2006 Italian football scandal.: Top teams in both series A and series B were accused of "influencing" and using refs that would favor them trough the tournament. Teams were punished, but still didn't change a thing in the argument of using Technology in soccer.
I think Rym's statement of Soccer = Monopoly is the main problem here. There is luck involved in the sport, and I would say that is true for all sports. But luck is not grater than or equal than skills. A poor decision by the ref can give a team a penalty shot, the most clear goal option available, the team is lucky to catch this break on the last minute of the game. But a player with no skill will miss the shot, a very skillful goalie will stop that shot. A lucky dice roll might land you on the Boardwalk and will give you the best property with the highest rent. Even if you are the most skillful Monopoly player (heh that's a oxymoron) , there is nothing you can do to get people to land on your property.
To be clear, I am not saying that soccer is a terrible sport. I think it's got a ton of potential. I just see some problem areas that prevent me from becoming a fan of the sport.
I'm not a huge fan of soccer, but living with soccer is a side effect of being in Brazil, it's everywhere and sometimes even though I'm not a good player nor like playing very much, I still have to play. The hardcore fans I know are not discouraged by the points you have made, since the rules are traditional and have been that way forever, but enjoy the championship as a whole and sometimes are happy with the way their team played even if they loose. By the way, on the national championship here the teams play 2 games, one in each of the home fields. Being the most popular sport in the world, it's funny how you say it has potential.
Posted By: KilarneyBeing the most popular sport in the world, it's funny how you say it has potential.
Popular =/= good.
Big Brother is popular, doesn't mean it isn't the biggest tumour on the TV Schedule since Eldorado. It just means there's a lot of stupid people watching stupid shit.
He's a broken record. This whole thread he's been saying the same thing, but never "corrects" them on what they don't understand. Sounds like a no true scotsman argument to me.
You're wrong and lost braincells for it. I'm not going to do something more futile than telling them they don't fucking understand the game and that they're stupid. Rym's 'core point' is refuted by the fact that he doesn't understand the game, his points are based on his point of view, which we know is flawed and wrong, making his points flawed and wrong at the core. They also lack any interest in the game, as they've said so themselves, if they did show interest they wouldn't fucking be making half the bullshit points they're making based solely up on their experience with the over-in-a-few-weeks-quick-world-wide-over-the-top-soap-opera-drama World Cup Football. AS I SAID AT FIRST, IT'S A REASON TO PARTY AND DRINK, and on top of that it's basically an economic stimulus package for the host country/countries. So what I'm saying is that what they're blabbering about means nothing since they don't know or understand a single fucking thing about the game and the World Cup AFTER BEING TOLD MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES. SO I SAY THEY'RE FUCKING STUPID BECAUSE THEY'RE NOTHING BUT STUPID.
a very skillful goalie will stop that shot
And lucky. By definition and basic physics a penalty kick CAN NOT be stopped without the goalie making a lucky guess as to where the shot will go.
Popular =/= good.
He did not claim that. Refer to nine posts above yours.
EDIT:
You don't seem to quite grasp the immensity of the fuck I do no give, here.
I feel violated... but you just said you didn't, then what is this feeling? Am I mourning... loss?
One other observation. One of the most dramatic times in sports is when a clock is ticking down to zero. Soccer needs to reconfigure the implementation of injury time.
The clock still counts down to zero, the uncertainty of when exactly the game ends allows for the revelation of "there is still time, we can still do it", making it all the more dramatic imho.
Actually, Rym's point is quite valid, regardless of his greater understanding of soccer/football (or lack thereof). He has broken down an aspect (one aspect mind you) to its basic principals and applied rudimentary game theory to it. Think of it like a philosophical argument. He broke down one aspect to its "p's and q's." Whether this point carries much weight is in the eye of the beholder, as the possibility of luck in a game is neither good nor bad in-and-of-itself, but rather a question of taste. The presence of luck (to such a high degree) may call into question the efficacy of the World Cup to accurately determine the best team, but that does not hinder the game of soccer/football overall (unless it is a systemic issue), and it may not hamper many people's enjoyment of the World Cup for its entertainment value.
Actually, Rym's point is quite valid, regardless of his greater understanding of soccer/football (or lack thereof). He has broken down an aspect (one aspect mind you) to its basic principals and applied rudimentary game theory to it.
It's inapplicable yet he stubbornly keeps applying it, making him wrong.
Also, you appear to not understand the game either, so I'll say you're being stupid too.
I'm still interested to see the actual application of Game theory to soccer, if possible. I have a pretty good idea of it now, but I'd like to see how well my analysis lines up with someone who knows more than I do before I unleash my stupid upon the world.
And lucky. By definition and basic physics a penalty kick CAN NOT be stopped without the goalie making a lucky guess as to where the shot will go.
So you are saying that I could have the worst goalie in the world, and it doesn't mater as long as he is lucky, or the shooter is unlucky?
Iker Casillas must be the most lucky SOB in the world. Even when he failed to stop the goal he always went the right way. What is the difference between luck, and an informed prediction?
