2010 FIFA World Cup

Originally posted by Robtard
Gift isn't their fault; discontinuing that offside (which I am), they still outplayed the shit out of Mexico.

Mexicans did play dirty, even before that 1st goal, several occasions where the camera showed clear abuse. Think that had something to do with it, the shove right before the whistle.

that's bullshit...what kind of game did you watch? the Argentinians subsequently stopped playing after the 3:0, which gave Mexico the upper hand...admittingly too late but still, was enough for Hernandez to score and as for fairplay, well the Gauchos did their fair share of provoking Mexico...

Originally posted by RogerRamjet
that's bullshit...what kind of game did you watch? the Argentinians subsequently stopped playing after the 3:0, which gave Mexico the upper hand...admittingly too late but still, was enough for Hernandez to score and as for fairplay, well the Gauchos did their fair share of provoking Mexico...

I watched the game where Argentina won 2-1(in reality) and had the ball more often, which one did you watch?

Dirty tactics the Argentinians used doesn't come close to Messi being intentionally kicked over and over and then there were several blatant MEX on ARG shoves/knock-downs the camera caught, but the Ref apparently didn't.

Brazil vs Spain finals lets make it happen.

So, yet another glorious day in Football. Poor officiating screwed over two teams today.
Seriously, goal-line technology and such shit should be incorporated to make up for the fallibility of the officials. This is one time I wish FIFA would get their heads out of their asses.

The second half of the Eng-Ger game probably wouldn't have been as one-sided as it was, had Lampard's goal counted.
Meh, still glad Germany & Argentina are meeting in the QF.

I agree, these bad decisions decide games, if Englands goal would have been given they woulnd't have had to open up like that and get 2 counter attacking goals. The England defenders positioning was abysmal and Germany deserved to win imo because they were technically superior in every department, hungrier and played like they were enjoying themselves.

The Argentina v Mexico game's bad decision was even worse, as it did change the whole match. Mexico were playing well until they went a goal down.

These sort of things annoy me so much I think Ill loose interest in the sport.

Got another question for you, Bic, as you've done a great job of answering my questions. BTW, I've watched probably 15 matches thus far in the Cup and am getting pretty familiar with most everything that occurs in the games, tactically and rulebased...but this one drives me up the wall:

At about the 80 minute mark of the ARG/MEX game, a MEX player crosses in front of the ARG goal and two opposing players dive for it. The ball hits the ARG player in the face, and he goes down. The ARG clear is poor and MEX gains possession outside the penalty box. However, because the ARG player is writhing around on the goal line some 20-or-so seconds later, the referee blows the whistle to stop play for the sake of the injured ARG player. The result? A goal kick for ARG, which takes the ball away from the MEX attack and kills momentum. I also saw this happen in the Ivory Coast/Brazil game when Ivory Coast was on the attack. The Brazil player was injured (I guess) and they took the ball away from the Ivory Coast, who was just seconds away from a possible shot.

Why isn't it like hockey on a delayed penalty call? In short, play doesn't stop for a penalty until the infracting team gains possession. I think play shouldn't stop until the teammates of the writhing team gains possession. Otherwise, why not just flop and dive whenever the other team goes on a counter-attack and end their possession and give your team a goal kick?

The only thing I can think of is that the referee thought the MEX player injured the ARG player instead of the ball?? Help me out on this one, b/c it doesn't seem the least bit fair.

Originally posted by botankus
Got another question for you, Bic, as you've done a great job of answering my questions. BTW, I've watched probably 15 matches thus far in the Cup and am getting pretty familiar with most everything that occurs in the games, tactically and rulebased...but this one drives me up the wall:

At about the 80 minute mark of the ARG/MEX game, a MEX player crosses in front of the ARG goal and two opposing players dive for it. The ball hits the ARG player in the face, and he goes down. The ARG clear is poor and MEX gains possession outside the penalty box. However, because the ARG player is writhing around on the goal line some 20-or-so seconds later, the referee blows the whistle to stop play for the sake of the injured ARG player. The result? A goal kick for ARG, which takes the ball away from the MEX attack and kills momentum. Why isn't it like hockey on a delayed penalty call? In short, play doesn't stop for a penalty until the infracting team gains possession. I think play shouldn't stop until the teammates of the writhing team gains possession. Otherwise, why not just flop and dive whenever the other team goes on a counter-attack and end their possession and give your team a goal kick?

The only thing I can think of is that the referee thought the MEX player injured the ARG player instead of the ball?? Help me out on this one, b/c it doesn't seem the least bit fair.

I also saw this happen in the Ivory Coast/Brazil game when Ivory Coast was on the attack. The Brazil player was injured (I guess) and they took the ball away from the Ivory Coast, who was just seconds away from a possible shot.

Yeah, that's the only explanation I can think of unless it was offside, rather than a free kick. There's definitely no reason for it to be a goal kick unless it goes out of bounds. He probably thought that the guy fouled him or someone else was fouled. Did the commentary not say anything about it?

Yes, they were saying that the ball hit his face, which led me to think the refs erroneously thought it was a foul on the MEX player. The referee sure took his time calling it, though. The player was writhing about for a good while before they stopped play. I'm sure if he had gotten up after only a few seconds that nothing would have been called, so good job on his part, I suppose.

I want Capello sacked.

How are you enjoying it botankus?

