Congrats to England and Ukraine. I did not think either would make it to the Quarters quite frankly but they both got the job done. England can basically smell the Semis it is so close.
Is it just me or does Schevchenko look like he’s about to cry. Always looks like his eyes are watering. I do like that Ukraine moves to the QF’s while Russia continues to inspect the bottom of the toilet bowl (when they aren’t lifting their heads up to peruse the PED aisle) of soccer.
In some ways boring but in some ways exciting finishes. Maybe I am a different type of fan but watching a lot of goals sometimes makes me cringe because it usually means too many defensive lapses and indiscipline.
[A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.] Did he see the Ukraine player coming for the ball? YES Did he lunge to clear the ball in a reckless manner? YES Again, it matters not that he got the ball first. It only matters that he went to lunge in a reckless manner to clear the ball from danger knowing there was a player about to challenge for it. The IFAB verbiage is pretty clear cut in this case. Looks like a reckless lunge to clear the ball with an opponent bearing down.
I remember when Portugal tied Iceland and people were laughing in 2016. Ukraine were first above Portugal in qualifing ... напій для їх майбутнього падіння в Римі
And Ukraine was garbage in the group stage other than 5 mins against the netherlands, barely pipping Slovakia and Finland for the last knockout spot and then got rewarded w/the easiest group winner opponent who even after getting themselves red carded, still couldn’t get off a shot for a half hour after the card. If England didn’t have a coach allergic to attacking soccer and intelligent line ups, England would probably beat them 5-0 Saturday. It’s a bummer the way the bracket played out. I appreciate my Denmark getting a friendly draw quite selfishly, but there’s something crazy in a bracket that forces Belgium to have to beat the defending champ and then the best group stage team just to make the semis while other parts of the bracket are so absurd. I think this was probably almost entirely because France, Portugal and Germany, probably 3 of the top 6 sides, were all jammed into the same group, but man, I am getting tired of these distorted Knockouts. The Euros need to figure out how to rig it like the Gold Cup has the past few decades (literally like the past 10+ Gold cups have almost uniformally insured that Mexico and the US are kept on opposite sides lol. Not very subtle about it lol. Then again, it’s easier to rig a tournament when nearly all the teams typically suck).
As a true neutral I think it is fun to see what I have dubbed a "bracket of death" in each of the last couple Euros. At this stage there are no easy games no matter how you want to spin it. And I have no problem with a team like Belgium having to play Portugal and Italy to make it to the Semis. If they are the best team in Europe as they are hyped up to be then they should be up for the challenge.
Rice and Philips play very well together. Philips has Bielsa in his bones and finds space with his passing AND never turns the ball over in bad places while Rice protects his back 3 and slots into the fullback rolls for an extra defender.
I am kinda glad we get England. We have a chance against them. I was very worried that Germany would advance to the quarters. We know how to compete versus England.
Ukraine - England smells to me like the upset of this round. I felt the same about Netherlands - Czech Republic in the last round...
My only worry for Belgium is possible absences of especially De Bruyne and to a lesser extent Hazard. In full-strengh I would trust Belgium to beat them all this year. Reagrdless of the monstrous path they have.
Read the language again, because reckless lunge at the ball on its face doesn't fall within the language. What matters is that the player didn't kick or lunge *at the other player* in any way shape or form nor use any force against him. That is where the analysis here departs from reality. Let’s say he entirely missed the ball. He kicks *at the ball* with the opponent fairly far away and arriving late. His kick hs exactly no more force than is normally used to kick a ball. So, so not only is he not lunging *at a player* he is also not using excessive force to kick the ball. Neither prong of the quoted language applies. Edit: a key for me is that the Ukrainian player arrives very late long long after the ball is gone. I think that was also dispositive for the ref in real time. put it another way, if the Ukrainian player pulks out of his run and no contact is made, do you still red card the player? According to you, yes, that should be a redcard even without touching anyone. (Still reckless, still at the player, still with force, etc.). applying this standard, we ought to be seeing red cards for clearances that leave the feet, even if they make no contact with the other player at all. Cant wait to see that happen. Referee forum post hoc rationalizations not withstanding, there is no case to be made for excessive force at all. (Reckless? Apparently any clearance of the ball where the foot goes above ankle height is now reckless. But keep in mind “reckless” appears in the yellow card langauge or at least it did.) The reality is that there is no case he was lunging at the player since the player was far away when he kicks the ball. Lunging for the ball under no one’s control, sure, but not at the player. After that the rest of the language become moot. The closer reality is that the referess use the following “was there a bad injury or does it look bad? If yes, red card and we will fit it to the laws afterwards even if application of the law here is pretty specious. “quick, let’s edit the language to “if a player lunges at a ball that happens to injure an opponent, it is red”. Maybe that is what the law should be, but that is NOT what the law *is.* In any event, we all know that referees don't really follow the laws to the letter and make all kind of post hoc rationalizations.
This is an issue of how the seeding is done and how upsets change which side the teams end up on. If the top teams actually win, then it is pretty standard. Here, Germany actually didnt prove to be that strong having done poorly in the group stage and then lost 2-0 in R16. About what one would have expected from their seeding. The other QF seems weak because Netherlands choked, as did group winner Sweden (who would have been Spain had Spain not started poorly). so, the unlbalance brackets really resulted from subpar performance from Spain, Germany and Netherlands rather than any stacking of the deck. (Though Germany one could argue just isnt that good)
You don't see these types of lunges every game, for they are uncommon. If he was just merely clearing the ball, then why lunge at it with legs and studs showing? He did that because he saw a player coming to challenge for it, and wanted to get there first, and lunged at it to win the challenge. It was a foolish decision, and no matter the intent, it was an easy call. Orsato just had to glance at the screen for half a second, and made the call. You're in the minority on this one, and I doubt you will find any current IFAB licensed official who would not have brandished a similar colored card after watching the replay. It was the correct call, plain and simple.