I figured it would be something like that, but had never heard for sure. I’ve seen the ball kicked to the keeper, then he’ll just kick it around a bit, then pick it up. That’s apparently legal.
23 pages, I must have missed that.
I’ve never heard of any doping connected with the World Cup. Do the players not dope, are they better at getting away with it, or does FIFA just not give a damn?
When I was a wee lad, goalkeepers could pick up the ball in the penalty area pretty much at any time. They could also hang on to the ball for an inordinate amount of time before putting it back into play. Made for some excruciatingly boring delaying tactics. After some Googling, I see the back-pass rule was instituted in 1992. The six-second rule for goalkeepers to put the ball back into play was instituted in 2000.
Yeah. Ronaldo has had a great international career, by any metric. He has won one major tournament, been to one other final, and been to two other major Semi-Finals; three if you count last years Confederations Cup. Not merely good; this is great!
On the issue of English Exceptionalism (:p) I would like to point out that CR7 international record is better than any English players…actually its better than the English national team; full stop.
Messi also has had a legitimately excellent international career; 4 finals is nothing to sneeze at. Its his failure to win one, despite having an extremely talented supporting crew that hurts him and only in the GOAT contest.
They changed the rules on this some time ago, to minimize double punishment (penalty AND red card). If the ref judges that the defender made an attempt to play the ball, it is yellow. Outside the penalty box it’s red.
Maradona was thrown out of the tournament in 1994 for a positive test. (the stumpy, fucking cheat)
And since this seems to be a little known change, here is a cite:
Interlude:
An anagram I found of one of the big stars:
Neymar Junior = Injury moaner 
It’s easier to remember World Cups because there have been fewer of them (or if one is the sort of fan who only pays attention to football during World Cups…)
The 2002 Champions League was sixteen editions ago. If we go that far back in World Cups, we’re talking about the 1950s. How much do you remember about the 1958 tournament, madsircool? Because earlier in this thread you wrongly suggested that Sweden had never reached a World Cup final.
It seems unarguable that it is difficult to compare players of Pele or Maradona’s eras to contemporary players. In Pele’s time, the only point of comparison between top players of the world was the World Cup itself. That is not at all the case today, hence fuzzy_wuzzy’s general point that the World Cup is today less important as a gauge of players’ “greatness.” We have available to us many more points of comparison.
Pele hardly ever played against the top European players. I not sure he ever played a competitive match against a German team, for example, either for club or country (some friendlies with Santos, it looks like.) In Maradona’s case we have a bit more to go on, because he played in Serie A and would have faced quality opposition like Maldini, Platini, or Baresi. But he only played once in the European Cup, a much simpler knockout format than the Champions League, and his team got knocked out straight away. A few more games in the UEFA Cup and that’s it.
Thanks to the globalisation of the game and the consequent concentration of talent in the European leagues, today’s elite footballers play against each other often, routinely if they are in the same league. We have a much better idea of how top players from all over the world compare to each other than just their World Cup records.
Finally, I have no idea what you meant by “English exceptionalism” and how it relates to fuzzy_wuzzy’s post. I can only think that you misread his post as saying “England don’t do well because we don’t care about the World Cup”? As I read it, he was questioning your confident assertion that the World Cup matters most to players. I’m not sure how you would know that. But there have indeed been suggestions over the years that some players, not just English ones, are more concerned with their club careers.
Cannot argue for madsircool but yeah, absolutley there is a case that people tend to denigrate international competition when their country (or player) sucks at it.
In the 1990’s and 2000’s the Spaniards were adfamanet that the CL was the real test. Changed their tune after their national team started winning.
CR7 supporters suddenly in mid 2016 decided that international footy titles were the pinnacle of a players career after 10 years saying the opposite. Wonder why.
If England win this time then absolutley English fans will change their tune and the WC is the most important thing ever.
I don’t hear any suggestion from English people that the WC isn’t the most important competition, certainly from an emotional perspective. It doesn’t make it the forum for the finest football however - I can’t see how anyone could dispute the CL’s dominance in that regard.
