• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Brazil 2014--The FIFA World Cup Thread

laughing dog said:
He clearly flopped over the foot.
Click to expand...
But the foot was there to flop over in the first place. This isn't as clear cut in the opening game when a Brazilian player just falls to ground despite no contact. A Mexican defender placed his foot directly in the path of Robben's foot to impede Robben, not play the ball. Robben very well could have embellished, but if he doesn't the foul isn't called and the Dutch lose their offensive opportunity. Also, his legs are heavy at this point, he is cutting to reverse direction, and he is trying to evade two defenders, so he isn't in proper balance to begin with.

I'd say the PK was certainly not a Suarez hand ball level foul, but there did seem to be a clear infraction.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
laughing dog said:
He clearly flopped over the foot.
Click to expand...
But the foot was there to flop over in the first place. This isn't as clear cut in the opening game when a Brazilian player just falls to ground despite no contact. A Mexican defender placed his foot directly in the path of Robben's foot to impede Robben, not play the ball. Robben very well could have embellished, but if he doesn't the foul isn't called and the Dutch lose their offensive opportunity. Also, his legs are heavy at this point, he is cutting to reverse direction, and he is trying to evade two defenders, so he isn't in proper balance to begin with.

I'd say the PK was certainly not a Suarez hand ball level foul, but there did seem to be a clear infraction.
Click to expand...
Is my memory deceiving me, or was it the case that not long before the penalty, Robben got into a similar situation and jumped over the lunge to continue his run in the box? This either suggests that he was still agile enough to evade the other tackle and so was deliberately trying to get a penalty; or that he was willing and capable of evading some bad tackles, so he probably couldn't have evaded the one which led to the penalty.
 
Wow--how many more of these down-to-the-last-minute-of-extra-time matches are we going to see.


Argentina pulls out a win after a very, very late goal when Messi sets up Di Maria. Even then they have a couple of nervous moments when the Swiss throw everyone forwards to try for an equalizer.

 
EricK said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
But the foot was there to flop over in the first place. This isn't as clear cut in the opening game when a Brazilian player just falls to ground despite no contact. A Mexican defender placed his foot directly in the path of Robben's foot to impede Robben, not play the ball. Robben very well could have embellished, but if he doesn't the foul isn't called and the Dutch lose their offensive opportunity. Also, his legs are heavy at this point, he is cutting to reverse direction, and he is trying to evade two defenders, so he isn't in proper balance to begin with.

I'd say the PK was certainly not a Suarez hand ball level foul, but there did seem to be a clear infraction.
Click to expand...
Is my memory deceiving me, or was it the case that not long before the penalty, Robben got into a similar situation and jumped over the lunge to continue his run in the box? This either suggests that he was still agile enough to evade the other tackle and so was deliberately trying to get a penalty; or that he was willing and capable of evading some bad tackles, so he probably couldn't have evaded the one which led to the penalty.
Click to expand...

Let's do a simple thought experiment first: You are in your car waiting at some traffic lights when somebody comes up from behind and hits you. Some questions?

1. Should the person coming from behind be let off because you could have avoided him by crossing the red light?
2. When afterwards you have a neck-ache do you have an obligation to man up and not complain about it so the poor ickle driver does not get in trouble with the law?
3. Do you have an obligation to quickly repair your car and cover up all damage to save the poor driver from having to pay for it?

Of effing course effing not. Is it really that difficult to see that the split second that Mexican put his foot where he did a foul was committed and nobody on the Dutch team had any other interest or need than to make him dearly pay for it?

Anybody with any experience in Football (soccer, whatever) tactics know that when a striker arrives with the ball that far out on the end line with three defenders on his heels he is either going to play the ball behind via an opponent or bait for a tackle. Both options is letting your opponent make a play that benefits you.

Robben used the rules and his opponents lack of self-control under pressure. He opened a trap and baited it, somebody fell in. That is not a dive/flop/schwalbe. The difference is that the foul is actually made first. All the attacking party does after the foul is to, well, lie back and think of England.
 
The US team was hanging in that game by the skin of their teeth for most of that game. The result was inevitable, I suppose.
 
Belgium had 38 shots. That about sums the game up. If US could have finished better they might have scored a couple, but then if Belgium could have finished better they might have scored 5-6. Tim Howard stopped it from getting embarrassing.
 
MarkW said:
Wow--how many more of these down-to-the-last-minute-of-extra-time matches are we going to see.


Argentina pulls out a win after a very, very late goal when Messi sets up Di Maria. Even then they have a couple of nervous moments when the Swiss throw everyone forwards to try for an equalizer.

Click to expand...

Can you say deja vu?


After a scoreless 90 minutes, Belgium and the US go to extra time. Belgium strikes quickly to take a lead, and extends it to 2-0 when the US presses forward, leaving space for a counterattack. They are helped immensely by the fact that the Romelu Lukaku who comes on as a substitute bears no resemblance to the Lukaku who was totally ineffective in group play--he sets up the first goal and scores the second. The US pulls one back when wunderkind Julian Green is subbed in for his first action of the Cup, and scores a very nice goal on his very first touch of the ball. This sets up a frantic final dozen minutes or so where the US frantically tries to score an equalizer, but can't get one in. Tim Howard made 15 saves for the US, which is apparently a World Cup record.

 
Belgium 2. America 1
Although it was 0-0 after 90 minutes it was probably the best 0-0 I have ever seen.
Belgium's quality showed in the end and they did deserve to win but where did America find the energy form in that last 15 minutes it was incredible, I really wanted them to equalise.
 
chrisengland said:
Belgium 2. America 1
Although it was 0-0 after 90 minutes it was probably the best 0-0 I have ever seen.
Belgium's quality showed in the end and they did deserve to win but where did America find the energy form in that last 15 minutes it was incredible, I really wanted them to equalise.
Click to expand...

