Those games are on simultaneously, so that’s over 50 million people watching football in the U.S. any given Sunday from 4-7 Eastern (1-4 Pacific). *250 times *as many as watch MLS broadcasts. Yowch.
Now I feel kinda bad for picking on you guys. All your talk about a big TV deal and so on, your spin actually had me going for a bit.
MLS has become immensely more popular since they stopped trying to tweak the rules that are used internationally. So, what does that say about your position?
We posted nearly simultaneously. See the post above yours for my take on the “immensely” more popular MLS (if true, then Jesus: where did they start?!?).
It’s not spin to say that soccer is getting bigger in the US. That’s objective fact. MLS had to close two franchises and pay ESPN to carry their games in the early days (when they tried to take your advice and make it more appealing to American audiences). Now people are paying $100M to get a team and networks are shelling out money to carry the games. Literally nobody is claiming that MLS is as big as the NFL so I’m not sure what you’re going on about, really.
I think we should just introduce more balls into the game. Start with two and every 5 minutes without a goal, another one is introduced. Also two players that are ‘goal keepers’ but they can both only use one hand each (one left; the other right).
I don’t buy that. It won’t catch all of them, but it will reduce them.
I’d like to see more detail on that. How was it implemented? Note that I’m not just talking about adding more bodies, but bodies with specific duties not currently covered well by the referee.
Not sure why you replied to me with this. I didn’t suggest (and wouldn’t be in favor) either of those things.
I 100% agree with the suggestion of post match fines and/or suspension for simulation. I think review could be done in near real time for PKs too. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a PK taken before I’ve seen multiple replays showing whether or not it was a dive. That could easily be relayed to the ref via earpiece during the game.
I think that offside could be called via motion tracking software too. This isn’t that important since I think the linesmen usually do a surprisingly good job, but it couldn’t hurt.
Okay, just looked up the experiment with 5 officials. It’s not at all what I was talking about. The two added officials were behind the goal line and their sole authority (as near as I can tell) was to validate goal/no-goal calls.
I’m talking about having two more guys running on the pitch (but each restricted to one half of the pitch) and doing more or less what the referee is already doing but with the ability to see more of the pitch and to get a different angle.
That’s a ridiculous response. It’s OFTEN possible to tell. So you review after the game as best you can, and you penalize anyone you are quite sure flopped. Some people still get away with flops. So? It’s still good to reduce the problem, even if it can’t be fully eliminated.
And people say that Americans are arrogant. “Objectively the best way”? You’ve objectively analyzed EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE WAY? Again, then, why do so many truly knowledgeable observers bemoan when important games are decided by PKs, etc?
It’s possible, POSSIBLE, that due to a number of logistical considerations there is no solution that actually ends up satisfying all the various appropriate criteria better than PKs. But to pretend that they’re wonderful and everyone loves them and we’re GLAD that important matches are decided by them is just bizarre.
You’ve gone back and forth between claiming you only want minor changes (a marginally larger goal) and a radically different game (No ties; 10-9 scores).
If you’re revising your position, you need to say so.
The argument I’ve heard made is that this would lead to the referee and his assistants having to stop play and confer over calls, which would disrupt the flow of the match (see: every NFL game).
My strawman complaint was because you characterised me as wanting soccer to be as high scoring as basketball. And the very quote of mine you snarkily attribute to “this guy” includes the sentence “It doesn’t need to be so big that the final score looks like an NBA result.”
10-9 is far, far lower scoring than basketball. But if someone came into the thread late, and I didn’t challenge your characterisation of my thesis, they would assume I was advocating for five or ten times as much scoring as I actually was.
Ties are only an issue, if they are at all, in the World Cup and similar tournaments such as the Copa America and the Euros. And those tournaments are not the be-all and end-all . Arguably the World Cup is no longer the pinnacle of football standards, now that the big clubs are pretty much world all-star teams. Many would say that the Champions League and the upper reaches of the big domestic leagues are of higher standard than the World Cup.
Ties are no problem in league formats, and there is never any need (that I can recall) for end-of-season tie-breakers. And even in the Champions League, teams play each other twice (except for the final) and it only goes to penalties if the scores in the two games are opposite and identical, so it’s considerably less likely.
I think you’re missing the point. Whether tie are an “issue”, for Americans at least (the specific topic of this thread), is not about whether league standings can mathematically be worked out. It’s that American sports fans find a tie, even in an early regular season game, deeply unsatisfying.
I’m more worried about people being wrongly punished than people still getting away with diving.
Undoubtedly there are a lot of complaints. There are no feasible suggestions for alternatives, though.
I personally don’t have to have analysed all alternatives, because the footballing authorities have spent decades looking for and trying out alternatives, and golden goal and silver goal, tossings of coins and infinite replays, and all other conceivable systems have been considered and disposed of. So yes, penalties are objectively the best way to do it.
Well, if you have a better suggestion, which i assure you is not the case, send it to FIFA.
This was in direct response to my comment. That’s not even close to characterizing me as wanting soccer to be as high scoring as basketball? I really don’t know what more to say, as this seems to be a “black is white, day is night” type of deal.
