***** Official World Cup 2026 Round of 16 Thread *****

109,417 Views | 2035 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by fig96
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just think: if that Paraguayan CB hadn't put his leg down before that dude started diving in the box, it would be nil-nil and this titanic grudge match would still be going on
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That France/Spain/Portugal side of the bracket looks a lot tougher than the England/Brazil/Argentina side.
dmart90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

That France/Spain/Portugal side of the bracket looks a lot tougher than the England/Brazil/Argentina side.

Because the France, Spain, Portugal bracket includes USA! USA! USA!
LeonardSkinner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgBQ-00 said:

was he wearing a napoleon hat?

Les Miserables?
Featured Video Previews
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MookieBlaylock said:

dmart90 said:

Infection_Ag11 said:

dmart90 said:

Infection_Ag11 said:

gougler08 said:

oh no said:

Feels cheap for France

Take a dive to get through


The Paraguay guy got him in both legs, it wasn't a dive (nor was the first one that didn't get called for a free kick)


It doesn't matter, that wasn't a significant enough act to warrant a free goal. He wasn't even going to get a shot off, and him actually scoring from that position had he gotten a shot off would have required an all time great goal.

It wasn't a dive. It was a clear penalty in the box. Which this ref whiffed on. It matters not which direction the attacker was moviSunday's.a PK every time and twice on Sundays.


My criticism is of the nature of awarding penalty kicks. I'm not disputing that it was a foul in the box. I'm disputing that the events in question warranted France being handed the game on that basis.

If penalty kicks had a 50% conversion rate? Fine. But when a penalty kick essentially equates to a free goal, deciding games on fouls like that will prevent American sports fans from going all in.

I understand your argument. But any time the ball is the box its a chance to score. So yes, its justified.


he was dribbling towards his own goal please explain how that was a chance to score

You serious?
Mathguy64
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This can't be your first Mookie experience. Surely not.
Out in Left Field
How long do you want to ignore this user?
England reportedly taking viagra to help with the altitude. I can't wait for a bulge offside graphic
fig96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's…a thing people do for altitude?
MookieBlaylock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PatAg said:

MookieBlaylock said:

dmart90 said:

Infection_Ag11 said:

dmart90 said:

Infection_Ag11 said:

gougler08 said:

oh no said:

Feels cheap for France

Take a dive to get through


The Paraguay guy got him in both legs, it wasn't a dive (nor was the first one that didn't get called for a free kick)


he must have that 20 yard heel kick that beats a world class keeper

It doesn't matter, that wasn't a significant enough act to warrant a free goal. He wasn't even going to get a shot off, and him actually scoring from that position had he gotten a shot off would have required an all time great goal.

It wasn't a dive. It was a clear penalty in the box. Which this ref whiffed on. It matters not which direction the attacker was moviSunday's.a PK every time and twice on Sundays.


My criticism is of the nature of awarding penalty kicks. I'm not disputing that it was a foul in the box. I'm disputing that the events in question warranted France being handed the game on that basis.

If penalty kicks had a 50% conversion rate? Fine. But when a penalty kick essentially equates to a free goal, deciding games on fouls like that will prevent American sports fans from going all in.

I understand your argument. But any time the ball is the box its a chance to score. So yes, its justified.


he was dribbling towards his own goal please explain how that was a chance to score

You serious?
MookieBlaylock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Out in Left Field said:

England reportedly taking viagra to help with the altitude. I can't wait for a bulge offside graphic


have ya seen English birds? they been on this since they was 13
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Out in Left Field said:

I can't wait for a bulge offside graphic
I bet you can't
AgBQ-00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dont know. looked like one of the french players was wearing a bi-corn hat but had it on wrong.
God loves you so much He'll meet you where you are. He also loves you too much to allow to stay where you are.

We sing Hallelujah! The Lamb has overcome!
scd88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is it fair to say the US has had a fairly easy draw so far? Belgium seems like a significant bump n competition.

ETA - seems like we are a similar bump in competition for Belgium, so there's that.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
scd88 said:

Is it fair to say the US has had a fairly easy draw so far? Belgium seems like a significant bump n competition.


Yes
MookieBlaylock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
the draw has been 10x harder than Mejicos

Peter Piper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAggie2011 said:

scd88 said:

Is it fair to say the US has had a fairly easy draw so far? Belgium seems like a significant bump n competition.


Yes

I agree if you base it on reputation (or lack thereof).

But based on average ranking across the four teams in each group, Group D was the 2nd most difficult.
f1ghtintexasaggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mathguy64 said:

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

Mathguy64 said:

I can't believe I'm about to say this.

He hasn't called squat all game. Fouls are happening everywhere and he's not calling anything. Like it or not he either doesn't know what a foul is or doesn't think any of these are fouls.

Is it really a "clear and obvious error" for VAR to call the one in the area for a PK? It's completely different than the way the rest of the match was refereed.


Yes, the game should not be decided by the head ref refusing to do his one job. It should be decided by the rules as written. That PK foul and the one before it outside the box that wasn't even called in favor of "advantage" (when PAR had 9 men behind the ball) were blatantly clear. At some point it becomes the other refs' duty to tell the head ref to pull his head out of his ass.


That's not his job. That's re-refereeing the match. Like it or not the ****ty ref you get is the ****ty ref you got.



That is the entire point of VAR. I guess we will agree to disagree here.
MookieBlaylock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
VAR has proven to be complete failure

should only be used to see if the ball crosses the line or not

everything else let the refs call it and move on


Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AustinScubaAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who?mikejones! said:



Oh look such a wonderful host nation.
AustinScubaAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
f1ghtintexasaggie said:

Mathguy64 said:

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

Mathguy64 said:

I can't believe I'm about to say this.

He hasn't called squat all game. Fouls are happening everywhere and he's not calling anything. Like it or not he either doesn't know what a foul is or doesn't think any of these are fouls.

Is it really a "clear and obvious error" for VAR to call the one in the area for a PK? It's completely different than the way the rest of the match was refereed.


Yes, the game should not be decided by the head ref refusing to do his one job. It should be decided by the rules as written. That PK foul and the one before it outside the box that wasn't even called in favor of "advantage" (when PAR had 9 men behind the ball) were blatantly clear. At some point it becomes the other refs' duty to tell the head ref to pull his head out of his ass.


That's not his job. That's re-refereeing the match. Like it or not the ****ty ref you get is the ****ty ref you got.



That is the entire point of VAR. I guess we will agree to disagree here.

Yes it is the point of VAR. The big issue is the Refs tend to use a different standard for VAR than has been used for other fouls in the game. As someone said earlier, in the context of that game and what was a foul that was not a clear and obvious error.

The Ref was awful and let much worse go.
nomad2007
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Out in Left Field said:

England reportedly taking viagra to help with the altitude. I can't wait for a bulge offside graphic


That'll help them play tall.

But in all seriousness, they're not taking sildenafil. A report went viral that it was permitted, not that it was actually taken. Mexico City is elevated but it's not really high enough for that.
Serious Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
so is everyone pulling for our teasipping mates in england today, or is this one of those times you just root for an asteroid?
nai06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll be rooting for ABE


Anyone but england
Danny Vermin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Absolutely. I hope Kane gets a hat trick on those savages .
#FJB
A is A
How long do you want to ignore this user?
England.

The Mexico fans are the worst.
LeonardSkinner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I would give our New England region back to the UK if it would guarantee a victory today.


Now that I think about it, I'd probably let them have it for a lifetime supply of bangers and mash.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sunday, July 5th

Brazil vs. Norway
3:00 PM CT
MetLife Stadium, East Rutherford, NJ(NYC)
TV: Fox, Telemundo


Mexico vs. England
7:00 PM CT
Estadio Azteca, Mexico City, Mexico
TV: Fox, Telemundo
Forum Troll
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I want Mexico to feel like the Brazilians in 2014.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AustinScubaAg said:

Who?mikejones! said:



Oh look such a wonderful host nation.

Who was the genius on here who said that the Ecuador situation was a completely unrelated event.
Maximus_Meridius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Man I would love a Norwegian victory today. I suspect this will be a disappointing day for me.
Mathguy64
How long do you want to ignore this user?
England has generational offensive talent.

England is managed by Tommy Tickles.

Net edge to Mexico.
tysker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AustinScubaAg said:

Who?mikejones! said:



Oh look such a wonderful host nation.

Maybe a hot take around here but I think that's kinda awesome. Welcome CONCACAF Mother ****ers!!!!

I wonder if Dinesh Patel agrees
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Give me the English



tysker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Serious Lee said:

so is everyone pulling for our teasipping mates in england today, or is this one of those times you just root for an asteroid?

How about a 3-3 game in regulation with 6-4 in PKs and also 4+ yellows, at least one red? Then I don't care who wins
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.