Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Not to Fix Soccer

freedom-to-tinker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 151 posts

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#51

Post by paulsmith »

ErrantX wrote: post #23
Maro wrote: post #16

I am familiar with the FIFA's reasoning, and I just don't think it holds up. The best example is the NBA: advanced technical rules at NBA games aren't stopping anyone from playing basketball on the courts or at the High School level. Also, the rules are different anyways. At the FIFA level, games are played on large fields for 2x45 minutes, there are 4 refs, etc. AFAIR HS level games were 2x30 minutes and we were luc…

Would it really kill soccer if we had video replay? Yes. Alot. Injuries already interrupt the flow of the game - and one thing Football is good at is flowing (one reason I personally enjoy it). A good game is non-stop action (which is my only criticism of US sports - I usually get bored waiting for baseball for example :)) Match outcomes are routinely altered by erroneous ref. decisions, decisions which the whole wor…

I suppose in some sense it flows but watching the World Cup I notice that there are constant little stoppages of play -- the ref is always blowing the whistle when two players collide going for a ball, any time there is a challenge (and an opportunity to mug and dive and generally lose dignity ;) Restarts happen quickly to be sure but the whistle stoppage seems to take some of the momentum out of the game.

It would be better if the refs just let the players play and only blow the whistle for the most egregious fouls.

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#52

Post by bukkake »

ErrantX wrote: post #39
bukkake wrote: post #26

The argument outlined in the article is absurd. Soccer is and has been by far the most popular sport participation wise in the USA for decades. I played and refereed it competitively for close to two decades until I started having problems with my knees. Most Americans are very well versed in soccer and have either played it themselves or have at least watched their kids play it. Most Americans have no problems with…

I think this is just differing perspectives; a lot of what you highlight, for me, makes US sports unwatchable (as i said elsewhere I can't watch all of a baseball game simply through boredom - despite quite liking the game). (though for the record post-mortems, referee training etc. are good ideas) Referees should be required to make distinguishing hand signals for each call. This would greatly aid the players, the f…

I'm a former ref and longtime player. I understand the flow of the game very well. Americans don't want to slow the game down in the slightest. What they want is more justice, post-mortem oversight, and less preventable human error.

Anyone faking an injury on my pitch used to get a red card for conduct detrimental to the game. So I consider 5 minutes to be very generous. I'm aware that it's quite a long time. That's the point. Provide a disincentive.

You cite the example of quickly throwing the ball back in. Yet average high school matches get a replacement ball to the thrower quicker than at the World Cup. Worse, everyone seems to be OK with having the thrower creep down the field for 10 yards until throwing it with all kinds of crazy side spin on it.

To most of us, you seem like the abused who now sympathizes with the abuser. You want egregious human error unjustly changing match outcomes? You want to continue to foster an ethic of diving and unsportsmanship?

To reduce this aspect of the game, you've got to provide disincentives. The key is to pick disincentives that do not change the fundamental "flow" of the sport. It's really very simple. I expect that at some point in the next 50 years, there will be some leagues that tinker with the rules, become immensely popular, and people will forget the current dark ages of corruption, incompetence, and unsportsmanlike, disgraceful on-pitch behavior.

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#53

Post by ErrantX »

ebiester wrote: post #48
ErrantX wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is just differing perspectives; a lot of what you highlight, for me, makes US sports unwatchable (as i said elsewhere I can't watch all of a baseball game simply through boredom - despite quite liking the game). (though for the record post-mortems, referee training etc. are good ideas) Referees should be required to make distinguishing hand signals for each call. This would greatly aid the players, the f…

I agree with you on the above points except for the five minutes rule. The point is to provide a disincentive to get on the stretcher. If you can get your butt up and recover on the side, you should do it. If you can't, there's no shame, but if you can get right back up and back in, then obviously it wasn't that big of a deal in the first place.

I see your point; any injury requiring the trainer on the pitch requires you to go to the side and be waved back on specifically by the ref anyway.

5 minutes is too long though; a minute maybe (and even then nothing formally timed etc.)

