How the mighty are fallen

[Long Run]

You are thinking of knock-out competitions - where one team must win to move on to the next round. The World Cup, for example once the group stages are finished. The shoot-out is rare compared to actual game results, even then, and it only occurs after 30 minutes of extra time has been played to no conclusion.

And yet, it is still a stupid way to decide a game. It would be like deciding a basketball game with a free throw contest. Or deciding an American football game with a field goal kicking contest. Or deciding a baseball game with a batting practice home run derby. It is so fundamentally different from the game that it is completely unrepresentative of what came before. At least in college football overtime they are still playing football, they have just shortened the field to make scoring more likely. It is an imperfect solution to end a tie, but it beats the heck out of the soccer shoot out which is the stupidest form of tie-breaking in sports.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Well there's a big difference in a game where the players have run hard and actually (you know) played the game for 90 minutes plus 30 minutes of extra time. In sports where everybody does nothing most of the time (American football, baseball) they could probably play for a week and not exert themselves much.

Real football ends in a draw (i.e. a tie). That's the result of the game. But in order to decide who moves on and who does not, penalty shots (a football skill) are used. You think that's silly? In the good old days, a coin was tossed to see which of two otherwise equal teams got to move on. The point is that both deserve to win but one must go home

[MajGenl.Meade]

While Dr. James Naismith was Canadian by birth and education, he invented basketball in Springfield, Massachusetts, and remained in the USA for the rest of his life.

Oh all right - netball was a girl's game inspired by basketball. Sensibly, real men wanted nothing to do with it


However, I will point out that I invented the game during the Civil War and to prove it, here's a quote from a letter:

Since the men have become fond of a game I invented called “peach basket”, I had each group form teams representing New York and Pennsylvania. The object of the game is to throw a gutta percha ball through a peach basket with the bottom removed, which is nailed high in a tree. In no time, the men largely forgot their hostility and entered into the full spirit of healthful exercise.

One cavalryman caused great hilarity when he wrapped a towel around his head, and used some half-burnt sticks from last night’s fires to blacken his face and hands. He solemnly declared that he was a wizard from Araby, by name Kowell Abdul Jabar, which no amount of infantry could o'erwhelm. Despite this amusing performance, the man played the game most indifferently and retired in the early minutes, claiming injury.

I am proud to tell you that after an hour of exertion, my men outscored the cavalry by 22 peach baskets to 17.

[Lord Jim]

FINAL SCORE:

PORTLAND LONG RUNNERS : 1
CLEVELAND GRAMMAR NAZIS :0

real men wanted nothing to do with it

I think you have a good point...

I suggest you walk up to LeBron James and let him know...

[Long Run]

Real football ends in a draw (i.e. a tie). That's the result of the game. But in order to decide who moves on and who does not, penalty shots (a football skill) are used. You think that's silly? In the good old days, a coin was tossed to see which of two otherwise equal teams got to move on. The point is that both deserve to win but one must go home

Yes, it is stupid because there are plenty of us on this board who could take penalty kicks against a pro goalie and score, so how much of a skill is that? It is pretty much luck if a goal is not scored (either the goalie literally guesses right and the shot is still sub-par, or the shooter makes a rare error). Just like there are plenty of good basketball shots who can shoot free throws better than the average pro player, but if they had to actually play against a pro would never be able to get a dribble down, let alone a shot up.

So, replacing an absurd coin toss with a stupid tie-break does not mean the stupid tie-break is any less so (and pretty much ruins the athletic opera that is a well-played soccer match). Soccer could do what American football does, which is allow the teams to keep playing their sport, but adjust the rules slightly to allow a better chance that a team will score. One way to do that would be to start pulling bodies off the field, opening up play but allowing the game to still be played. Another would be to adjust the idiotic offsides rule that is the main culprit in limiting scoring in the first place.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Whatever. Point is that saves are made and professional footballers miss the goal entirely on occasion. They've been running and playing hard for 120 minutes with minimal rest. I'd like to see you do all that against a top team and then score a penalty. Fortunately, it's not a sight one would ever be blessed with!

The beautiful game remains more popular and better than the extremely silly USian game which nobody plays for more than 10 minutes (if that), the rest of the time (170 minutes) being spent in standing around doing nothing and taking three hours to do it.

[Fafhrd]

Many games end in a draw. Baseball doesn't, and basketball has used 5 minute overtimes for as long as I inow--of course, I don't know everything; at one time, there was a jump ball at center court after every basket, I understand, and I can remember the extended stalls, where someone just stood there and held the ball.

But at one time hockey used points--two points for a win, one point for each team in a tie game. I guess that's gone now. Football got along with ties for a long, long time, too. I don't demand a win--just a good game.

[Long Run]

Football got along with ties for a long, long time, too. I don't demand a win--just a good game.

Totally agree. That was Meade's main point, I believe, that in regular competition, the game ends in a tie. The tie-break is only necessary in a playoff situation where one team has to advance, and that is where the fun begins.

