Dutch Favors?

[VCFan]

http://www.goal.com/en/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=737460

:eek: :eek: Wow! Lookie here! I can't believe this guy have the nerve to "threaten" MVB. Now I REALLY REALLY hope that Holland lose to Romania by at least 3-4 goals. The Italians are just ridiculous. Donadoni has just came out and "suck up" to Holland, and now this man came out to "threaten" them. At least France had the dignity not to do this kind of crap. I also hope that France kills Italy, since all Italians seem so confident that they will win (as they did against Holland AND Romania. but we all know what the result was.)

I love it when people form conclusions from the titles of Goal.com articles :rolleyes:

You know they are sensationalized to rile people up, right? Cesare Maldini never actually said that MVB can forget about coaching at Milan, he just said that if Italians perceived that MVB lost the game against Romania on purpose (i.e. not in the spirit of fair play), then that would be a bad start to a coaching career in Italy. Nowhere in his comments does he threaten Van Basten.

[Amsteldam]

^^^^^^^ Exactly, newspapers very rarely get sued nowadays, so they feel they can write anything they want. Doesnt matter if its true, if it sells papers then print it

[Fan123]

I don't see anything that Maldini said as threatening or wrong. Who the hell would hire a coach that loses on purpose? Don't be such a muppet.

How would he knows that Van Basten lost "on purpose?" How the heck do you determine that?

Is Romania that pathetic that they can't possibly even be considered to win against a B team with nothing to play for? Has anyone think that Romania COULD win even if Holland B team TRIES?

For example, if the Dutch goalie makes a huge mistake like Cech did today to gift Turkey a goal or Nikopolidis to gift Russia/Sweden a goal, and Romania wins 1-0. What is that considered? What about if some Dutch defender suddenly act like "Zambrotta" and assist Mutu in scoring a goal? Or if it is an own goal (like Zaccardo in WC) by a Dutch defender? What if that happens?

Does that mean that Holland threw the game away by "pretending" to make a mistake? How do you determine what mistakes are "real" and what is "fake?"

[FNU]

How would he knows that Van Basten lost "on purpose?" How the heck do you determine that?

Is Romania that pathetic that they can't possibly even be considered to win against a B team with nothing to play for? Has anyone think that Romania COULD win even if Holland B team TRIES?

For example, if the Dutch goalie makes a huge mistake like Cech did today to gift Turkey a goal or Nikopolidis to gift Russia/Sweden a goal, and Romania wins 1-0. What is that considered? What about if some Dutch defender suddenly act like "Zambrotta" and assist Mutu in scoring a goal? Or if it is an own goal (like Zaccardo in WC) by a Dutch defender? What if that happens?

Does that mean that Holland threw the game away by "pretending" to make a mistake? How do you determine what mistakes are "real" and what is "fake?"

The only way it can be determined is if one or more of his players come forward saying that was his strategy. Mistakes do happen, correct. The way the Dutch have been playing, mistakes are few if any. No one is denying Romania's ability, so stop being so sensitive about it. Romania is a good team defensively, so it should be fun watching them push forward more.

[1shot1kill]

Well apparently Robben wants to play, so he probably is, Ooijer and de Jong are most likely out due to their yellow cards. Marco van Basten has said all options are still open, players that need rest will get it if wanted, if they want to play they can play.

Nobody should think that Holland will lose on purpose, it's not like the people on the bench are of less quality of the ones that played so far and they want to win every game, because besides that a loss looks bad, a win also means the KNVB (dutch FA) get a 1 million Euro, a draw means 500k and a loss means they get nothing.

[romvert]

It is but it seems like a realistic approach seeing both games today. If either team wins, I see a 2-1 score line.
Like I said before, this will be an all out attack parade; none of these teams have anything to lose and both know they have to win to make it through.No draw here.IMO the italians will parlay their frustrations into a 3-1 win.

[ToonUSA]

Of course not, especially the last sequence of the game where the ball was given up to the Swedes how many times? I highly doubt you watched the game, you were wondering how the US would fair against some vacation resort in order to qualify for the World Cup. :rolleyes:

Italy-Bulgaria and Sweden-Denmark were played at the same time. Now are you going to claim you had 2 tvs side by side? Highly unlikely.

[Black Label]

After all this conspiracy talk, it would be great if Italy and France just managed to tie..

[frednmethod]

http://www.goal.com/en/articolo.aspx?contenutoid=738425

Domenech is a sore loser.

[tomwilhelm]

http://www.goal.com/en/articolo.aspx?contenutoid=738425

Domenech is a sore loser.

Can we stop posting links to goal.com articles? Their headline writers are bigger liars and trolls than you'll find even on Big Soccer...

"Holland Will Cheat Us Out, Rails Domenech"

Give me a break...

[footyfan1]

I didn't read most of the thread and don't know how I can vote.

Which one would you guys consider the closest to:

"Holland plays their subs and they do the best they can to win without getting anyone injured or booked, which will indirectly allow Romania to win the match."

I think this is what will happen.

[Amsteldam]

Can we stop posting links to goal.com articles? Their headline writers are bigger liars and trolls than you'll find even on Big Soccer...

