South Africa 2010

No Netherlands got a red card I swear to god Jay. Yes there was a penalty. Ill try and find it
 
But I could have sworn I saw Spain kick it so close Jay or was that a free kick but in front of the net. Idk man I saw a spain player do a penalty kick.
 
No you didn't. There was a free kick outside if the box. You can tell it's not a penalty when there is a row of Dutch players standing in front of the kick taker i.e. Xavi IIRC.
 
Alright Yuan I understand now ok. It was not a penalty kick it was a free kick.
 
Spain offensively were totally dominating I think. I mean Netherlands had some pretty good defense but, not enough power offensively. From what i've seen of the gaame Spain was the one's who owned that field.
Was it me or did it look like Spain was doing a lot of diving? I dunno, but it seemed to me that all the calls were against the Dutch. I can't say that all of them were fair calls.
I wasn't too bothered of who won tbh :hmmm: Still, congrats to them.

In the first half, I remember thinking that Spain was going to score first and they did.

Hmm, but when Spain won ( I was debating this with my dad over the phone) but, was it offsides? My dad said it looked like it was. I dunno though.
 
No. The replays clearly showed Iniesta was a couple feet onsides.

Diving? No. The Netherlands played a rough tackling game. If you looked at the tackles by Nigel De Jong or Van Bommel, those were really dirty tackles with one Spanish player even getting a boot to the chest. I wouldn't call crumpling down from that kind of tackle a dive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w0BD9oFl8c
 
Yeah, I thought it was onsides as well :hmmm: My dad's just mad because he wanted Netherlands to win.

I did see that kick to the chest yeah. I'm sure it was painful. I mean it's true I guess that Netherlands were being rough I mean you have a point but still.

I'm surprised it was that long of a game tbh :hmmm:
 
lol, that must've hurt so bad. That should've been a straight red card but no. I think the referee had a horrible game overall. :lew:
 
Just a friendly reminder posters, this is still a post count section, so let's refrain from 1-liners please. I know you're all excited about talking about the results of the World Cup, but please put a little more into the posts. Thank you for your patience, continue.
 
I think the referee did the best he could to keep control in the face of some rather rough play, it could have descended into anarchy if he wasn't careful. He didn't see De Jong's karate kick I'm sure else that would have been a red card.

As I said it wasn't a vintage World Cup but I'm still sad it's over :(
 
Van Bommel always tackles the players in a mean way. It looked as if he asked to get out of the game, he didn't even get careful when he already had a yellow card.

I don't think De Jong's karate kick would have been a red card, in the match against Uruguay, De Zeeuw had a kick in his face and had lost conciousness for a few seconds and that was also just a yellow card.
 
Going in studs up in a challenge is a red card offense. Combine that with the momentum the two players were travelling at on collision and where Alonso was hit and the offending player is lucky he hasn't been arrested for assault.

That said, Villa was lucky he wasn't banned for a minimum of three games for violent conduct against a Honduras player, but hey, I suppose there will always be bias for everyone's favourite team, no matter how badly they play. Both teams were cynical, both teams played ugly, neither deserved to be champions. This Spain team will most likely be remembered as the wonderteam they weren't. They don't make WCs like '98 anymore.
 
Of course Spain deserved to be champions, they won all their games bar their first, what more could they do. They're European and World champions now (one of only three teams to do that double) and deserve credit for that after so long underachieving. And how did Spain play ugly last night (or indeed throughout the tournament)?!

And every team who has won the World Cup has deserved it, that's one great thing about the tournament.
 
Absolutely not.

Argentina's win when they hosted it is still surrounded in controversy. It's been heavily suggested by a large contingent of the Argentinian players of that very winning team that the games were fixed and that there was intense pressure on the opposition from their dictatorship. Then there's the infamous hand of God in their other WC win. There are more controversial WC wins but I won't go into that.

