As we near the end of the group stage, writers from our newly expanded US soccer team Alexander Abnos, Pablo Maurer and Jeff Rueter are now online answering your World Cup questions
cata_bush asks: Which team has surprised you the most so far? Disappointed you the most? Been the best “story” (whether that be an underdog, a particular narrative, or an interesting tactical setup)?
Jeff: Surprise: Cape Verde! I’ll be gutted if they can’t advance after famous draws against Spain and Uruguay – though I expect them to beat Saudi Arabia.
Disappointment: I had Ecuador into the business end because of how stout their defense is, but I completely overlooked the lack of chance creation and alternative scoring threats beyond Enner Valencia.
Pablo: I don’t have any actual data, but I agree with your suspicion. That rule, which was created and trialed in Major League Soccer (and MLS Next Pro, its developmental league,) was an instant success in the league, drastically reducing time-wasting via simulation. Another new World Cup rule – the timed substitution rule – was a similar success, and nearly entirely eliminated the issue of players lolligagging off the field when being substituted. Americans don’t always get it right when they mess with the game, but every now and again, one of our dumb ideas sticks!
Alex: I’d just add a possible side effect of this, which again I’m pointing out with no data whatsoever: It really seems like the officials are letting a lot go in this tournament. Multiple times a game I’m seeing teams caught out expecting a tactical foul call that never comes, or teams livid that what seems like pretty heavy contact in the attacking half is going unpunished. Prime example would be Messi’s first goal against Austria – there was a coming together in midfield just beforehand that I think in past tournaments would have been called, but this time it wasn’t. I wonder if the higher bar on simulation has anything to do with that.