"Holland Will Cheat Us Out, Rails Domenech"

Give me a break...
Goal.com is slowly becoming the National Enquirer of football news

[NickyViola]

And Domenech is becoming the Boy Raised By Wolves.

[Martininho]

I can't imagine a neutral not thinking Grosso was legitimately fouled in the area on one of the stupidest challenges ever seen in a World Cup. As someone who has played a lot of soccer I really cannot imagine ever doing what Neill did.

Not necessarily stupid, but desperate. Not surprising: late in match, high tension, fatigue, etc.

I eventually concluded that it was a legitimate foul, but it took several viewings from different angles. And, Grosso played the contact for all it was worth, making claims of a dive understandable. The referee made the correct call, but Grosso's emphasis could have actually backfired. It was a very, very close call, and the referee deserves credit for seeing through the theatrics to make the correct call.

And I badly wanted Australia to win, so posters can save themselves the trouble of any pro-Italy bias flames.

[Martininho]

I suspect, as other posters have, that van Basten will rest some starters to avoid cards/provide rest.

The second team players will do their best against a very solid Romanian team that's playing for survival. That certainly gives the motivational edge to Romania.

Further, there will almost certainly be some loss of continuity for the Netherlands. That's natural when you try to blend players into the team that haven't been playing together. This is one of the risks of playing "B" team players. Do you risk injury/cards/fatigue for later rounds by playing your starters, or do you risk a loss of momentum and form by interrupting the team's rythm? Those are the questions van Basten must be asking of himself and his squad, and the answers that MVB comes up with will determine what he does.

As to the players: if you are suddenly given a chance to start that may not have happened if the team needed a result, surely you would want to give a best possible performance? After all, this could be your breakout moment as a player, and that chance may not come again soon, if ever.

Finally, and as we saw with Portugal yesterday, you can put very good players onto the pitch, and they still may not gel together. A Romanian win against a Netherlands side that has nothing to play for except to maintain its health and avoid suspensions is far from fanciful. The conspiracy theorists have already made it known that they won't accept anything but a positive result for their side as acceptable, and the "fix" will have been preordained.

Pitiful. Perhaps their side should have performed better when they had the chance. rather than leaving it up to others for help.

[blueguitar322]

Not necessarily stupid, but desperate. Not surprising: late in match, high tension, fatigue, etc.

I eventually concluded that it was a legitimate foul, but it took several viewings from different angles. And, Grosso played the contact for all it was worth, making claims of a dive understandable. The referee made the correct call, but Grosso's emphasis could have actually backfired. It was a very, very close call, and the referee deserves credit for seeing through the theatrics to make the correct call.

And I badly wanted Australia to win, so posters can save themselves the trouble of any pro-Italy bias flames.I agree with this view. A very very close call, but my view is that it was both a foul and a dive. (Grosso was fouled, but not in a way that should cause a world-class athlete to lose his balance and fling himself to the ground.) Neill just can't make that type of reckless attempt at the ball in the box. If he'd made the same attempted tackle in midfield, I would wager that whistle would blow 9 times out of 10.

And I, also, was rooting for the underdog...

[FNU]

Italy-Bulgaria and Sweden-Denmark were played at the same time. Now are you going to claim you had 2 tvs side by side? Highly unlikely.
PIP :cool:

[FNU]

I agree with this view. A very very close call, but my view is that it was both a foul and a dive. (Grosso was fouled, but not in a way that should cause a world-class athlete to lose his balance and fling himself to the ground.) Neill just can't make that type of reckless attempt at the ball in the box. If he'd made the same attempted tackle in midfield, I would wager that whistle would blow 9 times out of 10.

And I, also, was rooting for the underdog...
How about the straight red card on Materazzi? Was that a fair call? Let's not forget Italy was playing with 10 men for a majority of the game.

[RibbyBollywood]

I agree with this view. A very very close call, but my view is that it was both a foul and a dive. (Grosso was fouled, but not in a way that should cause a world-class athlete to lose his balance and fling himself to the ground.) Neill just can't make that type of reckless attempt at the ball in the box. If he'd made the same attempted tackle in midfield, I would wager that whistle would blow 9 times out of 10.

And I, also, was rooting for the underdog...

One American Commentator I read said this was similar to the way in basketball, some of our top players can drive for the basket and draw fouls and that is a plus for the point of view for Italy.

I think, having watched this a number of times, but not recently, that what Neill was doing is similar when in the NHL, a player dives in this case to block a shot, I think, Neill thought Grosso was going to pass or shoot on goal and he fell to block it, that's why he is on the ground, not that he lost his balance.

But on the other hand, I think, Grosso did purposefully dive over Neill and in that, I question if this is good sportsmanship and what the rules say about that.

This matter has never been cleared up, perhaps one of those gray areas in the rules of soccer.

[VCFan]

I think the consensus is that the referee certainly had the right to call a penalty, but people disliked Grosso's embellishment of the foul and that the penalty kick came so late into injury time. However, anyone who says that Australia deserved to win that game is seeing the world through Aussie-colored glasses, so to speak.