I can only assume that someone who thinks the English play down the importance of the World Cup has not been in England when a tournament is taking place.
The World Cup matters more than any club competition, sure. There’s national pride at stake, and the way it draws in casual fans who might have less interest in domestic leagues, the Champions League, etc. Nobody is downplaying it at all. Whether it is the highest standard of football is a different matter. I’d say definitely not these days. Elite club football surpassed it ten or twenty years ago.
It’s funny, if we mention 1966 we’re accused of going on about the World Cup all the time, but when it’s convenient the argument turns to the English feigning indifference. Can’t win!
I think the general consensus is correct. CL = highest level of play. WC = highest emotional level placed on it.
How the two are weighted when comparing players is the point of contention. I tend to think club success if more indicative of great players for a couple reasons. 1) Great players will end up on great clubs if they want. Great players cannot move to great soccer nations. So, in club soccer you find your level while in national team competitions a great player can be dragged down by poor teammates and a middling player can be elevated by great ones. 2) The sample size is too small. I have a hard time believing 15 games with people you don’t practice with all that much tell more about a player than 500 with a club.
I don’t think that’s a change of tune at all as I think there is a very clear distinction between club and country competitions.
As an England fan of far too many years standing I can confidently state that the World Cup has always mattered massively because it is tied to national pride which is wider and more affecting than the success of a domestic club. (and in Spain such domestic success by the big two is pretty bloody divisive whichever way it goes)
It is quite possible to think that the greatest test of a football team is the Champions League (it is, that is the highest quality tournament in the world) and at the same time think that the most prestigious tournament to win for a country is the World Cup. They occupy almost equally lofty positions, side by side.
I pretty much agree with all your post but just picking up on this. One option you’ve missed is that a moderate group or even just a decent group of national players offers the opportunity, the stage if you like, for a great player to elevate them. It is very noticeable when players do that. Perhaps it is because the scrutiny and visibility of a 7 game WC campaign is easily digestible to a wider set of fans (neutrals as well). However unfair it may seem for someone like Messi, that he has not dragged and inspired his national team to greatness and major trophies is…well…a fact.
It happens rarely. Maradona is, and will always be, a stumpy, coke-addled cheating twat but he was also an inspirational genius of a footballer who dragged Argentina and Napoli to performances that they otherwise couldn’t have achieved. Cristiano Ronaldo has done similar for club teams and Portugal.
Messi hasn’t and we can rationalise it away as much as possible and point to club records, honours and awards and say it is a minor point but I’ll tell you a few people who don’t think it is a minor point, Maradona, Ronaldo and most of all, Messi.
I would also put Zidane in this rarified group. He singlehandedly drag France to greatness. His absence or injury doomed them.
I agree with the above posts about the CL/WC. For me, the World Cup is a once in four years event. Its exciting to wake up at 5am for a group stage match; something I would never do for anything else. Its 5:45 am here and the local news is reporting from local bars where Mexico fans have been lining up since 4am to get a seat. This World Cup is also notable for its unpredictability. It does get a bit boring to have the usual suspects in the final eight.
Neymar seems to be a polarizing figure to Brazilians.
Why is Neymar such a divisive figure in Brazil? Soccer on ESPN - Scores, Stats and Highlights - ESPN
via @ESPN App http://es.pn/app
I like Neymar. Cocky and back it up? I like players like that, generally.
That said, I think I’m rooting for Mexico today. CONCACAF team, so even though they are traditional rivals to the US, it makes sense. Besides, with no clear dog in the fight I’ll usually go for the underdog. Not to mention that a World Cup where *every *favorite goes out before the quarter finals would be quite the story.
I am too.
Its 92F in Samara. This match is being played at a furious pace. If this goes to extra time someone might die out there.
What an intense half. I can’t imagine how anyone could find it boring.
Anyone remember Carlos El Pibe Valderrama? He has two funny Sprint commercials.
