Most boring World Cup in a history of football; Your ideas about how to save a football?

Question

Even FIFA president Blatter is now worried that this World cup is one of the worst n the history from spectators point of view.
http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slug=ap-wcup-lowscoringrecord&prov=ap&type=lgns

Teams can not score anymore and mostly play defending boring football, matches aren't fun to watch any more, and if there will be no goals scored in both remaining games the goal efficiency will be lowest ever in the tournament history. They now discussing an idea of increasing a size of the goal, or reducing number of players on the field to ten man instead of eleven, so the football can become attractive and entertaining sport again.
Any of you have ideas about how to save football?
Banning Portugal and Italy from playing is a nice joke of course, but I am serious..

If offside trap will be eliminated it can paradoxally make game even more defending. Thing is that in that case strikers will be allowed to take positions as close as they want to the opponents goals whole game long and then eventually team would keep even more defenders back to control those strikers..

I think tournament strukture should be changed. Look at the Champions league or Premiership game-there are plenty of goals scored and most games are very dramatic. So it is not a fabrique of the game it is something about the way the tournament rooster is set.
Could be they should allow to bring more the 23 players in the tournament so team scan rotate more players after some will be exhausted. And note: group stage was more exiting when a play off games,because players been less paranoid about losing a goal. May be they should set a second stage as a group stage as well like it was in 1970-s or in 1982 Spain?

I think Spain 1982 with 6 groups at first stage and four 3 team groups on second was a best model.
And reducing number of teams back to 24 would be good idea too, so spoilers who just coming to hung out like Saudi Arabia Angola would not waste fun's time.

NOTE: If you have any answer to the question please go ahead, but if you you hands itching to write something "Are you crazy!?This is most exiting WC ever!Christiano Ronaldo is CUUUTE!" please find some other thread ok?

SHOT CLOCK:I was thinking about it too but is you watch the games closely that would work against attacking teams actually. The nastiest defensive strategy most teams use here at this WC is actually to group the whole team back, let opponent play the ball, tackle everyone close to the box, and either wait for penalty shoot out or someone like Ronaldo to dive and win the penalty. France was able to break the lock though in most of her games,and Irespect them for it,but itdoesnot makea whole thing more exiting

So shot clock would actually punish an attacking team who would be limited in their chances to set a nice combination.

Colin have you actually noticed that in most 0-0 games teams actually Loved to keep the ball at their own half?It was happening because the opponent would usually have the whole team in defence and going forward meant risk of losing the ballandfasing counterattack while passing it between own defenders,or back to the goalie could go on sfaely for ages ensuring the safe passage to the penalty shoot out.

I don't know why asshoelteams like Germany or Portugal love he penalty shoot out somuchbut tagging along for two hoursnotplaying themselvesandnot alowwing opponent to play seems their major strategy.
If we will get rid of penalty shoot out option then could be those teams would be actually forced to play football..

Francis and Wood At you both are reported for personal attacks, and xenophobic remarks about whole nation (Georgia) which has nothing to do with discussion.

Francis is also reported for misinforming the yahoo about content of my posts-I have not written anything about either USA or Germany as far as i remember.

Answer 1

I have been thinking about this for a while. You should know that while I live in the United States, I know my country isnt very good, I have been playing since I was four, I love the game almost more than anything, and I have seen part of every game of this world cup, and I have taped all the games. Now, my father and I, big football (soccer to us, part of our ignorance, sorry) lovers, have spoken about this problem before. We brainstormed ideas, such as: increasing size of the goal, a new rule such as you must half at least two players within X amount of yard (meters, another part of our ignorance, sorry) of the halfline, but this would be very akward, and what would be the punishment if someone broke it? There have been enough yellow cards as it is. Then, I thought that maybe there could be a kind of "shot clock". In the United States, one of our big sports, basketball, used to produce low scoring, boring games, and they came out with the "shot clock" to speed up the tempo and increase the score. This was a few decades ago, and worked tremoundously well. However, how exactly would this work in football(soccer)? A two minute limit, or something? But again, what would be the punishment, and also how would they keep track of it? Then, he came up with another rule that originated in our basketball, the half-court violation, and this is the best one I have heard yet. In basketball, you have ten seconds to get the ball over the halfline, and once you get it over, you cannot go back. However, to make this rule work in football(soccer), we would scratch the time-limit, and just make it so that once you got it over the half-line, you couldn't bring it back. For the punishment, we decided it would be a free kick of some type, possibly from the corner-kick arc, although then every time there was a violation, there would be a slow-down as the teams moved half the field; that area needs some work, but still, we could figure it out. So now, teams are faced with three options: 1, keep the ball in their own end, which no team really wants to do, and, if pressured by the other team, the team with the ball will a) lose the ball and give up a counter-attack, or b) manage to break the defense, and get a numbers-up situation of their own; 2) put the ball forward and keep it there so A) when pressured, they cannot go backward as much, meaning i) the defense could steal it and get a counter-attack or ii) they beat the pressure and get a numbers-up situation; B) they go forward more, not wanting to risk losing it near the middle, and create more chances, which i) of course means they are more likely to score and ii) means the other team has a good chance for the quick counter-attack; and 3) they can bring it forward across the halfline, but if they bring it back, they give up a dangerous situation in front of their goal, such as A) a corner situation, B) a direct kick situation, or C) an indirect kick situation, but A,B, or C it is a scoring opportunity, no matter where it is from. Clearly, this beginning of an idea would need a lot of work, but couldnt it work? Of course, it could backfire, and just create a lot of midfield play with teams getting the ball, going forward 20 yards, not being able to go backward, and losing it, etc. But, on the other hand, with the goals-per-game average what it is, and with 7, yes, s-e-v-e-n 0-0 scores after 90 minutes in this cup, what is there to lose?

