Inside: U.S. Soccer's March to Brazil

[MLD Woody]

The basic format of the field they each play on is the same. The tactics designed to score are essentially the same. Hockey changes lines so often because it is a more demanding sport. With soccer the players often have a lot of time to stand around.

 

 

... like they're sitting on a bench?

[MLD Woody]

You don't seem to understand the game of soccer so this debate is really pointless.

[The Gipper]

I question some of this. I don't think soccer is necessarily #1 in China, at all. Baseball is every bit as big in Mexico.

And if soccer is so big in all those Asian and African countries, then why do they get short shrift in WC entries.

 

And, beyond everything, the only one that really matters is that big pick country on the left.

[The Gipper]

You don't seem to understand the game of soccer so this debate is really pointless.

I understand it fine. I just don't agree with your version of what its all about. They obviously don't play soccer with the same ferocity as they play hockey. Yes, soccer players do rest out there while they are watching the action occur on the other part of the field. When it is appropriate they move into position to become part of the action. Basketball players do too. Baseball players certainly do.

Not sure what it is that you think I don't understand.

I understand that it is a slow paced game. That is not the problem.

[MLD Woody]

You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it

 

If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.

 

I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.

 

 

 

We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?

[The Cysko Kid]

You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it

 

If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.

 

I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.

 

 

 

We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?

South America might disagree

[MLD Woody]

South America has 10 international soccer teams and gets 4 to 5 world cup spots

 

Europe has 54 international soccer teams and gets 13 world cup spots

 

 

Sounds pretty fair for South America. In fact, by ratios, you could say the World Cup committee thinks there is a higher percentage of talent in SA.

 

 

I guess I should have said most skilled region as a whole. Especially with all of the top leagues in the world existing there. With these amazing professional clubs and youth teams in place, the development system would seem to be much more prevalent. This then cold lead to more skilled players. It clearly makes sense they get more spots when the region includes England, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc etc etc. (though I know you weren't arguing against that point)

[gftChris]

And, beyond everything, the only one that really matters is that big pick country on the left.

Yep, that's your problem right there. I can fix it, but it'll need something to open your mind, and I can't order the can opener for another few days.

[The Gipper]

You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it

Again, I understand it fine. I just don't give a shit about it. What the fuck is it about that you don't understand?

If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.

I am saying that there are opportunities in soccer for the players to catch a blow. If they couldn't catch blows...if they couldn't find opportunities to rest while the action is taking part in another part of the field they could not play as continually as they do.

 

I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.

We got into this because hockey and soccer are played essentially the same way. A rectangular field with a goal and a goalie. And the tactics to score are almost the same. One is played on ice with a puck, the other on grass with a ball....but otherwise there is not much difference.

 

 

We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?

Then here is what you do: do NOT select countries from regions. Why is there a regional selection process? Why does Europe warrant receiving 13 of the 32 entries? I don't think they do. Have the entire tournament played on a worldwide basis....disregard regions altogether.

E.g. in preliminaries, Honduras say, must play of against the US/Canada/Mexico/etc. North American countries. Why? Why can't it play Columbia/Venezuela/Suriname/Chad/Togo/Benin/Indonesia/Goa/Iraq/Iran/Bosnia...whatever.

[The Gipper]

South America has 10 international soccer teams and gets 4 to 5 world cup spots

 

Europe has 54 international soccer teams and gets 13 world cup spots

 

There aren't even 54 nations in Europe. How can they have more teams than they have countries? Are they like taking countries and dividing them up? Like does England/Wales/Scotland/Northern Ireland count as 4 different "teams". Well, fuck, if they can do that, then we should have different soccer teams for California/Texas/Florda/New England/New York/Ohio/Montana etc. etc. etc.....and demand at least 10 slots for all those teams.

 

 

Sounds pretty fair for South America. In fact, by ratios, you could say the World Cup committee thinks there is a higher percentage of talent in SA.

 

 

I guess I should have said most skilled region as a whole. Especially with all of the top leagues in the world existing there. With these amazing professional clubs and youth teams in place, the development system would seem to be much more prevalent. This then cold lead to more skilled players. It clearly makes sense they get more spots when the region includes England, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc etc etc. (though I know you weren't arguing against that point)

[gftChris]

There aren't even 54 nations in Europe. How can they have more teams than they have countries? Are they like taking countries and dividing them up? Like does England/Wales/Scotland/Northern Ireland count as 4 different "teams".

 

 

Basically, international matches started out as being between England and Scotland, and generally what's known as the 'home nations' over here - including Wales and the Irelands. The fact that those places still have teams is a legacy thing. but even if you disagree, and count the UK as one team, you're still looking at 50-odd teams compared to south america's 10.

 

 

 

We got into this because hockey and soccer are played essentially the same way. A rectangular field with a goal and a goalie. And the tactics to score are almost the same. One is played on ice with a puck, the other on grass with a ball....but otherwise there is not much difference.

Disagree entirely about the tactics to score. Other than 'get it in the net without it getting stopped' - which is also how you score in basketball - there's not much similarity, if any.

[The Gipper]

 

Basically, international matches started out as being between England and Scotland, and generally what's known as the 'home nations' over here - including Wales and the Irelands. The fact that those places still have teams is a legacy thing. but even if you disagree, and count the UK as one team, you're still looking at 50-odd teams compared to south america's 10.

You are going to have to list all those teams for me to get to 50. Though I guess if you count Luxembourg, Monaco, Andorra, Liechtenstien, Vatican City, San Marino, Malta and all the recent splintered countries after the breakup of Yugoslavia you might get there.

 

 

 

Disagree entirely about the tactics to score. Other than 'get it in the net without it getting stopped' - which is also how you score in basketball - there's not much similarity, if any.

Not from a neutral point of view. It is similar. Create creases in front of the goal and get it in.

[gftChris]

Countries in UEFA:

 

Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales

[gftChris]

Countries in CONMEBOL (South America)

 

Argentina

Bolivia

Brazil

Chile

Colombia

Ecuador

Paraguay

Peru

Uruguay

Venezuela

[gftChris]

The current world top 31 ranked countries are made up of 3 african teams, 3 teams from north/central america, 6 south american teams and 19 european teams. The next 31 ranked countries have 8 African teams, 4 Asians, a couple from north/central america, 3 from S. America, and another 12 from Europe.

 

So why exactly should the other continents get an equal amount of teams there?

[The Gipper]

 

Countries in UEFA:

 

Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales

The nations in bold are in fucking Asia. Can't these guys read a map?

And the Faroe Islands? Gibralter? Those are like declaring Hilton Head and Martha's Vineyard as separate nations. WTF?

[The Gipper]

The current world top 31 ranked countries are made up of 3 african teams, 3 teams from north/central america, 6 south american teams and 19 european teams. The next 31 ranked countries have 8 African teams, 4 Asians, a couple from north/central america, 3 from S. America, and another 12 from Europe.

 

So why exactly should the other continents get an equal amount of teams there?

So, I guess what I say is correct. Soccer is merely a regional sport.....Europe and SA.

[MLD Woody]

I showed you the map, that's not true. Its the most popular sport in the world.

 

The tactics in hockey and soccer are very different, unless you're just looking at it from an incredibly high level. This belief again just plays in to you just not knowing what you're talking about.

[The Gipper]

I showed you the map, that's not true. Its the most popular sport in the world.

 

The tactics in hockey and soccer are very different, unless you're just looking at it from an incredibly high level. This belief again just plays in to you just not knowing what you're talking about.

It is not the most popular sport at all in the two largest Democracies in world....the USA and India.

 

And yes, I AM looking at the two sports from a high level. Because the purpose of the game is to play on a rectangular field and to put a biscuit in a basket, the methodologies of doing so..as I said, the passing, the spacing, are all very similar. Soccer is played on a larger surface and you cannot use your hands, but the maneuvering to get into position to score are quite similar.

[gftChris]

 

 

Countries in UEFA:

 

Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales

The nations in bold are in fucking Asia. Can't these guys read a map?

And the Faroe Islands? Gibralter? Those are like declaring Hilton Head and Martha's Vineyard as separate nations. WTF?

 

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan - doesn't matter, they wouldn't qualify anyway. I'm not sure why it's split up like this, but the countries have to apply to join the confederation, and so obviously they did and their application was successful.

Israel - joined UEFA because matches with neighbouring Asian countries were becoming highly political, with lots of violence surrounding them.

Turkey - has always been the bridge between Europe and Asia. Could go either way, they chose Europe - probably due to the improvements in their game that would come with playing against a higher standard of competition, is my guess.

Cyrpus - half greek, half turkish. So half european, half half-european-half-asian (and just a tiny bit British) - 75% european.

 

If Martha's vineyard declared independence from the USA, became a sovereign state in its own right, it would have a football team that could compete in the world cup qualifying.

[gftChris]

It is not the most popular sport at all in the two largest Democracies in world....the USA and India.

 

And yes, I AM looking at the two sports from a high level. Because the purpose of the game is to play on a rectangular field and to put a biscuit in a basket, the methodologies of doing so..as I said, the passing, the spacing, are all very similar. Soccer is played on a larger surface and you cannot use your hands, but the maneuvering to get into position to score are quite similar.

If you're looking at it like that, then soccer, hockey, basketball, netball and quidditch are all the same sport, while you have another group of gridiron football, rugby and ultimate frisbee.

 

There are crossovers between basically any sport in terms of high level tactics - move the ball/puck/frisbee around to move the defence around, wait until it loses its shape and exploit the weakness

 

Similar to how a coffee cup is topographically equivalent to a donut - doesn't mean I'm drinking my morning joe out of a krispy kreme though.

[The Gipper]

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan - doesn't matter, they wouldn't qualify anyway. I'm not sure why it's split up like this, but the countries have to apply to join the confederation, and so obviously they did and their application was successful.

