2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa

Was this game more physical than is the norm? Looked like a lot of collisions for a soccer game.

And could somebody explain the yellow cards? Do they count against the player for the rest of the tournament, or does he get a clean slate next game? Seemed like a lot of cards handed out…

It a goal is scored, it almost always means that someone messed up. It’s just that Green’s error was so very visible.

For world class players, they sure seem to have delicate psyches…

Why are the stats stuff like “yellow card 39 ft”? WTH does that mean?

No, looked pretty normal to me. Two yellow cards equals a red card which means you get sent off for that game. Starts again for the next game. I did think there was a low tolerance from the refs, but fair to both teams.

3 for each side I think - yellows.

Seems pretty normal to me on the physical stuff.

They start the next game with no cards but the yellow counts against them still. 2 yellows in the group round and you’re out of the next game. A red gets you a skip as well.

AFAIK after the group round all cards are forgotten about and they start again afresh.

I overheard a guy saying that in top-level football, the team that scores the first goal rarely loses (except by a PK “shootout”). Anyone know theses percentages? :

  • team that scores the first goal wins
  • match is a draw (or game is decided on penalty kicks)
  • team that scores the first goal loses

You mean:

Yellow Card 39’

?

The player got a yellow card in the 39th minute.

Dunno, but a breakthough early in the game often causes the defence to close in and make a second goal very difficult. Also the team that’s ahead can play defensively for the balance of the game.

Was the stat you saw written "yellow card 39’ "? If so, it refers to time, not feet. The yellow card was issued at 39 minutes into the game.

I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that is how they record it.

Result is OK really, not a particularly inspiring performance from England but it was a cunt of a goal to concede. Too alehouse for me though, just hoofing it up to Emile with Ste G(bh) and Frank not creating enough. We’ll see how things go.

USA played well, Tim especially.

Yes, sorry. The apostrophe is used to denote feet, so I assumed… Why does it matter what time the foul was called? Thanks for the info, as well, Rysto.

Argentina won and England lost, who can ask for more? :slight_smile:
(In fact I could, winning the Cup against Brazil, after defeating Germany, England and Italy)

England didn’t lose. Try to control yourself.

1-1 is a draw so neither side lost :wink:

Maybe have a Carlsberg :smiley:

Pretty much what I expected. I’m glad that the defense was sorted out after that first goal.

Howard and Cherundolo were fantastic. I thought Bradley played very well, but there’s controversy over that (always is). I’d have to watch it again and track him to make up my mind.

Altidore did was he always does. Not too much, then abuses somebody out of nowhere. Too bad he didn’t finish it off. I want to see Torres and more Buddle in the other games.

Still both these teams will advance.

That was an OK game, but England seemed a little lacking, a little sluggish. The US did the usual workmanlike thing, which is good, that gets a side into the knock-out rounds, so fair play.

Today’s best side - Argentina. Firing blanks, but somebody is going to get destroyed if/when they click. Lionel Messi is by some large margin the best player at this tournament so far. Am I alone in thinking that Veron had retired? Is he playing back in Argentina these days?

England fan here. Overall, it was a decent performance for us marred by a shocking piece of goalkeeping. We pressed and passed the ball well, and created a lot of chances. It was a big improvement over the warm-up games, and our play in the last world cup.

Goalkeeper has been a problem position for us for some time now, it’s really not clear who our best goalie is. The 39 year old David James would probably have started today if he was fully fit, and his nickname is “calamity”. (He’s a bit more dependable these days, but he does tend to flap at crosses from time to time).

Heskey played well, showing the form of the qualification campaign. Despite his terrible scoring record, I still think he’s our best option to partner Rooney up front. He kept winning the ball and bringing other players in, and played Gerrard in for his expertly taken goal. Was completely unsuprised when he shot straight at Howard when though on goal though.

Having started to pay close attention to the phenomenon, it amazes me how many “world class” strikers kick or head the ball in the goalkeeper’s direction.