Just make the field 10 feet narrower and you'll see scoring jump.

France was the class of the tournament, so this is a fair result. Croatia got some tough breaks early, but then France's goalkeeper gave away a goal, so they can't say they got no good fortune.

France deserved to win. Their last two goals were terrific.

concordtom said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Only thing I might be in favor of is a slight tweak to offside rules. I think maybe you could start to waive those once the ball is in close enough. That might result in one or two more goals. But even there I don't think it's entirely necessary.

---

Offsides the reason for offsides is to stop the goalie to goalie back and forth bombardment that would ensue. Boring.

But maybe you could do something where offsides is active the first time you enter the attacking zone. So, if you advance the ball beyond the 18 yard line, then offsides becomes inactive. Then you can attack as you like. How might that alter attacks?

---

Yeah, I'm thinking something like that. Once you're inside 18 yards, offside is waived for any passes into the box. That still prevents teams from just parking a striker close to the opponent's goal and lobbing passes to him (which would be boring).

I think that might add a goal or two every other game. It's still a chore to get the ball advanced that far, and then the defenders will pack themselves close to the goal anyway, so completing a pass isn't easy. But you do allow a little more freedom to the offense once they've got the ball in close.

I just learned: Kolinda Grabar, President of Croatia, and I have something in common: We both attended Harvard's Kennedy School of Government a long time ago for a short time! She also was an exchange student in Los Almos High School in New Mexico (where the Nuke lab is under the control of UC). Maybe that explains my recent love for Croatia!!

Go Bears!

In the 2006 WC Final, France (with Zindane) was clearly the better team, but, Italy won it (on penalty kicks).

Maybe, this year' WC Final was the poetic Justice!

Go Bears!

sycasey said:

---

France was the class of the tournament, so this is a fair result. Croatia got some tough breaks early, but then France's goalkeeper gave away a goal, so they can't say they got no good fortune.

France deserved to win. Their last two goals were terrific.

---

Agreed.
Pogba to Mbappe to Griezman to Pogba was worthy, as was Mbappe's solo shot from distance. That's what we want to see. I'm good with It!
Congrats to France.

hanky1 said:

---

Just make the field 10 feet narrower and you'll see scoring jump.

---

How so? Off throw ins becoming corners for headers?

I think that would make it far worse. Park the bus.

concordtom said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

Just make the field 10 feet narrower and you'll see scoring jump.

---

How so? Off throw ins becoming corners for headers?

I think that would make it far worse. Park the bus.

---

Agreed. Throw ins would become corners. Also the defense would pack in tighter around the goal with less field to defend laterally.

And congrats to France for winning a great WC. I wanted Croatia but France was deserving. At 2-1 it looked like they might be stealing it a bit with an own goal and PK, but the final two pegs in the coffin were brilliant.

calbear80 said:

---

These are the kinds of things one learns if one visits 123 countries after studying each country extensively.
More later (if you really want).

Go Bears!

---

BRING IT,
The games are over, but you didn't want this thread to die, did you?
Or
You didn't travel to all those places for nothing, did you?

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

Here are the changes I would make to soccer (knowing full well they will never happen and that they will elicit criticism):

1) Eliminate use of the head. It would reduce head injuries, it would keep the game to the skill set of the feet, it would diminish the importance of aerial set plays and encourage open play.

2) And here is a radical idea. Again, to encourage open play. Set play goals equal one point (free kicks, corners, and penalties). Open play goals are worth two points. Goals from distance (outside the box) without deflection are worth 3 points. I hate that so many matches are determined by a hand ball or a dive in the box. It would reduce incentive to cheat and keep the ball at the feet.

Both ideas are meant to reward team passing and individual foot skills which is what the sport is ultimately about.

The French victory celebrations are getting lit!

concordtom said:

---

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

---

The influence of players of African heritage is obvious from watching the WS, and those are the top players. I would say the US has some of the same factors going on (general interest, tradition) but the push/pull of Euro futbol is similar to U.S. MLB and Latin players. It's still industrialized countries pulling from developing countries.

