FIFA's pre-WC warning to referees coupled with magnified scrutiny from fans..

[Ted D]

Do you feel that FIFA's warning to the referees, which was that "card-shy referees will be sent home," led to magnified scrutiny from fans?

Which then, naturally, would lead to much bigger pomp and circumstance over any sort of mis-call by a referee. For instance, in the no-call situation with Adriano being offside, would the response be similar in say 1990?

I certainly cannot remember such uproar over the performance of referees. Of course, I am young at only sixteen years of age, but it seems that those around me who are older only reaffirm my belief. What are your thoughts?

[whitehound]

Do you feel that FIFA's warning to the referees, which was that "card-shy referees will be sent home," led to magnified scrutiny from fans?

Which then, naturally, would lead to much bigger pomp and circumstance over any sort of mis-call by a referee. For instance, in the no-call situation with Adriano being offside, would the response be similar in say 1990?

I certainly cannot remember such uproar over the performance of referees. Of course, I am young at only sixteen years of age, but it seems that those around me who are older only reaffirm my belief. What are your thoughts?I was old enough to closely watch 94,98,02 and now 06 WC..........these are the worst referees yet. which is why everyone is making some much noise. It is admittedly ill advised to give instructions to referees before the WC to make call differently then what the players have been seeing before. It frustrates the players and leads to inconsistancy and missapplication.

[MassachusettsRef]

I was old enough to closely watch 94,98,02 and now 06 WC..........these are the worst referees yet. That is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, not true.

In all 3 of those previous WCs, you had referees that quite clearly did not earn their spots. There were referees with little experience who were effectively political favors--particular at the AR position. At this WC, it's hard to argue that any of the 21 referees aren't, say, at least in the top 40 worldwide. They've been trained, assessed and tested for 2 full years and had to go through dozens of hoops to get where they are. To say they are the "worst yet" or "poor" as you said in the other thread, is simplistic.

The difference from the past, I think, is one of psychology and mentality within the referees. And, I've heard coaches and players say this, too. The change is that, in the past, when there was something controversial, the natural inclination of referees was to NOT make the call. Go back through the 80s and 90s...you see nasty foul after nasty foul with no whistle, nevermind red or yellow--either because a referee wasn't 100% sure or, unfortunately, they didn't want to change the game. Anything in the box that was short of murder just wasn't called (you never saw penalties for shirt-grabbing or holding a player when the ball was in the air).

People rarely remember the non-call that changed the game (like the vicious elbow in the box in 1994 in the Spain/Italy game, that would have given Spain the win if called and, upon video review, merited an 8-game suspension for the Italian), but they will remember any controversial penalties or red cards that do change the game, like what you're seeing in this WC. Fundamentally, though, there's zero difference in their effects.

Now, due to all the points of emphasis from FIFA, the mentality on the field is to make the call--game-changing or not--if you feel it's there. So, you get referees, like Larrionda and Medina Cantalejo, willing to give the red card or the penalty because, in their gut, that's what they think the call is. And FIFA encourages this.

And to be clear, I don't think this difference amounts to a 'problem.' In fact, I think the change in mentality, if fully implemented, will be good for the game and will make it better. The actual problems lie in the inconsistency and, to be sure, the hightened scrutiny. Not EVERY referee has fully adopted this mentality, so, game to game, you'll see some inconsistency and you'll see refs pull yellows where others would pull reds. And, with the increased amount of television cameras and attention given to every game and every play, you are bound to see more and more "dubious" and "incorrect" decisions played over and over on the highlight shows.

[billf]

The referees and ARs are better this time in the sense that they are more talented, have better teamwork, and were more throughly vetted this time than in the past. To me, that maginifies the mistakes and/or irritition with the way the games are managed a little.

[lotharis1]

I was old enough to closely watch 94,98,02 and now 06 WC..........these are the worst referees yet. which is why everyone is making some much noise. It is admittedly ill advised to give instructions to referees before the WC to make call differently then what the players have been seeing before. It frustrates the players and leads to inconsistancy and missapplication. I disagree...

I am old enough, and have been into soccer long enough, to watch every match that has been broadcast live in the united states... going back to 82... and have seen almost every world cup match via videotape or replay... (if you havent plase take advantage of the fifaworldcup.com website... as it has a section titled "classic football" in which you can watch select classic matches from previous world cups.... I would suggest 2 particular games... 1970 ITA-FRG semi-final, and 1982 FRA-FRG semi-final... those are by far the best games ever to occur in the world cup...

