Commander Obi-Wan Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Podolski scored twice yesterday against his native Poland team. But, hey that works for me since I'm cheering for Germany. I'm gonna have to go with favourites as well for today's matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tye Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Hey, everyone! I have always had an interest in football, but never watched it. Well, I am watching Euro 2008, and I have enjoyed it so far. I am not used to the style of this sport tho. They dont really stop like in american sports. Forty-five minutes until halftime, and is there any half-times? Anyways, I am pulling for France right now, but im really torn between them and Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 There is no "half time" as there is in American football. There's no real show or anything during half, but the time is spent by the commentators doing a summary/discussion of the first half, the quality of which varying, depending on the network you're viewing. Then they usually kind of predict what's going to happen in the second half. Anyway, first period of Netherlands vs. Italy, and I must say I'm very pleased with how it's going so far. That goal by Sneijder was absolutely amazing - he just popped it between the goalie like a thread through the head of a needle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pho3nix Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 I'm rooting for Portugal ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltiades Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 I so hate the Netherlands (sorry guys, I just do). First goal was definitely off-side, and it would've been a whole other match if it had been denied. And the chances Italy had in the second half, so frustrating to see. Gosh, I hate the Netherlands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ctrl Alt Del Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 I so hate the Netherlands (sorry guys, I just do). First goal was definitely off-side, and it would've been a whole other match if it had been denied. And the chances Italy had in the second half, so frustrating to see. Gosh, I hate the Netherlands. I think Netherlands deserved to win. Althought, since the first five minutes of the first half, they were stopping counter-attacks with fouls. Irony or not, Italy lost by their own poison, Netherlands counters were mortal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan7 Posted June 9, 2008 Author Share Posted June 9, 2008 I so hate the Netherlands (sorry guys, I just do). First goal was definitely off-side, and it would've been a whole other match if it had been denied. And the chances Italy had in the second half, so frustrating to see. Gosh, I hate the Netherlands. Why? Not there fault the officials have the visual ability of a bat. I thought Holland played well, the first goal was well offside, and I do think the result harsh on Italy, however the Italians are I feel too old to progress out the group stage, I have a feeling Holland and Romania will be the teams to go through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tye Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Hey umm what exactly happens if a game ends with a score of 0-0? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 In the group stage, nothing, each team get one point. J7: Netherlands, not Holland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Van Nisterooy was not offside. There was an Italian defender on the ground behind the net, taken out by his own goalie. That means he's technically meant to return to play. Regardless of how hurt he was - though he couldn't have been hurt too badly, since he was up and running again for the very next play. And I'm sorry, even without the first goal, the Netherlands still would have won 2-0. Different match my ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tye Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 In the group stage, nothing, each team get one point. J7: Netherlands, not Holland. Thanks:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltiades Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Van Nisterooy was not offside. There was an Italian defender on the ground behind the net, taken out by his own goalie. That means he's technically meant to return to play. Regardless of how hurt he was - though he couldn't have been hurt too badly, since he was up and running again for the very next play. Well, yes, I wasn't sure about that, but a player out of the field isn't part of the game, right? Ugh, this is why the offside rule should just be removed. And I'm sorry, even without the first goal, the Netherlands still would have won 2-0. Different match my ass. The Netherlands gained confidence from that first goal, not to mention Italy had to attack, meaning the Netherlands could counter easily, which they did. Italy's strength lies in defense, not attack. It would have been a different match, and I bet my ass on it. Why? Not there fault the officials have the visual ability of a bat. Oh, I just hate them. Nothing to do with this match in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 lolz...I think as a new rule, people should start placing bets against the teams Id like to win. That