Between that and the fact that Italy have yet to concede a goal from their opponents (ie one own goal only) then I don’t like our chances of getting by them. But with such low scoring anything is possible in a single game of soccer.
Italy are my dark horses for the Cup. As pointed out, their defence is excellent - they have the best goalkeeper and the best centre half in the tournie - and the midfield is solid, with Totti yet to really hit his strides. Up front, Lippi seems to be stumbling on his best combination, and I’d expect to see Inzaghi start against the Socceroos.
Banker: Australia to finish with fewer than 11 men
Best Bet: Grella to be first to be shown a red card
Spoilers for the Australia-Italy game:
[spoiler]Italy manages to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat despite being down a man for the majority of the second half. I only saw one replay of the red card offense, and I think that the punishment was a bit harsh – a caution would have sufficed.
A great game by the Australians was undone by boneheaded foul in the box to give up the penalty.[/spoiler]
Unbelievable finish. Unfuckingbelievable.
I just want to add that…
I agree it was a boneheaded play in the box and a correct call by the official. I know some folks are going to say it wasn’t but the player slid in, didn’t get the ball, impeded the Italian player and took away a scoring chance.
It was a boneheaded play in the box and a completely incorrect call by the official. The Italian player could have easily sidestepped the defender to go after the ball, but instead continued away from the ball and ran over the defender and, since he was still going to be able to continue unimpeded, dragged his feet across the prone defender to make it appear as a foul. It was an obvious desperation dive and the ref bought it. Hopefully FIFA will review and give the diver the card he deserves, but I doubt it.
I’m with duality72. Until the penalty, I was impressed with how little cynical and dirty play had gone on, especially given the desperate situations the Italians found themselves in.
The bottom line is that the Australian player didn’t get the ball and took away a scoring chance for Italy. It is not that easy to side step a player sliding in. According to the BBC website I am in the slight minority, where they said 44% of their listeners, webviewers, whatever thought it was a penalty.
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the penalty award - my belief is that it was an incorrect decision, with the referee buying the “professional” Italian play - credit must be given to Australia for the sporting and gracious way they reacted to the defeat. I hope some of the teams that have already returned home were watching, and indeed some of those still in Germany. To see Lucas Neill shaking the hands of the officials was an affirmation of the Australian approach to sport: prepare hard, get fit, develop mental toughness and learn how to win…and how to lose. Outstanding.
Yeah, actually sounds real fuckin’ familiar here.
kevegan, I too am impressed by the way the Australians play the game. They really never give up, either.
Well, this proves that the U.S. actually did have an Exit Strategy…
badump…psssssshhh
Well, now that the Dutch are out… it’s only just begun.
In Australia - Italy, I thought it was a clear penalty.
I cannot understand how a player can throw himself to the ground, in the penalty area, (without getting anywhere near the ball) right across the path of the attacker and not expect to be punished.
For us long-suffering English supporters, I expect you remember a last minute penalty (against an East European team, I think), where a Neville brother made a desperate lunge tackle and brought a player down, conceding a penalty.
I didn’t, and don’t, think ti was a penalty, but yours is a valid point, which I ruminated upon myself when it happened. I think it’s got to do with intention: if Lucas Neill had thrown himslef to the ground in front of the opponent’s onrushing feet then okay, penalty. But, in this case, he lost his balance in attempting to shadow/tackle the player, fell down and the opponent took the opportunity to run into him and fall down. Not a penalty for that reason, for me.
I think that if it was a bad call it is way down the list of bad calls, it just isn’t tha bad. I think so many people, myself included, admired the Australians and Italy does little to inspire neutrals. So to see them lose it in the last seconds that way on a marginal call probably gets folks to see it possibly more than what it was. i thought penalty, but it was close.
I agree that it was a penalty, but barely. If you look again you can see that after he misses the ball he intentionally leans into the forward to trip him with his head and shoulders. It wasn’t enough to send him sprawling like he did, but it was still a trip and a foul. Had he stayed on his feet we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
I must say that I was very impressed with the classy and sporting way the Australians handled such a controversial and gut-wrenching defeat. Very well done.
I thought it was a dodgy call, but my soccer experience is extremely limited. One of the Australian “expert” commentators on the telecast described it as a 50/50 call. 50% of referees would’ve ruled a penalty, the rest wouldn’t’ve. So it wasn’t so dodgy that any one was up in arms about it, but people recognised that it was unfortunate and it could easily have gone the other way.
I think that the better team won the game. The Australians played well but the Italians created more scoring chances and always looked more dangerous around the goal area. The Aussies wanted the chance to go in to overtime and get a goal, but the reality is that Italy probably would’ve won anyway.
Congratulations to Australia for puting themselves on the soccer/football map, and congratulations to Italy for winning a game they deserved to win.
I think some kind-hearted souls may feel that the penalty call was 50/50 at normal speed but you will struggle to find many that think it was correct after seeing the replays. Under the circumstances Neill picked the best way to defend the position Grosso had made. He laid himself across his path without touching either the ball or the attacker and left Grosso with the problem of getting around him while retaining possession.
The idea that this is somehow worthy of a penalty is a nonsense. The defender can get in an attacker’s way however he likes if he makes no contact with the attacker. You may as well criticise a defender for running right into the path of an attacker (without touching him or the ball) and robbing him of a goal scoring opportunity.
Well, you are quite wrong, hindering the path of a player with the ball, without playing te ball is a foul, obstruction, and is called frequently throughout the game. However, and I had forgottne this until it was pointed out to me, thatobstruction is an indirect free kick. So it was probably a foul, but should have been an indirect kick.
My initial thought was that it was a foul, but it wasn’t clear whether it was a trip or obstruction. Obviously it matters, since scoring from that spot on an indirect free kick would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, with a goal full of players. The more I see it, however, the more I’m convinced that Neill intentionally leaned into Grosso to trip him. You can see him looking for Grosso over his shoulder to make sure he gets him as he leans into him. Nevertheless, it was one of those calls that could go either way, and had the referee not called it I could live with that as well. It was very subtle (that was Neill’s intention), but it had a major impact on the game, as Grosso had a clear scoring chance. I have several Aussie friends, and they seem evenly split between those who think Oz were robbed, and those who think it was a call that could have gone either way and Oz were just unlucky. I just tell them all to have another beer and remember that moments like this build character and culture. They tell me to fuck off. 