bitchin' game: Euro 2004 - England-Portugal (R)

[Guest Jeffery S.]

Another great game, worthy of the competition. And a classic match-up that was probably the best one-on-one so far in Portugal: Cristiano Ronaldo up against Ashley Cole, who was probably man of the match. Superb player, all the more amazing that he had to show it vs. a 19 year old, who is also going to be a beauty if he isn't already. Ashley Cole for Prime Minister.

The game's 1st phase was really not the first goal but the sub of Rooney, as he was giving England more dynamism up front and gave them plenty of options going forwards. And Vassell was horrible all night, the penalty was just the icing. After this sub Portugal insisted without breaking down the middle, so much so that in the end, by the time they got their 2nd half goal, England had gotten used to defending and Portugal to attacking. Lucky for Portugal, since England was still basically 4-4-2 and Portugal was playing a 3-3-3-1 and then after Postiga came on a 3-3-2-2 or something weird like that.

Meaning by extra time England should have been able to play the game all over the field, but perhaps their mids, especially Lampard, were totally burned out. So Portugal looked like they wanted it more, and Rui Costa's goal was a burner, a killer. That should have been it, but England snuck back and got the goal for the right to lose from the spot.

That's two great Portugal comebacks in subsequent Eurocups vs. England. With Figo in the dressing room moping, what a prick.

[Grizzly]

Anyone have opinions on the disallowed goal? BBC is already whining about it and finding as many experts as possible who think it was a goal. I think for once in this tournament the ref made a good call as the keeper was obviously being held. The english player may have been able to score without committing a foul but I thought it was an obvious foul.

[Free kick]

Got love what happens to this city when Euro championships or World Cup is in full swing. I cannot think of another event that mobilizes people to the same extent except perhaps Olympic hockey. This morning while getting off the subway and heading to work, I noticed that Scotia Plaza had set up (in the concourse) two mini stands facing each other with two TV screen back to back. Last week, on my way to a department dinner at lunch time, I noticed up to a hundred people standing on the side walk next to one of the office towers looking up in the same direction. Initially one could have been forgiven for thinking that there might be someone on the ledge ready to jump from one of the towers. But No. Instead it was one of those giant jumbotrons showing the Greece versus Spain game instaed of the day to day market updates, Business news and latest economic data. Today, at approx 4PM while the Eng-Por game was on, I got up to look for someone and noticed that the entire office was practically empty. Did I forget about some meeting that I was supposed to attend?[:I] Fortunately, that wasn't the case since I did find one of my colleagues still at his desk and it turns out that everyone was packed into lunch room following the game on the small screen. There was no room in there and in order to not look like slackers but keeners, we decided not to be seen there and head over to the food court at BCE place where it was also packed with people screaming and yelling. Many World cup matches are the same. Even with the WC in the far east, it didnt prevent the scotia plaza concourse from being jam packed at at 8:30 AM following the game on the Giant that the property managers had installed specifically for the event.

There was quite a bit of shouting going on at the BCE foodcourt late this afternoon. I would estimate a crowd in the 200-300 range with loyalties fairly equally divided and distinguishable . There were many office maintenace and cleaning staff types in a group cheering for mainly cheeringfor one team and an other group consisting of older or middle aged, white collar-looking types, mainly cheering for the other side. My colleague and I had to cheer for Portugal since we were the only ones having picked them to win the game in our office pool. I was thinking there is no way the home advantge will prevent them from making it at least to the semis. It kind of bugged in way. Knowing full well how many folks could be over heard making jokes about the Italians. I was thinking that many of these people making these comments are likely the same once who will switch flags after Portugal are eliminated and Fly the Brazilian flag. What an envious advantage. You have two cracks at winnig the WC. So I Pretty much stayed silent.

I cannot help but think why the CSA fails to make it top priority to ensure that Canada's important WCQ matches are played here. Yes, I know about the facilities issue, but what have they done to adress this issue and make it a top priority. How can an private promoter get clubs games in the Skydome to likely sellout but the CSA cannot? What a poor way to grow the game when you totally neglect the game and the national team in Canada's largest centre. Please spare me the narrow-minded notion that westerners are more patriotic or that people here will cheer for the other vistors. You give these citizens a chance and SOME if not many they will cheer for Canada. You won't hear anyone saying that they don't like or wouldn't support Canada . Many can be accused for not knowing much about our NT's but whose fault is that?. Also spare me the notion that the eastern parts has had its fair share of MNT games. Last night I was browsing through pages at Fifa.com at the past Concacaf qualifying games involving Canada. Although I was aware somewhat of where most of the important games were played. It never really dawned on me the extend of the regional imbalance. All I ever saw on those game summaries in the location field was: Burnaby or Edmonton. Show me one other sport where there exists this kind of imbalance. I might understand that in a sport where the participation levels and interest is regional. BUt that is certainly not the case here. Look at where most of our National team(s) players are from.

I also couldn't help but think of what a failure Rogers Sportsnet has been. DON"T they see what is going on the Euro's and WC's and even if the interest for the U20 WC is a fraction of what I am seeing for these events then would it not have been a real Bonanza for the network and, by extension, unmeasuable exposure for our national programs.

