Match 58 (QF) - Uruguay v Ghana - Post-Match Thread [R]

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-...suarez-banned-1-match-handball?cc=5901&ver=us

Evidently, FIFA has sided with Uruguay. So for anyone arguing something else, keep in mind where FIFA stands on this.

 

Hi !

i am here to tell you a secret...


the referee CHEATED against Uruguay, it was a real unfair referee, but well,, that is my point of view right ? i might be wrong.. mmmmmmmmm


but i have some undeniably truth...


It was cheating, it was unfair, that suarez got a red card, and ghana was given a PK, that is what is was a cheated, unfair event....
why????

it was a CLEAR offside, right after the free kick, made by a ghanian player..

and after posting an answer i please urge you to se either a replay or download the match from soem website when you can see it,, it is INCREDIBLE how referees can make this huge mistakes, that can cost the match with holland because suarez not playing is a great loss,,


referees cost the world cup to mexico ( horrible offside by teves.. i think that my grandma would have seen that offside if he was where the referee was.. ) , it cost the cup to england ( i would like to see after a 2-2 how the match would have developed ) and it may cost the match to uruguay, because of the great loss suarez means to the uruguayan team against the netherlands.. so cme on FIFA.... after all the millions they earn making these event,, cant they at least in quarter finals an semi finales, guarantee a clean, good, referee ? and i know nobodys perfect and referees make mistakes.... but if this is so,,, technology should be used to clarify doubts of sitautions that may be unclear to the referee.... in basketball is so,, in rugby is so....



so that is the secret.. uruguay wasnt unfair,, unfair it was the red card , and the PK unfair because of an offside,

please see the replays..

 

there is no reason FIFA would want Uruguay to do well. Quite frankly, there is no reason why they would want Mexico to fail. that was an honest mistake.

Mexico has a huge population and an extremely powerful media, i doubt FIFA has a vendetta. they especially wouldn't want to help Maradona, as we all know FIFA hates him, see 1994 and 1990 World CUp FInal being fixed after diego beat italy and brazil, ruining havelange's plan.

that was an honest mistake, so the ref is at home.

There was however extreme bias going on against uruguay. it was all gift rapped for ghana, but they weren't good enough. not only was there off side, but there was no foul on the free kick either.

fifa gains nothing by having uruguay make the final. it is a potential ratings nightmare to have uruguay in the final. get over it ghana fans. your team wasn't good enough.

 

i am very pleased to see your comment... and even more pleased because you are argentinean,, there is always people making stuff about rivalry between argentina and uruguay but we are true brothers


of course i didnt say that it was in purpose against mexico the offside i only said that it is unforgivable a mistake of that size.... i mean referees should be top quality for an event such as the world cup,, btw,, i know that this is not the thread but i am truly sorry about what happened yesterday in the match argentina alemania,, i wanted Uruguay - argentina for the final, such as 1930, lets see if we can manage to go through holland...

and yes, it wasn't foul that last one, thats why fifa never played the replay on the screen because it was nothing,, ghana had it all in favour in this match, as i very honestly acknowledge that Uruguay south corea, the referee was really biased in favor for uruguay.... there were some serious fouls made by uruguayan players that deserved yellow cards and didnt happened....


the reason of this horrible referee against uruguay is because of the error the uruguayan referee had in the match England - Germany,, that goal that wasnt called... however come on england.. you know you werent better than germany... and 4-1,, come on... i know with that goal there was a draw,, but again come on... it is better to blame someone else instead of taking the responsibility...

shame on you.. and shame on fifa.. after all,, it is just business for FIFA.

 

are you the same gonchi from EL SABIO MAS SABIO? and wtf is gonchi ?

 

no, im not, gonchi comes from nickname to the name Gonzalo.

 

well my moms best friend is uruguayan so i have some close uruguayan friends who i will be watching the game with.

it would also be silly for me to hate a country that gives me punta del este

i also root for all spanish speaking conmebol teams, which is why i was upset that paraguay and chile went out too. i thought for a second we could have uruguay, chile, argentina, and paraguay in the last 4 but oh well

it is just a shame so many people are flipping out about the suarez controversy. it really bothers me- stupid haters. its honestly like they think ghana should have gotten a sympathy vote into the semis. this is football, there are no give away goals. hand ball in the box=penalty. a composed player not thinking about dancing but about scoring would have made it

 

Well, HELL!!!

