Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 166

Thread: 2019 Women's World Cup

  1. #51
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by interbellum View Post
    For me that doesn't make sense. As far as I know it doesn't matter what happens in the game after the offside-situation. Even if the defender would have had a bad moment in her head and took the ball in her hands and thrown it into her own goal - we've seen worse things happening on a footballfield - , the first foul (the offside-situation) counts.
    Wow, what timing. I was just reading FIFA's rules on what constitutes an offside offense. Here are the rules with photo (from FIFA.com):

    A player is not committing an offence simply by being in an offside position.
    Active involvement plus offside position is the offence.
    Being actively involved in the area of play is not the same as being in the area of active play.
    While in an offside position, there are three things a player cannot do:
    • interfere with play
    • interfere with an opponent
    • gain an advantage by being in the offside position

    “Interfering with play” means:
    • playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate


    That's why the goal was allowed. Carli Lloyd was offside, yes, but she was not interfering with an opponent nor did she touch the ball.

    I wish they would've explained that better on TV.
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  2. #52
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Germany won, no problem.

    But as I suspected, Norway/Australia was a battle and was probably the best match of the tournament so far. It was tied at the end of regulation forcing it into extra time. Still tied at the end of ET, they settled on penalty kicks. Norway wins 4-1. Sam Kerr, arguably the best player in women's football at the moment, had a so-so day. Part of the reason was Norway defended her well but even when she did have chances, she came up short, even missing a PK in ET. I guess it just wasn't the Matildas' day.

    Up next, today:

    England v Cameroon - 11:30 EDT, 16:30 GMT
    France v Brazil - 15:00 EDT, 20:00 GMT. This is gonna be a good one. Could be as tight as NOR/AUS.

    Here's the bracket as of right now:

    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  3. #53
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    8 minutes until US v Spain!
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  4. #54
    And USA advances!
    Maka ki ecela tehani yanke lo!

  5. #55
    I'm here for the moosic NogbadTheBad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,336
    Soft penalty
    Ian

    I blame Wynton, what was the question?
    There are only 10 types of people in the World, those who understand binary and those that don't.

  6. #56
    Outraged bystander markwoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,889
    USA must do better next time.
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
    -- Aristotle
    Nostalgia, you know, ain't what it used to be. Furthermore, they tells me, it never was.
    “A Man Who Does Not Read Has No Appreciable Advantage Over the Man Who Cannot Read” - Unknown

  7. #57
    That was a Tom Brady call.
    NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF STUPID PEOPLE IN LARGE GROUPS!

  8. #58
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Hal... View Post

    For some stupid reason, they scheduled two matches at the same time all this week so I missed almost half of them.
    For those who don't know...the final round of matches in a group always kick off simultaneously. The reason for this goes back to a notorious World Cup game in the eighties between West Germany and Austria. Algeria had already played all their games and were set to qualify from the group. The only result that would deprive them was a one-goal victory for West Germany. The Germans scored early in the game and the two teams then played out a hilariously non-combative 80-odd minutes with barely any attempts at goal, resulting in both Austria and West Germany progressing. The Wiki article on the game is fun...I especially liked the bit about a Spanish newspaper printing the match report in its crime section!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gij%C3%B3n

  9. #59
    Member TheH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevie B View Post
    For those who don't know...the final round of matches in a group always kick off simultaneously. The reason for this goes back to a notorious World Cup game in the eighties between West Germany and Austria. Algeria had already played all their games and were set to qualify from the group. The only result that would deprive them was a one-goal victory for West Germany. The Germans scored early in the game and the two teams then played out a hilariously non-combative 80-odd minutes with barely any attempts at goal, resulting in both Austria and West Germany progressing. The Wiki article on the game is fun...I especially liked the bit about a Spanish newspaper printing the match report in its crime section!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gij%C3%B3n
    I actually watched the game on TV. I can't remember if I watched the whole of it or gave up after a while.

    I remember that it was fun to see how anoyed the Players where when they got the ball and did not know what
    to do with it.

