Netherlands Vs. Italy Part II

[Heist]

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

Nice find. Upon reading that I vaguely remember when it happened. Its similar enough that I have no reason to believe the call was wrong.

[Dead Badger]

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."Ah, miscommunication here - I'm referring to the definition of unsporting behaviour being harsh if there isn't even a loophole to be exploited. FIFA say it should be a yellow card for unsporting behaviour when someone deliberately steps out of play to put an attacker offside. This would be bizarre if, under normal circumstances, being out of play did not have the effect of making the attacker offside. Therefore, you might reasonably infer that all players inadvertently off the pitch do not count for offside purposes. Otherwise, a defender stepping off the pitch would gain no unfair advantage in the first place, and there would be no reason for carding him at all.

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...Year-in-reviewYeah, but that story quotes the same rule 11.11, which is as irrelevant to Bundesliga matches as it is to UEFA ones because it's just the USSF's advice to its own referees, not FIFA law. It's quite possible similar advice exists for European federations (it certainly does if you believe this Gerhard Kapl guy), but I can't find it for love nor money at the moment.

[Heist]

Ah, miscommunication here - I'm referring to the definition of unsporting behaviour being harsh if there isn't even a loophole to be exploited. FIFA say it should be a yellow card for unsporting behaviour when someone deliberately steps out of play to put an attacker offside. This would be bizarre if, under normal circumstances, being out of play did not have the effect of making the attacker offside. Therefore, you might reasonably infer that all players inadvertently off the pitch do not count for offside purposes. Otherwise, a defender stepping off the pitch would gain no unfair advantage in the first place, and there would be no reason for carding him at all.

You could reasonably infer that, but you can just as reasonably infer that the yellow card is for the unsporting trickery involved and it doesn't necessarily mean that doing this by accident (or in this case due to a collision) does not make the attacker offside. Its like the difference between an unintentional handball for just a free kick and an intentional handball for a free kick and a yellow or red.

[inswinger]

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

Thanks ironduke, that's an interesting precedent for this case. But someone said law 11.11 doesn't have jurisdiction over UEFA matches... I can't find a video of this play on-line anywhere, either.

Anyway, it's funny how FIFA tinkers with the offside rules to encourage more attacking play, but the refs always tend to revert back to hedging towards favoring defenders. Here's one case where a ref stuck to the rules. I'm fine with that as long as others do the same on a consistent basis.

Edit: 11.11 and the "intention"/deliberateness question doesn't figure into this.

[ironduke2010]

...

Yeah, but that story quotes the same rule 11.11, which is as irrelevant to Bundesliga matches as it is to UEFA ones because it's just the USSF's advice to its own referees, not FIFA law. It's quite possible similar advice exists for European federations (it certainly does if you believe this Gerhard Kapl guy), but I can't find it for love nor money at the moment.

yeah, it would be nice to put this to rest. i imagine if it was in black and white from fifa, those guys who post in the various "cap tied" threads who dig up all sorts of fifa docs should find it. at the same time, you'd think that ussf would not advise it's refs to rule outside the spirit of fifa rules. and considering that that bundesliga ruling was not contested, it would suggest the ussf 11.11 advice is on the money. still, would be nice to have something in black and white.

[inswinger]

You could reasonably infer that, but you can just as reasonably infer that the yellow card is for the unsporting trickery involved and it doesn't necessarily mean that doing this by accident (or in this case due to a collision) does not make the attacker offside. Its like the difference between an unintentional handball for just a free kick and an intentional handball for a free kick and a yellow or red.

Yeah, but DeadBadger seems to insist that 11.11 and the whole issue of player's intention does not apply to this case. Panucci was still "active" even if he was on his back with his arms over his face.

What's even more ambiguous is that the FIFA offside rule uses the language "nearer to the goal line" but that's assuming everyone's on the field of play. Was Panucci nearer to the goal line than RVN?

-----------------|------CP?
------------GB--|
RVN?------------|

----------------^ Goal-line (pretty sketchy, eh?)

[inswinger]

Debate continued over in the Referees' forum:
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=704289

[Borussia]

It's a stupid rule in my eyes ... but well, it has to be respected. Bad luck for Italy in this scene.

However, the lead was pretty deserved for Holland ... and they could have easily scored the 3:0 before the interval, too (what a save from Gigi)! The "Squadra Azzurra" disappointed in all parts (especially the defence was a real torso without Cannavaro) against a brillant Dutch side, at least they never gave up and created a few good scoring opportunities after Del Piero came in.

