My two favorites going at it.. One is the "oh my wouldn't it be cool if they pulled off the upset" and the other is "they should totally have this and send a message that they are a contender like France and Brasil did." Anything but a blowout for England is a win for the US soccer program..Tonight is I think the best test of whether England are credible contenders. I'd expect them to win as squad depth is vastly different but the manner of the result will be informative. And of course if US can get at least a draw or win things start to look very positive on their side.
Yeah... unless Wales beats England, which becomes a bit more possible if England beats us and is through already.Scratch that US maybe don't need a point tonight if they can beat Iran.
I dont think England will let Wales win.Yeah... unless Wales beats England, which becomes a bit more possible if England beats us and is through already.
Then if Wales wins and the US wins it comes to tiebreakers.
Maybe not "let" then win. But there could certainly be different subs, resting players on yellow cards, etc. if they don't have much incentive to win.I dont think England will let Wales win.
They may not go all-out on that game but they would still outclass Wales by a lot
I agree but even then I don't think Wales has much chance of winningMaybe not "let" then win. But there could certainly be different subs, resting players on yellow cards, etc. if they don't have much incentive to win.
So with two very big upsets already, who here is a conspiracy theorist???
I kind of go back and forth on whether it's good or not. I'd be OK if they made it more accurate like they're trying, but also put some limits or adjustments on it to generally keep it under 10 mins. or something.The amount of extra time in each game is an affront to the soccer gods.
I know it is an affront to all football/soccer fans and probably a very American idea, but how about a clock that stops and starts so there is no nebulous decision on stoppage time?I kind of go back and forth on whether it's good or not. I'd be OK if they made it more accurate like they're trying, but also put some limits or adjustments on it to generally keep it under 10 mins. or something.
So with two very big upsets already, who here is a conspiracy theorist???
Not quite Rugby league and Union both stop the clock during the game rather than add on time and RL even has a strict 80min hooter, Union plays out the last possession which can mean a lot of time overrun in practice with the clock red.I know it is an affront to all football/soccer fans and probably a very American idea, but how about a clock that stops and starts so there is no nebulous decision on stoppage time?
Well the NFL (all American football really) has a weird mix of stopping and not stopping the clock rules. Sometimes it does so between plays and sometimes not, and that becomes part of the strategy.You wouldn't time an NFL game just on the time between snaps and downs for instance.
Maybe stop the clock afyer goals and for subs. The sub thing is stupid with the time wasting.more difficult in football because of the constant nature of the game
Sub on the fly like in hockey. That would be fun.Maybe stop the clock afyer goals and for subs. The sub thing is stupid with the time wasting.
Well you only get 3 player subs, so it wouldn't save much time.Sub on the fly like in hockey. That would be fun.
I'd guess that's really the rationale behind it... to either stop encouraging or make up for time wasting.It compensates for the excessive flopping and time wasting strategy a team uses
Five this year, no?Well you only get 3 player subs, so it wouldn't save much time.