Agreed. Sorry for the hijack. Now, on to football! (The round ball kind)
The roundest ball ever, I hear.
True. But blown offside calls are almost an every match occurrence. Phantom goals? Not so much.
In fact, off the top of my head I remember two others involving England: '66 WC Final & Lampard’s blast vs Germany in South Africa.
Care to list the number of controversial offside goals each an every season/tournament? A dime a dozen.
Now, granted, both could and should be easily corrected by inept FIFA, simply by using technology long available.
Is there another kind? :dubious:
Head referee is clearly saying the goal should have counted – all else included. At least that is how I read it. Mind you, not an appeal to authority, just matches my own view per post to NATB.
He didn’t mention the offside, so it’s impossible to say if he thought the goal should have counted. He’s saying the ball was in the goal, which everyone seems to agree on.
Yeah, but that doesn’t mean that the goal should have counted on some metaphysical level.
It is kind of weird that England always seems to be involved in phantom goals- though we’re usually on the other side. You could even include the Hand of God goal.
Moving on:
Czechs vs Portugal. Coin toss? Really all depends which Ronaldo shows-up. As a team, I like the Czechs better, but when you have CR7 on your side, you are really never an underdog.
That said, I am taking the Czechs 3-2 in a mad affair.
I predict a very tough battle between the Germans & the Greeks on Friday. This match – for good or ill – has a lot more than footie involved. A red card or two, not out of the question.
I agree w/lisiate: 2-1 Germany. But painful. Literally.
Spain vs France: If Spain come to play (and VDB starts with a legit 4-1-4-1, which is how I think we play best), I don’t see France beating us. That said, if we come out as we did against Croatia (an amazing 4-6), we are there for the taking.
That said, yet another 1-0 win by Spain wouldn’t surprise me – or anyone else.
England vs Italy. Rooting for England all the way in this one. Just can’t stand Italy’s football – besides the '82 WC, they are a disgrace to the game. That said, England’s going to have to step it up two notches. If anyone knows how to win games without playing football, that’s The Azzurri.
Biased prediction: England through 1-0. Or down to PKs.
As you can tell, I expect the scoring to go way down in the next round…
I’ve always hated Maradona after that.
I was too young to remember it, but on some level I’ve always sort of liked the “cheat to win” approach.
If the Greek squad were at full strength I’d go out on a limb and pick them to beat Germany… but they aren’t. I just don’t see France beating Spain, because they won’t have enough of the ball. I don’t think there’s a real favorite in either of the other two matches, though obviously I’d rather see an England win.
What was the Straight Dope’s motto again? 
Don’t understand that. I honestly hate cheats. I mean if Spain wanted Italy out of the tournament they’d just let in a goal in the last CK – I would have been disgusted if they had though.
Fair assessment, though I don’t think any player on the Greek squad is going easy on Friday. Yes, Germany should go through, but like I said this is a grudge match on more than one level. And again, I am certainly with you on wanting England through.
In fact, a Spain/England Final would please me to no end. Not because I think I’d be easy – it certainly wouldn’t. Remember what I told you last WC? You have a legit goalie now in Heart and that makes all the difference. For as good as Spain has done in the past four years, they’d be nowhere w/out Saint Iker.
Nitpick: Hart. I do think England matches up well against Spain. Scrappy, will run around and break up all those pretty passing exchanges, and disciplined at the back (though not against Ukraine!)
In attacking terms, everyone except the Irish seems to have tried to beat Spain at Spanish football. The Irish had the right idea: hoof it up the pitch and beat them in the air instead, which England should also be able to do. Ireland’s problem was that they just weren’t talented enough to make it work. Hard to beat anyone no matter what your tactics are if you only have 15% of the possession.
Methinks I am going to stick to the “it’s taking longer than we thought” part. 
Apologies: Joe Hart it is.
And yes, that’s basically the right idea; get us when we’re full forward with a lightning counter/long ball. You won’t get many – and you still have Iker to get through – but with players such as Rooney & Welbeck, Walcott, Carroll, and Gerrard to launch them (my favorite mid, outside of Xavi & Iniesta) you have as good a chance as anyone.
I used to like this song.
Greatest quote ever.
It kinda has. Not the Big Three (and may never be), but will probably pass hockey soon for the #4 spot (yeah, I know, NASCAR). Or something. Ranking the sports can be kind of weird.
Because teams are that strongly linked with physical location? I get that a “franchise” is such a foreign concept. But I don’t see how it’s a “far worse” concept. If I owned a team that was losing me money in one place, I sure as hell would like to move it to a place where it could succeed. Or is it that the idea that the team could succeed in a different location unreasonable?
Stop! I want soccer to be a huge success in the US. Telling people that it will lead to rugby & cricket will derail that. (Actually, I think I could like rugby better than American football…cricket is still a harder sell).
I don’t know. A lot of tap-ins are the result of a great buildup. Or at least one great pass. Same could be said of rebound and deflected goals.
Really? Watch some American sports occasionally. The way soccer caters to commercial breaks is in a different universe compared to the way that baseball/football (American)/basketball do. Timing the kickoffs? Really?
Of football? Yes. Lots. Pretending that there are no other sports called “football” is kind douchebaggy.
I hate petty cheating of the act-like-you-just-trod-on-a-landmine-when-a-defender-comes-near-you-in-the-box kind, but I do have a certain grudging admiration for pulling off something as audacious as the Hand of God goal. 
That. Fuck divers, but damn me if I didn’t think Maradona might actually have been God when I saw the goal years later.
Agreed. It was so beautifully, wonderfully shameless. Petty cheating is just annoying, but this kind of thing took serious balls.
What I think is “douchebaggy” is calling any sport mainly played with your hands, “football.” Never mind coming-up with a weak-sauced, American-only name such as “soccer” for the game the whole world know as as “football/futbol”
What you call “audacious” I saw live as clearly “cheating.” Semantics? Nope, it was simply cheating as the whole world saw & knows since them – some later than other, admittedly. Some “genius” that Pelusa…
Even though I am an atheist, I have a much better concept of “God” than Maradona scoring with his hand and jumping all over the field as if it was legit.
Oh, and I hate divers myself…though I admit we have a few; Busquet comes to mind.
God on the pitch? Try Zidane in Glasgow, with the sublime volley from just inside the box for Madrid’s 9th CL. One of the best legal goals you are ever going to see for a huge win.
But “soccer” isn’t an American-only name for the sport - it’s a contraction of “Association”, and used by the British to distinguish it from Rugby Football and, for that matter, American Football. I guess we don’t use it much, but we did originate it, and Americans have good reasons for using it. You may dislike the word, I guess, but don’t blame the Yanks for it.
Good link, though, I wonder if that wasn’t one of the best goals ever scored at Hampden.