[Sigi_BC84]

the saint, on Jun 26 2006, 07:27 PM, said:

You lot actually awake when it comes to all this red card stuff? I've told you all before that its FIFAs fault clamping down on all the wrong things. Instead of allowing a certain amount of physicality and cutting out all the cheating (some teams are much worse than others, but as this is a multi-national board, I won't shame which ones cheat their way to victory as their first course of action because it will only rile people).

To be honest I'd like to hear the names from you. You have made quite a few well-informed comments so far, why should anybody blame you for dropping a few names. When in doubt, people will assume anyway that it's just out of frustration about the English performance ;-).

I agree with what you have said about a good ref policy so far. Too many yellows are shown for acceptable tackles. On the other hand, some really annoying stuff (like dress tucking) has almost vanished due to the hard line the refs are going about this. So the situation is not completely hopeless.

No, what I find the most annoying are the fussy offside decisions. 1 out of 3 offsides are actual equal height situations decided in favor of the defending team (actually they should be made in favor of the advancing team, according to official policy). This is so damn frustrating. Beautiful advances are stopped because the linesman imagines an offside. One of my friends has suggested to bring in two additional linesmen and only give a freekick if both of them see an offside. Maybe this would work, anyways something has to be done.

I also agree with what you have said quite in the beginning of this thread about the general quality of the refs: having only Champions League refs would be a lot better. Just for the sake of internationalism the FIFA is bringing in too many inexperienced referees from countries without high class tournaments/leagues.

Quote

As a result, you only have to breath on someone to get booked and it has turned into a diving competition to see who can get the most opponents sent off. To encourage free flowing football, you have to allow challenges to be made. All this stop-start nonsense has stifled games. Players must also be banned immediately from harassing the referees. It is ugly and unsportsmanlike - witness Podolski's patting the ref on the back for sending off Lucic. There is no place for that.

Podolski is young and inexperienced, and I also think he's not the brightest. Probably refs don't take it even seriously if such players do that. In principle you are right, of course, but I think there are worse offenses.

A good referee will get so much respect that the players won't even dare patronizing or harassment (cf. Collina).

--Sigi

[Gerardo]

Sigi_BC84, on Jun 26 2006, 03:31 PM, said:

I will follow-up again after the Germans have sent Argentina home on Friday.

Open one, I think. Hope you're wrong. And you're at home already.


(continuing for older post): I AM from Argentina. BUT
Host team always got the upper hand, more before the TV brought BIG $$$ (see Sweden 2nd in 1958, Chile 3rd in 1962, Eng-Arg german ref and Ger-Uru english ref in 1966 for examples, Arg-Per after Bra-Pol in 1978 for examples), but still going on (Korea in 2002).

[Sigi_BC84]

Gerardo, on Jun 26 2006, 10:35 PM, said:

Host team always got the upper hand, more before the TV brought BIG $$$ (see Sweden 2nd in 1958, Chile 3rd in 1962, Eng-Arg german ref and Ger-Uru english ref in 1966 for examples, Arg-Per after Bra-Pol in 1978 for examples), but still going on (Korea in 2002).

OK, I thought you were referring to the group lottery. In Italy there were the usual ridiculous speculations about fraud (quite funnily, one of their theories was that the ballots containing the easy opponents for Germany have been kept in a fridge until right before the broadcast :-). I think the easy groups are a result of the fact that too many weak teams are allowed into the World Cup. Group A hasn't been the only easy one (Group D had Iran and Angola, Group H Saudi-Arabia and Tunisia and an overrated Ukraine).

Undoubtedly the host nation has certain advantage to their side, but at the moment I don't see were Germany has been given unfair advantages because they're the host nation.

--Sigi

[mgoetze]

Sigi_BC84, on Jun 26 2006, 07:56 PM, said:

Just for the sake of internationalism the FIFA is bringing in too many inexperienced referees from countries without high class tournaments/leagues.

