Since much of the scoring in this Cup has been on set pieces, perhaps we could make the game a series of set pieces. Then like you say, four tries and the other team gets a chance.
While cumulative cautions certainly play a role in the style of officiating that we have seen in this world, they are not the main reason for it. The main reason, just like in MLS for the most part of the league's history, for not giving cautions especially early in the match is to not have to give a caution later in the match and send the player off. The cards are low so that they don't have to produce red card in the match. Yesterday's match and the Uruguay vs. France match were a perfect example. The France vs. Belgium game had no threat of suspension as accumulation due to cautions were cleared. Yet the referee still refused to caution a couple of early cynical and blatant fouls in the first half and early parts of the second half. It was done to avoid having to produce a send off for a second caution. The Uruguay vs. France game had the threat of a suspension due to accumulation hanging over it. There might have been only a total of two or three players combined, and it certainly wasn't any of the important ones, who could have been suspended for the semi-final if they got a card. Yet, the game followed the same pattern as the Belgium and France game. Obvious early cards not given and then the referee gave out some meaningless ones towards the end to show "control" of the game. It was all done to minimize the threat of having to give a second caution red card.
While I think there are fair points, I don't know that the late knock out rounds can really prove the point. Those games are also being played in the atmosphere and expectations that have been set in the prior game--I think a wild change from what has been expected throughout the cup could result in a loss of control, even if the cautions (under general standards) were warranted. I still believe that giving more of the earned cautions would not dramatically increase the overall number of cards. Players adjust. In this tournament, they have adjusted to the knowledge they won't receive the cards that they earn.
Ok, not having anything to do with this match except for maybe the great (/s) coverage and analysis done by the Fox crew. Listening to the post game coverage and it is showing the play where Lukaku was receiving a cross in front of the goal. The defender has his arm over Lukaku's shoulder and is literally riding his back as he tries to go up and get his head on the ball. The "expert" guy commenting is praising this defensive effort actually saying "This defender is right on Lukaku's back keeping him from getting up and getting a good head on the ball! That is some great defending." No, that is actually the definition of a foul... (although unless he had stirrups and a jockey whip he wasn't going to be called for it in this WC) And Fox has the next 2 WC's??? Serenity now....
There are alternatives out there. They are not perfect and sometimes have some bizarre comments also, but in general are far far better than FOX. And best of all, NO Dr. JOE! One commentary duo in particular has been receiving rave reviews almost getting to cult status! PH
RedStar & Lurker, I agree with what you are both saying. But I think there is a general cowardice on the part of FIFA to make big calls in big games. Sadly, referees are the tools to carry this out. If they don’t, they risk their future assignments. What I don’t understand is why. Why does FIFA (through IFAB) make laws and give instructions that they don’t want followed in the biggest, most-watched games. It hurts the game tremendously amongst those with even cursory knowledge of the laws. When they see things that are clear fouls go uncalled or unpunished especially when combined with questionable at best handling calls, they lose trust in the game. When they lose trust in the game, they lose trust in the officials. So if FIFA has laws they don’t want enforced, get rid of them. If FIFA is instructing referees to call games differently than all of the games in the prior 3+ years, make that decision public as well as the reasons for the decisions. Players, coaches, fans deserve to know what rules are expected to be followed during games and have trust that those rules will be enforced. That’s not happing. FIFA is failing the game.
I’ve watched Telemundo throughout. Their sound mix allows me to put the volume low so that I can ignore the commentators’ specific words but still hear the crowd.
There are a lot of people who agree with this analysis. Whereas there is obviously a need for some differential application in high level professional matches that have an entertainment and financial factor to consider, it is apparent that it has gone too far in recent World Cups. I think it started in the 2010 Final. PH
FIFA is making $$$, billions and billions. You think they give a rats ass what you or I think? Stop kidding yourself. Eyeballs = advertising $$$ and brains of humans like drama, stars on the field, and 11v11 games. It really isn't all that complicated. Everything revolves around $$$. But you keep living in fantasy land thinking players, coaches, and fans deserve to know anything
But that's just your opinion based on all of your life's experiences with the game up to this point. One of which has been as a referee for I'm assuming quite a bit! If you were a FIFA exec, or an advertising exec at Coke, McDonalds, InBev, etc. then your opinion would be different. And they call the shots based on making $$$.
This is getting off-topic, but this has been my wish for a KFTPM replacement for a long time. In my mind-palace, it's corner kicks and play stops basically when it's cleared out by the defense.
There's an old saying that "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." I feel the same way bout KFTM...it's an utterly stupid way to end a game, but it's still better than any other idea I've heard.
Agree. It is a pendulum. It swings--slowly. It will swing back when FIFA believes that the laxity is harming the marketability of the game. (IMO, the time to push the pendulum back is in the second friendly round after the WC. Start setting expectations on conduct well before the next round of WC qualifiers. Enforce them through the qualifiers. The players will have adjusted by the time we get to the WC--and be clear before the WC starts that the standards remain. Enforce them Once they are actually enforced in the first few games of group play, the players will believe. That would result in cleaner play without refs having to throw lots of cards, as players would play to the expectations. I don't expect that to happen, but I can dream.)
I would like to see a high level experiment with true sudden death. Play till a goal. One player reduction in each extra time period to open up the field (down to 7s or perhaps even 6s). My hypothesis is (with the third period being 8 v. 8) it would be very rare that a game went past the 30 minutes of extra time played now, so there would actually be less demand on the players rather than more. And teams can't just bunker, as there is no KFTM to play for. (More radically, we could also make it easier for attackers by limiting the GK use of hands to the GA in extra time.) And if we don't do that, IMO the old NASL-created shootout with the attacker starting at the 35 is better--though still a gimmick. (Never again have to argue about how far off his line the GK can come during KFTM!)
But that fundamentally changes the game and favors the team with a few stars over the “team” concept.
Not that I’m agreeing with @socal lurker ’s proposal, but how does the same argument not apply to KFTM? Just in a more extreme manner? You’re limiting the sport to individual duels and only one type of such duels.
I'm not sure about fundamentally changing it, but of course it changes it. The only way to not change it is to have a replay--which is impracticable (with the possible exception of the final game).
Having had a career as one of those mentioned, you are WAY over thinking the influence advertisers have on any sport. FIFA yes, advertisers, no. To FIFA (or any organization) the advertisers are just a cash cow. No real influence.
I fully understand and realize all the reasons, as I think I mentioned. But I think that they can have the best of both worlds without throwing the book out of the window, and forcing top class referees to operate in a fundamentally different way to the one that got them to the top in the first place. FWIW, I have spent some time as a referee as well as as a player (more) and coach (less) but I consider myself a fan of the game first. And I think a lot of fans would like to see stronger enforcement of the LOTG to cut out the disgraceful displays that we saw from several of the weaker teams, and one or two of the better ones as well. PH
I should add the a PK actually happens in a game. Purposely reducing number of players does not. I accept that everything other than replay will have flaws
I'd suggest dropping straight to 9v9 at the end of regulation. And if do get all the way to 6v6 with no goal, you can always revert to KFTPM.