Also, you appear to not understand the game either, so I'll say you're being stupid too.
1) I was on a soccer team for four years. 2) What your fail to grasp is that he is specifically discussing one aspect of the set up of the World Cup, not the game of soccer in general.
So you are saying that I could have the worst goalie in the world, and it doesn't mater as long as he is lucky, or the shooter is unlucky?
From the point of view of the goalie, the player fumbling the shot is luck. You cannot rely on that. Yes, you can try and memorize which corner a player chooses most often, or try to read his body language, but even that means little because it's just hoping for statistics to be in your favour. As you said yourself, even with him jumping to the right corner, he still missed because basic physics says so. The only non-scoring penalty shots are bad shots, period.
1) I was on a soccer team for four years.
So? That doesn't necessarily mean you understand the game.
2) What your fail to grasp is that he is specifically discussing one aspect of the set up of the World Cup, not the game of soccer in general.
Jesus fucking Christ, you're the one rolling a critical failure on your grasp check, not I, missus. I've said this numerous times already, he is NOT discussing ANYTHING actually related to football because he has a misconception of the game and doesn't understand it. He's just blabbering and flailing his head against a keyboard to produce words. Hence I also said that you appear to not understand the game either because you think he actually is talking about football.
Jesus fucking Christ, you're the one rolling a critical failure on your grasp check, not I, missus. I've said this numerous times already, he is NOT discussing ANYTHING actually related to football because he has a misconception of the game and doesn't understand it. He's just blabbering and flailing his head against a keyboard to produce words. Hence I also said that you appear to not understand the game either because you think he actually is talking about football.
That sounds similar to someone else's posts, now doesn't it... Oh yeah, yours!
Yeah, I realize you've already explained why you keep it at "ScRym is stupid, and they have stupid thoughts," but that doesn't mean you're right. In fact, having said it "numerous times" doesn't make what you say any more true.
You say a lot about them not understanding what's going on in football, but you've yet to back it up. You just keep repeating yourself over and over and over again. I'm surprised a forum like this gets posts like yours. Maybe you should try out Meez, their forum for people aged 13-15 seems like a good place for you. Or maybe a place like The Flat Earth Society? I hear they love it when you just repeat yourself over and over with no evidence.
They are making valid points which, besides your constant babble of "lululul, ur stoopid," haven't really been disputed. Maybe you should try to?
You say a lot about them not understanding what's going on in football, but you've yet to back it up.
Then maybe you should've read the thread, because the idiots have been told. However, they kept crying and being utter idiots, so I then drop the most futile attempts and just tell them they're wrong and are stupid.
They are making valid points which, besides your constant babble of "lululul, ur stoopid," haven't really been disputed. Maybe you should try to?
Been there, done that half a dozen pages ago, keep up or shut up idiot. Applying inapplicable points is stupid and wrong. You wonder why I keep repeating myself? BECAUSE TELLING THEM THEY'RE BEING STUPID IS THE LAST AND LEAST FUTILE THING TO REPEAT. YOU LOT SHOULD TRY AND SHARE YOUR BRAINCELLS, MAYBE THAT WILL WORK, IF NOT THEN AT LEAST YOU'RE TRYING.
Then maybe you should've read the thread, because the idiots have been told. However, they kept crying and being utter idiots, so I then drop the most futile attempts and just tell them they're wrong and are stupid.
Been there, done that half a dozen pages ago, keep up or shut up idiot. Applying inapplicable points is stupid and wrong. You wonder why I keep repeating myself? BECAUSE TELLING THEM THEY'RE BEING STUPID IS THE LAST AND LEAST FUTILE THING TO REPEAT. YOU LOT SHOULD TRY AND SHARE YOUR BRAINCELLS, MAYBE THAT WILL WORK, IF NOT THEN AT LEAST YOU'RE TRYING.
I've read all 10 pages. If you wouldn't mind, please quote some of your wisdom that I've missed.
I've read all 10 pages. If you wouldn't mind, please quote some of your wisdom that I've missed.
Oh, Maybe you can show me the actual application of game theory that supposedly backs up their arguments. You're backing their points, so I figure you must know. Lay on, Macduff.
I've read all 10 pages. If you wouldn't mind, please quote some of your wisdom that I've missed.
Oh, Maybe you can show me the actual application of game theory that supposedly backs up their arguments. You're backing their points, so I figure you must know. Lay on, Macduff.
My complaint/point is more that Univers is calling everyone who doesn't agree with him stupid, when he hasn't explained why at all. It's either "you don't know football!" or "you're stupid, I would be wasting energy!" I just wanted to see more explanation. Neither of them have resorted to personal attacks that I can recall. Team ScRym is explaining, Team "You're Stupid" isn't.
My complaint/point is more that Univers is calling everyone who doesn't agree with him stupid, when he hasn't explained why at all. It's either "you don't know football!" or "you're stupid, I would be wasting energy!" I just wanted to see more explanation. Neither of them have resorted to personal attacks that I can recall. Team ScRym is explaining, Team "You're Stupid" isn't.
