Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Leshy
Seriously, I haven't seen the referee's decision seen called into question anywhere else than on this board.
|
Admittedly I only read/watch english news sources, but during the match, after the match,
every single one said there was nothing wrong with the goal. For most of these, that doesn't mean much because they would have allowed the goal if Terry had punched the goalkeeper and buried him beneath the six yard box with a small breathing tube. The BBC, on the other hand, tends to be more balanced.
Anyway, opinions of the match:
Without Beckham (especially) on form, the 'long direct passes to swift forwards' doesn't work and has no hope of working, as has been seen THROUGHOUT this tournament.
When we took Rooney off, we should have replaced him with Joe Cole; he's the only other English player who's skillfull enough to take the ball from the midfield and keep it, giving us a chance to get forward; even if he does lose it half the time, that's better than Vassell and Owen up front, firing long balls that they won't be able to get to.
Sven. He's picking on reputation, otherwise there's no way you can explain Beckham and Terry's appearances after they were showed to be off the pace (I've seen Terry play exceptionally well for Chelsea, in just about every match I've seen; but he was a yard off the pace and a yard off the thinking in this tournament; does this mean he's not ready for international football, or did the injury combine with some unknown factor to screw our chances?). Beckham, like Figo, is a bad captain to have to be defending with. Ignoring his other form problems, leading by example is tough when the most time you have on the ball is to punt another hopeful ball upfield to your strikers. It would have been much better to play any of (Cole, Hargreaves, Parker) in the midfield; hell, if we had Joe Cole on the field, Rooney may be able to play higher up the field.
Rooney's injury; stop trolling sunday, that is in no way a 'fight won'. That aside, the best football we play is when he's on the field, and it's no coincidence; yes we were unlucky to lose him after twenty minutes, but our tactics shouldn't have been so limited to rely on one person to such a great degree, especially one so young (even if he has been one of the more mature members of the England camp). Great things are expected of this lad in Germany 2006, and beyond.
The referee: a really really bad display. Whenever an english player was booked, within the next 5 minutes guaranteed there was an identical foul from a local player, for which they weren't booked. Some of the decisions were also mind numbingly bad; ignore the goal, look at two decisions that even a first division ref could handle (and I should know; I've seen some diabolical decisions in the last year).
Decision 1. Vassel, last 10 minutes (or thereabouts.) Vassel heads the ball, Portuguese player is backing into him, doesn't try to go for the ball (so there can be no complaints about obstruction) Portugal get free kick.
Decision 2. Owen Hargreaves, last few minutes again. He's on a superb run, beats one, but is caught and starts to lose his balance, beats two, is tripped again but manages to struggle forward for another 5 yards or so before falling over. How in the world that is not a free kick and a yellow card I don't know.
Conclusion: Portugal were lucky, the ref was poor, England should have been better. Ranieri for England; even if you bring random players on, you'll get the right swap some of the time.