6 ms·

Not OP, but I would guess: "hydration breaks" to inject commercials, half-time shows that felt alien to much of the core audience, and various rule-bending shen

by antonyt 2mo ago

Not OP, but I would guess: "hydration breaks" to inject commercials, half-time shows that felt alien to much of the core audience, and various rule-bending shenanigans (Ronaldo, Balogun).

dmarcos 2mo ago
Hydration breaks a tad weird. Half time shows were pretty subtle, didn’t change the length of the break except for the final. There’s no soccer competition without someone complaining about refereeing. Def always things to improve but I had fun, all people around me seemed to have fun. I flew in an out and always was either public transportation or uefa provided shuttles… It was really well run. Not something you can call a “shit show”
- Jtarii 2mo ago
  Balogun and Ronaldo red card overturns had nothing to do with "refereeing". It was clear corruption and favouritism. Also the treatment of the Iranian team was comically awful.
  - nkg 2mo ago
    Oh boy, how could I forget about the Iranian team, and the other players/referees/staff that were rejected or stuck at the airport for hours ? It was worse than a sh-t show actually.
    - decimalenough 2mo ago
      Blame the US for that one, not FIFA.
      - rimeice 2mo ago
        Blame FIFA for giving the contest to the US to host
        kaladin-jasnah 2mo ago
        Did this not happen before the current administration?
        probably_wrong 2mo ago
        The bid was accepted in 2018, during Trump's first presidency. So both yes and no. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup_bids https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup_bids
        rimeice 2mo ago
        Rabid commercialisation of the beautiful game in the US would be administration agnostic.
- drcongo 2mo ago
  > There’s no soccer competition Ahhhh, you're American!
  - dmarcos 2mo ago
    I’m spanish living in the US
  - TRiG_Ireland 2mo ago
    Here to give you the occasional reminder that Irish people (sauf a few weirdos in Dublin) also call the sport soccer.
    - padjo 2mo ago
      Most Irish people (save a few in Dublin) are basically Americans.
      - TRiG_Ireland 2mo ago
        So you've not heard of Gaelic football?
  - billforsternz 2mo ago
    Soccer is a legitimate name for the sport. Football is properly the name of a whole group of sports OR in a local context the locally most popular type of football. It's very weird for one type of football to try to claim the name all for itself globally. BTW I am not American.
    - xdennis 2mo ago
      No it's not. Americans call it that and they don't even like football.
      - billforsternz 2mo ago
        Lots of people call it that. The Australian national team are called the Socceroos. The best, most authoritative magazine about the sport is called "World Soccer", published in the UK, where the name soccer originated. Even if the name soccer was used only in the USA, it would be a legitimate name. Different cultures use different names for things.
- watwut 2mo ago
  > There’s no soccer competition without someone complaining about refereeing. Yeah, but most of them go without president calling Infantino to change the referee verdict. All the while the president says "I dont even know the game". > It was really well run. Not something you can call a “shit show” I can. Oh and not allowing referee in due to his race and mistreating teams due to politics.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
cryptoegorophy 2mo ago
Also a funny trump red card
another-dave 2mo ago
The fact that you had 'hydration breaks' in enclosed, fully air-conditioned stadiums is very telling.
- nxm 2mo ago
  Not all stadiums were enclosed
- fragmede 2mo ago
  Telling of what? I imagine if you're running around like eg Ronaldo would be during a game, it doesn't matter how air conditioned the space is, he'd still need to hydrate, on account of all the running that happens. I'm no football expert, but I'm lead to believe that does happen during matches.
- tzs 2mo ago
  An argument I've heard is that since hydration breaks can affect the game, if you are going to have them they should be mandatory and at the same time in all games in a tournament rather than doing them like they did when they were originally introduced in 2014. Then they were only done in games when the conditions on the field got dangerous.
  - ThatMedicIsASpy 2mo ago
    I can't remember this sports without a hydration break (half time). So they've been mandatory for a long time.
  - zzril 2mo ago
    Seems like the wrong spot to optimize for fairness / equal playing conditions when the weather itself affects the game in so many more ways.
  - toolslive 2mo ago
    football games can have "momentum". An extra break allows for a breather and a tactical intervention from the coach. That also why we saw keepers sitting down (faking injury) in the Premier league last season. Anyway, a hydration break while it's raining is a bit of a tell it has nothing to do with the needs of the players.
vehemenz 2mo ago
I think your attitude, which is all too common, is that we should do things according to the "footballing nations" without any other consideration for the rest of the world. North America is part of the world. The US itself is far and away the world's biggest sporting nation, and many there see football's informality and cynicism as antiquated and, honestly, embarrassing. The world outside of the US wants to protect "their" game, though it's not theirs to begin with, ignoring the existing, systematic issues with it, even making contrived arguments about the word "soccer" itself. FIFA's shenanigans off-the-field were a problem, but they're not unique to the World Cup nor its location. I'd argue the last Copa America and Cup of Nations had worse issues with officiating/corruption.
- snakey 2mo ago
  This is the most american centric take I’ve seen all week! Bravo! There are many other nations with just as much influence in sports outside of the US. The only difference being that the US doesn’t care about them. Football is a global game, everyone’s, not another thing for the US to dictate and ruin.
  - vehemenz 2mo ago
    I'm American, so I'm not sure who your comment is for. Anti-Americanism isn't a "gotcha" to me. If anything, it's confirmation of the persistent asymmetry in these discussions. Football (or basketball, if you're Lithuanian) is a massive cultural institution in many parts of the world. The difference is that sports—just sports—are the institution in America. We could look at revenues, but that's far too easy. Look at the whole picture. Look at youth participation, women's sports, college sports. It's not comparable anywhere else. For football specifically, the current situation is that a handful of European countries control the best leagues and consistently have the best international squads. This isn't changing anytime soon. The game is already owned by a group of elite countries—almost exclusively in Europe, benefitting from geography, mutual competition, and visa gatekeeping—and one confederation (UEFA). The fact that the game shouldn't be "ruined" (or latent anti-Americanism) suggests you're okay with this situation. You didn't comment on rule enforcement or cynical play either, but I assume you're okay with those things or take them for granted. Americans see football through the lens of other sports, because we are a sporting culture, and football is one of many. All the "American" sports have their problems too, but we don't pretend they don't for phony reasons. But we also have choices and exercise those choices. Footballing nations, I get the impression, see all sports through the lens of football. I often wonder whether fans in footballing countries genuinely like their sport for what it is or whether it's just a narcissistic cultural inheritance.

