∆ WC South Africa 2010 - Predictions ∆

[Alucard]

Same here.

I feel like head shooting the referee. Wtf was that red card?

 

[Caliburn]

I feel like head shooting the referee. Wtf was that red card?

For an elbow, which is in 95% red.

Either way does that really matter? That was in the 90th minute. Seriously for 3 minutes having 10 or 11 players doesn't make much difference.

 

[RasenLight]

The red card was stupid, but Spain still deserved to win.

That replacement (Hugo Almeida for Danny)... No comments :x
Still, despite Queiroz being an idiot, Spain still deserved to win.

When they return to Portugal, Eduardo and Coentr?o will be heroes, and Queiroz will receive... thrown eggs!

 

[~KRF~]

Well Eduardo really did superb job, but defenders...

 

[Alucard]

For an elbow, which is in 95% red.

Either way does that really matter? That was in the 90th minute. Seriously for 3 minutes having 10 or 11 players doesn't make much difference.

It still makes it. A football match is to be played till the very end. Not to quit on the last 5m since the game is about to end. Also, the elbow wasnt on purpose, and i heard it was aggression or something like that, which doesnt even make sense because it wasnt intentional.

And when Ronaldo was pushed, which would give us a penalty, the referee didnt do nothing too

 

[~KRF~]

And when Ronaldo was pushed, which would give us a penalty, the referee didnt do nothing too

Ronaldo was pushed like 4 times then they started counter-attacking and thus lessened chances of scoring a goal.. It was really unproffesional of refree to demostravily(spelling) turn his back on C..

 

[Caliburn]

It still makes it. A football match is to be played till the very end. Not to quit on the last 5m since the game is about to end. Also, the elbow wasnt on purpose, and i heard it was aggression or something like that, which doesnt even make sense because it wasnt intentional.

And when Ronaldo was pushed, which would give us a penalty, the referee didnt do nothing too

Elbow is elbow =/ it was not necessary of him to make such a wide movement and most of the faults committed in a match aren't on purpose.

Just for a little push no ref is going to give a penalty and the only thing Ronaldo did was kissing the field way to easily. It's hard to take him serious after a while.

 

[Alucard]

Elbow is elbow =/ it was not necessary of him to make such a wide movement and most of the faults committed in a match aren't on purpose.

Just for a little push no ref is going to give a penalty and the only thing Ronaldo did was kissing the field way to easily. It's hard to take him serious after a while.

Still, i think theres no need for a red card. And it doesnt need to take him serious. What makes a referee to say someone made a fault is the action a player did on another, not if a player is seriously injured or not, so that isnt a valid argument in my opinion.

Im not saying we loosed because of the referee. Just saying that if he had said it was fault, the course of the game would be completely different.

 

[Caliburn]

Still, i think theres no need for a red card. And it doesnt need to take him serious. What makes a referee to say someone made a fault is the action a player did on another, not if a player is seriously injured or not, so that isnt a valid argument in my opinion.

Im not saying we loosed because of the referee. Just saying that if he had said it was fault, the course of the game would be completely different.

It doesn't matter whether it is a valid argument or not, it matters what the FIFA says. If you look at most of the tackles/faults committed, you would see that in a lot of cases there's only minor contact or even none. Still the ref whistles as it's very dangerous and it must be showed that it's not allowed to do such things. Same goes with the elbow. It was not necessary to jump with such a wide movement, whether it's intentional or not he hit the other player right on the face.

And that way you can say a lot of things. What would have happened if Spain scored three times on those three shots in the first 10 minutes of the game? What would have happened if Villa shot a bit higher? That way you can start analyzing an entire match with "what if".

The only real "what if" moment was Lampards goal against Germany.

 

[Alucard]

It doesn't matter whether it is a valid argument or not, it matters what the FIFA says. If you look at most of the tackles/faults committed, you would see that in a lot of cases there's only minor contact or even none. Still the ref whistles as it's very dangerous and it must be showed that it's not allowed to do such things. Same goes with the elbow. It was not necessary to jump with such a wide movement, whether it's intentional or not he hit the other player right on the face.

And that way you can say a lot of things. What would have happened if Spain scored three times on those three shots in the first 10 minutes of the game? What would have happened if Villa shot a bit higher? That way you can start analyzing an entire match with "what if".

The only real "what if" moment was Lampards goal against Germany.

