The 2012 London Olympics Sports Thread

[Josephus]

What Waumbag did was gamesmanship. Nothing wrong with that. No different than everytime the ball goes out, players from both sides put their hands up as if to say "It's our ball." Part of the game is to try to influence the ref. The ref however didn't have to listen to her.

I just have a couple more things to say on this.

1. AS I said before, this is never called in any other game of footie that I've seen, and I've been following soccer probably since I was six in 1972.  That said, it is a rule. The ref didn't have to call it. Shouldn't have called it. But she can call it. Odd that it would be in a crucial moment of a high stakes game.

2. The USA was the better team anyways. There was still 10 minutes + 30 minutes of overtime left for Canada to get a goal, but  the US dominated.

3. The handball was a dicey call. But the Canadian defenders should know to keep their arms behind them in a situation like that. Not like they had to cover their nuts for the free kick.

4. Candian women are hotter.

5. The Women's Soccer semifinal was the #2 most-watched Olympic event ever on #TSN - only behind Vancouver 2010 Hockey Gold Medal game. 3.84 million. In Toronto, anyways, they even moved the CFL game that was scheduled to start to their lesser watched TSN2.

[PDH]

Hah, so the goalkeeper was warned by the linesman, apparantly (according to Wambach) warned by the ref (and you could see her acknowledging this with the mentioned raised arm), and then bitches she was not warned?

The rule is to try and stop such gamesmanship, and I for one think that it should be called - just as cards for diving should be given (or given when the miracle healing on the sideline happens).  Wambach was not gaming the ref, she was letting her know that the rules were constantly being fudged.

My respect for Canadian fair play has just cratered.

[Josephus]

I love the people, mostly NBA fans but they are everywhere, who get pissed that the refs "affects" the outcome of a game by calling a violation, that is really a violation.  On the other hand they have no problem with the refs affecting the outcome by NOT calling a violation, that is really a violation.

I agree refs should call a travel, or a 3 second, or a foul when it affects the game late.  But how much does a goalie holding the ball in a tie game affect the outcome?

At what point does the ref call it is the devil's advocate argument? Theoretically the goalie can then hold the ball till the final whistle.

[sbr]

I love the people, mostly NBA fans but they are everywhere, who get pissed that the refs "affects" the outcome of a game by calling a violation, that is really a violation.  On the other hand they have no problem with the refs affecting the outcome by NOT calling a violation, that is really a violation.

I agree refs should call a travel, or a 3 second, or a foul when it affects the game late.  But how much does a goalie holding the ball in a tie game affect the outcome?

At what point does the ref call it is the devil's advocate argument? Theoretically the goalie can then hold the ball till the final whistle.

Exactly.  Canada knew that the US was the better team, so the Canucks went with the  standard run the clock defence; limit the number of possessions the better team gets to limit their ability to score.  Same reason there is a shot clock in basketball and a play clock in football.

[Drakken]

At what point does the ref call it is the devil's advocate argument? Theoretically the goalie can then hold the ball till the final whistle.

There's a wide margin between holding the ball forever, and holding it a few seconds more while dribbling it to the ground, waiting for the players to place themselves further. The time that it would add to the clock after regular time would be only marginal, trickling about 30 seconds more to the clock in total.

It's all about common sense, and on this the ref was badly missing some because McLeod wasn't upholding the game, but waiting for players to move further in-field.

[Admiral Yi]

I would think more Americans would be sensitive to the issue, having been on the short end so many times.

[crazy canuck]

My respect for the American side just cratered.

So basically Wambach hounded the referee and incited her to call a foul by counting in her vicinity? That's rather unsportsmanlike, how the ref calls his or her game is the ref's own business.

I think next time "Tank-ready" should ram her into the goal post. Bet she was itching to do just that during the whole game, that Canadian soccer player is one mean girl. 

But Canada was apparently repeatedly breaking a rule to gain an advantage, and she was just repeatedly pointing it out. Isn't lobbying the ref in such a situation common in every sport?

It is a good reason not to have rules that aren't commonly enforced.

It might be hard for you yanks to get this but there is the letter of a rule and the spirit of the rule.  What ought to have occured is the Yank should have been given a yellow card for doing that.

[crazy canuck]

I love the people, mostly NBA fans but they are everywhere, who get pissed that the refs "affects" the outcome of a game by calling a violation, that is really a violation.  On the other hand they have no problem with the refs affecting the outcome by NOT calling a violation, that is really a violation.

I agree refs should call a travel, or a 3 second, or a foul when it affects the game late.  But how much does a goalie holding the ball in a tie game affect the outcome?

At what point does the ref call it is the devil's advocate argument? Theoretically the goalie can then hold the ball till the final whistle.

