Well, @Kitahara_Kazusa isn't going to like that spoiler title haha. James's behavior for the sending off was utter cringe. I couldn't believe what I was seeing, she should be ashamed of herself....
Well, @Kitahara_Kazusa isn't going to like that spoiler title haha.
James's behavior for the sending off was utter cringe. I couldn't believe what I was seeing, she should be ashamed of herself.
Also, VAR a bit inconsistent maybe? After watching the cricket this summer, where the replay decision works way better for admittedly more clear-cut technical decisions, VAR is a load of rubbish. You never know as a viewer what is going on, if a goal or penalty is going ahead or will be disallowed, it's annoying. They could do lots of things to improve it - 4th ref audio mic'd up instead of the poor out-of-breath on-field ref, limited review decisions that are triggered by the players, coaches or on-field ref, not just because the capricious VAR team fancies taking a punt, some kind of bias towards the original decision instead of it always seeming to go to VAR-choice, and a proper explanation of what decision was made and why.
Oh sorry, should I not have used the article title verbatim? I just copied the format of the Japan one from a few days ago. Can delete/repost (or edit the title, if possible here) if necessary.
Oh sorry, should I not have used the article title verbatim? I just copied the format of the Japan one from a few days ago. Can delete/repost (or edit the title, if possible here) if necessary.
You're fine. There's been recent debate around the spoiling of football match results with the headlines of posts. Personally, I've been posting all of my Women's World Cup articles one whole day...
You're fine. There's been recent debate around the spoiling of football match results with the headlines of posts. Personally, I've been posting all of my Women's World Cup articles one whole day after the result in order to give people the chance to watch the match, but then using the original headline as usual.
Not to worry... If you want to suggest a new title, I can edit the new one in for you now. Only certain approved users have the ability to edit post titles.
Not to worry... If you want to suggest a new title, I can edit the new one in for you now. Only certain approved users have the ability to edit post titles.
It was in jest, I don't care about spoilers personally. The other thread upset that one user because it was at a bad time for USA viewers (2am or something) so they watched the match later on and...
It was in jest, I don't care about spoilers personally. The other thread upset that one user because it was at a bad time for USA viewers (2am or something) so they watched the match later on and didn't want to know the result. I bet nobody cares about this one, because everyone in England or Nigeria is watching at work, and people in the USA are over the World Cup now heh.
You are fine! Someone will come along and adjust the title, especially since you're requesting it I am sure someone will help out. You're fine posting the title as is, but there is a request that...
You are fine!
Someone will come along and adjust the title, especially since you're requesting it I am sure someone will help out.
You're fine posting the title as is, but there is a request that titles not contain spoilers for sports. The debate is a bit of its your responsibility not to go on media vs the sites responsibility to keep it off the main page with potentially a spoiler tag or something.
I think its difficult for all of us to know what is "news" that should be immediately shared vs spoiler to wait on. Like let's use a non sports example. If I am excited to share the news about a rover landing on Mars but someone wanted to watch the launch in real time should my title be more vague or can it be direct. In this case it would be silly to be vague. However if I were reading a new book series and was excited to share the ending and I know I'm a quick reader putting that in the title would be rude.
Sports rides that grey line, because it's like a TV show were some will rewatch it but it's also like a news story especially when on a national stage. So I can understand why it's such a dilemma for moderation.
Anyways long winded way of saying don't worry about it as it's an unclear thing. It was just discussed at length yesterday and out of respect for the request of no spoilers a title got changed so that maybe considered the precedence on this.
I didn't notice the Lauren James incident as it happened, but the replays... yikes. I suspect she'll get a 3 match ban, ruling her out of the rest of the tournament. I think England showed some...
I didn't notice the Lauren James incident as it happened, but the replays... yikes. I suspect she'll get a 3 match ban, ruling her out of the rest of the tournament.
I think England showed some pretty incredible resilience in the end. Nigeria were relentless and it must be a horrible sap to your energy having to play extra time against such a fast, aggresive team a player down. Nonetheless the back line looked solid throughout (England look much better with 3 center-backs), and apart from the odd scare all of Nigeria's crosses were well dealt with.
Well, that's us out then... Still proud of the Super Falcons, exceeded expectations and did us proud
Well, @Kitahara_Kazusa isn't going to like that spoiler title haha.
James's behavior for the sending off was utter cringe. I couldn't believe what I was seeing, she should be ashamed of herself.
Also, VAR a bit inconsistent maybe? After watching the cricket this summer, where the replay decision works way better for admittedly more clear-cut technical decisions, VAR is a load of rubbish. You never know as a viewer what is going on, if a goal or penalty is going ahead or will be disallowed, it's annoying. They could do lots of things to improve it - 4th ref audio mic'd up instead of the poor out-of-breath on-field ref, limited review decisions that are triggered by the players, coaches or on-field ref, not just because the capricious VAR team fancies taking a punt, some kind of bias towards the original decision instead of it always seeming to go to VAR-choice, and a proper explanation of what decision was made and why.
Oh sorry, should I not have used the article title verbatim? I just copied the format of the Japan one from a few days ago. Can delete/repost (or edit the title, if possible here) if necessary.
You're fine. There's been recent debate around the spoiling of football match results with the headlines of posts. Personally, I've been posting all of my Women's World Cup articles one whole day after the result in order to give people the chance to watch the match, but then using the original headline as usual.
Ah, didn't see that discussion - apologies. Doesn't seem that it's possible to edit titles on here either, otherwise I would.
Not to worry... If you want to suggest a new title, I can edit the new one in for you now. Only certain approved users have the ability to edit post titles.
Could go with "England v Nigeria: Post-Match Discussion" or similar I suppose. (side note: good idea to have post-titles be approval only to edit!)
Done! I'll revert it back to your original title once some time has passed and no-one's gonna get spoiled. 👍
It was in jest, I don't care about spoilers personally. The other thread upset that one user because it was at a bad time for USA viewers (2am or something) so they watched the match later on and didn't want to know the result. I bet nobody cares about this one, because everyone in England or Nigeria is watching at work, and people in the USA are over the World Cup now heh.
Eh, I wanted to catch this one, but time zones. I followed along with my news apps though so not as worried about spoilers. We're not all over it!
You are fine!
Someone will come along and adjust the title, especially since you're requesting it I am sure someone will help out.
You're fine posting the title as is, but there is a request that titles not contain spoilers for sports. The debate is a bit of its your responsibility not to go on media vs the sites responsibility to keep it off the main page with potentially a spoiler tag or something.
I think its difficult for all of us to know what is "news" that should be immediately shared vs spoiler to wait on. Like let's use a non sports example. If I am excited to share the news about a rover landing on Mars but someone wanted to watch the launch in real time should my title be more vague or can it be direct. In this case it would be silly to be vague. However if I were reading a new book series and was excited to share the ending and I know I'm a quick reader putting that in the title would be rude.
Sports rides that grey line, because it's like a TV show were some will rewatch it but it's also like a news story especially when on a national stage. So I can understand why it's such a dilemma for moderation.
Anyways long winded way of saying don't worry about it as it's an unclear thing. It was just discussed at length yesterday and out of respect for the request of no spoilers a title got changed so that maybe considered the precedence on this.
I didn't notice the Lauren James incident as it happened, but the replays... yikes. I suspect she'll get a 3 match ban, ruling her out of the rest of the tournament.
I think England showed some pretty incredible resilience in the end. Nigeria were relentless and it must be a horrible sap to your energy having to play extra time against such a fast, aggresive team a player down. Nonetheless the back line looked solid throughout (England look much better with 3 center-backs), and apart from the odd scare all of Nigeria's crosses were well dealt with.