FIFA Women's WC France 2019

Eds said:
What was frightening was how poor the pass completion was from both sides given that they are meant to be two of the top three women's sides.
Click to expand...
City are supposed to be one of the best teams in the world, and renowned for our passing, yet we sometimes don't pass it well enough either. Its a huge game, and players will be nervous, and will rush their decision making.
 
halfmist said:
There is a picture on the back pages of Neville with his arms around Steph's neck. A bit like how you would cuddle your girlfriend just before you stuck your tongue down her throat. Not sure I am comfortable with this,arm around, hugging the players bit. Wonder how it works at the after match dressing room team talk when the girls are getting their kit off ready for a shower.
Click to expand...
He's not allowed in the dressing room straight after the match. That's why they do those huddles on the pitch at full-time.
 
Eds said:
What was frightening was how poor the pass completion was from both sides given that they are meant to be two of the top three women's sides.
Click to expand...

Is there are site that has those numbers? (that's a genuine question by the way rather than an attempt to challenge you)
 
cleavers said:
We don't know it was, and that's the point, its a single frame used, who picks that frame ?

With players moving quickly, often in opposite directions, the ball moving quickly, there is still scope for error, because the technology is not up to the job, we don't even know that the lines we see are in perspective.

Not a single USA player appealed, until after the goal was scored, well they would then wouldn't they ?

We've actually gone from encouraging goals (what wins in football) by giving strikers the benefit of the doubt on offside, to discouraging them, but disallowing marginal ones, just to pander to a technology that isn't yet good enough, and we're now saying his (her) big toe was offside, to me its ridiculous that football seems to want to prevent the whole reason we play it, goals.
Click to expand...

Indeed when using 25 frames per second 2 players moving at a mere 3 metres per second in opposite directions results in a 6 metre differentiation per second or 24cm per frame, and they reckon they can without doubt call a decision to a cm is total on utter fabricated bollocks. Even if the defender is static its 12cm margin of error per frame, and 3 metres per second isn't even sprinting, that's doing 100m in 30= seconds, imagine sane for example running full tilt at 8+mps with a quick full back running forward to try to play offside at 7mps that iss 60cm differentiation per frame, but we still trust someone to draw a line and say definitively he was 3cms offside totally disregarding the margins of error the laws of physics have dictated since time began.

I have gone 100% full circle on VAR from total support of the concept to absolutely hating the way its been corrupted and fully expect it to be used purely as a tool to appease the broadcasters rather than fans or actually improve match integrity.
 
Last edited:
cleavers said:
We don't know it was, and that's the point, its a single frame used, who picks that frame ?

With players moving quickly, often in opposite directions, the ball moving quickly, there is still scope for error, because the technology is not up to the job, we don't even know that the lines we see are in perspective.

Not a single USA player appealed, until after the goal was scored, well they would then wouldn't they ?

We've actually gone from encouraging goals (what wins in football) by giving strikers the benefit of the doubt on offside, to discouraging them, but disallowing marginal ones, just to pander to a technology that isn't yet good enough, and we're now saying his (her) big toe was offside, to me its ridiculous that football seems to want to prevent the whole reason we play it, goals.
Click to expand...

I agree,hence my use of the word humanity.

Regarding the actual footage,the frame used looked 100% conclusive to me......but i'll concede that there is always the factor of false perception/doubt.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
In that case I think it would be fairer to use the position of the feet to decide on a position rather than if they are leaning forwards or backwards while they are running. And what would happen in situations where the players are actually level?
Click to expand...

I agree as above,the advantage should always go with the attacker but VAR has removed that.

Focusing back on the tournament,lts hope heads can be raised for the 3rd placed game - that would be a wonderful achievement.
 
FantasyIreland said:
Cheers for that,my head now hurts ;-)
Click to expand...


Sorry, on the plus side you at least avoided my poor diagrams explaining to a colleague in even more detail how much can change in 1/25th of a second, when he was harping on how brilliant it was they could definitively rule on offside without human judgement.

On the actual football side I gather must of the squad are young enough to still around in 2 years and if they improve ball retention and sir Phil teaches them how to defend properly they must have a great shout at the Euros.
 
hello said:
Indeed when using 25 frames per second 2 players moving at a mere 3 metres per second in opposite directions results in a 6 metre differentiation per second or 24cm per frame, and they reckon they can without doubt call a decision to a cm is total on utter fabricated bollocks. Even if the defender is static its 12cm margin of error per frame, and 3 metres per second isn't even sprinting, that's doing 100m in 30= seconds, imagine sane for example running full tilt at 8+mps with a quick full back running forward to try to play offside at 7mps that iss 60cm differentiation per frame, but we still trust someone to draw a line and say definitively he was 3cms offside totally disregarding the margins of error the laws of physics have dictated since time began.

