Jump to content

rkomar

CSN
  • Content Count

    555
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by rkomar

  1. I haven't been following the NWSL too closely this season, but I knew that Rebecca Quinn had departed the Washington Spirit for France early in the year. So, I was mildly shocked to see her playing for the Seattle Reign today. I figured the Spirit would still have her rights, but somehow they lost them because she was transferred overseas. The Reign picked her up even though she wasn't allocated and had to take up an international spot. It all seems quite out of the ordinary.
  2. I hate the way the Europeans qualify their teams early for the Olympics. How do the Germans or the French feel about not going? The French got knocked out of the Olympics by the Americans. How is that fair? At least the CONCACAAF teams get to decide who goes to the Olympics amongst themselves. As far as substituting the women and men goes, it's not the same situtation. Our women's team is favoured, our men's team is one of the minnows that the good teams have to beat. Of course it matters where you are seeded as a minnow, not so much as one of the expected winners.
  3. The top two teams in the region are the USA and Canada. Everyone else is a fair ways back, so I don't see how the seeding for the tournament is going to change the outcome much. It will likely come down to Canada vs Mexico for the second spot, no matter how you lay things out at the beginning. How is it possible to "screw" us in the seeding? If we can't beat the minnows, we have no business going to the Olympics.
  4. That doesn't look like Leon. Is it really her?
  5. You make up your team with the best that you have. As long as replacing Sinclair with another player makes the team worse, she should stay on the roster. I don't care about how she has fallen off with the years; she's not in competition with her past self. She's in competition with our other players, and so far I don't see a lot of them that could replace her and make the team better (and that includes leadership along with playmaking and scoring skills).
  6. A good question to ask is: Is 30 million dollars enough money to go around? National programs are not cheap to operate. I don't think it is enough money. With over 6 billion dollars in revenue, would it kill FIFA to hand over a few tens of million dollars more to the women's programs? It would make a huge difference in many country's programs. It may even be good business sense in that the revenues from the women's side of things could go way up if the quality and viewer numbers keeps going up (a factor of 40 difference in revenues makes it look like there is plenty of room to grow there). With so much cash available to them, I think it's up to FIFA to explain why so little goes to the women.
  7. In that situation, the VAR can only bring the referee's attention to it. It was the referee that called the penalty after reviewing the video, not the VAR. I thought it was a weak foul, and Morgan did embellish it, but in the end it was the Dutch player who invited that disaster.
  8. I hate this shift in the interpretation of handball. I expect teams will start to deliberately target arms in the box. It's easier than scoring in open play.
  9. The slow-mo closeups of the fouls showed how the US players embellished so much. Instead of landing on their feet, they would often lift their feet on contact and flop to the ground. The ref fell for it most of the time. I don't mind that the US won the game; they were expected to. I'm just disgusted that the poor reffing was the difference that won them the game. Let's see if the same ref gets any more games in the tournament. Even more interesting, will the US get the same help playing against the French?
  10. You can't blame VAR for the soft penalty. In fact, they offered it as something the ref should look at again. That's all they can do.
  11. I can't believe the ref allowed that second penalty to stand. That contact was so weak compared with other shenanigans taking place in the penalty area. VAR gave her a chance to change her mind, but no...
  12. I saw a lot of turnovers from Huitema against the Dutch, so I'm a bit mystified why she's getting so much love right now. I would put Leon ahead of her in this tournament.
  13. I can see them now, when I couldn't see them before.
  14. They are putting a moratorium on the automatic yellow card on each offence, but I'm sure the ref can hand out the card later for repeat offences.
  15. It looked to me like we were over-excited in the game. Passes to where you hoped your teammate would be rather than where they can be. That's just an attitude problem. We were fine in terms of skill and fitness, we just need to address the mental side of things. I think we can be a lot better than we showed in that game. Hopefully they will use this experience to be more cold-blooded in the next game.
  16. Yes, I agree. I've been gaining more confidence in that particular referee as the tournament goes on, so I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. She seems to have a good handle on the games.
  17. The view from the camera behind the goal line made it look like the defender jumped in front and then hip-checked the forward. I was also doubtful about the call, but changed my mind after seeing that.
  18. So she's thinking of those who don't have the privileges she has, and is protesting the situation. I don't see that as having gall. She's just trying to make things better, even if things are pretty good for her.
  19. New Zealand, although good defensively, didn't really press the ball carrier very hard in either of their two games. So, both Canada and the Netherlands looked pretty comfortable on the ball in those games. Cameroon actually put more pressure on us when we had the ball, making us hurry the play more. So, although we looked to be playing better against New Zealand, I'm not going to be more confident until I see us play that well against the Dutch.
  20. I don't think it's all for wasting time on the clock. It's also for slowing down the game and taking momentum away from your opponent. So, even if you stop the clock, I think you'll still see delay tactics.
  21. I think we have the same goal differential, but they have scored more goals than us. So, I think the tie-breaker is in favour of the Netherlands. And I was also pretty impressed with how well we handled the Ferns today. They didn't look nearly as good as they did against the Dutch, which I assume is all down to us.
  22. I _have_ read the rules, which aren't as clear as you make out. Here's an excerpt from the Offside law: A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by: - interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or - interfering with an opponent by: - preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or - challenging an opponent for the ball or - clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or ... Notice how many times "played or touched" comes up. It sounds to me like FIFA distinguish between the two; they do not mean the exact same thing. You can "play" the ball by legally preventing someone else from playing it, without touching the ball at all. That was certainly my interpretation when I was reffing in the past, and I'm sure I wasn't alone in that. And that last part of the excerpt is what most who disagree with the decision are thinking about. Kerr was attempting to play the ball, and Monica was reacting to that when she headed the ball. You cannot say that Kerr was not involved in the active play. I guess the referees thought Monica was going to head the ball into her net anyway.
  23. No, you just need to have the ball within reach to be "playing" it. That's what makes the difference between shielding the ball and obstruction.
  24. I did agree with the call, if it's the one I'm thinking of. Where the Norwegian grabbed a fistful of jersey and dragged the French player down?
  25. VAR is slowing down the game, but I wouldn't say it is ruining it. I don't mind waiting if the ones committing sneaky fouls get caught on camera. I was in agreement with the panel in thinking they got Australia's third goal wrong, even with VAR. But the vast majority of the judgements using VAR look like they are more accurate.
×
×
  • Create New...