100 minutes or so. The world record is over 40 hours by the way which broke the previous record of 35 hours.

It has barely been a month since English club Cambray FC and a local All Stars team set a new world record by playing for 35 hours in the south western town of Cheltenham. However a 19 year old American lad is set to grind that record into dust by going one step further and playing 40 hours non stop this August.

120 minutes in soccer is nothing.

 

[Blackjack200]

BTW the lack of PKs would have made that last second red card mean something.

The Japanese girl committed one of the worst fouls in the game and in the end it meant nothing. That girl doesn't foul Alex and she had a perfect chance to win the game.

At the least they should change the rules to a red card on a scoring attempt is a PK instead of a free kick.

I know it sucks, but that was actually a very smart play by the Japanese defender not allowing Morgan to get into the area. It reminded me of that Paraguay defender that batted a ball out of the goal mouth with his hand in the men's WC quarterfinals. He earned a red card and the other team got a PK, but the goalie saved it and they went on to win.

The US also should have scored on the free kick, they had the ball right in front of the goal. The US had so many chances to win this game it was ridiculous.

 

[busydude]

Enormous pressure? You kick left and the goalie guesses right, you score. While I understand that you are saying the kicker still has to kick it in, this is essentially a coin flip that takes minimal skill. It'd be as dramatic as a "stolen base-off" in baseball and seeing the runner stumble/trip which allows them to be thrown out. And I wouldn't watch that crap either. Two people displaying 1 minute aspect of a game does not equal team skill.

Have you ever played soccer in your life?

 

[Blackjack200]

After 120 minutes that's where conditioning and genetics come into play. Why doesn't anyone watch boxing anymore? Because it has 12 rounds which is a walk in the park for modern athletes who hardly break a sweat. Gone are the days when boxers fought until a KO such as Harry Sharpe vs Frank Crosby in 1892:

If you want to see the best conditioned athletes win, go watch a marathon. I'm interested in soccer. After 120 minutes you are not watching quality play anymore, you are watching hail mary passes and 1-2 man sorties into the offensive zone. The ugly truth is that tournament play rarely results in the best team winning because so much can hinge on a lucky play or two.

Congrats to Japan, and nothing against them, but they are not even close to the best team in the world. Neither is the US btw. If I had to rank, based on what I saw, I would put it:

1. Germany
2. Brazil
3. US
4. France
5. Sweden
6. Japan

That's why professional football leagues award championships based on the entire season. That lets all the little flukes shake out. But it's impractical to do that for something like the World Cup, so you have to tolerate this type of thing.

 

[abaez]

You realize that the teams you listed first and fifth just lost to the team you listed sixth?

There are also two years of qualifying matches just to get IN to the world cup, which are alot longer than your quaint "seasons." So Japan qualified, beat the team you ranked as number one and five, and you somehow think they don't deserve it and aren't the best right now?

 

[Gooberlx2]

You realize that the teams you listed first and fifth just lost to the team you listed sixth?

There are also two years of qualifying matches just to get IN to the world cup, which are alot longer than your quaint "seasons." So Japan qualified, beat the team you ranked as number one and five, and you somehow think they don't deserve it and aren't the best right now?

He didn't say they didn't deserve it. Japan absolutely persevered throughout the tournament and won their title admirably.

He said that if you were to rank the teams from best to worst (I'm assuming from a skill perspective), Japan still doesn't top the list (and neither does the US). The World Cup is a snapshot tournament for the purposes of awarding a champion. "Champion" and "best" are not always mutually inclusive.

If, in the midst of this World Cup, the Japanese womens program made a turn to become the best in the world, we'll find that out over the next four years.

 

[Blackjack200]

You realize that the teams you listed first and fifth just lost to the team you listed sixth?

There are also two years of qualifying matches just to get IN to the world cup, which are alot longer than your quaint "seasons." So Japan qualified, beat the team you ranked as number one and five, and you somehow think they don't deserve it and aren't the best right now?

first, fifth, and third.

Of course they deserve it. They won the tournament. No, they are not the best team in the world. Not even close. They had never beaten the US before and had never even made it out of the knockout rounds. Do you think that a team like that can really become the best team in the world in a matter of months?

Was the 1980 US olympic hockey team better than the Soviet team? No. They won a single game.

My point is not to knock Japan, it is just to point out that a tournament is only good at crowning a champion, it is very bad at determining who the best team is. Do you really think that Brazil has never had the best Women's Soccer team?

 

[bigdog1218]

Yeah agree. And they could widen the O-zone on each side to give more of an advantage to aggressive offenses so teams cannot sit back and turtle. There are a plethora of ways to increase scoring instead of taking away sudden death OT.

rcpratt, I disagree. Even if subs ran out, that would make it even better. Remember infielder Wilson Valdez pitching in the 19th inning for the Phillies a couple months ago (and winning the game)? What about the 5OT hockey game in 2000 where the Flyers beat the Penguins at 2:35 in the morning after 92 minutes (7 hours after it started)? Or 2 NHL games that went over 100 minutes in the 1930's, think they worried about substitutions? And of course with no sudden death in baseball you wouldn't have this great moment in Tigers' history:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WV5oFj6zfI

All in all, it's great Japan won. That country really needed something good to happen after all they've been through this year.

You have absolutely no understanding of soccer, none at all. Any soccer thread is usually littered with the same useless arguments from people who never watch the sport. Why should they change the game to make some bandwagon fans that follow the sport 1 every four years happy? There have been multiple attempts to change how ties end in tournaments and it always comes back to PK's because it's the best choice.

Baseball players sit on their asses half the game, have 12 subs available and exert less energy then a golfer, some fluke game that an infielder finishes means absolutely nothing and was exciting for about 5 seconds on sportcenter, no one cares. And what sudden death in baseball? There is no sudden death, you don't even know what it means. Sudden death is first team to score wins, period. Not one team scores then the other team gets a chance to tie or win the game.

And why only bring up playoff hockey. The shootouts in regular season doesn't fit your argument? If you weren't completely simple minded you'll realize you can't play soccer for 240 minutes at a professional level, it's asinine to even think so.

 

[Blackjack200]

^^^^^^^^^

You could do it if you had unlimited subs, but again, what's the point? Now you're deciding the game with bench players instead of the presumably superior starters.

 

[SP33Demon]

If you want to see the best conditioned athletes win, go watch a marathon. I'm interested in soccer. After 120 minutes you are not watching quality play anymore, you are watching hail mary passes and 1-2 man sorties into the offensive zone. The ugly truth is that tournament play rarely results in the best team winning because so much can hinge on a lucky play or two.

So where did you get this magical "120 minute" cutoff BS? Athletes today could easily play 150 minutes of quality soccer yet we have to settle for PK crap. If men can play for 40 hours then 150 is nothing for women. When fighting fatigue, it takes a lot more to focus (see: Mental Toughness) on every aspect of the game vice one stupid kick. If one team really is better than it will be decided before superior conditioning/genetics get to play out. If not, playing til you can play no more is the next best option for the team to earn the win.

Hell, even tennis sudden death > any PK soccer match. Last year's Wimbledon is a great example:
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/wimbledon10/news/story?id=5322284

Epic, 11 hours of tennis over 3 days. And you're complaining about 120 minutes for soccer... You could stop it at the 150 mark and resume play the next day. A World Cup win that took 2 days > any match decided by PK. Plus it would give sponsors another day to hype the thing up and the stadium to make money in sales just as Wimbledon did. Win win for all stakeholders.