Netherlands Vs. Italy Part II

[Prawn Sandwich]

Maybe you should watch the game, Dutch dove about 15 times in this game. Just think it's funny how Italy always gets the bad rap for that kind of stuff but everyone just whistles the other way when it's any other team in Europe

Sorry but that's crap - so Portugal and Spain are known for their good sportsmanship? Portugal were universally condemned after the WC

[ToBeAGooner]

He collided into someone and the goal came a split second later, (wtf is he thinking not jumping up instantly?!?! :rolleyes: )man, it sure seems easy for the lazy asses to scream 'dive' and 'fake' from their couch, even more disgraceful than the actual activity imo




Yes, we should be ashamed for thinking Panucci was feigning injury. The poor guy was immediately substituted...whats that, he played ALL 90? Shame on me.

[Tetsuo]

Let's just wait, but remember that:
- If we talk about attack, italians are probably the best, even tough we don't have a player like Van Nistelrooy
-About the back, i think donadoni will work really hard and will resolve the problems that we had against the dutch... I hope that friday he will put Gamberini or someone else from the start and not Barzagli (:mad:)
- Today romania against France played a very great catenaccio, and it worked, but that doesn't mean a defensive game can always work... even because if you wanna (wanna... american slang lol) go to the quarter of finals you can't equalize all the game and do just 3 points, you need to win at least one game (or the one with us, or the one with holland), and to win a game you need to take some risk for the back.

1) italians have a good attack but i wouldn't call it the best
2) i don't believe a coach can make up a new defensive line in 4 days. the best thing Donadoni can do is to raise Italy's morale.
3) i think the romanian players were very nervous about the game agianst France and they were to afraid of it. because it was the first tournament in 8 years for Romania. but i hope the emotions and stress will disapear in friday's game. and when the romanians are confident they can also play very offensive (we scored many goals in the qualification).

[Tetsuo]

oh and btw Italy qualified with 3 points (3 draws) in 1982 and even went on and won the whole thing. it's very hard but it is possible to qualify with 3 points.

[SparkleZ]

Wtf is BBC doing?

Clearly offside? rofl
Nistelrooy man of the match? lol

No wonder they are not at the euro's

[arthur d]

Wtf is BBC doing?

Clearly offside? rofl
Nistelrooy man of the match? lol

No wonder they are not at the euro's

Well they asked Graham Poll and he said it was offside. I suspect he might have shown Ruud several yellow cards for it as well. :D

Sofar the BBC commentary has been pretty abysmal. I think it's mostly laziness on their part, they just don't bother doing any research (or looking up any rules etc.).

Congratulations to Holland, hope we meet you in the final!

[GrosMoulin]

I'm really impressed with Netherlands... What an amazing team, and they never stop attacking ! Nice to see that kind of football. Domenech should replay the video again and again.

[Tony Dellbird]

It's not all dire for Italy. You didn't look that bad, you had some bad luck, you had the ball inside the Dutch penalty area, a number of times forcing VDS to make some good saves not to mention the one Toni made with his ass. The luck wasn't with you today, not to take anything away from Holland, who were simply stunning. I just think Italy CAN take 6 points from the next two games, and look on the brightside, France are playing shit, think of what Domenech has been saying allllll summer!

[Tony Dellbird]

Wtf is BBC doing?

Clearly offside? rofl
Nistelrooy man of the match? lol

No wonder they are not at the euro's

MOTM was between Sneijder and Gio. Clearly.

I'd like to mention Engelaar too at this point, it's the first time i've seen him play and he is a beast!

[DaveyGorgeous]

It's not all dire for Italy. You didn't look that bad, you had some bad luck, you had the ball inside the Dutch penalty area, a number of times forcing VDS to make some good saves not to mention the one Toni made with his ass. The luck wasn't with you today, not to take anything away from Holland, who were simply stunning. I just think Italy CAN take 6 points from the next two games, and look on the brightside, France are playing shit, think of what Domenech has been saying allllll summer!

Thanks for the kind words friend but we def have our work cut out for us.

[Dead Badger]

Here's the rest of the rule that isn't about yellow cards.
11.11:Yeah, but that rule is from the USSF's advice to referees, which is not part of FIFA's laws of the game and thus irrelevant. I can't find any such law from any footballing body with jurisdiction over Euro 2008.

The chairman of Austria's refereeing association has come out backing the call, referring to a rule 11.4.1 of "the refereeing code", but I can't find any such code or rule online; the only links point to stories carrying the guy's quote. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, of course, but I certainly can't corroborate his claim.

As inswinger said, the official FIFA laws go out of their way to penalise someone who deliberately steps out of play to put an attacker offside. This rather implies that if someone is inadvertently off the pitch for whatever reason, they don't count for offside. Otherwise FIFA would be penalising players for trying to exploit a non-existent loophole, which seems rather harsh.

[inswinger]

Here's the rest of the rule that isn't about yellow cards.
11.11:...

