LOL, the fact everyone seems to think the fix was in, tells us more about soccer than FIFA might like us to know. Talk about an image problem!
That and the undercurrent of raciism that seems to pop up from time to time around the game and well, while it’s indeed a beautiful game to watch, they need to work on the off field optics a bit…
I’d like to split the topic at Podunkian’s post but I can’t find the way to do it. Anyway, I wanted to name the new topic with the question “What’s wrong with soccer?” As a recreational player, very minor league coach and disappointed fan of the game, here is my list of things and some suggestions:
1- Penalty kicks to break a tie.
Penalty kicks to win a game is a load of crap that should have stayed behind with the last century. A team can just stall the game and not produce offense in hoping to play lotto at the end. The World Cup final is a great example of that but not the best. The Euro 2000 semi-final between Italy and Holland was an even better example. Italy, with one man down, never went out of their zone and played with 8 guys constantly behind the ball. They then went on to win the penalty contest.
Suggestion: After regular time is expired, play 8 on 8 for first overtime, 7 on 7 for second overtime. Allow team 1 extra substitution for each overtime period. Taking players out of the field would surely open up the play and produce scoring.
2- Penalty kicks for fouls in box
Get rid of that. Too many good actors now to make this way of scoring a fair play. Replace it with a modified direct free kick with a limit to the number of defenders and offense players in the box. Take the kick from the center of the 18 m line. Offense still has the advantage but scoring isn’t as easy.
3- Diving and acting out
Be really harsh on incidents. Treat diving on a tackle in a harsher manner than a missed tackle ( see another thread for all the arguments)
4- Video replay
Since Zidane’s foul was the first instance of using video to punish a player ( despite what FIFA says, that’s what happened, there was a big screen in the stadium), bring in video replay at least for determining fouls in the box. At least, officials could see if someone dives.
5- Foster defense that builds into offense, not defense that stalls the game. Heck, give passivity warning to teams for delaying the game. Count them as team fouls like in basketball.
I don’t have a big problem with penalty kicks, as they are an integral part of the game. Ending a tied game with penalty kicks is a demonstration of skill.Â
Italy won because a French player wasn’t 100%. It’s not a coin-toss.
Fouls in the penalty area are just fine. You should have a different level of skill to play well that close to the goal. If you don’t want people to dive, then stay on your feet and don’t foul them.
I don’t like the video replay, because it could take hours to argue a call. For example, you and I still can’t agree on the Neill-Grosso foul, and we’ve watched a whole bunch of video, haven’t we? FIFA rules prohibit video replay.
If the ref used it for the Zidane red card, then it’s a problem. I don’t think he did – he walked over to the other official (linesman? 4th official?) and he basically told him what happened.
Are you willing to have a game have 50 or 60 minutes of stoppage time added on for all the video replays that need to be reviewed before a call is made? Or should only some stuff get video replay and not others? Which ones?
Also, BigThumb, you should be able to split topics with the “split” button.
You know, I couldn’t see the split button even if it would have taken half the screen 
The video replay could be a fast thing. The ref on the field would communicate quickly with another official and a decision would have to be made quickly. Like I said in my first post, only actions in the box that could result in penalty kicks ( if they stay in the game) would be eligible for video replay. After all, the goal success rate in penalty kicks seems to be around 75% ( see http://www.soccer-training-info.com/penalty_kicks.asp) so it’s is not a fair play. A modified free kick would probably even the chances.
As for a penalty kicks to decide a game, it’s an integral part of the game now but has not always been that way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shootout_(football)#History. So why couldn’t it be changed by FIFA? Is that governing body so stuck in its rut?
Here is an interesting alternative:
And, Portugal won the most entertaining team award. http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/w/met.html I honestly would have like to see Portugal in the final. They are a team that carries the play and tries to score. They often play the beautiful game. Also, like smartass said, Rupert would have been wild.
[quote=“BigThumb”]
As for a penalty kicks to decide a game, it’s an integral part of the game now but has not always been that way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shootout_(football)#History. So why couldn’t it be changed by FIFA? Is that governing body so stuck in its rut?[/quote]
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant penalty kicks, not penalty shootout being an integral part of the game. Shooting the ball past the keeper and into the net is the whole point of the game. It’s not unreasonable, when extra time has failed to determine a winner, that this “whole point of the game” be used to decide which team has the better skills.
It’s not a coin toss or crap shoot. If a national team can’t field 5 players that can score (or at least hit the target and not miss completely), then you have to question if they really deserve to win. Especially if their opponents can perform this basic skill better than they can.
It’s not like they’re deciding all games based on this, only those that are tied, and tied after extra time. At that point, you can say the teams are pretty even, so why not decide based on skill? France didn’t deserve to win, sorry, because one of their players couldn’t score.
As for FIFA not willing to change, that’s not fair either. They’ve been through a lot of changes, but evolution is better than revolution in this type of thing. Remember the golden goal rules? Why did they get rid of that?
