# It's time, once again, for Americans to tell the world how to fix soccer. **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [June 14, 2014, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742 "2014-06-14T00:06:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/201 "2014-07-16T10:31:11Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Oh wow, it turns out MLS actually \*tried \*to enlarge the goal in the 1990s but got [totally shut down](http://articles.latimes.com/1996-03-10/sports/sp-45390_1_goal-size) by FIFA. Our posts crossed. I was sure I wasn’t misremembering. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/202 "2014-07-16T10:38:55Z")
I’m glad someone is at least willing to talk about a marginal increase in goal size (one point that has been made is that the athletes guarding the goal have gotten larger themselves over the years). Researching a little more, I find that Sepp Blatter, the head of FIFA for the past 16 years and a high ranking member at the time of the proposal, was [actually for it:](http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/fifa-plan-bigger-goals-1322249.html) > [@](#): > > Fifa is proposing to enlarge the size of goals to make football a more attractive sport, writes Catherine Riley. Sepp Blatter, the general secretary of the game’s world governing body, revealed to the German magazine Stern that plans were in already in motion to make the changes. > > “The guardians of the rules are in agreement to lengthen the goals by the diameter of two balls, around 50cm, and to increase the height by the diameter of one ball,” he explained. So it’s “ridiculous” to even talk about changing the size of the goal (other than to **Fuzzy wuzzy** ), but the president of FIFA was all for it. Okie doke then. But this is refreshing, and makes me wonder if they might actually finally do this after seeing all these super low scoring World Cup Finals year after year. Then there will be howls of protest, but eventually the current era will be looked back on like the “dead ball era” in baseball or the past eras in the NFL when teams would slowly grind out yardage with power running plays. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/203 "2014-07-16T10:43:23Z")
1990 and 1994 finals were abysmal. The 1998 and 2002 games were dominated, niether losers were ever in it. The 2006 was an underdog sneaking through. 2010 and 2014 very exciting ET single goal wins. Cannot say the quality of the game has gone down. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/204 "2014-07-16T10:44:02Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Something else interesting I learned is that in the mid-twentieth century, [World Cup scores were a lot higher.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_FIFA_World_Cup) Sure, that was cherry-picked as a high water mark; but if you go look at the other World Cups from the 1950s, there just weren’t nearly as many 0-0 and 1-0 scores as there were this year. I wonder if someone transported from that era would be so sanguine about the low scoring. It looks to me like the evolutionary struggle between offense and defense has slowly ratcheted in the defense’s direction, slowly enough that you are standing on tradition for a situation that ironically was not traditionally the way the sport was intended! If that were true then we’d clearly see the same extreme pattern in the much higher sample size of league football. note: we don’t, On average there are about 0.7 less goals per game now than in the mid-50’s. IT has remained at the current level for nearly 50 years. i.e. during the period of massive professional, geographical and commercial expansion. The scoring rate isn’t a problem. > [@](#): > > Looking at just the scores of World Cup Finals (the games casual fans, with the potential to become more ardent fans if they like what they see, would be most likely to watch), the trend is put in even more stark relief. \*\*Six out of the last seven World Cup Finals (starting with 1990) have seen two or fewer goals scored (the exception being a 3-0 barnburner in 1998). Before 1990, there had never, _ever been a Final in which that was true. Three of the six were scoreless at the end of regular time, including the most recent two; and a fourth featured no regular goals scored but was won 1-0 due to a penalty kick._ You going to tell me this is a coincidence? Or that it is a healthy direction of evolution in the game? I think the above shows that you really don’t know what you are talking about. You measure entertainment in the number of goals scored. No matter how many times we repeat it I don’t think you are going to get it. The only thing that matters is the quality of the game. The score doesn’t necessarily tell you anything about how good a game was. As for the 1954 world cup. Is that seen as the best ever? Or were there a lot of one-sided hammerings? What do fans like to see…more goals or close games? would they choose more 7-1 Germany v Brazil or 1-0 German v USA? because I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that the majority would pick the latter. If you don’t grasp why then I really can’t help you. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/205 "2014-07-16T10:49:01Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Researching a little more, I find that Sepp Blatter, the head of FIFA for the past 16 years and a high ranking member at the time of the proposal, was [actually for it:](http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/fifa-plan-bigger-goals-1322249.html). That is from 1996, it is also from Sepp Blatter, Someone I wouldn’t trust to buy me an ice-cream and give me my change back. The man is an idiot and the traction the idea has had in the intervening 18 years shows you what a great idea it is. The current world cup has been the best ever due to the style of play and the closeness of the games, not the number of goals scored. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/206 "2014-07-16T10:55:08Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > That is from 1996, it is also from Sepp Blatter, Someone I wouldn’t trust to buy me an ice-cream and give me my change back. > The man is an idiot[…] Yet he gets reelected again and again to head your beloved sport. Which is fine and dandy just as it is. Um, ok? ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/207 "2014-07-16T10:58:47Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > I’m glad someone is at least willing to talk about a marginal increase in goal size (one point that has been made is that the athletes guarding the goal have gotten larger themselves over the years). > > Researching a little more, I find that Sepp Blatter, the head of FIFA for the past 16 years and a high ranking member at the time of the proposal, was [actually for it:](http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/fifa-plan-bigger-goals-1322249.html) > > So it’s “ridiculous” to even talk about changing the size of the goal (other than to **Fuzzy wuzzy** ), but the president of FIFA was all for it. Okie doke then. > > But this is refreshing, and makes me wonder if they might actually finally do this after seeing all these super low scoring World Cup Finals year after year. Then there will be howls of protest, but eventually the current era will be looked back on like the “dead ball era” in baseball or the past eras in the NFL when teams would slowly grind out yardage with power running plays. Im with you on the increasing goal size. Or at least im not aghast at the idea. As you said, athletes have become bigger, and dare I say more athletic. Football is more defensive minded than it was 50 years ago. All of which means fewer goals per game. If I were you I would not point to Blatter floating the idea as a way of attracting others to your opinion. A more corrupt official it is hard to meet. And a man who helped bring about some of the most incompetent decisions in the game. btw does anyone know Jimmy Hill’s opinion on larger goals? I’d automatically agree with whatever Jimmy Hill says on the matter of goal size. For all the criticism he gets Hill is/was a visionary of the game. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/208 "2014-07-16T11:15:22Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > It just seems like you all think it’s ridiculous because it’s not what you are used to. If you say “I prefer it the way it is”, I can’t argue with that (although I can point out that people tend to be reflexively against change, for example when new technological wrinkles are introduced to their lives, but eventually most people realise the new way is better). > > But if you say the change would be “ridiculous”, I can challenge you to show how it is ridiculous rather than just not what you desire. I mean, putting water hazards in the field of play would be ridiculous. Making the soccer ball as big as a beach ball would be ridiculous. Making the goal slightly bigger can’t inherently be ridiculous. I would suggest 27’ X 9’, preserving the exact same shape; but up to now I never stated a specific size. What if it was changed to 24’3" X 8’1", would that be ridiculous too? Other than it being such a slight change that it’s pointless to bother with? > > When researching the history of the goal size, I see that for the first few decades after fixing it at 24 feet wide, there was no height limit (kind of like with field goal kicking in football). Maybe they should go back to that. As I have already stated, we grew up playing football in all sorts of weird places with all sorts of sizes. The ridiculousness of the idea is that it is done to satisfy some of the fans from one country. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > In any case, in the process of Googling this, I happened across a SDMB thread from five years ago discussing the low scoring in soccer. One poster (a moderator, even) made very nearly the [same exact suggestion](http://http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11742288&postcount=11) I am being ridiculed for: > > Another poster in that thread observed that “many fans have a sort of stubborn traditionalism over the matter”, and that "the attitude among many soccer fans is a Bruce Hornsby-ish ‘that’s just the way it is’ ". Gee, that sounds familiar… No, just no. For the third time: WE GREW UP PLAYING WITH ALL SORTS OF GOAL SIZES. You are trying to fix a perceived issue that the vast, vast majority of the world has no issue with. We have played different types of football with different goals and different rules. We are used to the concept. To put it more simply, you are aware of the phrase “if it ain’t broke then don’t fix it”? Well, you may think it is broken but others don’t. This isn’t “stubborn traditionalism” this is just liking it how it is because we enjoy the game this way. This is like a Rugby League fan moaning about how in American Football you get a new set of four downs after running ten yards and putting down everyone who disagrees as “stubborn traditionalists”. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > Something else interesting I learned is that in the mid-twentieth century, [World Cup scores were a lot higher.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_FIFA_World_Cup) Sure, that was cherry-picked as a high water mark; but if you go look at the other World Cups from the 1950s, there just weren’t nearly as many 0-0 and 1-0 scores as there were this year. I wonder if someone transported from that era would be so sanguine about the low scoring. It looks to me like the evolutionary struggle between offense and defense has slowly ratcheted in the defense’s direction, slowly enough that you are standing on tradition for a situation that ironically was not traditionally the way the sport was intended! > > Looking at just the scores of World Cup Finals (the games casual fans, with the potential to become more ardent fans if they like what they see, would be most likely to watch), the trend is put in even more stark relief. \*\*Six out of the last seven World Cup Finals (starting with 1990) have seen two or fewer goals scored (the exception being a 3-0 barnburner in 1998). Before 1990, there had never, _ever been a Final in which that was true. Three of the six were scoreless at the end of regular time, including the most recent two; and a fourth featured no regular goals scored but was won 1-0 due to a penalty kick._ You going to tell me this is a coincidence? Or that it is a healthy direction of evolution in the game? I’d argue that a large part of that is that due to globalisation the sport is played to a better degree all around the world now. There are few “whipping boys” anymore. But we still have the same basic problem, you come from a position of “more goals makes game better”. I’m sorry, but that isn’t a universal belief. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/209 "2014-07-16T11:25:12Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Researching a little more, I find that Sepp Blatter, the head of FIFA for the past 16 years and a high ranking member at the time of the proposal, was [actually for it:](http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/fifa-plan-bigger-goals-1322249.html) Is this the same Sepp Blatter that thought [women should wear tighter shorts so as to make it more sexy](http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/3402519.stm)? > [@SlackerInc](#): > > So it’s “ridiculous” to even talk about changing the size of the goal (other than to **Fuzzy wuzzy** ), but the president of FIFA was all for it. Okie doke then. Again, it is ridiculous to do it just to keep a few fans (and I put that mildly, as your connection with football is watching the World Cup a decade ago and from watching your son play) happy in a single country. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > But this is refreshing, and makes me wonder if they might actually finally do this after seeing all these super low scoring World Cup Finals year after year. Then there will be howls of protest, but eventually the current era will be looked back on like the “dead ball era” in baseball or the past eras in the NFL when teams would slowly grind out yardage with power running plays. Or they may change other things, like the implementation of the backpass rule. As you are probably unaware of it, in the 80s the last ten minutes of the game generally degenerated into the defenders and the goalkeeper of the team in the lead passing to each other. The goalie would pick the ball up, think for a bit, throw it to a defender, who would then think for a bit and then pass it back to the goalkeeper. He would then pick it up, rinse and repeat. This is why the goalkeeper is now not allowed to pick up the ball when kicked to him by his own player. Personally, I want to see an end to the rule (and I believe I mentioned this in the “Brasil 2014” thread) where a player can use his body to shield the ball with absolutely no intention of playing the ball. This stops decent attacks, with the defender getting in the way of the attacker and then standing still, and it is what allows attackers to take the ball to the corner and just waste time, shielding the ball from the defenders (whose team is losing) with his body. I would **love** to see that rule changed. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/210 "2014-07-16T11:27:46Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Yet he gets reelected again and again to head your beloved sport. Which is fine and dandy just as it is. Um, ok? Yeah, you really need to read up on the corruption within FIFA and the alleged payments made to the heads of the Football Associations in countries where corruption is more common. Him getting voted in has nothing to do with football, it is very much to do with whose palms have been greased. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/211 "2014-07-16T11:30:33Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](#): > > btw does anyone know Jimmy Hill’s opinion on larger goals? I’d automatically agree with whatever Jimmy Hill says on the matter of goal size. For all the criticism he gets Hill is/was a visionary of the game. As a Coventry fan, I adore the guy. Three points for a win. Safer, family-oriented all-seater stadiums. Club-run trains specifically to get fans to away games. All his ideas. Then again, he was also behind the removal of the salary cap so, well, … 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Remember\_me](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/82dd89/32.png) [@Remember\_me](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Remember_me)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/212 "2014-07-16T11:45:15Z")
For several reasons I am not absolutely against making the goals a little larger - and I am European. - It would increase the chances of scoring long distance shots. Many people love long distance goals, just look at the three finalist for the [Ferenc-Puskas-Award 2013 (best goal in 2013)](http://www.fifa.com/ballondor/puskasaward/video=2222225/index.html) The closest of these three shots came from the 18 yard line. - Increasing the chances of scoring from long distance would mean that the defence has to defend further up the field. This would in turn provide more free space in the 18 yard box, i.o.w. it would make it more difficult to “park the bus”. I believe an increase of the width of the goal by about half a metre would improve the game. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/213 "2014-07-16T11:56:06Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Yet he gets reelected again and again to head your beloved sport. Which is fine and dandy just as it is. Um, ok? What point _are_ you making again. I can’t follow you. Blatter is corrupt and obviously so, pretty much all of football that isn’t directly in his pocket agree on this. The fact that he is in charge is a travesty and his opinion adds no weight to any recommendations. He isn’t in the job to improve football. His sole aim is to create and maintain a powerbase by greasing palms in order stay in power. He is a malevolent force and a stain on the sport and the sooner he goes the better…please, anybody…stop me if I’ve been unclear or gone too far here? By all means start a thread to pull that shit to peices and I’ll be right there with you, but don’t use him to add credibility to your argument. That dog don’t hunt monsignor. ETA - dammit **Amanset!** you even used the “greasing palms” phrase. Shouldn’t one of us at least be doing some work? OK, it’ll be me. You are beating me to the punch every time anyway:) ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/214 "2014-07-16T12:09:51Z")
