PDA

View Full Version : And in all the excitement...


Greg W
12-06-2010, 01:51:31
I didn't even realise there was an England v Australia Rugby test on tonight. Won't get to watch it, I'll be working. I expect we'll get beaten though, we're in rather a rebuilding stage. On top of just sucking recently.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 10:40:22
Proved me wrong. :beer:

Though giving away two penalty tries for scrum collapses is rather poor.

Debaser
13-06-2010, 14:51:34
Hey Greg, how many goals do you think an out of form Germany are going to put past your Socceroos tonight? I reckon it'll be 3-0.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 18:21:28
I hope for 0, but that's very much a long shot. :nervous:

Greg W
13-06-2010, 18:25:58
Mind you, I just woke up for the match. We're apparently playing without a striker! Eeeeeenteresting strategy...

Greg W
13-06-2010, 18:40:31
Crap! 0-1 after 8 minutes. And we could have had a goal after 3 mins! Not looking good so far! :(

Greg W
13-06-2010, 18:55:20
I wish we wouldn't play the offside trap! Going to have a heart attack! :(

Greg W
13-06-2010, 18:57:54
0-2. :(

Germany's pace is causing us way too many problems. Yes, they look like they may give up a goal or two, but they could score a brace as well. :(

Fistandantilus
13-06-2010, 19:12:09
I agree, German are playing really well. Every time they speed up the pace they cause trouble.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 19:20:53
Yep, their ability to put together an attack that is pacy with such quick and deft passes is bring us unhinged. They're simply running into space and beating the offside trap. Could have been 0-5 at halftime. And we really needed to take that chance we had int he first 3 mins if we were to get anything out of the game. As it is, I find it hard to see us getting much out of this. Germany just way too classy and pacy against the second oldest team in the competition.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 19:35:28
A penalty there for the handball would have helped. :(

Greg W
13-06-2010, 19:40:32
Oezil is showing class, even if he has some obvious Italian heritage!

Mightytree
13-06-2010, 19:41:45
Technically and offensively this is probably the best team we've had in a very long time. Especially Özil is an absolute joy to watch. We seem to be one of the few teams in this WC that are actually more defensively challenged than offensively. For us in this WC a lot will depend on whether we manage to stabilize our defense.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 19:43:09
And how the hell was that a red card? :bash: :rolleyes: :cry:

Greg W
13-06-2010, 19:56:31
0-3. That was just a matter of time, even if we have had a bit more of the ball recently.

That red card really kills us though. No Cahill for the 2nd game either. Yellow card? Sure. Red? Friggen joke, and not a funny one.

And 0-4 now. :(

Drekkus
13-06-2010, 20:02:27
Wipe out!!!

Debaser
13-06-2010, 20:24:16
A fair result I reckon, though it probably should have been worse. It's a shame about Cahill, but even with him I doubt Australia would have much chance against Serbia or Ghana on todays performances.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 20:26:45
Well, that screws things. That was a match that we were unlikely to ever get much out of, but that send off really hurt. Mainly cos it takes Cahill out of the Ghana match. That's really going to hurt, as with Ghana winning against Serbia, we need to win that match as a draw will bring goal difference into it and that means beating Serbia handily and relying on Germany giving Ghana a lesson.

Mind you, we were our own worst enemies. Playing a consistent offside trap with an aging defence is somewhat of a recipe for disaster. Especially against a speedy German side.

Germany - looked good in attack. Defence could be an issue, they looked somewhat wobbly at times. I'd like to see them play someone good (aka top 10 in the world) before I make a decision though.

The Shaker
13-06-2010, 20:28:19
Good game. Glad we don't have to play them for a while.

Greg W
13-06-2010, 20:34:00
A fair result I reckon, though it probably should have been worse. It's a shame about Cahill, but even with him I doubt Australia would have much chance against Serbia or Ghana on todays performances.We'll see. I think Ghana and Serbia will be a lot different, and I find it hard to read much into a match where we played a strange formation (bizarre decision from Verbeek there).