was the first time Id wanted Italy to win and they fluffed it @The Doc>>>Ive been playing for 23 years, the first goal was of course off side, the player off the pitch was off the ball and not in a scoring position. Every commentator watching said the same thing, maybe they have different rules on Galifrey Fortunes of games can sway on the actions of a couple of seconds. Unless you have played in a national team front of a crowd of 10s of thousands of devoted fans, you cannot make a accurate judgement about what emotional effects a goal for or against you can have. Look at Greece at Euro2004>>>alot of their success was based on the fabulous home ground support they got, combined with some clever tactics designed to frustrate teams that were technically better...similar to what Romania did against France last night. Militiades.... the tactical advantages of defences that can keep a good line are rewarded by the offside rule.It will never get removed. One thing I can see happening eventually is the fourth official be given some type of video review power, so that the ref can defer to him/her instantly in an unclear but obviously very important decision. Its been done in a few sports for years now, and with much success. I dont know why they havent applied it to a game like soccer, which is relatively low scoring and one such decision can sway the outcome of the whole game. However, on the overall balance of play, for last nights match, Netherlands definitely deserved to win, their work rate was high across the whole pitch, and through-balls delivered inch perfect...splitting open one of the worlds strongest defenses in the only way they can be>>on the counter. Very clever, and it payed off for them I think Van Basten knowing the Italian game inside out was a major advantage for the dutch. Will be interesting to see what they do against Romania.... mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 No, he was not offside. If a player is taken out of play by the opposing team, play is halted. But he was taken out by his own team-mate, and was therefore meant to return to play immediately. He was still in play, and Van Nistlerooy was therefore not offside. Were you watching every broadcast of the game? Clearly not, or else you'd have heard on the TSN broadcast that they walked through the offside rules at half, and he was not offside. Maybe they have different rules in bizzaro world. And I'm sorry, but just because their first goal would have been wrongfully nulled doesn't mean they wouldn't have had the confidence to score the other two. Nor does it mean that Italy would have been able to pull their feet from their asses to score anything themselves. I think some people are trying to comfort themselves after being disappointed by today's match. A good one that seems to work for a lot of people: "duuuh, the ref was paid off". I repeat: different match my ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
correllian_thug Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 agreed, Netherlands was the better team this time, and its about time Italy got hammered, if been waiting for this since the exit of Australia in the WC courtesy of Italy's BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 You see, you guys are only looking at the 11th rule of Football, which outlines the conditions of off-side. But you have to look at the 12th rule, as well. The Italian defender committed an infraction by not returning to the field of play after leaving the pitch. The ref could have called him on it, stopped play, and granted an indirect free-kick to the Dutch, from which they most likely would have scored anyway. But he decided to play the advantage, as the Dutch already had possession and were in a position to make an offensive play. They capitalised on it. The ref made the right call, no two ways about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 <blerg> TSN, you mean the Canadian channel... This aint curling ay How can you estimate whether Im watching it live or not!! I am watching every single game live on setanta sports, via Optus D2 satelllite transponder feed(152 degrees east along the Clarke Belt) Irdeto2 encrypted epsilon smartcard in my arion decoder box to unscramble. Capture to my vista x64ulti based pc via hauppauge PVR150 analogue tuner, displaying via vga at 720p into a sony projector on a 3m diagonal reflective surface. Detailed enough? I have no deep fondness for either team. It was the first time I would have liked to see Italy win, chiefly because I am a fan of Pirlo. My heart is always with Turkey, and there is no problem with what happened there. There are rules whose interpretation which place the decision in a grey area. Panucci didnt seem to do it intentionally, and yes, there is a rule that states a player who goes outside the pitch near the goals is considered on the goal line. There is also a rule that states that a player not interfering with play should not be considered in the offside decision. It is an unique set of circumstances here, which may require a clarification of the rule. In any event, in the overall scheme of things, its a moot point. Im still all for video review though Not sure what you are insinuating about the bizarro world, so keep your insinuations to yourself. Whether the decision would