> [@amanset](#): > > I’d argue that a large part of that is that due to globalisation the sport is played to a better degree all around the world now. There are few “whipping boys” anymore. How does that have bugger-all to do with World Cup _Finals_? Six of the past seven seeing two goals or fewer (the seventh seeing three), when there had never been a final so low scoring in the 60 years before that. There are no “whipping boys” in Finals…right?😕 My point about Blatter is that it comes across very strangely from my admittedly outside POV to hear a group of people leap to the defence of soccer, insisting it “ain’t broke”; but then practically in the same breath, gripe and moan about the leader of soccer’s governing organisation. Welll…kinda sounds like you think he broke it. Which means it’s broke. Or if it really “ain’t broke”, then what’s your beef with the guy? I don’t see how both can be true. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/215 "2014-07-16T12:13:55Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > ETA - dammit **Amanset!** you even used the “greasing palms” phrase. Shouldn’t one of us at least be doing some work? OK, it’ll be me. You are beating me to the punch every time anyway:) I am in this thread purely to annoy you 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/216 "2014-07-16T12:20:04Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > How does that have bugger-all to do with World Cup _Finals_? Six of the past seven seeing two goals or fewer (the seventh seeing three), when there had never been a final so low scoring in the 60 years before that. There are no “whipping boys” in Finals…right?😕 > > My point about Blatter is that it comes across very strangely from my admittedly outside POV to hear a group of people leap to the defence of soccer, insisting it “ain’t broke”; but then practically in the same breath, gripe and moan about the leader of soccer’s governing organisation. Welll…kinda sounds like you think he broke it. Which means it’s broke. Or if it really “ain’t broke”, then what’s your beef with the guy? I don’t see how both can be true. I have a hard time believing you’re not being deliberately obtuse. Sepp Blatter doesn’t really affect the way the game is played. Sepp Blatter is horribly corrupt. Do you understand this? ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/217 "2014-07-16T12:22:08Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > How does that have bugger-all to do with World Cup _Finals_? Six of the past seven seeing two goals or fewer (the seventh seeing three), when there had never been a final so low scoring in the 60 years before that. There are no “whipping boys” in Finals…right?😕 > > My point about Blatter is that it comes across very strangely from my admittedly outside POV to hear a group of people leap to the defence of soccer, insisting it “ain’t broke”; but then practically in the same breath, gripe and moan about the leader of soccer’s governing organisation. Welll…kinda sounds like you think he broke it. Which means it’s broke. Or if it really “ain’t broke”, then what’s your beef with the guy? I don’t see how both can be true. A large part of the post that I quoted was about how there are fewer big wins in general. Regarding the specifics of the final itself, a large part of it is how the game is played. That I’ll agree with, but what I will disagree with is the idea that how it is played now is wrong and it needs fixing. Because as it has been pointed out to you several times in this thread, but you just don’t seem to get, lots of goals doesn’t automatically mean a good game. Regarding Blatter, the beef with the guy is that he is corrupt as fuck and gets in the way of the changes people REALLY want, like the use of video replays. Seriously, you need to read up on the guy. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/218 "2014-07-16T12:22:55Z")
Oh, and **amanset** , how would it work to make shielding the ball illegal? As I see it, banning that would radically affect large portions of the game. Hold up play, for instance, would basically cease to exist. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/219 "2014-07-16T12:24:06Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > I have a hard time believing you’re not being deliberately obtuse. > > Sepp Blatter doesn’t really affect the way the game is played. Sepp Blatter is horribly corrupt. Do you understand this? If he really wants to understand why, IU think we should point him in the direction of [Andrew Jennings](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jennings), who has written and done documentaries about the issue. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742/220 "2014-07-16T12:29:53Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Oh, and **amanset** , how would it work to make shielding the ball illegal? As I see it, banning that would radically affect large portions of the game. Hold up play, for instance, would basically cease to exist. I would say that if the player shows no intent to play the ball (and playing the ball is just touching it with his foot) whilst using his body to block opposition then it is an indirect free kick. The interpretations of the laws document says this: [http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/28/law12-en.pdf](http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/28/law12-en.pdf) > [@](#): > > Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the > opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an > opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player. > > All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of > an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent. > > Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an > opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as > long as the ball is kept within playing distance and the player does not hold off > the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the > player may be fairly charged by an opponent. My problem is that “as long as the ball is kept within playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body” is badly refereed. All too often you see a player pushing into the player behind him with the ball a yard or so away and yet the referee does nothing. And, in my opinion, the “or body” part of the rule is completely ignored. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-once-again-for-americans-to-tell-the-world-how-to-fix-soccer/690742.md?page=12)