I loved the look on the ref’s face as he showed the card-- it was sort of like “sorry dude, I’ve got to do this.”
1 Like
Gutted by US loss. Glad Messi advanced.
My soccer-crazed Croatian relatives are happy today–Croatia beat Japan on penalty kicks.
6 Likes
SIL is probably very happy, too! 
1 Like
I was hoping some Asian teams would win, but how can you root against Brazil? They are just so good. This game is a clinic.
2 Likes
Brazil brought their A game today.
Japan/Croatia was an instant classic.
5 Likes
Uh-oh!! 
Hate PKs as tiebreaker. PKs have no relation to which is the better team. Play SD OT after the first regular OT with 10 a side then remove a player every 10-15 minutes until you are down to 7 players a side.
1 Like
Just one person’s opinion, but from a physical POV, that’s a lot of field to cover as the players are pulled out of the match.
They monitor the health of these players very closely and I could easily see an increase in overuse injuries to players, which jeopardizes the quality level of future matches. I’d assume rosters would have to increase as well in your scenario.
I’m alright with PK’s. They’re exciting to watch.
2 Likes
Why I would make it sudden death. There is likely a a quick score when teams are down to 9 or fewer players, but they are playing soccer. Could relax substitution rules. PKs have nothing to do with the game. It’s like deciding a tied basketball game based on a game of HORSE.
I am also not talking regular league games or round robins, where ties are accepted, but knockout rounds in championship games especially the World Cup.
Except the better team doesn’t always win though the run of play. And if they are tied, the teams aren’t wildly different in terms of skill/excellence. So I can understand the logic behind using PKs.
2 Likes
Maybe, but still that’s a lot of field to cover with potentially a team’s bench playing a much bigger role. I/we want to watch the best players play, not the last man on the bench.
And some of the players left on the field would be clearly exhausted or near exhaustion. I remember some player collapsing in a match within the past 1-2 years that I was watching.
As for HORSE in basketball, I like that a lot. Have you seen Steph Curry in warmups before? 
PKs are a way to end a game with an exercise in skill and strategy, while preserving the health of the players. They’ve already played 120+ minutes.
4 Likes
I disagree that PKs have no relation to which team is better. Let’s face it … Croatia was just better at PKs. Ds2, who played and ref’ed soccer, had lots of say on the matter right after the match. After we hung up, the announcers on the broadcast said some of the exact same things. There is skill involved in PKs, too.
2 Likes
More like somewhat less than 90 minutes of playing time (since extra time is usually somewhat less than time when the ball is out of play while the clock is running), but that is still more than basketball (48 minutes) or hockey (60 minutes), and the latter sports have unlimited substitutions so that teams can more easily avoid overuse of any players.
1 Like
They play a full 90 minutes. Then another 5-10 minutes of added time at the ends of the halves. (so 95-100). Then two 15-minute extra-time periods. So if a player plays the entire game, and extra time, it’s more like 125-130 total minutes playing.
Edit – I see what you did. Well, they’re on the field for 125-130, at least milling around for those 10 minutes (ish) of downtime. hehe
I think they run something like 5-10 miles per game, depending on position, tactics/strategy, and how long they are on the field.
Just adding my 2 cents. PKs are a brutal way to end the game but I don’t see a better way. As others have noted, players are physically and emotionally worn out by the end of 120 minutes. Adding more playing time with fewer players would be terrible. I suspect it would lots of boot and chase rather than beautiful soccer.
2 Likes
Some of the most thrilling soccer we see is when teams are both down a man or two. Creates spaces which allows for more creative passes. Doubt it would devolve into boot and chase. If we are playing for who is the best team in the world, what is wrong by deciding the game on fitness and depth of bench? Maybe allow free substitutions (including players previously substituted for) during the SDOT so that we allow players to catch their breath and rehydrate to maintain a high level of play.
1 Like
I disagree with this premise. The most thrilling and exciting soccer, to me at least, is when the players operate in tight spaces, not when there’s huge swaths of grass unoccupied by players.
I can tell you what would happen. I’ve been there. 
You play the long ball into the box and have some players hanging out, onsides of course, in the last 1/3 of the field waiting to “cherry pick” a goal. PK’s are better.
I’m all in for a game of “Survivor World Cup”! 
But seriously, a) they’re not trained endurance athletes and b) the TV audience, advertisers, sponsors and fans aren’t paying or tuning into the match to watch the last players on the bench. We want to see the stars play.
And c), I’m assuming nearly every player, or every player, at the WC is a professional with a career, contracts, sponsorships, etc. They don’t want to screw that up with an injury.
4 Likes
I’m fine with PKs, but keepers should not be required to stay on their line.
2 Likes