2014 World Cup

[pineapple stu]

Bit of a damp squib of a final alright. First half very good; second half on not so.

Though really, the tournament dipped from the quarters on. It probably couldn't keep up the quality of the earlier rounds, and Brazil v Germany was enjoyable, but it's interesting that the bigger teams were generally all able to stifle wins out of their game but maybe naive opponents. After the group stages, I don't think there was a single upset. Club level has been similar (thinking Mourinho in particular, and many CL finals have been dull, cagey affairs). Really hope this isn't the way football is going, but maybe it's too late. In the first 13 World Cup Finals (up to 1986), every single team scored. 1990 was the first time a team failed to score in the final; since then, only once have both teams scored. 1994 was the first 0-0 draw; the last two finals have been 0-0s (after 90 minutes anyway)

Is there any rule changes that could change this trend? Is there a need to change it?

[NeverFeltBetter]

I dunno. Argentina should have scored a few times after all, they weren't parking the bus entirely. I'm not sure what kind of acceptable rule changes would result in attacking football becoming the standard.

[Charlie Darwin]

Argentina didn't score because Higuain had a stinker. Germany took 110 minutes to score because they only brought one striker to the competition and he's not anywhere near as athletic as he used to be. If either side had their shooting boots on it could have been 3, 4+.

[pineapple stu]

I dunno. Argentina should have scored a few times after all, they weren't parking the bus entirely.
It's not that Argentina parked the bus necessarily; it's more that there's maybe more focus on an organised defence, which is becoming increasingly difficult to break down.

Interesting too that a lot of the top players had bad tournaments. Higuain as Charlie says. Messi vanished from the quarters (having done very well up to then). David Luiz and Gerrard obviously were wojus (maybe they're not top top players, but the extent to which they underperformed gets them an inclusion anyway). Ronaldo. Van Persie didn't do much after the Spain game. Xavi and Casillas stand out for Spain. Dzeko for Bosnia? Hazard. Maybe Lahm until he went to full back.

Neuer should have won the Golden Ball I think.

Finally, a couple of my favourite images from recent games. This is Fred's heat map against Germany. Spent most of the time tipping off again -

http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9594719.ece/alternates/w460/Fred-heat-map.jpg

And I'm sure we all spotted this last night -
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/p526x296/10440680_858197434208414_8524094275201265884_n.png

[ArdeeBhoy]

Anyone looking forward to this or has this tourney taken such a boring path that its sucked out all of your enthusiasm?
And how are fans of the game who happen to be Jewish rooting? Where the nazis lived and worked, then where they retired to.

Strange question. Pal of mine claimed much the same about the Germans. Told him to take his head out of his anal orifice...

If it was anyone Israel would object to, probably Russia/Polska and Iran/Egypt? Though their pariah status means we're stuck with them in Europe which is a joke.


I thought that was a really good game. Lots of mistakes by both sides but lots of quality too and lots of heart and commitment. The big players all played well.

The players generally tried hard, but in terms of attacking quality Argentina barely turned up as their forwards were largely anonymous.

[DannyInvincible]

I didn't think it was that bad a final. It was tense, fairly open with both teams having chances and was decided by a terrific goal. It wasn't as if both teams shut up shop completely. Neuer was great once again and maybe should have won the Golden Ball on second thoughts. I certainly don't think Messi did enough throughout the tournament to deserve it.

[OwlsFan]

It was great to see Schweinsteiger emotional (not in the way portrayed above ;)) at the end of the game. You'd imagine he would be the last to shed a tear as I always think he is quite similar to Roy Keane, on the field in particular. I had tipped Germany at the start of the campaign but then thought perhaps it is Messi's destiny to win the Cup - I pay more heed to such things compared to whether one team is better than the other.

I was delighted to see the Cup won by a goal rather than a penalty shoot-out. Messi seemed a spent force (by his standards) and so lethargic on occasions. On form he was such a live wire for Barca chasing back but when he lost the ball in Brazil, more often than not he did a Ronaldo.

