|
FIFA World Cup 2010 in South Africa Discussion (pg. 131)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Trance Nutter |
| Never happens here in Aus either. |
|
|
| Slipmat |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cloudburst
That NEVER happens here. EVER. I do hear it ALL the time when watching american broadcasts (like NHL) though. "This second period is brought to you by Gecco car insurance!!". It freaks me out, it seems so unworthy of the announcers. |
this |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
So you're fine with the points system but you don't like draws? lmao
That doesn't make seeeeeeeense!! |
when did I ever say I don't like draws |
|
|
| schwarzes |
| france out :o :( |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| Chemy has a point. IF FIFA wants to expand the game in North America (which stands to reason as it is the most valuable market in which the game is not a major spectator sport; therefore, offers the greatest opportunity for revenue growth) then it needs to make rule changes that will make the game more exciting to North Americans. The changes need not be drastic or at least as drastic as Chemy suggests; however, they do need to happen. Ultimately, if FIFA wants to penetrate the North American market they need to make the game more exciting by creating conditions that offer more scoring opportunities. While those who have grown up with the sport appreciate the defensive game and turnovers in mid-field the North American audience demands shots on net/scoring opportunities. I'm sure there is a way this could be done without making major changes and thereby alienating the existing audience; however, I'll admit that I know too little about the game to make any realistic suggestions. Perhaps it would be a better conversation if those of you who love the game actually give some suggestions on how it could be improved as opposed to taking the defensive position that the game is perfect and Fuck North Americans if they don't like it... as that will benefit no one. |
|
|
| G-Con |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
Wow some of you are so dense. Chemenhanced might not know it, but all over the world advertisement happens *during* the game with the announcer slipping 5-10 seconds read messages here and there. Elsewhere you have a portion of the screen showing advertisement during the game again. That's not annoying or you guys are just ignoring it on purpose.
The idea is not to stop the game for a minute or two, but to stop the clock for those oh so annoying faked injuries and goalies that take forever (even with the new rule) to send the ball back to play, the intentional ball kicked out to slow the game, the player change that take much more than 30 seconds, etc etc.
A short list of events that could be enumerated to stop the clock and FIFA could implement them without alienating anyone. If the game is about fairness, these things should be looked at seriously by FIFA.
Those clock stoppages won't break the game flow, it is already broken when these events happen! and it frustrates anyone else watching but the leading team fans.
So that lame excuse of advertisement and game flow do not hold one bit. |
In game advertisements, either on screen or by the commentator NEVER happens in the UK and judging by the previous replies, doesn't happen anywhere else either (apart from North America?) so please shut the up.
There is nothing wrong with stoppage time as it is. Sometimes, the time given seems a bit short, other times a bit long, but its all part of the game and works just fine.
Honest to god, the bull in this thread by many of you Americans regarding rule changes is so stupid, its unreal.
Football is the biggest sport in the world, and just because it doesn't appeal to a typical American, they think the rules should be changed to suit them and everyone else.
And, Chemenhanced, all the suggestions you have given WOULD alienate the majority of football fans worldwide and they would stop watching the sport if your ideas came into play.
You obviously have no understanding of football and therefore you have no idea why your ideas would completely ruin the game.
I find hockey, basketball, baseball all boring as hell to watch. They do not appeal to me at all. But I'm not about to suggest drastic changes to help improve them though because I don't understand those sports at all and my ideas would most likely ruin whatever it is people love about them.
But as you believe that the American audience is more important than the rest of the world, I suppose all that matters is getting football to appeal to Americans.
After all, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs... |
|
|
| G-Con |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Chemy has a point. IF FIFA wants to expand the game in North America (which stands to reason as it is the most valuable market in which the game is not a major spectator sport; therefore, offers the greatest opportunity for revenue growth) then it needs to make rule changes that will make the game more exciting to North Americans. The changes need not be drastic or at least as drastic as Chemy suggests; however, they do need to happen. Ultimately, if FIFA wants to penetrate the North American market they need to make the game more exciting by creating conditions that offer more scoring opportunities. While those who have grown up with the sport appreciate the defensive game and turnovers in mid-field the North American audience demands shots on net/scoring opportunities. I'm sure there is a way this could be done without making major changes and thereby alienating the existing audience; however, I'll admit that I know too little about the game to make any realistic suggestions. Perhaps it would be a better conversation if those of you who love the game actually give some suggestions on how it could be improved as opposed to taking the defensive position that the game is perfect and Fuck North Americans if they don't like it... as that will benefit no one. |
ing hell! |
|
|
| kr00t0n |
| quote: | Originally posted by G-Con
ing hell! |
Innit! It's like saying they should make the hoops lower in basketball so as to get better penetration in Asia. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cloudburst
That NEVER happens here. EVER. I do hear it ALL the time when watching american broadcasts (like NHL) though. "This second period is brought to you by Gecco car insurance!!". It freaks me out, it seems so unworthy of the announcers. |
Similarly, we in NA are a litte freaked out that your hockey players are covered in advertisements.
