Nothing like some good old group think to jump start your morning.
Uh why? This is probably the most important rule of the game, outside of the “no hands” thing.
To those saying offside is a dumb rule, why exactly?
I mean, we could start every (American) football play with players positioned anywhere they want to on the field. Would that improve the game? It is basically the same idea.
I understand the intent of how offside works in soccer, so I don’t have a problem with it, but I can understand why others do. I think the biggest “problem” people have with it is the fact that offside is a function when the ball was passed, not where the ball is located. The unfortunate thing is that can make it very difficult to make a correct call because an official can’t watch two events at the same time when they’re 20 or 25 yards apart. That is, it’s often just not possible for a single official to be looking at the origination of the pass and the potentially offiside player at the same time. Again, I understand why the rule is the way it is as opposed to being more like offside in hockey and a lot of very exciting plays would disappear if offside in soccer were like offside in hockey, but it does make for some horrificly bad calls from time-to-time.
It’s not in the spirit of the game but I suppose that it’s much the same as a defender making a professional foul by cutting down a player on a counter attack and taking the yellow.
Please stop watching soccer and go back to watching NFL/NHL. There is a reason soccer is the world’s game and not NFL/NHL.
As much as I like the USA, you guys are the master of “us vs them” mentality. It’s funny that you called someone else out on it.
I get your point after you explained yourself further. However I would like to see what the percentage of games at the top level (World Cup, Champions League) are actually decided by penalty shootout. I can bet that its in the 25-30% range.
I think the idea of a PK shootout is just that everyone is equal 12 yards from net.
There has to be an end point in the game and players can’t get substituted back on once they leave the field of play. There are also no breaks. If they had multiple OT periods like Hockey and basketball, the quality of play would decline significantly after the original 120mins. The amount of area a midfielder covers in a non-finals 90min game is over 8KM of sprinting, directional changes, and jogging. You’ll see that after most 90 + 2 Extra Time periods, players are cramping up or falling over. PK shootouts are a standard and fair way to determine the winner, and much better than flipping a coin. If you can’t beat someone over 120mins its probably fair to say it was an evenly matched game anyway.
Yeah, playing beyond 120 mins isn’t realistic and likely dangerous.
I like the compromise of having the shootout before the Extra time period, as it guarantees that at least one team will play aggressively in the extra time period.
What Higgmond wrote. The passing and bad calls.
You want the rule to be a function of where the ball is located? That will remove a major tactical element of the game. I’ll give you an example.
Team A has extremely fast defenders that can turn quickly and have extremely high recovery speeds. Due to this fact Team A defenders are confident playing further up the pitch and squeezing the game in the oppositions half. As a result there is a huge amount of space between Team A’s defenders and their goalkeeper.
Team B uses this to their advantage and invites pressure from Team A when they have the ball. Team B uses an extremely pacey striker who stays onside but the moment the ball is released from his midfielder he runs into the space behind the defenders. Your rule will negate this whole lovely bit on how teams try to outhink each other and then implement it on the pitch.
I do agree on the incorrect calls sometimes which can be extremely frustrating if your team is on the recieving end of it. Video replays or 4’th officials will make their way into the game once they figure out how to make decisions without interrupting the flow of the game.
^ I don’t want the rule changed. I’m simply pointing out why a lot people don’t understand it and/or don’t like it. More people would understand offside though if to remain onside a player had to get behind the last defender after the ball went past the last defender, that is a player could never be ahead of the ball unless there was defender between him and the goalkeeper. That would be much easier to follow and officiate, but it would eliminate a lot of dynamic scoring opportunities, which is why I would not like such a change. The comparison in hockey is that you can’t be across the blue line before the puck.
The reason is that it costs practically nothing to play. You would have a point if soccer was as expensive as hockey and football.
^Neither does pickup football, basketball, baseball, rugby or even cricket.
The reason it’s a bad thing is because it prevents great comebacks. If you’re down 1-0 or God forbid 2-0, you’re most likely toast. Sure, you can claim there was an amazing comeback a few years ago in the Champions league, but for the most part it’s harder for a team to climb back after a horrible start. The suspense can be killed by halftime. When i look at the great sporting games I’ve witnessed, they had one thing in common: unbelievable comebacks. That’s what you end up remembering, not a team going in defensive mode for the last half of the game protecting a 1 goal lead.
In all the years of watching football i can honestly say that the suspense is very rarely killed at halftime.
You say that when you look at various sporting games the one thing they had in common were great comebacks. I could not agree more, Football has that in spades in addition to incredible storylines and underdogs standing their ground with their backs against the wall to achieve the impossible.
The last point is actually the opposite. It is incredible watching one team throw everything they have against the other team in the last ten min wondering whether their defense can stand strong or they will crumble.
Iv’e yet to come across a sport where something will just leave you stunned and you have no words to express what happened at the frequency that football does. You just look at the person standing next to you and say ‘Football eh? Bloody hell’ and he’ll just nod in understanding.
One thing I want changed in soccer is more parity, not 100% of course, but at least something like sharing tv revenue equally like in the EPL
100% agree on the TV revenue point. La liga would benefit hugely
So are you saying that the chances of scoring are low? Because 2-0 in soccer is the same as 14-0 in American football. It’s hard for any team to come back after a horrible start, but not impossible.
Offside is very easy to understand. Often in replays, the camera will freeze when the ball is kicked to show you. Of course, there are bad calls due to human error but it’s very minor.
It’s actually harder to officiate the game if the attacker was allowed past the last defender only when the ball is passed because there would be arguments as to when the ball passed the last defender. The blue line in hockey is static, while the blue line in soccer is always moving. This rule would also minimize a major factor and that is speed.