but that 1982 semi-final between FRA-FRG has one of the calls which peple complain about still to this day... when Germany's goalkeeper suposedly leveled a French attacker intentionally who was then knocked unconcious... and did not recieve a red for it... I personally believe the ref called it accurately, but I am in the minority... many still say Schumacher should have been banished from the game for it... then in the following match FRG-ITA in the final... Italy's first goal... which swung the balance of the match, and this the result came off a bogus officating decision... in which there was a foul on an Italian player 30-40 yards from goal... and the Germans were protesting it... and the ref blew the whistle to stop play... as he was ordering the German players back 10 yards from the kick, and they were setting the wall... the Italian player took the free-kick (despite the whistle not being blown to whistle play resumed) and passed it square to a flank who was uncovered and then crossed it in while the Germans were scrambling to get back into the play and Paulo Rossi eventual golden boot winner headed the ball in... the play never should have occured... and it allowed Italy to then play pass back and forth to their goalkeeper Dino Zoff (back when the keeper could pick it up with his hands)... and they were able to kill off the match... while the Germans who were fatigued fom 3 days earlier playing France to an extended pk match... had to chase the game to get back into it... and had actually held the run of play up until Italy's goal...


but the officiating to me the officiating was worse in 98 and 2002

for France in 1998... FIFA issued a mandate that any shirt grab was a yellow... and any slide tackle from behind ought to be given an "automatic" red card... thus officials were quick to react and instantly eject players for challenges which were questionably from behind but often from the side, or getting the ball...

It also looked quite apparant to many that that world cup was a set up to make sure France won... as they had not done shiyte at the world cup in forever, had not qualified for 2 successive world cups... but had previously been to 4 semi-finals and were regarded as an elite soccer nation

there was also the case of the Croatian team... whose head coach went to visit a policeman in the hospital who had been injured in a crowd of hooligans who were Germany supporters... the policeman gave the Croatian coach his helmet... and he would lift it up with him as he entered the pitch for each Croatia match after that...

the first one was the round of 6 match between CRO-ROM... and it to this date is probably the worst officiated game I have ever seen... Croatia got ALL the calls, even the one goal of the game came in the 48th minute of the first half... which there was very little stoppages of play so no way there should have been so much stoppage time... and Davor "the Diver" Sukor made a horrible dive on a cross which was well out of his reach to begin with.. and the ref awarded a PK... which became the only goal of the game... as the Romanians tried to come back in the second half... every time they were in the opposing teams half a foul was whistled against them...

the following match was GER-CRO... which I am all sure we remember Christian Worns' tackle on Davor "the Diver" Sukor, which made Sukor roll 5 times after it... and it was rulled he did it as the last man back... despite the fact that Juergen "Eissen Fuss" Kohler was in position and already tracking back into the play (you would figure one of the clear top 5 defenders of the time, and perhaps all-time would have been able to get into the play to make a challenge) but it was given a straight red... Germany up to that point in the game had all the posession, created the best chances, and was clearly the better team... but they were by far the oldest team in the competition, and in the extreme heat in southern France on July 4... they were able to wear down the German team with the man advantage and get a goal in the 48th minute of the first half... and even down a man Germany still pressed the action and hit the post 3 times... and had to keep pressing for the goal... finaly with 4 forwards and an extra attacking mid on the field... Croatia got 2 counter-attack goals against Germany's 2 man defense of Matthaus(37 at the time) and Kokler(36 at the time) and were able to convert them to make it 3-0... I have no doubt that that result was inflicted by a horrible call by the referee... since Germany were clearly proving themselves better on the field at 11v11 and for 35 minutes of 10v11 in the second half... only giving up late half goals being down a man (which they were for a total of 55 minutes that match)...

then Croatia met France... and it all changed... because Larent Blanc became suspended for the final match... as a result of a dive in which Boban hit the ground with no contact from any players, since there was no one within 2 yards of him, and they pinned the foul on Blanc for elbowing... which became his second acrued yellow, and he missed the following match, and after everyone saw the replay knew Blanc did nothing... BUT FIFA DID NOTHING TO RE-INSTATE BLANC.... WHICH IS A TOTAL SHAM!!! How could they not recind that card when evidence clearly showed he did nothing...

then in 2002... everyone clearly saw the BS officating which went on to eliminate Ireland against Spain, Italy against Korea, then Spain against Korea.... which weren't andated decisions, they were horribly blown decisions... about balls over the touch line, goals dissallowed, and red cards... tthese were so attracious and left a huge mark on that world cup, which no one respects the legitimacy of... as the result of Korea advancing to the semi-finals...

then there was the final... where Collina got in a battle against Hamann, because Hamann yelled at him after not giving a yellow(or even a whistle) when Hamann was clipped down from behind on his achilles...after that the two of them went back and forth all game, and Hamann never recieved a whistle for the rest of the game, until after Brazil scored 2 goals... so later in the game when Kahn's hand was stepped on by Ronaldo... and then on the ensueing play Hamann was shoved knocked down by Ronaldo from behind, and Collina let it go... he then passed to Rivaldo whose shot Kahn dropped, and Ronaldo pounced on to make it 1-0... when up to that point Germany had all the best chances...

now on the other hand...

these referees in 2006 have been somewhat ok... despite the missed/bad calls that have occured... it is the FIFA mandate which has ruined this cup... forcing referees to give ticky-tack offenses yellow cards... thus so many people recieved 2nd yellow ejections or acrued yellow match suspensions... this is what has detered from the game...

these refs have actually been calling as FIFA expected them too... just their expectations of what should be called in a game is different from what 99% of the world is

[Ted D]

That is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, not true.

