world cup thread

[Lissa]

I was disappointed in how little coordination either team had in setting up for scoring opportunities.

The Spanish strategy is normally to play a careful, technical game, and beat their opponents through superior skill. The Dutch strategy was to disrupt the Spanish strategy as well as possible to stop them from scoring. Add the two together, and you have a game that was almost a parody of football - no goals, no thrills, lots of dubious moves, nobody committing to anything.

So, it wasn't just a bad game. It was a strategic choice to have a bad game. Too much on the line for both teams, I think.

-Jester

The Dutch just plain played dirty. There were several yellows that really should have been reds (like the kick to the chest).

---

I'm surprised I'm the first to post this: Spain wins the world cup 1-0 in the second over-time! What a wild game. I thought it was going to go to penalty kicks. Hat off to Spain. Announcers said it's their first world cup win ever.

*cough*

And the Octopus is a World Cup profit, called every game that Germany played along with the final. 100% success rate...if only the rest of us could be so lucky...

[Nystul]

Yeah, they have to do something about the fouling system. This is not really "a gentleman's game" now is it? The hockey style penalty box, or the basketball, free shot on goal, would help improve the lack of scoring problem, and there is need for a penalty for "bad acting".

I don't think it's really a problem with the foul rules. The head referee is asked to cover an awful lot of ground and make an awful lot of decisions. I think they are influenced by the player reactions because they just aren't in position to see everything that is going on. They could give warnings and then send people off for acting, but they have to be in position to see it and know for sure that's what is happening. And they'll be reluctant to award penalty kicks precisely so few goals are scored that it could swing the entire game. How are your going to run 50 yards in a few seconds and see whether someone who is rolling around on the field actually got cleated or not? And knowing if you send a player off or award a penalty kick, it may have a bigger effect on the outcome of the game than which is the best team?

[kandrathe]

Yeah, they have to do something about the fouling system. This is not really "a gentleman's game" now is it? The hockey style penalty box, or the basketball, free shot on goal, would help improve the lack of scoring problem, and there is need for a penalty for "bad acting".

I don't think it's really a problem with the foul rules. The head referee is asked to cover an awful lot of ground and make an awful lot of decisions. I think they are influenced by the player reactions because they just aren't in position to see everything that is going on. They could give warnings and then send people off for acting, but they have to be in position to see it and know for sure that's what is happening. And they'll be reluctant to award penalty kicks precisely so few goals are scored that it could swing the entire game. How are your going to run 50 yards in a few seconds and see whether someone who is rolling around on the field actually got cleated or not? And knowing if you send a player off or award a penalty kick, it may have a bigger effect on the outcome of the game than which is the best team?

Maybe more refs then (6 total), maybe 2 watching the goal areas, 2 watching the lines at midfield, and 2 watching the field from either side of the center line. Free throws, and fouling out players certainly affects how basketball is played.

[eppie]

The Spanish strategy is normally to play a careful, technical game, and beat their opponents through superior skill. The Dutch strategy was to disrupt the Spanish strategy as well as possible to stop them from scoring. Add the two together, and you have a game that was almost a parody of football - no goals, no thrills, lots of dubious moves, nobody committing to anything.

So, it wasn't just a bad game. It was a strategic choice to have a bad game. Too much on the line for both teams, I think.

-Jester

Yes sad....we teached them how to play that game, failed ourselves in 1974 and 1978 and now again get beaten, this time by our pupils......Cruijff our national football icon has cost us again a titel.

I found that the Spanish midfield was easily made toothless by the dutch. Also David Villa wasn't able to do anythinhg this game.
For the rest, the dutch played like the played the whole tournament.....not sharp enough.....our star players Robbern, van Persie, Sneijder, van der Vaart just didn't find eachother.....so in that sense we didn't loose undeserved.
Point is, that Spain was also nothing special....so I am sad they won.
About the roughness of the match. The Dutch were stupid to make too many fauls on midfield.....so useless ones, while the Spanish only tackled players going for the goal.....so it might seems the dutch played dirty.....at least the ref saw it.....what the Spanish did remained unseen.

Both teams could have gotten a few red cards as well.....but I guess not giving them is in the spirit of the game. (I think de Jongs attack on the chest was not as bad as it looked.....if he had only put a little force on his foot the Spanish guy would not be able to play anymnore.....so there a yellow card was a good decission.

The goal was a sad ending of this game, because the referee didn't see the previous attack should have ended in a corner kick for Holland. Instead he gave it to the spanish and they scored directly (with some offiside and kicking from Iniesta involved I heard (didn't see the replays anymore).