Enjoyable game which Argentina might have won but which Germany probably deservedly came out on top. If you beat Brazil and Argentina in the knock out stages, you'll usually end up champion.

Now, time to get back talking to the wife again. I wonder how has she been the last month or so.

[DannyInvincible]

Bit of a damp squib of a final alright. First half very good; second half on not so.

Though really, the tournament dipped from the quarters on. It probably couldn't keep up the quality of the earlier rounds, and Brazil v Germany was enjoyable, but it's interesting that the bigger teams were generally all able to stifle wins out of their game but maybe naive opponents. After the group stages, I don't think there was a single upset. Club level has been similar (thinking Mourinho in particular, and many CL finals have been dull, cagey affairs). Really hope this isn't the way football is going, but maybe it's too late. In the first 13 World Cup Finals (up to 1986), every single team scored. 1990 was the first time a team failed to score in the final; since then, only once have both teams scored. 1994 was the first 0-0 draw; the last two finals have been 0-0s (after 90 minutes anyway)

Is there any rule changes that could change this trend? Is there a need to change it?

Obviously, offering more points for a win enhances the value of scoring more goals than your opponent in a league or group-stage scenario, but I'm not sure how you could add extra value to winning in a knock-out scenario so as to encourage more goal-scoring as you can't really offer anything further than simple progression to the next round.

In saying that, I don't think last night's final was played in an overly conservative manner by either team. The lack of goals was primarily down to a mix of good goalkeeping and the inability of talented players who would have done better had they been more composed to take some great chances.

[DannyInvincible]

It was great to see Schweinsteiger emotional (not in the way portrayed above ;))

Himself and Klose shared an emotional embrace before it was disrupted by Boateng pulling at their shoulders. I think they've both been around that squad for so long now and knew this was their last chance to win a World Cup, so they could finally say, "At last! We've done it." Nice to see such team spirit, as you say.

[NeverFeltBetter]

I've got it. Automatic qualification for the next World Cup to whichever team scores the most goals. One for knock-outs, one for group stages. That would be the Netherlands and Croatia respectively this time around.

[BonnieShels]

Anyone else think Neuer should have been penalised for his Schumacher on Higuain?

[strangeirish]

Anyone else catch this?


https://mtc.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/CB68C9FC341099211519876886528_2a27f19dfab.1.0.1653 498167747453877.mp4?versionId=10ppZVZ20JSjZeM3ta8s zjDOtzLHjc7w


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0_B6PLnA-w

[NeverFeltBetter]

Anyone else think Neuer should have been penalised for his Schumacher on Higuain?

Absolutely. And both Aguero and Mascherano should have gotten second yellows before the end as well.

[BonnieShels]

Absolutely. And both Aguero and Mascherano should have gotten second yellows before the end as well.

Aguero definitely. Don't remember Mascherano's second yellow-able offence.

[pineapple stu]

Have to say Neuer had eyes only for (and got) the ball for me. Good keeping. Though at least one person I was watching with did mention Toni Schumacher.

SI - the Vlaar penalty is covered a couple of pages back

[jbyrne]

Have to say Neuer had eyes only for (and got) the ball for me. Good keeping. Though at least one person I was watching with did mention Toni Schumacher.

SI - the Vlaar penalty is covered a couple of pages back

if an outfield player had gone up to head the ball with his knee up like Neuer had it would be a foul. very reckless and a foul all day long for me

[ArdeeBhoy]

Anyone got the video of this, don't recall the incident...

[osarusan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqPLMH26Fz4

[osarusan]

if an outfield player had gone up to head the ball with his knee up like Neuer had it would be a foul. very reckless and a foul all day long for me

Yeah, I agree with this. Keepers aren't exempt from thr rules, and not seeing the player isn't an excuse either.