In all 3 of those previous WCs, you had referees that quite clearly did not earn their spots. There were referees with little experience who were effectively political favors--particular at the AR position. At this WC, it's hard to argue that any of the 21 referees aren't, say, at least in the top 40 worldwide. They've been trained, assessed and tested for 2 full years and had to go through dozens of hoops to get where they are. To say they are the "worst yet" or "poor" as you said in the other thread, is simplistic.

The difference from the past, I think, is one of psychology and mentality within the referees. And, I've heard coaches and players say this, too. The change is that, in the past, when there was something controversial, the natural inclination of referees was to NOT make the call. Go back through the 80s and 90s...you see nasty foul after nasty foul with no whistle, nevermind red or yellow--either because a referee wasn't 100% sure or, unfortunately, they didn't want to change the game. Anything in the box that was short of murder just wasn't called (you never saw penalties for shirt-grabbing or holding a player when the ball was in the air).

People rarely remember the non-call that changed the game (like the vicious elbow in the box in 1994 in the Spain/Italy game, that would have given Spain the win if called and, upon video review, merited an 8-game suspension for the Italian), but they will remember any controversial penalties or red cards that do change the game, like what you're seeing in this WC. Fundamentally, though, there's zero difference in their effects.

Now, due to all the points of emphasis from FIFA, the mentality on the field is to make the call--game-changing or not--if you feel it's there. So, you get referees, like Larrionda and Medina Cantalejo, willing to give the red card or the penalty because, in their gut, that's what they think the call is. And FIFA encourages this.

And to be clear, I don't think this difference amounts to a 'problem.' In fact, I think the change in mentality, if fully implemented, will be good for the game and will make it better. The actual problems lie in the inconsistency and, to be sure, the hightened scrutiny. Not EVERY referee has fully adopted this mentality, so, game to game, you'll see some inconsistency and you'll see refs pull yellows where others would pull reds. And, with the increased amount of television cameras and attention given to every game and every play, you are bound to see more and more "dubious" and "incorrect" decisions played over and over on the highlight shows.


Thanks for providing some insight on the situation. Your point on more cameras and attention is certainly a valid one, one which I had not thought about. My thinking is that there have always been calls which, quite frankly, may not have been correct, and with the heightened attention, more people seem to forget that the referee doesn't see the play more than once from more than one angle. As with everything else, people expect perfection, which of course is just not reasonable.

I don't know if I agree with you in that the new system of making the call rather than not making the call is a better way. I believe that if the call is made every time, it will eventually subtract from the natural physicality of the game, and we will see more and more instances of the referees call drastically changing the game. For instance, the referee in the Ghana v. USA match made the call on Aguchi Onyewu, for the penalty kick. That was a situation in which I believe no call should have been made. The effect of the call was enormous, and had there been no call the game would have simply gone into half-time tied at one a piece. Of course I don't know what the referee saw at the time, and who knows if FIFA's warning effected the situation, however I have no choice but to believe that the call would not have been made without some sort of extra-pressure on the referees this time around. Instances like this one, in my mind, will occur over and over before there is another standard set for what to call and what not to call.

[MassachusettsRef]

Uh, I'm not quite sure where to start, but I'll just pick at these two, since my memories of the incidents are very vivid...the following match was GER-CRO... which I am all sure we remember Christian Worns' tackle on Davor "the Diver" Sukor, which made Sukor roll 5 times after it... and it was rulled he did it as the last man back... despite the fact that Juergen "Eissen Fuss" Kohler was in position and already tracking back into the play That red card was given for serious foul play, not for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. It was a dangerous, ugly tackle that was almost thigh-high.

then Croatia met France... and it all changed... because Larent Blanc became suspended for the final match... as a result of a dive in which Boban hit the ground with no contact from any players, since there was no one within 2 yards of him, and they pinned the foul on Blanc for elbowing... which became his second acrued yellow, and he missed the following match, and after everyone saw the replay knew Blanc did nothing... BUT FIFA DID NOTHING TO RE-INSTATE BLANC.... WHICH IS A TOTAL SHAM!!! How could they not recind that card when evidence clearly showed he did nothing...Other than the fact that I don't know what you're getting at, since, above this passage, you said FIFA set the Cup up for France to win...your description is nearly 100% inaccurate.

