Half the point of football is that scoring is hard. I would never want it to become like basketball. So much scoring that you take it for granted. Keep it as it is I say.
My only suggestion would be to look again at the offside rule in the wake of VAR. I don’t like to see a goal ruled out because the striker’s ear crossed the plane at the time the pass was kicked. That’s not what the offside rule was invented for. In any games without VAR (like the lower English leagues where I watch most football) the striker would be seen as level in that situation and therefore onside. No one ever gained a meaningful advantage by having their toe or nose in front at that point. If we are going to use this technology the basics of the rule need to change to give the benefit of doubt (or closeness) to the attacker I think.
That’s a strength of football not a problem. All the other great team sports - both codes of Rugby, Cricket (especially Tests), American Football etc - a superior team will utterly dominate an inferior team due to the scoring system.
Not so in football. Which means upsets such as England v USA (1950), Italy v North Korea (1966) and Germany FR v Algeria (1982) are always possible.
Yeah, but I spoke only of 6 - 8 goals, or maybe 4 - 6.
Scoring shouldn’t be easy, of course, but it also shouldn’t be so easy to destroy the playing. 0 - 0 games are not that attractive, and even if penalty shoot-outs are very exciting, they should not decide games so often. I remember there were quarter finals with 3 penalty shoot-outs.
More goals would make games much more attractive, I’m pretty sure about that.
For me the idea of sport is that the better ones win, and not the more lucky ones.
And more goals would still bring some outsider wins, cause the outsiders are sometimes just better.
And it wouldn’t make football predictable, great names would still not make automatically great teams. The team-spirit would still beat sometimes the tired favourites.
I think I would be in favour of eliminating extra time in order to go straight to penalties. More often than not it is just prolonging the inevitable anyway.
Copa América has done that for many years. The drawback is that teams settle for penalty kicks midway through the second-half. Good for shoot-out specialists like Croatia but not so good for England or Netherlands.
Statistically, from the six previous 32-team World Cups, a winner has been found in extra-time on 13/31 occasions. But that’s not including matches where a team has equalised in extra-time.
However from 4/8 in 2014, the trend is going the other way - 1/5 in 2018.
I fully agree. We’ve seen goals being disallowed during this World Cup that seemed perfectly allright and therefore would have counted without a Var and hisboodhounds looking for a nose or an eyelid in offside position. My idea is: look at the person’s feet, not his shoulders, arms or ears.
Two other points of attention: referees (and VARs) should be more attentive to a) time waisting and b) diving: in virtually every game I see players making a spectacular dive (and rolling over the pitch as if they were hit by a bullet) in order to get a free kick. The replay often tells you that they were only touched (on the arm or hip) by a hand, or not even touched at all. That kind of behavior is ruining the game and should be punished by a warning (and a yellow card if it happens again). In the past it were often players from South American or Mediterranean countries who were guilty of this ‘falling disease’, but today they’re all doing it. And referees reward every dive.
100% agree. And either way let’s have a distance that makes a clear advantage obvious. Say, a foot (30cm).
Again, 100% agreed.
I have often said that the problem with referees is that very few have ever really played the game very much. Consequently, they rarely see the game the way the rest of us do. Far too often they are taken in as you describe and, like naughty children, the players’ behaviour reflects the lack of discipline they are ruled by. If it becomes clear that cheats prosper, then everybody starts cheating. Penalties are the most obvious case. Far too often I hear pundits (former players) say “if he felt contact he has every right to go down.” As if the slightest contact automatically constitutes a foul. Noticeably, you never see a defender go down in the box when he is touched. There’s no potential advantage to be gained in that. And of course, “if he doesn’t go down he won’t get anything”. For my money, a foul is when a player is unlawfully impeded. Pushed, kicked, tripped up. Contact is just contact and can be just as easily initiated by the attacker as by the defender. If there’s no clear impeding there’s no foul. At least, that’s how this old fossil sees it
Brazil knock out. Quite a surprise, but one that I saw coming throughout the game. This was a good Brazilian team, but not one of the better Brazilian national teams in history. At half time I had the feeling that Croatia would make it. Brazil was dominating, but without creating too many chances and the Croatians were clearly speculating on extra time and penalties. The Neymar goal seemed to thwart their plans, but after the equalizer I was sure it was over for the Seleção Canarinho
Frankly Brazil have been living on past glories for at least twenty years. Maybe some are still blinded by the yellow shirts. Their disrespectful showboating against little South Korea was always likely to come back and bite them on the backside. Perhaps they should have practised penalties more than the dance routines.
Brazil struggle playing against very technical, elite European teams who are comfortable with the ball and won’t allow them to take control. It was also hilarious to see the ridiculous Neymar Jr. left high and dry at the end.
If France are somehow eliminated tomorrow, then this title is anybodys.
Holland again out after losing a penalty shootout. I’m very sad about this, of course, but in all honesty Argentina was the better team over 120 minutes. And this Dutch team wasn’t ripe for the world title (but the Argentines don’t look like a true world champion either)
I expected more from them, They had the potential for more, but did not enfold it completely in every game. But it was their best WC team since 2002.
Looking back it seems they have become now a “quarter-final” team, they could not fulfil the high expectations in 5 tournaments in a row. Kinda surprising considering all the talent involved.
Brazil are overhyped favourites at every World Cup - including the ones they bomb out. But in reality the team has been going backwards for some time. Further exacerbated by the introduction of the UEFA Nations League, which means Brazil no longer play elite European opposition outside a World Cup.
Argentina just about deserved to advance ahead of Netherlands. Although the Dutch missed a trick by not carrying the momentum of the late fight back into extra-time. They were never going to beat specialists Argentina in a penalty shoot-out.
Argentina are gaining momentum but they’ll probably need more than that to get past a tournament hardened unit such as Croatia.
For France, the 50/50 clash with England is the de facto final.
As for England, outside hosting a World Cup (fat chance), they’ll never have a better opportunity than the present.
England deserved at least extra-time, but like Holland, they have a history with penalties …
Maybe it wasn’t a wise decision to let Harry Kane take that second penalty. He clearly chose the same corner (his favorite) but tried to do something different at the same time (a shot nearer to the crossbar) and the result was disastrous. England will probably never (never say never) have such a good chance to win the title again.