World Cup 2002

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:12 am

Originally posted by Littiz
I hope this isn't referred to me, as I complain only about irregularities. Honor to South Korea, should they beat us fairly!!
(hope not, anyway! )

You mean my compliment to Bruce for being gracious in defeat? Oh no, not at all - I was thinking of the tragic riots in Moscow, and also, since Bruce Lee is Swedish, of how people reacted here last spring when Sweden shockingly went out of the Olympic hockey tournament after a defeat by Belarus. Too many people react with anger and hostility towards their own team or other people. Sorry if I was unclear, it was a general statement.

Maharlika · Post by **Maharlika** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:12 am

England: Bring on Brazil!

Well, there you have it folks... tune in for this exciting game...

...I'm sure that there will be massive work stoppage here in Thailand at that time!

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:30 am

Originally posted by Yshania
Radio 5 Live commentators knew this, Mexico have not beaten the US in 9 games or so, so Mexico were in fact the underdogs mentally...

Congrats to 5 live then, I am glad to see some commentators can do their research, what is the general consensus on the commentating so far? (BTW I hate it!

)

Delacroix · Post by **Delacroix** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:33 am

For me the game was a shame.
Best Brazilian players: Marcos the Gkeeper! Commom!!!

If Brazil still playing like that, dependant of individual moves, England can most possibly win the game.

Also, the Belgium goal, nulifyed at the first half; In my opinion was legal.

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:34 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep

Congrats to 5 live then, I am glad to see some commentators can do their research, what is the general consensus on the commentating so far? (BTW I hate it! )

It's been ok, I like Jonathon Pearce - he knows his stuff and does his research. Radio 5 are the only station actually out there apparently. Talk Sport only offer updates - no commentary.

Re TV commentary, well that leaves a lot to be desired, though Ian Wright has made me laugh once or twice

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:40 am

Originally posted by Yshania
It's been ok, I like Jonathon Pearce - he knows his stuff and does his research. Radio 5 are the only station actually out there apparently. Talk Sport only offer updates - no commentary.

I have missed most of them since my boss doesn't like football and wont abide me listening to it in the office

Re TV commentary, well that leaves a lot to be desired, though Ian Wright has made me laugh once or twice

Wrighty is amusing, as is Peter Schmicael, but explain to me how three former Irish players are going to give unbiased punditry about Ireland Vs Spain?

After this comment i will stop harping on about the commentators, i am sure you are all as sick of my complaints as i am of their poor commentary

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:40 am

Originally posted by Delacroix
For me the game was a shame.
Best Brazilian players: Marcos the Gkeeper! Commom!!!

If Brazil still playing like that, dependant of individual moves, England can most possibly win the game.

Also, the Belgium goal, nulifyed at the first half; In my opinion was legal.

Brazil did as I anticipated, there was less flair and more defensive play. Though Ronaldo looked as sharp as ever, and Cafu had a good game. Re England/Brazil, I am looking forward to it - it will be the 21st time we have met, and England have only won 3 times apparently

but then we had never beat Germany away until our 5-1 win, hadn't beat Argentina in 30 odd years then beat them 1-0. Who knows? I hope for a good game though - and am sure it will be

I agree, shame really. IMO Belgium played well, but that is the nature of knock out cup competitions - if you don't convert your chances you are out. I still maintain that the score line flattered though. For a while when Belgium were playing better I could see this game also going to extra time...

Littiz · Post by **Littiz** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 12:26 pm

Anyway, this World Cup is DEVASTATED by the mistakes of the referees.
It's loosing its sense....

Every match at least one grossy error, enough to steer the story of the match.

The goal cancelled to Belgium??? It was regular... it would have been 1-1, IIRC.
The penalty not given against USA?

Really, here we complain a lot about our league, but yet we're not used to such an endless sequence of grossy mistakes!!!!!

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 12:42 pm

Originally posted by Delacroix
For me the game was a shame.
Best Brazilian players: Marcos the Gkeeper! Commom!!!

If Brazil still playing like that, dependant of individual moves, England can most possibly win the game.

Also, the Belgium goal, nulifyed at the first half; In my opinion was legal.

I agree, Brazil didn't play well at all. I wonder why they looked so passive and stand-still for most of the game? Belgium played very well, so no credit taken from them, but Brazil looked like they weren't awake.

Like Ysh, I'm really looking forward to the England-Brazil game, and it's looks like I will be able to see it live

Cross your fingers I won't be sent off to Canada on a conference instead...

Re: Belgiums disallowed goal, why was it disallowed? The Swedish commentators seemed confused about it, and I didn't understand what was wrong with the goal...

Re: Mexico - USA and the penalty, I didn't see the game unfortunataly, can someone tell me what happened?

Congrats to USA anyway, for bringing us yet another surprise in this WC

Demis · Post by **Demis** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 3:04 pm

About Mexico-USA

There is a TV show from our state channel (ET1) every day during the WC that comments the day's games and the games for the next day. The two guys doing the show are very good. So they did a nice history backround for Mexico - USA. I didn't know that USA and Mexico played around 20+ games in the past and that they played against in the preliminary round before the WC. After learning that these two teams knew pretty well each other, any result was possible in this match and US win did not surprised me at all.

As for Brasil, what is to say, i'm somewhat dissapointed by the performance of the Brazil team. Belgium's goal was indeed a valid goal and not a foul (commentator said so, i didn't see such). I believe that if the goal was allowed the two teams would play better football and still Brazil could pass.