It was Bilic, not Boban. There was a free kick about 30 yards out and Bilic and Blanc were jostling for position in the penalty area. While the referee, Garcia-Aranda, was dealing with the wall, Blanc swung at Bilic, hitting him in the chest. Bilic dropped to the ground, covering his face. Blanc was shown a straight red card for violent conduct.

The problem was twofold. On the one hand, Bilic certainly embellished and deserved his own yellow card. Then again, Blanc did swing at Bilic, even if the contact was short of violent. Still, how can you argue (or, at minimum, how can you overturn?) the red card?

And, before you try to say I'm wrong, I was there. I saw all the French papers the next morning and, when I went to the third place game between Croatia and the Netherlands, I heard (and participated in) all the boos and whistles whenever Bilic touched the ball.

http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/w/pwc/mr_8786.html

http://france.worldcupblog.org/upload/Thuram7.jpg

[MassachusettsRef]

I don't know if I agree with you in that the new system of making the call rather than not making the call is a better way. I believe that if the call is made every time, it will eventually subtract from the natural physicality of the game, and we will see more and more instances of the referees call drastically changing the game. For instance, the referee in the Ghana v. USA match made the call on Aguchi Onyewu, for the penalty kick. That was a situation in which I believe no call should have been made. The effect of the call was enormous, and had there been no call the game would have simply gone into half-time tied at one a piece. Of course I don't know what the referee saw at the time, and who knows if FIFA's warning effected the situation, however I have no choice but to believe that the call would not have been made without some sort of extra-pressure on the referees this time around. Instances like this one, in my mind, will occur over and over before there is another standard set for what to call and what not to call.To clarify, I mean referees should be making the call when they truly think it's there. I mean, more specifically, that they shouldn't be afraid of 'changing the game' when they know they are right.

I'm not advocating that referees should be willing or eager to make dubious calls. So far, from the replays we've seen, the Merk penalty decision falls into this category.

I'm thinking more like situations where a player dives in the box and the referee gives him his second yellow card for it. In the past, most referees would just ignore the whole thing. But, to me, cheating is cheating and if a referee is sure that's what he's seen, then the integrity of the game demands the yellow and subsequent red cards.

[lotharis1]

Uh, I'm not quite sure where to start, but I'll just pick at these two, since my memories of the incidents are very vivid...

That red card was given for serious foul play, not for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. It was a dangerous, ugly tackle that was almost thigh-high. then obviously this one isn't very vivid for you... because the challenge was neither high... nor late... it was just from the side and slightly behind... as Sukor was making a run 35-40 yards from goal... and Kokler was about 30 yards from goal... and running towards him... but the ref was explaining how it was last man back... as the Germans kept pointing to Kokler and explaining how he was in position to make a play...

Other than the fact that I don't know what you're getting at, since, above this passage, you said FIFA set the Cup up for France to win...your description is nearly 100% inaccurate. It was set for them to win... very few people who follow the sport will disagree with that... except on how it was fixed... or if they're refs or supporters of the establishment and would not buy into any "conspiracy theories" even including what happened to JFK...

what I was discussing with the FRA-CRO match was simply that the Croatians were exposed for being dirty floppers...

which only goes to show how when you say they flopped against Romania and Germany youre not so far off from the truth as to suggest something that could never happen... and more than likely true that they did flop...

what I didn't discuss was the other poor officiating decisions of that world cup...

like ARG-ENG... with Beckham-Simeone... in which Beckham gets tripped no call, then held down on the ground... and then Red Carded for a slight kick at Simeone as he flopped to the ground... and then Sol Campbell has a clearly legitimate goal called back....

or NED-ARG... where tied at 1 late in the match Simeone is given a Red for a ticky-tack foul... and as the Argies argue the call... Holland send a long ball to Bergkamp.. who takes the chance well... in one of the most beautiful goals in the history of the World Cup... but which should not have occured as Simeone did not deserve to be called, and the ref should not have allowed play so quick after giving out a red... without expecting the argies would have a chance to argue the call which red carded their leader... and whistling to notify that play had resumed...

there were plenty of other calls such as this... I just chose a few of them... as 8 years has passed and they are not all 100% fresh in my mind... but the calls in that world cup were attracious and at the time were being discussed as hotly as they are in this world cup... as it were , it broke a record for red cards back then...

It was Bilic, not Boban. There was a free kick about 30 yards out and Bilic and Blanc were jostling for position in the penalty area. While the referee, Garcia-Aranda, was dealing with the wall, Blanc swung at Bilic, hitting him in the chest. Bilic dropped to the ground, covering his face. Blanc was shown a straight red card for violent conduct.

