==============================
Subject: Rule changes for 2038.
Date: 25 Nov 1997 14:43:04 +0100
From: Steve Jones
Okay time to get silly. Its 2036, and for the first time the Moon is
entering a qualification group. The obvious problem in their indoor
dome with its own unique brand of genetically engineered grass is the
1/6th g conditions. The ball goes higher and just doesn't seem to
dip at all. The lob isn't possible at all and free kicks over a wall
are all but impossible. But FIFA have decided to allow the players to
play at home on the moon rather than coming down to earth. It is
rumoured that the 2066 WC could be going to the Moon as well.
So folks what are the rule changes required for low g footy ?
----------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: HansAnders@hotmail.com
Date: 1997/11/25
As someone else mentioned, I think the fundamental nature of the game
should be changed. My suggestion is to play the game ice hockey style
within an enclosed playing surface utilising a 'roof' in addition to the
walls used in ice hockey. The difference between this and simply having
a 'building with a pitch inside' is that the walls and roof would
constitute the boundaries; and thus the ball would never go out of play,
as it would simply bounce off it, and hey presto; we would have a much
more free-flowing game and soon everyone would want to be Moon
nationals. The question is, what are the guidelines for naturalisation
on the moon.......................
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: "Chris Applegate"
Date: 1997/11/25
Install a uniform electric field running vertically through the pitch
(Positive being on the ground), and have the ball negatively charged.
Problems: Electronic equipment (Scoreboards, watches etc.) completely
unusable.
Possible massive static electricity of lethal magnitude to players (esp.
with synthetic shirts).
Hair-standing-on-end syndrome, thus requiring every player to sport the
Vialli look.
An alternative would be to build a giant centrifuge chamber that houses the
entire pitch, thus 'generating' the extra 5/6 g needed. Or install a really
big fan blowing downwards that would stop the ball rising.
Or, by 2036 the graviton will have been properly isolated and science would
have found out how to produce it, thus enabling scientists to produce a
ball with an in-built graviton emitter, thus allowing the ball to 'weigh'
more.
However, players would still be able to jump and even 'fly' in the match.
Should create interesting viewing.
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Daniel O'Rourke
Date: 1997/11/25
Well throw ins are going to have to be scraped, I suggest invisible walls,
by means of some force field or other.
Wellingtons instead of boots will be worn, obviously these will incorporate
the lastest antigravity ultra light material.
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: nelliott@monet.artisan.calpoly.edu (Noah Stephen Elliott)
Date: 1997/11/25
MOON SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN WORLD CUP THEY ARE NOT PART OF WORLD FIFA
ARE IDIOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:)
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: lagloirede@aol.com (Lagloirede)
Date: 1997/11/26
Soccer on the moon? Why, it's obvious what would happen.
Europeans would complain about American encroachment
and that silly little flag that was left there in the sixties.
The Americans would respond that the flag was just a gesture
and that the moon still belongs to all of mankind. The Europeans,
on behalf of the rest of the world, would then plant 16
European flags and ban all lunar flights from the Caribbean.
("Finally, a truly special event," they'd say. "We're doing it
just the way it should be done.") And then we'd all settle in
to watch Greece-Ukraine...
=======================================
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Paul Mettewie
Date: 1997/11/30
1) Play in a centrifuge -- this will simulate gravity through
centrifugal force.
or
2) Weight the ball down accordingly -- six times heavier than usual.
or
3) Make the playing field and goals very, very, very large (hmmm... a
mile or so in length and about a third of a mile wide -- for you metric
types, about 1600 meters by 500 meters.)
Now there may be some problems with the above. They are (and
I may miss a few)
1) Motion sickness -- Batigol the IIIrd breaks loose and is free on
goal and suddenly stops and runs off the field looking for for a place
to clean out the inside of his space suit. Also, this will have to be
one helluva big centrifuge.
2) The goalkeeper may get killed -- Inertia is still great in space
I believe so this increased weight of the ball might mean a very
nasty shock for the goalie when he attempts a save. Or possibly
it would mean a tear in his suit which would of course put the
keeper *slightly* off his game. I predict keepers will be in no
particularly hurry to "suit up" for a moon squad. In fact, the moon
squad may only find "volunteers" for keeper from amongst
penal colonies.
4) Play will be somewhat difficult to follow without binoculars and the
match officials will need to have rocket belts. Of course they must
also be magnificent pilots as well as fine match officials as any
collision with a player will lead to much more than a sending off.
(....and there goes Collina Junior off into the Oort Cloud along
with poor unfortunate Gianfranco Zola II....wave goodbye to them
folks, they've been good for the game...)
In fact, holding of any sort will be banned which means Boban
or Costacurta can have none of their descendants on the moon
team. The reasons for banning holding are obvious as per the
above explanations (see under "Explosive Decompression" in
the science dictionary.)
