World Cup 2022 Qatar FIFA World Cup (Quarter Finals) - On SBS

[SM]

They just need a second massive set of golden goals that come out in extra time to hopefully break the deadlock for big tournaments.

The one problem with soccer is the 0-0 draws, especially when the knockout stage is on.

Why is it a problem?

 

[apollo_creed]

On some of the decisions in the England game.

Don't think Saka was fouled in the lead-up to the first goal - he felt something and fell down as opposed to the contact actually being enough to bring him to ground. It's a contact sport.

Can't believe someone on here was trying to argue the one in the first half should've been a penalty. Was clearly outside the box. Not even a point to debate.

Penalty one - obviously there but funnily right before Saka went down Bellingham was trying to milk a penalty. Never really watched Bellingham before but he went down very easily all game and is one of those dudes who is always in the referees face.

Penalty two - yes, there as the contact was significant in his back. He did sort of stop and the ball was going over his head but he stopped because the ball was clearing his head, not to win a penalty. If the contact was minor and he jumped forward as opposed to falling over because of the push then I'd say no penalty. But pretty comfortable that it was clumsy defending a penalty.

Don't think the referee had a poor game either. Missed a couple of fouls but nothing major and probably could've booked Griezmann one foul earlier.

Thought the England players were pathetic all game in terms of surrounding the ref and whining. Griezmann committed a 'foul' in the second half (wasn't even a foul) and they surrounded the ref to give him a second yellow. Give me a break. But just generally any decision and some of them dives they were harassing him. Piss weak.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Nothing wrong with having an offside rule. Just i think VAR makes it too ticky-tacky, a hand or head can be slightly forward of the line, and they disallow the goal, when pre-VAR it had to be more egregious to get the flag raised. So for me, if there was a tweak to offsides I'd make it -- most of the players body has to be forward of the line to call it offside, whether VAR is available or relying on refs call.

You can't be offside if your arm is forward of 2nd last opposition player. It has to be a part of your body that you can validly score from.

They have tinkered with the VAR offside calls quite a bit over the last few seasons. The Premier League increased the width of the lines so that the tiny offsides are no longer counted. There could be scope for increasing it further. The general principle is that teams don't get an advantage by having players beyond the last defender. I remember in the school playground if a kid just stood next to the goalkeeper he would be shamed by a chant of "you're goal hanging".

I didn't like the semi-automated offside VAR they used in this World Cup. The lines and photos that the Premier League show are much clearer to the fans than the simplistic graphics. And I think it led to some wrong calls as maybe they relied on it too much. There are other factors in offside decision such as did it come off a defender, did an attacker in an offside position challenge for the ball.

 

[SM]

The semi-automatic made it very clear how the player was offside and worked very efficiently. Not sure how you can prefer the manually drawn MS Paint lines on a grainy image.

 

[Purple Suit]

Why is it a problem?

It's just a dumb way to decide a game in my opinion. Especially since it seems to happen more and more with better defensive coaching.

Imagine if you did the same thing in other sports? Cricket tried to do a bowl at the stumps and that was replaced with a super over in T20 but it is more a novelty rather than deciding who is the best team in the world.

I would rather they come up with a known metric to decide a game to encourage scoring. This would open it up, even if it was just the most shots on target in the extra time part of the game. As long as fans knew the rules and what was happening it would be fine. It would obviously need to be worked out and tested otherwise coaches could ruin it to once they got ahead.

 

[peetoo]

I just noted the goalies are 20-20 v the strikers in penalty shoot outs. Good going and fits with kane 1-1 in other penalties. CBF adding up the in play penalties

As the Socceroos qualified to go at all on a penalty mind game we cant really complain much

 

[SM]

It's just a dumb way to decide a game in my opinion. Especially since it seems to happen more and more with better defensive coaching.

Imagine if you did the same thing in other sports? Cricket tried to do a bowl at the stumps and that was replaced with a super over in T20 but it is more a novelty rather than deciding who is the best team in the world.

I would rather they come up with a known metric to decide a game to encourage scoring. This would open it up, even if it was just the most shots on target in the extra time part of the game. As long as fans knew the rules and what was happening it would be fine. It would obviously need to be worked out and tested otherwise coaches could ruin it to once they got ahead.