[Bicycle Bill]

Hey, all you futbol and cricket fans .....
Broncos fan says he dropped $20k on Super Bowl tickets without telling his wife

Right or wrong, idiot or not, when the day comes that someone does something like this to attend the World Cup or a test match, then maybe you can put in a legitimate claim that 'kickball' or 'flat-bat croquet' is the greatest sport in the world.
Until then, please hold your tongue and find a seat.

-"BB"-

[MajGenl.Meade]

BB, really? How does the vapid stupidity of one US American deny the vapid stupidity of the game of American football?

[Bicycle Bill]

BB, really? How does the vapid stupidity of one US American deny the vapid stupidity of the game of American football?

I am merely saying (with tongue firmly planted in cheek, of course) that cricket and soccer fans do not show this sort of financial dedication to their chosen teams, whereas here in America people pay for the privilege to be able to pay even more money to buy season tickets.  In fact, there is one team in American football that has a waiting list of people willing to buy season tickets should any become available (a current season ticket-holder declines to exercise his option for tickets for the following season, for example) that is so long that if a newborn child were to be added to the list today said child would probably be fifty years of age or older before his name would come to the top.  And tickets in the hands of current holders are often a major bone of contention in divorce settlements or disposition of a deceased person's assets.

Now, when it comes to the r̷i̷o̷t̷s̷  v̷i̷o̷l̷e̷n̷c̷e̷  fanatical shows of support during the competition or afterwards........
— well, we're learning, and expect to be able to hold our own with any group of soccer hooligans you would care to name in the very near future!

-"BB"-

[Lord Jim]

soccer hooligans

That's one thing I'll say for cricket...

You never hear about "cricket hooligans"...

It's hard to go on a rampage right after you wake up from a nap....

[rubato]

soccer hooligans

That's one thing I'll say for cricket...

You never hear about "cricket hooligans"...

It's hard to go on a rampage right after you wake up from a nap....

ahh yes, cricket hooligans, notorious for being all hopped up on tea and cucumber sandwiches with the crusts cut off! Animals. Quiet, sleepy, animals. All wrapped up in white flannel. Ready for their naps.


yrs,
rubato

[rubato]

We have shown that by attendance at a professional game Baseball is the world leader by a huge margin.


But if we measure it by participation, which is a superior metric if we are considering the love of playing the game itself rather than just watching someone else, then it is clear that soccer, basketball, cycling, volleyball, and running are the five leaders.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

I understand that the primary cause for a "bench clearing brawl" at a cricket match are un-chilled salad forks at lunch time...

Second greatest cause being tepid tea and scones that aren't flaky enough served at their Elevenses...



cricket is one of the very few subjects that can bring rube and I together...

[Econoline]

cricket is one of the very few subjects that can bring rube and I together...

...and that sort of grammatical error is one of the few subjects* that can bring Meade and me together...



* well...objects, not subjects, actually...

[MajGenl.Meade]

My eagle eye detected an emaciated mouse and I decided not to swoop but to continue my majestic soaring flight high above mere morsels.

[dales]

Carrion?

[MajGenl.Meade]

Yes, I did carry on

[Big RR]

add in the silly shootout by which games are often won or lost

Oh that is just nonsense. You would be all over my case If I stated that the following is how NCAA games are often won or lost: When a game goes to overtime, each team is given one possession from its opponent's twenty-five yard line with no game clock, despite the one timeout per period and use of play clock. The team leading after both possessions is declared the winner. If the teams remain tied, overtime periods continue, with a coin flip determining the first possession. Possessions alternate with each overtime, until one team leads the other at the end of the overtime. Starting with the third overtime, a one-point PAT field goal after a touchdown is no longer allowed, forcing teams to attempt a two-point conversion after a touchdown.

That makes a penalty shoot-out look like genius.

Anyway, there are no "shoot-outs" in regular league Association soccer play anywhere in the world. All games are finished in 90 minutes, regardless of the score - a time to which officials have carefully added 0-5 minutes to account for any time-wasting by players and/or injuries. There are occasions on which an injury causes a large time extension - I watched a match just recently in which two players on the same team collided; one left the field temporarily for stitches and to clean up the blood. The other was concussed and went into convulsions; off to hospital and he's fine now (they say) but he was being attended to on the pitch for about 10 minutes.

You are thinking of knock-out competitions - where one team must win to move on to the next round. The World Cup, for example once the group stages are finished. The shoot-out is rare compared to actual game results, even then, and it only occurs after 30 minutes of extra time has been played to no conclusion.

Here's a link--World cup matches decided by a shootout:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F ... shoot-outs

seems an awful lot.

Now I couldn't find anything re NCAA football teams decided by that arcane tiebreaker system, but I will say I cannot think of any championship (Bowl ) games decided that way. And of course the professional teams, the NFL, do not do that sill procedure but play extra time until a winner is declared.