Lost One · Post by **Lost One** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 6:53 pm

Originally posted by Demis
As for Brasil, what is to say, i'm somewhat dissapointed by the performance of the Brazil team. Belgium's goal was indeed a valid goal and not a foul (commentator said so, i didn't see such). I believe that if the goal was allowed the two teams would play better football and still Brazil could pass.

Couldn't agree more. Brazil entered the game with a sort of relaxed attitude - expecting to walk the game. A 1-0 up for Belgium would have turned the game to the height of excitement everyone'd expect from a Brazilian team.
@C Elegans - The Belgian goal by Wilmots was disallowed because the referee called it a foul by him on the Brazilian defender before heading it net-bound. However, close replays don't suggest much - though, there might have been a slight nudge from the Belgian striker, but so minimal that it is just one of those little things that happen in goal areas. No foul IMO.
Also, in response to your enquiry about the Mexico-USA game, heh, a ball was crossed in from a Mexican in the American area, and one of the US defenders chose to prevent a possible Mexican header by punching it in mid-air. Hah! And the referee didn't see it! I still believe the USA should've won that game, but that was a huge refereeing mistake!

@Littiz - True, this World Cup has seen a lot of mistakes, which amazes me considering these are supposed to be the best referees in the world! Can one explain it?

IMO - this is all too fishy to be true.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:00 pm

Thanks a lot for your reviews, Lost One.

Originally posted by Lost One
a ball was crossed in from a Mexican in the American area, and one of the US defenders chose to prevent a possible Mexican header by punching it in mid-air. Hah! And the referee didn't see it!

Incredible. What is wrong with the refeering system? In almost every game, serious mistakes are made. Should there be two refs? Should video assessment be used, as in hockey? Would it help to educate the refs better - I thought that was that FIFA had done to prepare for this years WC.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:15 pm

Originally posted by C Elegans
Thanks a lot for your reviews, Lost One.

Incredible. What is wrong with the refeering system? In almost every game, serious mistakes are made. Should there be two refs? Should video assessment be used, as in hockey? Would it help to educate the refs better - I thought that was that FIFA had done to prepare for this years WC.

Video assessments would not fit with football imo. The game isn't made to have a lot of interuptions and will break both the flow and rythme of the game for both teams.
Could be used to give out penalties (as it is now) to players that have done something wrong (Rivaldo ei.)

A second referee would be a more viable options - but this is somewhat already under consideration in FIFA where they are suggesting that the "line-referees" (actually don't know there english names

) should get a much more active part and should make calls onto the field instead of just near the lines.

A problem with this WC is that the refs. have been incredibly bad - and imo the big problem is that there is a rule that all countries (well almost all ) should be represented, so we get ref.s that are inexperienced (and some just plain bad).
So much of the problem is the training of refs. imo - that and FIFA always put out "recomendations" as how to ref.

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:24 pm

Originally posted by Xandax
A problem with this WC is that the refs. have been incredibly bad - and imo the big problem is that there is a rule that all countries (well almost all ) should be represented, so we get ref.s that are inexperienced (and some just plain bad).
So much of the problem is the training of refs. imo - that and FIFA always put out "recomendations" as how to ref.

Well thats the problem, all referees improve with experience. How do you get a referee to function properly under the intense pressure of the tournaments, without giving him a baptism of fire as some may call it. The picking of refs is extremely stringent, its just that many as you said haven't experienced that sort of atmosphere before. They will improve, you just have to remember that they are human after all, and unlike us all. Don't have the luxury to watch replay after replay of the same event.

Krynus · Post by **Krynus** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:02 am

Personally, I don't follow soccer or really care which team win. I just wanted to comment on something I heard on the news the other day. It seems that some person from South Korea decided to light himself on fire in order to become a ghost and be the twelfth person on the South Korean soccer team. I personally am not aware of South Korean superstitions and the like, but wouldn't you rather WATCH your team win??? It's kind of hard to do that when you are dead

Bruce Lee · Post by **Bruce Lee** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:04 am

The thing with the Mexico-USA match was that the handball from the American was shown on the big screen straight away so every one in the stadium saw that it clearly was a penalty...except the referee...somewhat frustrating for the Mexicans I'd say.
Nevertheless the USA played a very tactical game I think.

at99 · Post by **at99** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:14 am

I think Brazil looked a class ahead of belgium even though iwas 1-0. Brazil seemed to have superior ball control and looked stronger on the ball. I think their on ****yness was ther enemy.

The referees dont seem to be from big soccer nations like italy,england,germany etc. I think this is the problem (if I am no wrong). There seems to be inexperienced refs ?

at99 · Post by **at99** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:17 am

One more thing.

National anthems of countries dont seem to be 'good tunes' from the world cup
My country Australia has a bad national anthem (general feeling)

What do you think of your anthem?

Bruce Lee · Post by **Bruce Lee** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:21 am

I love ours! "Du gamla du fria du fjällhöga nord, du tysta du glädjerika sköna..."
Creeps my skin every time... just the way it should be.
Which one is the Australian? Is it waltzing mathilda?
I think the Russian one is great, good thing the changed back to the Sovjet one.

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:34 am

Originally posted by Krynus
Personally, I don't follow soccer or really care which team win. I just wanted to comment on something I heard on the news the other day. It seems that some person from South Korea decided to light himself on fire in order to become a ghost and be the twelfth person on the South Korean soccer team. I personally am not aware of South Korean superstitions and the like, but wouldn't you rather WATCH your team win??? It's kind of hard to do that when you are dead

I haven't heard of this, do you have a link?