The Official 2022 FIFA World Cup Thread

[TripleThreat]

YOUNG AMERICANS
The USMNT was by far the youngest team to qualify for the 2022 FIFA World Cup, garnering valuable experience going through the rigors of World Cup qualifying. Through 14 qualifiers, the USA Starting XI came in at an average of 23.82, almost two years younger than the next closest team, Ghana at 25.67. Together, the other 31 participating teams averaged a Starting XI age of 27.5 through qualifying, nearly four full years older than the U.S. Sources say this is one of the youngest, but most talented teams the U.S. has ever fielded. While they may not win the world cup this year, they may garner the experience needed to make a serious run on home soil in the year 2026 when the World Cup comes back to North America.

2022 USA World Cup Roster

FORWARDS
Jesús Ferreira (FC Dallas)
Jordan Morris (Seattle Sounders)
Christian Pulisic (Chelsea)
Gio Reyna (Borussia Dortmund)
Josh Sargent (Norwich City)
Timothy Weah (Lille)
Haji Wright (Antalyaspor)

MIDFIELDERS
Brenden Aaronson (Leeds United)
Kellyn Acosta (LAFC)
Tyler Adams (Leeds United)
Luca de la Torre (Celta Vigo)
Weston McKennie (Juventus)
Yunus Musah (Valencia)
Cristian Roldan (Seattle Sounders)

DEFENDERS
Cameron Carter-Vickers (Celtic)
Sergiño Dest (AC Milan)
Aaron Long (New York Red Bulls)
Shaq Moore (Nashville SC)
Tim Ream (Fulham)
Antonee Robinson (Fulham)
Joe Scally (Borussia Monchengladbach)
DeAndre Yedlin (Inter Miami)
Walker Zimmerman (Nashville SC)

GOALKEEPERS
Ethan Horvath (Luton Town)
Sean Johnson (NYCFC)
Matt Turner (Arsenal)

[penguinz]

The call on the field was it was out of play and a goal kick. VAR ping the ref and says hold on it might have still been in play. They review it and relay their decision. Ref can take their word or can go review himself on the screen. In the end it is still the refs decision.

[carlos3652]

Originally Posted by penguinz

The call on the field was it was out of play and a goal kick. VAR ping the ref and says hold on it might have still been in play. They review it and relay their decision. Ref can take their word or can go review himself on the screen. In the end it is still the refs decision.

There is goal line technology: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goal-line_technology

This tells the referee if the ball is in or out. No referee goes against the assistance of VAR on these calls. VAR buzzes them and tells the ref if it’s a goal or not.

Human element is removed on these calls.

In football - if they implemented this, the ball would tell you if it crossed the line or not - and you would not need refs to look at 30 different camera angles to determine if it crossed or not.

The difference would be that they would need to be able to tell the system when the knee was down. So it’s a little difference when there is no “down by contact” component in soccer - if it’s in, it’s in, if it’s not, it’s not

[carlos3652]

On offsides calls there is still a human element because there is a dude that is using technology and creating the lines - the VAR ref is the ultimate decider of offsides - they only call the on the field ref on subjective offsides call (if the offside person participated in the play or not)

So VAR ref tells ref of offsides. BUT human errors can occur - as var ref could make a mistake

[njchiefs]

Why do they always show fans from KC celebrating during the World Cup. Not from around here, just curious.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by TripleThreat

Exactly my point. The call on the field seemed to be no goal, yet they reviewed the footage and said it was “inconclusive” and stated they went with the call on the field. If they went with the call on the field it shouldn’t have been a goal.

What is your evidence about the original call on the field? Do you have any photos, video or statement from FIFA? Play by play announcers are not authority for what people are doing on the field. Play by play announcers get shit wrong all of the time.

I did rewatch the broadcast on tubi and MarK Clattenberg the referee consult on the broadcast guesses that the goal would be "chalked off" when he see the first angle as if it were called a goal in the first place. And when he speaks at the 53:20 mark on the game clock after the goal ruling is final, he says that the original call on the field of a goal scored stands.

If you watch the video when the ball crosses the line at the 49:49 mark on the game clock, the main referee and the assistant referee do not make any call while they are shown on the video feed. They look at each other and then the video feed shows the Japan player celebrating then stopping the celebration.

You should have some proof of the referee and the main referee signaling something and I also say that if they did signal something, they would say into their microphones with each other and the VAR that they did not see the play well enough to make a call on the position of the ball relative to the end line that should be given any deference.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by TripleThreat

Ok so first off I agree with the call that they gave them the goal. That being said, your post makes no sense. Go back and rewatch the actual live game, the announcer literally says the AR is lifting their flag up, then down, up, then down. The entire Japan squad stops celebrating within 5 seconds of scoring. Our analysts also have also questioned this call. The bottom line is there HAS to be a call on the field prior to using VAR but nobody knows what that call was. Did they say it was a goal? Did they say it was out of bounds? What was the call on the field prior to going to VAR, that’s the question.

I really just brought this up for conversation but if you’re gonna act like a weird entitled bitch about it I probably won’t reply again. It’s definitely a call that will be talked about for a while and it’s clear as day you haven’t watched the live replay of the game and how the ref and squads acted post goal.

Could you let me know what I said in the post that caused you to flip your lid and say it reflected "weird entitled bitch"?

The above is what you wrote in quoting my post and I honestly do not see anything in my post that you quoted that would warrant the name calling or you taking it personal.