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#54

Post by Maro »

zazi wrote: post #20
Maro wrote: post #16

I am familiar with the FIFA's reasoning, and I just don't think it holds up. The best example is the NBA: advanced technical rules at NBA games aren't stopping anyone from playing basketball on the courts or at the High School level. Also, the rules are different anyways. At the FIFA level, games are played on large fields for 2x45 minutes, there are 4 refs, etc. AFAIR HS level games were 2x30 minutes and we were luc…

> The best example is the NBA: advanced technical rules at NBA games aren't stopping anyone from playing basketball on the courts or at the High School level. alternatively, basketball has so many rules that it prevents first timers from truly picking up the game at all... ie. a non-intuitive game > Would it really kill soccer if we had video replay? Has the lack of video replays killed soccer? Why stop at video repl…

Players constantly lying/cheating certainly has a negative effect on how the game is perceived. I know it has an effect on me.

Also, it has a noticably negative effect at the kids playing at the amateur level. At one of the World Cup games the commentator noted that he teaches his young kid that diving/cheating is part of soccer and it's important to be good at it. Sports are supposed to be a part of life where cheating and lying is discouraged and outlawed.

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#55

Post by ErrantX »

bukkake wrote: post #52
ErrantX wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is just differing perspectives; a lot of what you highlight, for me, makes US sports unwatchable (as i said elsewhere I can't watch all of a baseball game simply through boredom - despite quite liking the game). (though for the record post-mortems, referee training etc. are good ideas) Referees should be required to make distinguishing hand signals for each call. This would greatly aid the players, the f…

I'm a former ref and longtime player. I understand the flow of the game very well. Americans don't want to slow the game down in the slightest. What they want is more justice, post-mortem oversight, and less preventable human error. Anyone faking an injury on my pitch used to get a red card for conduct detrimental to the game. So I consider 5 minutes to be very generous. I'm aware that it's quite a long time. That's…

To most of us, you seem like the abused who now sympathizes with the abuser. You want egregious human error unjustly changing match outcomes? You want to continue to foster an ethic of diving and unsportsmanship?

No; and in fairness this is the only legitimate criticism I can accept about the game.

It's a new thing as well and entirely to do with the players and their ethos rather than the rules of the game. It's a catch 22 - sacrifice the spirit of the game to enforce fair play or keep the spirit and try to mitigate the diving etc.

Honestly; I don't think it is so bad as to warrant changes. Perhaps at the highest level of the game (though the world cup hasn't been too bad) but below that (club level outside of the premiership) it is pretty ok.

throwing it with all kinds of crazy side spin on it.

What's wrong with that? (I dislike the creep... agreed).

Yet average high school matches get a replacement ball to the thrower quicker than at the World Cup.

Citation? But also this proves the point somewhat - even the World Cup I disapprove of this whole "chuck em a new ball" philosophy. That is taking away from the game (where you should be running to grab the ball and get it back on the pitch ASAP). Modern football is having the urgency sapped by new ideas and rules like this. :P

I'm not saying the game is perfect; just that, well, Football is a game designed for Europeans to enjoy and some of that is stuff Americans don't seem to enjoy. Whilst I appreciate the suggestions we still enjoy the game very much - and would prefer for it not be changed to suit the American market (develop a break off game, certainly!). In the same way people would get pretty annoyed if I started making suggestions about how much Baseball could be improved :P

We each have our cultural games.

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#56

Post by zalew »

ErrantX wrote: post #53
ebiester wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you on the above points except for the five minutes rule. The point is to provide a disincentive to get on the stretcher. If you can get your butt up and recover on the side, you should do it. If you can't, there's no shame, but if you can get right back up and back in, then obviously it wasn't that big of a deal in the first place.

I see your point; any injury requiring the trainer on the pitch requires you to go to the side and be waved back on specifically by the ref anyway. 5 minutes is too long though; a minute maybe (and even then nothing formally timed etc.)

a minute, involving another clock, another person to control the time, another clock ticking in the corner of the screen. meh, gimme a break :)

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#57

Post by ErrantX »

Maro wrote: post #50
ErrantX wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it really kill soccer if we had video replay? Yes. Alot. Injuries already interrupt the flow of the game - and one thing Football is good at is flowing (one reason I personally enjoy it). A good game is non-stop action (which is my only criticism of US sports - I usually get bored waiting for baseball for example :)) Match outcomes are routinely altered by erroneous ref. decisions, decisions which the whole wor…

Yes. Alot. No. Not at all. Games are already being interrupted constantly by players diving, kicking each other. Video replays wouldn't add that much.

