Gman94 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2375 times:
Quoting Derico (reply 0): 1) No disrespect, but since when does world football powerhouse WALES get to set the agenda?
Wales is a member of the International FA Board which is made up of four representatives of FIFA and one representative from the English, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish Football Associations. These are the guys responsible for governing and changing the laws of the football, hence why Wales is a footballing power. It's something to with acknowledging the British Football Associations place in the history of the game, that's a quote taken from the FIFA website and not made up by me.
Derico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4304 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2359 times:
Well, I meant more in terms of it's power within FIFA...
I never really understood why these countries have national squads if they are not sovereign countries (and no matter what people argue they are not otherwise they'd be members in the UN); much less why do the Faroe Islands or Hong Kong have teams, buy anyways.
The main point was about the offside rule. Nothing to say about that?
My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
Aviationfreak From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1166 posts, RR: 40
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2339 times:
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this issue brought up a few times before by several countries? Didn't suggest the US the same years ago to make football popular in the states because of the higher scores it will cause?
I love both Airbus and Boeing as much as I love aviation!
KCmike From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 537 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2336 times:
It looks as if FIFA and football are finally stepping into the modern world. The no offsides is going to set up higher scoring games which is what the fans want. All sports do this, look at baseball and all their juiced ballparks and equiptment. NASCAR is dumping its heroes that have been around forever such as rusty wallace and terry labonte for all their new "young guns". You die hard fans dont like these kind of changes but whatever makes money. Thats all todays world is about remember
Allstarflyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2271 times:
When I played soccer (football) in high school, I was goalie up until my senior year, when I switched to striker. I agree with AviationMaster and Pilotaydin - I appreciate the tactics that are involved with competitive soccer. Doing away with the offsides rule would put a bad taste in the mouths of many fans, myself included. If they're going to give any leeway on this, let it be so that only 1 striker (or other player) can be behind the defense before the ball crosses midfield. But even then, that's an enormous amount of pressure to put on the goalie, as if they don't face enough already. To draw crude comparisons, it would be like shortening the 3-point line in basketball, or saying that a fly ball that bounces over the wall is a home run (which is how it used to be a long time ago). Or saying that a 1st down in American Football can be achieved after 8 yards instead of 10. It's what MLB did when they shortened the pitchers mound after guys like Sandy Koufax kept mowing down the batters. It's all, like Derico, AviationFreak and KCmike mentioned - allowing for more scoring, which will draw more highlights on SportsCenter, which will then allow for more flash in marketing for soccer. It stinks. Don't mess with the game.
BlackandWhite From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 113 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2237 times:
What fans want is not big scores what they want is for their team to win.
Take away offside and you take away the element of controversy , the ability to cast doubts on the match officials parentage, the enjoyment of talking about the match afterwards with your mates in the pub or at work, as most football supporters will agree the next best thing to an actual match is the arguments and discussions after it.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2226 times:
The first thing to remember is that all these proposals don't go straight into all levels of football. It's an ideas seminar more than anything, and what happens is that IF a proposal is adopted a very low level league (park football in effect) will try it out and report back. Then you might have one of the higher level leagues volunteering to try it out for a further period of experimentation, then it'll come back to the International FA Board for appraisal an a decision as to what to do. It may carry on being trialled, it may be passed into general play, or it may be dropped altogether.
To give an example, the idea of penalising dissent by marching the ball forward ten yards came from Rugby Union initially, was trialled in Jersey for a two year period, went back to IFAB, was trialled in the English Premier League for a further two years, and has now gone back to IFAB where the concept is going to be discontinued, partly because the rugby union concept is alien to much of FIFA and partly because football is not a territory based game in the way that rugby is.
So, whatever gets proposed, don't panic. It's just a means of trying out new ideas and seeing if they work.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.