Israel - joined UEFA because matches with neighbouring Asian countries were becoming highly political, with lots of violence surrounding them.

Turkey - has always been the bridge between Europe and Asia. Could go either way, they chose Europe - probably due to the improvements in their game that would come with playing against a higher standard of competition, is my guess.

Cyrpus - half greek, half turkish. So half european, half half-european-half-asian (and just a tiny bit British) - 75% european.

 

If Martha's vineyard declared independence from the USA, became a sovereign state in its own right, it would have a football team that could compete in the world cup qualifying.

Neither the Faroe Island nor Gibralter are sovereign states....by any means. They are like, I don't know Guam or something aren't they? The only thing on Gibralter is a rock and navy base,no?

[The Gipper]

If you're looking at it like that, then soccer, hockey, basketball, netball and quidditch are all the same sport, while you have another group of gridiron football, rugby and ultimate frisbee.

 

Sure, there are some similarities between a lot of sports. The difference perhaps between soccer and all those others is that they move at a much faster pace.

 

There are crossovers between basically any sport in terms of high level tactics - move the ball/puck/frisbee around to move the defence around, wait until it loses its shape and exploit the weakness

 

Similar to how a coffee cup is topographically equivalent to a donut - doesn't mean I'm drinking my morning joe out of a krispy kreme though.

[MLD Woody]

It is not the most popular sport at all in the two largest Democracies in world....the USA and India.

 

 

Alright?

 

You claimed it us a "regional" sport. That isn't true. But you seem two consider the USA one region, and the rest of the world another, equal region.

 

It is the most popular sport in the world. That's a fact. I'm sorry you don't understand the game and don't enjoy it. That doesn't make what you're saying true. Either about the popularity of the sport or the tactics used within the game

[The Gipper]

Alright?

 

You claimed it us a "regional" sport. That isn't true. But you seem two consider the USA one region, and the rest of the world another, equal region.

Sounds about right to me, no?

 

It is the most popular sport in the world. That's a fact. I'm sorry you don't understand the game and don't enjoy it.

I do understand it. That is precisely why it is not as enjoyable.

 

That doesn't make what you're saying true. Either about the popularity of the sport or the tactics used within the game.

I said that I think the tactics are similar to hockey. That is a basic truth....even if perhaps you are too close so you can't see the forest for the trees.

As for popularity...as we noted elsewhere, that is apparently an economic issue, as I guess you can play soccer in a landfill if you have a ball..

[MLD Woody]

From your previous posts it is clear you do not understand the sport.

 

You can claim that the sport is only popular worldwide because of its ease to play for the poorer countries. That obviously doesn't work in a lot of countries, but you seem to be jumping around to try to prove the sport as inferior or something. You want to just call it an "economical issue"... That's stupid.

 

Its the most popular sport in the world. Its growing in popularity in the US and will continue to do so. And the US is just one country in the world. It doesn't determine the popularity of a sport.

[gftChris]

In what way is it an economic issue? It's by far the most popular sport in western Europe, which is one of the wealthiest parts of the world.

 

You could play gridiron football in any place you can play association football, you just need a ball. So why isn't it so popular in China?

[The Gipper]

From your previous posts it is clear you do not understand the sport.

 

You clearly misunderstand what I say. I understand the sport. YOU just disagree with my opinion about it. The next thing you are going to say is that I don't understand Michigan football. Let me make this clear: FUCK Michigan. And FUCK Soccer. Equate the two. Do I make myself clear now that you don't misunderstand me?

 

You can claim that the sport is only popular worldwide because of its ease to play for the poorer countries.

I say that based on what you told me. If there is a misimpression, it is your own fault.

 

 

That obviously doesn't work in a lot of countries, but you seem to be jumping around to try to prove the sport as inferior or something. You want to just call it an "economical issue"... That's stupid.

Soccer IS an inferior sport. That has nothing to do with economics. But, its popularity around the world very well may have to do with economics.

 

Its the most popular sport in the world. Its growing in popularity in the US and will continue to do so. And the US is just one country in the world. It doesn't determine the popularity of a sport.

Lacrosse is growing in popularity..and may be a superior sport, though it has a lot of soccer/hockey elements to it.. Jarts is growing in popularity. Bocce Ball is too. X games are growing in popularity. Football, baseball, and basketball are growing in popularity as well even thought they were already popular...and probably at a pace outstripping soccer.

[MLD Woody]

In the US, baseball is growing in popularity?

[MLD Woody]

In what way is it an economic issue? It's by far the most popular sport in western Europe, which is one of the wealthiest parts of the world.

 

You could play gridiron football in any place you can play association football, you just need a ball. So why isn't it so popular in China?

He's trying to find "excuses" for it being the most popular sport in the world. Mainly because he doesn't like it (and frankly it doesn't seem he understands the game).

 

 

But this is the dude that equated Akron engineering to Michigan engineering so really all logic is lost on him