lol you're funny :biggrin:
The only sport the USA has dominated in is Basketball, and now you're not so dominant. NFL and baseball doesn't count because its really only Americans that play them.
Technique can be trained with drilling and playing. You can't train speed quickness and athleticism. And US and Jamaican athletes are the most gifted in the world period. We have dominated sprinting from 100-800m since day 1 in Olympics and many NFL players did run Olympic track and many many more could if it had any profit in it. international Soccer players not so much. Everyone who is or was a former athlete knows we send halfletes who could not make mainstream sports in US and are guided into soccer by virtue of their incompetence. Quite simply we send our worst specimens they send their best specimens in the gene pool.
No I'm afraid if we devoted our athletes to soccer it would be just like our dominance in any other hyper athletic event like basketball and track world attempts to compete in, no competition.
Someone like Barry Sanders would make Maradona look mediocre.
From your description it doesn't sound like you even watch American football. Very few plays are reviewed, even big plays, unless there was an apparent reversible error.
Considering how little scoring there is in soccer, it the benefit of getting the call right on a goal-scoring play seems pretty critical. Refusing to accept beneficial technology because "mistakes are part of the game" is beyond idiotic. The outcomes of games at the World Cup have been altered because of mistakes. How in the world is that desirable?
I agree for the most part. With American football it can get a little tedious especially if the call is a "did he catch it out of bounds" call.
In soccer you have a few options. First, you can make just about any play reviewable - offsides, goals, hand balls. Or, you can just make "did the ball cross the line for a goal" the only reviewable call. If you go with the second option, then the play could be reviewed in a matter of seconds.
If you started investing heavily in football now it would still take 20-30 years before youd start to see real results. Also, Im not so convinced that youd be dominant. A lot of these top countries put "everything" they got into football. While they dont have the resources you do, they put most of it into one basket, football. If youd be as focused as for example Brasil, youd be number one but your other sports would suffer greatly.
And you cant really compare speeds between american footballers and footballers. In one your role is very specialized and one dimensional and in the other its more balanced. For strikers your only as fast as you can run while dribbling. Technique, heading, shooting, set pieces, strength, dribbling, defending, stamina, tackling etc. all have to be trained and in good shape and it takes away from speed training and more importantly the most talented in the speed aspect rarely are very in good in the other areas.
Hardly. England couldn't string together more than 2 passes to save their lives. Who was going to do the rest of the scoring for them? Rooney?
You can't tell me that one goal would have made a difference in a 4-1 game. Your rationalization is just stringing together a whole bunch of ifs.
If they had gotten one more goal, and if they hadn't let Germany score two more after that, then they'd only have to get one more goal to win!
Geez, if the Seahawks hadn't lost all those games last year, they'd have won the Super Bowl!
apples to oranges. we're talking football, not tackleball.
the thing about football is that teams can change momentum and become dominant. look at how the swiss handled spain. look at how new zealand handled italy, etc. it's a sport where momentum can swing all due to one moment.
Not only that, but playing when you're a goal down is a completely different game than playing when you're tied. When you're down in a single elimination tournament, you're forced to focus on attack and be more vulnerable in the back. So what happened? Germany took advantage of that and scored 2 more goals on counter-attacks.
Nobody is saying that the result definitely would have changed if the goal was allowed. Based on the respective performances, Germany would still probably have come out on top. The real problem is that we will never know what would have happened anymore. It's unfair to both England and Germany IMO.
Great goal by Netherlands. Anyone else watching the Netherlands v. Slovakia game?
Yep I expect either Holland,Argentina ,Brazil for the final.
Considering how little scoring there is in soccer, it the benefit of getting the call right on a goal-scoring play seems pretty critical. Refusing to accept beneficial technology because "mistakes are part of the game" is beyond idiotic. The outcomes of games at the World Cup have been altered because of mistakes. How in the world is that desirable?
They use technology as it is.. with the head sets to communicate with each other. I'm sure that changed game dynamics when it was first introduced. Adding a goal sensor / reviewable camera, is just logical extension of what they are currently doing.
I was out all weekend and missed all the games. Man still can't believe the US lost to Ghana.
applaud Netherlands for not diving at the slightest touch to kill time against Slovakia
JOHANNESBURG -- FIFA will censor World Cup match action being shown on giant screens inside the stadium after replays of Argentina's disputed first goal against Mexico fueled arguments on the pitch.
Angry Mexico players protested to referee Roberto Rosetti after the screens in Johannesburg's Soccer City showed Argentina forward Carlos Tevez was offside before he scored the opening goal in a 3-1 victory on Sunday.
FIFA spokesman Nicolas Maingot said Monday that replaying the incident was "a clear mistake."