Of course they would. Your looking at 30s plus for a video replay. Plus then the restart recommended by the ref. A free kick or other call is a few seconds usually (unless it is tense, or important edge of the box stuff etc. which adds to the drama of the game).

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#58

Post by bukkake »

fserb wrote: post #46
bukkake wrote: post #26

The argument outlined in the article is absurd. Soccer is and has been by far the most popular sport participation wise in the USA for decades. I played and refereed it competitively for close to two decades until I started having problems with my knees. Most Americans are very well versed in soccer and have either played it themselves or have at least watched their kids play it. Most Americans have no problems with…

It seems you are not very familiar with soccer rules. Just a few comments: 1,3. is already true. There is post-morten review, we do see red-cards being cancelled and players being suspended all the time. 4. It is like this already. FIFA rules says that "when in doubt, favor the offense". 5. There has been some national championships with 2 field referees, it didn't noticeably improve the quality of the calls. FIFA al…

Simply put, there is insufficient and non-timely post-mortem review. Kaka's red card should have already been canceled and the CIV player suspended. Italy's dive against NZ for the PK should have already generated a post-mortem yellow.

As far as multiple referees goes, it's simply a matter of having greater field coverage in the area of view. It also reduces referee fatigue. It's a no-brainer and is the norm for just about every other sport on Earth.

Let me ask: what was the call in the US / Slovenia game? Nobody knows except for one guy. I was stumped. The commentators were stumped. The players didn't even know. There was no signal whatsoever, and it's not even required.

In fact, you actually can signal just about everything: pushing, holding, dangerous challenge, tripping, elbowing, and unsportsmanlike. Pretty much everything can be summed up as one of these with a simple hand signal.

Your point about the difference between "discretionary power" and "anarchy" is disingenuous. One would expect an officiating body for the world championship for a sport to have at least a reasonable consensus on what constitutes fouls and caution-worthy offenses. Do you think that the German team deserved 5 or 6 yellows and a red from that Spanish ref? I don't think so, and most people did not.

Sports evolve. You can either embrace it or fear it.

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#59

Post by zazi »

ubernostrum wrote: post #49
zazi wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes i see where you are coming from, some officials have been making bad calls. but some would argue that the refereeing is part of the game and instituting video replays etc might unnecessarily complicate matters and ruin the flow of the game. i play soccer in an amatuer league every weekend and although the referees generally are not of a high standard, I still enjoy it. its part of the game.

Disparate levels of play do not require arbitrariness in officiating. I don't do soccer at any level, but in my spare time I do work and hold a certification as a tournament judge for Magic (the card game: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic:_The_Gathering ). The DCI -- sanctioning body for organized Magic -- has formal standards for officiating which work at and scale from the smallest local game shop tournaments all…

I agree that the video replay may/may not affect the flow of the game. but i guess what i'm saying is that I enjoy the game alot, regardless of the quality of refereeing. To fifa, it probably takes alot of will power to implement changes that may or may not work to something that 1) people already enjoy 2) is growing in popularity 3) is probably the most played sport in the world in its current state 4)they make alot of money off

What would be interesting if a well known respected soccer league (italian/spanish/english) instituted video replays in some manner into the games to test this out. then we would know how it would affect the game (flow, behaviour etc). all we have right now is alot of personal subjective opinions (including my opinions), which we have no way to validate. =)

Re: How Not to Fix Soccer

#60

Post by adw »

Maro wrote: post #12
lionhearted wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Question for the Americans: Is soccer really on the brink of becoming a popular sport in your country? No, but it's slowly trending upwards. Without looking it up, the top American spectator sports are American football, baseball, basketball, NASCAR racing, hockey, golf, and tennis. The problem is that the best American athletes look to one of top three American sports - if you look at top NBA and NFL players, many…

NBA players and soccer? You must be joking. Unless you want 11 Peter Crouches running around the field...

Steve Nash (admittedly: Canadian). His dad was a professional footballer.
Post reply on HN