2006 FIFA World Cup

[10bellies]

[quote="The Cid";p="648523"][quote="10bellies";p="648499"][quote="Deacon";p="648498"]I'm talking about commercial viability. Soccer struggles in the US, and I think part of the reason for that is that there's only one real, planned stoppage in the game that the networks can use to run commercials, you know, the way they make the money that keeps the sport on the air.....[/quote]
So how can it manage so well everywhere else?[/quote]

Well for starters, in most of those countries there aren't too many local sports. In how many other nations does football run up against so many competitors?[/quote]
Pretty much everywhere else has numerous sports, at every level.
Stop being so insular, and learn something about sports outside of U.S. borders.

[tankkisankari]

[quote="Deacon";p="648498"][quote="tankkisankari";p="648491"]It's football, no need for several hours overtime play as with ice hockey can end up.[/quote]
The point is that when you go to penalty kicks, you remove the game itself from the decision on who wins. There are myriad OT schemes that you could come up with that would still involve actually playing the game.[/quote]

Apart from playing until a team scores i can't think of any.

Oh, and terribly unfriendly to TV. There really ought to be a stoppage every once in a while other than halftime.

The best thing about footy is that it isn't ruined by commercial breaks, it's a game for players, not for the tv sponsors,and if you weren't raised in a environment where there needs to be a commercial break every ten minutes, you would appreciate it too.

lol im a stupid amercian lol i r needz teh brakez!!!!!111

I'm talking about commercial viability. Soccer struggles in the US, and I think part of the reason for that is that there's only one real, planned stoppage in the game that the networks can use to run commercials, you know, the way they make the money that keeps the sport on the air....

It's quite weird then how footy is the most popular televised game in the world and is the fighting point for many tv channels . Soccer suffers in US because you aren't interested of it, not because it's not desiged around commercial tv. And if the tv channels would really wan't to, they could run commercials during the game, it's not like the teams are going to make goal at that time any way.

Enough of the inane bullshit and onto more important matters.
Henry really needs to fed more balls, he can score goals if he get's half a chance. Apart from Zidane, rest of the French team was somehow a bit bland. Despite them beating Brasil i can't se them winnng the whole thing.

Portugal should lose the next game, they don't have what it takes, Figo is older than the universe itself and apart from occational passing, isn't on his old level. Portugalreally misses Deco and Nuno Gomez.

Germany mght be the team this year, Klose has been in good form lately and Lehmann can apparently be a good goalie.

And i hope a really big meteorite drops on the Italia footy team.

[Rorschach]

Gray skies are gonna clear up,
Put on a happy face;
Brush off the clouds and cheer up,
Put on a happy face.
Take off the gloomy mask of tragedy,
It's not your style;
You'll look so good that you'll be glad
Ya' decide to smile!
Pick out a pleasant outlook,
Stick out that noble chin;
Wipe off that "full of doubt" look,
Slap on a happy grin!
And spread sunshine all over the place,
Just put on a happy face!
Put on a happy face
Put on a happy face
And if you're feeling cross and bitterish
Don't sit and whine
Think of banana split and licorice
And you'll feel fine
I knew a girl so glooming
She'd never laugh or sing
She wouldn't listen to me
Now she's a mean old thing
So spread sunshine all over the place
Just put on a happy face
So, put on a happy face

[Koeniou]

I <3 you Rors.

[CyberEd]

[quote="Arminius";p="648494"]1-0 France Brazil!! YAY!!! Nice play Zidane and Thierry Henry.

Sorry Ed. I know you're a fan of Brazil, but it's over bud. [/quote]chapeau

[Deacon]

[quote="tankkisankari";p="648556"][quote="Deacon";p="648498"]There are myriad OT schemes that you could come up with that would still involve actually playing the game.[/quote]
Apart from playing until a team scores i can't think of any.[/quote]
We discussed this topic quite a bit in the IRC channel, actually, talking about various scenarios where you cut the field in half for 5 minutes and only play on one team's side, and then do the same on the other side, etc. Basically just ways to increase the odds that a goal might be scored.

It's quite weird then how footy is the most popular televised game in the world and is the fighting point for many tv channels . Soccer suffers in US because you aren't interested of it, not because it's not desiged around commercial tv.

..."not designed around commercial TV"?? Are you suggesting any other sport was invented in such a manner? It's not a question of design but compatibility. Hell, NASCAR is successful, and NASCAR races have no particular stopping points, either. And you're right in that it doesn't help that the US isn't involved in a rich history with the game, but it can be quite lucrative in many countries. Businesses have wanted to kick-start (lol) the game's popularity here in the US, but it hasn't worked too well, partly because it's never really televised, and it seems like that is because 1) not as break-friendly as most other televised sports and 2) not enough demand. #2 there sure strikes me as part of a nasty cycle: the game must get air time for it to gain exposure and therefore popularity, but the game must be popular for it to get airtime...

And i hope a really big meteorite drops on the Italia footy team.

Ha! Italy, for whatever reason, seems to have a decent number of supporters in this area.

[Arminius]

I also think that Germany might be the team. A France Germany final would be nice. That damn Italia mustn't win.

[BtEO]

It's somewhat tough as an Englishman to say this, but a France - Germany final would see me pleased with the winner regardless.

[tankkisankari]

[quote="Deacon";p="648587We discussed this topic quite a bit in the IRC channel, actually, talking about various scenarios where you cut the field in half for 5 minutes and only play on one team's side, and then do the same on the other side, etc. Basically just ways to increase the odds that a goal might be scored.

[/quote]
How would completely eliminating one team's chance for goal and forcing them only to defend add chances of a goal, especially in footy where most goals happen after fast counter attacks?
Add to that how easy it's to "fill" the field, especially when everybody is only defending.

As brutal as penalty kicks are, they are the best way to solve the match in a certain time.

[BtEO]

My brother has the suggestion that after the 30 minutes (and that length could be adjusted) of extra time, each team be required to remove one player from their squad before a further 10 minutes are played; at the end of that time, another player is removed from each side and the process repeats. The idea is that attacking play requires fewer players than defensive play.

While I wouldn't mind seeing this trialled there are a few problems I can think of. The biggest one being that as the field thins, a higher emphasis will be placed on running plays - from players who may have already played 120 minutes of regular time. Aside from that concern, it does also leave more room for the team with the better tactics, rather than the better team, to win. This is not necessarily a downside.

[CyberEd]

mind you, penalty kicks are only done when the match MUST end with a winner and a tie is not an option

[Rorschach]

Beckham quits

Controversial

[Deacon]

Which is also bunk. There must always be a winnar!!

[Arminius]

2-0 Italy - Germany. These goddamn Italians. Two goals in two minutes.

[kaiju01]

I was sad. I think the second goal was more a result of Germany pushing more men forward out of desparation. The first goal was a pretty one and couldn't have come at a better time for Italy.

C'mon France vs. Italy.