have affected *this* game or not is a debate with no end, so I wont partake in it any further than to say, individual events can always sway a teams confidence. Overall, in this match, Netherlands were technically superior and far better organised. If it was a boxing match, they would win by TKO So, stop referring us to your ass, and tune in tonight for the next installment of E2008 Being Turkish anyone of course guess who I hope wins out of Greece vs Sweden... and being a Liverpool and Torres fan makes me partial to Spain, but I am also an admirer of Russia's coach Guus Hiddink, so it will be a great game to watch. Russia also have a player call arshavin, which reminds to buy some shaving foam next time Im at the shops mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I've PMed this to you as well Astro, but decided it's just as suitable for posting after all: I fail to see why you're allowed to condescend to me, where I get reprimanded for it. I don't appreciate my opinions and insights being replied to as if I'm watching from another - fictional, I might add - planet. I also don't appreciate the curling comment in your last post. I don't belittle your nation or its broadcast affiliates, please don't do so to mine. I am watching every single game live on setanta sports, via Optus D2 satelllite transponder feed(152 degrees east along the Clarke Belt) Irdeto2 encrypted epsilon smartcard in my arion decoder box to unscramble. Capture to my vista x64ulti based pc via hauppauge PVR150 analogue tuner, displaying via vga at 720p into a sony projector on a 3m diagonal reflective surface. Detailed enough? As for this bit, I'd just like to ask what the point of it all was, apart from another move at talking down to me? And I don't recall commenting on whether or not you watched it live. I commented on your statement that every "commentator watching said the same thing"; I highly doubt you watched every broadcast of the game to back up that claim - and if you had, you've have heard that the Canadian commentators said nothing of the sort. As far as the bizarro world comment is concerned, it was mere retaliation to your Gallifrey comment. If I'm to keep my insinuations to myself, I expect the moderators - the supposed role models of the community - to do the same, please. Much appreciated. EDIT: About the rule stating that a player not interfering with the play should not be considered in the offside rule decision, the Italian player was supposed to have re-entered play again long before he did - if not immediately. The fact that he was not interfering with the play was in fact an infraction, as he did not return to the pitch when he should have. But perhaps you're right: it's all a moot point now. The call can't be changed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Down Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Ole, Ole, Ole! We are the champions, we are the champions! Way to go Holland, I'm so proud to be Dutch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabish Bini Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Yes!! Croatia won their first match against Austria 1-0, couldn't say it was a good game though, far from it, it was a crap game to watch, and we only scored from a penalty, we really need Eduardo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan7 Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 Everyone chill out, I'm pulling rank here.., I'm a qualified coach, referee, I've played semi-pro and coached for the Brazilian football association. Lets clarify a few things, there is no need to flame or otherwise be unpleasant to other members just because their opinions differ from yours or they are from a different Nation. As to the Holland goal, I do not recall any player being in front of Van Nistelrooy other than Buffon (the goalie), now if there was another player off the pitch, Van Nistelrooy is, as far as I'm aware of still off-side (I say this, because the official rule book I have, is about as clear as a monkeys ass when it comes to offside - this also is why the ref's permission is needed for players to leave the pitch, where the Doctor is correct, is it is an infringement, though accidental in this case), because that other player isn't in the field of play. Edit I stand corrected... For those interested in the specifics, it was Fifa regulation 11, sub-clause 11 that started the trouble. Passed five years ago, seemingly under the cover of darkness to judge from the surprise when it was implemented by Peter Fröjdfeldt, the Swedish referee, last night, it established that a player no longer has to be on the field to be active, provided he has left the pitch without the permission of the referee. And Christian Panucci, Italy’s right back, had most certainly done that after he collided with his own goalkeeper, Gianluigi Buffon, when trying to clear the ball. He stumbled two paces and collapsed in a heap, lying on his back, with both hands on his head, some three yards beyond the byline. And it was from that prone position, not even watching the action, that he was somehow judged to have played Ruud van Nistelrooy onside and allowed him to score one of the most controversial goals in tournament history. Not because it was indisputably illegal, for it was quickly established that, despite