The problem was twofold. On the one hand, Bilic certainly embellished and deserved his own yellow card. Then again, Blanc did swing at Bilic, even if the contact was short of violent. Still, how can you argue (or, at minimum, how can you overturn?) the red card?

And, before you try to say I'm wrong, I was there. I saw all the French papers the next morning and, when I went to the third place game between Croatia and the Netherlands, I heard (and participated in) all the boos and whistles whenever Bilic touched the ball.

http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/w/pwc/mr_8786.html

http://france.worldcupblog.org/upload/Thuram7.jpg

Ok so I will not argue that it was Bilic or Boban... it has been a long time since I saw the match... and from the match report it has Boban off the pitch at the time of the incident...

but my description is accurate... you may have been there... but I was here watching the game on TV... with several angles and several replays...

Blanc did not swing at him...

they were jockying for postion on a free-kick... and Blanc moved his arm trying to get free... and did... and when the Croatian player dove...there was no one within 2 yards of him... because he knew he had been beat

you can show me a picture of Blanc getting red carded... but you'd be hardpessed to find me a picture that shows any contact by Blanc... nor someone within proximity of the Croatian player as he goes down...

the red card should clearly have been rescinded after the game... because it was a clear dive... if you think different... then it could have been reduced to a yellow... as it was clearly not a straight red...

and yes I do remember all the whistles from the 3rd place match... which I never even described...so I don't know where you'd say I was innaccurate about that....

[Ted D]

To clarify, I mean referees should be making the call when they truly think it's there. I mean, more specifically, that they shouldn't be afraid of 'changing the game' when they know they are right.

I'm not advocating that referees should be willing or eager to make dubious calls. So far, from the replays we've seen, the Merk penalty decision falls into this category.

I'm thinking more like situations where a player dives in the box and the referee gives him his second yellow card for it. In the past, most referees would just ignore the whole thing. But, to me, cheating is cheating and if a referee is sure that's what he's seen, then the integrity of the game demands the yellow and subsequent red cards.

So Merk either believed that there was a penalty on this play, or he was basically coerced into making a call like this by FIFA. Both situations are terrible.

However, I agree with you on the second example. You make a good point.

[MassachusettsRef]

Blanc swung at Bilic. Did he deserve to be sent off? No. Did Bilic dive? Yes. But there was a swing. And FIFA didn't rescind or reduce the card because FIFA has said that they won't do that when the referee takes action.

As for the Woerns tackle on Sukor, I implore you, if you can, to find a tape and look at it. The tackle was very high and very late. I was watching with a friend at the time who was furious a straight red card was shown--until he saw the replay. Also, the Germans were not pointing back to the middle of the field to argue against DOGSO (since that wasn't the call). They were pointing upwards, towards a video screen:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/world/events/1998/worldcup/news/1998/07/05/germans_blame/t1_ref_ap.jpg

Anyway, I'm not going to delve into the conspiracy theory zone that you seem to be living in, but, since you're throwing so much out there, let me correct the most glaring error...
or NED-ARG... where tied at 1 late in the match Simeone is given a Red for a ticky-tack foul... and as the Argies argue the call... Holland send a long ball to Bergkamp.. who takes the chance well... in one of the most beautiful goals in the history of the World Cup... but which should not have occured as Simeone did not deserve to be called, and the ref should not have allowed play so quick after giving out a red... without expecting the argies would have a chance to argue the call which red carded their leader... and whistling to notify that play had resumed...
Ariel Ortega got red carded for blatantly headbutting Edwin Van der Saar in the face as he was about to be booked for diving. And the goal was not scored as a direct result from the subsequent free kick. As this match reports indicates, Ortega was shown red in the 87 minute and Bergkamp scored in the 89th: http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/w/pwc/mr_8784.html

So the Argentinians had 2 minutes to "argue the red card of their leader" (oh wait, it was Ortega, not Simeone..)

Anyway, feel free to go ahead and keep making stuff up.

[lotharis1]

Blanc swung at Bilic. Did he deserve to be sent off? No. Did Bilic dive? Yes. But there was a swing. And FIFA didn't rescind or reduce the card because FIFA has said that they won't do that when the referee takes action. I never once saw any "swing" at the Croatian player...

and I agree FIFA pretends nothing went wrong, instead of backing video evidence... which is my complaint...

