Yeah, for a ball with such an unpredictable response, the players in this game sure gave the illusion of being able to shoot accurately.
On the ITV website there was a lot of discussion about the ball after the first goal. But what effect are people supposing that the ball had? Made his shot more accurate?
I won’t be offering mine. Sorry. 
Well, me too - despite watching the match in an Oranje grove, with cries of “get the fuck out” from the owner. It was fun.
Well, I decided to go to the horse’s mouth and check if they had made a test, it sounded iffy to me that NASA would bother with this, but they did and they did compare it with a ball from the recent past.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/nasalife/features/soccer_ball.html
By what definition was that an own goal? 
A deflection, depending on how it happens. Subjective call most times.
A deflection isn’t an own goal, benefit of the doubt is given to the attacker, the defender would need to intentionally re-direct a ball into his own net for it to be an own goal. That’s why it wasn’t recorded as an own goal.
Make your own call. Had the defender not stuck his foot in the way of Wesley’s strike, he wouldn’t have scored. The shady part is the Dutch player, clearly offside, who could be flagged as interrupting the play.
Any more questions?
Terrific match. Forlan certainly gets my vote for the Golden Ball. Also, best hair.
It isn’t something that is up for debate, the benefit of the doubt is always given to the attacking player, for it to be ruled an own goal the defender needs to intentionally play the ball, which did not happen here. I would be surprised if you could find a single review of the game (from the thousands on the internet) that awards it as an own goal.
As for being flagged for offside another look at the laws of the game clears it up nicely:
The Dutch player doesn’t touch the ball and is therefore not interfering with play.
It wasn’t offside, and it wasn’t an own goal. Not an opinion, just following the laws and guidelines set out by FIFA.
I daresay the Dutch player in the offside position obstructed the keeper’s line of sight.
“Not an opinion, just following the laws and guidelines set out by FIFA.”
And, BTW, I was rooting for the Oranje.
Again, any more questions?
Your cite: Wikipedia
My cite: FIFA Laws of the Game 2010 (downloaded from fifa.com)
We can discuss which is more reliable if you wish.
No, I don’t. I’m done with this topic. Readers are left to make up their own minds.
Cheers.
Can I just say, I had no idea how much of an embarrassment Arjen Robben is with his near-complete refusal to use his right foot. How on Earth did he reach this point in his career without some coach somewhere beating that out of him?
Ridiculous.
Re: the offsides goal, I don’t think van Persie was offside to begin with. I do think he interfered with the play because the keeper thought he was going to redirect it, but if you check the replay, the ball was already a blur coming off Sneijder’s foot when the defender stepped up. Obviously, it’s debatable, but I think it was a good call.
The rule as it always seems to be quoted by commentators on the Premier League (and I don’t know how reliable they are!) is that if the *original shot *was on target, it goes down as the striker’s goal, but if it was off target then it goes down as an own goal.
I fairness that was a very close call and hard to make on the spot. It’s another case for video replay but it’s a perfectly acceptable miss under the current system. It’s not on the level as some other terrible calls.
Anyway - ref’s decision is final so moving along … Come on Spain!
Agreed. Everyone only thinks it was offside because the production crew put “the magic line” where it would look offside, but you can see in the still photo at the link above the ball had already been kicked at that point (Sneijder kicks the ball from the right side of his body, but the still frame has the ball on his left). That fraction of a second makes all the difference.