Korea
[quote]eisenaffe wrote:
Well done Ghana!
Ghana beats the Czechs. After an early lead they manage to defend the score against one of the best teams so far in the tournament and score another one to take the win for sure. Ghana’s defense stood like a wall and their middlefield outplayed the czechs gloriusly. One thing to work on, for the ghanaian, is their scoring, it needs to be more sophisticated and not lose numerous chances.
What they need now is that the US beats Italy.
Go USA![/quote]
Im at a loss. Im in my back garden constructing my dipping station when i get the shout that fucking Ghana have beaten my team for the tourny (Besides England), the czech republic. WTF? This is what seperates the World cup from many sporting events in my opinion. Its unpredictability.
Roll on the last round of games!!
I know I could rely on rational german argumentation to solve our little dispute.
Hotsauce and Eisenaffe, your posts show that you know how to make a case. Your rethoric is sharp, clear and comes to the point. You leave out what’s unnecessary and focus on the large picture (especially Hotsauce).
[quote]supermick wrote:
Im at a loss. Im in my back garden constructing my dipping station when i get the shout that fucking Ghana have beaten my team for the tourny (Besides England), the czech republic. WTF? This is what seperates the World cup from many sporting events in my opinion. Its unpredictability.
Roll on the last round of games!![/quote]
Exactly. That is makes the WC so interesting. The gap between international teams is not so big like in american sports like AFootball or Baseball.
Nontheless, to claim the title, a team has must have a tremendous “company spirit”. That is why home soil is of great benefit and the reason why Germany will prevail this year.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
supermick wrote:
Im at a loss. Im in my back garden constructing my dipping station when i get the shout that fucking Ghana have beaten my team for the tourny (Besides England), the czech republic. WTF? This is what seperates the World cup from many sporting events in my opinion. Its unpredictability.
Roll on the last round of games!!
Exactly. That is makes the WC so interesting. The gap between international teams is not so big like in american sports like AFootball or Baseball.
Nontheless, to claim the title, a team has must have a tremendous “company spirit”. That is why home soil is of great benefit and the reason why Germany will prevail this year.
[/quote]
Not gonna happen fella…lol
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Exactly. That is makes the WC so interesting. The gap between international teams is not so big like in american sports like AFootball or Baseball.
[/quote]
Um, as far as I know only Americans play football - even the Canadian and European teams are manned by American players. Therefore there is no international “gap”
And part of the brilliance of the NFL is that there is so much parity - on any given Sunday anyone can beat anyone - and every year you’ll usually have a differenct champion. It is not a monopoly on talent that you’ll find in European football - where all the best players are concentrated on 3-4 teams - those same 3-4 teams who end up winning the title every year. That does get a bit boring.
Consider that in Spain Real Madrid and FC Barcelona have over 80% of all La Liga titles. Juve, Inter and AC probably have something similar in Italy - and fuck Bayern Munich pretty much wins it every year in the Bundesliga.
I’m hoping that Germany tanks against Ecuador so England v. Germany goes down in the 2nd round.
I’m also rooting for Korea to go through in their group - so the Spaniards can have their revenge for the FIFA sanctioned referee raping they received in the 2002 quarters. Then the Koreans will see what a pissed off Spanish side can do without the referee giving them all the calls to keep them in the game.
[quote]OARSMAN wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Exactly. That is makes the WC so interesting. The gap between international teams is not so big like in american sports like AFootball or Baseball.
Um, as far as I know only Americans play football - even the Canadian and European teams are manned by American players. Therefore there is no international “gap”
And part of the brilliance of the NFL is that there is so much parity - on any given Sunday anyone can beat anyone - and every year you’ll usually have a differenct champion. It is not a monopoly on talent that you’ll find in European football - where all the best players are concentrated on 3-4 teams - those same 3-4 teams who end up winning the title every year. That does get a bit boring.
Consider that in Spain Real Madrid and FC Barcelona have over 80% of all La Liga titles. Juve, Inter and AC probably have something similar in Italy - and fuck Bayern Munich pretty much wins it every year in the Bundesliga.
[/quote]
Your draft system allows for his and is pretty much unique in the world as far as im aware. Besides you Americans have some hope tonight, as well as a Hero. His name is Casey Keller and if you get through to the next round then you have him to thank.
Get behind your team.
america were unlucky tonite they got a goal ruled out which shouldn have been.
In addition guys from the US…
You should now HATE italy and have a gut wrecnhing feeling that the referee fucked you over. You need to be optimistic that your lads can still qualify for the next round so long as you can beat them Ghanain bastards!!!
I will teach you how to support properly. Never fear!!
[quote]supermick wrote:
In addition guys from the US…
You should now HATE italy and have a gut wrecnhing feeling that the referee fucked you over. You need to be optimistic that your lads can still qualify for the next round so long as you can beat them Ghanain bastards!!!
I will teach you how to support properly. Never fear!![/quote]
As a matter of fact, I’m REALLY rooting for Italy now because a USA win and an Italy win send us through to the second round.
That ref really did fuck up the game. I heard he was suspended for the 02 WC for “inconsistencies”, whatever that means. I can’t understand why they need to bring a questionable ref back into the fold anyway. I agreed with the two yellows on Pope, but I think Mastroeni’s red was undeserved. It was a yellow for sure, but not a red.
[quote]supermick wrote:
You should now HATE italy and have a gut wrecnhing feeling that the referee fucked you over. You need to be optimistic that your lads can still qualify for the next round so long as you can beat them Ghanain bastards!!!
[/quote]
Hate Italy? I’ll be one of their biggest fans until they beat the Czechs, THEN I’ll hate them 
And I couldn’t be prouder of the US side. This may have been a tie, but they held up under pressure that would have destroyed them in the past. I personally view this as one of the best matches the US has ever played. As I watched it, I kept thinking of the “plucky American underdogs” refusing to give up. Now if only they could actually score a goal in this cup …
[quote]dcb wrote:
supermick wrote:
In addition guys from the US…
You should now HATE italy and have a gut wrecnhing feeling that the referee fucked you over. You need to be optimistic that your lads can still qualify for the next round so long as you can beat them Ghanain bastards!!!
I will teach you how to support properly. Never fear!!
As a matter of fact, I’m REALLY rooting for Italy now because a USA win and an Italy win send us through to the second round.
That ref really did fuck up the game. I heard he was suspended for the 02 WC for “inconsistencies”, whatever that means. I can’t understand why they need to bring a questionable ref back into the fold anyway. I agreed with the two yellows on Pope, but I think Mastroeni’s red was undeserved. It was a yellow for sure, but not a red.
[/quote]
The Mastroeni call was just ridiculous and could have been one of the biggest deciding points of that match. First, he actually got the ball before hitting the feet.
Second, if they are calling that “spikes up”, his feet were flat to the ground. I mean, come on! What a royal screw-job that was. As much as I love soccer, when I see calls like that, I get incredibly suspicious (hell, just look at Juventus).
I was pleased we played with a lot more passion and enthusiasm. We just kept attacking, which was great. I did think McBride could have made a lot more of his 2nd half chance as opposed to popping it wide, but oh well.
Actually, one last thing. That offside that negated the Beasley goal - questionable at best. The one guy who was “offside” was not involved in the play and it was not like it was a pass to him - it was a damn shot on goal! Am I just taking crazy (and horribly biased) pills here in thinking that was a poor call?
[quote]dcb wrote:
That ref really did fuck up the game. I heard he was suspended for the 02 WC for “inconsistencies”, whatever that means. I can’t understand why they need to bring a questionable ref back into the fold anyway. I agreed with the two yellows on Pope, but I think Mastroeni’s red was undeserved. It was a yellow for sure, but not a red.
[/quote]
OK, took a look at the article about the match on ESPN.com:
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=371526&cc=5901
In the side bar box in the story is the following:
[quote]
Jorge Larrionda, the Uruguayan referee who handed out three red cards in Saturday’s game between the United States and Italy, was suspended for six months in 2002 by his country’s soccer authorities.
Larrionda was one of five referees to be suspended for “irregularities,” a decision that prevented them from officiating in local or international matches.
The suspensions reportedly were connected with accusations of corruption between members of rival unions that represent Uruguay’s match officials.[/quote]
Gee, well that’s encouraging.
[quote]
The Mastroeni call was just ridiculous and could have been one of the biggest deciding points of that match. First, he actually got the ball before hitting the feet.
Second, if they are calling that “spikes up”, his feet were flat to the ground. I mean, come on! What a royal screw-job that was. As much as I love soccer, when I see calls like that, I get incredibly suspicious (hell, just look Juventus).
I was pleased we played with a lot more passion and enthusiasm. We just kept attacking, which was great. I did think McBride could have made a lot more of his 2nd half chance as opposed to popping it wide, but oh well.
Actually, one last thing. That offside that negated the Beasley goal - questionable at best. The one guy who was “offside” was not involved in the play and it was not like it was a pass to him - it was a damn shot on goal! Am I just taking crazy (and horribly biased) pills here in thinking that was a poor call?[/quote]
I agree that the Mastroeni call was ridiculous. I can see a yellow, but not a red.
Also, trying to be objective about the offside call that took back the goal, FIFA rules state that someone is offside if they gain an advantage by being in that position or they interfere with play.
It’s at least arguable that McBride gave the US an advantage or interfered by blocking the keeper’s view. I couldn’t really tell in the replay, but I think it might be a more legitimate call then the red on Mastroeni.
[quote]Kuz wrote:
dcb wrote:
supermick wrote:
In addition guys from the US…
You should now HATE italy and have a gut wrecnhing feeling that the referee fucked you over. You need to be optimistic that your lads can still qualify for the next round so long as you can beat them Ghanain bastards!!!
I will teach you how to support properly. Never fear!!
As a matter of fact, I’m REALLY rooting for Italy now because a USA win and an Italy win send us through to the second round.
That ref really did fuck up the game. I heard he was suspended for the 02 WC for “inconsistencies”, whatever that means. I can’t understand why they need to bring a questionable ref back into the fold anyway. I agreed with the two yellows on Pope, but I think Mastroeni’s red was undeserved. It was a yellow for sure, but not a red.
The Mastroeni call was just ridiculous and could have been one of the biggest deciding points of that match. First, he actually got the ball before hitting the feet.
Second, if they are calling that “spikes up”, his feet were flat to the ground. I mean, come on! What a royal screw-job that was. As much as I love soccer, when I see calls like that, I get incredibly suspicious (hell, just look at Juventus).
I was pleased we played with a lot more passion and enthusiasm. We just kept attacking, which was great. I did think McBride could have made a lot more of his 2nd half chance as opposed to popping it wide, but oh well.
Actually, one last thing. That offside that negated the Beasley goal - questionable at best. The one guy who was “offside” was not involved in the play and it was not like it was a pass to him - it was a damn shot on goal! Am I just taking crazy (and horribly biased) pills here in thinking that was a poor call?[/quote]
I actually think that was a good call. There would have been no problem if he was onside but he wasnt and he obscured the keepers vision.
Mcbride did well to come back on. He’s a good player too imo.
[quote]supermick wrote:
I actually think that was a good call. There would have been no problem if he was onside but he wasnt and he obscured the keepers vision.
Mcbride did well to come back on. He’s a good player too imo.[/quote]
Yup, you’re right. This is part of FIFA’s offside rule:
“# Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent?s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.”
McBride did block the keepers line of vision.
[quote]dcb wrote:
supermick wrote:
I actually think that was a good call. There would have been no problem if he was onside but he wasnt and he obscured the keepers vision.
Mcbride did well to come back on. He’s a good player too imo.
Yup, you’re right. This is part of FIFA’s offside rule:
“# Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent?s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.”
McBride did block the keepers line of vision.
[/quote]
Fair enough. I would need to see the replay again, but I will take your word for it.
I was dissapointed that we didn’t see Eddie Johnson in the game there, maybe his speed would’ve been useful with the players out of the game, but McBride was doing a good job of winning a lot of balls sent deep by Keller. It just sucks he basically botched that one scoring opportunity he had by sending the shot off to to the left. I don’t think that’s where he was trying to put that ball.
You are certainly right about Keller, that one save he made was amazing.
BTW, I’ve never seen so many offsides as Italy had in that game!
A gutsy performance from the US, and very entertaining for the neutral spectator, unlike any England match so far!
Hate to say it though about a match with 3 red cards, but I thought the ref had a good game.