As for the Woerns tackle on Sukor, I implore you, if you can, to find a tape and look at it. The tackle was very high and very late. I was watching with a friend at the time who was furious a straight red card was shown--until he saw the replay. Also, the Germans were not pointing back to the middle of the field to argue against DOGSO (since that wasn't the call). They were pointing upwards, towards a video screen:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/world/events/1998/worldcup/news/1998/07/05/germans_blame/t1_ref_ap.jpg

yes, you've shown me a picture of Kohler himself pointing to the replay... but Kohler wasn't there when the red card was handed out... he was shocked to have seen a red and rushed over... Matthaus was the essential captain... and was there defending Worns from the get go... and he was pointing to Kohler right after seeing the card... and that's when he and Klinsman the actual captain came over and got involved as well... after a few minutes it appeared on replay.. and thats when they started pointing to the replay screen... they didn't replay it before the card, because it did not appear to be a re cardable offense...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/world/events/1998/worldcup/news/1998/07/04/croatia_optional/lg_worns_ap.jpg

heres even how the CNN/SI article described it...
after stating that Germany had all the early chances

"With the ball 40 yards from the German goal, Suker dribbled inside Woerns and appeared to have a breakaway. The defender missed the ball and swept Suker's legs from under him, and with the Croat writhing on the ground, the referee reached into his back pocket for the red card. "

but here is what the NY Times wrote about it...

"In the 40th minute of a scoreless game that Germany was dominating and that was becoming increasingly contentious, Pedersen gave a red card to the German defender Christian Worns for a late, open-field tackle of Croatia's star forward, Davor Suker. It was hardly the most vicious of the 54 fouls called, but it changed the course of the game irrevocably. "

and here is Jurgen Kohler's quote the next day...

"In my opinion that was a wrong sending-off -- sure it was a foul, but I was the last man [in the defense] and I think that referee lost it for us," Kohler said.

and some more quotes there on CNN/SI...

"I think you could say that the referee lost us the game," said German defender Juergen Kohler, complaining about the ejection. "It's a great shame because I don't think it was fair to lose in this way."

Asked whether the sending off had made a big difference to the result, Ladic said: "Yes, but nonetheless we played very well"

I have that particular SI issue with all the articles from it...

If I can get it they also show a picture describing a "foul" Matthaus made on Sukor... but the picture clearly shows Matthaus foot on the ball... and Sukor's foot waist high on the inside of Matthaus' shin, inside the shin gaurd... which is an event from the second half I am sure you remember seeing, with Matthaus yelling at the ref and asking why there was no card for that.... and everyone has turned it around about how the Germans were complaining about the refs instead of playing...

but in fact there was only 1 card issued after he gave out the red... and it was to Davor Suker... since the ref knew that would be an expulsion, and Germany were still knocking on the door... he didn't call it



Anyway, I'm not going to delve into the conspiracy theory zone that you seem to be living in, but, since you're throwing so much out there, let me correct the most glaring error...

not just my theories...

NY Times writes...
"Blazevic had called for revenge for a dyspeptic match between the two teams in the 1996 European championships, in which the Croatian defender Robert Jarni was ejected and Germany prevailed, 2-1, in the quarterfinals. "


CNN/SI quotes Berti Vogts...
"There have been some very peculiar decisions against the German team. Maybe there were some secret instructions. Perhaps the German soccer was too successful and now had to be punished," Vogts said Sunday about the refereeing.

"I don't want to talk about the referee, especially not this one," he added.

Lothar Matthaeus, the 37-year-old veteran, said FIFA was sometimes assigning referees to World Cup matches who officiated only "second-rate" matches at home.

Another article...
"Until the sending off incident, there's no doubt about it, Germany were putting on their best performance so far in the World Cup," fumed Vogts.

"My team really played their hearts out, they tried everything they could. Unfortunately, it wasn't enough, but I have to say I'm satisfied with them."

But taking aim at Pedersen, he said: "Germany were playing better, we had the upper hand...and until this incident, which I think was provoked by the Croatian team, we did well.

"The sending off would only have been justified if Worns was the last defender and that wasn't the case," he said.

Defender Jurgen Kohler went even further, insisting: "It was not us who lost the game but it was the referee who cost us the match.

"The sending off decision was unjust. It was ridiculous. Why is it always the Germans who get cheated?"

Worns himself said; "The referee's decision was quite simply a joke."


GERMANY EVEN PROTESTED THE MAN'S INVOLVEMENT BEFORE THE MATCH!!!

(and if you'll notice... all of the German story links are still available except for their game result story about this game, because it conflicted with the stories which came out after)

after the match the French came out in the press how they "would rather have faced Germany"... YEAH RIGHT!!!


However, more of the conspiracy revolves around this episode...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/world/events/1998/worldcup/news/1998/07/15/ronaldo_hotel/

there was so much to point at it was obvious something was going on...


Ariel Ortega got red carded for blatantly headbutting Edwin Van der Saar in the face as he was about to be booked for diving. And the goal was not scored as a direct result from the subsequent free kick. As this match reports indicates, Ortega was shown red in the 87 minute and Bergkamp scored in the 89th: http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/w/pwc/mr_8784.html

So the Argentinians had 2 minutes to "argue the red card of their leader" (oh wait, it was Ortega, not Simeone..)

