2014 World Cup

[pineapple stu]

Yeah, I didn't think it was a penalty; the keeper got there. But had the keeper missed the ball, I think you can give a penalty even if the player wasn't going to get the ball. Just it can't be a professional foul.

And again, it was surely a corner?

[pineapple stu]

Good enough for Chile there. A nice counter goal while a Chilean player dives to the ground for a free in vain.

[DannyInvincible]

I'd say the minimal touch on the ball is enough in that case. The later contact didn't affect the outcome.

I don't suppose you saw the discussion I was having with osarusan on the tackler making contact with the ball a few pages back? Are there instances where you think contact to the ball wouldn't be enough to justify the awarding of a penalty? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts as, if I recall correctly, you were critical of the "expert opinion" and thought the Zabaleta tackle in the Iran game constituted a foul even though he had made contact with the ball? If I was reading him correctly, for osarusan it was a simple case of: penalty if no contact made with ball; no penalty if contact made with ball.

[DannyInvincible]

I'm sure you love this story, TOWK!: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27969231 :p


England captain Steven Gerrard has called on Harry Redknapp to name names after he claimed players tried to avoid international duty when he was in charge at Tottenham.

QPR boss Redknapp told BBC Radio 5 Live's Sportsweek programme: "They'd come to me 10 days before the game and say 'gaffer get me out of the game. I don't want to play in it'."

Gerrard, speaking as England prepare to play their final World Cup game against Costa Rica in Belo Horizonte, said: "I'll tell you what - I'd be interested to find out who those players are.

"If Harry is making a comment like that he should name them and embarrass them. No-one in this group wants to go home - no-one."

Redknapp was giving his thoughts on the national team following England's elimination from the 2014 Fifa World Cup after just two group games.

[Charlie Darwin]

I don't suppose you saw the discussion I was having with osarusan on the tackler making contact with the ball a few pages back? Are there instances where you think contact to the ball wouldn't be enough to justify the awarding of a penalty? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts as, if I recall correctly, you were critical of the "expert opinion" and thought the Zabaleta tackle in the Iran game constituted a foul even though he had made contact with the ball? If I was reading him correctly, for osarusan it was a simple case of: penalty if no contact made with ball; no penalty if contact made with ball.
I saw a bit of it but was cycling through the thread quickly so didn't get to read it all. Yeah, I am of the opinion that making contact with the ball isn't enough - you need to make enough contact to affect the ball, otherwise it's a foul. Kenny Cunningham on the highlights show on RTE yesterday morning said exactly what I was thinking. Dejagah flicked the ball and its lightly brushed Zabaleta's foot with no real effect on the ball, then he barrelled through the player. Has to be a penalty.

[bennocelt]

I'm sure you love this story, TOWK!: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27969231 :p

Nothing to do with bad management in England then?

[BonnieShels]

So John Kenny on RTÉ it is.

[pineapple stu]

1-0 Brazil so.

I have a vague hope - and I know I'm being horrible to Cameroon - that Brazil will find this match as easy as or easier than Croatia found Cameroon, and might even use it to get some of their swagger back. They've been one of the disappointments of the tournament so far, even though they're on course to win all three games.

They'd be lost without Neymar though. Having a great tournament,

[tricky_colour]

1-1 Cameroon still 16-1 which is just stupid 2-1 would be about right.

[pineapple stu]

Brazil looking great in attack and chaotic in defence. Great header by Paulinho against his own bar just before Cameroon's goal. This is the Brazil we all want to see! :)

[tricky_colour]

Well Brazil back in front but I still maintain the odds do not reflect what is happening on the pitch.
It's not a one side match by any stretch of the imagination, love to see the 1st half stats, now way
will they justify such mad odds, but then it's Brazil and people are backing the name, not the game.

[pineapple stu]

Stats here (http://www.livescore.net/) if you want.

[DannyInvincible]

Mexico unlucky not to have a penalty for a Croatian handball in the box. Mexico looking more likely of the two to score/go through here. I can see the end to this game becoming very frantic. Where's the popcorn?

[pineapple stu]

Livescore showing one shot on target all game (from Mexico). Sounds fairly dull from that one stat. Presume it's not quite as bad as all that then?

Can see any half-decent side beating this Brazil team. Suspect Chile may be over-awed given how often they've played (and lost to) Brazil, but you never know. Fred and Hulk are the two best-named players in the World Cup, but they're bloody awful. Neymar's carrying this team.

[pineapple stu]

1-0 Mexico. Great shout Danny!