[jbyrne]

Yeah, I agree with this. Keepers aren't exempt from thr rules, and not seeing the player isn't an excuse either.

oh, he knew higuain was there ok..... that's why he went in with his knee up. at minimum a yellow card

[NeverFeltBetter]

Mascherano slid in a bit recklessly on Schweinsteiger in ET, easily worthy of a second yellow. It was bonkers how Aguero stayed on though, he could easily have been shown a straight red for his offence.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Thanks Osa, though 'not available'...but do recall now.

Not sure how intentional, but definitely reckless, worth a booking. Plus Aguero should probably have walked. Normally too soft in the CL/EPL but that would been a definite red there.

[geysir]

I didn't think it was that bad a final. It was tense, fairly open with both teams having chances and was decided by a terrific goal. It wasn't as if both teams shut up shop completely. Neuer was great once again and maybe should have won the Golden Ball on second thoughts. I certainly don't think Messi did enough throughout the tournament to deserve it.
Messi didn't deserve it because he didn't do enough in the game that mattered, but up to the finals he produced Messi moments of outstanding ability, enough to swing games on their own but would have had to be the game changer in the Final as well to earn a serious consideration for the golden ball. I don't know what the verdict was on why it wasn't the 'Messi final', tiredness, Argentine tactics or just good covering by Germany?
Likewise I enjoyed the game, it was titanic, either team would have deserved it and good that it didn't go to penalties.

[NeverFeltBetter]

He did looked wrecked in the last two games. I think he's played every minute of all seven of his nations matches. But, then again, I'm sure he's not the only one.

[Charlie Darwin]

Have to say Neuer had eyes only for (and got) the ball for me. Good keeping. Though at least one person I was watching with did mention Toni Schumacher.

SI - the Vlaar penalty is covered a couple of pages back
Schumacher is a bit OTT but it was reckless. The funny thing was the referee awarding Neuer the free kick. Higuain was distraught - he's running after the ball and about to get to it before the goalkeeper comes and knees him in the face at full speed. As baffling a decision as you'll see.

[pineapple stu]

I can only plead keeper's union! :o

It does look worse now than it did on Sunday for some reason.

Did Neuer actually get a free out of it? Don't remember that! That's clearly nonsense.

[Charlie Darwin]

Yep, free kick for Neuer. Baffling.

[pineapple stu]

Just can't challenge keepers these days, can you?

[DannyInvincible]

Taking for granted they weren't born in Germany, trying to be kind to whoever came up with the figure of 18.

Only other explainations is was for provisional squads, or inclues german parentage. Which is too much wiki work

Taking us back a few weeks to the middle of the World Cup, this - them were the days! - but I read an article today about German youth football and it mentioned that current Fulham player and Iran international Ashkan Dejagah played for Germany at numerous under-age levels before switching to play for Iran at senior level. He was born in Tehran, but his family moved to Berlin when he was one. He might be another one of those who some sources erroneously included in their list of Germany-born players playing for other countries besides Germany.

[DannyInvincible]

I can only plead keeper's union! :o

It does look worse now than it did on Sunday for some reason.

Did Neuer actually get a free out of it? Don't remember that! That's clearly nonsense.

Aye, it was a shocker alright. Neuer was the one with the force behind him. Was it bordering on excessive? Some might say it was.

Was Kramer OK, by the way? Even when he was being helped off ten minutes after his head was on the receiving end of a heavy shoulder, he still looked very shaky and dazed. I hadn't heard anything about him after that.

[pineapple stu]

Kramer was in with everyone else celebrating at the end anyway, so he can't have been that bad.

[Charlie Darwin]

Just can't challenge keepers these days, can you?
I know that's the cliché, but in this case he didn't even challenge the keeper. He was chasing the ball 20 yards from goal and just got completely cleaned out.

[Stuttgart88]

Kramer was in with everyone else celebrating at the end anyway, so he can't have been that bad.

Someone probably told him he scored the winner.