Poor defending and bad finishing is untypical for Italy, so a clear improvement is needed in order to avoid another groupstage EURO k.o. !

Congrats to Holland on a big surprise and fantastic result & performance! Sneijder & Van der Saar were terrific!

[oldsam]

Well the win after 30 years isn't that big of a deal. If you only count non-friendly games Holland has always been very competitive. They won at the WC in 1978 and in the EC in 2000 it was just incredible bad luck or incredible stupidity on Holland's part. How can you waste two penalties in normal time and then miss three penalties in the penalty shootup while playing in front of a home crowd? Holland tends to be a bit lackluster in friendly games and even qualification is usually a struggle.

[Andy Bennett]

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
It sounds completely and utterly different to what happened today... to such an extent I imagine you either didn't watch what happened today or you didn't watch the Bayern match. The report says...

Replays showed Lars Ricken ran off the field (over the endline) DURING THE RUN OF PLAY, important, and then hesitated before stepping back on right when Pizarro hit the winner, thus, keeping the Peruvian onside.

The important phrase there as far as I can see is the bit that says, 'and then hesitated'. It's perfectly obvious from that description that the fella was deliberately trying to use the rules to circumvent the intention of the law.

The piece goes on to say...

n this case, the second ruling (11:11) is the one we should examine closer because that is the one that applies. After watching the play again recently, it is very clear Ricken DID NOT intentionally step off the field of play to create an offside call and Pizarro is clearly past the last defender.

I tracked down referee Michael Weiner only for him to say he doesn't comment on matches. But he did say his first job was to determine if Ricken stayed off the field longer than he had to after his slide-tackle carried him off the field of play.

Over the air, I said had Ricken stayed off he would've kept Pizarro offside. However, since Ricken did not immediately return, as judged by the referee, the goal stood, as it should have. So just like so many offside calls, the interpretation is subject, to well, subjectivity, in determining whether or not a player is offside.

So, contrary to the hyperbole from some quarters, (although it only confirms what those of us who've been watching the game for the past several decades :rolleyes: already knew), the laws of the game are NOT a complete description of every possible permutation that might ever occur. They have to be interpreted.

As the referee in the instance YOU, YOURSELF, HAVE SELECTED, said, he ',did say his first job was to determine if Ricken stayed off the field longer than he had to after his slide-tackle carried him off the field of play'. So, apparently, it IS relevant whether the fella could get back onto the field under his own steam and the ref. (as I said), made a judgment as to the condition of the player involved.

My own interpretation of what happened is that the ref thought the defender was making a meal of the contact with his own keeper, (although who he collided with is utterly irrelevant for these purposes, it has to be said), and decided that he could have easily have got up again, as the other two players involved with the collision had done.

So, personally, I haven't really got a problem with the decision as I think the Italian was using gamesmanship, (or, cheating, as the rest of the world calls it), to gain an advantage. What I have got a problem with, though, is people pretending that it's a cut and dried case... IT'S NOT!!!

As I say, I'd be very, very surprised if anyone can truly find another instance that's quite like this one.

So, keep trying fellas :)

[oldsam]

It's a stupid rule in my eyes ... but well, it has to be respected. Bad luck for Italy in this scene.

However, the lead was pretty deserved for Holland ... and they could have easily scored the 3:0 before the interval, too (what a save from Gigi)! The "Squadra Azzurra" disappointed in all parts (especially the defence was a real torso without Cannavaro) against a brillant Dutch side, at least they never gave up and created a few good scoring opportunities after Del Piero came in.

Poor defending and bad finishing is untypical for Italy, so a clear improvement is needed in order to avoid another groupstage EURO k.o. !

Congrats to Holland on a big surprise and fantastic result & performance! Sneijder & Van der Saar were terrific!
Holland were lucky to score 3. They tend to have a lot of chances and score too little, now they scored on par.

The Italy vs France match will be something I guess. I know Italy won both games in the qualification but was it comfortably?

[rovaniemi]

Well... I am very happy and also surprised with this result.
I didn't think the Dutch would win this one... mainly because of their sluggish and inconsistent defense.

Still, I hear many people here saying Holland will be 1st in this group. I'm not so sure.... France may not be in their best form, they're still France, with many very talented and skillful players. I'm not convinced it'll be an "easy win" for the Dutch.
And Romania? Well let's not forget Holland did not score against them in two qualifying matches (0-0 and 0-1)

Worst case scenario for the Dutch could very well be a defeat against France AND Romania :eek:

This way they would end up 3rd or even 4th

Well... I hope they qualify though, their performance today was tremendous :)

[ToBeAGooner]

Holland were lucky to score 3. They tend to have a lot of chances and score too little, now they scored on par.

The Italy vs France match will be something I guess. I know Italy won both games in the qualification but was it comfortably?

Pretty sure France won one 3-1, and drew the other.

[Redondo85]

Some of the passing on display tonight was terrific, Van Der Vaart's pass to Van Nistelrooy was practically through the eye of a needle, and if it weren't for a brilliant save from Buffon it wouldn't been one of the goals of the tournament thus far.

Italy didn't play as bad as the scoreline would suggest, some cagey defending aside they were pretty unlucky, Gattuso and Zambrotta played well though.

[!Bob]

It sounds completely and utterly different to what happened today... to such an extent I imagine you either didn't watch what happened today or you didn't watch the Bayern match. The report says...

Replays showed Lars Ricken ran off the field (over the endline) DURING THE RUN OF PLAY, important, and then hesitated before stepping back on right when Pizarro hit the winner, thus, keeping the Peruvian onside.

The important phrase there as far as I can see is the bit that says, 'and then hesitated'. It's perfectly obvious from that description that the fella was deliberately trying to use the rules to circumvent the intention of the law.

The piece goes on to say...

n this case, the second ruling (11:11) is the one we should examine closer because that is the one that applies. After watching the play again recently, it is very clear Ricken DID NOT intentionally step off the field of play to create an offside call and Pizarro is clearly past the last defender.

I tracked down referee Michael Weiner only for him to say he doesn't comment on matches. But he did say his first job was to determine if Ricken stayed off the field longer than he had to after his slide-tackle carried him off the field of play.

Over the air, I said had Ricken stayed off he would've kept Pizarro offside. However, since Ricken did not immediately return, as judged by the referee, the goal stood, as it should have. So just like so many offside calls, the interpretation is subject, to well, subjectivity, in determining whether or not a player is offside.

So, contrary to the hyperbole from some quarters, (although it only confirms what those of us who've been watching the game for the past several decades :rolleyes: already knew), the laws of the game are NOT a complete description of every possible permutation that might ever occur. They have to be interpreted.

As the referee in the instance YOU, YOURSELF, HAVE SELECTED, said, he ',did say his first job was to determine if Ricken stayed off the field longer than he had to after his slide-tackle carried him off the field of play'. So, apparently, it IS relevant whether the fella could get back onto the field under his own steam and the ref. (as I said), made a judgment as to the condition of the player involved.

My own interpretation of what happened is that the ref thought the defender was making a meal of the contact with his own keeper, (although who he collided with is utterly irrelevant for these purposes, it has to be said), and decided that he could have easily have got up again, as the other two players involved with the collision had done.

So, personally, I haven't really got a problem with the decision as I think the Italian was using gamesmanship, (or, cheating, as the rest of the world calls it), to gain an advantage. What I have got a problem with, though, is people pretending that it's a cut and dried case... IT'S NOT!!!

As I say, I'd be very, very surprised if anyone can truly find another instance that's quite like this one.

So, keep trying fellas :)
Did you watch the BBC analysis of the game later in the evening? It has been discussed in this thread already. A different rule applies, and while it is meant to be for those trying to get an offside by stepping over the line, an "inadvertent" going over the line counts as well.

[el_urchinio]

Maybe the reason why there hasn't been a precedent for a call like this is that the vast majority of players are more clever than to feign injury by the touchline during a scramble in their own goalmouth. Just a thought.

[RibbyBollywood]

That's ridiculous that some would argue it was offsides, wasn't the defender there in the first place to begin with! It almost makes me wonder if I was watching something different and as if the attacking players would know all this is going on!

Dutch Treat!

italy got stuffed, no elbows to the face as done to McBride, no tripping over Neil in the penalty area, no injuring Henry, no trash talking, shirt pulling... same old tricks didn't work, but one wonders if that play even had injury simulation only because the defender got right back up.

italy got stuffed!

[canzano55]

Flattering scoreline taking into account the whole 90 minutes but it was the Dutch who finished their chances. Congratulations Holland.


There are two possible outcomes from this opening day fiasco: either Italy is incapable of coping with the pressure and subsequently crashes and burns, or they survive this group and play the final.

[morry]

I JUST WANT TO SEE A REPLAY

all of the replays I saw during the match, well i was looking at the defenders on the field.

[RibbyBollywood]

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

Does anyone know if there is a good sportsmanship award given in the World Cup?

If so, one might check who won it in 2006: once I heard that one team was given a goodsportsmanship award but I have Never found confirmation for it.

But if there is, check out who won it!