(WC - FINAL!!!) Germany Vs Argentina July 13

Definitely not. He was going for the ball, Higuain didn't look and ran into him. BTW, there was a very similar situation on the other side, only much worse where Romero jumped with his leg pointing forward to the ball, the only difference being that Klose was careful enough to stop running and hence avoided having studs in his face.

Having said that, even if you disagree, at most you could go for dangerous play by Neuer which isn't punished by penalty, but by indirect free kick. But again, I don't even think it was that.

 

Im with Casey Keller on this one: it all depends on the timing: Neuer plays the ball(inside?) then collision with Higuain - no foul, Neuer comes out half a second later doesnt play the ball - foul. Now if Neuer had fouled Higuan Id say it was inside the box so penalty but no red cause it wasnt a clear goal scoring opportunity - so yellow to Neuer and penalty for ARG. But Neuer played the ball and Higuain should have stayed away but still it was no foul by Higuain to me, he did not run into Neuer but Neuer ran into him - so rather throw-in for ARG. In any case it was no foul by Higuain to me.

 

Nope. Had he tried to catch it there may be an arguement for a PK. Punching the ball was a good decision because it was considered as good as him having possession of the ball, so when Higuain collided with him that's why a foul was called on him because a parry is like possession. Many would miss that call.

That was in no way a red card under those circumstances.

 

This is no longer a condition for whether something was or wasn't a PK or red card. You can "go for" and get the ball and still get a red card or PK.

Yup...this could have gone red too.

There were two outcomes from this play:

1. Parry: He parrys the ball which is as good as possession. No foul from Neuer, foul from Higuain for running in to a keeper in possession as he made contact with the ball (possession) prior to contact with the opponent.
2. Catches or Misses: Foul from Neuer and could have been a red card for serious foul play (worst case) or charging an opponent (least case) and a direct free kick for the Argies.

 

Actually, the 3rd outcome would have been no foul on anyone, and throw-in for Argentina. Rizzoli admitted after watching a replay that is what the call should have been.

http://buenosairesherald.com/article/164627/rizzoli-‘it-was-not-a-penalty’

 

Based on the speed of the game, it was the correct decision from what he saw. Still think he got that right.

 

Wow, you're stubborn. Rizzoli himself admitted it was the wrong call. How could it possibly be the right call in any context, if it ultimately was the wrong call?

 

He said, if you read the article, that he changed his mind AFTER having seen the replays and other match images that he made the wrong call.

AT THE TIME HE MADE the call, it was the correct one.

Do you not understand that he orginally saw the game without the aid of replay and other angles, and therefore had to make the call based on what he saw? Then later he saw replays and other angles and second-guessed his original call.

Why is that so hard to understand? That's not me being stubborn. That is me agreeing he made the right call based on what he saw. Based on the angles I saw he got it right.

 

I don't know if we're just arguing semantics here, but no, at the time he made the call, it was the wrong call. It was the wrong call on Sunday, it was the wrong call on Monday after he watched the video, and it is still the wrong call today. You can attribute it to bad positioning on his part, unlucky positioning, whatever. It was the wrong call. Was it his honest opinion at the time? Of course, but that doesn't mean it was the right call.

To take your argument to its logical conclusion, there are no wrong calls, as long as the referee honestly calls it the way he sees it.

 

You're back! You owe Höwedes an apology

 

Uh? How?

 

Read please. I said the call he made on the field was the right call at the time he made it with the view he had.

Based on NEW information he said he made the wrong call.

A referee can only make a call based on what he sees.

 

Why? A week like last week without a @LoewenBoy failure is boring.

 

To take your argument to its logical conclusion, there are no wrong calls, as long as the referee honestly calls it the way he sees it.

"A referee can only make a call based on what he sees."

So in your opinion there are no wrong calls, as long as the referee honestly calls it the way he sees it?

Really?

 

It took just under ten days to go from sky high to sour. This is depressing people! Ignore the trolls this was a deserved win, no need to prove anything to anyone, these four years are ours and may extend to eight too.

 

Argentina got eliminated in the World Cup by us for the last 8 years

 

Yes. See if you read the LOTG you'd know that just about every rule starts out with the phrase, "If in the opinion of the referee..." So it's not just my opinion, FIFA's own rules state that as long as as the referees sees something and interprets it accordingly it's HIS opinion and interpretation that matters.

Read the LOTG. They tell you the answer to your own question.

 

There's no trolls here. Just a discussion of a few incidents during the game.

 

It was an easy win

 

I see. So according to you, in the 2010 match between England and Germany, when Frank Lampard kicked the ball that clearly went over the goal line for a goal, but the referee thought it didn't go over the line, that was the correct call because that is what the referee saw.

I dunno, I think you have a screw loose or something.

 

I'm starting to realize what an understatement that really is

 

You seem to really want to be right without reading what I am actually writing OR the rules that govern the game. I'm done.

 

Yes, probably for the best. I seriously doubt there is anyone reading this page who understands the argument you're making here.

Including you.