65 pages of rolling around in the murky depths of ignorance and NOW you pick this time to let us in on the truth?

I think I'll call my Grandpa -he's been a big sports fan forever- and tell him all about this and see what he thinks...

.. I'm back. Here's what my Grandpa said:

"It's a game. Shit Happens. Get Over it!"

 

haha yeah but i really can't understand how people enters a forum to comment but at the same time can't have the neurons to watch the replay and see what really happened..

 

Well.. let me try to explain, That was FAR from the only case of side refs not getting it right. When all is said and done, you have to pick your arguments and the argument has to come down to the basic facts.

Which is .. "did Ghana deserve to win outright because of the reflexive handball?"

The answer is No. As someone else pointed out, Fifa looked at everything and made the best decision.

The alternative is to play most of the games over.

More and more I find myself starting to agree with that gasbag Sepp Blatter, At the least I understand that he understands the slippery slope of video replays.

 

As explained in my blog article (located in my profile), you cannot say with 100% assuredness that if the interference had not occurred that the receiver would have made the catch. In the World Cup Ghana vs Uruguay handball incident, it is 100% certain the ball would have gone in for a goal.

You fail to mention the goal tending rule, where the points are automatically awarded if a player blocks a ball when it is in its downward path towards the basket. Clearly a ball that is 100% certain of being a goal when it is blocked by a hand, especially a RAISED HAND, should be an auto goal as well.

As for Shaq, or what is known as "hack a shaq", fans and the Lakers did complain about how viciously the other team would foul Shaq at times, and it may have led to the flagrant foul rule, (although I am not sure about the timeline for the flagrant foul rule).

 

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but BOTH Uruguay defenders that were in the goal area RAISED THEIR HAND to block the ball.

Clearly the rules favor the use of the hand versus not using the hand in that particular situation, and that is a flaw in the rulebook in my opinion.

 

Precisely, in the case of actually stopping a goal with one hands, the punishment is less than the act of the handball, and that is a flaw within the rule book.

 

All punishments for fouls are not equal.

 

1) 2 very smart defenders

2) The rules don't favor using the hand. Try doing that over and again the next match you play.

 

Quit whining, if he made the PK it was over, its the risk Suarez took and luckely it turned out perfect.
Sorry if we broke your hearts for beating South Africa and now Ghana, but thats football.

THANK YOU SUAREZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

The point that I was trying to illustrate is that most punishments the the game are not equal to (or more severe than) the punishable acts.

If a cross was about to be delivered to a completely unmarked player in the box, the defense is allowed to mark up before play is resumed and the defense benefits as the opportunity to move attackers forward is trumped by the fact that nobody is unmarked and alone anymore. There is less of an opportunity to score. Is this a flaw in the rules?

I know that this is a vague hypothetical situation, and that I didn't take yellow/red cards into account (to try to be less complicated) but I hope you understand what I am trying to say.

The way I see it, it is simply the nature of the game that individual punishments for fouls are not equal to or more severe than the acts committed.

 

If the player that is offsides does not receive the ball, is it still offsides?

 

Even so, all of those examples are non-goal examples. In Baseball, if a fan interferes with a ball that would have been a home run, the play is ruled a home run. It is the situation where a 100% certainty of the goal that the handball stopped that is the issue here.

 

This is what I find frustrating. THE HANDBALL POSED NO RISK FOR SUAREZ.

 

Yes. You're from Italy, watch the USA v Italy game in 2006 and the US disallowed 2nd goal.

 

I bitched about Kewell.

The law is an ass.

 

I was born in the USA, my folks are from Italy. I don't recall the play you speak of.

 

How about once at the end of the match? These situations come up in other sports and the rules do get changed.

In american football, There was a play once in the final seconds where the Oakland Raiders kept fumbling the ball forward because they had no other choice since the game would be over.

They got their touchdown, but then the rule was changed. It is a very famous play in the U.S. , It's called the "Holy Roller" and it is practically a mirror regarding the end of the game situation to what happened with the handball.

Check out the story, it is short.