In fact, one thing doesnt have to do with another, because those are just random things that could have happened, however, what i was saying should have happened. It didnt, only because of the referee.

 

[RasenLight]

"You want justifications? Ask Carlos Queiroz!" - Cristiano Ronaldo
"Good environment? Between the PLAYERS, yes!" - Deco



I feel sorry for four or five players.

_____

Anyway, as a Portuguese, I'll repeat myself: Spain deserved to win! They were better, so they won fairly. If any team has a real reason to protest with the refs, it is the English team.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I think they could better use computers and camera images to see if the players really made an offense. Only then their judging will be 100% fair. I don't really understand why they don't do that. In sports as tennis they use it already. I think tat would be the best solution.

 

[~KRF~]

I think they could better use computers and camera images to see if the players really made an offense. Only then their judging will be 100% fair. I don't really understand why they don't do that. In sports as tennis they use it already. I think tat would be the best solution.

It's because refs value would go down..

 

[Konoha Rokudaime]

Even in cricket, they are using fourth official, but refs value didn't go down at all. Its not that the refs will always lean on the fourth official, but only when situation arise at which the 3 officials(refs and 2 linesmen) are not 100% sure in decision-making. Currently, what the refs could do(sure or not sure is "yes or no". No other choice.

 

[Pesh]

Even in cricket, they are using fourth official, but refs value didn't go down at all. Its not that the refs will always lean on the fourth official, but only when situation arise at which the 3 officials(refs and 2 linesmen) are not 100% sure in decision-making. Currently, what the refs could do(sure or not sure is "yes or no". No other choice.

There are four referees in the football too, every and each of the 3 *the linesmen and the fourth ref thats not on the field* might give signals to the ref *the one one the field* but he is the one who decides if thats right or not.
Also, FIFA has decided that there shouldnt be replies on the screen in the stadium because there usually are fights in some situation when the refs are wrong.

 

[Konoha Rokudaime]

There are four referees in the football too, every and each of the 3 *the linesmen and the fourth ref thats not on the field* might give signals to the ref *the one one the field* but he is the one who decides if thats right or not.
Also, FIFA has decided that there shouldnt be replies on the screen in the stadium because there usually are fights in some situation when the refs are wrong.

Alright, sorry for not explaining about fourth official. What i meant was the one who'll monitor the game from different pictures/video from different cameras by using computer or whatever so that he/she can make the right decision.

 

[Caliburn]

In fact, one thing doesnt have to do with another, because those are just random things that could have happened, however, what i was saying should have happened. It didnt, only because of the referee.

No, your situation is just the same. It's a situation that could have happened, but not one that should have happened. That's just your vision because you wanted Portugal to win.
Yes I supported Spain, though I'm not a Spaniard and in the end I just want the one who plays the best to win. I can't recall any situation that should have been a penalty for Portugal which wasn't given and I always remember such things, which indicates it was just a normal situation or a small fault which wasn't worth to give a penalty for. Unless it happened in the first five minutes of the second half, I was on the toilet then.

It's because refs value would go down..

It has nothing to do with that as you can never eliminate the ref from a game, no matter how the technology evolves, though by now they should have done something for cases like Lampard's goal.

That some things aren't repeated in a stadium is logical as it could undermine the authority of a ref during a match.

 

[Alucard]

No, your situation is just the same. It's a situation that could have happened, but not one that should have happened. That's just your vision because you wanted Portugal to win.
Yes I supported Spain, though I'm not a Spaniard and in the end I just want the one who plays the best to win. I can't recall any situation that should have been a penalty for Portugal which wasn't given and I always remember such things,

No, it should have happened. Dude, he was pushed right inside the penalty area when he was about to hit the ball with his head. He didnt hit it because he was pushed and fell to the ground. That's clearly a fault.

 

[Konoha Rokudaime]

Guys, i don't know whether you've gone through this. I post it, in case you like it

You must be registered for see links

 

[Caliburn]

No, it should have happened. Dude, he was pushed right inside the penalty area when he was about to hit the ball with his head. He didnt hit it because he was pushed and fell to the ground. That's clearly a fault.

That doesn't make it worthy enough to give a penalty for it :| pushing happens all the time in the box. If they would give penalties for every time someone pushes another player in the box, we would have 10 penalties per match.

In the box they always let minor faults go by as they're to small to give a penalty for it.