World Cup 2014

[Loki]

When will you Americans get that the only stats that count are the stats on the score board at the end of the match?

When will you learn the concept of "small sample size"? Whether a given shot goes in is based mostly on luck. But the number of shots taken and possession figures are based on skill and don't change much game-to-game. Ultimately, teams that have the ball more and shoot more will score more, but with some variation.

Just look at the Belgium game. The shots were 17-3 Belgium, and Belgium controlled the ball 2/3 of the time. It might seem like good luck that they scored 2 late goals, but really, they were the substantially better team and would win this game 9 times out of 10. Also look at the Netherlands game. Spain had more ball possession, but were outshot 13-9; the shots on goal were 11-6 Netherlands (that's outstandingly bad defense by Spain).

[Flixy]

A defensive play with good counters can score a lot with little possession though, and with Belgium you skip the fact that a lot of their shots on goal were from way too far and had no chance of becoming a goal, and most of their possession was just playing the ball around in the back, which isn't going to win matches either. Of course generally speaking it's true, but one shot on goal isn't the other,you should take the quality of the chance into account. Of course if it's 17-3 on shots it's a pretty good indication of who was best, but possession definitely isn't a great measure of that.

[Loki]

Yes, no one's claiming that all possession is equal and all shots are the same. I'm just providing two very general stats. One can equally look at quality scoring chances, shots at close range, possession in the offensive zone, etc. My point was that it's not enough to just look at the score. Just because a team wins doesn't mean it had a high chance of victory. And if they didn't have a high chance of victory in one game, their luck will eventually run out.

[Flixy]

As long as it runs out after the final, nobody will care And in a competition luck is less a factor, at a world cup, especially at the knock out stage, hazir is right that the score is the only important stat.

I didn't see the us match, so no idea how the stats are representative there. But possession is definitely more about tactics than skill, often. Shots are probably the better measure.. After the score of course

[Hazir]

When will you learn the concept of "small sample size"? Whether a given shot goes in is based mostly on luck. But the number of shots taken and possession figures are based on skill and don't change much game-to-game. Ultimately, teams that have the ball more and shoot more will score more, but with some variation.

Just look at the Belgium game. The shots were 17-3 Belgium, and Belgium controlled the ball 2/3 of the time. It might seem like good luck that they scored 2 late goals, but really, they were the substantially better team and would win this game 9 times out of 10. Also look at the Netherlands game. Spain had more ball possession, but were outshot 13-9; the shots on goal were 11-6 Netherlands (that's outstandingly bad defense by Spain).

IIRC the ratio was 2:1, which shows that it's less relevant how much time you have control of the ball than that you control it at the right time.

[Loki]

IIRC the ratio was 2:1, which shows that it's less relevant how time you have control of the ball than that you control it at the right time.

All that shows is that the Dutch were lucky to win by as much as they did, but they nevertheless deserved the victory. Do you really think that if the same game was played tomorrow, the score would still be as lopsided?

[Hazir]

All that shows is that the Dutch were lucky to win by as much as they did, but they nevertheless deserved the victory. Do you really think that if the same game was played tomorrow, the score would still be as lopsided?

Why not? The Spaniards played their stale old game which ensures them a lot of ball time but it's mostly movement sideways. The reason why they lost was that they couldn't turn playing the ball around into enough action towards the Dutch goal.

[Hazir]

Am I the only one here who's not overly impressed with the play of the Brazilians?

[earthJoker]

No, I am not impressed either. Not in the first game, and not now.

[Khendraja'aro]

The Brazilians seem to be utterly incapable of actually hitting the goal

[Flixy]

I didn't watch, but is it true they dodged yet another red card?

[earthJoker]

Close. You could give a red for that, but you don't have to.

[Lor]

Why not? The Spaniards played their stale old game which ensures them a lot of ball time but it's mostly movement sideways. The reason why they lost was that they couldn't turn playing the ball around into enough action towards the Dutch goal.

Indeed.

The Spanish have played for possession for to many years, always looking for the intricate pass from their false number 10 (Xavi for example) to the runs of the attacking midfield players or even a lone wolf forward like Diego Costa or Torres before him. This is where the likes of Barcelona have been found out!

If you look at the last two domestic seasons, you'll see elements of the old Dutch ways of Total Football/counter attacking football winning vital games like the Champions League final. Noticeable games include: B.Munich vs Barcelona CL Final and Real Madrid vs Athletico Madrid CL Final.

I don't think Spain will change their ways, however I still wouldn't underestimate them and simply park the bus in front of goal waiting for the opportunity to counter.

Am I the only one here who's not overly impressed with the play of the Brazilians?

Nope, I've not been impressed by them for quite a few years. They've got a young player in Neymar who's been hyped up far to much and a suspect defence (Luiz was dire at times for Chelsea). For a country which prides itself in being 'The Spirit of the Game', they cheat an awful lot.