We were told in England that Brazil played ugly, defensive football and had lost their swagger. Where was the swagger we were told by the English media that Spain and Holland would demonstrate? They were beaten by a Swiss side who realised the Spanish could only create a chance by passing, out played by Chile even after they went down to 10 men, Spain resorting to holding the ball for the last 15 minutes and pulling a 4-5-1 formation. If you want to say it's still deserving, that's your opinion and fair enough, but I don't like that footballing philosophy.

I'd also suggest there was European bias in this tournament, but I suppose I'd sound too bitter.
 
So a magical, fanciful, side full of swagger = deserved World Cup champions? Excuse me for saying, but that can't possibly be how it works. The winner of the cup should be the one who actually wins the tournament and not the one that does all this magical stuff and doesn't win. If that was the case then Germany should have won it and yet they didn't because they couldn't put away a dominant Spain side.

We've all seen that flair doesn't necessarily mean a win in the biggest tournament in football, although perhaps it may bag a team a 4-0 or a 3-0 win along the way.
 
Fair enough Warbs, but should FIFA have taken retrospective action against Villa for violent conduct? Should they have used video evidence against him as they did against Zidane in 2006? Should they have given him the three game ban they issued Rivaldo for in 2002 for simulation? I'd say so. Without him Spain wouldn't have had the form frontman they relied on so heavily throughout the tournament. Again, I don't wish to sound bitter. The win is the win, but I'm not going to say they were the best team in the tournament nor that they played the best because they won.
 
Sure, but they're too stubborn to do anything, are they. :hmph:

Honestly, I agree, there should be post-match inquiries into this kind of thing, and the kind where something actually gets done. When players dive (like Robben against Brazil) there should be some repercussions afterwards, regardless of whether or not it was identified on the pitch. I suppose that undermines the authority of the referees, but this is for the sake of getting justice done.

And yeah, I agree, they weren't the best or most entertaining side, but lookit, they managed to neutralize two of the tournament's flair sides in Germany and the Netherlands. I think we have to give credit to their defense rather than disparage their sometimes toothless offense.

Also, they didn't play their best and still won. That in itself is a scary thought. Wonder what would've happened if Torres was on form and match fit.

EDIT: You are bitter. :hmph:
Don't worry, you'll probably win it all in 2014.
 
Harlequin said:
Absolutely not.

Argentina's win when they hosted it is still surrounded in controversy. It's been heavily suggested by a large contingent of the Argentinian players of that very winning team that the games were fixed and that there was intense pressure on the opposition from their dictatorship. Then there's the infamous hand of God in their other WC win. There are more controversial WC wins but I won't go into that.

We were told in England that Brazil played ugly, defensive football and had lost their swagger. Where was the swagger we were told by the English media that Spain and Holland would demonstrate? They were beaten by a Swiss side who realised the Spanish could only create a chance by passing, out played by Chile even after they went down to 10 men, Spain resorting to holding the ball for the last 15 minutes and pulling a 4-5-1 formation. If you want to say it's still deserving, that's your opinion and fair enough, but I don't like that footballing philosophy.

I'd also suggest there was European bias in this tournament, but I suppose I'd sound too bitter.
Click to expand...

The only game where there was controversy in 1978 was the Argentina v Peru game, but nothing has ever been proven. Plus Argentina lost a first round game and almost lost the final when Holland hit the post in the last-minute. If it was rigged it wasn't very well planned at times! Argentina fully deserved the World Cup in 1986, Hand of God or no, they had one of the finest football players ever in their team and were great through the tournament. I care little about swagger, Spain won games and kept clean sheets, and that got the job done. They outplayed a very good Germany team and then kept their heads in the final. The team that wins the World Cup in recent tournament is usually the one with a strong defence (certainly it was the case in 1998, 2002, 2006 and this year). Total Football etc is all very nice but it doesn't win a World Cup usually.

As for European bias, no that was just the South American teams imploding in the quarter-finals. Brazil lost their heads in the second half against Holland and Argentina were just blown away by Germany.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top