Only if the referee lets him.Is it worse for the players to play that game or the coach that subs every time the ball goes out of play so that it runs the clock down?
Everyone knows he's doing it, but the ref never denies the sub.
I guess that can be gamesmanship, but he's an ass for doing it.
It's cheating.
This is exactly why our system is broken. Nowhere else in the world that I know of does winning a Ulittle club game mean anything. But here, we pretend that a tactic of booting the ball is somehow "innovation". This assumes that the reason that our kids play soccer is to win games when the reasons our kids play should be to get better.It’s funny, on this board, people are always talking about how soccer should be played, rip teams for playing the ball over the top, etc... people have in their minds how a game is supposed to be played and get all bent out of shape when someone does something different or don’t play how they expect. But the reality is they just weren’t prepared for it. It’s called strategy. It’s called innovation. And many times it evolves the game and is what makes it interesting because it forces opponents to adjust accordingly. Those who lack the ability to adjust have nothing left but to whine and label their opponents as cheaters or jerks because they can’t accept the reality that they simply lost.
On a related note. If you guys or your kids haven't seen it, pay the $3 per-game fee and watch Juventus vs Ajax (2nd leg of UCL) on BR Live. The second half in particular was a spectacular display of how the game should be played. Ajax's style was so exciting that a 10-year-old can easily watch the second half without losing interest.This is exactly why our system is broken. Nowhere else in the world that I know of does winning a Ulittle club game mean anything. But here, we pretend that a tactic of booting the ball is somehow "innovation". This assumes that the reason that our kids play soccer is to win games when the reasons our kids play should be to get better.
No one gets better by just booting the ball randomly forward every time they get it. They may win more games, which makes the parents and coaches happy, but the kids suffer.
This is exactly why our system is broken. Nowhere else in the world that I know of does winning a Ulittle club game mean anything. But here, we pretend that a tactic of booting the ball is somehow "innovation". This assumes that the reason that our kids play soccer is to win games when the reasons our kids play should be to get better.
No one gets better by just booting the ball randomly forward every time they get it. They may win more games, which makes the parents and coaches happy, but the kids suffer.
This is exactly why our system is broken. Nowhere else in the world that I know of does winning a Ulittle club game mean anything. But here, we pretend that a tactic of booting the ball is somehow "innovation". This assumes that the reason that our kids play soccer is to win games when the reasons our kids play should be to get better.
No one gets better by just booting the ball randomly forward every time they get it. They may win more games, which makes the parents and coaches happy, but the kids suffer.
As they say, don’t hate the player, hate the game....
I see it as nothing more than using the rules to his advantage - the rules committee could’ve just as easily made the penalty for such an action a goal conceded just like goaltending in basketball... but they didn’t.
Whether you think he cheated or not, it was undoubtedly a smart play that gave his team a chance and paid off.
It’s funny, on this board, people are always talking about how soccer should be played, rip teams for playing the ball over the top, etc... people have in their minds how a game is supposed to be played and get all bent out of shape when someone does something different or don’t play how they expect. But the reality is they just weren’t prepared for it. It’s called strategy. It’s called innovation. And many times it evolves the game and is what makes it interesting because it forces opponents to adjust accordingly. Those who lack the ability to adjust have nothing left but to whine and label their opponents as cheaters or jerks because they can’t accept the reality that they simply lost.
It's called cheating.
There is a difference between winning with class and winning at all costs. Many people (and Suarez fans) don't know the difference.
There is a difference between winning with class and winning at all costs. Many people (and Suarez fans) don't know the difference.
I don't think cheating means what you think it means...
cheat
/CHēt/
verb
gerund or present participle: cheating
- 1.
act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination.
We are talking about what we teach our children, most of whom will never play professionally. War as an analogy for sports is just plain stupid. War is not entertainment.And they used to fight wars by walking into an open field facing each other before they realized that was just plain stupid... just sayin..
"The Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton."
Wellington was referring to Eton, a boys' school in England, where playing (and by extension, fighting) with honor is a primary principle.
While you have your dictionary open, look up "integrity".
LOL. Don't be mad bro.
Integrity: "the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness."
...and he was dishonest or immoral, how?
You're really struggling with this whole english vocabulary thing, aren't ya?
We are talking about what we teach our children, most of whom will never play professionally. War as an analogy for sports is just plain stupid. War is not entertainment.
Sports is a great vehicle to teach our kids about life and frankly, I prefer to teach my children to think intelligently and that there isn't just one way to solve a problem.