World Cup General Comments

[Canuck Oranje]

My point was more about the preliminary group stage. I would agree that the later rounds got better in 1982 and 1990 was forgetable unless you are German and especially forgetable if you are Dutch. I really don't think the fact that the tournament includes 32 or 24 teams makes a whole lot of difference at the group stage if the second phase is a single knock out group of 16 as was the case from 1986. Personally, I think the serious part of the tournament begins with the group of 16 and this tournament will be judged by what happens from that point on.

[Canuck Oranje]

Out of curiosity, I did a quick comparison among all the six World Cup Tournaments that had a single elimination group of 16 as their second phase. From 1986 to 1994, the tournament began with 24 teams and 1998 to 2006, there were 32 teams. I compared the overall average goals per game and the number of times three or more goals were scored in a game from the quarter finals on (excluding the third place game). Generally, it shows there is little difference between a 24 team tournament or a 32 team tournament on those two measures.

Year = 1986 QF to Final - times three goals/game or more = 2 Tournament Av. goals / game = 2.5
= 1990 = 1 = 2.2
= 1994 = 5 = 2.7
= 1998 = 5 = 2.7
= 2002 = 1 = 2.5
= 2006 = 1 = 2.3

[Free kick]

Worth also bearing in mind that in this year's WC, the draw pitted many of the top heralded sides in each group against one another in teh very first games. Unlike teh past. Hence being fully aware of their opponents, teh common sence approach was to make sure you dont lose out of the gate. a couple of examples:

Fra-Uru
Eng-USA
Arg-Nig
Ita-Par ???


In each of the above, its expected that each of these sides will have viewed their opponent as the most serious challenger in their group and that a draw would have more than suited their needs given that ther are easier opponents where you can "go for it" inth rest of the group. You clearly saw this with England after the americans drew even. A loss would have been devasting and forced them to open things up against Slovenia, so when the US tied things up, they played to make sure they didn't lose. same thing happened with Argentina. They could have really forced matters agaist Nigeria (they have the playesr to do it) but why bother and risk losing .

The only one of the favourities who got, who they could view as an also ran, was Germany. And look what happened.

[Unnamed Trialist]

I really was excited before the tournament, but have been dozing since it started. Some poor play, and no discoveries yet, no big surprises in terms of players. Except maybe Oezil, and England's Johnson, who I really did not know well either.

I was only really gripped by US-England because of the upset in the making. Missed 1st half of Italy-Paraguay, but I did not consider Paraguay such an underdog. I am not really enjoying it, mostly because the defensive play is excessive and there is little offensive talent or system.

And I hate those vuvuzelas, because they wipe out any crowd singing or chants, it makes every game have the same atmosphere and quashes the fans audio contribution.

[Free kick]

And I hate those vuvuzelas, because they wipe out any crowd singing or chants, it makes every game have the same atmosphere and quashes the fans audio contribution.

Yup. That has to be the number one story of this world cup. Yet, the protests over the plastic horns came up during the Confederations cup but Danny Jordan (organizing committee) and FIFA vowed to do nothing about it. Now, isn't that what the confederations cup is primarily for? (ie, a trial run for the actual WC). What I found annoying about his argument and ultimate decision was that it was based cultural factors. But these are plastic horns for christ sakes!!!! You used to be able buy them anywhere in Canada for something like fifty cents to a a couple of bucks. Its got to the point where, when they show people in the crowd, you'd see people in visiting colours blowing on those things.

I have no objection to anything that produces a rythm, A damn garbage can lid and a stick would at least product some rytym but these F****** thinks things only produce a buzzing sound.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

I'm already so tired of the slow motion replay. As much as I hate having no replay during Impact games on the Internet, this is overkill. Especially the fouls.

and what is with all the slow motion replays of facial expressions? I find that really weird. They show Capello's mouth wide open for a good 4 seconds.... why?

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

...I do think that 32 teams is a bit of problem but 24 teams creates a even worst scenario beacsue end up with that wild card (3rd place entry). That aspect sucks because: how do you determine the best 3rd place finisher? You can't do it by points IMO because the points you get is a reflection of the group you are in.

That's definitely the main drawback of having 24. Maybe the first round could be eight groups of three, then there could be a second phase with four groups of four, quarters, semis and a final?

[nolando]

Agree with much that has been said including the odd video replays, the generally lacklustre football on display and the dreaded vulvapaloozas (sp?).

I wouldn't mind if they were only used during the matches played by the home nation, but to lose out on some of the most treasured sounds of the game at their expense is a shame, like looking at empty seats in the stands in a World Cup finals match.

[Unnamed Trialist]

Already more than half a million downloaded. On the iPhone it is fine, because it is personalized. Don't like it in the stadium, but in the future we'll look back nostalgically on this month with that buzzing in our ears. Or not.

http://itunes.apple.com/en/app/vuvuz...349168254?mt=8

Talking about the Confed Cup last year as a dry run: Xabi Alonso came out publicly saying they should be banned in late June 2009, and took a lot of flack for the comments. The guy played in Anfield mind you, so maybe Fifa thinks he has a distorted idea of what a football crowd ought to be.

[Vic]

South African soccer fans who prefer their matches to be vuvuzela-free can now take three easy steps to sonic freedom.

A user on social networking site Twitter has posted simple instructions for resetting your television's sound equaliser - a move that will drown out the drone of vuvuzelas without muting other sounds.

The instructions are:

Enter the sound settings for your TV and find the equaliser.

Drop the 300Hz channel (which Samsung TVs have, second from left), and raise the adjacent levels.

Save as a custom set-up (if you can).

Eric Smit, the assistant manager at Samsung Store in Canal Walk, did a spot test and found that it worked on both low-end and high-end TVs.

"I can relate to the people who are saying the equaliser can lower the sound of the vuvuzela on your TV because vuvuzelas are blown at a specific frequency. On the TV you can set the frequencies at high, mid and low level," he said.

Meanwhile, the BBC has said it is considering offering "vuvuzela-free" coverage via its red button after hundreds of complaints.

Fans say the droning sound of the plastic horns, which has been likened to the buzzing of millions of angry bees, is drowning out coverage and leaving them with aching eardrums.

Now the BBC is looking into providing "clean" coverage, which would strip out most crowd noise.

A BBC spokesman told Britain's Daily Mail on Monday night: "We have already taken steps to minimise the noise and are continuing to monitor the situation. If the vuvuzela continues to have an impact on audience enjoyment, we will look at what other options we can take."