Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

    Dumb question... just watched the highlights of Mexico-Sweden, and saw that penalty in the box- which was pretty much done to prevent a score.

    In hockey, doing something like that makes some sense- as even penalty shots are not so high percentage.

    But in football- it seems that a penalty shot would be a higher percentage goal vs. kind of following the guy hard and making him attempt the shot. In other words, it seems as if you go for the tackle that is very high risk for a penalty shot, it's actually better to force a shot.

    Is that accurate or not?

    Comment


    • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

      Originally posted by alfablue View Post
      Dumb question... just watched the highlights of Mexico-Sweden, and saw that penalty in the box- which was pretty much done to prevent a score.

      In hockey, doing something like that makes some sense- as even penalty shots are not so high percentage.

      But in football- it seems that a penalty shot would be a higher percentage goal vs. kind of following the guy hard and making him attempt the shot. In other words, it seems as if you go for the tackle that is very high risk for a penalty shot, it's actually better to force a shot.

      Is that accurate or not?
      I haven't seen the play but it sounds like what The Biter pulled off (successfully) at the last WC. 81% of all WC penalty kicks in history have been converted, so I guess you pile drive the guy if you think he has an 82% chance of scoring. It sure seems to me like guys miss from close in way more than 20% of the time, so my intuition is like yours: leave the guy alone and leave it to chance. I assume what happens in real life is along the spectrum of contact between non-callable and mandatory foul someone miscalculates or dekes wrong and the foul is much harder contact than he intended.

      If a guy is coming in on an empty net, like the end of KOR-GER, and is flattened, does the ref have the discretion to simply award the goal?
      Last edited by Kepler; 06-27-2018, 11:55 AM.
      Cornell University
      National Champion 1967, 1970
      ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
      Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

      Comment


      • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

        Originally posted by alfablue View Post
        Dumb question... just watched the highlights of Mexico-Sweden, and saw that penalty in the box- which was pretty much done to prevent a score.

        In hockey, doing something like that makes some sense- as even penalty shots are not so high percentage.

        But in football- it seems that a penalty shot would be a higher percentage goal vs. kind of following the guy hard and making him attempt the shot. In other words, it seems as if you go for the tackle that is very high risk for a penalty shot, it's actually better to force a shot.

        Is that accurate or not?
        That seems intuitively correct to me as well, but I'm wondering if we have to factor into it the likelihood of the referee actually calling the penalty?
        That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Kepler View Post
          If a guy is coming in on an empty net, like the end of KOR-GER, and is flattened, does the ref have the discretion to simply award the goal?
          No. The player who commits the foul is sent off for Denial of an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity (unless a Penalty Kick is awarded and the player made an attempt to play the ball).

          A goal is only awarded when “the whole of the ball passes over the goal line, between the goalposts and under the crossbar, provided that no offence has been committed by the team scoring the goal.”
          Last edited by Jimjamesak; 06-27-2018, 12:08 PM.
          U-A-A!!!Go!Go!GreenandGold!
          Applejack Tells You How UAA Is Doing...
          I spell Failure with UAF

          Originally posted by UAFIceAngel
          But let's be real...There are 40 some other teams and only two alaskan teams...the day one of us wins something big will be the day I transfer to UAA
          Originally posted by Doyle Woody
          Best sign by a visting Seawolf fan Friday went to a young man who held up a piece of white poster board that read: "YOU CAN'T SPELL FAILURE WITHOUT UAF."

          Comment


          • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

            Originally posted by Jimjamesak View Post
            No. The player who commits the foul is sent off for Denial of an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity.

            A goal is only awarded when “the whole of the ball passes over the goal line, between the goalposts and under the crossbar, provided that no offence has been committed by the team scoring the goal.”
            I thought it might be a situation where the guy gets a penalty kick against an open net, or something like that.
            Cornell University
            National Champion 1967, 1970
            ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
            Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Kepler View Post
              I thought it might be a situation where the guy gets a penalty kick against an open net, or something like that.
              No. A team must always have a goalkeeper on the field and the LOTG state: “The defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball has been kicked.”
              U-A-A!!!Go!Go!GreenandGold!
              Applejack Tells You How UAA Is Doing...
              I spell Failure with UAF

              Originally posted by UAFIceAngel
              But let's be real...There are 40 some other teams and only two alaskan teams...the day one of us wins something big will be the day I transfer to UAA
              Originally posted by Doyle Woody
              Best sign by a visting Seawolf fan Friday went to a young man who held up a piece of white poster board that read: "YOU CAN'T SPELL FAILURE WITHOUT UAF."

              Comment


              • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                Poor Mexico, gonna be out in round of 16 again

                Comment


                • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                  Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                  That seems intuitively correct to me as well, but I'm wondering if we have to factor into it the likelihood of the referee actually calling the penalty?
                  That's reasonable to wonder. But it is still a high risk tackle, so the odds are against the defender when they are behind the ball (as I think I saw that in the replay).

                  And here's another point- some of the penalties are not against the most skilled player on the team- which lowers their chance of scoring during a live play. Whereas the people taking the penalty kick are always the best ones- which is one of the reasons the percentage is so high.

                  Comment


                  • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                    Germany has a great collection of talent but at least in this tournament they lacked a lead guy. For example an in his prime Klose.

                    Comment


                    • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                      Originally posted by J.D. View Post
                      Germany has a great collection of talent but at least in this tournament they lacked a lead guy. For example an in his prime Klose.
                      The last time the Germans got bounced out of the World Cup at the group stage was 1938. Hope they take it better this time.
                      That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                      Comment


                      • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                        Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                        The last time the Germans got bounced out of the World Cup at the group stage was 1938. Hope they take it better this time.
                        The 1938 WC was in France. Watch out, Vladimir.
                        Cornell University
                        National Champion 1967, 1970
                        ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                        Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                        Comment


                        • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                          Originally posted by J.D. View Post
                          Poor Mexico, gonna be out in round of 16 again
                          Ivan is well and truly f-cked, as well.
                          Cornell University
                          National Champion 1967, 1970
                          ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                          Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                          Comment


                          • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                            The first 25 of this BRA-SER match has been truly sublime and the announcing crew have matched the pace and fervor. There's just something about football commentary lexicon that's hard to beat in moments touch as this.

                            Comment


                            • Re: World Cup 2018: The best party money could buy (until 2022)!

                              That was an embarrassing display by Neymar

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Kepler View Post
                                The 1938 WC was in France. Watch out, Vladimir.
                                Won by Italy. Well, history can't fully repeat itself.

                                BTW, Referee Geiger acquitted himself quite well in the SK - GER match. Hope he gets more games.
                                CCT '77 & '78
                                4 kids
                                5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                                1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                                ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                                - Benjamin Franklin

                                Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                                I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X