WC: All but US matches

No... even the guys on 'The sports reporters, who know less about soccer than we do think that's a bad idea.

Essentially it WOULD end up awarding a goal for a defensive handball.
THEN what about ball-hand which we've seen happen several times in the box.

I'm not telling you what to think, {DAWG}.....I'm just asking you to think about ALL the ramifications of doing that.
And in Basketball a basket awarded is 2 or 3 points, out of what.. 90?

Seriously, I may make myself more unpopular than I already seem to be but why dont you guys who are obsessing on this just imagine how much it would bother you if the situation was perfectly reversed?

Then let's consider the STATED objective of the World Cup. Need I explain further?

Added: Maybe I should. I would have relatively little problem with a fifa-mandated player sanction for that, even extending to the Club level.
What would be fair... 5 Games? It would still be a judgement call but the penalty would be where it's best applied, the offending player.
Now.. visualize it was John Pantsil who did it.

---------------------------------------------------------

We could argue separately on the negative economic impact foisted on SA by fifa.

 

That's just it, 'Fog. If it were reversed, I'd be disgusted that one of my players stopped a goal so blatantly illegally. I would have no problem with a goal being awarded. Heck, if I was the goalie on a team and one of my defenders deliberately used his hand to stop a ball going in, I'd sit in the middle of the goal-line and make it clear to the penalty taker that all he had to do was hit the freakin' target; I wasn't going to stop it.

Granted, my "fair play" gene is more developed than most, but if you think a "ball on the other foot" argument is going to sway me, you're dreamin'.

Plus, to clarify, I'm not talking about every handball in the box being awarded as a goal. just one's that occur on the goal-line. The only ones I recall from this World Cup that would qualify are the Harry Kewell (AUS) hand-ball and, of course, the Uruguay one. And again, the only difference I'm recommending is that you don't award a penalty shot, you award a goal.

 

And how close to the goal line counts? And what if it's ball to hand and what if it's on an angle where it might have gone out otherwise... and .. and ... and...

And OF COURSE it WOULD require video replay.

Screw fair play and get on with it. I no longer care the US was screwed out of two goals.. never crosses my mind.
Isnt that amazing?

 

'fog. Refs are humans because they have the ability to make decisions. And yes, even on a ball-to-hand, I think the goal should be awarded.

 

It's the sort of rule that would require a high degree of certaintly. We all know that a foul in the box has to be more severe and/or the ref more certain to call it due to the result. The same would be true of the handball on the goal line. Refs, honest ones, would only call it as goal when they are certain that they saw it. And if it results in instant replay for decisions that involve a goal then I'm all for it.

FIFA needs to institute some sort of video replay technology. As it stands now you get it anyway but with a huge delay. Lorrionda from Uruguay should have been dropped as a ref international tournaments years ago, his own country's football association did so for a time. But it took the England no goal v. Germany for FIFA to decide that he was done for this WC. Say what you want but that is a form of using video technology to make decisions.

 

okay, time to stop talking about this because it's exactly what Seppie boy wants and why he is resisting goal line technology ( along with the fact that then he cant control the world .......... cup)

 

Would have to think that it's time for Uruguay's carriage to turn back into a pumpkin, but this match could be very similar to the Paraguay v Spain match which was a knockdown drag out brawl. Is there enough leadership on Holland's team to not have a letdown after beating Brazil? I think the answer will be a resounding Yes.

 

I've recently developed a dislike for the Dutch team, considering them a bunch of diving, dirty tackling thugs, but I'll be rooting for them over the cheating slime that are Uruguay.

 

I found reading the last two posts by Andy and Don very satisfying.

During this WC, I've also lost my respect for Brazil and France. Cant get over Fabiano waxing on about how beautiful his double, or was it triple, handball goal was. However, I've gained tremendous respect for Paraguay, Ghana, New Zealand, and probably some others that I'm forgetting.

I dont care who wins the Uruguay v. Netherland match, I'm just hoping it goes into overtime and extra penalty kicks so they are physically and emotionally knackered when the winner gets to the finals

 

Today's game is sort of like the NBA Eastern Conference Finals from 1998-2008.

It doesn't matter who wins because the real final is taking place on the other side of the bracket tomorrow -- Sunday will just be a formality.

 

Only problem Timmy is Detroit, Miami, and Boston won it all during that time span. Uruguay would be a formality. However, Holland would be anything but a gimme. Germany would have to be the favorite, but Sneijder and Co. can certainly play w/Spain on any given day.

EDIT: You would think a Fulham fan would know better... It's 1-1 at the half and given his current form any team w/Diego Forlan ain't a pushover either.

 

On the Dutch offside allowed goal, if the roles had been switched, who thinks the ref would have called offside?

And what's up with Ian Darkes (?) "claiming" that what's so nice about the Netherlands team is that it has "no egos"? Was that some ironic English humour or something?

 

I got to give some props to Uruguay after watching that match. They were missing key players in all three parts of the field yet they were there with a chance to send it to extra time at the end. Looking forward to tomorrow's match