About the WC98 England vs Argentina match

[MIGkiller]

What are the English fans impressions of that match? For me it's one of the greatest games of recent World Cups, and England didn't deserve to lose. They were one of the most regular teams and played their best game in that tournament. For me, Beckham's red card wasn't fair, since Simeone who had clearly provoked didn't get a similar punishment. Anyway England managed to hold the score with one man down for an entire half and extra time. Had England won, maybe the outcome of that WC would have been different.

[gaijin]

Nah. The Argies went to out Holland in the next round. They were a pretty good side.

That Bergkamp goal was one of the best WC goals, I've ever seen.

France were destined to win that tournament.

[Mikey10]

Argie scum cheated.

[bracer028]

france was unstoppable...killed brazil 3-1 if i am correct...

france had the best player in the world and makelele...

[comme]

france was unstoppable...killed brazil 3-1 if i am correct...

france had the best player in the world and makelele...

Makalele wasn't even in the squad at France 98.

France weren't particularly good, scraped past Paraguay, Italy and Croatia. Only really playted well against Saudi and South Africa, then beat a Brazil shocked by the Ronaldo saga beforehand.

England were capable of winning WC 98, but it would have been a real up-hill struggle.

[aloisius]

France weren't particularly good, scraped past Paraguay, Italy and Croatia. Only really playted well against Saudi and South Africa, then beat a Brazil shocked by the Ronaldo saga beforehand.

England were capable of winning WC 98, but it would have been a real up-hill struggle.


They had the best defensive package , maybe ever. We were the only team to score from open play against them in a meaningful match. If Boban hadn’t made the worst mistake of his career 20 seconds after we went ahead, we would have won the WC :(

If I remember correctly England were disallowed a good goal because of some bogus foul on the keeper , and weren’t given a penalty after handball. England were certainly capable of going to the final, even if they didn’t quite have the talent they have today.

[tino11]

I watched it in 35°C heat in Mexico drinking ice cold beer, personally I thought it was hilarious, but being Scottish I would.

[sendorange]

Was a wonderful game and we didn't deserve to lose. But I doubt we would have gone much further with Holland and then Brazil to get through, we had a good team but a bit inconsistent, Hoddle was also not a good enough man manager with big name players and I don't think the squad had the right mentality.

[Mobile]

Was a wonderful game and we didn't deserve to lose. But I doubt we would have gone much further with Holland and then Brazil to get through, we had a good team but a bit inconsistent, Hoddle was also not a good enough man manager with big name players and I don't think the squad had the right mentality.


I agree, people tend to think of us being robbed in that game because of Beckham's red card and Sol's disallowed goal (and then another penalty defeat). But the fact is we weren't really that great a side anyway (losing to Romania was a disgrace) and I can't imagine we would have got past Holland, Brazil and then beaten France in the final.

[gaijin]

france was unstoppable...killed brazil 3-1 if i am correct...

france had the best player in the world and makelele...

It was 3-0...

And yes, Stephane Guivarch was incredible....

[Eertamai]

That Bergkamp goal was one of the best WC goals, I've ever seen.

Bergkamp has many great goals, but the skill, timing and importance of that goal make it one of the best ever.

The match had two main impacts for England. The realisation that Owen could actually go on to to fullfill his potential, and the making of David Beckham for his comeback from his deserved sending off.

It was a great match.

[MassachusettsRef]

I remember thinking at the time, and still believe now, that the cards to Simeone and Beckham should have been reversed.

At WC 98 there was a crackdown on (and in reality, an overreaction to) any sort of retaliation. Kluivert got tossed in his first match for a seemingly innocuous nudge on a Belgian player and there are a few other examples. What Beckham did was stupid and petulant, but in no way did it rise to the level of violent conduct. He lightly kicked Simeone with the outside of his foot as he lay prone on the ground, barely touching the Argentinian. Remember, Simeone admitted a few years later, before a UCL match against Man United, that he dove and exaggerated the contact (he also dove and rolled about 10 times in the subsequent match against Holland in order to get Artur Numan unfairly sent off). To compound matters, Simoene's charge into Beckham's back was violent and completely unexpected--a violent charge from behind like that is just as bad as a tackle from behind. Simeone probably should have seen red for the foul alone, but compound that with his theatrics and there's no way he should have stayed on the field.