I'm really getting into it and will still watch even though the US has been eliminated. I never thought I'd be glued to the couch at the 55' mark of a Uruguay/South Korea match, not wanting to even use the restroom or get a drink from the refrigerator, but I was.

Now that the US is gone, I have varied rooting interests. In terms of pure entertainment, I like watching the Dutch or the Germans. In terms of country allegiance, I'd like to see Argentina do well as my parents hosted 2 students from Argentina in a student-exchange program. And yes, they were both hot chicks.

I would also agree with those that say video instant replay should be used for goal and non-goal reversals, but still the initial decision to stop play is always going to be subjective. A standard has to be set as to which "non-goals" will be reviewed...because on the field they were not goals.

Originally posted by botankus
Got another question for you, Bic, as you've done a great job of answering my questions. BTW, I've watched probably 15 matches thus far in the Cup and am getting pretty familiar with most everything that occurs in the games, tactically and rulebased...but this one drives me up the wall:

At about the 80 minute mark of the ARG/MEX game, a MEX player crosses in front of the ARG goal and two opposing players dive for it. The ball hits the ARG player in the face, and he goes down. The ARG clear is poor and MEX gains possession outside the penalty box. However, because the ARG player is writhing around on the goal line some 20-or-so seconds later, the referee blows the whistle to stop play for the sake of the injured ARG player. The result? A goal kick for ARG, which takes the ball away from the MEX attack and kills momentum. I also saw this happen in the Ivory Coast/Brazil game when Ivory Coast was on the attack. The Brazil player was injured (I guess) and they took the ball away from the Ivory Coast, who was just seconds away from a possible shot.

Why isn't it like hockey on a delayed penalty call? In short, play doesn't stop for a penalty until the infracting team gains possession. I think play shouldn't stop until the teammates of the writhing team gains possession. Otherwise, why not just flop and dive whenever the other team goes on a counter-attack and end their possession and give your team a goal kick?

The only thing I can think of is that the referee thought the MEX player injured the ARG player instead of the ball?? Help me out on this one, b/c it doesn't seem the least bit fair.

It can only have been a free kick if it was a foul, or a goal kick if it went out, so he must have seen it wrong.

If a player injures himself and it looks bad, especially a head injury, and the opposing team doesn´t put the ball out of play (which they normally do, fair play) then the referee can stop the game, and re-start it with a ref´s ball. That´s is he drops it on the floor and two opposing players try and get the ball.

But normally it´s fair play to kick the ball out, of course if it´s in the opponents penalty area and someone injures himself, the the ref can let play continue giving the team a chance to score. Then when the balls out of play get the player seen to.

It´s basically at the referee´s descretion what happens. And as you pointed out some teams use this as a negative tactic slow the game down, break the opponents rythm or preventing a goal chance. Sad as it is, some teams do this.

If you saw the England V Germany and Argentina V Mexico matches you might have noticed that England and Germany played hard but very fair, unlike the other game which had a hint of the bad side of football. Watch the Germany v Argentina match to see more of Argentina´s ranting and unfair play.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I want Capello sacked.

That wouldn´t achieve much except maybe an English manager could understand the mentality better. T

The English players still have the "give the ball away, and lets welly long balls up field" genetic problem in their DNA.

Until they are taught to keep the ball at a young age, doing lot´s of 2 touch small field games, box work and getting the kids to play on smaller pitches like other top European countries so they learn technical ability, nothing will change.

Having 11 or 12 year olds play 11 a side on full size pitch is just rediculous, they spend more time running than controlling the ball.

Here's hoping Chile pulls a win out of the asses.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
I agree, these bad decisions decide games, if Englands goal would have been given they woulnd't have had to open up like that and get 2 counter attacking goals. The England defenders positioning was abysmal and Germany deserved to win imo because they were technically superior in every department, hungrier and played like they were enjoying themselves.

The Argentina v Mexico game's bad decision was even worse, as it did change the whole match. Mexico were playing well until they went a goal down.

These sort of things annoy me so much I think Ill loose interest in the sport.

Agreed. Even though IMO England started the second half better, they just gave up after a bit. Had it been 2-2 like it should have been, they would have fought for longer.
The offside incident was horrendous. facepalm2 How that linesman did not see Tevez being offside is beyond me.

Match-changing incidents deserve the usage instant replay for justification. Then we wouldn't have incidents like Fabiano's goal counting against Ivory Coast (where he handled the ball twice), or Kaka being sent off for no fault of his in the same game.
Instant replay won't even slow down the game by much anyway. The game is already slowed down every time some one is injured.

Instant replay for questionable goals wouldn't add that that much time, they could show it to the Ref on the big screens, almost instantly, should there be a dispute.

Brazil 1-0 will be my guess

1st half just ended; it's 2-0 Brazil, so your guess sucks.

Originally posted by Robtard
1st half just ended; it's 2-0 Brazil, so your guess sucks.

yeh totally sucks 😆

I can smell a few cards in this game, Chille seem to be impatient and hectic as usual. Exciting to watch, but the finishing is what´s missing.

Originally posted by Robtard
Instant replay for questionable goals wouldn't add that that much time, they could show it to the Ref on the big screens, almost instantly, should there be a dispute.

Indeed, or they could have the 4th official watching replays. Hell, a member from each team could watch replays, and a team could challenge a questionable decision of the referee, much like it is in the NFL.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
Brazil 1-0 will be my guess

It's already 2-0 313

Maybe a 4-1 repeat of the Brazil-Chile match in '98.