A good percentage of MLB's top players are Latin descent either American or from other countries. It's similar to African players in Europe...strong tradition, biggest professional leagues, an economic push-pull.

blungld said:

---

Here are the changes I would make to soccer (knowing full well they will never happen and that they will elicit criticism):

1) Eliminate use of the head. It would reduce head injuries, it would keep the game to the skill set of the feet, it would diminish the importance of aerial set plays and encourage open play.

2) And here is a radical idea. Again, to encourage open play. Set play goals equal one point (free kicks, corners, and penalties). Open play goals are worth two points. Goals from distance (outside the box) without deflection are worth 3 points. I hate that so many matches are determined by a hand ball or a dive in the box. It would reduce incentive to cheat and keep the ball at the feet.

Both ideas are meant to reward team passing and individual foot skills which is what the sport is ultimately about.

---

I agree with eliminating heading. I'd like to see that change.
But I think you've got it backwards. You don't want to encourage just wildly taking long range shots, otherwise it's goal kick city all game long. Balls scored on the ground are worth more from closer in.

Here are some of our wild proposals:
1. Remove goalie
2. Remove heading
3. Remove offsides AFTER ball has already been advanced one time past the 18 yard marker with offsides having been in place.
4. 1 point for goals scored from distance, 2 points for goals scored from inside the 18 yard box, 3 points for balls scored from inside the 6 yard box (and since no GK, go ahead and change the size of boxes to be more arc like.
5. Decide ties by time of possession in the attacking third.

Now then, what about subs? Are we going to keep 11 on the field? Are we going to run players to exhaustion? How about 8 vs 8 with free "tag" subs on the fly,

concordtom said:

---

calbear80 said:

---

One of My Favorite Stories About Visiting Croatia:

In Novermber 2015, while visiting Croatia, I got a tour of Roman Forum and Roman Coliseum (smaller version of the Coliseum in Rome) in the historic city of Zadar in Northern Croatia on the Adriatic Sea.

While standing in the middle of the ruins of the Coliseum in Zadar, Croatia, here is what our 40 something year old local tour guide said:

. My grandfather was born in Austro-Hungarian Empire.
. My father was birn in Italy.
. I was born in Yugoslavia.
. And, my son was born in Croatia.

AND, WE WERE ALL BORN IN THE SAME HOUSE!!!

That is a part of what makes Croatia so interesting. Here is a little history about Croatia:

. Not long ago, most of the region was a part of the Ottoman Empire ruled from Istanbul (back then Constantinople)
. Before WWI, most of Croatia was a part of Austro-Hungarian Empire (and their playground and beach town).
. After WWI and demise of Austro-Hungerian Empire, it became a part of Italy (which was on the winning side of the WWI).
. After WWII, Croatia was taken away from Italy (which was on the losing side of WWII) and was incorporated into Yugoslavis under Marshal Tito (who had helped the Allies in WWII).
. Then, after the death of Marshal Tito in 1980 and desolation of Yugoslavia, Croatia eventually became the independent country of Croatia in 1991

Balkans are a little like Middle East: Amazing history and very volatile. Remember, WWI started when the Austro-Hungarian Prince Ferdinand was assassinated in 1914 in Sarajevo (in nearby Bosnia-Herzegovina, another one of the republics which later formed Yugoslavia). I have visited all the seven former Yugoslav republics and recomnend visiting them all (if you are Serbian, you would kill to prove that there was/is only six because Kosovo doesn't exist and never existed as a separate region)

Go Bears!

Disclaimer: I am not a historian and all the above statements need to be fact-checked.

P.S. I ran into a bunch of Serbian fans in the Moscow Kremlin a couple of weeks ago during the World Cup. In their mind, ...never mind, I don't want to go there.

---

Please. Go there. I was enjoying.

So, how did it come to be that Yugoslavia was behind the iron curtain? It was, right?