Ok.

Cricket does a super over.. didn't they have a match at a WC decided by most 6s in the tournament or something dumb?

 

[Frank Bunn]

England were poor mate. Created bugger all, most of their possesion was in non threatening areas. Most of their shots were rubbish too. Only genuine chance apart from the penalties was Kane vs Lloris.

Absolutely laughable to suggest Saka was fouled. Nowhere near it. In any case Mbappe ran up the wing, turned back and then inside all with Kyle Walker & a mid (either Rice or Bellingham) unable to stop him. The goal was a new phase, 5 passes and 30 seconds away.

Class difference was there to see and this was a France minus Nkunku, Benzema, Lucas Hernandez, Kante & Pogba.

I'm wondering if we watched the same game. Did you miss the top bins save by Lloris from the Kane shot? Or the header from Maguire that hit the post. England had three valid penalty claims.

I agree that the 1st France goal was a new phase so VAR shouldn't have overruled it. But the referee should have called a foul. You are being inconsistent with the Saka and Kane fouls. In both cases the defender had a nibble that the ref correctly didn't call as a foul. Then the defender took the attacker's legs away. It should have been a free kick in an advanced area for England rather than a goal for France, and a penalty for England.

You don't get points for class difference if they are not on the field. You claimed Pavard should have been in the joint team. He's collecting splinters. Whereas Walker kept Mbappe pretty quiet. Your negative judgment on Griezmann is looking very silly.

 

[Zidane98]

I'm wondering if we watched the same game. Did you miss the top bins save by Lloris from the Kane shot? Or the header from Maguire that hit the post. England had three valid penalty claims.

I agree that the 1st France goal was a new phase so VAR shouldn't have overruled it. But the referee should have called a foul. You are being inconsistent with the Saka and Kane fouls. In both cases the defender had a nibble that the ref correctly didn't call as a foul. Then the defender took the attacker's legs away. It should have been a free kick in an advanced area for England rather than a goal for France, and a penalty for England.

You don't get points for class difference if they are not on the field. You claimed Pavard should have been in the joint team. He's collecting splinters. Whereas Walker kept Mbappe pretty quiet. Your negative judgment on Griezmann is looking very silly.

1 clear penalty claim. 1 maybe. Not sure where you are getting the other "penalty" from but if it's when Maguire threw himself to the floor that's seriously embarrassing.

Maguire's header - never a chance of going in. Lloris was outside the post .


Walker kept Mbappe quiet apart from the time that Mbappe tore him a new one on the left wing in the first half, played a one two which lead to the goal and the second half where he tore him a new one after burning him off on the wing and crossed to Dembele along the ground who completed an air swing from 8 yards out in front of goal.

Also, there absolutely was no foul on Saka. Barely any contact at all and he threw himself to the ground. If it was the other way around you would 100% say it was a dive because that's what it was.

Mbappe was fouled numerous times without the referee calling it. He let plenty go for both sides.

Griezmann is a good player, never said anything otherwise. However if France have most players available he doesn't start any more. His best position is on the right. First choice front 3 for France is Mbappe, Benzema, Nkunku. He is getting a game in midfield because there's no Kante or Pogba.

 

[Frank Bunn]

1 clear penalty claim. 1 maybe. Not sure where you are getting the other "penalty" from but if it's when Maguire threw himself to the floor that's seriously embarrassing.

2 penalties that were validly given then the Kane one you acknowledge was a foul but claim the first clip on him was outside the area. Just like you hypocritically claim the first clips on Saka were not free kicks before he had his legs taken away.

 

[Zidane98]

2 penalties that were validly given then the Kane one you acknowledge was a foul but claim the first clip on him was outside the area. Just like you hypocritically claim the first clips on Saka were not free kicks before he had his legs taken away.

So two penalty claims then. Thanks for confirming.

 

[peternorth]

There is an issue when comparing sports such as cricket, afl and the like to football. A popular suggestion is to remove the offside rule to encourage goal scoring opportunities and encourage greater number of fans (new) to the game.

The same argument was made about hockey. A rise in viewership and eyeballs has not resulted directly I feel.