[DannyInvincible]

Mexico fully deserve to be 2-0 up. Looks like it's all over for Croatia.

Mexico's manager resembles a cross between Nick Griffin and a retired WWF wrestler.

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

Chile will beat Brazil and Mexico will edge Holland I reckon.

Mexico are very defensively solid. Croatia never looked like threatening tonight. Very disappointing from Modric and Rakitic.

[DannyInvincible]

Croatia have complately collapsed now. 3-0. There could be more.

[pineapple stu]

3-0 Mexico!

One more goal for either them or Cameroon and Mexico top the group.

With Neymar off, it's hard to see where Brazil are going to get a goal from. This is interesting.

[DannyInvincible]

If Mexico score another, they'll top the group and face Chile. Assuming Brazil don't score another.

[pineapple stu]

There's the goal I said wasn't coming.

Oh well.

[pineapple stu]

And Croatia have scored.

So Brazil v Chile and Mexico v Holland.

Still, Brazil have needed a dodgy penalty, an offside goal (Fred's tonight) and at least one, probably two, perfectly good disallowed goals from Mexico against Cameroon to top the group. Not a great sign.

[BonnieShels]

The smell of that 4th goal has bet written all over it. The keeper dived on the spot. Cameroon are bad but they aren't that bad surely?

[DannyInvincible]

I'll have to get myself a Campos tribute jersey.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc12/poguemahone85/mexico_zpse7715870.png

http://blogs.20minutos.es/quefuede/files/campos1.jpg

[Charlie Darwin]

I'll have to get myself a Campos tribute jersey.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc12/poguemahone85/mexico_zpse7715870.png

http://blogs.20minutos.es/quefuede/files/campos1.jpg
That's a terrible tribute. All their jerseys clearly fit.

[DannyInvincible]

[Brazil have] been one of the disappointments of the tournament so far, even though they're on course to win all three games.

Seven points from three victories is a pretty disappointing return alright. :p

[Stuttgart88]

Hmm. Interesting penalty call. No way should the arm have been around the player's chest. So if the ball hits the arm grappled around the player...?
I actually think it wasn't handball but a definite foul for pulling.

[Stuttgart88]

Mexico unlucky not to have a penalty for a Croatian handball in the box. Mexico looking more likely of the two to score/go through here. I can see the end to this game becoming very frantic. Where's the popcorn?

What an absolute slam dunk penalty. Mexico have had at least 3 probable goals chalked off in the last week.

[pineapple stu]

Seven points from three victories is a pretty disappointing return alright. :p
Seven points from three wins would be fairly bad alright. :)

They got very lucky against Croatia; let's be honest. Shouldn't even have gotten seven points arguably.

[Stuttgart88]

I thought that was a quality performance from Mexico against a good Croatian team made to look very ordinary. They had a strategy (or call it a game plan) and implemented it perfectly. England take note.

I used to always think Mexico were pretty but generally ineffective. No more. And Marquez is still a complete dude of a player.

[DannyInvincible]

I saw a bit of it but was cycling through the thread quickly so didn't get to read it all. Yeah, I am of the opinion that making contact with the ball isn't enough - you need to make enough contact to affect the ball, otherwise it's a foul. Kenny Cunningham on the highlights show on RTE yesterday morning said exactly what I was thinking. Dejagah flicked the ball and its lightly brushed Zabaleta's foot with no real effect on the ball, then he barrelled through the player. Has to be a penalty.

I think I'd have to agree with you that contact with the ball alone shouldn't be enough to cancel out the possibility of a foul having occurred. Do you know what the official line on it is or if refs have any further guidelines on the matter besides regulatory clarification as to what is meant by "careless"? I was having a look around the web for some thoughts and opinion on the actual significance of making contact with the ball but my search was largely fruitless.


Nothing to do with bad management in England then?

Y'reckon it's down to bad international management or bad club management? Or are you referring to Hodgson in particular?

I'm not sure what a player's motive in wanting to avoid international duty might be - ask Stephen Ireland how it is to have no affiliation with one's national team - but I'm not sure what a witch-hunt will achieve for England here. Naming and shaming?... It sounds like the type of mid-summer campaign the Daily Mail would happily sponsor in the run-up to a new season. I hope Harry Redknapp does the decent thing and keeps his trap (and jeep window) shut on this one. Gerrard is just a nasty piece of work. Imagine the reaction of English fans at games up and down the country week in and week out towards the "named and shamed". I can't say I have much time for Gerrard at all. For a captain, he possesses such scant emotional maturity and commands very little sense of authority. In fact, his interviews of late have done little besides humour me; it's as if he's desperately trying to exude this wise, authoritative aura by saying things he thinks someone in his position should be saying, but he fails so miserably at genuinely convincing me he's ever been a leader. He's a cod. Thoroughly uninspiring.

If players aren't interested in the international game, leave them be. Their loss. Why bother wasting energy getting angry about them? It's a (relatively) free country and there's no duty upon them to show up against their will. Forget about them. Instead, focus on players who do want to represent their country and ensure the experience is an appealing one for those willing to give up their time.

A lot of players are also pressured out of international fixtures by disapproving club managers. It's fairly well known that Alex Ferguson loathed Roy Keane and Ryan Giggs competing in international friendlies.

[BonnieShels]

I think I'd have to agree with you that contact with the ball alone shouldn't be enough to cancel out the possibility of a foul having occurred. Do you know what the official line on it is or if refs have any further guidelines on the matter besides regulatory clarification as to what is meant by "careless"? I was having a look around the web for some thoughts and opinion on the actual significance of making contact with the ball but my search was largely fruitless.



Y'reckon it's down to bad international management or bad club management? Or are you referring to Hodgson in particular?

I'm not sure what a player's motive in wanting to avoid international duty might be - ask Stephen Ireland how it is to have no affiliation with one's national team - but I'm not sure what a witch-hunt will achieve for England here. Naming and shaming?... It sounds like the type of mid-summer campaign the Daily Mail would happily sponsor in the run-up to a new season. I hope Harry Redknapp does the decent thing and keeps his trap (and jeep window) shut on this one. Gerrard is just a nasty piece of work. Imagine the reaction of English fans at games up and down the country week in and week out towards the "named and shamed". I can't say I have much time for Gerrard at all. For a captain, he possesses such scant emotional maturity and commands very little sense of authority. In fact, his interviews of late have done little besides humour me; it's as if he's desperately trying to exude this wise, authoritative aura by saying things he thinks someone in his position should be saying, but he fails so miserably at genuinely convincing me he's ever been a leader. He's a cod. Thoroughly uninspiring.

If players aren't interested in the international game, leave them be. Their loss. Why bother wasting energy getting angry about them? It's a (relatively) free country and there's no duty upon them to show up against their will. Forget about them. Instead, focus on players who do want to represent their country and ensure the experience is an appealing one for those willing to give up their time.

A lot of players are also pressured out of international fixtures by disapproving club managers. It's fairly well known that Alex Ferguson loathed Roy Keane and Ryan Giggs competing in international friendlies.

First thing I thought of reading that...

He is often looked on as a great player. He is nothing of the kind. His performance on Wednesday was a disgrace, a monument to conceit adorned with vanity and self-indulgence, rendered all the more objectionable by the swagger of his gait.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Thankfully Ian Wright is on hand to make sure things don't go too far with this story: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bq2ZXn_CIAEfoEF.jpg

[Charlie Darwin]

I think I'd have to agree with you that contact with the ball alone shouldn't be enough to cancel out the possibility of a foul having occurred. Do you know what the official line on it is or if refs have any further guidelines on the matter besides regulatory clarification as to what is meant by "careless"? I was having a look around the web for some thoughts and opinion on the actual significance of making contact with the ball but my search was largely fruitless.
It might be worth having an ask in the ask the referees thread on here (not sure where it is). I'm not aware of any official guidance on the rule other than the fact it's against the rules to trip an opponent and that winning a ball does not count as a trip. I've never seen it written or heard it said that any contact with the ball is sufficient to make it a clean tackle outside the rules of Subbuteo.

[osarusan]

Don't know if it's been mentioned already, but here are the tie-breaker criteria, taken from the FIFA handbook:


5. The ranking of each team in each group shall be determined as follows:

a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;
b) goal difference in all group matches;
c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.

If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their rankings shall be determined as follows:

d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned;
e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned;
f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams concerned;
g) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee

So, A, B, and C all make sense to me, and if they're all level, then we move on to D. That's fine too.

But how are E and F different from B and C respectively?

EDIT: Aha! E and F are only relevant if there are 3 teams all tied on criteria A-D.

