BF2S Forums The Official 2010 FIFA World Cup Thread

CammRobb wrote:

KingCheese wrote:

Must be nice to watch the competition as a neutral Camm.

Neutral? You best be trolling. I support whoever England are playing.

mikkel wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Kind of pathetic, really, the lack of replay, oversight, appeal, or anything else resembling modern advances in officiating accuracy.

The rest of the world doesn't really want to hear "After further review.." every five minutes. The absence of all of these boring elements is part of what makes football interesting. Red cards can be reversed by a governing body, and in extreme cases, matches can be declared void and rescheduled. That's all the "oversight and appeal" that's needed.

ya fuck getting it correct.  who wants the correct call.  pffftt..... i want to watch human error ruin the efforts of the players.

HaiBai wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

mikkel wrote:

The rest of the world doesn't really want to hear "After further review.." every five minutes. The absence of all of these boring elements is part of what makes football interesting. Red cards can be reversed by a governing body, and in extreme cases, matches can be declared void and rescheduled. That's all the "oversight and appeal" that's needed.

It is only needed for the truly pivotal occurrences -- red cards and whistled goals.

Regarding the absence of "those boring elements", you think the endless back passing and stalling by defenders is more intriguing? The game already stops for injuries anyways, and I'm fairly sure the players would tolerate a couple more breaks (and the fans as well) if they knew the game's most crucial elements would be called with near 100% accuracy.

no.  i dont want commercial breaks in the middle of a game.  soccer isn't an american sport, it's actually fast paced

They don't go to commercials for injuries, so why would they need to when the refs are fixing an obvious wrong call?

To the people who actually watch this crappy sport: Filter to strip vuvuzela noises from your coverage

i'd love to know how the most popular sport in the world is crappy?!

I'm going to emphasie this word: WORLD

mikkel wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

mikkel wrote:

The rest of the world doesn't really want to hear "After further review.." every five minutes. The absence of all of these boring elements is part of what makes football interesting. Red cards can be reversed by a governing body, and in extreme cases, matches can be declared void and rescheduled. That's all the "oversight and appeal" that's needed.

ya fuck getting it correct.  who wants the correct call.  pffftt..... i want to watch human error ruin the efforts of the players.

I know this might be news to people who don't follow the sport, but replays have never been used, and this managed to become the most popular sport in the world without them. When the debate (frequently) arises, the vast majority of players fans prefer it to stay just the way it is. So yes, "fuck" getting every little detail right one hundred percent of the time. Most people prefer the element of chance.

So the rest of the world is 20 years behind on athletics modernization? That's a nice thing for a US jingoist to know.

I know they've never been used, and I know it became popular regardless. I also know its moronic to accept obviously wrong outcomes when you easily have the capability to rectify such errors. The fact it become popular regardless of officiating innovations is a poor justification for not implementing them when the cost in time and money would be insignificant compared to the increased validity in the results on the field. You seem to think that a game-winning goal is only a "little detail", which seems rather laughable considering how much soccer players celebrate scoring a goal and more importantly, the impact it has on the US chances to qualify for the later rounds. The lack of accountability and oversight is absolutely pathetic for such an authoritative organization, and if the US fails to advance, I'll have a hard time taking anything sponsored by FIFA seriously until they reassess their archaic rulebook.

So if Germany beat Australia...
...and Serbia beat Germany...
...and if New Zealand beat Serbia, (1 - 0 in the friendlies.)

YAAAY!

(Then again if Australia beat New Zealand in the friendlies... we have a conundrum!)

nukchebi0 wrote:

mikkel wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

ya fuck getting it correct.  who wants the correct call.  pffftt..... i want to watch human error ruin the efforts of the players.

I know this might be news to people who don't follow the sport, but replays have never been used, and this managed to become the most popular sport in the world without them. When the debate (frequently) arises, the vast majority of players fans prefer it to stay just the way it is. So yes, "fuck" getting every little detail right one hundred percent of the time. Most people prefer the element of chance.

So the rest of the world is 20 years behind on athletics modernization? That's a nice thing for a US jingoist to know.

I know they've never been used, and I know it became popular regardless. I also know its moronic to accept obviously wrong outcomes when you easily have the capability to rectify such errors. The fact it become popular regardless of officiating innovations is a poor justification for not implementing them when the cost in time and money would be insignificant compared to the increased validity in the results on the field. You seem to think that a game-winning goal is only a "little detail", which seems rather laughable considering how much soccer players celebrate scoring a goal and more importantly, the impact it has on the US chances to qualify for the later rounds. The lack of accountability and oversight is absolutely pathetic for such an authoritative organization, and if the US fails to advance, I'll have a hard time taking anything sponsored by FIFA seriously until they reassess their archaic rulebook.

Heh, I think the world of Association Football can do without you, nukchebi0. I get what you're saying. I understood when you said precisely the same thing in your previous post. What you need to understand is that the sport is the way that it is because it is the way that the players and the fans want it to be. Name calling doesn't change that. If you don't like it, that's fine, but getting your panties in a twist and posting about it in this thread does no good.

Winston_Churchill wrote:

m3thod wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

most of the americans i know say its the most popular because "its cheap as shit so poor nations like africa can play."

Thats the beauty of the game...it's simplicty.

Its boring.  And I dont consider it a sport if diving and crying like a little girl is considered a legitimate strategy.

you're boring.  and diving and trying to fake a foul isn't a legit strategy

It's because they didn't include Gabriel Agbonlahor.

I think he means fast as in constant play, not kick, stop, plan, kick, stop, plan etc.

nukchebi0 wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

Winston_Churchill wrote:

Its boring.  And I dont consider it a sport if diving and crying like a little girl is considered a legitimate strategy.

you're boring.  and diving and trying to fake a foul isn't a legit strategy

Then why does everyone do it?

because theres no punishment for it or they hardly ever get punished for it.

@all others, more fast paced then football and baseball.  basketball is debatable really.

All this whining and bitching about how "good" teams aren't doing as well as expected...

Know the solution?

Support New Zealand! The team that no-one expects to do anything! The team most people said were at the World Cup just to make up numbers! The pre-emptive wooden spoon recipients!

Seriously it's great. Any result they get fails to disappoint. You saw the way we treated a draw against a team ranked 34th, (I think.) Think of the reaction if we even score a goal against Italy. I'm telling you, no downers if you're an All Whites fan.