[carlos3652]

Originally Posted by jettio

What is your evidence about the original call on the field? Do you have any photos, video or statement from FIFA?

You should have some proof of the referee and the main referee signaling something and I also say that if they did signal something, they would say into their microphones with each other and the VAR that they did not see the play well enough to make a call on the position of the ball relative to the end line that should be given any deference.

I provided a link from yahoo

Here is another from espn: https://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-wor...r?platform=amp

VAR overturn: Ball in play for Tanaka goal

What happened: Japan thought they had scored a second goal in the 51st minute when Ao Tanaka scored as Kaoru Mitoma cut the ball back from the goal-line, but the referee disallowed the goal for the ball being out of play.

VAR decision: Goal, ball in play.

[carlos3652]

Here’s another link with more photos / angles from FIFA

https://www.football.london/internat...y-25657784.amp

Moments later, Japan put the ball in the net for the second time but the goal was initially ruled out as the ball was deemed to have gone out of play.

[TambaBerry]

Apparently the flu is in the Dutch camp

[TripleThreat]

Originally Posted by jettio

Could you let me know what I said in the post that caused you to flip your lid and say it reflected "weird entitled bitch"?

The above is what you wrote in quoting my post and I honestly do not see anything in my post that you quoted that would warrant the name calling or you taking it personal.

See above post from Carlos.

You keep asking for proof. The simple point is they never called it a goal on the field so they reviewed via VAR and said it was inconclusive and we’re going with the call on the field. It was never called a goal on the field, how is this so hard for you to comprehend?

[jettio]

Originally Posted by TripleThreat

See above post from Carlos.

You keep asking for proof. The simple point is they never called it a goal on the field so they reviewed via VAR and said it was inconclusive and we’re going with the call on the field. It was never called a goal on the field, how is this so hard for you to comprehend?

Those linked stories are no more authoritative than you or I or Carlos watching the FIFA feed and guessing about the original call based on the video feed and whatever the announcers on our version of the feed are guessing about what the call is.

If there are no pictures or video of a goal kick being signaled by the referee and no statement from FIFA that a goal kick was signaled by the referee then there is no case to make about an original call of goal kick being overruled by "inconclusive" evidence.

[DJ's left nut]

This feels like an absurd amount of flopping in this Ghana/Uruguay match.

At one point there were FOUR players rolling around on the ground - all of whom were up and playing within 2 minutes with the most extreme treatment provided being a quick shot of freeze spray on someone's hip.

I mean every 2 minutes I look up and one of these guys is dying. This is ****ing rough, man.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

This feels like an absurd amount of flopping in this Ghana/Uruguay match.

At one point there were FOUR players rolling around on the ground - all of whom were up and playing within 2 minutes with the most extreme treatment provided being a quick shot of freeze spray on someone's hip.

I mean every 2 minutes I look up and one of these guys is dying. This is ****ing rough, man.

Well, Ghana is overmatched, two goals down, and facing elimination with a loss. It’s desperation time for them. And the South American teams seem to feel diving is an art.

But really, there’s some amount of selling of fouls that goes on in the NFL and the NBA and other sports as well, whether that’s Tommy Townsend dramatically going to the ground after punts, certain QBs begging officials for calls all the time, or players making the motion for a flag in the middle of a play.

And being on the end of a tackle can cause acute pain that people can play through or run off at times. I think there’s more embellishment or attempts to “sell” a foul in soccer especially in desperate spots, but we’re underselling how much there is in other sports.

[TripleThreat]

Originally Posted by jettio

Those linked stories are no more authoritative than you or I or Carlos watching the FIFA feed and guessing about the original call based on the video feed and whatever the announcers on our version of the feed are guessing about what the call is.

If there are no pictures or video of a goal kick being signaled by the referee and no statement from FIFA that a goal kick was signaled by the referee then there is no case to make about an original call of goal kick being overruled by "inconclusive" evidence.

My god you're a ****ing dumb ass.... You're missing the point.

You're asking where is the evidence that the call on the field was "NO GOAL" I'm asking the same ****ing question, where is the evidence that the call on the field was a "GOAL".. How is this so hard to comprehend for your brain?

I see a lot more evidence pointing to the fact that both teams and the refs were believing it was NOT a goal, rather than it BEING a goal... If you noticed everyone stopped post it going in, because obviously there were refs and other people saying HOLD ON HOLD ON.

The EXACT same reaction happened with our 2nd goal in the IRAN game. Our guy scored, started celebrating and stopped JUST like Japan.

So again, this isn't rocket science dude. When you say its inconclusive, and you're going with the call on the field, where/when was the call on the field made prior to going to the VAR? My god dude.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by TripleThreat

My god you're a ****ing dumb ass.... You're missing the point.

You're asking where is the evidence that the call on the field was "NO GOAL" I'm asking the same ****ing question, where is the evidence that the call on the field was a "GOAL".. How is this so hard to comprehend for your brain?

I see a lot more evidence pointing to the fact that both teams and the refs were believing it was NOT a goal, rather than it BEING a goal... If you noticed everyone stopped post it going in, because obviously there were refs and other people saying HOLD ON HOLD ON.

The EXACT same reaction happened with our 2nd goal in the IRAN game. Our guy scored, started celebrating and stopped JUST like Japan.

So again, this isn't rocket science dude. When you say its inconclusive, and you're going with the call on the field, where/when was the call on the field made prior to going to the VAR? My god dude.

Well of course everyone stopped. The ball was in the net. What else would they do? Either it was out for a goal kick or it was a goal scored.