it was said that was the reason why Argentine players ran up to the reff....they saw it too. And it means the whole stadium did...i bet fifa isnt too happy about that one
I might get another infraction but I don't think there was any need for Germany to play dirty vs Eng. I simply think Messi is not Maradona good to play football himself and is constantly stopped. Like I said Germany mid is very good, maybe the best on the cup so we will see how they handle the hand of the hand of god.
What's the rationale for not having 5 or 6 on-field refs? I don't think anyone wants video review for every little call. That would really kill the game. But having two line refs on each sideline, or even two field refs would double up on the eyes. Has FIFA given a rationale for keeping the number of refs to 3, besides tradition?
General discussions about how to solve this problem, even if this problem affected this game, are best suited for another thread or forum: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=262 I agree video would kill the game and have argued that video is not the solution - I invite everyone else to join the argument there. As for this particular game - the call seemed to kill Mexican spirits and maybe even contributed to Osorio's gaffe. But you have to get up and deal with it if you want a chance to win, not let it get to you. On the other hand perhaps there's a collective, larger-than-this-game sort of feeling that has even infected the players with all this talk. Hopefully it contributes to change in the long-term.
To correct the Ref.,linesmen mistakes could be easily solved. The Ref.'s all have headsets, now that could be on line to a 'Ref.' with game feed monitors, and in 5-10 seconds a corrected call could be made. Little, to no, game speed slow down. FIFA now has lighted games now, not just the sun. FIFA step-up make it right, it can be easy, and better.
A lost goal when you are behind and a received goal when you're tied seem to me to be comparable. If anything, how late in the game it happens would be a mitigating factor.
Kind of depends, really. In one case, you think, now we need to score or we're out. In the other case, you think, now we need to score again or we're out. Subtle, but important difference. Either way it's terrible, but having an illegal goal be allowed is probably a worse feeling than having a legal goal missed. Especially when it is replayed on the screens, and the call is so clearly wrong. If it really was replayed, which it sure seems like from the video of the players pointing up, then that decision by the stadium screen operators may have made Mexico's situation way worse. I think it's far better not to know either way, than to have the evidence before you and not be able to do anything about it.
The screwed up ref call for Argentina was a "go ahead goal", much like the Wembley 1966 goal was a "go ahead goal". Such goals dramatically change the gameplay of the team getting screwed over by them. In the Germany/England match, the call was not a "go ahead" score, and only marginally changed the complexion of the game. There is no way England would have played to a draw with Germany with their PK history, so they would have been trying to put another point up anyway. Both calls sucked, unfortunately. But I think the better teams won in both occassions. Mexico looked like the better team for maybe 10 minutes, England maybe 15.
Vamos Argentina!! Showed great stuff today! Golazo from Tevez. The only goal we gave up was once we started playing soft defense b/c we had a 3 goal advantage. A little worried about the game against Germany, it will be our first real test in this WC. They will be the first real big team that we will play, but we got Messi and co. Great job today; don't mind the sore losers.
Mexico controlled the middle and I really am puzzled what you are talking about. Since Mexico untill the goal (which happened in 26 minute) hit bar 2 times, were in general very solid attacking team and they picked up after ARG bunkered, which was another bad call by Maradona because ARG is simply not strong enough in defense to bunker.
In case you missed it in the PBP thread, Heize bitch slaps the camera guy [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl2mblQuNGs"]YouTube- Heinze bitch slaps the camera guy[/ame]
I would have too. The guy was way too close, since Heinze bashed into it just by turning out of the huddle.
The goal given to Argentina counted double against Mexico. first it is a goal that Argentina didn't deserve so they should not be 1-0 and Mexico should not be down by one goal... A good comeback goal by Mexico would not have placed Mexico on the lead either; as it would only just have tied the game. So Argentina after the wonderful gift by the referee was very comfortably winning by a 2-0 margin (if you know what i mean). that is a huge psychological advantage; and one from what even some of the best teams rarely ever recovers. as indicated by the statistic in this world cup where a team which was the first to score a goal, in 20 out of 25 games ended up winning the match and in only two ocasions they lost.
I watched the game in Canal 7 (Argentina local) while the whole dilemma was going on the commentators said, "If they take this goal away they would also have to give England its goal" the linesman never raised the flag in the first place, so... nothing could be done. Bad calls/controversial plays is what makes us different from American sports, instant replay? 20 minute long reviews? commercial break? what's next throwing a little yellow flags? Professional players know that when a call is made it stands! or at least they should. Imagine if instant replay was available... That would kill the essence of futbol. Don't act like bad calls are never made in futbol; Serie A, Premier, MLS, Liga, ect... I guess the only difference here is it's the World Cup. It is what it is, it's football/soccer/futbol. Mexicans will talk about this for days/weeks/months/years in some way that's the beauty of football. I watched the game in a bar in downtown Seattle, many left upset overheard quiet a few saying something along of the lines of "Argentina will get screwed when they play against Germany" or "I hope Germany kills Argentina" I'm sure that's not how everyone feels, i would prefer it if Argentina won the whole thing... and say "well least we lost to the champions" thats my two cents. btw, I think "historic controversial" plays only qualify with quarter final games and beyond. I think the only bad call was the no call offsides.
Well, it was as difficult as expected. I liked Tevez and Otamendi, also Heinze. Messi was active but not effective, not his best match so far but neither the worst, once again the rivals decided to focus their marking on Di Maria rather than on Messi or Tevez. I guess the third goal came a bit early, and so the guys relaxed and allowed Mexico to dominate, which did it well not letting the midfielders play, yes i think it was both things mixed not one or the other.
Sorry, I don't know what you mean. If you're saying after the first goal it was like Argentina was up 2-0, then you are saying that 2 Mexican goals would mean they were tied. But 2 Mexican goals would put them in the lead. ??? I agree that it was a gamechanger. Wish the game could have been settled by the teams more directly. Once stuff like that happens, the game is fouled. Still, a team needs to adjust to these things, regardless how bad as they are. Mexico couldn't come back from that.
And the phatom foul USA goal. Worst calls in the WC so far. Not seeing the goal in germany/England is explainable. The assistant ref just didnt have a good angle on it to say for sure it went in. There was really no excuse for the phantom foul and the offsides mex/arg goal, especially the offsides as the officials chatted it up for 3-4 minutes to finally arrive at a "ok, who cares, screw Mexico" decision.