One positive thing is that Benny's kid will enjoy the games as
"diving" will be nonexistent -- Albertini Junior being the last
person to try it in 2030 (and they are still collecting pieces of
him from low lunar orbit.)
All in all, I vote for enlargening the boundaries of play and
outlawing all contact. Players will not allowed to form
walls nor will penalties be given. The goalie is allowed to
use special giant gloves to protect himself. These should
be approximately six feet in width and could also provide
a fine place for additional marketing slogans.
-Riff"Tranquility base here....we've just been cautioned"Ster
----------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: cpearson@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Chuck Pearson)
Date: 1997/12/01
Stan Collins (scollins@trinity.edu) wrote in response to riffster:
: > 1) Play in a centrifuge -- this will simulate gravity through
: > centrifugal force.
: There's no such thing as "centrifugal force". There's inertia in a
: circle. I'm not sure what that means, but my physics teachers always
: made sure to point it out to me.
inertia in a circle. i like that.
it means the "centrifugal force" is a pseudoforce - it doesn't really
exist. the "force" you feel in a centrifuge is really merely your
tendency to continue in a straight line. but you can't continue in a
straight line, 'cause this thing keeps pulling you in a circle. hence,
the "force."
it's the reason that gravity can be simulated in outer space in a hollow
tube that rotates at the right speed. you can be held on the inner
surface of the tube in a manner that simulates gravity simply by inertia.
: > 2) Weight the ball down accordingly -- six times heavier than usual.
: You know, galileo dropped two balls, one six times heavier than the
: other, and last time I checked, they both hit the ground at the same
: time.
never mind the fact that if you are playing in a centrifuge, this doesn't
matter beans.
chuck [besides, how do you deal with the fact that if you really *are*
playing in a centrifuge, to keep gravity constant you would have
to play on a curved surface?]
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Steve Jones
Date: 1997/12/02
HansAnders@hotmail.com writes:
> But the surface of the earth is curved too.
Oooooo but, and here is the clever bit, the force generated my a centrifuge
is _internal_ to the centrifuge. Where as Mr Gravity works externally as well.
Thus if you could create a centrifuge with the same curvature as the earth then
its going to be rather large and take quite a bit of energy to get it moving.
If Newton were alive today.... well he'd be scratching on his coffin lid.
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Mark Blackman
Date: 1997/12/02
Well there just so happens that there is a large object, with earth-like curvature
near to the moon, and strangely it also happens to come with an earth-like
atmosphere, grass, football pitches etc.
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Steve Jones
Date: 1997/12/02
Its not quite working as a centrifuge though.
Okay moving on from physics to biology, Richard Dawkins put forward the
concept of "memes" ideas that evolve and gain strength through recognition,
is football the most powerful meme on the planet ?
Thus if relgious nutters are right, and they aren't, and man represents
the pinicle of evolution then football represents the pinicle of human
existance.
Next week Albert Camus on saving penalty kicks.
----------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Mark Blackman
Date: 1997/12/02
Your statement, reduced, states that football does NOT represent the pinnacle of human
existence, in your opinion. I disagree.
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: M.A.Brown@amtp.cam.ac.uk (Matthew A. Brown)
Date: 1997/12/02
Tut, tut, Mark. Careful with your logic there.
I'm sure you can find the problem.
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Mark Blackman
Date: 1997/12/02
Axiom 1 (Religious Nutters' Law): Man represents the pinnacle of evolution.
Theorem 1: Football is man's ultimate achievement.
(proof: by inspection)
Corollary 1.1: Football represents the pinnacle of human existence.
However, axiom 1 is incorrect, in Steve's opinion, hence Corollary 1.1 is also
incorrect. Or am I wrong?
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: M.A.Brown@amtp.cam.ac.uk (Matthew A. Brown)
Date: 1997/12/02
The mistake is assuming that A=>B is equivalent to Not A=> Not B.
Or in other words, the corollary is not necessarily incorrect only
because the proof is flawed. It could still be correct for entirely
different reasons. Which is the case here :-)
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Mark Blackman
Date: 1997/12/03
In the closed universe that is Steve's post, there can be no 'different
reasons'. Anyhow this has gone way of topic. I'll ask another question - could it
be possible that whilst we play football on the surface of this planet (and also,
apparently, soon on the moon as well), microscopic organisms could be playing on
the surface of the ball? if so would the motion of the football effect the progress
of their game?
---------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rule changes for 2038.
From: Steve Jones
Date: 1997/12/03
:-)
They used a statically charged ball that is thus attracted to the "pitch"
(our ball) and wear statically charged boots. This is why sometimes when
you kick the ball it stings, its isn't because you mis-kicked it, but
because there was a free kick and you hit their wall.