Countries like, oh, I dunno, England?

(Think Croatia vs. Australia.)

[Gerardo]

Sigi_BC84, on Jun 26 2006, 06:27 PM, said:

OK, I thought you were referring to the group lottery.

That too, BOTH Korea and Japan group heads in 2002.

Well, you got an easy group, and guaranteed to not meet Brazil before the finals, provided both win the group.

Our group was much harder (on paper, turned out not to be), including Pele taking the balls in the lottery(!).

If you think I'm paranoid, maybe, but it doesn't mean they are not after you :-)

[Codo]

the saint, on Jun 27 2006, 02:27 AM, said:

You lot actually awake when it comes to all this red card stuff? I've told you all before that its FIFAs fault clamping down on all the wrong things. Instead of allowing a certain amount of physicality and cutting out all the cheating (some teams are much worse than others, but as this is a multi-national board, I won't shame which ones cheat their way to victory as their first course of action because it will only rile people). As a result, you only have to breath on someone to get booked and it has turned into a diving competition to see who can get the most opponents sent off. To encourage free flowing football, you have to allow challenges to be made. All this stop-start nonsense has stifled games. Players must also be banned immediately from harassing the referees. It is ugly and unsportsmanlike - witness Podolski's patting the ref on the back for sending off Lucic. There is no place for that.

Where to begin? KICK OUT SEPP BLATTER NOW. THE MAN IS A COMPLETE %*&*£!

This World Cup is being spoilt by his edicts.

Okay Sepp Blatter should be eleminated and Podolskis clap for the ref was wrong, but I disagree with the rest of your post.

What do you want to see in a football game?

I like to see high speed football, many shots on goal, nice tricks and fair sports. So any rule, which allows this is welcommed.

A lot of cards for "tactical" fouls, for tacklings, which may hurt the opponent, for time play and other ugly nonsports are wonderful.

So the second Yellow for Lucic was a good example. Klose simply won the fight and tried to run down the line. I had liked to see the attack, but no, Mr. Lukic played foul. I hate this and I believe, that a free kick is not sufficent for this kind of foul.


And I absolute disagree with all your protests against the refs.
I saw about 90 % right offsides descissions. And this is marvellous.
Of course, there had been some very stupid descissions too. There had been very big mistakes from some refs too. Esp. Mr. Iwanov had a bad day- not because of his single descissions, most had been right, but becuase he was not able to calm to the players.
But so what? Do the refs claim to be free of faults?

Players like Ballack tried five times to shoot on goal against Sweden. No success, some tries had been really bad. So he made mistakes. Joe Cole had some very bad tries too - and one of the nicest goals ever. Do you blame them for their bad tries? No.
So, why on earth do you believe, that refs must be without any mistake?

In my opinion, Football developes in the right direction. Away from wrestling, tactical fouls, bad habits to a game full of speed, tricks and shoots on goal.

[Codo]

Gerardo, on Jun 27 2006, 10:34 AM, said:

Sigi_BC84, on Jun 26 2006, 06:27 PM, said:

OK, I thought you were referring to the group lottery.

That too, BOTH Korea and Japan group heads in 2002.

Well, you got an easy group, and guaranteed to not meet Brazil before the finals, provided both win the group.

Our group was much harder (on paper, turned out not to be), including Pele taking the balls in the lottery(!).

If you think I'm paranoid, maybe, but it doesn't mean they are not after you :-)

It is always thew same. We are so lucky lucky lucky.
We had been so lucky, that we met the USA and south Korea in our way in the final 2002.
Okay, Italy had the same luck, they met south corea too, but failed.
We were looking for Argentina or France, but luckily, they did not reach the 2. round. Just pure luck. Or had other teams simply been better and deserved the right to play in the quarter- and semifinals?

And this time, we will meet Sweden and Argentina, Italy and Brazil. Well, just pure luck....

