2006 World Cup

[Zeno]

I didn't get what happened here. Was the goal called off because he was offsides or because he was obstructing the goalie's view? I thought he was offsides, but they kept talking about the obstruction thing.

Its an offside call, had he just been in an offside position but not in the keepers way the goal would have counted, but because of the position where he was offside they had no choice but to make the call.

Official FIFA rules...

A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:

interfering with play or
interfering with an opponent or
gaining an advantage by being in that position

The definitions of elements of involvement in active play are as follows:

Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

 

[CaptTurbo]

In reality it didn't matter because even with 9 men the US took it to the Italians...a team as gifted as Italy should be able to put any team away with a man advantage but the US held and actually created a couple of chances.

Agreed!
Thx to the squad for at least giving us something wo cheer about thursday win or lose they made it interesting.

 

[Nate]

Zeno, four deciding scenes in a game, you agree on at least 50% of them, are borderline on another and obviously biased ( ) on the fourth which everybody outside of the english-speaking world seems to agree on.

And that makes for a horrible ref?

 

[Nate]

Total agreement regarding the teams performances. The American fans also outsang and outnumbered the Italian fans.

You must be registered for see images

 

[azsouthendzone]

You guys are killing me with your comments on the ref and his red cards. The ref was probably even the best guy on the field today. Otherwise, great atmosphere in the stadium and a great effort in the second half by the US team.

- The red card against Italy: good call, harsh, coward, totally unneccessary elbow to the face;

- The red against the USA: brutal tackling with no intention or possibility to play the ball, just "playing the bones", mandatory call!

- Yellow-red against the USA: not a hard foul, but according to FIFA-standards used at this tournament appropriate.

- Offside call, denying the 2-1: Clear interfering in the play by the offside player, good call.

Nate, the call against Mastroeni was rediculous. That call changed the game from the stand point that the US was a man up, by way of a no-doubt legitimate red card, and that advantage was elimintaed for a hard tackle, one that we see every game without a red card. That is undebatable. I really don't know what game you watched. As far as the ref, he will never ref another game. He was suspended once, and he'll be suspended again.

 

[Zeno]

Zeno, four deciding scenes in a game, you agree on at least 50% of them, are borderline on another and obviously biased ( ) on the fourth which everybody outside of the english-speaking world seems to agree on.

And that makes for a horrible ref?

1 bad send off makes for a bad ref, absolutely. That changed the whole game. I am willing to wager that he won't see another match during the tournament. Beckenbauer is already up in arms about the ridiculous amount of cards that have been handed out in the tournament and there are several other national football federations that agree.

Mastroeni challenge = Yellow not red, was it particularly vicious or brutal or did it prevent a clear goal scoring chance? nope. watch the replay, while it was a foul (a 2 footed tackle) he did contact the ball, he didn't go spikes up in to the back of the players knees and it didn't appear to be done with the intent to injure a player
Pope = maybe--maybe not but it was stupid by the player, I can live with it
Offisdes = Good call
De Rossi = Good call

thats 2 of 4 he got right and 1 I think could go either way. Thats bad refereeing and believe me I've seen more than my share of good and bad--both on the field and on the sideline (as a coach and fan) and I've even had my USSF coaching license for a couple of years and officiated games myself...I know I've made mistakes,no ref is perfect, but he did not have a good match calling the game and I can say that without any doubt in my mind.

Of course I can't admit to be without bias...it is my country's national team.

 

[Nate]

CNN-SI Senior Writer Grant Wahl:
http://http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/grant_wahl/06/17/us.italy.qa/index.html

I thought the two red cards were legit, just total red card challenges. A little more dubious was perhaps the second yellow card given to Eddie Pope. But it was a hard tackle from behind, and that's the kind of thing you don't want to take a risk on in that kind of situation

Another source, the BBC recap:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2006/4853182.stm

Mastroeni's two-footed, reckless lunge on Pirlo was deserving of a red card and left referee Jorge Larrionda with little option

 

[Nate]

You must be registered for see images

 

[Zeno]

You must be registered for see images

Thats a good picture.

Still its not cleats high, and the ball is moving away because he contacted it.

From skysportsnews running match commentary...44: RED CARD: Mastroeni is off and it's ten-apiece. Looks a trifle harsh to me. The midfielder lunged in on Andrea Pirlo but there didn't seem to be too much intent. Certainly a good game that is ensuing here in Kaiserslautern.


But whatever, its overwith now. Bad calls happen in every WC - last WC a missed hand ball cost the US a goal(Germany) and a missed hand ball gave the US a goal (Mexico) so things tend to even out eventually. I've never claimed it wasn't a foul just that it wasn't worthy of a Red card...but the ref obviously thought so and he is the one to make those decisions, just IMO it was a bad call but it was called regardless.