Anyway, feel free to go ahead and keep making stuff up.

as far as the ARG-NED game I saw it a few weeks ago on GolTV just before the world cup... but I was in and out of the room with my daughter being fussy... so I guess I got Ortega and Simeone mixed up... Simeone is the one that was fouled to get the Dutch player sent off... again... names... but in action... he got 2 yellows in a span of a minute... and Argentina was arguing when the ball was put into play it was not some 2 minutes as you suggest... it may have been like 20-30 seconds and the minutes changed...

all the post match discussions speak about how it was such a controversial win... which was reminiscent of the 1978 final...

but what's your point???

I've argued that there was a whole host of bad officiating during that world cup... and you're telling me I am wrong it was an oustandingly officiated cup???

then why would even Blatter have been outraged by it?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/world/events/1998/worldcup/news/1998/07/07/blatter_fifa/


it was such a bogus cup....

[MassachusettsRef]

but what's your point???Just to get facts straight.

Reasonable people can disagree about the Woerns send off, but I fully supported it at the time.

The NED:ARG game, however, is a different story. Ortega quite clearly, and violently, headbutted Van der Saar. And the restart was no immediate, as you suggest. If there was anything wrong about that game, it was Simeone's dive to get Numan a second yellow card.

To come full circle, I'm not suggesting past WCs were refereed flawlessly. In fact, I pointed out that past WCs have been worse than this. Still, though, it's only fair that we get facts right and you put out a LOT of information, much of which was inaccurate.

And I'm sorry, but Blanc did swing at Bilic. Until either of us finds Internet video, it's a pointless argument, but I know what I saw because I saw it for days on end at the time. It was just like Rivaldo in 2002. He grabbed his face even though he got hit elsewhere. Bilic grabbed his face when he got hit in the chest.

[DadOf6]

and the ref blew the whistle to stop play... as he was ordering the German players back 10 yards from the kick, and they were setting the wall... the Italian player took the free-kick (despite the whistle not being blown to whistle play resumed) and passed it square to a flank who was uncovered and then crossed it in while the Germans were scrambling to get back into the play and Paulo Rossi eventual golden boot winner headed the ball in... the play never should have occured...

A team is entitled to take a quick kick. The protocol is that the team taking the kick asks the referee to enforce the distance. At that point the ref points to his whistle, indicating that they musy wait for a whistle before taking the kick.

So the question is: was a cereminial restart requested/granted? If it was then they should have waited for a whistle or been forced to retake the kick. If not, they had no obligation to wait.

[lotharis1]

A team is entitled to take a quick kick. The protocol is that the team taking the kick asks the referee to enforce the distance. At that point the ref points to his whistle, indicating that they musy wait for a whistle before taking the kick.

So the question is: was a cereminial restart requested/granted? If it was then they should have waited for a whistle or been forced to retake the kick. If not, they had no obligation to wait.right... the team has the right to the quick restart... but if the ref blows the whistle to blow the play dead, they have to wait for it to be blown a 3rd time to restart...

the whistle was blown for the foul... then blown because the ref was setting up the free-kick... the restart was taken before it was blown again... the ref in my oppinion lost his head by letting play go and not ordering a re-kick... perhaps he thinks he didn't blow to stop play a 2nd time... but I heard it clearly each time I watched it...

you can too... go to fifaworldcup.com and check it out... it's listed as Rossi's goal against FRG...

[lotharis1]

Just to get facts straight.

Reasonable people can disagree about the Woerns send off, but I fully supported it at the time.

The NED:ARG game, however, is a different story. Ortega quite clearly, and violently, headbutted Van der Saar. And the restart was no immediate, as you suggest. If there was anything wrong about that game, it was Simeone's dive to get Numan a second yellow card.

To come full circle, I'm not suggesting past WCs were refereed flawlessly. In fact, I pointed out that past WCs have been worse than this. Still, though, it's only fair that we get facts right and you put out a LOT of information, much of which was inaccurate.

And I'm sorry, but Blanc did swing at Bilic. Until either of us finds Internet video, it's a pointless argument, but I know what I saw because I saw it for days on end at the time. It was just like Rivaldo in 2002. He grabbed his face even though he got hit elsewhere. Bilic grabbed his face when he got hit in the chest. Reasonable people can disagree about anything...

but you've clearly shown your bias to always side with the refs... as if they are the ones playing the game.... and defended the officials on end... like the blue shield in which policemen will always back another policemen...