 |
|
|
| woscar |
As pointed out earlier (and repeatedly), why the would FIFA make rule changes to attract a few million rednecks at the expense of alienating a big chunk of its 3.5 billion fans all over the world? And in case you weren't paying attention, these changes have been attempted by Major League Soccer and failed. Miserably.
| quote: | Rule changes
MLS experimented with deviations from IFAB rules and standards in its early years. Some of which had been used in the NASL and continue to be used in college soccer and many high school associations.
Among them was the use of a countdown clock, rather than a standard progressive clock, with time paused for dead ball situations at a referee's discretion. Halves ended when the clock reached 0:00, rather than at the whistle of the referee as was customary elsewhere.
Also implemented was the use of shootouts to resolve tie games. These best-of-five contests placed a player 35 yards from goal with five seconds to put the ball past the opposing goalkeeper; if needed the shootout progressed into extra frames. A winning team received one standings point (as opposed to three for the regulation win).
While IFAB rules allow teams to substitute three players during games, MLS allowed a fourth, goalkeeper-only substitute. MLS discarded the rule after 2003 and adopted the IFAB standard, prompted in part by a match in which then MetroStars coach and current U.S. national team manager Bob Bradley used a loophole to insert an outfield player as a fourth substitute.
MLS eventually conceded that the rules changes, particularly the shootout, had alienated some traditional soccer fans while failing to draw new American sports fans as hoped. The shootout and countdown clock were eliminated after the 1999 season.
MLS continued to experiment with the settling of tie games in regular season play. In 2000, a 10-minute golden goal period replaced the shootout for tied games. It was abandoned after 2003. The golden-goal overtime remained through 2004 for playoff matches, where it had been used since the league's inception.
In 2005 the league adopted a playoff extra time structure that followed new IFAB standards for such situations: two full 15-minute periods, followed by kicks from the penalty mark if necessary. The away goals rule is not used in any playoff round. |
SOURCE |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by G-Con
And, Chemenhanced, all the suggestions you have given WOULD alienate the majority of football fans worldwide and they would stop watching the sport if your ideas came into play.
You obviously have no understanding of football and therefore you have no idea why your ideas would completely ruin the game.
I find hockey, basketball, baseball all boring as hell to watch. They do not appeal to me at all. But I'm not about to suggest drastic changes to help improve them though because I don't understand those sports at all and my ideas would most likely ruin whatever it is people love about them.
But as you believe that the American audience is more important than the rest of the world, I suppose all that matters is getting football to appeal to Americans.
After all, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs... |
you make a lot of assumptions about someone you know nothing about. As I've already said, I've followed soccer for over a decade so don't tell me I know nothing about the sport.
The difference here is that I do find soccer appealing enough to watch but it doesn't appeal to me enough to spend my entertainment dollar on it. You refuse to try and watch the other sports and you wouldn't spend a single penny to watch them.....at least I'm willing to give soccer a chance to entertain me....which it continues to fail in doing.
and as I've already said...the north american audience is a very important audience for FIFA right now. It's where the greatest opportunity for expansion is for soccer.
Its your failure to accept the fact that the game is flawed in some ways that keeps the sport from taking over in the north american market. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by kr00t0n
Innit! It's like saying they should make the hoops lower in basketball so as to get better penetration in Asia. |
I did state "if" gaining market share in North America is a priority then the game needs to be made more exciting for North American viewers. Surely to god you can think of someways the game could be made more exciting without alienating the existing audience, no? Are you trying to say there is absolutely nothing that can be changed that won't result in loss of more spectators then the potential gain? Honestly, I'm not trying to insult the game, nor am I suggesting it should try to cater to Americans; but, if it wants growth in the most valuable market available to it then it needs to. All I'm asking is do those of you who know and love the game see any way that could be done. |
|
|
|
|