Of course he is - that's pretty much what you expect out of Nineless. He's little patience for anything he perceives as foolish or stupid.
I'd love to see the explanation too, either explanation - then, I get to learn things too - but having better form in an argument doesn't make them right, just somewhat more polite. Though, on top of that, the explanation doesn't matter so much, if the point was bad to begin with, to to put it another way, You can explain gibberish, but it's still gibberish. (Not to comment on the content of their arguments, but simply as an example - And not to try and slip a sneaky insult in, saying that, if I was going to insult them, I'd insult them openly. Again.)
Of course he is - that's pretty much what you expect out of Nineless. He's little patience for anything he perceives as foolish or stupid.
Yeah, but instead of trying to explain his point of view that results in his opinion of the other person being stupid, he just keeps saying "you're stupid" and "you don't understand" over and over. If someone is saying something that is uneducated, they should be educated as to why their opinion is unenlightened, not just told that they're stupid and left to figure it out on their own.
I've already explained it MULTIPLE times. They know SHIT about the game and are basing their blabbering on the World Cup. THE WORLD CUP. Team Scrym is still crying, I have stopped explaining BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED SHIT SEVERAL TIMES AND THEY KEPT SWINGING AND SCREAMING "LOOK AT MY PENIS." If they were actually bringing up arguments that required a new fucking explanation, then maybe I would've considered explaining it, three pages ago. You haven't even read the fucking thread you pisser, so fuck off.
and left to figure it out on their own.
THAT WAS THEIR CHOICE, THEY SAID THEY HAVE NO INTEREST IN IT ERGO REPEATING EXPLANATIONS IS FUTILE. THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE YOU IDIOTS.
Yeah, but instead of trying to explain his point of view that results in his opinion of the other person being stupid, he just keeps saying "you're stupid" and "you don't understand" over and over.
I don't think you're quite grasping exactly how little patience I'm speaking of, here.
Comments
Top teams in both series A and series B were accused of "influencing" and using refs that would favor them trough the tournament. Teams were punished, but still didn't change a thing in the argument of using Technology in soccer.
I think Rym's statement of Soccer = Monopoly is the main problem here. There is luck involved in the sport, and I would say that is true for all sports. But luck is not grater than or equal than skills. A poor decision by the ref can give a team a penalty shot, the most clear goal option available, the team is lucky to catch this break on the last minute of the game. But a player with no skill will miss the shot, a very skillful goalie will stop that shot. A lucky dice roll might land you on the Boardwalk and will give you the best property with the highest rent. Even if you are the most skillful Monopoly player (heh that's a oxymoron) , there is nothing you can do to get people to land on your property.
Being the most popular sport in the world, it's funny how you say it has potential.
Big Brother is popular, doesn't mean it isn't the biggest tumour on the TV Schedule since Eldorado. It just means there's a lot of stupid people watching stupid shit.
EDIT:I feel violated... but you just said you didn't, then what is this feeling? Am I mourning... loss? The clock still counts down to zero, the uncertainty of when exactly the game ends allows for the revelation of "there is still time, we can still do it", making it all the more dramatic imho.
Think of it like a philosophical argument. He broke down one aspect to its "p's and q's." Whether this point carries much weight is in the eye of the beholder, as the possibility of luck in a game is neither good nor bad in-and-of-itself, but rather a question of taste. The presence of luck (to such a high degree) may call into question the efficacy of the World Cup to accurately determine the best team, but that does not hinder the game of soccer/football overall (unless it is a systemic issue), and it may not hamper many people's enjoyment of the World Cup for its entertainment value.
Also, you appear to not understand the game either, so I'll say you're being stupid too.
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
You're stupid!
Whoops! Out of memory! Shutting down...
univers@frcf:~$
Iker Casillas must be the most lucky SOB in the world. Even when he failed to stop the goal he always went the right way. What is the difference between luck, and an informed prediction?
2) What your fail to grasp is that he is specifically discussing one aspect of the set up of the World Cup, not the game of soccer in general.
Oh yeah, yours!
Yeah, I realize you've already explained why you keep it at "ScRym is stupid, and they have stupid thoughts," but that doesn't mean you're right. In fact, having said it "numerous times" doesn't make what you say any more true.
You say a lot about them not understanding what's going on in football, but you've yet to back it up. You just keep repeating yourself over and over and over again. I'm surprised a forum like this gets posts like yours. Maybe you should try out Meez, their forum for people aged 13-15 seems like a good place for you. Or maybe a place like The Flat Earth Society? I hear they love it when you just repeat yourself over and over with no evidence.
They are making valid points which, besides your constant babble of "lululul, ur stoopid," haven't really been disputed. Maybe you should try to?
I'd love to see the explanation too, either explanation - then, I get to learn things too - but having better form in an argument doesn't make them right, just somewhat more polite. Though, on top of that, the explanation doesn't matter so much, if the point was bad to begin with, to to put it another way, You can explain gibberish, but it's still gibberish. (Not to comment on the content of their arguments, but simply as an example - And not to try and slip a sneaky insult in, saying that, if I was going to insult them, I'd insult them openly. Again.)