Germany competed in 13 World cups. They reached the finals 7 times. We must be the luckiest nation on this planet.

P.S: Host nations are always group heads and funnily enough, they (nearly) always make it into the second round.....

P.P.S. Argentina is guaranteed too not to meet Brazil before the finals.
But both of our teams are unlucky enough to play against the strongest possible opponent besides Brazil. I really had prefered anybody from Europe.

[whereagles]

Sigi_BC84, on Jun 26 2006, 06:36 PM, said:

I also think the Penalty Kick decision was okay.

Well, all the news I've read so far (except for italian, of course!) are unanimous in saying that was a phantom penalty

But the red card was quite overboard, I agree.

[hotShot]

For the referee this "penatly" situation was a no win scenario.

The australian player slides into the way of the italian (not playing the ball) and the italian player could not avoid (and did not even try to avoid) falling over him.
It does not matter which decision he made, it would have been disputed any way.

[Walddk]

Germany had a great team in the 70's with the likes of Maier, Vogts, Breitner, Beckenbauer, Overath, Grabowski and Müller, but I think it's fair to say that they haven't even come close to a team with that many profiles since then.

They always did well at major championships, right enough, but rarely because of spectacular football. Fight and a little luck with the draw (all teams need that) have been main factors. The team of today has very few profiles. Ballack and Klose are excellent players, and Lehmann is a fine goalkeeper. Not much more to write home about.

That might be enough to advance further, but I don't think and I don't hope it will. Argentina plays the kind of football I like to see, and I hope it will prevail.

I understand perfectly well that Sigi, Arend and Roland support their country. That's how it should be. Just like I supported my country in the 1992 European Championship final ... against Germany. They had all the stars, we had the better team on the day, and then of course Peter Schmeichel in goal.

Roland

[Gerardo]

Italy- S. Korea 2002: Thanks for the point. The Italians were robbed (and were just paid back against the Aussies, who probably don't have enough power to get a payback).

Roland, not saying the advantage is unfair, is is just accepted practice. You are just getting it as you are host. Let's see what happens with S. Africa in 4 years, ok?

Said all that just to show the group "lottery" is not a lottery at all, and that hosts get usually the better of it.

Another example: Italy 1990

Argentina played all group matches in Napoli (3 different stadiums for group matches started in 1998, before that, 1, rarely 2, was the norm).
At that point, Maradona had played there for 6 years, and was an absolute idol. So Argentina was the host team during the matches, spectators wise.
Had Argentina won the group, would had continue in Napoli till quarterfinals.
In semifinals, Italy was going to play in Napoli, and Argentina in some northern city, Milano or Torino,
completely away team for the exact same reason.

NO WAY this was not arranged that way!

P.S. Argentina ended 3rd in group stage, qualified (6 groups, 4 best 3rds passed), went to play to the North instead, and came back to Napoli in SF against Italy.
It is my candidate to worst runner-up in the history of the WC.

[Codo]

Walddk, on Jun 27 2006, 06:29 PM, said:

The team of today has very few profiles. Ballack and Klose are excellent players, and Lehmann is a fine goalkeeper. Not much more to write home about.

That might be enough to advance further, but I don't think and I don't hope it will. Argentina plays the kind of football I like to see, and I hope it will prevail.

But this is exactly the point. I love this world cup team, because they really are a team and work great as a team and they really PLAY football, they don´t work it..

Through all the years, luck, will power, tactics, great fitness and discipline had been the attitudes for german football.

During the last ten years, we learned, that this is not enough, so the next generation, like Lahm, Podolski and Schweinsteiger is able to play football.

It is the first time in my life, that german players play one touch football and that at least some, like Klose or Lahm are able to win a 1:1 situation in offense.
So I really hope, that they will survive this great quarter final, because I would hate, if they will turn back the clock and start the german football, they played some 20 years ago.

But if "we" should loose, at least we had lost against another marvellous team, no doubt.

Quote

I understand perfectly well that Sigi, Arend and Roland support their country. That's how it should be. Just like I supported my country in the 1992 European Championship final  ...  against Germany. They had all the stars, we had the better team on the day, and then of course Peter Schmeichel in goal.

This championship 1992 had a marvellous finish. I must admit, that right after the game was over, I was quite unhappy. But the next day, I was glad to see the danish team win.

[Codo]

Gerardo, on Jun 27 2006, 06:49 PM, said:

Italy- S. Korea 2002: Thanks for the point. The Italians were robbed (and were just paid back against the Aussies, who probably don't have enough power to get a payback).

No, in my view Italy did not get robbed. The ref was onesided, for sure. But it was their fault to play for a 1:0 and not look for a second or third goal. Same story as 2000 in the final against france in the european Championsship....
If they had made a second or third goal, even the referee had not been able to rob the Italians.

Quote

Roland, not saying the advantage is unfair, is is just accepted practice. You are just getting it as you are host. Let's see what happens with S. Africa in 4 years, ok?

Said all that just to show the group "lottery" is not a lottery at all, and that hosts get usually the better of it.

Another example: Italy 1990

Argentina played all group matches in Napoli (3 different stadiums for group matches started in 1998, before that, 1, rarely 2, was the norm).
At that point, Maradona had played there for 6 years, and was an absolute idol. So Argentina was the host team during the matches, spectators wise.
Had Argentina won the group, would had continue in Napoli till quarterfinals.
In semifinals, Italy was going to play in Napoli, and Argentina in some northern city, Milano or Torino,
completely away team for the exact same reason.

NO WAY this was not arranged that way!

P.S. Argentina ended 3rd in group stage, qualified (6 groups, 4 best 3rds passed), went to play to the North instead, and came back to Napoli in SF against Italy.
It is my candidate to worst runner-up in the history of the WC.

Yes we agree, the hosts are seeded as if they are great nations. No doubt about this. Sometimes, the host is Italy or Germany and there is no big change, but in 2002, we had two hosts, which are not among the leading nations, so this was quite different.
And it is common practice to place the host in group A and the defending Champion as far away as possible.
You may agree or disagree, but yes this happens in every Worl Cup.

I think, it was a great idea to put Argentina to Napoli, just because of Maradonna. It gave them an advantage, sure, but it gave thousnad italians a chance to see their hero again. Nothing wrong with this in my view.
They did the same to Germany. We played many games in Milano, where a lot of Germans played for Inter at that time.

[the saint]

Gerardo, on Jun 27 2006, 09:49 AM, said:

Another example: Italy 1990

Argentina played all group matches in Napoli

No. Their first was definitely in the San Siro where they lost 1-0 to Cameroon.

I agree they were a terrible finalist, being dependent still on Maradona who by that time was starting to show the effects of his somewhat hedonistic lifestyle.

I personally don't want the Argentinians to win, because they still resort to the dark arts IMO. They have played the best football of the tournament so far, but that isn't enough for me.

Putting my neutral hat on, I would have liked Holland, the Czechs or Spain to win. But, Holland are out and I don't think this side was worthy of winning a World Cup compared to some of their predecessors, and in Robben they have had the most shameless diver of the event. The Czechs are out too having suffered from injuries and then self-destructing - this team won't all be around in 4 years time. So if England can't win, I want Spain to. They for me have played the best football apart from Argentina, but without all the other stuff.

[Rain]

Not Africa's time.

[Aberlour10]

Rain, on Jun 27 2006, 03:20 PM, said:

Not Africa's time.

but Zizouuuuuu's time...

well done Zinedine

[hotShot]

Only 8 left and we are almost back to the usual suspects.

Argentina
Brasil
England
France
Germany
Italy
Portugal
Ukraine

But my impression is that most of them had a hard time getting there.

[the saint]

France deserved it. Spain played with fear in the second half. There were, however, two incidents of the sort I have been bemoaning though. Thierry Henry and Fernando Torres both going to the ground clutching their faces when no contact had been made. Both are great players and although I don't see enough Spanish football to judge Torres' character, it was certainly out of character for Henry (even though I think there is bad blood between him and Puyol after the Champion's League Final). It was a foul by Puyol for a deliberate obstruction, but no contact was made to the face.

This is the kind of thing that FIFA must stop. But they refuse to look at events like this retrospectively. Naming, shaming, banning and humiliating those players involved is required. If France lost Henry for 6,8,10 games then its a huge blow. Sadly too, the referee, having been excellent for most of the match, got card happy towards the end, when I doubt there was a single bookable challenge in the match.

No team is innocent. Even England - Gerrard dived for a penalty in a warm-up match against Hungary and there was a large debate about whether we should do it because everyone else does, or whether we should take the moral high ground, play cleanly and possibly lose. The debate goes on...

Who will win? The lesson from tonight's match is that the team that wants it will win. The French showed some ambition. The event will be won by the players who are prepared to take the games by the scruff of the neck. The candidates so far for me are Messi, Rooney and after the last two matches Vieira. All have shown much more desire to drive their sides on than any other players I have seen yet.

[Sigi_BC84]

hotShot, on Jun 27 2006, 10:59 PM, said:

Only 8 left and we are almost back to the usual suspects.

Argentina
Brasil
England
France
Germany
Italy
Portugal
Ukraine

But my impression is that most of them had a hard time getting there.

Yeah, fascinating actually. In the next round, three big names will have to leave the stage.

My bet: France, Ukraine and England; I hope the fourth one will be Argentina, but unfortunately it's 50/50 or so odds... England have their chances to advance as well (I've started telling myself that so I won't be so disappointed if it actually happens ;-).

Personal nightmare scenario: France, England and Ukraine somehow manage to worm their way through, while Germany gets eliminated in the last second. I don't want to think about it :-).

--Sigi

[Sigi_BC84]

Walddk, on Jun 27 2006, 11:29 AM, said:

They always did well at major championships, right enough, but rarely because of spectacular football. Fight and a little luck with the draw (all teams need that) have been main factors. The team of today has very few profiles. Ballack and Klose are excellent players, and Lehmann is a fine goalkeeper. Not much more to write home about.

Sorry, I can't hold myself back to address this.

Firstly, should the question be why a team is successful? You're mentioning "spectacular football". Which teams are actually consistenly guilty of such? Even the Netherlands and Brazil (!) have started to play "result oriented".
No, honestly I think when you're discussing EC and WC success, in the end what counts are titles and results. Many factors are involved, including luck, determination, team play, coaching, individual quality of players and tradition of a team.

There are not many teams in the world which are playing consistenly successful soccer in international events -- now like it or not, but one of them is, and will be, Germany. Whinging about their style does not change that.

I'm wondering why nobody is mentioning Italy. They often play unfair (ie. foul), they are not afraid of pouring loads of concrete into their own penalty area when they see fit and -- worst of all -- they're terribly sore losers. And Germany gets the blame for playing "boring soccer". This smells a bit like envy. (Before anybody jumps at my throat for mentioning Italy: I am not anti-Italian, I rather find their attitude quite amusing.)

Secondly, please, please at least try to consider that the current German team is a young team (as is the Dutch one, mind you). You can't expect a bunch of legends with star qualities here. What I really admire is Klinsmanns ability to finally make a change and rejuvenate the team. So far, it has worked great. They are a team, and that's why they are successful without many stars.

I can tell you, Germans are renowned for their defeatism, and rightly so. They like to critize everything, including the national team. Finally this has changed for a few weeks, and most importantly, for a reason. This team deserves to be praised, and they are thriving on it. And I can tell you, it feels really good to all of us.

End of rant.

--Sigi