by antonyt 2mo ago

Not OP, but I would guess: "hydration breaks" to inject commercials, half-time shows that felt alien to much of the core audience, and various rule-bending shenanigans (Ronaldo, Balogun).

dmarcos 2mo ago

Hydration breaks a tad weird. Half time shows were pretty subtle, didn’t change the length of the break except for the final. There’s no soccer competition without someone complaining about refereeing. Def always things to improve but I had fun, all people around me seemed to have fun. I flew in an out and always was either public transportation or uefa provided shuttles… It was really well run. Not something you can call a “shit show”

Jtarii 2mo ago
Balogun and Ronaldo red card overturns had nothing to do with "refereeing". It was clear corruption and favouritism. Also the treatment of the Iranian team was comically awful.
- nkg 2mo ago
  Oh boy, how could I forget about the Iranian team, and the other players/referees/staff that were rejected or stuck at the airport for hours ? It was worse than a sh-t show actually.
  - decimalenough 2mo ago
    Blame the US for that one, not FIFA.
    - rimeice 2mo ago
      Blame FIFA for giving the contest to the US to host
      - kaladin-jasnah 2mo ago
        Did this not happen before the current administration?
        probably_wrong 2mo ago
        The bid was accepted in 2018, during Trump's first presidency. So both yes and no. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup_bids https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup_bids
        rimeice 2mo ago
        Rabid commercialisation of the beautiful game in the US would be administration agnostic.
drcongo 2mo ago
> There’s no soccer competition Ahhhh, you're American!
- dmarcos 2mo ago
  I’m spanish living in the US
- TRiG_Ireland 2mo ago
  Here to give you the occasional reminder that Irish people (sauf a few weirdos in Dublin) also call the sport soccer.
  - padjo 2mo ago
    Most Irish people (save a few in Dublin) are basically Americans.
    - TRiG_Ireland 2mo ago
      So you've not heard of Gaelic football?
- billforsternz 2mo ago
  Soccer is a legitimate name for the sport. Football is properly the name of a whole group of sports OR in a local context the locally most popular type of football. It's very weird for one type of football to try to claim the name all for itself globally. BTW I am not American.
  - xdennis 2mo ago
    No it's not. Americans call it that and they don't even like football.
    - billforsternz 2mo ago
      Lots of people call it that. The Australian national team are called the Socceroos. The best, most authoritative magazine about the sport is called "World Soccer", published in the UK, where the name soccer originated. Even if the name soccer was used only in the USA, it would be a legitimate name. Different cultures use different names for things.
watwut 2mo ago
> There’s no soccer competition without someone complaining about refereeing. Yeah, but most of them go without president calling Infantino to change the referee verdict. All the while the president says "I dont even know the game". > It was really well run. Not something you can call a “shit show” I can. Oh and not allowing referee in due to his race and mistreating teams due to politics.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]

