Topic: 2010 FIFA World Cup Thread

Go Germany! Yeah! Now, since the US is out, me go for Argentina and Messi.

Now I wonder where Machu is. I thought he would be the first to comment on England's defeat plus I like to hear his thoughts on his teams performance today. My thoughts however is that disallowed goals are no excuse for the English but it makes Fifa look like fools for not allowing instant replay to the game

Machu is likely drowning his sorrows right about now.

And that doesn't say anything. Having instant replays doesn't make it a video game. It's a ridiculous comparison. Also, given you're at this site, I can't believe you think of video games as a negative comparison.

I think I'm the only Argentinian in this website... VAMOS ARGENTINA!!

Sorry again for asking but I know nothing of sports. How are teams chosen from their Nationality? I mean consider Mexico, I know there's a bunch of teams inside Mexico such as Las Chivas and America but who goes to the World Cup as Mexico? Is it just a mix or do they have to win something for that team to play in the World Cup.

@KaiserGX
The manager of each team decides on a 23-man squad of players of their nationality from any club in the world. They don'T have had to win anything with their club, but it does affect selections

If you're saying what I think you're saying (and that is; believing a national team is made up from domestic team mates of a single football team), then you are completely off.

As such, a team is formed from players that meet a certain standard (judged by the person tasked as Head Coach), assuming they hold citizenship of that country.

In Mexico's case, the Head Coach can draw players from the domestic leagues and across the globe - as long as they're Mexican. There aren't many Mexicans in the English Premier League, so I'd imagine they'd probably be playing in the European leagues as well as domestically.

Oh ok thanks, So if there's a Mexican player in Spain he play for Mexico's team in the World Cup?

Yeah, but if he also obtains a Spanish passport and nationalty for whatever reason, he can opt to play for Spain as well.

Well, Edhe explained alot better than me! I'm just not in the mood for full explanations after the horror show today

The game should be a game and not a slave of technology. Do you really belive that football will be the same? Everyone will want a check by the referey for every fight or throw in and so on. The game loses its nature that it is a game. The one and only reason why some people want technological stuff in the game is because there is A LOT OF MONEY involved. The game will be controlled by machines and no more by the people on the field.

And yet more evidence that we need instant replay. Good grief, FIFA, this is embarrassing. Argentina was way offside. You'd have to be blind to miss that. I feel bad for Mexico. If they lose by a goal, I'll have lost interest entirely in this tournament.

Edit: My goodness. A slave to technology? Over the top a bit? Fans want the cameras. Everyone wants to see a fair game. If they aren't going to allow cameras, they could at least start requiring referees to be sighted.

Wimbledon (tennis) has/had a system where a player can make an appeal during the match - up to three, and if they are proven right (via technology), the decision is overturned. Could this not work in football.

I'm not talking about expensive equipment that detects whether a ball crosses a line or a player strays offside, but a 4th official. That may sound familiar because it is a system that has been used before, but FIFA hasn't enforced.

With the number of bad refereeing decisions during this cup (and even before with Ireland), something needs to be done. Maybe implanting bionic eyes into Referees and Officials...

Yes, the other football -- the real one -- has already been through this matter, and came to the correct conclusion that video replays help the process to remain fair. They were smart enough, however, to carefully circumscribe the relationship between field rulings and subsequent instant-replay reviews: unless the tape offers clear and indisputable proof that the ruling on the field was incorrect, the former will stand. That gives the original read by the refs a somewhat higher status, making it so that the tape will only impact the process in the case of a clear mistake. If it's at all ambiguous during replay, the initial call must always be retained.

I'm sure soccer will catch up one day.

I hope someday American football catches on in Europe so we can call it European soccer. I feel like there isn't enough confusion in international sports talk yet.

We call it "Rugby".

Also, Fries are "Chips".

Yes, more cultural confusion could only be a good thing, at least for my amusement. Reminds me of a humorous line in Nabokov's Pnin:

Pnin entered a sport shop in Waindell's main street and asked for a football. The request was unseasonable but he was offered one.
"No, no," said Pnin, "I do not wish an egg or, for example, a torpedo. I want a simple football ball. Round!"

Poor Pnin. Alternatively, I'd be happy enough if we started calling the sport soccerball instead.

Who stole the word ad used it for a completely different sport? Not us! AF should be called American Rugby as that's clearly where it came from.

And yes, for the second time today it has been proven that technology is needed and FIFA should stop being a complete bunch of asses.

I think you missed the winky face there, Rensch.