I feel now I can't enjoy watching a football game anymore....hopefully this chhanges again. With the extra negative is that we, the dutch, didn't win anything but were at least known for the best looking football......now we are also known as a dirty team.....(which I still find not correct but can of course clearly understand why).

[Lissa]

The Spanish strategy is normally to play a careful, technical game, and beat their opponents through superior skill. The Dutch strategy was to disrupt the Spanish strategy as well as possible to stop them from scoring. Add the two together, and you have a game that was almost a parody of football - no goals, no thrills, lots of dubious moves, nobody committing to anything.

So, it wasn't just a bad game. It was a strategic choice to have a bad game. Too much on the line for both teams, I think.

-Jester

Yes sad....we teached them how to play that game, failed ourselves in 1974 and 1978 and now again get beaten, this time by our pupils......Cruijff our national football icon has cost us again a titel.

I found that the Spanish midfield was easily made toothless by the dutch. Also David Villa wasn't able to do anythinhg this game.
For the rest, the dutch played like the played the whole tournament.....not sharp enough.....our star players Robbern, van Persie, Sneijder, van der Vaart just didn't find eachother.....so in that sense we didn't loose undeserved.
Point is, that Spain was also nothing special....so I am sad they won.
About the roughness of the match. The Dutch were stupid to make too many fauls on midfield.....so useless ones, while the Spanish only tackled players going for the goal.....so it might seems the dutch played dirty.....at least the ref saw it.....what the Spanish did remained unseen.

Both teams could have gotten a few red cards as well.....but I guess not giving them is in the spirit of the game. (I think de Jongs attack on the chest was not as bad as it looked.....if he had only put a little force on his foot the Spanish guy would not be able to play anymnore.....so there a yellow card was a good decission.

The goal was a sad ending of this game, because the referee didn't see the previous attack should have ended in a corner kick for Holland. Instead he gave it to the spanish and they scored directly (with some offiside and kicking from Iniesta involved I heard (didn't see the replays anymore).

I feel now I can't enjoy watching a football game anymore....hopefully this chhanges again. With the extra negative is that we, the dutch, didn't win anything but were at least known for the best looking football......now we are also known as a dirty team.....(which I still find not correct but can of course clearly understand why).

Denmark deserved to lose that match. They played extremely dirty. And that kick to the chest by de Jongs was completely uncalled for and should have been red carded no matter what, he wasn't trying to get to the ball, he was trying to take the Spaniard out of the game. That is a red card offense no matter how much hurt he put on the Spaniard.

Spain deserved that win way more than Denmark did.

[Jester]

Spain deserved that win way more than Denmark did.

Especially so because the final was between Spain and The Netherlands.

-Jester

[Nystul]

Denmark deserved to lose that match. They played extremely dirty. And that kick to the chest by de Jongs was completely uncalled for and should have been red carded no matter what, he wasn't trying to get to the ball, he was trying to take the Spaniard out of the game. That is a red card offense no matter how much hurt he put on the Spaniard.

Spain deserved that win way more than Denmark did.

Hang on a minute... Which ones are the Danes and which are the Dutch again?

[eppie]

Denmark deserved to lose that match. They played extremely dirty. And that kick to the chest by de Jongs was completely uncalled for and should have been red carded no matter what, he wasn't trying to get to the ball, he was trying to take the Spaniard out of the game. That is a red card offense no matter how much hurt he put on the Spaniard.

Spain deserved that win way more than Denmark did.

As I said before, the problem of the dutch is not being dirt enough.
And what I call dirty is making fauls that the referee doesnot see.
Same happened 4 years ago against portugal and in 1994 and 1998 against Brazil. We will end up losing those matches.
The attack by de Jong was more stupid than dirty....I really can't think of any reason why he wanted to do that. If, as you suggest, he wanted to kick a spaniard out of the game, he could have better done in on one of the better players. Because if that was his goal and he succeeded he would indeed have a red card and another Spaniard would enter the game (probably Fabregas who is a better player than the victim).

The dutch made more fauls but I think the Spaniards made more fouls that were not punished. E.g. the double fake fall to the ground by Xavi and Iniesta in the dutch penalty area. Which were correctly not awarded a penalty but if the ref was doing a good game he would both give them a yellow card.
Also the Spanish goal fell because of a referee error (not giving a corner after not 1 but 2 spanish players touched the ball (and of course the Spanish players didn't tell the ref they did). Of course also the dutch wouldn't have admitted that during the game, but please spare me the stories that Spain played a clean game and wanted to win. They were just better in commiting fauls without being punished.
And for the dutch missing de Jong wth a red card wouldn't be so bad as for Spain to miss Iniesta.

I saw this coming however; many times during this tournament, referees failed to see or punish 'natrappen'. (don't know what that is in English....kicking or hitting a player with no ball near).