He was clearly concussed.

[DannyInvincible]

Kramer's claimed he doesn't recall the first half, nor how or when he made it into the dressing room: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jul/14/germany-christoph-kramer-i-cant-remember-anything


Christoph Kramer has admitted he cannot remember anything about his performance in the World Cup final after he suffered a head injury early in the first half of the victory over Argentina.

The Borussia Mönchengladback midfielder was a late replacement for Sami Khedira, who was injured in the warm-up before the game at the Maracanã. Kramer collapsed to the ground following a sickening collision after 19 minutes with Ezequiel Garay when his jaw smashed into the Argentinian defender’s shoulder. The 23-year-old had lengthy treatment before being allowed to carry on.

But, obviously groggy, he was replaced after 31 minutes by André Schürrle, who was to set up Mario Götze’s winning goal in extra-time.

“I can’t remember that much from the game,” Kramer said. “I don’t know anything from the first half. I thought later that I went straight off after the incident. How I got to the changing rooms I do not know. I don’t know anything else. The game, in my head, starts only in the second half.”

The incident involving Kramer, who was playing his first competitive game for Germany, led Fifpro, the world players’ union, to accuse Fifa of failing to protect players during the World Cup with its treatment of concussion.

[jbyrne]

just read that we are one of only 3 teams that have never failed to get out of our group at a world cup finals. germany and holland being the others. impressive if true?

[DannyInvincible]

just read that we are one of only 3 teams that have never failed to get out of our group at a world cup finals. germany and holland being the others. impressive if true?

If only we qualified more regularly! :)

[BonnieShels]

I love those pointless stats.

Italy have a horrendous group record but have 4 World Cups to their name. I'd take that.

[jbyrne]

I love those pointless stats.

Italy have a horrendous group record but have 4 World Cups to their name. I'd take that.

not sure how a stat that shows that we have been competitive at each of the 3 world cups we've qualified for is "pointless" but each to their own i suppose

[centre mid]

just read that we are one of only 3 teams that have never failed to get out of our group at a world cup finals. germany and holland being the others. impressive if true?
East Germany have failed to qualify for a major tournament since 1974

[osarusan]

East Germany have failed to qualify for a major tournament since 1974


That's nothing - the Dutch East Indies haven't qualified for a World Cup since 1938.

[ArdeeBhoy]

just read that we are one of only 3 teams that have never failed to get out of our group at a world cup finals. germany and holland being the others. impressive if true?

Now you've just Tempted Fate! For 2026...

[DannyInvincible]

Came across this on Balls.ie (http://balls.ie/football/this-world-cup-special-effects-video-is-absolutely-brilliant/):


Some of the best and most bizarre moments of the 2014 FIFA World Cup have been given a Hollywood-style special effects video makeover and the results are absolutely superb.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOisF2bEleA

[osarusan]

That was agony to watch.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Yeah, too OTT.

[DannyInvincible]

I don't think CAS have published the full judgment of the Suarez case yet, but I've just had a read of their official press release on the decision, which features a neat summary of their conclusions: http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/4201/5048/0/Media20Release20366520(English)201420082014.pdf


The CAS Panel found that the sanctions imposed on the player were generally proportionate to the offence committed. It has however considered that the stadium ban and the ban from “any football-related activity” were excessive given that such measures are not appropriate to sanction the offence committed by the player and would still have an impact on his activity after the end of the suspension.

Accordingly, the following sanctions have been confirmed by the CAS:

1. Luis Suárez is found guilty of violation of art. 48 par. 1 lit. d) of the FIFA Disciplinary Code for having committed an act of assault during the match between Italy and Uruguay played on 24 June 2014 at the 2014 FIFA World Cup Brazil.