I have a friend who also said split was awesome! Super cheap, too. But maybe that's been changing as it's been discovered again.

I was traveling Europe with my then girlfriend now wife in '92. We went to Greece and then Turkey by hitching a ride with a Finnish couple on their sailboat. Made our way to Istanbul and then needed to get back to Brussels. Two train options. One thru Belgrade, but they were fighting a civil war. We heard train lines were good, but I didn't want to be on CNN. The other route was thru Romania. Now, while in Greece we got some work at a restaurant hotel on Rhodes. We met a couple Romanian men there, and they told us about the chowchesku (sp?) revolution, police with Freddy Kruger hands that would rip your guts out. Then we later heard how they were so desperate they'd steal your bags on trains and throw you off, while moving.

Now, I realize that such stories can be very far fetched, but I also know that 3 hikers once got lost hiking in Iran and occasionally a journalist will be nabbed as a prize. I also know that I had to take care of this girl, else I could never look her dad in the face again. So, we went to a travel agency store and bought a couple tickets on a plane and flew over the mess. When we got to the airport, I discovered it was on an Aeroflot plane. Flashback to January 1990 when I went to Moscow and flew Aeroflot, the airline with the worst safety record. Nothing eventful, other than we stopped in Riga unannounced for an hour (were they loading stolen goods? was the pilot banging some chick?). It was the chicken that freaked me out. I felt like it had been dipped in formaldehyde. No way was I going to touch that! But the Cuban guy next to me polished it off like his last meal. I was like, wow!

On that Moscow trip, lots of super interesting things. I'll never forget being offered a bowl of fruit while sitting around a table with teachers, students, administrators in a sort of cultural exchange. I didn't really want/need an orange but felt rude if I didn't partake. After an hour or more when they saw my brother and I would not eat more, they let the kids have some, and they dove into that bowl. I then realized, oh my god, they just offered us something that must have cost a mint, not to mention a day of waiting in some horrible line to get.

In this country, we have pretty much only known good times, and we see progress happening all around and envision of a future of only good. But things can change rapidly if we do not take care vigilantly! Society can collapse thru many means, and misery and desperation is right around the corner. I have barely traveled the world compared to Cal80, but he knows it's true.

. My grandfather was born in Austro-Hungarian Empire.
. My father was birn in Italy.
. I was born in Yugoslavia.
. And, my son was born in Croatia.

Thus, the Yugoslavs agree with me, too.
So do the Poles, the Jews, the Germans, the Chinese who've starved, those sent to Siberian gulags, been raped by Boko Harim, those wiped out by Agent Orange....
20 Millions Russians died in WW2. 20 MILLION!!

Lest we not forget, these are the Best of Times (queue Styx song).

This is why this WC event is important. It keeps us talking, shaking hands, celebrating out differences. Quite a different tone than the divisive fear mongering politics of Brexit and Trumpism. Don't go down that road, folks. There are 7 billion people on planet earth, we are all human, and this is OUR home. Let's celebrate, not divide.

Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
-Santanaya

---

There you go again...politics....

Anyway congrats to France, Croatia did not have the ball bounce their way. Happy for Pogba. Hopefully he gets a free wheeling role now at MU. Mourinho will probably squash him though...

The WC victory celebration and trophy/medal awards had a nice vibe of sportsmanship/getting along and a lack of blathering commentary like the U.S. Both France and Croatia's heads of states were there and embraced. Then both were there to give out medals and congratulations. (This would never happen with the current admin.) Sure there were language differences but it was stunning not to see a network boob up there with a microphone yapping away, killing the moment.

concordtom said:

---

blungld said:

---

Here are the changes I would make to soccer (knowing full well they will never happen and that they will elicit criticism):

1) Eliminate use of the head. It would reduce head injuries, it would keep the game to the skill set of the feet, it would diminish the importance of aerial set plays and encourage open play.

2) And here is a radical idea. Again, to encourage open play. Set play goals equal one point (free kicks, corners, and penalties). Open play goals are worth two points. Goals from distance (outside the box) without deflection are worth 3 points. I hate that so many matches are determined by a hand ball or a dive in the box. It would reduce incentive to cheat and keep the ball at the feet.

Both ideas are meant to reward team passing and individual foot skills which is what the sport is ultimately about.

---

I agree with eliminating heading. I'd like to see that change.
But I think you've got it backwards. You don't want to encourage just wildly taking long range shots, otherwise it's goal kick city all game long. Balls scored on the ground are worth more from closer in.

Here are some of our wild proposals:
1. Remove goalie
2. Remove heading
3. Remove offsides AFTER ball has already been advanced one time past the 18 yard marker with offsides having been in place.
4. 1 point for goals scored from distance, 2 points for goals scored from inside the 18 yard box, 3 points for balls scored from inside the 6 yard box (and since no GK, go ahead and change the size of boxes to be more arc like.
5. Decide ties by time of possession in the attacking third.

Now then, what about subs? Are we going to keep 11 on the field? Are we going to run players to exhaustion? How about 8 vs 8 with free "tag" subs on the fly,

---

With that last one about subs, you'd be playing arena soccer instead of real soccer. My kids played that when they were much younger. Everyone except the GK runs at full speed for 3-4 minutes and then they're subbed out and a new shift of players runs on to the field without play stopping.

Banning heading has some appeal because head-to-head accidents when two players are going for the ball can be pretty bad. One big issue is that corner kicks would have very little value if heading is not permitted. I could see coaches encouraging the defense to kick the ball out of play over the goal line instead of the sideline on the theory that a corner kick that can't be floated into the box for a header isn't very dangerous. One possibility would be, for balls out of play over the goal line, giving the offense a free kick that could be taken near the sideline from any place of the offense's choosing, not just from the corner.

As for the offsides rule -- I could see changing the rule so that offsides doesn't apply to any ball that is hit from inside the 18-yard-line extended. But expanding this further to make any pass free of the offsides rule as long as the offense once carried the ball past that line would be too much.

I'm happy France won (one of the teams I root for every WC) and they deserved the win, but wasn't that first goal on the PK off a flop?

HoopDreams said:

---

I'm happy France won (one of the teams I root for every WC) and they deserved the win, but wasn't that first goal on the PK off a flop?

---

The first France goal to make it 1-0 was the one that was off the Griezmann (sp?) flop leading to a free kick (not PK) from outside the box that resulted in the Mandzukic own goal header.

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

The 3rd and 4th French goals were all class though. Was rooting for Croatia but, I think France was (somewhat) the better team.

OneKeg said:

---

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

---

The video review process has adjusted many of these. I suspect that US-Germany play would have been ruled a handball and a PK given if there had been video review in 2002.

By the rules I think you have to call that if you see it. The hand was away from the body (not tucked in close) and clearly blocked France's attempt to attack the goal.

sycasey said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

---

The video review process has adjusted many of these. I suspect that US-Germany play would have been ruled a handball and a PK given if there had been video review in 2002.

By the rules I think you have to call that if you see it. The hand was away from the body (not tucked in close) and clearly blocked France's attempt to attack the goal.

---

The German player also should have been red-carded. It was blatantly intentional. Germany would have been playing with 10, and the U.S. would have had a great shot to win. It might have changed the course of U.S. soccer, as a win would have put us into a very winnable semifinal against South Korea. No chance we beat Brazil in the final. But the U.S. making the final would have been special.

GMP said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

---

The video review process has adjusted many of these. I suspect that US-Germany play would have been ruled a handball and a PK given if there had been video review in 2002.

By the rules I think you have to call that if you see it. The hand was away from the body (not tucked in close) and clearly blocked France's attempt to attack the goal.

---

The German player also should have been red-carded. It was blatantly intentional. Germany would have been playing with 10, and the U.S. would have had a great shot to win. It might have changed the course of U.S. soccer, as a win would have put us into a very winnable semifinal against South Korea. No chance we beat Brazil in the final. But the U.S. making the final would have been special.

---

Thanks for sharing the video, brings back memories, for sure the US would have had the PK but I couldn't tell from that one replay if it was intentional, it happened so fast. USA and South Korea were in the same group in 2002, I think their group match was a 1-1 draw.

concordtom said:

---

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

---

CT, you have an excellent point there. Around a year ago, I counted six out of starting 11 in the France team to be of African heritage. Zindane (sp?) who is arguably the greatest French footballer of all time is north African (although, botn in France, I believe) and Henry (the former French capitan and current Belgium assistant coach) is African. And, then, there is the current #10 ...

Go Bears!

concordtom said:

---

calbear80 said:

---

These are the kinds of things one learns if one visits 123 countries after studying each country extensively.
More later (if you really want).

Go Bears!

---

BRING IT,
The games are over, but you didn't want this thread to die, did you?
Or
You didn't travel to all those places for nothing, did you?

---

I would be honored to answer any specific questions now or later. BTW, If you don't hear from ne for a few days is because I am headed to the airport to go see Andorra (#124), one of the only two remaing countries in Europe (Albania is scheduled for November to finish off Europe).

Go Bears!

calbear80 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

---

CT, you have an excellent point there. Around a year ago, I counted six out of starting 11 in the France team to be of African heritage. Zindane (sp?) who is arguably the greatest French footballer of all time is north African (although, botn in France, I believe) and Henry (the former French capitan and current Belgium assistant coach) is African. And, then, there is the current #10 ...

Go Bears!

---

So much of what goes on in youth soccer is the US appears to be dictated by affordability. By that I mean exposure for your players costs big bucks. I don't want to argue quality of coaching, etc., but if you do not go through the expensive "club soccer" route your child's chances become restricted especially as they age. It does not mean it is impossible, and scholarships are available, but our experience is the skin tone decreases as age increases. Not right, not good, and not even totally true, but generally speaking the total cost of soccer goes way beyond club fees. Travel is dictated the higher you go, and with that the further you travel, whether that be right or wrong.

To point out the ridiculousness of this, ECNL playoffs just finished in June/July and almost every winner in the girls divisions were from California---North or South. Yet, these coaches feel the need throughout the year to travel to New Jersey (PDA), Florida, Seattle to play teams from all over. Where we live there are eight solid women's soccer teams within a 50 mile radius (four within a 15 mile radius), and for the most part they are all good, yet they must travel and pay coaches expenses in doing so. Tough for economically challenged to keep up.

MAYBE, THIS WAS THE BEST WORLD CUP OF ALL TIME

Around a week ago, I agrued that the 1970 WC (with Pele) was the best of them all.

Well, maybe I was wrong. As I think back, specially with the games being in Russia, all those amazing close games, a 4-2 finals score and Croatia being in the finals, maybe the 2018 Russia World Cup was the best of them all.

I cannot wait for the next year's Women World Cup in France and the 2022 World Cup, although I HATE it that it is in Qatar.

Go Bears!

calbear80 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

---

CT, you have an excellent point there. Around a year ago, I counted six out of starting 11 in the France team to be of African heritage. Zindane (sp?) who is arguably the greatest French footballer of all time is north African (although, botn in France, I believe) and Henry (the former French capitan and current Belgium assistant coach) is African. And, then, there is the current #10 ...

Go Bears!

---

Article found on how most of France's WC winning team comes from an area of Paris where descendants of African immigrants play street soccer in their youth.
Kinda like when inner city American black kids took over the NBA and American newspapers discussed the "movement" away from whites to blacks similarly.

Right up this alley:
https://slate.com/culture/2018/07/the-french-world-cup-team-for-children-of-immigrants-is-a-powerful-success-story.html

So, you will go to Qatar for those games?
I would never support such a scam.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calbear80 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

---

CT, you have an excellent point there. Around a year ago, I counted six out of starting 11 in the France team to be of African heritage. Zindane (sp?) who is arguably the greatest French footballer of all time is north African (although, botn in France, I believe) and Henry (the former French capitan and current Belgium assistant coach) is African. And, then, there is the current #10 ...

Go Bears!

---

So much of what goes on in youth soccer is the US appears to be dictated by affordability. By that I mean exposure for your players costs big bucks. I don't want to argue quality of coaching, etc., but if you do not go through the expensive "club soccer" route your child's chances become restricted especially as they age. It does not mean it is impossible, and scholarships are available, but our experience is the skin tone decreases as age increases. Not right, not good, and not even totally true, but generally speaking the total cost of soccer goes way beyond club fees. Travel is dictated the higher you go, and with that the further you travel, whether that be right or wrong.

To point out the ridiculousness of this, ECNL playoffs just finished in June/July and almost every winner in the girls divisions were from California---North or South. Yet, these coaches feel the need throughout the year to travel to New Jersey (PDA), Florida, Seattle to play teams from all over. Where we live there are eight solid women's soccer teams within a 50 mile radius (four within a 15 mile radius), and for the most part they are all good, yet they must travel and pay coaches expenses in doing so. Tough for economically challenged to keep up.

---

Article on this affordability issue killing US soccer:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2018/07/16/whats-killing-youth-soccer-in-america-is-also-hurting-most-every-other-sport/#63c411801ea8

GMP said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

---

The video review process has adjusted many of these. I suspect that US-Germany play would have been ruled a handball and a PK given if there had been video review in 2002.

By the rules I think you have to call that if you see it. The hand was away from the body (not tucked in close) and clearly blocked France's attempt to attack the goal.

---

The German player also should have been red-carded. It was blatantly intentional. Germany would have been playing with 10, and the U.S. would have had a great shot to win. It might have changed the course of U.S. soccer, as a win would have put us into a very winnable semifinal against South Korea. No chance we beat Brazil in the final. But the U.S. making the final would have been special.

---

VAR is a fantastic new add for high level soccer!
As discussed by FoxSports on set, there were NO direct red cards and much less simulation.
Eye In The Sky has been HUGE.

I recall this handball, and you make a good point about the ramifications. #sad

For me it was The Best World Cup games not just for
1) the good games and surprising results, but also because of:
2) VAR
3) Fanfest city centre block parties around the world
4) FoxSports App on my Roku!!!!!

concordtom said:

---

For me it was The Best World Cup games not just for
1) the good games and surprising results, but also because of:
2) VAR
3) Fanfest city centre block parties around the world
4) FoxSports App on my Roku!!!!!

---

CT, +100 on your #2.

I LOVED going to the Fan Fest in Russia and watch other games in other cities. It was A LOT of fun. I really miss it.

concordtom said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calbear80 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Here is a soccer topic to kick around. Many decades ago, Pele predicted that African nations would rule the world of soccer.
Well, he was right and he was wrong.
While African nations have not fared well in the World Cup, there is a noticeable increase in players of African heritage dominating the world stage. Look how many players of different skin tones are representing teams such as England, Belgium, France, to name a few.

It seems that the US suffers a bit of the same fate as African nations. We lack the je ne se quoi soccer culture or awareness that allows us to succeed, though we have the athletes.

---

CT, you have an excellent point there. Around a year ago, I counted six out of starting 11 in the France team to be of African heritage. Zindane (sp?) who is arguably the greatest French footballer of all time is north African (although, botn in France, I believe) and Henry (the former French capitan and current Belgium assistant coach) is African. And, then, there is the current #10 ...

Go Bears!

---

So much of what goes on in youth soccer is the US appears to be dictated by affordability. By that I mean exposure for your players costs big bucks. I don't want to argue quality of coaching, etc., but if you do not go through the expensive "club soccer" route your child's chances become restricted especially as they age. It does not mean it is impossible, and scholarships are available, but our experience is the skin tone decreases as age increases. Not right, not good, and not even totally true, but generally speaking the total cost of soccer goes way beyond club fees. Travel is dictated the higher you go, and with that the further you travel, whether that be right or wrong.

To point out the ridiculousness of this, ECNL playoffs just finished in June/July and almost every winner in the girls divisions were from California---North or South. Yet, these coaches feel the need throughout the year to travel to New Jersey (PDA), Florida, Seattle to play teams from all over. Where we live there are eight solid women's soccer teams within a 50 mile radius (four within a 15 mile radius), and for the most part they are all good, yet they must travel and pay coaches expenses in doing so. Tough for economically challenged to keep up.

---

Article on this affordability issue killing US soccer:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2018/07/16/whats-killing-youth-soccer-in-america-is-also-hurting-most-every-other-sport/#63c411801ea8

---

As that article points out, the cost argument is BS. The problem is kids dont play outside. Everything has to be organized and supervised. Modric learned to play in the hallways and parking lot of a hotel he lived in during a war. He won the Golden Ball... The french players learned on the street.

If you want to dominate, let kids play.

If you make it expensive, it becomes expensive. You dont need money to kick around a ball.


Also, FWIW, I do think video games are a direct competitor. The prize pool for Fortnite tournys is $100million. Last year it was $90m total for gaming. The growth is HUGE. You dont have to participate in hyper organized groups to play, you get found relatively easily if you play and are good... Video games are what sandlot ball used to be.

concordtom said:

---

GMP said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

---

The video review process has adjusted many of these. I suspect that US-Germany play would have been ruled a handball and a PK given if there had been video review in 2002.

By the rules I think you have to call that if you see it. The hand was away from the body (not tucked in close) and clearly blocked France's attempt to attack the goal.

---

The German player also should have been red-carded. It was blatantly intentional. Germany would have been playing with 10, and the U.S. would have had a great shot to win. It might have changed the course of U.S. soccer, as a win would have put us into a very winnable semifinal against South Korea. No chance we beat Brazil in the final. But the U.S. making the final would have been special.

---

VAR is a fantastic new add for high level soccer!
As discussed by FoxSports on set, there were NO direct red cards and much less simulation.
Eye In The Sky has been HUGE.

I recall this handball, and you make a good point about the ramifications. #sad

---

There were no direct red cards? What do you mean by that? In the final? Group? Knockout? Maybe Direct Red Card means something else to Fox? (Other than a straight red, not two yellow?)

I heard them say that, as well, and thought it must have been just a talking head saying stupid things because they were wrong after the 6th day. There was one in a Japan game for a handball in like the first 5 minutes of play.

I cant remember if Boateng was a second yellow or red after a very hard foul, But Lang was a straight red in the 94th minute against Sweden in the round of 16 for denying a goal scoring opportunity. A Russian was also shown a red.

But that is at least two direct reds. Maybe 4.

OneKeg said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

I'm happy France won (one of the teams I root for every WC) and they deserved the win, but wasn't that first goal on the PK off a flop?

---

The first France goal to make it 1-0 was the one that was off the Griezmann (sp?) flop leading to a free kick (not PK) from outside the box that resulted in the Mandzukic own goal header.

It was the second France goal to make it 2-1 was off the PK, which was on a handball, not a flop. Of course you could potentially argue about whether the handball deserved a PK. Despite having played and watched soccer a good amount, I'm never really clear on how that is called. In 2002 I think, a German defender standing at his own goal-line blocked a US shot that was going right into the goal directly with his hand and nothing was called. The Germans were the better team and went on to win 1-0, but that kind of sucked. So who knows.

The 3rd and 4th French goals were all class though. Was rooting for Croatia but, I think France was (somewhat) the better team.

---

thanks. thx for correction. it was a free kick not a PK

my question was if that free quick was due to a french player flopping. just wanted to hear peoples opinion. here is link to highlights...first highlight shown:

https://www.foxsports.com/soccer/video/1277347395717