Mightytree
13-06-2010, 20:38:47
Honestly, I think Australia aren't nearly as bad as a lot of people will make them now. The main reason we won this game is because we played well and not because the Australians played badly.

Also, I thought Serbia looked really terrible today and Ghana wasn't that much better either. Australia may not make it out of this group, but I do give them a fair chance at drawing with either team.

paiktis
13-06-2010, 21:15:34
don't know that much about football but i think the germans know how to play it

Drekkus
13-06-2010, 21:16:09
Australia did play badly. Horrible defending. Germany was a surprise for me though.

paiktis
13-06-2010, 21:20:08
btw the argentinians look like don corleone

also found this video which is unbelievable

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbaa2oTazMU


i think we are going to get crushed

(that's why i prefer basketball where we rule)

Mightytree
13-06-2010, 21:29:29
The point is that there's a correlation between one team playing good offense and the other team playing bad defense. With all due respect to Serbia and Ghana, but I don't think they're nearly as potent offensively, so Australia will look better defensively against them.

Greg W
14-06-2010, 03:45:59
It was a bad game though. We did play poorly, easily the worst game we have played in the last 4 years. Having said that, Germany were very classy in attack and still needed to create and then exploit the chances we gave them. And Verbeek playing a totally different formation to our normal one didn't help. Cahill is not made to be a lone striker, he's made to sit in behind the striker(s).

Still, the goals we gave up were a result of poor defending. We allowed ourselves to get pulled out of position and the Germans ruthlessly exploited that. I'd be surprised if that happens two games in a row. I remember the last WC, we lost 0-2 to Brazil and I was impressed with the way we played. This match I was more impressed with the way we played in the last after Cahill was sent off. But then, I think Germany relaxed at that point.

Back!
14-06-2010, 06:46:38
Oezil is showing class, even if he has some obvious Italian heritage!

in case this was not a joke, Özil is Turkish.
(if I'm not mistaken he even retained double nationality)

I understand that ethnically both peoples might look just the same to you, but I hope you admit that at least football-wise there should be a difference
:p

Greg W
14-06-2010, 07:14:39
I was referring to his yellow card for diving! :p

Fistandantilus
14-06-2010, 07:42:57
You deserve :rolleyes: in that case.

Greg W
14-06-2010, 07:50:06
Rubbish, it were a joke. :D

Funko
14-06-2010, 07:56:27
Honestly, I think Australia aren't nearly as bad as a lot of people will make them now. The main reason we won this game is because we played well and not because the Australians played badly.

Also, I thought Serbia looked really terrible today and Ghana wasn't that much better either. Australia may not make it out of this group, but I do give them a fair chance at drawing with either team.

I don't think Australia played badly, but I think they generally lack quality through the side. I completely agree that you guys played really well though. Comfortably the best performance we've seen by anyone so far. We really have to avoid you in the 2nd round.

BTW welcome back! :beer:

Greg W
14-06-2010, 08:06:39
No, we did play badly. We left too many gaps in our defence and didn't cover players running into them. We allowed ourself to be dragged out of shape and didn't pick up opposition runners, both through the middle and out wide.

And, heck, we didn't even hold the ball until the last 30 mins or so, when Germany seemingly relaxed.

As an example, how many times did you see Cahill get the ball before he was sent off? He was our "striker" and barely got the ball. Schwarzer had a shocker for the 2nd goal, and arguably the first as well. It was a very poor performance.

Funko
14-06-2010, 08:07:26
Maybe I should say you didn't play worse than I expected. :)

Greg W
14-06-2010, 08:16:15
Fair call. I expected better from previous results. Such as drawing in Japan, Holding the Netherlands to a draw and beating Norway 1-0.

Mind you, losing 3-1 to the USA and only barely beating the Kiwis 2-1 did give me reason to doubt. TBH, I wonder just how much is the coach playing with the system at the worst time.