That being said, Beckham and everyone else knew that referees had been overreacting to all forms of retaliation, so a case could be made that he should have known better than to put himself in that sort of position regardless.

As for the match, besides some of the memorable controversies (did Owen dive? Campbell's disallowed goal, the Beckham/Simeone flashpoint, Roa's mindgames during the penalties, etc.) and Owen's play, I don't remember it for particularly incredible play.

As a partial aside for those that said France was sluggish during the middle of the tournament. Remember that Zidane, possibly the best player in the world at the time and France's playmaker, was suspended for 3 matches. When France had their full-team and was tested, they dominated, aside from against a Croatian side that was playing out of their minds. But even in that match, France rose to the occassion, as great teams must.

[nazzo]

This was by far the best Wc1998 game. I loved it.

However it was sad to see England lose at the end.

Truly an undesereved win by the Argentinians.

[El viejo Matias]

all matters of opinion.....no? I mean did England deserve the 2002 win?? Argentina dominated play for large segemtns of the game, had Seaman not had such a great game then what?? Fact is one team wins the other loses, simple see? Come to the Argentina board, you will see we talk about the future, leave the past for memories. :rolleyes:

[Brainodo]

all matters of opinion.....no? I mean did England deserve the 2002 win?? Argentina dominated play for large segemtns of the game, had Seaman not had such a great game then what?? Fact is one team wins the other loses, simple see? Come to the Argentina board, you will see we talk about the future, leave the past for memories. :rolleyes:

Well, one major difference is that in the 2002 game Argentina didn't have a goal disallowed.

[Mikey10]

all matters of opinion.....no? I mean did England deserve the 2002 win?? Argentina dominated play for large segemtns of the game, had Seaman not had such a great game then what?? Fact is one team wins the other loses, simple see? Come to the Argentina board, you will see we talk about the future, leave the past for memories. :rolleyes:

What a dick head. England played the Argie scum off the pitch for a good 70 minutes and should have been about 3-0 up before you twats put any pressure on us. Piss off.

[Mobile]

all matters of opinion.....no? I mean did England deserve the 2002 win?? Argentina dominated play for large segemtns of the game, had Seaman not had such a great game then what?? Fact is one team wins the other loses, simple see? Come to the Argentina board, you will see we talk about the future, leave the past for memories. :rolleyes:


You are joking, right?

Seaman had one save to make in the whole match. One. That was Pochettino's (I think?) header from a corner late on.

Apart from that Spunky was a spectator, for all Argentina's possession in the middle of the park.

[El viejo Matias]

Hmm, usually those that have to resort to cussing and swear words and name calling are the ones who are insecure about themselves :rolleyes: . As for the so called disallowed goal... any contact against the oppositons keeper is automatically ruled into the play, there was contact, of course millions of english men at that precise moment lost their eyesight :p . Owens penalty was a 50 - 50 call but I think a fair call in 2002, however Aiamr was also brought down in the box much later in the game and no foul was called. Instead of protesting too much at the end of the game Simeone went over and shook Beckhamms hand... what a dick head. :rolleyes:

[Brainodo]

I used the disallowed goal as reasoning as to which team should be the more aggrieved to lose, 98 England or 02 Argentina. Going out on penalties, losing a player to a dodgy red card and having a goal disallowed in extra time is more reason that one dodgy pen, IMHO. If Argentina had created more and England hadn't any chances on goal in 02, that'd be different, but from memory, there was Owen's shot off the post and Teddy's strike coming off the bench.
As has already been pointed out, Seaman was hardly working his socks off in that game, so how Argentina 'deserved' it is beyond me.

[El viejo Matias]

Maybe you are all not getting my point. Opinion is what it all comes down to. Personally Im not a big fan of teams that defend and counter, that is what England did, Sweden, and Nigeria. Oh well at the end of it all we did not do enough and out we went. As for 1998, Argentina dominated possesion anyone who argues that did not see the game :mad: .I give england the hands up that they defended like lions and that the red card was bogus, but if memory serves me correctly the ref was not an argie was he :rolleyes: . England played to their strengths in both games, personaly not my style, but hey to each their own.

PS this is how one has an intelligent conversation see??? :p