All in all a well played game by both sides with a great deal of excitement.

 

[dogpoo32]

It all comes down to the fact that the ref's trigger finger on the cards changed the game drastically. This is why I cannot get into soccer. So many primadonnas flopping all over the place hardly makes for entertainment. I can't seem to stop watching the games, but every two or three minutes I am screaming at the TV because some guy decides to fall rather than try to get to the ball. Thanks to the rules, it seems like they have to play that way and its a shame.

 

[slinslin]

You just about aone in thsi opinion. Even fans of other countries are saying the ref was awful. check the other football message boards.

The ref was good, all calls you are complaining about were absolutely correct.

If anything the US fans should be happy about the refs on the sidelines because they called Italy offside when they really weren't and would have had a good chance in one instance they scored and I am not sure Keller could have gotten that if he tried.

 

[slinslin]

He actually hit the ball before the player so yes there was a very real possibility of playing the ball. Yellow card? yes. Red card...nope.

This one I am borderline on, I'm not even sure if it was hard enough to merit a yellow but Pope should have known better already carrying a yellow and being at a position on the field where it really posed no big danger to the US goal.

It was a clear red card, he attacked the man and took the chance of injuring him. He had the bottom of his shoe up when tackling him and hit him, it was an easy call, easy red card.

Pope's second call was definately a yellow card also.

 

[slinslin]

The disallowed goal was McBrides fault for ball watching and not being quick enough. He should have vacated that space before Beasley even lined up his shot he had to know he was offsides or he just wasn't in the game.

Again, if McBride doesn't stand there, Buffon sees the ball and there is no way that shot would have gone in.

 

[ArizonaSportsFan]

Notice how Pirlo is not even looking at the ball? This is what is wrong with soccer. It is all about acting - drawing the refs attention so that you get a free/penalty kick. Portugal had a terrible play where this was indeed the plan. Wait for the defender to arrive in the box, fall down, get a penalty kick in the box - goal. It was blatant, poor-sportmanship. How does the worlkd get excited about this? I do enjoy the game - the flow and the strategy and the skill. But all of the diving is just rediculous.

 

[Zeno]

Again, if McBride doesn't stand there, Buffon sees the ball and there is no way that shot would have gone in.

I heartily disagree, that shot was a rocket that had the back of the net written all over it. Buffon did see the ball, McBride was in the area but was not directly in front of him(watch the replay from the goal cam angle), enough of a nuisance to be called for offside but had he not been there it would have been a legal goal.

It was a clear red card, he attacked the man and took the chance of injuring him. He had the bottom of his shoe up when tackling him and hit him, it was an easy call, easy red card.

Again I disagree, but no matter the call was made, the game is over. As Mastroeni said after the game anywhere else in the world thats a yellow card, he's not disputing it being a foul but in order to be an offense worthy to be sent off it needs to be malicious, violent or deny a clear goal scoring opportunity. Look close at the picture, do you see his cleats buried in to the Italian players legs? Look at the replay it clearly shows that while a foul he had the intention of contacting the ball--his boot hit the ball before the player.

I'm done arguing this anyway. Games over, looking ahead to Ghana--3 points and an Italian victory.

 

[slinslin]

Notice how Pirlo is not even looking at the ball? This is what is wrong with soccer. It is all about acting - drawing the refs attention so that you get a free/penalty kick. Portugal had a terrible play where this was indeed the plan. Wait for the defender to arrive in the box, fall down, get a penalty kick in the box - goal. It was blatant, poor-sportmanship. How does the worlkd get excited about this? I do enjoy the game - the flow and the strategy and the skill. But all of the diving is just rediculous.

Good players don't look at the ball.. I don't know what kind of argument this is. I certainly didn't see any diving by the Italians in particular. The US team played excessively hard and fouled a lot and tackled hard that's probably why Italians were on the ground a lot..

Baiting other players to foul you is not poor-sportsmanship. Or would you say that faking a shot and jumping into the defender in the NBA is poor sportsmanship? If he invites you to foul him and you do, it's your fault..

 

[slinslin]

Again I disagree, but no matter the call was made, the game is over. As Mastroeni said after the game anywhere else in the world thats a yellow card, he's not disputing it being a foul but in order to be an offense worthy to be sent off it needs to be malicious, violent or deny a clear goal scoring opportunity. Look close at the picture, do you see his cleats buried in to the Italian players legs? Look at the replay it clearly shows that while a foul he had the intention of contacting the ball--his boot hit the ball before the player.