Italy’s ire, Holland’s first goal was within the new rules as so interpreted by Fröjdfeldt, but because it was so daft, so wrong, so clearly a mistake, that it should have been scrapped on commonsense grounds. Yet when was clarity of thought last on nodding acquaintance with the offside laws? Not for some time. Maybe this will spark a re-evaluation. The Doctor, was in fact correct, however I think that that whoever changed the rule this, is clearly an idiot in the suit, and ex refs would be far better candidates to refine the laws. Please understand that offside decisions are very difficult for officials these days, as the rule book is greatly open to interpretation, personally I think if a player 'isn't interfering with play' they shouldn't be on the pitch, It is of course moot point as the referee's decision is final, although I think the mistake on the part of the linesman was that bad he should be thrown out the tournament. I say this as he should have at least flagged over for the Ref to come and discuss the decision, if he didn't flag because of the Italian behind the goal (I'm trusting you here Doc, as I don't remember the Italian being behind the gaol, though I do remember one falling down when Buffon punched clear). My 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltiades Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 The rules shouldn't be open to interpretation, that's why they're rules. The offside rule has be changed numerous times in the last few years, and it's time for some clarification, I think. Still, if these are the rules, then Van Nistelrooy was indeed not offside when Panucci wasn't on the field. Anyway, looking forward to Spain-Russia very much, and I'm rooting for Sweden against Greece. Let's hope Ibrahimovic is at his best and that Larsson has still got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan7 Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 The rules shouldn't be open to interpretation, that's why they're rules. The offside rule has be changed numerous times in the last few years, and it's time for some clarification, I think. Still, if these are the rules, then Van Nistelrooy was indeed not offside when Panucci wasn't on the field. No rules shouldn't be open to interpretation, but that's the problem with the current set; they are open to interpretation especially offside. Its still an awful rule, under current rules Van Nistelrooy was onside, however its just plain stupid, Panucci was down and injured and not even on the field. Anyway, looking forward to Spain-Russia very much, and I'm rooting for Sweden against Greece. Let's hope Ibrahimovic is at his best and that Larsson has still got it. Spain are the team I've been waiting to watch, if they perform will be cracking to watch. Ibra is awesome, I'm hoping for no Greek tragedies this tournament! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltiades Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Spain are the team I've been waiting to watch, if they perform will be cracking to watch. They haven't performed that well on the big tournaments for a long time now, which is disappointing considering how much talent they have. I don't particularly like them, but should they do well, I might get excited. Though Russia isn't to be underestimated. With Hiddink as coach, they could be a hard opponent to beat for every team. Ibra is awesome, I'm hoping for no Greek tragedies this tournament! The goals Ibrahimovic sometimes makes are stunning. They aren't always that beautiful, but they can be very weird. It's fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ztalker Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I've been looking some stuff up about that match while my computer was broken (and still is, I'm about to call the repair shop ) and it's a legal goal Van Nistelrooy made. First of all, why do you think substitues have to wear different coats when warming up? To prevent the ref 'seeing' them in play and make mistakes for off-side. Second, why is there ALWAYS a fifa official holding his arm around a subsitute before the one comes in? To clearly show they aren't in play. This player was knocked of his feet. The ref could have: a) Allowed the med team to come in, but STOP the game first. He would have been taken out and not be part of play. Or in any case, stop. b) Allow to play on, observing nothing severe happened to stop for (buffon knocked him down actually, so no Dutch mistake) He did B. And no matter what, with NOT stopping the game, it means the man is IN play. Another example, which we call 'hinderence offside.' Sometimes, a player who isn't offside, profits from an offside teammember who blocks or does something benificial. This player is (technically) 'out of play' and most of the time walks back and doesn't go with the attack. This means the player who isn't offside can go on, since he wasn't offside to start with. The one who WAS simply doesn't participate. If he does, it's offside. And finally: Italy was weak. Everyone in Netherlands would bet on a 2-0 or 2-1 victory for the Squadro Azzura. We thought the World Champion would wipe us off. Be you didn't. It's not a country's fault that an experienced World Champion can't beat some 20 year Dutch punks.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.