Part of it, I'm sure, is that Green's goal gave the US team a bit adrenaline surge; the other part is simply that this is how the US tends to play--not always the most skilled, but very energetic and scrappy in pursuit of a goal when they really, really need one.
 
The US played great for 15 minutes. I'm just glad Wonodolski (SP!!!) missed the point blank shot as he was called offside despite being clearly onside by a couple yards. Belgium continues moving on without scoring dominance, yet are perfect in the win column. This game, it is insane that a player like Romelu Lukaku is available on the bench for Belgium. He is worth 4 or 5 of our Altidores.

This World Cup has been so awesome. Now we'll see if Costa Rica can really mess up the semifinals.
rousseau said:
Belgium had 38 shots. That about sums the game up. If US could have finished better they might have scored a couple, but then if Belgium could have finished better they might have scored 5-6. Tim Howard stopped it from getting embarrassing.
Click to expand...
Tim Howard was very impressive. Not only did he have the most saves, several of them great, but he did the color commentary on the broadcast as well.
 
rousseau said:
Belgium had 38 shots. That about sums the game up. If US could have finished better they might have scored a couple, but then if Belgium could have finished better they might have scored 5-6. Tim Howard stopped it from getting embarrassing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was like someone built a time machine and brought back the American team from 15-20 years ago. We sucked at possession/turnovers, sucked at the transition game, and only got as far as we did because of a truly heroic effort by the goalie.
 
Underseer said:
rousseau said:
Belgium had 38 shots. That about sums the game up. If US could have finished better they might have scored a couple, but then if Belgium could have finished better they might have scored 5-6. Tim Howard stopped it from getting embarrassing.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was like someone built a time machine and brought back the American team from 15-20 years ago. We sucked at possession/turnovers, sucked at the transition game, and only got as far as we did because of a truly heroic effort by the goalie.
Click to expand...
We didn't suck. Belgium was a notably better team. There were a few moments when I saw Belgium setting something up (typically to drive to the net) and was wondering why the US wasn't picking it up.

The US was outplayed, but oddly enough, the US appeared to have some of the best conditioned players as the US was finally able to make some runs in the second half of extra time. Seriously though, when you play against a nation that has Lukaku available from the bench... it is an uphill battle.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Underseer said:
Yeah, it was like someone built a time machine and brought back the American team from 15-20 years ago. We sucked at possession/turnovers, sucked at the transition game, and only got as far as we did because of a truly heroic effort by the goalie.
Click to expand...
We didn't suck. Belgium was a notably better team. There were a few moments when I saw Belgium setting something up (typically to drive to the net) and was wondering why the US wasn't picking it up.

The US was outplayed, but oddly enough, the US appeared to have some of the best conditioned players as the US was finally able to make some runs in the second half of extra time. Seriously though, when you play against a nation that has Lukaku available from the bench... it is an uphill battle.
Click to expand...

Whether or not we sucked overall is a matter for debate, but in the specific areas I mentioned, we sucked. Flat out sucked. They had possession of the ball far more than we did, and as a result they got a lot more shots on goal. It was only through the miracle of our goalie that we did as well as we did, which is why that game was so reminiscent of American teams in the past.
 
dystopian said:
I will admit, when a local news-site quoted this as if it was real, I believed it: http://dailycurrant.com/2014/06/27/63-of-americans-think-belgium-is-a-beer-company/

It made me instantly cheer on Belgium.

Then I saw that the source site also posted: http://dailycurrant.com/2014/07/02/john-mccain-calls-for-invading-belgium/

And I was ashamed I had so easily believed.

But then I realized I'd cheer on Belgium either way; Low Countries FTW!
Click to expand...
Especially with the whole "McCain calling for invading Belgium" headline down below. ;)

This World Cup has been so great because there are so many teams that have reasons to cheer for. Costa Rica is the underdog, Belgium is the dark horse, France is the recent underachiever but Giroud has been so good recently, Brazil for the people and to prevent the burning of the country, a World Cup for Messi with Argentina, and many of the teams that have already passed by.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
dystopian said:
I will admit, when a local news-site quoted this as if it was real, I believed it: http://dailycurrant.com/2014/06/27/63-of-americans-think-belgium-is-a-beer-company/

It made me instantly cheer on Belgium.

Then I saw that the source site also posted: http://dailycurrant.com/2014/07/02/john-mccain-calls-for-invading-belgium/

And I was ashamed I had so easily believed.

But then I realized I'd cheer on Belgium either way; Low Countries FTW!
Click to expand...
Especially with the whole "McCain calling for invading Belgium" headline down below. ;)

This World Cup has been so great because there are so many teams that have reasons to cheer for. Costa Rica is the underdog, Belgium is the dark horse, France is the recent underachiever but Giroud has been so good recently, Brazil for the people and to prevent the burning of the country, a World Cup for Messi with Argentina, and many of the teams that have already passed by.
Click to expand...

And for comedy relief, there's always England.
 
C_Mucius_Scaevola said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Especially with the whole "McCain calling for invading Belgium" headline down below. ;)

This World Cup has been so great because there are so many teams that have reasons to cheer for. Costa Rica is the underdog, Belgium is the dark horse, France is the recent underachiever but Giroud has been so good recently, Brazil for the people and to prevent the burning of the country, a World Cup for Messi with Argentina, and many of the teams that have already passed by.
Click to expand...

And for comedy relief, there's always England.
Click to expand...

It's somewhere between comedy and tragedy, if you ask me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom