Why not? If it's "not very uncommon" as you claim then there should be plenty of examples around for you to recite. The two examples you provided were incidents that happened after the matches had ended, as opposed to Tassotti (and Villa) which took place during the game.
Because you phrased the question in a way that I'm only allowed to recall Wolrd Cup related incidents. Of course, incidents related to the Champions League and other yearly held competitions are plentiful. The same code of conduct, which gives the governing body the authority to suspend players, applies to these competitions as well. In the case of Chilavert the game was only technically ended. A referee has til 30 minutes after the match the authority to warn and expulse players.
Well to match frances record Spain would have to crash out in the group stage in 2014, and make the final in 2018 lol......winning a euro or a 2nd WC would trump france period, as at the current moment they have the same trophy count as far as WC's and euros
But surely there were circumstances where FIFA could've reacted: Valderrama on Sforza in 1994, Rivaldo playacting against Turkey in 2002, De Jong in the 2010 final... We're limiting the incidents to World Cup since the tournament is played in a small window of time. Champions League and 'other yearly competitions' last months thus post-match punishment is more easier to deal with. But we can extend the window to other FIFA tournaments that last a month like the Olympics, U-20, U-17. etc. Hell, I'll even give you the continental national team tournaments (EURO, Copa America, AFC, CAF, etc...) to work with as well. "Technically" or not, the officials didn't see the incident thus no punishment was handed out on the night. Likewise, no officials saw Izaguirre step on Villa's foot nor Villa's knee-jerk reaction.
Bottom line is that you're quick to list things that either aren't true (Torres 'dive') or are not easily confirmed (Capdevila 'playacting', Paraguay offside goal) and claim them as favoritism for Spain. You even go on and suggest that the "universally praised" Xavi and Iniesta helped out matters since "public opinion stuck to their side and every sign of luck or unsporting behavior was negated for the sake of being the good guys." You may not play the blame game, but you sure try your best to discredit Spain's World Cup victory for reasons known only to yourself. I suppose Holland being defeated in the final has something to do with it. Robben's failure to finish off one-on-one chances on July 11, 2010 can be blamed for that.
It doesn't matter. The referee thas until 30 minutes after the last whistle the complete authority over the stadium. Only after those 30 minutes the authority ends (just as the authority of a governing body to suspend players afterwards).
Fine then. Tassotti and Chilavert (even though Chila happened during the qualifying stage). That's two. Eight more to go.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icJTYQqdlzY"]Fernando Torres Dives Against Chile Piscinazo de Fernando torres contra Chile - YouTube[/ame] An unbiased neutral (which you clearly aren't, given the heavily biased nature of your argument despite the existence of contrary video evidence against it - i.e Capdevilla's performance) would see that the minimal, accidental contact would not be enough to send off a player with a yellow card. It wasn't a foul nor a yellow, let alone a second yellow. Can you point to another sending off for a similar situation, ever? I'm guessing his point about the referee's nationality is that a referee who can speak the same language would be more prone to the concerted pressuring the Spaniards place on every referee, over any decision, in an attempt to win an advantage. Much like the Italians, Portuguese, Brazilians, Argentinians, and other "Latin" countries (not the only ones to do it, but the most infamous for it). How about this one? [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAA2VL_MuhM&feature=related"]Magic head injury - YouTube[/ame] Only to those who support the Spanish NT. Any neutral can see that the goal was valid. Either way, in case of doubt (Cardozo clearly does not touch the ball) the linesman is supposed to rule in favor of the attacking side. What is your argument for the offside goal against Portugal, the sending off of the Portuguese player, or the total sum of all the favorable decisions which allowed Spain to advance to the final? You don't think they received any "favorable" decisions at all?
Yeah, it's always an advantage anyway. The Spaniards have still very good relations with Mexico by the way (in contrast with some other former colonies), both economically and culturally. Another interesting thing to note is that the head of the Referee Committee was a Spaniard, the famous mr. Villar (of course, there were a couple of other nations who sat on that committee too).
LOL maybe so ... In anyhow, Spain is on good track and form coming to this Euro12 - just like France coming to Euro04 ... we'll see. The big bet would go between Spain, Germany, Holland and Italy
lol Even when I admit the offside goal? I even corrected the situation by pointing out it was Xavi who was offside (it was suggested that Villa was offside). But anyway, based on this video it does look like Capdevila playacted. Shameful on his part. Hypothetical situation: If Torres had the ball running at goal with only the goalkeeper in front, and Estrada made that same minimal, accidental contact from behind, you would not call a foul? On this occassion it's the same situation except Torres doesn't have the ball. Torres was ahead of Estrada and looking to get in a good scoring position. As lightly Estrada clipped him, I would think any referee would've called a foul on that play and probably booked Estrada. That Estrada was already on a yellow should be totally irrelevant: A bookable foul is a bookable foul. The only instance I would withhold the yellow is if a goal was scored, which happened on this particular play. The conceded goal was punishment enough, in my eyes. The referee felt otherwise, and without the pressure of Spanish players surrounding him as he clearly was ready to take action on Estrada before the goal had been scored (2:33 of video, note the ref put whistle to lips and looking towards Estrada to make sure he has the correct player): [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrDuMZQK0Qw&feature=player_detailpage#t=153s"]WC 2010 Spain vs Chile Second Goal and Snippets - YouTube[/ame] Perhaps the ref had Estrada on a short leash given the nature of his first booking. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9j4ntqTSCE"]Estrada Yellow Card Chile Spain 2010 - YouTube[/ame] I can only assume that the linesman saw the ball change trajectory as Cardozo made the attempted header and thus was in no doubt. I've only been able to view replays from high up which is why I say the play is debatable (I've never said Cardozo didn't touch the ball, I have doubts based on the views I've seen). Is there a ground level view of Cardozo attempting the header that has you convinced he didn't touch it? Re the offside goal, you just spoke about favoring the attacking side in case of doubt. It's only on slow-motion replay that we notice Xavi being slightly offside. In normal speed would you have been able to make such a confident call that he was offside? I've already addressed the Capdevila incident. No need for that nonsense, even if your team is leading in the 90th minute. I granted the Xavi offside previously and the Capdevila dive. Torres did not dive but I admitted that I would have withheld the yellow since a goal was scored. Keep in mind that Spain were leading Chile 2-0 at that point, so how much the sending off helped Spain advance is very debatable. Yes, Chile would score in the second half with ten men, but we can't assume that Chile would've completed the comeback if they were at full strength based on that. Did Spain take a foot off the pedal knowing that Chile were down a man? After all, it was 2-0 11v11. I've addressed everything you've brought up. What other "total sum of all the favorable decisions" are you referring too? Although I have a vested interest in Spain I have no problem debating their victory in South Africa.
Same game: Waldo Ponce got away with a yellow card for this: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MomBrO9WSTw"]Ponce Yellow Card Chile Spain 2010 - YouTube[/ame] The match thread in the referee's forum was beyond belief that a red wasn't shown. Ref clearly saw the play, hence the booking. Actually, reading that match thread in whole the folks in the ref's forum felt Chile got away with a lot in that game. So now what?
Spain World Cup / Euro rank among the most decisive in recent history (only Brazil in 2002 being more impressive, I can't remember them ever being in serious danger to leave the pitch as a loser) ET and PK each once. France for comparison had to go to a PK once and ET (2nd half twice) three times.
That doesn't say a lot to me. I know Spain is one of the most popular countries in the world (although that is changing since a year or so). I don't complain about that (I do complain about the influence of the press on mr. Webb) but it is not very far fetched to assume that someone's perception is influenced by that.
That's true they played very well (possession) and solid (at the back - again thanks to their possession of balls) - So hardly to see them possibly lose a game. HOWEVER, I did not see they could win game (decisively) ... until they scored the (sole) winner goal .. oufff ... bingo ... "decisive"? not really as ... not losing is very different from "decisive" wining. BTW .. who RANKS them?
If Webb was influenced by the press as you suggest, why then didn't he send off De Jong? Or do you believe that De Jong's kick on Xabi Alonso only deserved a booking? Or didn't deserve a booking at all? Nevertheless, you earlier stated this... By feeling that Villa should've been suspended, I'm assuming that you feel the referee should've sent off Villa if he had seen the retaliatory strike. By the same token, I'm guessing that you feel Ponce should've been sent off as well for his retaliatory kick on Torres, correct?
Revisiting this topic, here, once again, is the foul that saw Estrada receive his first booking in the 21st minute... [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9j4ntqTSCE"]Estrada Yellow Card Chile Spain 2010 - YouTube[/ame] In the 27th minute Estrada committed a similar foul on Iniesta as the Spaniard began heading towards goal. Estrada's attempted tackle completely missed the ball but caught Iniesta's left foot. This video only shows the play at normal speed (0:45 of video). Funnily enough this is the only youtube video I can find of the incident. Plenty of "Torres dive" videos, yet nothing on Estrada's foul on Iniesta. How convenient. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grp8-v7u5vs"]El Genial Andres Iniesta - YouTube[/ame] As an unbiased neutral (assuming you are one), would you agree that Estrada should've seen a second yellow at this point? If not, how many more fouls - minimal, accidental or otherwise - were you willing to allow Estrada to commit before deciding enough was enough?
I trust you two are still willing to discuss Estrada's sending off. Hell, I welcome ANYONE'S opinion on Estrada's expulsion. Here's a better video of Estrada's foul on Iniesta. It's at 2:42 of the video in this link: http://www.footytube.com/video/spain-v-chile-50827
You have no basis to assume that. It was pretty to anyone familiar with even the most basic physics or with playing the game that the ball doesn't change trajectory. It was clear even watching it from above. The videos you are arguing against have been around since, and were mostly available directly after the WC, but you seem to be happy to "not have seen it". [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y142WghmPIo"]3Dgraphic DISALLOWED goal Valdez Paraguay Vs Spain.flv - YouTube[/ame] You didn't grant the Capdevilla dive. I showed you a video that was available which clearly shows him pretending to have been hit in case Portugal got in an attacking position, or perhaps to get Salomao sent off for nothing. Before I posted the video you claimed the evidence wasn't available to be able to make a conclusive judgment, when you would have seen the opposite was true if you had been willing to look. For the offside goal against Portugual: Xavi was not the one offside, Villa was. It is possible that the linesman did not see it, and if that is the case he was poor. Those type of offside decisions are usually always called in the CL, and Villa gets many of them called in Spain. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0JN5YQbmkk&feature=related"]David villa offside vs Portugal , come on FIFA - YouTube[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzaSp_lNnYU&feature=related"]MUST SEE! David Villa offside goal vs Portugal - YouTube[/ame]
Estrada deserved a yellow in first tackle - However, with Torres diving to make Estrada sent off was so disgrace. In brief, Spain were so LUCKY to have won that game (66minutes with 1 man advantage) and the first goal was gifted by the naive Chilean GK.
I acknowledged the dive after viewing your video, adding that Capdevila was shameful for the simulation. What more do you want? Fair enough. My position hasn't changed: The goal was unjustly awarded. What more do you want from me, my friend? Any comment on Estrada's foul on Iniesta?
James, you've conveniently avoided commenting on Estrada's foul on Iniesta in the 27th minute, which took place after his first booking and ten minutes before what you still believe to be a Torres dive. Even Rivelino87 admitted that Torres went down due to contact (however minimal and incidental it may have been).. 2-0 during 11v11 And it should have been 76 minutes with a 1 man advantage. Estrada was on the pitch ten minutes longer than he should have been. Terrible mistake by the goalkeeper, no doubt. So what? Should we take away the win because of an opponent's mistake?
I want you to acknowledge and seek out the facts before making your arguments, rather than lazily ignoring them though they are out there. I want you to stop making up fantastical, biased "what if" scenarios to defend favorable decisions which helped Spain. Yes: Estrada got a yellow card for his foul on Iniesta.
No he didn't. He received a yellow 6 minutes earlier for his foul on Busquets. I even posted the video of the incident earlier... What were you saying about seeking out facts before making an argument?
PuckVanHeel said that Torres dived on the Estrada sending off. YOU said that contact had been made ("minimal, incidental"). Puck has still refused to acknowledge that Torres did not dive... I've acknowledged the Capdevila simluation... Yet you single me out for not "acknowledging and seeking out the facts before making your argument". Did you simply come here to harass Spanish fans?