2. In application of art. 11 lit. c) and art. 19 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, Luis Suárez is banned for nine (9) consecutive official matches of the national team of the Asociación Uruguaya de Fútbol:


- The first ban was fulfilled in the 2014 FIFA World Cup Brazil match Columbia vs. Uruguay of 28 June 2014;

- The remaining bans will be fulfilled in the future official matches of the national team of the Asociación Uruguaya de Fútbol based on art. 38 par. 2 lit. a) of the FIFA Disciplinary Code.

3. Based on art. 11 lit. c) and art. 19 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, Luis Suárez is declared ineligible to play in official matches at any level for a period of four (4) consecutive months, starting on 25 June 2014.

4. Based on art. 10 lit. c) in connection with art. 15 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, Luis Suárez is sanctioned to pay a fine in the amount CHF 100,000.

The FIFA Disciplinary Committee's decision was originally outlined here (http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y=2014/m=6/news=luis-suarez-suspended-for-nine-matches-and-banned-for-four-months-from-2386354.html) and the FIFA Disciplinary Code upon which that decision was based can be found here (http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/50/02/75/discoinhalte.pdf).

CAS considered the sanctions in line with the following articles, as specified above:


48: Misconduct against opponents or persons other than match

1. Including the automatic suspension incurred in accordance with art. 18 par. 4, any recipient of a direct red card shall be suspended as follows:

...

d) at least two matches for assaulting (elbowing, punching, kicking etc.) an opponent or a person other than a match official;

Interestingly, part (e) of article 48.1 outlines that a ban of "at least six matches [would be considered appropriate] for spitting at an opponent or a person other than a match official". Spitting (along with biting) is admittedly disgusting/socially frowned-upon, insulting and terribly unsporting, but worse than a physically-damaging assault that might seriously threaten the health, well-being or career of another player? I'm not so sure about that.


11: Sanctions applicable to natural persons

The following sanctions are applicable only to natural persons:

a) caution;
b) expulsion;
c) match suspension;
d) ban from dressing rooms and/or substitutes’ bench;
e) ban from entering a stadium;
f) ban on taking part in any football-related activity

Article 19 details the nature of potential suspensions rather than specifically mentioning what sort of length might be appropriate for different types of offences. It does state, however, that any suspension "may not exceed twenty-four matches or twenty-four months". That raises the question: what sort of utterly awful misconduct might a player have to commit to be penalised with such a lengthy suspension? If the lower threshold of a ban for an assault is at least two games, I can't imagine that conduct warranting a two-year ban would be the type of conduct that would legally enable a player to return back on to a field of play after two years under the common law anyway!

Anyway, back on point; the Suarez case appears to be somewhat different in nature to, say, the Daniel Kearns case or any potential case that Legia Waraw might bring to CAS against UEFA over their enforced 3-0 forfeit loss to Celtic as the disciplinary regulations in question are more subjective, ambiguous or open-ended than the more objective and literally-interpreted regulations that were or would be under analysis in the former two examples.

In Kearns' case, the question was: have FIFA applied the regulations correctly? It was a simple yes-or-no answer. And they were found to have been applying them correctly.

In the Suarez case, though, it's been: have FIFA applied an appropriate or proportionate punishment based on the nature of the offence and the applicable regulations in place governing such conduct? The answer is not simply a straight yes-or-no one; CAS must also consider exactly what amounts to an appropriate punishment.

How exactly do CAS decide on a more subjective and undefined matter like this? It seems that the concept of what might be fair and what might be unfair may well come into certain CAS cases of this nature then. Do FIFA have some further set of disciplinary guidelines to which their Disciplinary Committee adhere and from which CAS can also take cue or do CAS simply base judgment on their own perspective of what is just (or considered appropriate and proportionate)? It will be interesting to read the full judgment once it's published.