Another claim was that football is boring due to a "lack of scoring". When the game played in heavens hardwood (basketball) is mentioned as a high scoring sport, the same people shake their heads vigorously whilst maintaining basketball is crap and you can't compare.

lol

 

[Buckleys Jocks]

Griezmann is a good player, never said anything otherwise. However if France have most players available he doesn't start any more. His best position is on the right. First choice front 3 for France is Mbappe, Benzema, Nkunku. He is getting a game in midfield because there's no Kante or Pogba.

I find that very hard to believe. His international record, particularly in tournaments, is fantastic and he offers something in midfield that none of the other options do. Rabiot & Tchouameni are the players who have benefited most from Pogba's & Kante's absences.

 

[apollo_creed]

I'm wondering if we watched the same game. Did you miss the top bins save by Lloris from the Kane shot? Or the header from Maguire that hit the post. England had three valid penalty claims.

I agree that the 1st France goal was a new phase so VAR shouldn't have overruled it. But the referee should have called a foul. You are being inconsistent with the Saka and Kane fouls. In both cases the defender had a nibble that the ref correctly didn't call as a foul. Then the defender took the attacker's legs away. It should have been a free kick in an advanced area for England rather than a goal for France, and a penalty for England.

You don't get points for class difference if they are not on the field. You claimed Pavard should have been in the joint team. He's collecting splinters. Whereas Walker kept Mbappe pretty quiet. Your negative judgment on Griezmann is looking very silly.

Mate this whole thread has been you having a cry about the referees. We get it. You are upset England lost and are looking for someone to blame but c'mon at least attempt to be realistic...

'top bins save'... he did well to come out so Kane had virtually no angle. Was good, smart goalkeeping.
Did Maguire's shot hit the post? must've nicked the outside of it.

England had two valid penalty claims. Both were given. Stop taking rubbish about the other one.

The whole Saka foul in the lead-up is debatable. Contact doesn't equal a free kick. Either Saka chose to go to the ground or the contact was enough to force him to the ground. To me he went down easily and was looking for the free kick and one that would often get given. Don't personally think it was a free kick and think the referee got this one right.

My goodness. All your crying won't change the result. England are out and another failed campaign against a side missing half of their starting XI. With the best side England have had for a while. Should've won on the balance of play but luck (Giroud's header bouncing off Maguire's shoulder) wasn't on their side , they didn't execute under pressure (Kane's penalty) and the substitutions didn't help (bringing on Sterling... who is shit and taking off Saka the best player on the pitch). No conspiracy and the refereeing had nothing to do with anything.

 

[apollo_creed]

On another note the end of the Brazil game - only saw the last 10 minutes...

Can someone please explain to me how a side leading 1-0 with three minutes to go - could lose the ball and get outnumbered and exposed on the counter attack?

Inexcusable to get caught out of shape in that situation. If they're scoring make sure it's a cross into a box/scramble or long range worldie.

 

[peternorth]

On another note the end of the Brazil game - only saw the last 10 minutes...

Can someone please explain to me how a side leading 1-0 with three minutes to go - could lose the ball and get outnumbered and exposed on the counter attack?

Inexcusable to get caught out of shape in that situation. If they're scoring make sure it's a cross into a box/scramble or long range worldie.

Clue: refs

 

[apollo_creed]

That seems to be the play doesn't it?
Win - enjoy. (or if you're Argentinian be an ungracious dickhead)
Lose - not your fault. blame the referee.

The Portugal one was the strangest. The referee from all accounts had a very good game yet copped a barrage after the game and was apparently at fault because of his nationality. Nothing like questioning the competency and integrity of the referee because you can't handle losing a football game.

Unusual for Pepe (and to be honest Bruno) to be a dislikeable piece of shit though. So out of character...

 

[Gavin Excell]

On another note the end of the Brazil game - only saw the last 10 minutes...

Can someone please explain to me how a side leading 1-0 with three minutes to go - could lose the ball and get outnumbered and exposed on the counter attack?

Inexcusable to get caught out of shape in that situation. If they're scoring make sure it's a cross into a box/scramble or long range worldie.

