Tuesday, February 05, 2013 :::
The final round of Word Cup qualifying for North America starts tomorrow. Six teams will play a double round-robin, scoring three points for a win, one for a draw, and zero for a loss; the top three will go to the big event in Brazil and the fourth will have a winnable play-in match, probably against New Zealand, for another spot.
The following table contains the American team's schedule along with a "par score" that I made up to estimate whether the American team is on track. In the last couple of cycles, 17.5 points has been enough to qualify comfortably but not too comfortably, so I figure if we're on track to collect 17.5 points, we're in good shape, and if we aren't, we're at risk of not making it to Brazil. That obviously isn't a guarantee, but it looked like a reasonable conservative estimate to me. In the matches in the last qualifying hexagonal tournament, the home team averaged 1.5 points more than the visiting team, so I expect 1.5 points more out of each home game than out of the road game against the same team. Finally, some of our opponents are stronger than others, so I picked some numbers that seemed reasonable and add up to five - if our team gets a total of five points from its road matches and 12.5 from its home matches, a trip to Brazil is probable.
| When | Who | Where | Game Par | Cumulative Par |
|---|
| 2/6 | Honduras | Away | 1 | 1 |
| 3/22 | Costa Rica | Home | 2.5 | 3.5 |
| 3/26 | Mexico | Away | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 6/7 | Jamaica | Away | 1.25 | 5.25 |
| 6/11 | Panama | Home | 2.75 | 8 |
| 6/18 | Honduras | Home | 2.5 | 10.5 |
| 9/6 | Costa Rica | Away | 1 | 11.5 |
| 9/10 | Mexico | Home | 2 | 13.5 |
| 10/11 | Jamaica | Home | 2.75 | 16.25 |
| 10/15 | Panama | Away | 1.25 | 17.5 |
UPDATE: The advantage of using a "par score" over just following the standings is that the standings don't reflect how difficult a team's schedule has been vs. how difficult it will be. But I believe that the teams play a complete round robin followed by another complete round robin - i.e., we play each other team exactly once before Flag Day and exactly once after Flag Day. So after the matches of June 11, a much better heuristic would be to look at the standings after adding 1.5 points per remaining home game (some teams will have three remaining and others will have two). As it happens, the American team's schedule is slightly tilted toward playing tougher games earlier, so if we stay in the top three of the standings, we're probably in good shape. Labels: soccer, sports
::: posted by Steven at 6:40 PM
(0) comments
Thursday, December 02, 2010 :::
Those of you who don't find this interesting will probably consider it justification of your attitude toward soccer: last weekend, for the first time since the English Premier League was founded 19-or-so years ago, all 20 teams scored a goal.
In the game between Tottenham Hotspur and Liverpool, the first two goals were scored by the same Liverpool player, but one was for each team.Labels: soccer
::: posted by Steven at 11:11 PM
(0) comments
Tuesday, July 06, 2010 :::
A little soccer, starting with something that might amuse non-soccer people: in the game between Paraguay and Spain on Saturday, Paraguay got a penalty kick (referred to as a "P.K." in the US and a "pen" in, I think, the rest of the English-speaking world). The Spanish player who committed the foul was named "Piqué" — pronounced "P.K."
Today's semifinal between the Dutch and the Uruguayans was well-played and, perhaps more surprisingly, well-officiated. Since the Dutch won, they will play either Spain or Germany for the cup. There seems to be a consensus that the Dutch have been the best team in the world over the last half-century not to win a Cup, that the Spanish have been the best team in the world over the last few years (with the possible exception of Brazil), and the Germans have been the best over the past month.
Much has been made of the way Uruguay reached that game. In case you missed it, Ghana nearly scored in the last minute of extra time, the draw being preserved by one of the better Uruguayan field players blocking a goal with his hands. As a result, the defender was kicked out of the game (without replacement), suspended for the next game (i.e., today's), and Ghana got a penalty kick; before last Saturday, over the last five World Cups, 84% of penalty kicks taken not as a tiebreaker had gone in, but this one didn't (nor did the Paraguayan kick resulting from Piqué's foul, nor did a Spanish kick a minute later).
Uruguay has been the target of some contempt for deliberately taking a foul; while I wouldn't consider it a particular point of pride, I don't think it's especially dirty, either. Colby Cosh notes that deliberate fouls are common in other sports when a player decides that the penalty is worth taking, which doesn't necessarily mean spectators have to celebrate them. In particular, a baseball pitcher might throw at a batter's head in retribution for some earlier perceived slight, accepting that this will put a runner on base; perhaps the penalty for a deliberate hit-by-pitch should be steeper, but I think the culture surrounding the game should provide its own reinforcement for the message that this is not accepted (indeed, pitchers do give intentional walks to players who are so good at hitting home runs that the pitchers would rather give up a base than risk a bigger hit; they don't seem to intentionally throw the ball at a batter unless there is some perceived slight, even though injuring an opposing star slugger at the beginning of a series might be worth giving up a base).
In this case, a soccer player accepted a red card and a penalty kick to prevent a goal. I don't find that terribly admirable, but I don't find it terribly objectionable, either - certainly not as objectionable as doing something that is considered a foul because it causes injury, and clearly less objectionable than committing a foul based on the possibility of getting away with it. I don't think this is a situation in which the unofficial rules of the game need to be notably stricter than the official rules. And the official rules in this case are almost always enough to deter a deliberate hand-ball in the box. Even late in the game, when ejection isn't a strong penalty, suspension from the next match is likely to be enough to make up the difference between a goal and a penalty kick unless the existence of the next match depends on preventing the goal.
So, as Cosh pointed out, this isn't the most egregious example in sport of a penalty being inadequate compared to its foul. And it certainly isn't the biggest problem in soccer. It's just a quirk of the circumstances, and not much of one, at that.Labels: soccer
::: posted by Steven at 5:23 PM
(0) comments
Wednesday, June 30, 2010 :::
I have a suggestion for FIFA: Instead of using the trained referees they have, they should flip a coin before the game to pick the manager of one of the teams, put a blindfold on him, and have him officiate the game.
I'm not saying this would result in good officiating, just better officiating than the status quo.Labels: soccer
::: posted by Steven at 12:03 AM
(0) comments
Friday, December 04, 2009 :::
The United States will play England, Slovenia, and Algeria in the World Cup in South Africa next June. The matches are June 12, June 18, and June 23, respectively.Labels: soccer
::: posted by dWj at 1:40 PM
(0) comments
Sunday, October 11, 2009 :::
The United States Men's National Soccer Team will play in the World Cup Finals in South Africa next June. Mexico locked up a spot tonight, too.
Either Costa Rica or Honduras will lock up a spot next Wednesday; the other will have to play a South American team for a spot. Costa Rica will play at the United States and Honduras will play at El Salvador. If Costa Rica wins, they get the bid; otherwise, Honduras can get the bid with a win; if neither team wins, Costa Rica gets the bid. It might sound like Costa Rica has the inside edge, but they have the substantially harder game.Labels: soccer
::: posted by Steven at 12:16 AM
(0) comments
|