cryptoegorophy 2mo ago

Also a funny trump red card

another-dave 2mo ago

The fact that you had 'hydration breaks' in enclosed, fully air-conditioned stadiums is very telling.

nxm 2mo ago
Not all stadiums were enclosed
fragmede 2mo ago
Telling of what? I imagine if you're running around like eg Ronaldo would be during a game, it doesn't matter how air conditioned the space is, he'd still need to hydrate, on account of all the running that happens. I'm no football expert, but I'm lead to believe that does happen during matches.
tzs 2mo ago
An argument I've heard is that since hydration breaks can affect the game, if you are going to have them they should be mandatory and at the same time in all games in a tournament rather than doing them like they did when they were originally introduced in 2014. Then they were only done in games when the conditions on the field got dangerous.
- ThatMedicIsASpy 2mo ago
  I can't remember this sports without a hydration break (half time). So they've been mandatory for a long time.
- zzril 2mo ago
  Seems like the wrong spot to optimize for fairness / equal playing conditions when the weather itself affects the game in so many more ways.
- toolslive 2mo ago
  football games can have "momentum". An extra break allows for a breather and a tactical intervention from the coach. That also why we saw keepers sitting down (faking injury) in the Premier league last season. Anyway, a hydration break while it's raining is a bit of a tell it has nothing to do with the needs of the players.

vehemenz 2mo ago

I think your attitude, which is all too common, is that we should do things according to the "footballing nations" without any other consideration for the rest of the world. North America is part of the world. The US itself is far and away the world's biggest sporting nation, and many there see football's informality and cynicism as antiquated and, honestly, embarrassing. The world outside of the US wants to protect "their" game, though it's not theirs to begin with, ignoring the existing, systematic issues with it, even making contrived arguments about the word "soccer" itself. FIFA's shenanigans off-the-field were a problem, but they're not unique to the World Cup nor its location. I'd argue the last Copa America and Cup of Nations had worse issues with officiating/corruption.

snakey 2mo ago
This is the most american centric take I’ve seen all week! Bravo! There are many other nations with just as much influence in sports outside of the US. The only difference being that the US doesn’t care about them. Football is a global game, everyone’s, not another thing for the US to dictate and ruin.
- vehemenz 2mo ago
  I'm American, so I'm not sure who your comment is for. Anti-Americanism isn't a "gotcha" to me. If anything, it's confirmation of the persistent asymmetry in these discussions. Football (or basketball, if you're Lithuanian) is a massive cultural institution in many parts of the world. The difference is that sports—just sports—are the institution in America. We could look at revenues, but that's far too easy. Look at the whole picture. Look at youth participation, women's sports, college sports. It's not comparable anywhere else. For football specifically, the current situation is that a handful of European countries control the best leagues and consistently have the best international squads. This isn't changing anytime soon. The game is already owned by a group of elite countries—almost exclusively in Europe, benefitting from geography, mutual competition, and visa gatekeeping—and one confederation (UEFA). The fact that the game shouldn't be "ruined" (or latent anti-Americanism) suggests you're okay with this situation. You didn't comment on rule enforcement or cynical play either, but I assume you're okay with those things or take them for granted. Americans see football through the lens of other sports, because we are a sporting culture, and football is one of many. All the "American" sports have their problems too, but we don't pretend they don't for phony reasons. But we also have choices and exercise those choices. Footballing nations, I get the impression, see all sports through the lens of football. I often wonder whether fans in footballing countries genuinely like their sport for what it is or whether it's just a narcissistic cultural inheritance.