I have gone 100% full circle on VAR from total support of the concept to absolutely hating the way its been corrupted and fully expect it to be used purely as a tool to appease the broadcasters rather than fans or actually improve match integrity.
Click to expand...
Just a thought. In cricket you see on screen when the ball edges the bat. Is it possible to put something in the ball to detect the moment it is kicked. You would probably need something in the boot as well. As I'm writing this more problems come up. Let's go back to steel toe caps and laced up balls ( footballs). There was not as much controversy them days.
 
cleavers said:
We don't know it was, and that's the point, its a single frame used, who picks that frame ?

With players moving quickly, often in opposite directions, the ball moving quickly, there is still scope for error, because the technology is not up to the job, we don't even know that the lines we see are in perspective.

Not a single USA player appealed, until after the goal was scored, well they would then wouldn't they ?

We've actually gone from encouraging goals (what wins in football) by giving strikers the benefit of the doubt on offside, to discouraging them, but disallowing marginal ones, just to pander to a technology that isn't yet good enough, and we're now saying his (her) big toe was offside, to me its ridiculous that football seems to want to prevent the whole reason we play it, goals.
Click to expand...

Only legitimate goals should count. Dippers are yapping on about two Golden Boots - one of whom arrived at the magic number with an offside goal! The problem with VAR introduction is that it has not been trialled for a sufficient length of time to show what effect it would have on the game, and I have seen precious little info from the RDAHMeedya as to how the game would change. I think the basic reason why is because none of the people involved in the decisions had the faintest idea about how it would change, dramatically or otherwise, and we are left with a system of arbitration that is vastly different from what we might have seen over the last fifty years.
 
SebastianBlue said:
From the research I have seen, and some of my experiences coaching and playing whilst living here, I think it is only a matter of time before football overtakes baseball and/or hockey in popularity. Some of it is just demographics (barring any horrific actions taken by a Trump dictatorship, mind).
Click to expand...

I agree it's only a matter of time before football is more popular than baseball with boys. I'd argue depending on where you live football is already more popular than ice hockey.

In the Boston area and other New England and upper Midwest states I'm sure hockey is very popular. Where I live, hockey is a niche sport and football is far more popular for boys and girls than hockey. Perhaps it's due to having a very diverse population with many Hispanic, African and European (east and west) immigrants? I don't know. I think that can be part of it but also it's hot here and far less tradition in playing hockey.
 
FCBarca said:
Never happen for two simple reasons - one, money & the other is that there simply isn't enough physical aggression in the sport. Yanks need their violence and the sport will never see wages that compare to that of NBA, NFL & MLB much less NHL
Click to expand...
You've obviously never watched a group of Latino kids play. My daughter is 7 plays on a 9U travel football team and the latina girls shove, elbow and bulldoze if they can. My goodaye that's a Salvadoran immigrant tells me that's just how it is in Central and South American football.
 
Metalartin said:
NBA and Baseball are less contact sports than "Soccer". I think they don't get behind sports they can't dominate personally.
Click to expand...

To an extent NBA isn't as physical. European players in the NBA are typically more finesse players. Many players with size and strength that grew up playing in America bring a good bit of physicality to the game.
 
FCBarca said:
I hear comparisons of Cricket to Baseball but all I would tell you is that there is a lot more physical contact in the game - I played throughout my adolescence into high school. Same for basketball, rules allow for contact but if you thought FIFA/UEFA officiating was poor, basketball officiating is not far off from WWF in terms of refereeing theatrics & agendas. NBA was my favorite pastime to watch prior to football but I couldn't stomach the officiating any longer - it's not a sport anymore, just a media event
Click to expand...

I would agree about NBA refereeing. I've essentially stopped watching altogether. After the NBA referee was arrested a few years ago for essentially "match fixing" all the shit calls, etc I saw made sense. NBA may not be totally corrupt but I think it is to an extent.
 
Eds said:
It was on Sky Sports app. We had 74.8% pass completion USA had 68.2%
Click to expand...

OK, so higher than quite a few premier league teams are achieving on average. It's not that bad and broadly speaking i don't think pass completion in isolation tells us a lot anyway. Would also add that playing in those kind of temperatures can knacker people out pretty quickly and lead to a bit of sloppiness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top