Yeah , the USA got robbed.
However Slovenia jumped ahead 2-0 in the first half and then seen that gone in the second. Regardless of that call, what are they saying about seeing a should have been game evaporate.
Declan
A nitpick but Slovaks are from Slovakia. The people from Slovenia are Slovenes.
It’s not really a nitpick when the OP described an entirely different people.
I imagine the Slovaks are more focused on their upcoming game against Paraguay.
Well, what would the USA’s reaction have been if it were the other way around? Mine would have been “thank god for that ref saving our asses after we threw away a 2-0 lead”.
I imagine they were quite upset when they threw away a 1-0 lead in the 93rd minute against New Zealand, hardly a powerhouse in world soccer. With Italy and Paraguay tied, winning against New Zealand might have given them a chance to progress; now they’re facing an uphill battle to say the least.
ETA: when come back bring at least a modicum of geographical knowledge
I don’t know about the Slovaks but I, and others I have spoken to, are mostly dissapointed with throwing a 2 goal advantage away, which would have seen us through to the next round. Per usual bad calls in your favour aren’t dwelled upon for too long and I maintain the US had one person too many on the pitch for the entire game (Dempsey elbow after 10 seconds).
No doubt US fans will think it wasn’t intentional or at least not a red, supporters rarely see things the same way. The dismissing thought about the free kick would be that half of the free kicks that are put in the box aren’t played out because a ref sees something - I don’t feel this is relevant, but it does seem to happen a lot - and this time sticks in the memory because a goal was scored out of it.
But to come back to the question, we are mostly thinking about giving away a huge oppurtunity and wondering if we can still get something out of the England game.
I imagine the Slovaks are more interested in their Italy game.