- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I don’t watch a ton of soccer but for the life of me
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:15 pm to UncleRuckus
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:15 pm to UncleRuckus
It’s why soccer will never gain an audience in a country with options.
2
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:16 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
It’s why soccer will never gain an audience in a country with options.
shite we can barely determine what is or is not a catch in football.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:16 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
This doesn’t make sense. If a “cherry picker” stood near the goal and the other team posted someone next to him, there would be zero incentive for long passes to see who comes down with it.
So now you are saying they should just take 2 players essentially out of the game? If the players camped out near the goal aren't going to be used what's the point?
I don't understand what you are arguing anymore. You see saying 2 things that are antithetical to each other.
Camping someone out should be ok. But they would never be used.
Sounds like a great game you got there.
This post was edited on 7/2/26 at 8:19 pm
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:16 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:It would turn into like 4 v 4 at each end and when the defense got the ball they would just bomb it to the other end of the field, then those would go at it before it was bombed back the other way. It’s to prevent that more so than just the cherry picking.
This doesn’t make sense. If a “cherry picker” stood near the goal and the other team posted someone next to him, there would be zero incentive for long passes to see who comes down with it.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:16 pm to TigrrrDad
You complain about the offside rule and say it keeps players from using their speed and athleticism when the rule literally promotes having speed and athleticism up front for counterattacks. Teams would each keep half their team in each penalty box and kick the ball from end to end without the rule, so being tall would be way better than being athletic.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:18 pm to tgrgrd00
quote:
So now you are saying they should just take 2 players essentially out of the game?
Not at all - I’m saying cherry picking wouldn’t happen because it would just be defended. Pointless to put a guy by the goal if the opposing team would just guard them, so it wouldn’t happen.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:19 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
I’ve shot down the cherry picking argument.
No you didn't, it's just so obtuse nobody has bothered to respond. You clearly don't watch soccer and understand the chaos that follows long passes and second balls. That's fine...you are an American after all with options!
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:19 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:I grew up playing and watching football, baseball, and basketball, never played soccer a day in my life, didn’t start seriously watching or following a team until 6 or 7 years ago, but find it infinitely more fun to watch than just about anything going on in our current sports world.
But for viewers who grow up with other sports, it’s the single thing that ruins soccer.
This post was edited on 7/2/26 at 8:21 pm
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:20 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
so it wouldn’t happen
Yes it would.
This was essentially the US strategy in the World Cup for 20 years.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:21 pm to MOT
Same. I follow LSU sports but otherwise could not care less about football, basketball, or any other sport at large.
I watch soccer whenever I can.
I watch soccer whenever I can.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:21 pm to nicholastiger
Without var that would have stood but he was offside.
So pick your poison.
So pick your poison.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:22 pm to MOT
quote:
It would turn into like 4 v 4 at each end and when the defense got the ball they would just bomb it to the other end of the field, then those would go at it before it was bombed back the other way.
No it wouldn’t - that would be like QBs throwing Hail Marys every play. There would be little sense in bombing soccer passes down the field for 50/50 balls. Moving it downfield in a controlled manner most of the time would still be the more successful strategy - just like football (real football).
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:26 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:Yes, it would.
No it wouldn’t
You know what promotes strategically moving the ball down the field with passing and keeping teams in unison? I can give you a hint if needed.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:28 pm to TigrrrDad
I don’t think these tourists realize defenders can’t mark forwards indefinitely. It’s like arguing a DB can cover a WR for a sustained period of time
It ceases to be a team sport at that point. It would be unwatchable slop
It ceases to be a team sport at that point. It would be unwatchable slop
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:30 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
No it wouldn’t
If you think soccer teams wouldn't implement camping players out by the goal as a strategy I got a manager named Jose Morihno you need to meet.
But seriously, teams that are outmatched in the midfield would absolutely implement the strategy.
But whatever, you don't have to watch if you don't like it. Nobody really cares.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:30 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
No it wouldn’t - that would be like QBs throwing Hail Marys every play. There would be little sense in bombing soccer passes down the field for 50/50 balls. Moving it downfield in a controlled manner most of the time would still be the more successful strategy - just like football (real football).
Is this where you go full retard and pretend you were trolling the whole time?
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:30 pm to MOT
I’ll close with this: Get rid of the offsides rule and scores would be
14-12 instead of 2-1, and the global audience would double overnight.
We’ve already convinced those already viewing that excess is best by conditioning them with free drink refills, oversized brisket sandwiches at massive gas stations, etc., so they’ll all fall in line. None will resist the rule change.
14-12 instead of 2-1, and the global audience would double overnight.
We’ve already convinced those already viewing that excess is best by conditioning them with free drink refills, oversized brisket sandwiches at massive gas stations, etc., so they’ll all fall in line. None will resist the rule change.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:31 pm to SulphursFinest
quote:
I get the need for an offsides, I just find it absolutely insane that your big toe or giant nose can be the reason you’re offsides.
The premier league has a 5 cm grace zone, where your nose, hopefully, would not trigger offsides. Fifa do not have that grace zone. Fingernail over and you are offside.
Canada league will trial the “daylight” offside rule next season. Will only be offside if there is daylight between you and the 2nd to last defender (goalkeeper is usually the last defender). Apparently there is support in fifa to change to that if it works out.
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:35 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:How exactly would the global audience double when 95% of that same audience would regard this as retarded? I’m very curious
the global audience would double overnight
Posted on 7/2/26 at 8:36 pm to TigrrrDad
quote:
I’ll close with this: Get rid of the offsides rule and scores would be
14-12 instead of 2-1, and the global audience would double overnight.
Yeah, this is definitely the point you need to check out.
You sound like the dorks at a Super Bowl party who only watch that one game all year but tell everyone around how much better it would be if they changed whatever it is you think should be changed.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News