Mastreoni is lying then, no matter what commentator I heard or former ref on post game shows they all agreed good call. The tackle wasn't on the ball, he took the chance to injure the other player,fully extended leg with the bottom of his shoe up... it was an easy red card to call.

 

[azsouthendzone]

Notice how Pirlo is not even looking at the ball? This is what is wrong with soccer. It is all about acting - drawing the refs attention so that you get a free/penalty kick. Portugal had a terrible play where this was indeed the plan. Wait for the defender to arrive in the box, fall down, get a penalty kick in the box - goal. It was blatant, poor-sportmanship. How does the worlkd get excited about this? I do enjoy the game - the flow and the strategy and the skill. But all of the diving is just rediculous.

The diving isn't a soccer thing, it's just typical Euro. That's the way they roll. You rarely see it in MLS or in other parts of the world. If one of the Italians had gotten elbowed like McBride, forget the stretcher, they would have needed an air evac. How many Americans have been hauled off on the stretcher? NONE, because we aren't *******. In America, if you get hauled off on a stretcher, there is a shot you may never walk again. The funniest one was when the Italian actually made them tighten the straps. The best one in the World Cup was in the opening game where the German gets hauled off on the stretcher than scores a goal minutes later. I'd be willing to bet the Europeans have used the stretcher 95% or more in the WC, Pretty pathetic, but it is what it is. Do they even have stretchers in MLS? Oh yeah, they are in the abulances waiting outside. Even with all of the BS, soccer, or futbol or whatever, is a great game, and in the last 10 years has grown leaps and bounds in the US. With consistent success by our national team, teh sport and MLS will continue to grow, which is good.

 

[Hired Goon]

Slinslin you are flat out wrong. Pablo's tackle was a legitimate tackle. It was maybe a yellow card, but to say it is a straight up red is ridiculous. He got there right after the ball left (it wasn't very late at all), and that is a play in which he barely nipped him. Maybe the Italian acting was working on you, but there was a miniscule chance of injury there. Pope's second yellow was also a poor call. It was deserving of a first yellow yes, but by no means did it merit a second yellow card. You have to take into account the stakes of the game and the stage it is being played on. Generally these factors do not apply, but in the world cup they must. The flow of the game was hampered by all of the red cards, and both sides were running on fumes with 15 minutes to go. I do not know how you can say that they were obvious when every announcer, analyst, and fan (save maybe some Italian fans) recognizes that those were awful, awful calls.

 

[Stout]

Good players don't look at the ball.. I don't know what kind of argument this is. I certainly didn't see any diving by the Italians in particular. The US team played excessively hard and fouled a lot and tackled hard that's probably why Italians were on the ground a lot..

Baiting other players to foul you is not poor-sportsmanship. Or would you say that faking a shot and jumping into the defender in the NBA is poor sportsmanship? If he invites you to foul him and you do, it's your fault..

So, are you an Italian supporter or what? They could have put Greg Luganis (sp?) to shame on the diving board. Hell, even their free kick that led to the goal came on a horrendous dive. I remember one play when a player who got carried off on a stretcher (incidentally, getting up immediately and begging to come back on), where the replay showed the contact with the US player, the Italian player taking two steps, and then flopping to the ground. I mean, the Italians were flopping all over the field. It was pretty disgusting, really, from a sporting standpoint, and highlights one of the problems with the game today.

As to the Ref...wow, how horrible. The worst part was his lack of consistency. I love how the commentators put it...late in the game, as he's letting the aggressive play go on, it went something like this...'he's finally letting them simply play the game...a little too late.' The elbow? Clear red. Mastroeni? No high cleats, got ball....a yellow AT MOST. Pope? definitely a foul, probably a yellow, but the problem is this...his earlier card had been way, WAY too harsh. As the commentator explained, the card-happy Ref should have taken Pope aside early and given him a warning that the card would come if he did it again. Instead, because of a stupid early card and a decently called late card, he sends off a player that in no way should have been sent off. And where are the cards for diving, Ref? Hmm...maybe the Italian match fixing scandal is leaking out of the country...

 

[Zeno]

Advancement Scenarios for US

The US must win for them to have any chance to advance. If they win, one of the following scenarios must happen:

1. Italy win over the Czech Republic.
2. Italy/Czech Republic tie 0-0 or 1-1 AND a at least a four goal win for the US over Ghana.
3. Italy/Czech Republic tie 2-2 or with a higher score AND at least a five goal win for the US over Ghana.
4. Italy/Czech Republic tie 2-2 or with a higher score AND a four goal US win AND the US outscoring, by three goals, the Czech Republic in their tie.
5. A Czech Republic win over Italy AND the total combined margin of victory for the US and Czechs is six or more.
6. A Czech Republic win over Italy AND the total combined margin of victory for the US and Czechs is five AND the US score at least three goals more than the Italians do in their loss.
7. A Czech Republic win over Italy AND the total combined margin of victory for the US and Czechs is five AND the US score exactly two more goals than the Italians do in their loss AND the US win a drawing of lots by FIFA.

Bottom line is win, control what you can. Find a lineup that can score goals. Ghana is in the same boat as us needing a win to guarantee themselves a chance at the second round. It should be a wide open game with both teams pressing the attack. The Ghana team is physical and fast but they don't strike me as the most tactically sound squad, they can be beat.

I'm just hoping we go in with the same attitude we had today and have the right gameplan.

I'd like to see the following lineup

GK--Keller (of course)
Right Back--Cherundulo (he played a great game and was dangerous on the flanks)
Center Back--Onyewu (he played good not great--a huge improvement from the Czech game)
Center Back--Bocanegra (he had a good game as well)
Left Back-- Lewis (he adds an attacking edge similar to Cherundulo although he didn't really play well versus the Czechs)

Left MF--John O'Brien (well rested, more of a threat in the attack than Mastroeni--smarter and better passer than Convey)
Center MF--Claudio Reyna (good match he settles the field well when he is in good form like versus Italy--not much of a threat to score though)
Center MF--Landon Donovan (good game versus Italy, caused some worried moments for the Italians)
Right MF--Clint Dempsey (he was confident, played hard and was dangerous)


Forward--Eddie Johnson (its a shame he didn't play versus Italy)
Forward--Josh Wolff (his speed coupled with Johnson's could cause Ghana's back-line fits)

I am not impressed with Brian McBride's play--in this tournament especially, he has never been great with the ball at his feet and his headers have been off target. A good late game sub if the game is tied or we are trailing but he isn't able to go the full 90 and provide a good consistent game. But McBride will start as long as he is healthy no matter what I think, Arena is loyal to him.

I could see Convey starting over O'Brien, Convey did play well against Italy. Beasley will probably be a guy coming off the bench the rest of the tournament. O'Brien could even possibly start at RMF with Dempsey going back to the bench--although I think Dempsey deserves another start.

The back line could have Bocanegra on the left and Conrad in the middle, leaving Lewis on the bench.

I would really almost like to see Arena throw caution to the wind and go with a 3 - 5 - 2 so he can get both Dempsey, O'Brien and Convey all on the field at the same time but I doubt that will happen...he can do that and have Reyna play the more defensive/holding MF role and let O'Brien direct the attack with Donovan.

 

[Stout]

Arena, I will now eat my words. I was freaking out when we showed up in that stupid (or what I thought was stupid) formation. Instead, he tweaked the system and got our guys firing on all cylinders. Still clearly should have subbed McBride out, but you know what? GREAT game. We defended with 9 men for more than 35 minutes. Heroic game, with a great shot to win.

Also, we have a great chance still to advance. Our game is at the same time as the Italy/Czech game, so they will have to play for the win. Also, there is the chance we win by 4 against Ghana if Italy and the Czechs tie...both of their goal scorers are out with two yellows for our match. The loss of Pope is addition by subtraction at this point, and O'Brien can easily fill Mastroeni's role. I like our chances, boys...I like our chances.

 

[Stout]

Zeno, I'd actually like us to go with something more along the lines of a 3-1-5-1 or 3-1-4-2, kind of what we played today, only with maybe an extra midfielder in place of the defender. Let ***** anchor the center with Cherundelo and Bocanegra beside him, and put O'Brien where Mastroeni was.

 

[azsouthendzone]

Can't argue diving with Euros. Diving to a Euro and use of a stretcher is the same as a baseball player using a bat in America. To them it is "part of the game".

 

[Zeno]

The diving isn't a soccer thing, it's just typical Euro. That's the way they roll. You rarely see it in MLS or in other parts of the world.

Thats pretty off base, the Mexicans have been perfecting the art of diving for years. Cuathemoc Blanco and Luis Hernandez were famous for it. Latin American countries are just as guilty of it as any European team. I remember the South American goalkeeper a few years ago who pretended he was hit in the eye by something thrown from the stands (with fake blood and all) and the match was called with his team declared the victor (they were the visitors) he did the best acting/flop job I'd ever seen. He was handed like a 1 year ban when they finally figured out he was a fraud...but despicable, rather than trying to win on the field he faked an injury to get his team a decision.

Diving is a part of the game like it or not and it works with a lot of ref's because all they see is the result and forget what actually happened.

Also don't delude yourself some Americans are pretty good at it too. Donovan is a guy who takes a dive as well as anyone....Beasley too.