Exactly.  Canada knew that the US was the better team, so the Canucks went with the  standard run the clock defence; limit the number of possessions the better team gets to limit their ability to score.  Same reason there is a shot clock in basketball and a play clock in football.

If you had watched the game you would realize that is utter bullshit.

When the ref blew her whistle everyone, including the broadcast announcers, had no idea what was happening or what the ref could have possibly seen.

If you want to use a basketball analogy - it would be like a ref blowing a whistle to call a foul for contact that never ever gets called.

[Neil]

Meh, tuck rule.

When sports are played, sometimes bullshit happens.  Just put an asterisk on the win and leave it at that.

[MadBurgerMaker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rafxT0zNQ4I

Here you go.  1:00 in.  Same call on Hope Solo.  Seems like it is called significantly more than "never ever."

Want to be sure it isn't called?  Don't hold the ball more than six seconds because you're trying to burn clock and hold a lead.   Seems pretty clear. 

[sbr]

My respect for the American side just cratered.

So basically Wambach hounded the referee and incited her to call a foul by counting in her vicinity? That's rather unsportsmanlike, how the ref calls his or her game is the ref's own business.

I think next time "Tank-ready" should ram her into the goal post. Bet she was itching to do just that during the whole game, that Canadian soccer player is one mean girl. 

But Canada was apparently repeatedly breaking a rule to gain an advantage, and she was just repeatedly pointing it out. Isn't lobbying the ref in such a situation common in every sport?

It is a good reason not to have rules that aren't commonly enforced.

It might be hard for you yanks to get this but there is the letter of a rule and the spirit of the rule.  What ought to have occured is the Yank should have been given a yellow card for doing that.

A yellow card for counting out loud? 

How about 3 seconds in the key in basketball?  Is there anything wrong witha defender counting out loud while Shaq is camped in the key?  Or should the defender get a technical foul?

[sbr]

I love the people, mostly NBA fans but they are everywhere, who get pissed that the refs "affects" the outcome of a game by calling a violation, that is really a violation.  On the other hand they have no problem with the refs affecting the outcome by NOT calling a violation, that is really a violation.

I agree refs should call a travel, or a 3 second, or a foul when it affects the game late.  But how much does a goalie holding the ball in a tie game affect the outcome?

At what point does the ref call it is the devil's advocate argument? Theoretically the goalie can then hold the ball till the final whistle.

Exactly.  Canada knew that the US was the better team, so the Canucks went with the  standard run the clock defence; limit the number of possessions the better team gets to limit their ability to score.  Same reason there is a shot clock in basketball and a play clock in football.

If you had watched the game you would realize that is utter bullshit.

When the ref blew her whistle everyone, including the broadcast announcers, had no idea what was happening or what the ref could have possibly seen.

If you want to use a basketball analogy - it would be like a ref blowing a whistle to call a foul for contact that never ever gets called.

Why don't they change the rule then?  Why haves rule on the books that no one enforces and everyone get pissed when they do?

[crazy canuck]

A yellow card for counting out loud? 

How about 3 seconds in the key in basketball?  Is there anything wrong witha defender counting out loud while Shaq is camped in the key?  Or should the defender get a technical foul?

That is actually a very good example sbr.  Coaches often get warned that they will recieve a technical foul for doing exactly that...

[sbr]

A yellow card for counting out loud? 

How about 3 seconds in the key in basketball?  Is there anything wrong witha defender counting out loud while Shaq is camped in the key?  Or should the defender get a technical foul?

That is actually a very good example sbr.  Coaches often get warned that they will recieve a technical foul for doing exactly that...

I am pretty sure I have heard players doing it though.

[crazy canuck]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rafxT0zNQ4I

Here you go.  1:00 in.  Same call on Hope Solo.  Seems like it is called significantly more than "never ever."

Want to be sure it isn't called?  Don't hold the ball more than six seconds because you're trying to burn clock and hold a lead.   Seems pretty clear.

Yeah, there is no way of guarding against unreasonable judgments if those judgments are able to be made.

Here is a good description of what occurred from the Globe and Mail.

The U.S. tied the game on a penalty kick by Abby Wambach after referee Christina Pedersen gave the U.S. a free kick in the 78th minute, ruling Canadian goalkeeper Erin McLeod had taken more than six seconds to put the ball in play. Megan Rapinoe's subsequent free kick struck Canadian defender Marie-Eve Nault on the arm, which Pedersen ruled to be a hand-ball. They were highly literal interpretations of rules that are usually viewed in a more obtuse manner, especially given the time and the significance of the match.

The link you gave was not the Semi finals of the olympic games in the last 10 minutes of a one goal game.

It would be like calling a technical foul for something a player had been doing all game long in the final moments of a baskball game to allow the other team to tie from the free throw line.

What is most shameful about the whole episode is that the Yank who cause this disgrace of a call seems rather proud of herself.  Its disgraceful conduct.