I was wathing the play... and have seen it over and over again just as you have... and there was no way in the world it deserved a red card... especially in comparison with other yellow/red card experiences I have seen over the whole history of the game...

this one was way too harsh, and cost the Germans the game... 11 v 11 Germany were the better team... and even for most of the second half 10 v 11 the Germans were better... It wasn't until 2 defenders were subbed out did Croatia make a counter attack and press for a 2nd goal in the 80th minute... and 3rd in the 86th...

there were only 4 chances on goal prior to the red, and all of them were from Germany...

that was a game changing call... and there should never be such a call unless it clearly is a straight red for a viscious intent to injure tackle... this was more of the professional foul, by one of the consumate professional defenders in the world... who had already won a European Championship... and Champions League title leading up to that World Cup... to not give him the benefit of the doubt is rediculous...

again it comes down to whether you think the best players in the world should be on the worlds biggest stage... or whether you think the ref is there to decide who should be on or off the pitch... rather than reacting only if someone has gone overboard... and in the 40th minute... the #2 team in the world, and reigning European Champion, to have a man sent off for a professional foul... that's rediculous... give him a caution... if he does something similar in the second half... give him a second caution...

[whitehound]

Reasonable people can disagree about anything...

but you've clearly shown your bias to always side with the refs... as if they are the ones playing the game.... and defended the officials on end... like the blue shield in which policemen will always back another policemen...

I was wathing the play... and have seen it over and over again just as you have... and there was no way in the world it deserved a red card... especially in comparison with other yellow/red card experiences I have seen over the whole history of the game...

this one was way too harsh, and cost the Germans the game... 11 v 11 Germany were the better team... and even for most of the second half 10 v 11 the Germans were better... It wasn't until 2 defenders were subbed out did Croatia make a counter attack and press for a 2nd goal in the 80th minute... and 3rd in the 86th...

there were only 4 chances on goal prior to the red, and all of them were from Germany...

that was a game changing call... and there should never be such a call unless it clearly is a straight red for a viscious intent to injure tackle... this was more of the professional foul, by one of the consumate professional defenders in the world... who had already won a European Championship... and Champions League title leading up to that World Cup... to not give him the benefit of the doubt is rediculous...

again it comes down to whether you think the best players in the world should be on the worlds biggest stage... or whether you think the ref is there to decide who should be on or off the pitch... rather than reacting only if someone has gone overboard... and in the 40th minute... the #2 team in the world, and reigning European Champion, to have a man sent off for a professional foul... that's rediculous... give him a caution... if he does something similar in the second half... give him a second caution...
Nice to see somebody else saying this stuff.....I was about to back down! ;)

[DadOf6]

right... the team has the right to the quick restart... but if the ref blows the whistle to blow the play dead, they have to wait for it to be blown a 3rd time to restart...

the whistle was blown for the foul... then blown because the ref was setting up the free-kick... the restart was taken before it was blown again... the ref in my oppinion lost his head by letting play go and not ordering a re-kick... perhaps he thinks he didn't blow to stop play a 2nd time... but I heard it clearly each time I watched it...

you can too... go to fifaworldcup.com and check it out... it's listed as Rossi's goal against FRG...

OK, I saw it. It doesn't look like he was setting up a free kick. The signal for a ceremonial restart is to face the player(s) setting up to take the kick and point to the whistle--meaning "wait for the whistle." It's is awarded when the team taking the kick asks for it. That didn't happen. He wasn't pushing back a wall because at that point there was no wall, players were still on the ground.

It looks to me that the ref blew the whistle because the ball was quite far from the point of the foul and it looked like some players were still playing so he made sure that they knew to stop. After he signaled foul the second time the ball was returned to the spot of the foul and a quick kick was taken.

That is a better explanation for the second whistle than a (nonstandard) signal for a ceremonial restart.

[DadOf6]

that was a game changing call... and there should never be such a call unless it clearly is a straight red for a viscious intent to injure tackle

USSF and IFAB disagree.

This link is to "Ask a Soccer Referee." It is written by Jim Allen, a National Assessor and mamber of the National Instructor Staff. Dan Heldman of the National Instructor Staff assists. The answers in "Ask a Soccer Referee" are gospel in the US and it says so at the top of each page.

http://www.drix.net/jim/past053.html

Look for the eighth question (the third may be interesting).

[whitehound]

OK, I saw it. It doesn't look like he was setting up a free kick. The signal for a ceremonial restart is to face the player(s) setting up to take the kick and point to the whistle--meaning "wait for the whistle." It's is awarded when the team taking the kick asks for it. That didn't happen. He wasn't pushing back a wall because at that point there was no wall, players were still on the ground.

It looks to me that the ref blew the whistle because the ball was quite far from the point of the foul and it looked like some players were still playing so he made sure that they knew to stop. After he signaled foul the second time the ball was returned to the spot of the foul and a quick kick was taken.

That is a better explanation for the second whistle than a (nonstandard) signal for a ceremonial restart.
Actually if you read the ATR is says that referees should avoid pointing at the whistle which is funny since I have seen many reffs do it and also been instructed the same.