Brazil haven't made a world cup final in 20 years

They are living off reflected glory from the years past

 

[apollo_creed]

Brazil haven't made a world cup final in 20 years

They are living off reflected glory from the years past

No, they haven't. But they were more than good enough this time and have the best defense they've had for 20 years.
To leave that much space in behind while leading with 3 minutes to go in a world cup QF is one of the stranger things I've seen.

 

[Zidane98]

On some of the decisions in the England game.

Don't think Saka was fouled in the lead-up to the first goal - he felt something and fell down as opposed to the contact actually being enough to bring him to ground. It's a contact sport.

Can't believe someone on here was trying to argue the one in the first half should've been a penalty. Was clearly outside the box. Not even a point to debate.

Penalty one - obviously there but funnily right before Saka went down Bellingham was trying to milk a penalty. Never really watched Bellingham before but he went down very easily all game and is one of those dudes who is always in the referees face.

Penalty two - yes, there as the contact was significant in his back. He did sort of stop and the ball was going over his head but he stopped because the ball was clearing his head, not to win a penalty. If the contact was minor and he jumped forward as opposed to falling over because of the push then I'd say no penalty. But pretty comfortable that it was clumsy defending a penalty.

Don't think the referee had a poor game either. Missed a couple of fouls but nothing major and probably could've booked Griezmann one foul earlier.

Thought the England players were pathetic all game in terms of surrounding the ref and whining. Griezmann committed a 'foul' in the second half (wasn't even a foul) and they surrounded the ref to give him a second yellow. Give me a break. But just generally any decision and some of them dives they were harassing him. Piss weak.

France had 14 fouls called against them while England only had 10 called against them. It makes the England whining all the more ridiculous combined with them getting away with pushing Giroud to the ground off the ball in the box.

 

[Zidane98]

No, they haven't. But they were more than good enough this time and have the best defense they've had for 20 years.
To leave that much space in behind while leading with 3 minutes to go in a world cup QF is one of the stranger things I've seen.

Yep. Surely with minutes remaining and 1-0 up it is time to shut up shop. This is where Arnold excelled at this world cup. But no, they kept going for it. Should have been keeping possession, running it up to the corner flag etc. Pretty naive.

 

[Frank Bunn]

I find that very hard to believe. His international record, particularly in tournaments, is fantastic and he offers something in midfield that none of the other options do. Rabiot & Tchouameni are the players who have benefited most from Pogba's & Kante's absences.

Griezmann has 115 caps and 42 international goals. He was named best player of the tournament in Euro 2016. 3rd best at WC 2018 and man of the match in the final. He's having a great tournament this time. Plenty of defensive work, great link up play, then a heap of dangerous crosses such as the one for Giroud to get the winner.

 

[Seeds]

The goals thing is absolute nonsense. Even the wealthiest of football associations cringe at the cost to replace every goal frame. And imagine the scrap metal issue it creates. Think of how many goal frames there are worldwide. And imagine the chaos it would cause in underdeveloped nations who the last thing they need to be doing is having to spend a fortune replacing every goal frame.


Goals will never change in size for eternity.


Offside rule may evolve and change but will never be removed. If you remove it then football becomes a guaranteed game of long ball end to end with strikers able to sit up front behind defensive lines.

you have dramatically, like insanely so, overestimated the cost of soccer goals.

 

[Seeds]

Look at Wrexham, small teams that have good fa cup runs, Morocco, st Pauli . Etc.

Underdogs often get a lot o love in football.

Felt like everyone was cheering Leicester City leading up to them winning the league

im not saying neutrals never get behind underdogs. It just seems to happen a lot less then in other sports.

Wrexhams not an underdog. they are so cashed up compared to their competitors now its ridiculous.

morocco isnt getting the love they would in other sports from neutrals.

 

[Seeds]

The goals thing is absolute nonsense. Even the wealthiest of football associations cringe at the cost to replace every goal frame. And imagine the scrap metal issue it creates. Think of how many goal frames there are worldwide. And imagine the chaos it would cause in underdeveloped nations who the last thing they need to be doing is having to spend a fortune replacing every goal frame.


Goals will never change in size for eternity.


Offside rule may evolve and change but will never be removed. If you remove it then football becomes a guaranteed game of long ball end to end with strikers able to sit up front behind defensive lines.

Wouldnt the game potentially be better with long balls foward in the air? Thats what we love about afl.