• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Retired US Soccer / World Cup Thread (RIP)

Only counter argument I have is that had we beaten Slovenia we wouldn't have been under as much pressure vs Algeria, potentially allowing us to have more in the tank when we played Ghana a little over 72 hours later.

But I'm willing to admit that's a stretch. Also who knows if we would've won the group if we didn't have to beat the Algerians, and if we didn't that would've meant Germany and certain elimination.

yep this was/is my argument
 
Not involved in the play. As in, he didn't interfere with the goal going in directly.


He is what you would call "passively offside." It's the part of the offside rule that most people (including more Asst Refs than I would like) understand.

How do they determine passively offsides? I'd imagine that would be very contentious.
 
How do they determine passively offsides? I'd imagine that would be very contentious.

If you don't play the ball or attempt to then you are passively offside, but won't be called offside.

For example:

Let's say a forward is jogging back after a goalie punted the ball. A CB on his team wins a header and launches it back towards him. A midfielder on his team, who was onside, reacts quickest and runs after the ball. If the forward continues to just walk back to his side and does not try to become involved in the play, then he is just passively offside and should not be called "offside." Unless he interferes with a defender on the other team trying to track back or something like that.
 
Another more blatant case of somebody being passively offside:



If the ball would have touched the guy down on the goal line and then gone in, it would have been ruled out for offside since he became "involved" in the play.
 
HAHAHAHHAHA, no fucking way. A ProEvo vid best shows this:



That is similar to what I tried to describe earlier. Not ruled offside because the forward did not interfere with the ball or any defenders, he simply realized he was in an offside position and walked away.
 
HAHAHAHHAHA, no fucking way. A ProEvo vid best shows this:



That is similar to what I tried to describe earlier. Not ruled offside because the forward did not interfere with the ball or any defenders, he simply realized he was in an offside position and walked away.

Pretty sue they would have called this one
 
Yeah well you know way more of the technical terms of the rules than I do so you're probably right. I just feel like that's one that would be called.
 
Yeah well you know way more of the technical terms of the rules than I do so you're probably right. I just feel like that's one that would be called.

I could see it called if the AR has a quick trigger, but hopefully he waits a second to see how it develops. The FWD doesn't impact that play at all and the flag should stay down, and I think would if it didn't go up immediately after the ball was played in to near the guys' feet.
 
Another example from one of my favorite goals. Notice Arshavin hanging out by the ad boards:

 
If you don't play the ball or attempt to then you are passively offside, but won't be called offside.

For example:

Let's say a forward is jogging back after a goalie punted the ball. A CB on his team wins a header and launches it back towards him. A midfielder on his team, who was onside, reacts quickest and runs after the ball. If the forward continues to just walk back to his side and does not try to become involved in the play, then he is just passively offside and should not be called "offside." Unless he interferes with a defender on the other team trying to track back or something like that.

Exactly. If the passively offside (not offsides :tard:) player isn't involved in the play and didn't obstruct the keeper, for example, in any way, the goal stands.
 
Scoreline predictions?

USMNT 1-1 Argentina

USMNT 3-2 Paraguay

I'd be pretty thrilled with a draw against a strong Argentina side. Especially with news today that Messi is "definitely starting". Will be interesting to see how they line up, but we should definitely be looking push them.


US 2 - 2 Argentina or an optimistic US 2 - 1 Argentina

Possibly optimistic, but clearly they are weakest at the back and strongest at the front. I can see them scoring one early, as we are prone to conceding within the first 15 min with us pulling one back shortly before the half. The second half could be a bit cagey, but I expect us to be playing primarily off the break and nick one there.

US 3 - 1 Paraguay

We are stronger than them in essentially every position. The big battle for me will be Cardozo (he travelled right?) and Gooch/DeMerit. Cardozo is a huge target and could do well to hold up the ball. But I think the combo of Bradley and/or Jones should be enough to break up those sort of attacks. We should be able to boss the midfield and control most of the game, but Paraguay are no mugs and should give us some worry.
 
If Paraguay brought their real 1st team then we are NOT stronger than them.
 
If Paraguay brought their real 1st team then we are NOT stronger than them.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe we are.

Riveros, Barrios and Valdez are a pretty potent threat with Caceres anchoring. But overall, we have them covered. Look at their World Cup. They drew a shitty Italy, beat a decent Slovakia and drew an apparent threat in New Zealand.

They're a strong side, but if we put out our strongest XI and them as well, I see us coming good.
 
Last edited:
It's pretty close to even, IMO.

I give us: GK, CBs
I give them: LB/RB, FWDS
Midfield is a split. Both teams strong here.
 
It's pretty close to even, IMO.

I give us: GK, CBs
I give them: LB/RB, FWDS
Midfield is a split. Both teams strong here.

Any team we have beat in any position on the back line will not have me shaking in my boots. I think we are better than Paraguay, all things considered.
 
Our CBs aren't that bad. Our outside backs are pitiful and draw our CBs out of position far too often. Seriously, our outside backs are fucking terrible.

I would go to a flat back 3 if the manager, just so I didn't have to watch the ineptness of the outside backs. Ugh.
 
Our CBs aren't that bad. Our outside backs are pitiful and draw our CBs out of position far too often. Seriously, our outside backs are fucking terrible.

I would go to a flat back 3 if the manager, just so I didn't have to watch the ineptness of the outside backs. Ugh.

Agreed it would be great to see a Timothy Chandler or a Lichaj develop on the outside for us. Also, I really think our team with a healthy Stuart Holder in that CAM position would fully change the complexion of our team as we know it. I was so ready to see it vs Argentina dammit
 
Our CBs aren't that bad. Our outside backs are pitiful and draw our CBs out of position far too often. Seriously, our outside backs are fucking terrible.

I would go to a flat back 3 if the manager, just so I didn't have to watch the ineptness of the outside backs. Ugh.

Left back, yes. Dolo has been one of our better players for over a decade at right back though, and Spector has filled in well at times. Waiting to see what Chandler can do there (assuming he's used as a back)
 
Back
Top