Ongoing Euro '08 matches. Spoilers included

The Game Room
181

Well, so much for my predicting abilities…can’t say I saw the Germans coming, then again, neither did Portugal, who looked in need of a guide-dog for most of the first half.

Props to them for their courageous attempt at a comeback, but going down two, twice, in match against Germany, doesn’t really leave room for much hope.

Anyone think Ballack’s goal should have been disallowed? I left my DVR on and I’ve just watched the replay of his goal a number of times. Seems obvious that he pushes off the defender…

Weird, but I think this result bodes well for us. For I don’t think it likely that all three of the “jogo-bonito” teams left are going out in this round.

182

Yeah. The Dutch have clearly looked the best which is why I wouldn’t say Italy looks like a good shot at making the finals. They have to beat Spain to even get that far. I’d be just fine with a Holland-Germany final. I’m of the opinion of German against anybody but Italy at the moment.

183

I am now officially rooting for Croatia. I thought Portugal had the heart that I was looking for, but now only Croatia is left. Add to that, Turkey played like a bunch of thugs last game, and it makes the rooting easy. I’d like to see Holland v Croatia in the finals. I’d settle for Croatia v Spain. From where I’m sitting, those three teams are the only ones with heart. But then again, I’m sitting in Minnesota, so rip on me if you will.

184

My thoughts:

Portugal - The back line played like U-12s today. Totally unforgivable at this level. They also suffered from piss-poor finishing and poor attack planning–my students and I were watching the first half at lunch and kept saying, “When are they going to start making runs? How do they expect to score?” Reece Davis was right: they showed up for kickoff 30 minutes late. You can’t do that in the EURO quarterfinals, people! As for Ricardo, he was a liability in this game. Shoddy play all around in the defending half for the attack-minded Iberians, who shouldn’t have expected to beat Germany without playing well in their own third of the field. Ronaldo even joined the party, disqualifying himself from the “best player in the world” race by making a horrific defensive mistake.

Germany - Metzelder and Mertesacker are simply too slow to stop first-tier forwards from scoring. They got burned badly all game long. The German midfield needs to push up on attackers to take the pressure off their central defense and Lehmann, who, to his credit, is as cool under pressure as anyone. (Germany-Argentina in the 2006 World Cup is my cite.) On the other hand, their counterattack is strong, and few midfields can hammer the net and dominate the middle of the pitch like Germany’s. The team’s defensive play was largely devoid of the embarrassing positioning meltdowns that plagued the Portuguese. However, they haven’t demonstrated the ability to penetrate really good defenses, IMO. I don’t consider them a favorite at this point, although I wouldn’t be too surprised if they went and proved me wrong.

Croatia - I agree that they’re much easier to root for than the Turks. In a well-refereed game, Turkey doesn’t stand a chance. But how many of those are there? Nevertheless, Croatia can get up and score without being down by two goals, and the green and white have got to run out of luck at some point. I expect the Croatian attack to overwhelm the Turkish backup goalie. I could be biased, though–I really like watching Croatia, and I desperately want to see a Croatia-Germany rematch!

Netherlands - The best team in the tournament, IMO. The psychological advantage of getting up by three goals more than makes up for any defensive weakness they may have, which is overstated. And if you ask me, their end-to-end goal against Italy (Von Bronckhorst-someone else-Von Bronckhorst-Kuyt-Sneijder) is an excellent contender for Best Goal Ever–or, at the very least, a strong argument for direct football. They know how to one-touch with the best of them, and I can’t see anyone, least of all Russia, getting over the humiliation of suffering a torrent of goals. (Remember how they played against the David Villa Show?) Giving Russia a royal pounding will only strengthen their resolve. They’ve already bought the key to the back of the Italian net, and I think they could outdo Spain in a high-flying game-of-a-lifetime, so I’m looking for them to make it into the final and maybe even win it.

Spain - As a Hispanophile, a great hater of Italian football and a lover of the Spanish attacking style, I hate to say this, so I’ll whisper it:

Spain benefited from its group draw and they haven’t shown the ability to beat a really good team when it counts on the world stage.

Wait! Put down your guns! Spain is historically bad against Italy and worse in quarterfinals. If the Italian side that should’ve beaten Romania 2-1 (except for a bad offside call) shows up, the David Villa Show could be in for a nightmare. On the other hand, if anything outside of the relentless Dutch attack can get past Gigi Buffon, it’s good old-fashioned Spanish ingenuity. This one should be a cracking game. I’d give it to Italy, but I hope they prove me wrong.

In much briefer format, here are my picks, with winners in bold:

Quarters
Croatia vs. Turkey
Netherlands vs. Russia
Spain vs. Italy

Semis
Croatia vs. Germany
Netherlands vs. Italy

Final
Netherlands vs. Croatia

185

Oh, sure–one of the most underperforming French teams in recent history, that is.

186

I’ve never liked how this “gentleman’s agreement” has become such a big part of the game. It’s nice and makes one’s heart feel all warm when a team kicks the ball out because another player is “injured” or unable to play. Makes you feel like we should all hold hands and sing songs around the campfire. Unfortunately, soccer, like any other sport, is a contest between two teams that ultimately want to beat the other team. This doesn’t mean that rules should be broken and eyes gouged out. But it doesn’t mean expecting that the other team play by some unwritten rule because that’s the way “gentlemen” do it.

I agree that changing the laws of the game would be the worst idea of all. I recall this having been contemplated after an African player “improperly” did not kick the ball out again in a European league game and had the gall, the audacity to score a goal. Screw that! If I was the manager of that team, I would have personally shook his hand.

I was watching an Italian league game with family and the conversation was on this technique and when it should be used and when not. If an attack is under way, for example, and an opponent is unable to continue, the attack should proceed, according to that bald-headed Italian referee whose name escapes me, because the injured player might be faking. In all other situations, though, the ball should be kicked out. To me, this betrays the hypocrisy of this nonsense, for one thing. If you have a chance to score and some guy collapses, to hell with him. He could have had a heart attack for all I care, I’m going for goal because he might be faking. But if it happens in midfield, I’m going to go all FIFA FAIR PLAY and kick it out, I’m such a wonderful person.

And for a sport that is so popular for its simplicity, the last thing needed is complicated rules to determine when a ball should be stupidly kicked out.

If you get hurt, that shouldn’t be your opponent’s problem. Same thing if you can’t run fast enough to keep up with an attack or jump high enough to head away a cross. Doesn’t mean a player who intentionally hurts another for an advantage shouldn’t be punished. But the rules take care of that in the form of a red card. Nor am I saying that I think the game should continue if an injury has occured. But it should never be anyone’s decision to stop the game other than the ref.

Maybe NFL teams should “gift” timeouts to their opponents in similar circumstances. And if a sprinter turns up lame, all the runners ahead of him or her can fall down until they are able to continue. Please, just play the game and leave charity for when you go to church.

187

I wonder what justification the ref had to do that. No rules were broken. If the goalkeeper wasn’t on his game, whose fault should that be that he got beat?

Unsporting conduct is faking injuries to win benefit or elbowing an opponent when the ref isn’t looking and then shrugging your shoulders and saying, “Who me?” when you get busted. Wow, this nonsense has to stop, it’s so pretentious.
I wonder how many times a player who has kicked the ball out in such situations has later in the game dove in the penalty area.

188

That would be Pierluigi Collina. One of the very best to ever don a ref’s whistle.

189

Arsenal did a similar thing a few years back, their goal stood (as I think it should, even though I hate Arsenal). I think this ‘gentleman’s agreement’ is a load of crap, considering the number of gentlemen on the pitch… Play should continue until the referee stops play. That was the advice at the start of the last Premiership season, though it seemed to be ignored towards the end.

I think Scotland tried to do something like this at the start of their last season too. If I remember; they were told off by the governing body. I would absolutely love for it to become policy though.

I think the worst part of last nights game was the obvious stamp on Ronaldo’s foot. It seemed like a malicious attempt to injure. I would hope something like that is reviewed and the player given a one match ban.

190

I’m not sure it was, actually - from one angle in particular it looked pretty clear that the German player was just running past, and Ronaldo’s foot moved into the way as he went to stand up. They only showed that shot very briefly, though.

But then, I didn’t think Rooney stamped on Carvalho’s plums at the World Cup either. Slo-mo makes a lot of things look deliberate.

191

I’m guessing you mean the FA Cup game against Sheffield United a few years back?

If so then the circumstances weren’t quite the same.

About 10 minutes from time it was 1-1, Sheffield Utd had the ball in our penalty area and, in the process of Arsenal getting the ball back, one of their strikers went down under a defender’s tackle (think the defender was Vivas).

From the tackle, we broke and (as was/is the Arsenal style) it turned into a swift counter-attack. The final ball wasn’t great, however, and was just too far ahead of Bergkamp for him to get on the end of it. The Sheffield Utd keeper managed to leg out and get there first, and booted the ball into touch.

While the ball was out of play, the United striker received treatment (can’t remember who it was, which is gonna bug me!) then we took the throw in.

Trouble was that half the players on the pitch (including both Arsenal and United players) assumed that the keeper had kicked it out defensively and the other half thought it was so the player could receive treatment, and that the resulting throw-in would be used to return the ball to United.

As always, neither half realised what the other half was thinking and Overmars (being firmly in the “defensive” group) had already put it in the back of the net before the confusion had been noticed/cleared up.

You’re correct that the goal stood but you’re forgetting what happened next:

First, when Sheffied Utd kicked off after the goal there seemed to be a brief moment where the Arsenal players were inviting Sheffield United to score, but the ball went out of play again and then some seriously nasty tackles started flying in from some (understandably) pissed off Sheffield United players, which soon evaporated any of the goodwill remaining on the pitch (most of which had already disappeared thanks to Steve Bruce - the United boss - acting like a complete fucking child and trying to get his players to all leave the pitch). At the final whistle, the score was 2-1 to Arsenal.

Second, after the game, Arsene Wenger (the Arsenal manager) immediately offered to replay the game and petitioned the FA for permission to do so. Remember - absolutely no rules had been broken. More, the motives behind the keeper’s original clearance were by no means obvious.

Despite Sepp Blatter (from FIFA) trying to stick his fucking oar in (as usual) about how the result should stand because officially no rules had been broken, permission was granted, the result was ruled null and a reply was staged.

Arsenal won the replay 2-1.

And before anyone asks, my cite for this version of events is me. I was sitting in the North Bank when it all happened. :smiley:

192

I’m afraid I can’t remember which game it was. I don’t remember it happening more than once though, so you’re probably right.

I just used it as an example though. I think the ‘gentleman’s agreement’ should stop. Maybe it was a good idea a long time ago (though I doubt it) but it’s exploited to hell and back. If the referee doesn’t think he’s injured then that’s good enough for me. Continue play and if the player stays on the floor then make him leave the field and wait to come back on.

193

Would you believe his name finally came to me after the edit period expired? :smack:

194

Well, I’m not going to agree with Tony. Soccer started out as a “gentlemen’s” game. Up until very recently, the rules themselves cautioned players for “ungentlemanly conduct.” It’s actually nice to see something in the way of “gentlemanly” behaviour in sports; the world needs more of it. For an example, see the quite sporting gesture of the women’s college softball team that carried their opponent around the bases after she tore her knee ligament running past first base after hitting a home run.

And if you are a player, and you see another player down and in obvious agony, it’s not hard to see how you would want to put the ball into touch, given that you might be in that very same position at some future point in the game.

But, of course, the trouble with all this is that, as has been pointed out, these aren’t “gentlemen” by any real stretch of the imagination. They deceive, they fake, they hack, they commit the most cynical fouls, all in order to gain an advantage. They will even fake being injured in order to put pressure on the opponents to stop an attack.

The real reason all this got started is that referees were loathe to stop games for injured players, which some years back now resulted in some memorable examples of seriously injured players not being attended to promptly. So the players started taking matters into their own hands. It started with returning the ball to the team with the injured player when they had put it into touch so that their teammate could get attended, and has now encompassed returning the ball to the possession of the opposing team when they put the ball over the line so that their opponent can be attended. This, of course, starts putting an onus on the opposing team to put a ball out of play whenever an opponent is injured, and, well, now we have what we have.

The correct solution, of course, would be for referees to stop the game for injured players. This runs into the same trouble though: simulation. Which is why it is time for the various national associations to step up to the plate and start using filmed evidence of ungentlemanly behaviour to sanction players after the fact. You roll around on the ground and refuse to play, and the evidence doesn’t support that you were injured significantly? Suspension city. Couple that with having the opponents play on when you are lying on the pitch, and you will see the “injured” players getting up p.d.q. In time, the only ones left lying on the pitch would be the truly injured, which would give the referees more confidence in stopping the game when they felt that a serious injury was involved.

After all, suppose you DID get stepped on, and it DOES hurt (and it does!). So what? Or you have cramps and can’t run? So what? So your team is down a man for a short spell. Big deal. No one gets particularly upset about that when a player is forced off the pitch due to play stoppage for “injury;” players still simulate significant injury all the time to gain stoppage of play, then pop up after the magic spray has been applied (almost makes you think of a “Head On” commercial! :smiley: ), but have to wait to be waived on, forcing their team to play shorthanded for a few seconds. It simply isn’t the end of the world.

I still say Croatia today. I like the Turkish heart, but the Croatian ability appears to be sufficient to overcome it. :slight_smile:

195

Let me add that Turkey’s short-passing attack will have a difficult time breaking through the Croatian midfield. Turkey are also slow to revise their strategy, as evidenced by how long it took them to start passing through the air in the muddy game against Switzerland. You can get away with that kind of foolhardiness against Switzerland, but not against Croatia, I feel. And if they manage to break through the Croatian midfield, they’ll have an even tougher time against Germany’s.

196

Croatia is looking good against Turkey’s defense, but that miss was a hella heartbreaker.

197

Well, it’s good to see Turkey trying on a more direct approach, playing a cleaner game, putting more emphasis on the counterattack and even switching across the field a couple of times–but you can tell that they’re not comfortable in that style. And there are still times when, even if you’re rooting against them, you have to say, “FOR THE LOVE OF ALLAH [I hear he’s popular over there], PUT IT IN THE AIR!” One great attacking opportunity was wasted when a center mid was running toward the area with the Croatian defense stacked on the near side and Kasim finding an opening on the far side; I felt that if they had lobbed it over to Kasim, the switch might have facilitated the first true Croatian breakdown, but instead they passed it to him indirectly on the ground and gave the defense time to shift over and kill the threat. Still, it looks an awful lot like Turkey’s game to win now, if they can grease the squeaky cogs in their attack without going down by 2 first. Croatia hasn’t found many chances and they put their best chance of the game off the woodwork and then over the crossbar on the rebound.

198

I Hate Rolando after the whole foot stomp thing.

First it doesn’t look like it was intentional, Ronaldo’s foot just got in the way. He then takes a dive. Stops, looks around, sees the ref coming, and immediately begins to cry like a little bitch.

I hate that shit. And now I hate him.

Also, Go Germany!

199

Forget the national associations. What incentive, beyond sportsmanship, do they have to suspect their own players(or by national associations, do you mean organizations like the Premiership? Is that’s the case I agree with you).

200

Kinthalis, the foot stomp came after he was on the ground. He began to “cry like a little bitch” immediately afterward. I know it looked bad at first, but the replay vindicates him.