Im really interested in the inconsistency of these calls. Heres Swedens Equaliser on Italy. Which was not even challenged. Here’s the goal that should have put England up 2-1 in the 90th minute. Disallowed?? Where is the consistency??? AND.....Interestingly enough it was the same ref for both games..... Referee Urs Meier (SUI) Your thoughts?
you know, I feel really bad for the kid in the pic - he looks like he's really hurtin Terry's arm is wrapped about Ricardo
I think both players are clearly fouling the keepers. Practically using them as ladders. Yet one is allowed and the other is not, clearly obstruction in both instances.
Ricardo is clearly obstructed by Terry, and subsequently comes to ground. Wether or not it was intentional is irrelevant. Nothing fishy about the refs calls... wether or not its an inconsistency I dont know, but inconsitencies occur all the time in all sports...
WHAT?!!!!!!! Did you watch the Italy-Sweden game? I think its interesting how you base your opinions on two photographs where anything could have occured to lead to that situation. In the case of Zlatan, he jumped up while running away from the goal, and Buffon ran into HIM, trying to keep him from settling the ball. There was no possibility of a foul on Zlatan. This doesn't mean that you don't have a case with Campbell's goal (although I think that Terry probably was pushing...sorry). It reminds me of Landon Donovan's goal against Poland in the World Cup, which was ruled out for pushing as well. It was a completely bogus call and almost knocked the US out of the tournament. I think you should almost feel more gutted about losing Rooney, as I think he would have made a significatn difference, and England wouldn't have been in that situation to begin with (pure speculation, obviously). Despite the earlier rant, sorry you guys lost.
what you don't see on the pic, but you do on the video is that Terry, and Campbell were planted in that spot and jumped up. Ricardo came in, and jumped up UNDERNEATH Terry. He jumped into his arm. Terry was there first, kept his eyes on the ball the whole time, and never made a motion to Ricardo. No obstruction = no penalty.
Reverse the color of the shirts and there would be no debate. It is so much easier to blame the ref than the players that allowed Portugal so shoot 35 times against only 16. Truth is, if England had won, it would be unffair, by objective standards.
Exactly! I replayed it several times. Ricardo only made a half-hearted attempt to jump anyway. The ref f'd this one, big time. It reminds me of US/Germany '02.
His "half-hearted attempt" was mainly due to the presence of a large man named Terry jumping on him and pressing down across his arm and shoulder...which the video shows pretty clearly. I know there is one shot which is ambiguous (the one the BBC decided to focus on...) but the other angles make it very clear that Terry impeded Ricardo. The England fans would have been going nuts if someone had done that to James to score a late winner. Please don't whine like the Italians... The England squad looked horrible as soon as their wunderkid was hurt and were lucky to be in the match at all. I thought the ref was actually fairly kind to England. I love A.Cole but a few of his tackles should have earned cards and he wasn't the only player that seemed to do little but foul for the final 70 minutes of regular time. Many other refs would have started handing out cards for repeated fouls but this one just kept giving free kicks.
I disagree. Have you ever tried to jump when someone's got their arm on your shoulder? It definitely obstructs your ability to jump up. I think that's the key here. Terry is just standing there and so Ricardo cannot go through him to get to the ball. Most people seem to think that Terry being there first means that this is not a foul. However, goalkeepers are allowed to use their hands, and so there is another way for a keeper to get to the ball, and that is to jump up and use the length of his arm to reach over the defender. Now, I don't think Ricardo would have made the save jumping up and reaching over. But theoretically, he could have (it's like a lot of those obstruction calls you see where a player puts it way too far in front of him and there's very little chance for him to get to it but there's contact and a foul is called). He's late but he's close enough that it's plausible. And because it's theoretically possible for him to jump up and make a play on that ball, any attempt to impede him from moving upwards has to be an obstruction foul. It seems that it wasn't a foul when Terry's just standing there, but as soon as his arm goes out, he obstructs Ricardo's ability to jump up and make a play. And even if Terry's arm was there first it's still obstruction (think about it - if a cross is played into the box, you cant put your arm milimeters away from the keepers shoulder and then when he jumps up into it claim your arm was there first). Terry has the right to his space, but not the space above Ricardo in any way. And that's why it was a foul.
Yeah c'mon fellas use your brain watch the replay, both players (Campbell and Terry) had jumped before Ricardo and Ricardo jumped into Terry and fell over KNOWING the ref would give a foul on the keeper, CHEATING CVNT! If you want the game so bad that you have to cheat just take it and not bother playing the game! And they wonder why English fans cause trouble....
Keep in mind that in the Sweden - Italy match, Ljungberg had just been throttled by an Italian defender before Ibrahimovich scored. There's no way that the ref could call a foul there since he let the contact on Ljungberg go. As far as the Terry foul: it could have gone either way, in my opinion. I would think that in the dying seconds an official would be more inclined to "let them play" rather than call that foul. Granted, it was a split second decision, and I'm sure 50% of officials would have probably let it go. Tough break for England.
I think that, as so many of you have pointed out, the original poster is missing the point. I think he thinks the referee called the foul on Sol Campbell. Which is the only way I could imagine him using the picture of Ibrohimavic's goal as some kind of evidence. I didn't even see the match but to me it looks clear that Campbell isn't in much contact with the Goal keeper at all. John Terry looks to have fallen on him.
I don't see why there's a discussion either, Terry is keeping the goalie from jumping up = foul. Wether he would have saved it or not if Terry wasn't there doesn't matter.
First, I'll agree to disagree with you. Terry was there first, and did not play Ricardo, Ricardo played him. Second, the referee said he made the call because Ricardo was pushed. As you've just illustrated, as have many others, he was not pushed. ?
I guess the same way that the Netherlands SOUNDS like a good team on paper. Sorry bluedaddy, I had to take the opportunity. Commence the Ireland jokes now. =)
I didn't see the game, but wasn't it the Linesman that called the foul and not Urs? Or did I get the wrong info. Looking at the pics it looks like Terry fouls Sol Cambpell... So of course that should be penalized Anyway, sorry to see England out, I was hoping for a England - Sweden semi.
I guess it can be a mistake. You could easily mistake the word FISHY for PICS. Hence they sound the same. I mean last year my mate picked up his holiday photo's from the chemist and I said " let shave a look at your holiday fishy ". See it's easily done. Or the other Conspiracy thoery is this: Fishy is short for Fishing. And when your Fishing then your looking to find something a catch something. Pic is short for Picking. And when your Picking like your nose then you could be picking for bogeys up your nose. In both cases your looking to find or catch something, whether is picking or fishing for bogeys or fish. Or on the other hand it could be that the person who created this thread was pissed !