  10. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Hal... View Post
    Wow, what timing. I was just reading FIFA's rules on what constitutes an offside offense. Here are the rules with photo (from FIFA.com):

    A player is not committing an offence simply by being in an offside position.
    Active involvement plus offside position is the offence.
    Being actively involved in the area of play is not the same as being in the area of active play.
    While in an offside position, there are three things a player cannot do:
    • interfere with play
    • interfere with an opponent
    • gain an advantage by being in the offside position

    “Interfering with play” means:
    • playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate


    That's why the goal was allowed. Carli Lloyd was offside, yes, but she was not interfering with an opponent nor did she touch the ball.

    I wish they would've explained that better on TV.
    Don't want to go on with this matter, but I think picture 21 is more accurate to the given situation (couldn't download it): https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afd...e_en_47383.pdf

  11. #61
    I'm here for the moosic NogbadTheBad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,336
    I agree
    Ian

    I blame Wynton, what was the question?
    There are only 10 types of people in the World, those who understand binary and those that don't.

  12. #62
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by interbellum View Post
    Don't want to go on with this matter, but I think picture 21 is more accurate to the given situation (couldn't download it): https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afd...e_en_47383.pdf
    I used that picture simply to illustrate that just because a player is offside doesn't mean it's an offside offence. Picture 21 states that the offside player (Lloyd) "runs toward the ball, preventing the opponent from playing or being able to play the ball." In actuality, Lloyd didn't even get a chance at the ball because the Swedish player who tried to clear it was nearer the ball than Lloyd.

    As for the picture most representing what actually occurred, I would say picture 14 is the best representation:



    Now, instead of player A being offside, it's player B (Lloyd). Player A (Heath) is onside and runs in and gains possession after the Swedish player tried to clear it.

    Here's picture 14 but representative of what happened, with Lloyd being offside player A, Heath being onside player B, and the ball being kicked by Sweden:



    The key issue, here, is that not only did Lloyd not touch the ball but she also did not interfere with either of the Swedish players she was running between.
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  13. #63
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Okay, so here's the quarterfinal bracket. Anyone wanna make predictions?

    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  14. #64
    Member moecurlythanu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Crimea River
    Posts
    6,061
    Nor, Fra, Ned & Ger.

    Most will go to extra time tied.

  15. #65
    I'm here for the moosic NogbadTheBad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Hal... View Post
    I used that picture simply to illustrate that just because a player is offside doesn't mean it's an offside offence. Picture 21 states that the offside player (Lloyd) "runs toward the ball, preventing the opponent from playing or being able to play the ball." In actuality, Lloyd didn't even get a chance at the ball because the Swedish player who tried to clear it was nearer the ball than Lloyd.

    As for the picture most representing what actually occurred, I would say picture 14 is the best representation:



    Now, instead of player A being offside, it's player B (Lloyd). Player A (Heath) is onside and runs in and gains possession after the Swedish player tried to clear it.

    Here's picture 14 but representative of what happened, with Lloyd being offside player A, Heath being onside player B, and the ball being kicked by Sweden:



    The key issue, here, is that not only did Lloyd not touch the ball but she also did not interfere with either of the Swedish players she was running between.
    This is where I disagree, I thought she did interfere.
    Ian

    I blame Wynton, what was the question?
    There are only 10 types of people in the World, those who understand binary and those that don't.

  16. #66
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by moecurlythanu View Post
    Nor, Fra, Ned & Ger.
    Most will go to extra time tied.
    Now that you mention it, I think you're probably right. The only one that I think won't be particularly close is GER/SWE.

    And I'll be honest, I won't be heartbroken if the US loses because maybe then they'll fire Jill Ellis. Conversely, even if the US wins the Cup, I won't give Ellis much credit.

    Quote Originally Posted by NogbadTheBad View Post
    This is where I disagree, I thought she did interfere.
    From FIFA's rules:

    "Interfering with an opponent" means:
    – preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball. For example, by clearly obstructing the goalkeeper's line of vision or movement
    – making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent
    • the opponent must be reasonably close to the play so that the blocking, deceiving or distracting makes a difference

    Point one obviously doesn't apply. Point two, otoh, might. However, I'd argue that with the cross coming from Rapinoe on the left and Heath coming up the right side, the Swede would have attempted to clear the ball regardless of whether Lloyd is there. Therefore, Lloyd did not interfere with play. But, look at it again:



    Now, tell me where Lloyd interfered as the rules state.