I think what you’re not liking about soccer is that it rewards teams that are good at penalty kicks, and teams that are good defensively.
Is that a bad thing?
Your suggestions about how to “improve” the game are basically suggestions about how to increase the amount goal scoring, are they not? But if goal scoring is a good thing, then it isn’t unreasonable to suggest that the ability to score a goal (in a penalty kick) is a skill that can determine which team deserves to win.
Was the Netherlands “better” than Italy in your example? No. They weren’t. Italy played better defensively, and in the end, they played the shootout better. They were the better team.
I think when Portugal and England have gone to the penalty shootout, the English fans have always groaned, because they know England sucks at the shootout. Well, that’s something to consider: a national team can’t field 5 players who can score a penalty kick? They don’t deserve to proceed, do they? A national team that can field a keeper that can stop 3 penalties, they deserve to proceed, don’t they?
[quote]I think what you’re not liking about soccer is that it rewards teams that are good at penalty kicks, and teams that are good defensively.
Is that a bad thing?
[/quote]
Yes it’s a bad thing when the whole strategy is to finish the game with a shootout.
[quote]As for FIFA not willing to change, that’s not fair either.
[/quote]
I asked a question. I didn’t imply anything.
[quote]Was the Netherlands “better” than Italy in your example? No. They weren’t. Italy played better defensively, and in the end, they played the shootout better. They were the better team.
[/quote]
Sorry. Italy didn’t play better soccer than the Netherlands in that game. They did better in penalty kicks during the shootout and won the game which is why you think they were the better team. But they sure didn’t play better soccer.
You seem to think that playing defensively in hopes of getting to the shootout is a great winning strategy ? Didn’t you also say that the whole point of the game was to score goals? I guess you don’t mean goals during regular play. Only when the ball is on the dot and 2 out of 22 players are involved.
By extension, why not have all 10 players lined up just outside the 18 m box and wait for the other team to take shots from the outside for 90 minutes. I guess you would find this entertaining since all games would be decided by penalty shootout. Heck, even non-skilled players could have a chance as long as they were fast enough to kick the ball away from the others. No need for attacking strategy, fancy footwork or give and go passes, just kick the ball back to the opponents and wait for them to come back.
I actually think I’m not going to watch high level soccer much anymore. It is quite a disappointing game nowadays because the great skills of the players is overshadowed by so many things that shouldn’t be in soccer. I’d rather search the net for great goals and moves footage instead. At least, these rarely contain penalty kicks, dives, headbutting and fraud stories.
The shootout is a way to settle a tie.
So I’m sure you’re just fishing here with this:
[quote]
You seem to think that playing defensively in hopes of getting to the shootout is a great winning strategy ? Didn’t you also say that the whole point of the game was to score goals? I guess you don’t mean goals during regular play. Only when the ball is on the dot and 2 out of 22 players are involved.
By extension, why not have all 10 players lined up just outside the 18 m box and wait for the other team to take shots from the outside for 90 minutes. I guess you would find this entertaining since all games would be decided by penalty shootout. Heck, even non-skilled players could have a chance as long as they were fast enough to kick the ball away from the others. No need for attacking strategy, fancy footwork or give and go passes, just kick the ball back to the opponents and wait for them to come back. [/quote]
You know I don’t think that. A game should be decided in 90 minutes of regular play.
So when all the “attacking strategy, fancy footwork or give and go passes” and everything else that you consider “real soccer” fails to determine a winner, what should be done? More of the same? Ok, let’s have extra time of more of the same, to see if it decides a winner. Oh, still a tie? Well, now what?
I’m ok with ties standing as well, and so is FIFA. Most leagues allow ties to just stand as ties.
I think Italy was rewarded for playing better defensive soccer, and for being better at the shootout. You don’t think those skills are “playing soccer” so we’ll just have to disagree.
I think defending is an incredibly important part of the game. If you can keep a determined national-level team from scoring, then that’s a pretty big accomplishment, certainly equal (cough cough tie) to a great attacking team.
When there’s a tie, let it stand. If it needs to be decided, then there’s nothing wrong with extra time. Then if it’s still not decided, what’s so wrong about testing two important skills?
Everything else being equal, the team that can’t get 5 players to score a penalty should advance.
Yah I was fishing a bit since I had some success lately 
A tie to stand is fine by me in any regular game. The away goal tie-breaker is also a good idea. But a shootout to decide a winner of the world’s biggest tournament will never, ever, ever be ok in my books. I would rather have them play three days of extra time.
Like I said, in extra time, take players out, allow more substitutions so that players can stay fresh ( they have lots of subs on the bench), heck take the goalie out but please stop the shootout non-sense in important games.
Here again, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
My original post was not meant as debate starter. It was just my opinion as to what I find is wrong with soccer after watching this world cup. If you don’t think anything is wrong or if you think different things are wrong, you could have just posted your opinion. If arguing is what you want, here is one for your win column: Skinhead nazis shouldn’t be allowed in soccer stadia.