He had never played Cahill up front, nor Culina out wide on the left, nor Garcia as support to the striker. He has also ignored poor form from Grella as a Defensive Midfielder and Moore as Center Back. Why experiment in such a game? Surely you play the same as you have for the last 2+ years? But no, he had to go and fiddle with things and look where it got us. :bash:

Greg W
19-06-2010, 14:16:41
GOAL Australia! :vuvu:

Greg W
19-06-2010, 14:25:49
Oh shit, and now Kewell off! And Ghana level! We's fooked now. :(

Greg W
19-06-2010, 14:27:17
Possibly another harsh sending off (and penalty this time). His arm appeared to stay by his side. He did not appear to try and handball it at all. :cry::cry::cry:

Fistandantilus
19-06-2010, 14:41:45
I'm not watching the game but..


35 min "The Australian TV thinks that the sending off is 'very harsh'," says Tomohiko Harada. "Personally, I think Harry Kewell is a complete and utter numpty."


:lol:

Greg W
19-06-2010, 14:49:58
There isn't a great angle on it. But the angles you do get seem to indicate that his arm did not move and stayed by his side. Since when is that a send off offense? Fark, it's barely a free kick.

Two referreeing decisions, one of which was a shocker and the second one of which looks to be as well) could have cost us any chance of anything in this World Cup (Cahill being unavailable for this game and now Kewell being sent off).

:bash:

Greg W
19-06-2010, 14:55:21
Finally saw a decent angle on the handball. It was hit from 9 yards away and Kewell's arm was at about a 30 degree angle from his body when it hit him. Possibly a send off on that respect in that his arm was not by his side, but there was no way he had time to even twitch by the time the ball hit his arm. Definitely not deliberate. The side on view was misleading.

The sad thing is that that is probably the last we will ever see in a World Cup of arguably Australia's greatest football talent. We'd need to progress to the Round of 16 to see him again and with the send off, that's looking unlikely. :(

Greg W
19-06-2010, 15:57:46
Well, that was a much better effort. That was what I expect to see from Australian Soccer (er, football)! Shame that a red card ruined our chances. But the effort, the resolve, the sheer guts shown to continue to play positive football a man down and actually have the best chance to win it. Shame it's quite possibly not going to mean much.

On a side note, that referee was absolutely crap. Not just the red card offense, but the rest of the match. Aside from anything else, 3 mins of extra time are announced. 2 mins in, the ref calls a halt for an injury. He restarts the game and 10 seconds later blows full time. That typified his game.

Shame too that now with Craig Moore getting a 2nd red, he misses the next match. He has been a great stalwart for Australia over many years. I hope we can somehow make the last 16 just so he and Kewell can get another match.

Funko
19-06-2010, 16:20:29
Totally fair sending off, according to the rules. He swung his arm towards the ball, it hit him on the top of the arm. Dunno what the Australians are moaning about.

And lost the rugby at home to England today too?!

Greg W
19-06-2010, 16:27:45
Swung his arm at the ball? His arm didn't even have a chance to move, the ball was smashed at him from 9 or 10 yards away. The only possible argument that I could see was that his arm was away from his body. And that was... debatable I guess.

Penalty, sure. Red Card? Harsh.

And you owe me a beer. :p

Greg W
19-06-2010, 16:45:09
For Australia to progress we need:
- to beat Serbia (duh)

Then, one of the following has to happen:
- Ghana beat Germany
- Germany beat Ghana and we beat Serbia by enough to redress a 5 goal difference
- Germany and Ghana draw and we beat Serbia by 8 goals

Personally, I'll be rooting for either a Ghana win, or for Germany to flog them cos the last is just not going to happen. Which will make it hard to know who the hell to barrack for. If Ghana go a goal up, I barrack for them. If Germany go a goal up, I barrack for them to score 3 more, right up until Ghana equalise then I switch!

Germany can go out with either a loss to Ghana and a win in the Aus/Serbia match. Or with a draw and a Serbia win; or Aus beating Serbia by 8 goals.