Heist, good points throughout, but still:

The ref was never going to halt play in the middle of the action to see if Panucci was injured, especially because he was off the pitch. There's a all-too obvious contradiction in the rationale for this call:
The ref is essentially saying, on the one hand: "I didn't whistle for the injury because Panucci was off the field and not interfering in the action."
AND he is saying, on the other hand: "I didn't consider Panucci injured so he was active in the play."

So which one is it, ref?

All in all, it was a mighty harsh because at the moment of the shot-pass that RVN deflected in, all players, RVN included, were playing as if Panucci was not part of the play. You can see RVN move back a few steps with the line of defenders. If he stood his ground 2 yards out of goal and then knocked in the goal, he'd actually have a stronger case for Panucci playing him onside. But he was playing with the ones standing on the pitch, and he was in an offside position in relation to them.

Oh well. The rules aren't written for such a bizarre case. Italy probably deserved to lose today, but it's impossible to determine without considering this one incident.

[Kufibear]

DID YOU PEOPLE SEE THIS?!?!
best monday night of my life so far
and the goal was 100% legit,no way to argue against it

[inswinger]

...rather harsh.

Exactly what it comes down to. Any team would be aggrieved by that call if it happened to them, which is for all practical terms the definition of "unfair."

[ECMoney]

Let's say Romania draws all its games and gets 3 points. Let's further assume Holland wins the remaining game against France and Italy and France draw their game:
Holland 7 Points
Romania 3 Points
France 2 Points
Italy 2 Points

It's not even that unlikely after today.

More realistic scenerio is that Italy will bounce back with a team performance againts Romania and get the all important 3 points. Key game is the France/Holland game. Italy need Holland to either win or draw with France. In a perfect world, standings after Friday's games will be

Holland 6
Italy 3
France 1
Romania 1

OR

Holland 4
Italy 3
France 2
Romania 1

Then Italy would be back in the drivers seat and just have to avoid defeat in the final game vs France and they are through regardless of the Holland/Romania outcome.

[inswinger]

and the goal was 100% legit,no way to argue against it

So in the next match, if France scores one vs. Holland in precisely the same way, you won't "argue against it" one bit? I doubt it.

[Heist]

Heist, good points throughout, but still:

The ref was never going to halt play in the middle of the action to see if Panucci was injured, especially because he was off the pitch. There's a all-too obvious contradiction in the rationale for this call:
The ref is essentially saying, on the one hand: "I didn't whistle for the injury because Panucci was off the field and not interfering in the action."
AND he is saying, on the other hand: "I didn't consider Panucci injured so he was active in the play."

So which one is it, ref?

All in all, it was a mighty harsh because at the moment of the shot-pass that RVN deflected in, all players, RVN included, were playing as if Panucci was not part of the play. You can see RVN move back a few steps with the line of defenders. If he stood his ground 2 yards out of goal and then knocked in the goal, he'd actually have a stronger case for Panucci playing him onside. But he was playing with the ones standing on the pitch, and he was in an offside position in relation to them.

Oh well. The rules aren't written for such a bizarre case. Italy probably deserved to lose today, but it's impossible to determine without considering this one incident.

Halting play has nothing to do with it. If a guy falls down in the corner (but on the field) the ref has no obligation to stop play. Why is this situation any different. The ref doesn't have to whistle at any injury. Its impossible to get inside Ruud's head, but its not fair for the Italian team to have it both ways. Their guy got knocked down by their own goalie and wasn't able to get up in time to help on the play. If Ruud HAD been deemed offside you could certainly argue that Panucci got an advantage by staying off the pitch and not playing Ruud onside.

[ironduke2010]

Continuing on... :)

As I said before, if someone can provide an example of another goal in world football where a defender, lying motionless on the ground 2.5 metres over the dead ball line, is deemed to be playing someone onside I'd like to see it.

Genuine request because I've been playing and watching the game for over 40 years and I've never seen that.

Bayern Munich-Dortmund match on November 9th 2002. this (bottom of the page) sounds a lot like what happened today:

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/836432/DEUTSCH:-The-2002-Year-in-review

[Kufibear]

So in the next match, if France scores one vs. Holland in precisely the same way, you won't "argue against it" one bit? I doubt it.

it was by the rules,thats a fact
a defender cant put himself out of play like that,without referee interference
so he was still a part of the game,and RvN was onside

[NGV]

Exactly what it comes down to. Any team would be aggrieved by that call if it happened to them, which is for all practical terms the definition of "unfair."
It was definitely unlucky - the Italian defenders did what should have been the right thing, and as a result ended up gifting Van Nistelrooy a chance that he finishes 99 out of 100 times (even RVN expected the goal to be disallowed, judging by his initial reaction).

But I wouldn't call it "unfair" unless there's evidence that the rules were incorrectly interpreted, and I haven't seen any. Suppose that Panucci had been hit and gone down right ON the goal line, rather than behind it - the play would have probably happened exactly the same way, and the result would have been unlucky, but not unfair.