Yes, this is why soccer sucks, and the plague it carries has spread to
other sports. The whole concept of ending a game with a shootout makes it
not even worth watching. Hockey is only slightly better for the fights, as
opposed to those soccer players rolling around faking an injury like little
pussies.
agreed... shootouts are pussy. i thought it was all over for Canada in the
OT when USA went on a power play, but thanks to a lack of skill on thier
part they couldn't manage better than 2 shots on net...Keen eye on
Price as well.. those shots had no chance
Think about it this way: you spend 1-2 hours watching a match,
getting all hyped up about a team game, and then you have it
all end with a one-on-one shot between a shooter and the goalie. At
least in hockey the goal is smaller, and the goalie has a decent
chance of deflecting the shot, but in soccer it is basically flipping
a coin because the goalie dives one way or the other hoping he the
ball went that direction. Yes, there is some skill, but most of it is
just guesswork.
Oh, and what is really funny is that Los Alamos labs for some
reason did some study which concluded that soccer was the most "exciting" sport
because of the greatest potential for upsets. Little do they consider
that if there is such a large chance for upsets that it shows that
skill does not really play a part. The game with the highest
percentage of upsets if flipping a coin, at 50-50. What kind of
"sport" is that?
What kind of "sport" is that?
The most popular one in the world. Although one might argue that
it is an art.
skill does not really play a part
Have you even seen a football match??? You are like a 40 year old
virgin talking about sex. "Oh I read this research and it
says... " , "oh I heard that.. " .
Seriously you say lots of things , some smart , some idiotic ,
but when you start talking about football it sounds like you have
the downs syndrome.
I've watched three World Cups (no, not all of them),
including two games from the last. I remember the first
time watching the World Cup (I think 1996? 1992?), wondering
what the commotion was about. Brazil was supposed to be
really good, but Germany and others had good teams too. It
seemed like it would be entertaining since I liked playing
it, and this was a professional match. Really, it
wasn't that bad.
That was, until the ending. What the hell? I sat through
two hours of this game--the final match--only to end it with
a shootout? I thought that was for
penalties!Whatmore, what I observed was the goalie
jumping left or right, and depending on what he guessed, he
either deflected the shot, or missed altogether. I was even
more pissed by the fact that this sorry ending to the game
was not part of the original game, but rather something made
up by FIFA (or somebody) to terminate the game early. It
seemed nobody was happy with it.
My dissatisfaction was really solidifed with the last
World Cup. Not only did it end like that one described
above, but now I was noticing players rolling around
the field like fucking girls trying to lure the ref
into giving a penalty. Despite that, the game still
ended in a shooting match. End result: 0/0, game won
in a shootout. WHOOP-DEE-DOO.
And come on Fanatic, "popularity" as a
criteria for something being good? 100 Billion served, right?
Art? Then why is soccer a team game? At least
if it remained that way it would have some dignity.
Perhaps that "art" could be extended to
actually scoring some points in regulation?
Thank the hells other sports are more popular here,
because soccer is just not that fun to watch.
You cant really compare engines and fruits or like
you cited - macdonalds and football. Completely
different things. And different rules of
popularity apply . You know that.
An art it is because , the individual play , the
team play - it can be so beautiful. Goals out of
nowhere, outstanding passes , phenomenal
dribbling. You have to see it to understand.
By the way you didnt seem to watch it very well ,
the score before shootouts wasnt 0-0 , it was 1-1
. And if you were to actually root for one of the
teams you'd worry so much during the
penalties , an emotional state close to hysteria.
Now imagine what the players feel , the weight of
5 billion people watching them , the fate of the
most desired trophy in their hands (or feet) . I
cant say that I am a big fan of shootouts , but
they really have their charm as well.
Yeah faking injuries is a bitch - it can win
matches, but public opinion of that player really
drops. Believe me its not that big a problem as
you see it , and its definately not a reason to
not watch the game.
Just a tip: You can continue watching your oh so
amazing baseball or american football , I really
dont care. I have my most beautiful sport in the
world and I am happy about it. Just dont start
discussing it because the statements you make
really show that you have no idea what you are
talking about.
Hockey was better with no helmets...Soccer should be played with 2
balls...as there is not enough scoring. Defense is only fun to watch for so
long...as like watching to hot lezzy chicks being prudish when the other
goes for a tit or tries to get her fingers stinky. We want ACTION! As for
shoot-outs...stupid, sudden death is the way to go...even if it takes 10
overtimes...you want the game over? score then! But the guys get too tired?
Well it shows who's team is in better shape...only the strong survive.
Yeah, it is pretty boring. It's like a game centered on
shootouts, only with a stick, some running, etc. At least,
however, it remains a team game to the end, and the players
don't drop like crybabies from the smallest of hits (even
that hit by Zidane was pretty weak to collapse to the ground
from).
It should be played to the death if necessary. FIFA can kiss my ass
if it wants to cut it short. At the very least the final World Cup
match shouldn't ever end in a shoot-out. I wouldn't even
accept the win at that point, because it's not one.
Having two balls would at least make it so the game has a little more
strategy than just kicking the ball back and forth to team mates and
then at the goal. Simulataneous shots on goal, dedicating players to
certain balls, etc. would make it more interesting. Other sports,
American Football, Baseball, Basketball, Cricket, etc. at least have
some strategy behind them. Even hockey has collisions to make things
interesting. Maybe that's why the soccer players drop like flies
at the smallest hit to earn penalties: there's no strategy in
that game.
I disagree. Soccer (I'll stick to the way YOU prefer to call
it) is a game of skill and strategy. I'm not very into
American football but how many minutes do they run before they
take a break (2 or 3 maximum?). In soccer they have to be able to
run 2x45 minutes. Speed, endurance, control of the ball
(it's easy running with the ball in your hands, try with
your feet), team play and it takes a lot of practice and
determination to be good. Believe me it takes a lot of skill to
even pass the ball to the right direction. Strategy? Isn't
this situation - having 5 defenders and 2 attackers and ends with
scoring a goal - called strategy? Or you'd say it happen by
accident? If you've never played you cant appreciate it, nor
understand it.
Also, nothing is comparable with the kicks you get when you go to
a soccer match. It's like going to a war or something,
nothing of the other sports can give that much of an
adrenaline... but that's another story.
OMGWTF Shootout.