[geysir]

I think I'd have to agree with you that contact with the ball alone shouldn't be enough to cancel out the possibility of a foul having occurred. Do you know what the official line on it is or if refs have any further guidelines on the matter besides regulatory clarification as to what is meant by "careless"? I was having a look around the web for some thoughts and opinion on the actual significance of making contact with the ball but my search was largely fruitless.
I'd disagree with Kenny, because the (almost invisible) phantom touch from Zabaleta meant the ball was going out of reach to the left, before the attacking player was clattered.
I'd hazard a guess that Richard Dunne has made more than a few of them and didn't concede a penalty. Contact with the ball was deemed sufficient.
I don't know what the official guidelines are on these sorts of tackles but I'd guess if after the defender's touch on the ball, it's still in play and up for grabs for a possible goal threat and the attacker has just been clattered, then it's likely a penalty.

[A N Mouse]

We've got 12 players. I think the claim of 18 was inaccurate. That figure was mentioned by James Richardson after someone had e-mailed it to him, so it hadn't been verified. Obviously, whoever'd e-mailed also got the figure of France-born players wrong as there are 25 rather than 16. I would imagine the New Statesman assertion of 14 Germany-born players is accurate. That means there'd be two more we're missing. Did you say there were two other Ghanaian squad members who you thought were born in Germany? Who were they? I can't seem to see any others besides Boateng.

I thought Mateo Kovačić of Croatia might have been another, but he was born in Linz, which is in Austria.

Edit: Julian Green of the USA grew up in Germany from the age of two, although he was born in Tampa, Florida. It seems New Statesman might have counted him in their tally of 14 as they did put the German figure at five rather than four in the article.

Sorry - I fupped up. Should have clarified this yesterday.

Can only imagine I read the ones either side of Boateng as Bochum and Berlin.

[BonnieShels]

Fierce quiet in here lads!

[DannyInvincible]

Fierce quiet in here lads!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhNMHcRSNdo

[BonnieShels]

These final round games are dragging this world cup down. Brutal games both.

[Charlie Darwin]

This Italy game is so bad I'm considering watching England.

[BonnieShels]

This Italy game is so bad I'm considering watching England.

I've already made that decision.

[DannyInvincible]

I hope those last few days weren't the honeymoon period!


I don't know what the official guidelines are on these sorts of tackles but I'd guess if after the defender's touch on the ball, it's still in play and up for grabs for a possible goal threat and the attacker has just been clattered, then it's likely a penalty.

Should it matter whether or not there's a goal threat actually? A penalty is to be awarded simply for a foul inside the box; not necessarily for an illegal denial of a goal-threat. If Zabaleta had been on the outside left of Dejagah and a mirror-image version of the tackle had occurred with Zabaleta ever-so-slightly nudging the ball back in towards his goal, would you have deemed that a penalty then? I don't see why that should make a difference. Judgment is to be made irrespective of the position of the ball. Then again, if you'd be a referee taking the prospect of a goal-threat out of your consideration, how would you judge contact with the ball to be "enough" or "not enough"? Enough or not enough for what exactly, if not for the denial of a goal-threat? Maybe osarusan's position has merit. Or would the judgment be based on whether or not there was enough contact with the ball to simply dispossess the attacker?


Sorry - I fupped up. Should have clarified this yesterday.

Can only imagine I read the ones either side of Boateng as Bochum and Berlin.

Ha, to be fair, I thought Berekum and Seclin sounded vaguely Germanic myself. I'll admit I did check out both of them on Wiki.

[DannyInvincible]

Italy facing the dump.

[DannyInvincible]

I've been watching the Costa Rica-England game - I don't know why - but the commentators are saying they've heard word that Suarez bit Giorgio Chiellini! I've promptly switched over. Have I missed much?

[pineapple stu]

And Suarez with a little nibble of Chiellini. Sure why not.

[Razors left peg]

Suarez is absolutely mentally ill. I wonder who in the english media he will try to blame for that bite

[BonnieShels]

Thankfully Ian Wright is on hand to make sure things don't go too far with this story: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bq2ZXn_CIAEfoEF.jpg
mother of Jesus.

My opinion on him being awful wasn't strong enough. Moron.

Poor Jack Grealish is gonna get it.

[Charlie Darwin]

His World Cup has to be over.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bq6ex70CcAAGw8r.jpg

[DannyInvincible]

His World Cup has to be over.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bq6ex70CcAAGw8r.jpg

Well, not only did the poor lad get a bad bite, his team did get knocked out of the competition. That Suarez fella though... What will happen to him? :p


Suarez is absolutely mentally ill. I wonder who in the english media he will try to blame for that bite

Ha, as if "absolutely mental" wasn't mental enough. Just saw it. Lunacy. Well, the photo above says it all. Am I correct in thinking Saurez can be retrospectively punished if the ref missed it during the game and fails to document it in his match report?