Answer 2

Maybe the teams should rematch the 0-0 games. This way they would be forced to score, because a rematch will cost plenty of their energy and eventually the players will get pretty tired. Even if a club has 25 players they cannot manage more than 2 games / week, not to speak about the world cup where after a long season players have to play 7 games in 4 weeks.

Answer 3

Portugal is the most dirty playing team I have ever seen play the game.

I think the best idea is to eliminate the offside trap altogether. This will make games more interesting and we will have more one on ones with the goalie, and only the skillfull player/goalie will win such challenges which befits the idea of a skillfull team, unlike Greece when they won with textbook defending football and no skill whatsoever.

Answer 4

You're a farce on two feet, you know that ? You know absolutely nothing about football and you could do with some spelling lessons too but you keep insulting Germany, Portugal and the USA..
( by the way you have been reported to Yahoo Answers for the "questions" you have been posing in the last few days solely to insult THAT country and its people !!!
I just thought I would tell you.
I would suggest you use names like "cockroaches and "scum" on yourself and not on a country and apeople you know nothing about, you silly bum !) Sorry the rest of you about this. This Nick_G is a psycho and a few peoploe are complaining about him

Answer 5

Are you crazy this was the best WC ever !!!

The worst WC will be Italia 90 that one WAS boring...also the last one as some really ordinary teams like Korea & Turkey made it to the semis..

Answer 6

i just think Blatter is stupid and boring he dosnt know anything
yea there were some matchs were boring but not th whole world cup

Answer 7

Yess....absolutely. I'm agree with you. 2002 WC was more better than this. Every team was play with one mind set: Winning the World Cup. I'm disappointed with Brazil for not displaying their samba skills like in 2002.....the Dutchman also didn't showed up their Total Football too much..and England is "slow-heated". And the referee.........it's hard to say how they can being chosen to refereeing this WC. After the loss of Pierluigi Collina ( ex-ref in WC 2002 )....the quality of the referees are dumped. Just look at the match Portugal vs Netherlands, US vs Italy, or England vs Portugal....many of the referee's decisions can being an argument........like Aaron Lennon / Wayne Rooney case ( Portugal vs England )......and the players...many of them have a right thing to became a actor.....looks to Thierry Henry ( France vs Spain ) and Cristiano Ronaldo ( Portugal vs England )......well....

Answer 8

I couldn't agree more! This world cup sucked big time!

Answer 9

("Francis" I have also reported "Nick_G" for what he was saying about Portugal -- disgusting that someone who is from oppressed Georgia should come to Yahoo and insult other people and their country).

Answer 10

1. Disagree. I found 2002 the worst WC - remembering since '78.
2. Are you concerned in scoring goals? Take a look:
2002 - 5 goals scored in quarters. 2006 6 goals
2006 - 2 goals in semis. 2006 3 goals.
Of course, this number doesn't allow penalalty kicks scored.
And I don't pick the number of goals scored in stage1. '02 Germany-Saudi Arabia 8-0 was a worthless match. When Germany was winning 3-0 everyone could turn off TV. The match was highly unbalanced and Saudis can't react. Waste of time seeing such a match until it ends.
I need to point it out as 2002 WC quarters had 3 former WC champions in (GER-ENG-BRA), and 2006 had 6 (same as 02, plus ITA-ARG-FRA). So '06, even if having more balanced match, give us more goals than last WC.
;-) Are things theirselves improving???
3. As cars competition often change rules, FIFA does in a slower way. The last changes I can remember were done to having more scoring opportunities:
a. Goalkeeper can't touch with end the ball passed form him teammate.
b. To claim an offside foul, the forward must be further the defender. Being at the same line isn't a foul.
Technical changes also occur. The ball is made to go faster when kicked. The criticized 'Roteiro' ball used in UEFA championship was known to acted strangely too, to fake goalkeepers... So, why didn't those changes rise scoring?
Because football is a TACTICAL game. And the basic tactic is to avoid opponent scoring opportunities, not to play as actual Brazil does. Having 2 only defensive midfielders to cover a weak defenders group is a suicidal tactic. Having 2 offensive midfielders and 2 forwards playing together is a great way to score a lot of goal, but against thin opponents only as JAP, CRO, AUS were. When you are facing France they easily control ball possession in midfield, stop your attacks, put your defender in trouble...

Finally, to 'save' football by your means, I can suggest:
1. Having highly unbalanced match, i.e. rising the number of teams coming from Asia and North America. Unfair to me.
2. If a stage1 match is in a draw, extra-time with golden-goal rule. The first team to score earn 2 points instead of 1.
3. Play-off rule with scored goals coefficient. At stage1 final result, pick the 3 second teams with less points (this WC AUS+MEX 4, SWE+FRA 5) and the 3 third teams with more points (KOR 4, POL,PAR,CIV,CZE 3). If there is draw, pick the # GOAL SCORED (swe/fra 3 both, civ 5, cze 4, pol,par2) Now, the 3 third group is done with KOR, CIV, CZE. Between swe/fra the second will be picked 'cause has less goal against (1/2) and now the 3 second group is done with AUS, MEX, FRA. The six teams will have their random match with stage2 rules (must-win match).
With this rule, goals scored are highly deserved.
It's all.