[beachesl]

Good observations, Free Kick.

Having watched many of the games at the Portuguese and Italian joints in Edmonton, it is interesting to see how many photographers and videographers from the media come into these otherwise ignored centres to record the "ethnic" excitement, and the viewers are drawn to this tangible emotion.

Even more, I think what is drawing the interest of non-soccer types to Euro 2004 at the moment is the pictures on the news and papers of the foreign fans painted and dressed up, and obviously having so much fun. The actual sports activity is almost secondary. There is a vicarious enjoyment and some fantasy indulgence here because of these images, but the difficulty is making (or helping them make) the leap and indulging in being soccer fans themselves.

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

Got love what happens to this city when Euro championships or World Cup is in full swing. I cannot think of another event that mobilizes people to the same extent except perhaps Olympic hockey.

I'm not even in a Portuguese neighbourhood (perish the thought! ), but I've heard cars honking all evening since the game ended. I talked to a couple of people on cell phones who were both driving through different parts of the city and I could hear the horns through the phone.

I can live with all of it in this case as I was cheering for Portugal (a loner among the Italians I know), but I hope they will be silenced after the semifinals.

[beachesl]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

Anyone have opinions on the disallowed goal? BBC is already whining about it and finding as many experts as possible who think it was a goal. I think for once in this tournament the ref made a good call as the keeper was obviously being held. The english player may have been able to score without committing a foul but I thought it was an obvious foul.

I may be biased, but I agree that it was an obvious foul, you can't stop a keeper from jumping up to block a shop.

Apart from the Cole-Ronaldo struggle referred to by Jeffrey, it was also interesting to see how England tried to minimize the atack by having their midfield force the Portuguese attackers into the congested centre, and it looked like this tactic would work.

Bottom line apart from Portugal wanting it more: an uninsprired Erickson was again outcoached by Scolari, especially in the area of substitutions.

[BearcatSA]

The two biggest names on the pitch (Beckham and Figo) stood out as the most disappointing. Interesting to see that Scolari had the b*lls to sub his captain and Erickson chose to stay with his.

[Michael Crampton]

Craig Forrest got it right on Sportsnet: that was 110% a goal for England and the game I watched should've ended 2-1. John Terry had every right to be there, was looking at the ball, and was trying to head it. If Ricardo can't muscle his way through then it's no fault of Terry's; Terry had position. If anything you could argue that Campbell fouled Terry by going over his back. Absolute BS "homer" call by Meier who I now doubley hate - once for screwing Celtic out of a Champions League round of 16 spot and now for killing England's Euro dream.

I'll agree that Sven blew it with the substitutions (especially bringing on Hargreaves) and that England got a little too eager to protect their lead but I still feel like I just had my heart ripped out and stomped all over (after 6 hours of digesting the result).

Mike.

[Cooks]

I now have more respect for Scolari, after the Figo move. I would have subbed him earlier (I was screaming at Scolari through the TV to get Figo off shortly after half time).

As for the disallowed goal, there was no question it was a foul. Terry was hanging on Ricardo like a wet t-shirt.

[devioustrevor]

Sven messed up by taking Gerrard and Scholes off, after those two came off England didn't look to really threaten Portugal. Sven's substitutions were too Italian today.

BTW- It seems that Rooney broke his foot and that is why he came off.

[bettermirror]

certainly a goal. two things in soccer right now that absolutely drive me fecking batty are:

a)referee's who don't force a penalty kick re-take for stuttering. PLAYERS CANNOT STUTTER LIKE THAT. it's in the law book. it's not like there are that many rules to remember!!!

b)players getting called for fouls on goalies when the goalie jumps into the player.

ps-did anyone see the czech goalie literally run out of his way to push that german striker to the ground and then grab the loose ball with the referee looking RIGHT AT it?

all of my european heritage countries are out, plus my sentimental favourite england. the heritage ones being GERMANY, and ukraine/scotland.

let's go oranje!

[Michael Crampton]

Thank-you for reminding me about the stuttering bettermirror as I forgot to include that in my earlier post. You don't want to know what I was yelling at the screen in the bar when Meier didn't force those kicks to be retaken. Nice to see that he'll give a controversial call for the home side (that literally decided the match) but wouldn't enforce TWO CLEAR VIOLATIONS OF THE RULES when it favored Portugal. I'm not accusing him of being on the take or anything or of even consciously favoring the home team - he's just crap is all!

Mike.

[wbn1000]

Quick aside about the stutters on the penalties....

The provision that a penalty be taken in one continuous motion was quietly dropped from the Laws of the Game about 5 years ago. If you look at Law 14 (Penalty Kick), you will notice that there is absolutely nothing in the law prohibiting the kicker from stuttering or otherwise feinting on their penalty. Check it out at:http://www.fifa.com/fifa/handbook/laws/2003/LOTG2003_e.pdf (on page 16 of the pdf, page 30/31 of the laws).

This is also covered in the questions about the Laws at http://www.fifa.com/fifa/handbook/laws/2000/QA/Q&A_2000_E.pdf on page 29 of the document. Specifically question 10:

Q: A player taking a penalty kick feints before kicking the ball. Is this permitted?

A: Yes

So in short, the two penalties scored from stuttered approaches were perfectly legal penalties and were correctly allowed by Meier.

[Mimglow]

quote:Originally posted by wbn1000

Quick aside about the stutters on the penalties....

The provision that a penalty be taken in one continuous motion was quietly dropped from the Laws of the Game about 5 years ago. If you look at Law 14 (Penalty Kick), you will notice that there is absolutely nothing in the law prohibiting the kicker from stuttering or otherwise feinting on their penalty. Check it out at:http://www.fifa.com/fifa/handbook/laws/2003/LOTG2003_e.pdf (on page 16 of the pdf, page 30/31 of the laws).

This is also covered in the questions about the Laws at http://www.fifa.com/fifa/handbook/laws/2000/QA/Q&A_2000_E.pdf on page 29 of the document. Specifically question 10:

Q: A player taking a penalty kick feints before kicking the ball. Is this permitted?

A: Yes

So in short, the two penalties scored from stuttered approaches were perfectly legal penalties and were correctly allowed by Meier.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was not aware of the rule change, and was also one of the ones screaming at the screen.

For the record, I thought Terry fouled Ricardo and the right call was made.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

My god how we love to falsify the rules. That was a clear foul by Terry on the keeper, he was holding him down with absolutely no chance at playing the ball. Sure he could stand there, but not put his hands on the keeper's shoulders. I mean, do you think Ricardo didn't jump because he didn't want to? Learn the rules boys.

Also re stuttering. The question I thought was that the player had to have a continuous forwards movement, regardless of any change in speed. He cannot start, come to a full stop, and then start again. Though stuttering looks like a stop and start, it is an optical effect, as the body is usually still in forward motion. Is this right or have I messed up the rule like I am accusing the others of doing on the disallowed goal?

[Free kick]

I did not see the that part of the game ( I arrived after) but the word I got from two neutral observers was that the keeper would have had no chance to prevent that goal regardless whether or not Terry had his hand on the keeper's shoulder.

[An Observer]

From watching the video replay a few times it seemed clear to me that when Terry jumped his arm went on top of the keepers shoulder which prevented Ricardo from jumping. That being said, it certainly did not seem intentional and simply was the result of him jumping. If it happened in the middle of the park between two players it would likely never be called. That being said, I see this type of foul consistently called between an opposing player and a keeper in the box so by no means can I believe that Meir is not being consistent. This is simply the way the game is called (whether in the Rules or not). Whether Ricardo could have caught the ball or punched it if Terry did not prevent him from jumping seems to me to be academic and irrelevant for the decision. It was clearly a foul on the basis of how such matters have been consistently called by the referees over the last number of years.

[mattbin]

I had no idea the stutter step rule was changed either. Interesting.

Can anyone think of any tournament match, ever, where the ref actually called for a PK to be re-taken? I remember in the U19 against Brazil, the keeper was halfway to the ball on every one of Canada's kicks (among other shenanigans). But no matter how far off the line the keeper is, no matter what the kicker does, I've never seen a kick re-taken.

Not that I expected Urs to buck the trend or anything. I'm just sayin'.

Allez les Rouges,

M@

P.S. "Do you know what 'nemesis'" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible @#%$... [urs Meier]." -- Brick Top, Snatch

[Massive Attack]

Seeing as we had a spitting game for Totti, here's a game for Beckham:

http://www.thomasscott.net/flash/beckham/

[sstackho]

In the recent Brazil - Argentina WCQ match, a Brazil PK was retaken due to encroachment into the box by a Brazil player. So Ronaldo actually scored on FOUR PKs in that match.

[Gian-Luca]

That Brian Blessed game on the same site is even better!

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by mattbin

Can anyone think of any tournament match, ever, where the ref actually called for a PK to be re-taken?

"Tournament match", I don't know, but I remember a match in Serie A not long ago where Juventus had to retake a penalty kick twice on the same play (so three kicks in total). I couldn't remember exactly when that happened but after a quick Google search it all came back to me: it was Fabrizio Miccoli, against Brescia at the beginning of March, a great game with that PK kick-starting a Juve comeback from 2-0 down in the second half to win (which is not the great part) 3-2.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by BHTC Mike

Craig Forrest got it right on Sportsnet: that was 110% a goal for England and the game I watched should've ended 2-1. John Terry had every right to be there, was looking at the ball, and was trying to head it. If Ricardo can't muscle his way through then it's no fault of Terry's; Terry had position. If anything you could argue that Campbell fouled Terry by going over his back. Absolute BS "homer" call by Meier who I now doubley hate - once for screwing Celtic out of a Champions League round of 16 spot and now for killing England's Euro dream.

Yeah, it was a good goal I would say. Wouldn't call it a "homer call" though since there were 30,000 England supporters in the crowd and they were making more noise than the 30,000 Portuguese in attendance.