Extremely close. The linesman is right there, though.
OTOH, I’ve always wondered how they make two split-second decisions at once: whether or not the player was just offside, and exactly when the ball was kicked. On a play like this, is peripheral vision really good enough?
Chile will want to win, because winning group B leads to probable knockout games against Mexico or Croatia, followed by maybe Ivory Coast or Costa Rica, rather than Brazil, then Colombia or Italy. Although I wouldn’t discount Italy winning group D rather than Costa Rica, which throws that off a bit.
Apparently they sometimes listen for the sound of the ball being kicked. You’re right though, it is a fundamentally difficult judgement to make since it involves simultaneous events that take place in different locations.
I do wonder sometimes if there shouldn’t be video reviews for critical calls, maybe on a challenge system. It seems silly that the game relies on a tricky call by a linesman, when ten seconds later millions of people watching on TV know for sure whether it was offside.
There’s a neat graph on Deadspin visualizing what has to happen for the US to advance.
Yeah, I’m generally not a fan of instant replay, and particularly in soccer so much of the appeal is the constant flow of action, but they seem able to put up often-definitive replays really quickly, and if implemented well it probably be for the best.
One of the big problems with replays in sitatons like this (offside calls and the like) is how do you interrupt the game to correct the call? For instance, if one pass should have been an offisde, but the ref doesn’t call it, then there are three or four back and forth passes which are legitimate, before the attackers score - do you then “reverse” the game, essentially cancelling out the 30-60 seconds of legimiate play back to when a offside should have been called?
Or if the ref makes an uncorrect call of offside, and it is overturend on review, how do you restart the game? A drop would do the attackers no good, seeing as the advantage of the attack is long gone, and the defenders will all be lined up and ready for the next attacker phase.
Unlike many other games where you have instant replay, football doesn’t easily lend itself to “resets” of the game, as the flow will be interrupted one way or the other.
I do, however, support an instant replay on penalties given, as penalties have such a huge impact on the game. This would probably lead to refs signaling for more penalties, because they know their decision will be double checked, and they would be less hesitant to influence the game erronously. This would have two positive effects, erronous penalty calls would be eliminated, and more of the “this should have been a penalty” situations would be judged as such.
Also, it wouldn’t interrupt the flow of the game, as the game has stopped anyway, and it would proceed naturally, either with a penalty kick, or a “free kick” for the defenders (and a appropiate yellow for the diving attacker, if apropiate)
ETA: Oh, as for off side calls, refs should be much more strigent with the “if you’re not absolutely sure, don’t call off side” rule. I’d rather they missed a few close calls in favor of the attacker per game, then cancel a legitimate goal.
Do it when it is important. If it goes out for a goalkick or the keeper gets it then there’s no real need. If it is a goal, check with the off-field ref. Football already has the concept of “advantage” that means even if something qualifies for a free kick it doesn’t have to be given if the current situation is better for the team that would be given the ball.
He could just have an earpiece in and someone in the booth calls down to tell him it was offside within a couple seconds. Hell, there’s probably software than can tell via motion tracking and could alert him in real time.
In the case of offside calls, I would say it could only be reviewed if it led immediately to a goal with no intervening play. Like the incorrect offside call against Bosnia-Herce the other day - nobody stopped playing, and the flag only went up after Dzeko had scored. A bit vague, but possible to define satisfactorily, I think.
So in the case of the close call in the images posted above, that would not be challengeable because there was a lot of further play before the goal was scored.
Pleasingly, it seems that there have been decent crowds at open air screenings in some US cities. Here’s one from Kansas City
I’m curious if any non americans are bothered when a country that doesn’t give a crap about soccer has some success in the world cup.
And please leave replays out of the game.
Nah, not at all. There’s not many countries actually had success at a World Cup, it’s mostly a story of over-enthusiastic expectation and heartbreak.
British people generally side with the underdog, so I can say that I genuinely like it when such things happen.
I don’t know how popular soccer is in Costa Rica but I am now rooting heavily for the Ticos for that reason. I don’t think I’m even going to watch England play them. If England round into form and score five, I’ll be upset about what might have been. If they lose, I’ll be upset about how awfully they played. Basically, the only result that would please me is a close win.
Yeah, if the US progressed far in the knockout stages they’d have massive “underdog” support. Argentina - USA in the quarter-final? I’ll be draped in the Stars and Stripes for that one.
[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
Basically, the only result that would please me is a close win.
[/QUOTE]
What I’m hoping for is England play a blinder but have several goals harshly disallowed, and then Costa Rica equalise with a soft penalty in the 93rd to win the group (not “send Uruguay home” as I said before, which makes no sense).
I’ve always thought USA advancing deep would be great for any WC because the interest they would generate. I imagine fans of eliminated teams would either love rooting for the underdog Americans or love rooting against the arrogant Yanks. Either way it’d make for some passionate watching. (Go USA, go Portugal, fingers crossed).
I could live with that, too.
It would give me some new material to moan about too, without the incidents really affecting much.
We are a very welcoming bunch in the world of football, so if the US have success in the big cup, and as a result football increases in popularity stateside, we’d all be happy to cheer more fans into the fold 
Of course, fans of any nation the US would manage to knock out of the competition, will not share this sentiment.
Well, maybe. As an England fan, I am never that upset when we are knocked out of a tournament as long as it wasn’t the Germans.
Some more soccer questions:
About the offside rule, I don’t understand this part: “An attacking player is judged to be in an offside position if he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second to last opponent.” I don’t get the “both”. Do they mean he’s offside if he’s closer to either the 2nd to last opponent or the ball? Or the midpoint distance between the two? Or the closest/furthest one?
I’m trying to figure out what the crowd is chanting. It sounds like the melody to the White Stripes’ “7 Nation Army”. That can’t be what the crowd is chanting right?
And whatever happened to the vuvuzelas? Brazil banned them? I don’t hear or see them at all this year