    BTW, Fox's rules analyst Christina Unkel has been a referee for 21 years, 10 at the professional/international level. She said the goal was good and she has a J.D.
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  17. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Hal... View Post
    Now that you mention it, I think you're probably right. The only one that I think won't be particularly close is GER/SWE.

    And I'll be honest, I won't be heartbroken if the US loses because maybe then they'll fire Jill Ellis. Conversely, even if the US wins the Cup, I won't give Ellis much credit.


    From FIFA's rules:

    "Interfering with an opponent" means:
    – preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball. For example, by clearly obstructing the goalkeeper's line of vision or movement
    – making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent
    • the opponent must be reasonably close to the play so that the blocking, deceiving or distracting makes a difference

    Point one obviously doesn't apply. Point two, otoh, might. However, I'd argue that with the cross coming from Rapinoe on the left and Heath coming up the right side, the Swede would have attempted to clear the ball regardless of whether Lloyd is there. Therefore, Lloyd did not interfere with play. But, look at it again:



    Now, tell me where Lloyd interfered as the rules state.

    BTW, Fox's rules analyst Christina Unkel has been a referee for 21 years, 10 at the professional/international level. She said the goal was good and she has a J.D.
    On second 2/3: she's clearly active - going for the ball in an offside position.

  18. #68
    I'm here for the moosic NogbadTheBad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,336
    Oh it's a judgement call & they do keep changing the rule so its tough to keep up, IMO as soon as Lloyd tries to play the ball she has affected how the Swede tries the play the ball & thus interferes, if Lloyd hadn't gone for it the Swede would have had an easier job clearing it. But it's not the most contentious decision its very 50:50.

    Or as Bill Shankly said, "if you're not interfering with play what are you doing on the pitch?"
    Ian

    I blame Wynton, what was the question?
    There are only 10 types of people in the World, those who understand binary and those that don't.

  19. #69
    Member hFx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    395
    Eng, Fra, Ned & Ger, always pretty close because its the final 8, Fra n USA being the nail biter, the will be pretty easy if the stronger teams get can keep it together. But I'm very sad that the Japs, by far the most entertaining team, lost due to the bad first half. But also the thrill of the cup format, that any team can have a good/bad day enough...
    My Progressive Workshop at http://soundcloud.com/hfxx

  20. #70
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by NogbadTheBad View Post
    But it's not the most contentious decision its very 50:50.
    I'll agree with that.
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  21. #71
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by moecurlythanu View Post
    Nor, Fra, Ned & Ger
    Quote Originally Posted by hFx View Post
    Eng, Fra, Ned & Ger
    Anyone else wanna hazard a guess?

    I'm gonna go on record and say ENG, USA, ITA, GER. I don't think SWE has much of a chance against GER and I think ENG is stronger than NOR. FRA/USA and ITA/NED are too close to call so my picks are who I want to see win.

    My intuition says it'll be FRA/GER in the final, tho. Maybe I should pick FRA over USA. Hmmm.
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  22. #72
    I'm here for the moosic NogbadTheBad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,336
    Eng, Fra, Ned, Ger
    Ian

    I blame Wynton, what was the question?
    There are only 10 types of people in the World, those who understand binary and those that don't.

  23. #73
    Member moecurlythanu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Crimea River
    Posts
    6,061
    My picks were based on the play that I've managed to see thus far, not the reputations of the teams coming in.

  24. #74
    Member since 7/13/2000 Hal...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by moecurlythanu View Post
    My picks were based on the play that I've managed to see thus far, not the reputations of the teams coming in.
    That's what I based my picks on, too.

    NOR showed a lot of promise but that's all it was: promise. They only beat Korea 2-1 when France beat them 4-0. I figured ENG would beat them.

    I see a similar game between GER & SWE. GER may not score a lot but they've haven't conceded a goal, yet, in this WC, altho they did score 4 vs S Africa and 3 vs Nigeria.
    I love sleeping. It's like being dead without the commitment.

  25. #75
    France wasn't good and brave enough to win this game; with the courage they showed the last 10 minutes they might have had a chance. The early US-goal made it easier for the US-team to controle the game.
    US-England - interesting meeting!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •