sluggo said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

E) The American way is to keep playing until someone scores. Golden goal rules should be changed so that the first one to score in extra periods wins if this isn't the rule in the knockout rounds already.

---

FIFA last used the Golden Goal rule in a major tournament in 2004.

Why was it abolished?

---

It is deemed unfair, because the other team cannot respond. A bit like the difference between the sudden death NFL overtime back in the day vs the NCAA rules where both teams have a possession in OT, the latter rule is more "fair".

---

Not the answer I was looking for, nor the respondent.
Lone gripes about something already explained in this thread.

So I'll say it again. Golden goal caused refs to not want to call anything for fear of suddenly ending the game.

---

I never heard this before, but it makes total sense. Imagine the outrage in an elimination game where the golden goal is a result of penalty taken after the VAR shows the ball grazing a player's arm that sort of looks like it's in a natural position in one angle vs. another angle in the corner of the 18-yard box far away from the goal.

---

I hate the golden goal because soccer is a timed event and tiebreakers should model the standard game. This is why I also hate penalty kicks.

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sluggo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

sluggo said:

---

9. I think the red against Balogun was incorrect, although not a terrible call. I think he slipped rather than going into the challenge recklessly, that is why I think it deserved a hard yellow, but not a red. But I can't claim it was unfair because it was so close.

---

In thinking this over I think the real problem is the inconsistency, with several similar plays in the tournament being let go without a VAR review but suddenly this one warranted it. As I noted, quite similar to the targeting penalty, where no college football fan understands the how or why of when it's applied.

---

Yes, it would be ideal if fans could recognize what the call should be from the reply. Targeting, as you know, is something that Cal does, not something that happens to Cal. Remembering that may help you next season.

I have not seen the other relevant plays in the tournament. But I watch A LOT of soccer year round. This red is an unusual call. The players are side by side, I cannot remember the last red card I saw from a side to side challenge. When you are side by side you are typically not reckless. Balogun slips with one foot leading to the ugly contact with his other foot. A counter argument is that Balogun was in no position to get the ball so he purposely fouled and made dangerous contact. Everything happens so fast.

A much more typical red is when one player is 5 yards from the ball and another is 4 yards from the ball in the opposite direction. They both go toward the ball and the player who comes in second has a cleat (or both clears) in a dangerous position and does not pull back in the challenge.

I think Cal88 states the law earlier. I can't remember the words but I know from experience what the typical interpretation is. That is, a red is for a reckless challenge followed by dangerous contact. This play has the latter but not the former IMO.

---

Bruce Arena, quoted by Tom, stated the rule, which was kind of similar to my justification (reckless challenge resulting in dangerous play) as Balogun was driving through the defender who established position between him and the ball.

It looks like the betting market has the Belgium game as a toss-up:

Quote:

---

The USA vs. Belgium Round of 16 World Cup match on July 6 in Seattle is a statistical toss-up. Major sportsbooks like BetMGM list the three-way moneyline as a near pick 'em: USA (+160), Belgium (+160), and a draw (+230). To advance, both teams are deadlocked at -110 odds. [1, 2, 3, 4]

---

Homefield advantage is big, especially considering that the Belgians often aren't mentally strong, their last comeback notwithstanding, though on paper they feature more talent than team USA. Strong start and 2nd quarter play a must.

Looking at the venue, forecast is 79F and partly sunny, the milder weather in Seattle favors Belgium, a veteran team from a relatively colder weather country, vs the younger US squad. They would have struggled more in a steamy east coast venue.

---

So we all agree on a reckless challenge being part of a red card. I think the challenge was not reckless, since to me he was side by side and slipped, but I also think reasonable people can disagree on whether it was.

With Balogun, I see an even game. Without him, I hope the crowd can be a 12th man.

---

You’ve seen the misleading angles again and again. Let’s focus on the angle that counts. What actually happened?
1. Pass to Balogun who’s in preferred position, so 60-40 ball.
2. Defender from behind attempts to step in and contacts Balogun from behind.
1/2 pic.twitter.com/eBgTK5pdpm

— Arsenal In 👊 (@dariendude2) July 3, 2026

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

sluggo said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

E) The American way is to keep playing until someone scores. Golden goal rules should be changed so that the first one to score in extra periods wins if this isn't the rule in the knockout rounds already.

---

FIFA last used the Golden Goal rule in a major tournament in 2004.

Why was it abolished?

---

It is deemed unfair, because the other team cannot respond. A bit like the difference between the sudden death NFL overtime back in the day vs the NCAA rules where both teams have a possession in OT, the latter rule is more "fair".

---

Not the answer I was looking for, nor the respondent.
Lone gripes about something already explained in this thread.

So I'll say it again. Golden goal caused refs to not want to call anything for fear of suddenly ending the game.

---

I never heard this before, but it makes total sense. Imagine the outrage in an elimination game where the golden goal is a result of penalty taken after the VAR shows the ball grazing a player's arm that sort of looks like it's in a natural position in one angle vs. another angle in the corner of the 18-yard box far away from the goal.

---

I hate the golden goal because soccer is a timed event and tiebreakers should model the standard game. This is why I also hate penalty kicks.

---

What would be the solution then if the score is still tied after extra periods?

---

sycasey said:

---

concordtom said:

---

sycasey said:

---

concordtom said:

---

As if Holding in American Football is called consistently.
That's a joke!

---

It isn't, but no one gets ejected from a game for holding.

---

But it gives a first down that leads to a game winning TD, or takes one away. It matters!

I agree, though, tough.

Penalties have to be harsh, otherwise "if you're not cheating, you're not playing hard,"

---

Do they HAVE to be harsh, though? Seems to me that a yellow card for Balogun would have done the job, no need to send him off given that there had been no other dangerous play by him.

The ejection is why I'm comparing the red card review to targeting: a rule that seems inconsistently applied but nevertheless carries a severe penalty.

---

sluggo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

concordtom said:

---

sycasey said:

---

concordtom said:

---

As if Holding in American Football is called consistently.
That's a joke!

---

It isn't, but no one gets ejected from a game for holding.

---

But it gives a first down that leads to a game winning TD, or takes one away. It matters!

I agree, though, tough.

Penalties have to be harsh, otherwise "if you're not cheating, you're not playing hard,"

---

Do they HAVE to be harsh, though? Seems to me that a yellow card for Balogun would have done the job, no need to send him off given that there had been no other dangerous play by him.

The ejection is why I'm comparing the red card review to targeting: a rule that seems inconsistently applied but nevertheless carries a severe penalty.

---

When they went to VAR it is either a red or nothing, a yellow is not a choice. The ref called nothing in real time.

---

sluggo said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

I got my brand new McKennie t-shirt pseudo-jersey on and am ready to go 4.5 hours before the game! LFG!

---

congrats, except gotta share a pic or it dint happen; from the manufacturer would suffice.

---

I can't find it online. I should figure out how to post pictures.

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

I got my brand new McKennie t-shirt pseudo-jersey on and am ready to go 4.5 hours before the game! LFG!

---

congrats, except gotta share a pic or it dint happen; from the manufacturer would suffice.

---

I can't find it online. I should figure out how to post pictures.

---

yes sir, and if an alzheimers sufferer can then, shoot, it's not too hard. just grab/copy the URL
of an image, and paste it in the video shaped box, halfway to the right of the Your Reply prompt.
# don't cost nothing

---

sluggo said:

---

I used my jet lag to rewatch the game today at 5am from my couch. And to watch the last 40 minutes for the first minute. Here is what I saw:

1. Complete and total domination before the red card. BH's only scoring efforts during that time were on a goal kick where maybe the center defenders don't know there is no offside on goal kicks and the wind taking a corner leading to a difficult save that prevented an Olimpico (goal directly off a corner). What an awesome performance!
2. The US was way, way too athletic for BH. Other than Ream every other US player is at least replacement level athletic, while some (Mckennie, Tillman, Robinson, Freeman) are way above replacement. Freeman will be scary by 2030. He just glides past players without even making a fancy move. Remember he got his first start in MLS (!) just over a year ago. Where it all ends is hard to say, perhaps top 10 center back in the world (he is not really an outside back).
3. BH's line of confrontation (the line where the first defender attacks the ball) started just outside the goal box when the game started but after like 15 minutes (I am making up that number) moved to the other side of midfield. That is, the US gained half a field offensively for free by scaring the crap out of BH.
4. Balogun was other worldly. Like was said about Dembele once, he has a favored foot, he just doesn't know which one it is. I believe Balogun is right-footed, but his left-footed finishing is insanely good and perhaps more precise.
5. Tillman was very, very good. Before the WC he had played a more offensive position. But McKennie has that locked down. (Berhalter liked to play two offensive mids and one defensive mid, Poch likes the reverse.). His backheels are insane. McKennie and Robinson are also very good at the backheel, I play I generally disdain because it is low percentage. I hope Tillman's German club sees how good he is playing back a bit and puts him back on the first team.
6. The center defenders, who I thought would be a weakness, are a strength. Richards has not put a foot wrong the whole tournament. Ream's passing is the best I have seen from the back line in the whole tournament, although I have only seen about 1/3 of the games. (The 48 team tournament sucks, it is too much for a even sicko like me.)
7. The US was a little messy. McKennie and Robinson, who both tend to be a little messy, were extra messy. But it did not matter. I like that McKennie plays so many high-risk, high-reward balls. I read that McKennie has more line breaking passes than anyone else in the tournament. I want to see him play for a top team in the premier league, he is too big for Italy. And I want him to start dating Olivia Rodrigo or someone like that to push the popularity of the team over the top. There were rumors, denied by both, that Pulisic was dating Sydney Sweeney a few months back.
8. A few minutes after I posted here that Pulisic was not getting the ball enough Stu Holden said Pulisic was not getting the ball enough. This has to change against Belgium. Holden provides almost no tactical insight, he is pure vibes. I hate that. Donovan every once in a while mentions something tactically. Come on, we all have eyes, tell us (casuals) something we can't see. Like how BH changed the line of confrontation, how BH was playing a mid block and squeezing the field, etc. The stuff I can see. And please lock up Jenny Taft with Melissa Ortiz. I am not a misogynist but the role they have female sideline reporters play makes me crazy.
9. I think the red against Balogun was incorrect, although not a terrible call. I think he slipped rather than going into the challenge recklessly, that is why I think it deserved a hard yellow, but not a red. But I can't claim it was unfair because it was so close.
10. I feel great with Freese minding the goal. He is not the best keeper, but he is 100% confident all the time; if he makes a mistake it is not because of nerves. In this way he reminds me of Pickford of England. Turner is a nervous mess. it also help that he is built like a linebacker when there is jostling on corners.
11. Our only respectable opponent was Turkey. BH had nothing, I think they were the worst. We have done what we were supposed to do better than we were supposed to do it. Time to show out on Monday.
12. Lastly, I love Poch. I hope he stays. He has gained a little weight, grown his hair, and looks like a boss. Who needs the every day stress, it will shorten your life?

---

sluggo said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

E) The American way is to keep playing until someone scores. Golden goal rules should be changed so that the first one to score in extra periods wins if this isn't the rule in the knockout rounds already.

---

FIFA last used the Golden Goal rule in a major tournament in 2004.

Why was it abolished?

---

It is deemed unfair, because the other team cannot respond. A bit like the difference between the sudden death NFL overtime back in the day vs the NCAA rules where both teams have a possession in OT, the latter rule is more "fair".

---

Not the answer I was looking for, nor the respondent.
Lone gripes about something already explained in this thread.

So I'll say it again. Golden goal caused refs to not want to call anything for fear of suddenly ending the game.

---

I never heard this before, but it makes total sense. Imagine the outrage in an elimination game where the golden goal is a result of penalty taken after the VAR shows the ball grazing a player's arm that sort of looks like it's in a natural position in one angle vs. another angle in the corner of the 18-yard box far away from the goal.

---

I hate the golden goal because soccer is a timed event and tiebreakers should model the standard game. This is why I also hate penalty kicks.

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Suck it Aussies, go home

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

I got my brand new McKennie t-shirt pseudo-jersey on and am ready to go 4.5 hours before the game! LFG!

---

congrats, except gotta share a pic or it dint happen; from the manufacturer would suffice.

---

I can't find it online. I should figure out how to post pictures.

---

yes sir, and if an alzheimers sufferer can then, shoot, it's not too hard. just grab/copy the URL
of an image, and paste it in the video shaped box, halfway to the right of the Your Reply prompt.
# don't cost nothing

---

concordtom said:

---

If I could make Fantasy Island be a real thing, I'd have you be a guest who is like Weston, who gets to be with… Olivia Rodrigo was it?

---

concordtom said:

---

If I could make Fantasy Island be a real thing, I'd have you be a guest who is like Weston, who gets to be with… Olivia Rodrigo was it?

---

Cal88 said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

I got my brand new McKennie t-shirt pseudo-jersey on and am ready to go 4.5 hours before the game! LFG!

---

congrats, except gotta share a pic or it dint happen; from the manufacturer would suffice.

---

I can't find it online. I should figure out how to post pictures.

---

yes sir, and if an alzheimers sufferer can then, shoot, it's not too hard. just grab/copy the URL
of an image, and paste it in the video shaped box, halfway to the right of the Your Reply prompt.
# don't cost nothing

---

The challenge here is to post/upload a picture from his personal collection online and get that URL. I use Imgur for that, on this page:

https://imgur.com/upload

There are other similar sites. once you manually drag and drop your picture into the designated area on the left side of the page, your image is uploaded online. You can then get the associated URL by right-clicking on the picture and enter that URL in the field that comes up when you click on the "Insert/upload a Photo" command in your reply menu, and voila:

---

sluggo said:

---

While Pulisic and Dest are both wingers, Pulisic comes back and gets the ball much farther from the goal and tends to drive it forward but to the right. Dest basically always stays right and as close to the sideline and opposition goal as he can while staying onside. When they attack up the left wing it also takes longer because Robinson has to get there from his back line position.

In the future I would like to see Pulisic at right wing, a young winger at left wing, and Dest as a reserve.

---

Big C said:

---

Keep 'em comin' sluggo (and the rest o' y'all): I'm learning.

Wish the folks on TV were this edifying.

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Suck it Aussies, go home

---

Are you cheering for Egypt or just a negative fellow in general?

---

Cal88 said:

---

sluggo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

sluggo said:

---

9. I think the red against Balogun was incorrect, although not a terrible call. I think he slipped rather than going into the challenge recklessly, that is why I think it deserved a hard yellow, but not a red. But I can't claim it was unfair because it was so close.

---

In thinking this over I think the real problem is the inconsistency, with several similar plays in the tournament being let go without a VAR review but suddenly this one warranted it. As I noted, quite similar to the targeting penalty, where no college football fan understands the how or why of when it's applied.

---

Yes, it would be ideal if fans could recognize what the call should be from the reply. Targeting, as you know, is something that Cal does, not something that happens to Cal. Remembering that may help you next season.

I have not seen the other relevant plays in the tournament. But I watch A LOT of soccer year round. This red is an unusual call. The players are side by side, I cannot remember the last red card I saw from a side to side challenge. When you are side by side you are typically not reckless. Balogun slips with one foot leading to the ugly contact with his other foot. A counter argument is that Balogun was in no position to get the ball so he purposely fouled and made dangerous contact. Everything happens so fast.

A much more typical red is when one player is 5 yards from the ball and another is 4 yards from the ball in the opposite direction. They both go toward the ball and the player who comes in second has a cleat (or both clears) in a dangerous position and does not pull back in the challenge.

I think Cal88 states the law earlier. I can't remember the words but I know from experience what the typical interpretation is. That is, a red is for a reckless challenge followed by dangerous contact. This play has the latter but not the former IMO.

---

Bruce Arena, quoted by Tom, stated the rule, which was kind of similar to my justification (reckless challenge resulting in dangerous play) as Balogun was driving through the defender who established position between him and the ball.

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sluggo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

sluggo said:

---

9. I think the red against Balogun was incorrect, although not a terrible call. I think he slipped rather than going into the challenge recklessly, that is why I think it deserved a hard yellow, but not a red. But I can't claim it was unfair because it was so close.

---

In thinking this over I think the real problem is the inconsistency, with several similar plays in the tournament being let go without a VAR review but suddenly this one warranted it. As I noted, quite similar to the targeting penalty, where no college football fan understands the how or why of when it's applied.

---

Yes, it would be ideal if fans could recognize what the call should be from the reply. Targeting, as you know, is something that Cal does, not something that happens to Cal. Remembering that may help you next season.

I have not seen the other relevant plays in the tournament. But I watch A LOT of soccer year round. This red is an unusual call. The players are side by side, I cannot remember the last red card I saw from a side to side challenge. When you are side by side you are typically not reckless. Balogun slips with one foot leading to the ugly contact with his other foot. A counter argument is that Balogun was in no position to get the ball so he purposely fouled and made dangerous contact. Everything happens so fast.

A much more typical red is when one player is 5 yards from the ball and another is 4 yards from the ball in the opposite direction. They both go toward the ball and the player who comes in second has a cleat (or both clears) in a dangerous position and does not pull back in the challenge.

I think Cal88 states the law earlier. I can't remember the words but I know from experience what the typical interpretation is. That is, a red is for a reckless challenge followed by dangerous contact. This play has the latter but not the former IMO.

---

Bruce Arena, quoted by Tom, stated the rule, which was kind of similar to my justification (reckless challenge resulting in dangerous play) as Balogun was driving through the defender who established position between him and the ball.

It looks like the betting market has the Belgium game as a toss-up:

Quote:

---

The USA vs. Belgium Round of 16 World Cup match on July 6 in Seattle is a statistical toss-up. Major sportsbooks like BetMGM list the three-way moneyline as a near pick 'em: USA (+160), Belgium (+160), and a draw (+230). To advance, both teams are deadlocked at -110 odds. [1, 2, 3, 4]

---

Homefield advantage is big, especially considering that the Belgians often aren't mentally strong, their last comeback notwithstanding, though on paper they feature more talent than team USA. Strong start and 2nd quarter play a must.

Looking at the venue, forecast is 79F and partly sunny, the milder weather in Seattle favors Belgium, a veteran team from a relatively colder weather country, vs the younger US squad. They would have struggled more in a steamy east coast venue.

---

So we all agree on a reckless challenge being part of a red card. I think the challenge was not reckless, since to me he was side by side and slipped, but I also think reasonable people can disagree on whether it was.

With Balogun, I see an even game. Without him, I hope the crowd can be a 12th man.

---

concordtom said:

---

sluggo said:

---

While Pulisic and Dest are both wingers, Pulisic comes back and gets the ball much farther from the goal and tends to drive it forward but to the right. Dest basically always stays right and as close to the sideline and opposition goal as he can while staying onside. When they attack up the left wing it also takes longer because Robinson has to get there from his back line position.

In the future I would like to see Pulisic at right wing, a young winger at left wing, and Dest as a reserve.

---

I really like Dest. He's going to score!

And, they put Pulisic on the left in a warm up game and, no, he was not nearly as good. I noticed it and TV noticed it, too.

---

concordtom said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sluggo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

sluggo said:

---

9. I think the red against Balogun was incorrect, although not a terrible call. I think he slipped rather than going into the challenge recklessly, that is why I think it deserved a hard yellow, but not a red. But I can't claim it was unfair because it was so close.

---

In thinking this over I think the real problem is the inconsistency, with several similar plays in the tournament being let go without a VAR review but suddenly this one warranted it. As I noted, quite similar to the targeting penalty, where no college football fan understands the how or why of when it's applied.

---

Yes, it would be ideal if fans could recognize what the call should be from the reply. Targeting, as you know, is something that Cal does, not something that happens to Cal. Remembering that may help you next season.

I have not seen the other relevant plays in the tournament. But I watch A LOT of soccer year round. This red is an unusual call. The players are side by side, I cannot remember the last red card I saw from a side to side challenge. When you are side by side you are typically not reckless. Balogun slips with one foot leading to the ugly contact with his other foot. A counter argument is that Balogun was in no position to get the ball so he purposely fouled and made dangerous contact. Everything happens so fast.

A much more typical red is when one player is 5 yards from the ball and another is 4 yards from the ball in the opposite direction. They both go toward the ball and the player who comes in second has a cleat (or both clears) in a dangerous position and does not pull back in the challenge.

I think Cal88 states the law earlier. I can't remember the words but I know from experience what the typical interpretation is. That is, a red is for a reckless challenge followed by dangerous contact. This play has the latter but not the former IMO.

---

Bruce Arena, quoted by Tom, stated the rule, which was kind of similar to my justification (reckless challenge resulting in dangerous play) as Balogun was driving through the defender who established position between him and the ball.

It looks like the betting market has the Belgium game as a toss-up:

Quote:

---

The USA vs. Belgium Round of 16 World Cup match on July 6 in Seattle is a statistical toss-up. Major sportsbooks like BetMGM list the three-way moneyline as a near pick 'em: USA (+160), Belgium (+160), and a draw (+230). To advance, both teams are deadlocked at -110 odds. [1, 2, 3, 4]

---

Homefield advantage is big, especially considering that the Belgians often aren't mentally strong, their last comeback notwithstanding, though on paper they feature more talent than team USA. Strong start and 2nd quarter play a must.

Looking at the venue, forecast is 79F and partly sunny, the milder weather in Seattle favors Belgium, a veteran team from a relatively colder weather country, vs the younger US squad. They would have struggled more in a steamy east coast venue.

---

So we all agree on a reckless challenge being part of a red card. I think the challenge was not reckless, since to me he was side by side and slipped, but I also think reasonable people can disagree on whether it was.

With Balogun, I see an even game. Without him, I hope the crowd can be a 12th man.

---

Cometh the hour, cometh the man.
Step forward, Ricardo Pepi!

By the time we get to Spain USA will have the advantage on 3 days rest and Balogun more rested than everyone else!!

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

smh said:

---

sluggo said:

---

I got my brand new McKennie t-shirt pseudo-jersey on and am ready to go 4.5 hours before the game! LFG!

---

congrats, except gotta share a pic or it dint happen; from the manufacturer would suffice.

---

I can't find it online. I should figure out how to post pictures.

---

yes sir, and if an alzheimers sufferer can then, shoot, it's not too hard. just grab/copy the URL
of an image, and paste it in the video shaped box, halfway to the right of the Your Reply prompt.
# don't cost nothing

---

The challenge here is to post/upload a picture from his personal collection online and get that URL. I use Imgur for that, on this page:

https://imgur.com/upload

There are other similar sites. once you manually drag and drop your picture into the designated area on the left side of the page, your image is uploaded online. You can then get the associated URL by right-clicking on the picture and enter that URL in the field that comes up when you click on the "Insert/upload a Photo" command in your reply menu, and voila:

---

I guess this is directly from google photos. Thanks for the tip! Easy for me to just download and post but good to know there is another way.

That is a cool image. I won two IM titles at my second graduate school, but neither in soccer. Cal was my first graduate school (and my undergraduate school). I did once win an IM playoff game for the dept. soccer team and then the next day was the dept. seminar, and I was treated like royalty. Lots of foreigners in the dept., much better players than me.

---

sluggo said:

---

Has anyone been to a watch party in SF? Thinking of going to one on Monday.

---

DiabloWags said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Has anyone been to a watch party in SF? Thinking of going to one on Monday.

---

I would imagine that San Pedro Square in San Jose will be the place to be.
But given the massive crowds, San Jose has moved this watch party to Discovery Meadow
or the SAP Center for the Round of 16.

Relocated San Jose World Cup watch parties moved for Mexico, Brazil matches quickly sell out - CBS San Francisco

---

Cal88 said:

---

I won once as an undergrad on the I-House soccer team,

---

concordtom said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Flock You, #4 !!!

---

---

You suck!!!!!

---

Cal88 said:

---

One hour of trash time in this ARG-CPV game, I was hoping they could hold out one half...

---

sluggo said:

---

Okay, time to step away from the computer and do something with my day.

---

sluggo said:

---

concordtom said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sluggo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

sluggo said:

---

9. I think the red against Balogun was incorrect, although not a terrible call. I think he slipped rather than going into the challenge recklessly, that is why I think it deserved a hard yellow, but not a red. But I can't claim it was unfair because it was so close.

---

In thinking this over I think the real problem is the inconsistency, with several similar plays in the tournament being let go without a VAR review but suddenly this one warranted it. As I noted, quite similar to the targeting penalty, where no college football fan understands the how or why of when it's applied.

---

Yes, it would be ideal if fans could recognize what the call should be from the reply. Targeting, as you know, is something that Cal does, not something that happens to Cal. Remembering that may help you next season.

I have not seen the other relevant plays in the tournament. But I watch A LOT of soccer year round. This red is an unusual call. The players are side by side, I cannot remember the last red card I saw from a side to side challenge. When you are side by side you are typically not reckless. Balogun slips with one foot leading to the ugly contact with his other foot. A counter argument is that Balogun was in no position to get the ball so he purposely fouled and made dangerous contact. Everything happens so fast.

A much more typical red is when one player is 5 yards from the ball and another is 4 yards from the ball in the opposite direction. They both go toward the ball and the player who comes in second has a cleat (or both clears) in a dangerous position and does not pull back in the challenge.

I think Cal88 states the law earlier. I can't remember the words but I know from experience what the typical interpretation is. That is, a red is for a reckless challenge followed by dangerous contact. This play has the latter but not the former IMO.

---

Bruce Arena, quoted by Tom, stated the rule, which was kind of similar to my justification (reckless challenge resulting in dangerous play) as Balogun was driving through the defender who established position between him and the ball.

It looks like the betting market has the Belgium game as a toss-up:

Quote:

---

The USA vs. Belgium Round of 16 World Cup match on July 6 in Seattle is a statistical toss-up. Major sportsbooks like BetMGM list the three-way moneyline as a near pick 'em: USA (+160), Belgium (+160), and a draw (+230). To advance, both teams are deadlocked at -110 odds. [1, 2, 3, 4]

---

Homefield advantage is big, especially considering that the Belgians often aren't mentally strong, their last comeback notwithstanding, though on paper they feature more talent than team USA. Strong start and 2nd quarter play a must.

Looking at the venue, forecast is 79F and partly sunny, the milder weather in Seattle favors Belgium, a veteran team from a relatively colder weather country, vs the younger US squad. They would have struggled more in a steamy east coast venue.

---

So we all agree on a reckless challenge being part of a red card. I think the challenge was not reckless, since to me he was side by side and slipped, but I also think reasonable people can disagree on whether it was.

With Balogun, I see an even game. Without him, I hope the crowd can be a 12th man.

---

Cometh the hour, cometh the man.
Step forward, Ricardo Pepi!

By the time we get to Spain USA will have the advantage on 3 days rest and Balogun more rested than everyone else!!

---

Pepi had a great late game chance against BH. And like usual he flubbed his lines, not properly trapping the ball. Balogun would have trapped it, cut back, and scored. Pepi is not good enough for a WC round of 16.

Okay, time to step away from the computer and do something with my day.

---