Purely in light of article 48.1 (d), I do think Suarez can feel hard done-by. In my opinion, CAS could have lightened the severity of the punishment even further than they did. When FIFA stated in their original explanation of the decision that "such behaviour cannot be tolerated on any football pitch, and in particular not at a FIFA World Cup when the eyes of millions of people are on the stars on the field", they were, more-or-less, admitting that they were making an example of a prominent scapegoat. The witnessing audience and resulting publicity may have been bloated due to the stage upon which the incident occurred, but did it really magnify the crime? Article 39.4 permits the Disciplinary Committee to "take account of all relevant factors in the case and the degree of the offender's guilt when imposing the sanction"; this would seemingly allow a determination on an appropriate punishment to be made on the basis of the status or prominence of the game in which an incident of misconduct occurred. Article 40 also accords the panel the right to "increase the sanction to be pronounced as deemed appropriate if an infringement has been repeated"; of course, Suarez was indeed a recidivist. However, it's often a universally-recognised principle of sport that all misconduct on a field of play is to be treated equally, be it in a World Cup final or at national lower-league level. I think it's overly prejudicial to allow the prominence of the setting colour so significantly the severity of the punishment.

Another thing; does CAS's opinion that "the stadium ban and the ban from 'any football-related activity' were excessive given that such measures are not appropriate to sanction the offence committed by the player and would still have an impact on his activity after the end of the suspension" mean that part (f) of article 11 might be deemed inherently unjust no matter what the crime might be? I should think a suspension from any football-related activity would always have the effect of impacting upon a suspended footballer's activity after the end of the suspension period, wouldn't it?

[DannyInvincible]

I was just having a read of some other CAS cases and came across the following paragraph in a case brought against UEFA by Fenerbahçe last year (http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/7234/5048/0/Award20313920FINAL.pdf):


With respect to the proportionality of the sanction, UEFA refers to jurisprudence of CAS and in particular to CAS 2012/A/2762, according to which, allegedly, “[t]he measure of the sanction imposed by a disciplinary body in the exercise of the discretion allowed by the relevant rule can be reviewed only when the sanction is evidently and grossly disproportionate to the offence”. CAS thus has a very limited and restricted competence in this respect.

It seems to offer the best clarification I've been able to find relating to the court's competence or ability to consider the proportionality of disciplinary punishments. CAS upheld UEFA's verdict.

[DannyInvincible]

Actually, this paragraph from another case (http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sites/CaseLaw/Shared%20Documents/2756.pdf) offers a better clarification of the competence of CAS on matters where a disciplinary body whose decision is under review enjoys an extra discretion under its rules to set an ambiguously-defined sanction (and, I think, on matters where no discretion at all is afforded by the rule-book):


CAS “enforces a strict approach in the definition of its power reviewing the exercise of the discretion enjoyed by the disciplinary body of an association to set a sanction”. This Panel confirms the CAS jurisprudence according to which the measure of the sanction imposed by a disciplinary body in the exercise of the discretion allowed by the relevant rules, can be reviewed only when the sanction “is evidently and grossly disproportionate to the offence”. According to CAS jurisprudence, the sanction imposed on an athlete must not be disproportionate to the offence and must always reflect the extent of the athlete’s guilt.

I suppose the above is something I'd suspected or assumed to be true based on how I see arbitration bodies like CAS operate, but I don't think I'd ever seen their scope or competence clarified explicitly. I interpret the above to at least implicitly confirm that CAS cannot then make judgments based on external notions of "fairness" and "proportionality" on matters where the rules concerned or under review do not permit a disciplinary body any extra discretionary power. For example, in the case of Legia Warsaw who were punished with a 3-0 loss against Celtic; due to the fact there is no discretionary power accorded to UEFA in the rule-book in relation to the offence Legia committed - the relevant regulation clearly states that punishment for fielding a suspended player is the match being declared forfeit - CAS have no scope to overturn or review the proportionality of the punishment. Even when there is discretionary power accorded by the relevant regulations, CAS will only review the sanction under very limited circumstances.

(I do realise I'm posting back and forth to myself here by this point, but I'm sure someone's interested somwehere. Anyone?... No? OK... :p )