I didn't watch, but is it true they dodged yet another red card?

I saw they tried to con the ref again for a penalty!

[Flixy]

Well, silva is complaining they didn't get a penalty because of the media

[Lor]

Well, silva is complaining they didn't get a penalty because of the media

Silva should have scored with his header! He was completely free to do as he pleases but sent the ball straight to the keeper. He can blame his team mates for the lack of a penalty too - the Brazilians are to theatrical. Fred cons ref against Croatia, Marcelo tries it against Mexico but doesn't get it!

You'd think people would wise up to it after Rivaldo in 2002.

[Timbuk2]

Brazil played like a bunch of individuals, not a team. Too much hogging of the ball, trying to do something fancy when passing would be the better option.They were listless too.

Mexico impressed, quick-flowing fast football. I was shouting at the tv for them to score as time wore on in the second half.

[Loki]

You know, for a game where the average team scores 1-2 goals a game, does it really make sense so have a penalty kick, which goes in a vast majority of the time? It creates far too much incentive for players to cheat in order to obtain that kick. It doesn't help that all one needs to do to get a penalty kick is to get knocked over in the penalty area. I know it's wishful thinking, but soccer should adopt the NHL standards for penalties: you only get a penalty kick if there's no one but the goalie in front of you, you get knocked over, and you're unable to get a solid shot on goal because of being knocked over. This would make reduce the success rate of flopping, reduce the number of penalty kicks, and make teams play a game that's less centered around getting knocked over in the penalty area.

Indeed.

The Spanish have played for possession for to many years, always looking for the intricate pass from their false number 10 (Xavi for example) to the runs of the attacking midfield players or even a lone wolf forward like Diego Costa or Torres before him. This is where the likes of Barcelona have been found out!

If you look at the last two domestic seasons, you'll see elements of the old Dutch ways of Total Football/counter attacking football winning vital games like the Champions League final. Noticeable games include: B.Munich vs Barcelona CL Final and Real Madrid vs Athletico Madrid CL Final.

Sure, some teams have a strategy of maximizing possession, even when it's not "good possession". But think of the counter-factual. The Aussies had even possession with the Dutch today, but were out-shot. As a result, they lose 3-2. Does anyone believe that if the Aussies were outshot and the Dutch had the ball twice as often, the score would still be 3-2?

[Hazir]

Phew, that was quite a hard match. I think the Dutch side underestimated the Australians a bit, almost to their detriment. On the other hand, the referee at times seemed to play as the 12th man of the Australians. That penalty was totally undeserved. And Cahill should have been sent off with red.

Which brings me to Loki's idea about penalties; I think such a penalty rule would clash with the off-side rule. But I could be mistaken.

[Loki]

Wouldn't you still be onside as long as you were even with an opposing player when the ball was initially kicked in your direction? Or if you simply managed to dribble around the last defending player? I just fail to see the rationale for giving a penalty kick, which goes in about 85% of the time, just because someone gets knocked over in the penalty area, which they have perhaps a 10% chance of scoring. Make the punishment fit the crime.

[earthJoker]

This rule already applies to the red card rule for last man. So instead of giving a red card and penalty, you would "downgrade" the punishment.
Foul Situation: Now -> New
In penalty box: Yellow & Penalty -> Free kick
In penalty box, clear chance or last man: Red & penalty -> Yellow & penalty
Outside last man: Red & free kick -> Yellow & free kick

But what do you do if the foul was closer then 9 meters to the goal?

[earthJoker]

Spean on the way out.

[Timbuk2]

Aye - Just got home from work n switched on the box at half time.

Chile 2 - 0 Spain

Deserves a big wtf

[Loki]

This rule already applies to the red card rule for last man. So instead of giving a red card and penalty, you would "downgrade" the punishment.
Foul Situation: Now -> New
In penalty box: Yellow & Penalty -> Free kick
In penalty box, clear chance or last man: Red & penalty -> Yellow & penalty
Outside last man: Red & free kick -> Yellow & free kick

But what do you do if the foul was closer then 9 meters to the goal?

Maybe give the fouling team a choice between a red card or a penalty?

[Hazir]

SIX minutes? I feel the rules are being skewed on the fly in favor of the countries with the biggest money in their leagues.

[Flixy]

Six minutes sure seemed crazy.

Adios Spain

[Hazir]

And bye bye Australia, Holland and Chile will advance. Only question is who they'll play next round.

[earthJoker]

It's not unlikely that Brazil will finishs second. That would make a strange 3rd game with no-one willing to win.

[Flixy]

Btw, cahill's goal was niiice

[Hazir]

It's not unlikely that Brazil will finishs second. That would make a strange 3rd game with no-one willing to win.

Yeah, not necessarily because the Brazilian side is so wonderful, but they'll rule the crowd and I doubt the referee will be really independent either.

[Khendraja'aro]

And there goes England