It was the checkers championship of the whole known galaxy.astronaut said:When the Aussies win at cricket or win a gold medal, they take it a certain way, they assume it has a certain meaning, an extreme arrogance, and that is entirely negative, IMHO. It takes the enjoyment out of the game.

LD Rudeboy said:Sore loser. Sore loser. Sore loser.
I'm grinning when I'm winning 'cause I'm feeling so great,
It's just the losing that I hate.
You’re really into your stereotyping aren’t you.astronaut said:I would have thought, as a kiwi, you would have had enough of Australian arrogance for a lifetime.

Has an Australian "jumped your fence" at any time?Shared you lunch perhaps or just met a few of my countrymen.If you want to indulge in insulting behaviour you can talk to yourself.Pretentious jerkastronaut said:I really don't give a flying fuck if you think I'm an idiot/drooling moron/fool or not. You don't know me from Adam. I have my reasons for what I write. You have a problem with that? Tough shit.
(and Gary Linneker said something to the same effect to the Brazilian pundit dude after Brazil went 1-0 behind)astronaut said:The World Cup is a festival of football, and most countries seem to appreciate that. It should be about playing great football.
Some countries however seem to think the World Cup, or any sporting event, is about superiority. "We're there, therefore we're better than you."
I've argued about this before, and IMHO, Australians are the worst at this.
When the Aussies win at cricket or win a gold medal, they take it a certain way, they assume it has a certain meaning, an extreme arrogance, and that is entirely negative, IMHO. It takes the enjoyment out of the game.
I'm not Australian, I've been there many times, but I came there with a fairly objective outlook on the place, but was astonished at what I saw and heard - the racism, the arrogance, which I have suffered there myself, and the many Asians and Jews I know who have suffered it there.
Moreover, I'd like to see it being less inclusive, to give access to the best teams, not teams that had to beat Vanuatu to get in.
No, neither am I Japanese or Brazilian or Italian.
mhendo said:It's actually not arbitrary.
The length of the game is officially 90 minutes, with 45 minutes for each half.
During each half, there may be unscheduled stoppages in play. This happens most often for injuries, such as when a player goes down in a screaming heap and play is halted while he recovers or is stretchered off the ground. There can also be stoppages for other reasons, like the referee conferring with his line judges over a play, or giving a player a yellow card for time-wasting.
Each time one of these unscheduled stoppages occurs, the clock that you see on the screen continues to run, but the referee actually stops his watch. So, when the 45 minute mark arrives, the amount of time used up in stoppages during that half is added on.
According to the official FIFA Laws of the Game:For the complete rules, go here, scroll down a bit, and click on the part that says "English Laws of the Game 2006."
Johnny Canuck2 said:Thanks to you and Yossarian.
You'd think they could just stop the clock when a whistle blows.

TheLostProphet said:They do this in rugby union and its poor relation rugby league. It's bloody helpful.
![]()
Johnny Canuck2 said:They do it in all our sports as well: hockey, football, basketball, etc.

TheLostProphet said:ah - you see the problem then.
if rugby players and americans do it, it's clearly not for FIFA![]()
astronaut said:Like I was saying to a friend yesterday afternoon, before the Aussie win, I have been very disappointed with the quality of this competition. I think it is the worst world cup for many years.

just the most popular sport in the world....Johnny Canuck2 said:Yes: no progressiveness there...
snowypat said:If the clock was stopped and the players could see the clock then that might lead to an unfair advantage to the team in possesion.
snowypat said:by keeping posession and running the clock down(aussie rules)