Ghana can go out with a loss to Germany and either a Serbian win or an Australian win and a change of 5 Goal Difference.

For Serbia,they simply need to win. Or draw and hope that Ghana beat Germany by 4 goals.

4 pts - Ghana GD: +1
3 pts - Germany GD: +3
3 pts - Serbia GD: 0
1 pts - Australia GD: -4

Mightytree
19-06-2010, 17:09:55
Totally fair sending off, according to the rules. He swung his arm towards the ball, it hit him on the top of the arm. Dunno what the Australians are moaning about.

I have to side with Greg on this one. Kewell had absolutely no chance to react in any way on that play. That red card was total rubbish. As far as the penalty is concerned, there was actually a penalty-worthy foul on that play as well when an Australian pulled down a player from Ghana right before the shot. If we pretend the ref gave the penalty for that foul, then it's ok I guess.

Greg W
20-06-2010, 02:46:28
Haven't heard anyone talk about that foul. Probably cos a penalty was awarded, so why worry about it...

Looking at the FIFA laws though, this is what they say:
Direct Free Kick
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player
commits any of the following four offences:
• handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his
own penalty area)

Sending-Off Offences
A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red
card if he commits any of the following seven offences:
...
4. denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity
by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a
goalkeeper within his own penalty area)On that basis I have to argue that a foul was never committed at all, let alone a send off offense. From the shot from behind the Ghana player, Kewell did not move his arm between the ball being struck at the goal and the ball striking his arm. He didn't have a chance to. Therefore it cannot have been deliberate, therefore no foul, no penalty.

So, great, 2 ridiculous send offs in 2 matches for us.

Fistandantilus
20-06-2010, 06:18:39
Wow Greg, you sure whine a freaking lot don't you?

Asher
20-06-2010, 06:30:21
Why is it called a test? Is it graded on a curve?

Greg W
20-06-2010, 07:36:39
Wow Greg, you sure whine a freaking lot don't you?Whine:
1. To utter a plaintive, high-pitched, protracted sound, as in pain, fear, supplication, or complaint.
2. To complain or protest in a childish fashion.
3. To produce a sustained noise of relatively high pitch: jet engines whining.Can't possibly be the first, seeing as it's silent on the 'net and thus has no pitch and ain't the third. So it must be the second. Personally, I see very little that I have said that could be considered childish, but feel free to point out exactly what you consider to be childish if you feel so inclined.

Fistandantilus
20-06-2010, 08:52:10
I just meant that you complain a lot.

The same official document you quote also says:

This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored.


My english is crap but to me the wording suggests that intent is irrelevant and the simple fact that it prevented a goal in an unfair way (handball) is what matters.

You had to watch replays in slow motion from a different angle to decide, refs have to make split second decisions based on what they see on the pitch.

But I really don't want to argue about it.

There have been (and will be) a lot of mistakes (i.e. US disallowed goal and many others) that was at best a borderline call which could go both ways yet you go on and label it as ridiculous.

Move on. I hope you guys beat Serbia and go thru so you can smile a bit :D

Debaser
20-06-2010, 09:26:48
Yep, intent doesn't really matter. It was a clear penalty and sending off.

Funko
20-06-2010, 09:40:57
Yeah. Exactly.

But his arm clearly moved away from his body as well (I don't think it was concious from him... )

Funko
20-06-2010, 09:41:18
The rule is harsh though.

The Shaker
20-06-2010, 10:09:54
Like most laws, the reason, and the spirit in which they exist gets lost and overtaken by ...'but that's the rule'

Handballs(to stop people gaming an unfair advantage by deliberately using their arms), most fouls(to stop people kicking the shit out of others without even vaguely trying to get the ball...not a teensy tiny clip of the calf with a blade of grass ), it's all basically a ton of shit. At least now there seems to be a bit of leeway in the 'ball to arm' thing. In the past the rules seemed geared only to players who had had their arms surgically removed.

Same with offside...to stop goalhangers, not to spend ages moaning about whether there was a cm of daylight between a defender and forward.

Spirit of the game, bring it back please (fifa and players).

Greg W
20-06-2010, 10:16:15
I just meant that you complain a lot.

The same official document you quote also says:This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored.My english is crap but to me the wording suggests that intent is irrelevant and the simple fact that it prevented a goal in an unfair way (handball) is what matters.No, you are misreading that quote. That quote refers to the fact that the send off is not for the deliberate handball, but for the fact that it denied a goal scoring opportunity.

The point being that a deliberate handball is a direct free kick. But a deliberate handball that removes a goalscoring opportunity is a send off. Otherwise why still use the word deliberate there. The way that it is worded also gives it away.

Sorry Debaser and Mike, but you're wrong too.

The Shaker
20-06-2010, 10:16:28
However in my rose-tinted ideal world i'm not sure what I would have done with the Kewell thing.
If I was sure there was no intent, then I would award a penalty goal (not a kick), and no punishment for the player.

The Shaker
20-06-2010, 10:17:18
Plus i would award Cameroon a point for entertainment, and take one away from England for 'inability to make simple pub team passes'

Greg W
20-06-2010, 10:18:28
Yeah. Exactly.

But his arm clearly moved away from his body as well (I don't think it was concious from him... )You'll also see that what he is doing is pushing his chest out, not pushing his arm out per-se. Most defenders on the line do so. The obvious point though being that he was obviously not moving his arm to stop the goal.

Debaser
20-06-2010, 13:22:30
He deliberately put himself on the line to block the ball, and he blocked the ball with his (raised) arm.

I don't think it's even a particularly debatable penalty.

Greg W
20-06-2010, 14:15:38
The question is whether he deliberately used his arm to block the ball, or did the ball hit his arm without him deliberately sticking it in the way?

If you think the latter then we'll agree to disagree. He did not have time to even attempt to move his arm to block the ball as it was blasted at him from all of 8 yards out. That ball would have taken all of about 1/4 of a second to reach him. Thing is you see players hit in the hand or arm all the time in the box and no penalty. The intent to commit a hand ball is what causes it to be a penalty and/or red card.

Thing is, I would have given the penalty too, despite the law stating it wasn't warranted as it did stop a goal. The send off is the part I object to.

Funko
20-06-2010, 14:22:02
I don't think that Fist is misreading the quote.

Next up, was that NZ goal offside? I'm not sure a kiwi touched it on the way through,

Mightytree
20-06-2010, 14:26:19
Well, the ball was touched by somebody. Depends on who it was.

Funko
20-06-2010, 14:29:18
Yes, sorry. That's what I meant, could have been the Italian, Chialleni?

An Australian referee backs us all up (except Greg)

http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/world-cup-2010/harry-kewells-handball-was-a-straight-red-card-says-top-aussie-referee/story-fn4l5v26-1225881956506

Mightytree
20-06-2010, 14:42:31
The Kewell red card/penalty was discussed at length by the German commentators at halftime. They basically agreed that the most elegant solution to the whole thing would have been to award a penalty for the foul just prior to the shot and ignore the handball altogether. That's also how it should have been handled according to the rules.

The Shaker
20-06-2010, 14:50:21
Such ruthless efficiency.

Funko
20-06-2010, 14:51:11
You can never write the German pundits off.

The Shaker
20-06-2010, 14:57:03
Well, the ball was touched by somebody. Depends on who it was.

hand ball by canavaro surely, red card and penalty...good job it was already offside

Greg W
20-06-2010, 16:01:07
Amazing effort by New Zealand. I think that so far they have to be the surprise of the tournament.I don't think that Fist is misreading the quote.I don't think he's misreading it, I know he's misreading it, and I used to be a ref. Anyway, enough. No way will you convince me and I doubt I'll convince you. So let's forget it, eh?

Funko
21-06-2010, 07:45:16
You disagree with the most senior Aussie ref and all our refs I've seen talk about it too then.

Back!
21-06-2010, 08:10:24
He just misses arguing with that MoSe guy, so he feels entitled to take his place in this forum with hairsplitting arguments to defend his opinion alone vs Rest Of The World

:p

The Shaker
21-06-2010, 08:49:23
You disagree with the most senior Aussie ref and all our refs I've seen talk about it too then.

Well that's at least something in his favour then.

Funko
21-06-2010, 08:54:03
:lol: True.

Back!
21-06-2010, 09:18:36
Rivaldo
Dida
Busquets

now welcome

Keita

Funko
21-06-2010, 09:23:44
Lots of disgraceful diving from the Brazillians in that match too. :(

MOBIUS
21-06-2010, 11:22:02
You can never write the German pundits off.

God, if only...

Saw Roy Hodgson doing some punditry the other day and was genuinely impressed with his thoughtful and intelligent analysis - which makes a change from the usual spouting of empty-headed point out the obvious bollocks...:beer:

Also liked the NK '66 expose and find myself really willing the current NK team to do really well and make it through the group - despite the fact that the country is run by a ruthless despot, etc, etc...

Funko
21-06-2010, 11:24:44
Saw Roy Hodgson doing some punditry the other day and was genuinely impressed with his thoughtful and intelligent analysis - which makes a change from the usual spouting of empty-headed point out the obvious bollocks...:beer:

Absolutely. :beer:

MOBIUS
21-06-2010, 11:29:04
He just misses arguing with that MoSe guy, so he feels entitled to take his place in this forum with hairsplitting arguments to defend his opinion alone vs Rest Of The World

:p

I miss that MoSe guy...

Please come Back!:cry:

Greg W
21-06-2010, 13:25:54
Actually, I hadn't read anything from the refs until just today. There was an article in today's paper about it. Apparently, from the directions FIFA have given the referees, the decision was correct. The direction is that if the player is 2-3 yards (or less) away from the ball when it is kicked, it's unintentional. Any further and it's intentional. As a rule, no discretion, nothing.

I am sorry, but I have to say that that is a fucking ridiculous ruling. I have had balls kicked at me from much further away than 2-3 yards away that there's no way I could have dodged. It is to do with the strength of the kick and the resultant speed of the ball. A rule based entirely on some arbitrary measurement is crap. Especially as it can contradict the actual law itself. If the law says it comes down to intention, then let the referee make a bloody decision on the intent. Don't give the referee a fucking measuring tape to determine whether it's a red card or not.

So, yes, the ref got it right according to FIFA's direction. I completely disagree with the fucking direction though. Fucking FIFA! :bash:

Funko
21-06-2010, 13:27:25
You could have read it yesterday if you'd read the link I posted.

Greg W
21-06-2010, 13:31:05
Why should I when you don't read my posts properly? :p

Greg W
21-06-2010, 16:22:39
Rivaldo
Dida
Busquets

now welcome

KeitaYou forgot the Italian dude (see, I have scrubbed his name from my memory, despite the fact that I re-read that thread the other day) that fell over Lucas Neill in '06! :p

Not to mention arguably the most famous of all: Maradona. And Zidane. Cantona's was bloody good too, though it was a club match.

Fistandantilus
21-06-2010, 16:54:33
Lol, that's Grosso but he didn't feign an injury which I think was the point of that list. Those things happen on a daily base in Italy :p

And it's about time we summon Luis Enrique to bring MoSe Back! in anger :p

Back!
21-06-2010, 17:04:44
you got the club admission rule all wrong, Greg

that's not Divers Club

as Fist pointed out, it's the club of those who feigned an injury
but that's not enough

they feigned an injury to their face/head, when all the world watching saw that they got hit elsewhere, if ever at all.

(BTW, Luis Enriques' nose actually bled)

Fistandantilus
21-06-2010, 17:08:46
I know it did, Tassotti broke his nose :lol:

Greg W
22-06-2010, 01:42:58
Ah, I see. I thought it was just a shameful act club. :cute: