Uruguay-Holland [Official Thread]

[Einstein agogo]

the krauts are gonna win , just like '74 final.. and good luck to 'em.

2 great goals today
Proof that if you ain't scared of no-one then you have a chance...also england are a pile of shyte compared to the last 4

[Jerry St Clair]

Just seen the lino's view and it looks level to me - just his foot is offside.

Elaborate fishing, Dirkers? The law says any part of the player's body with which he could legitimately score a goal.

Still not sure if he should be given offside though. From memory, I think the law says you're offside if you play the ball, or have an opportunity to interfere with an opponent, or their ability to play the ball. So, should it have been given?

[handbags_harris]

A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
• interfering with play or
• interfering with an opponent or
• gaining an advantage by being in that position

[Jerry St Clair]

A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
• interfering with play or
• interfering with an opponent or
• gaining an advantage by being in that position

Could be either of the last two.

"Interfering with an opponent" includes making a movement which deceives an opponent.

"Gaining an advantage" includes reacting to a ball which rebounds off an opponent having been stood in an offside position when the ball was originally played.

All are arguable and, of course, in the opinion of the referee,

[Urinal Mint]

delighted for holland. another nation similar to ours that seem to get there, have high hopes but go home too early. superb goal as well.

[Archie's penalty]

Manchester fan park very pro Holland. Thought it was very even until the 3rd goal, then Uruguayan heads dropped. Shame an offside goal did it for the Uruguayans. Felt they missed Suarez. Will be supporting whoever plays the Dutch, hopefully Germany.

[RoyalChicagoFC]

As five-goal thrillers go, I give it a

[AbovetheI]

As five-goal thrillers go, I give it a

Yeah but you're 5(6?) hours behind, haven't worked all day yet and aren't wasting your life away next to the telly craving for something to enlighten your evening. So meh.

[Archie's penalty]

Van Bommel is a cnut.

[Flyingkiwi]

Van Bommel is a cnut.

What did he get booked for late on? There was a Uruguayian handball and Van Bommel gets booked!

[Archie's penalty]

For being a scary bastard! Did you see the look he gave the Uruguayan at one point? It was like, 'you're staying down'.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

^ Re Dirk...so he's off-side then.

Bottom line is, at the point of the ball release, and eye contact of that very movement of referee's assistant, there is no way he could of given that. As mentioned earlier, camera angles from one side are very deceiving, proven with this goal.

Sure but you can understand Uruguay's frustration that such a close call went against them.

I'd imagine they thought it was rather less close.

To be frank, if you need a slow-mo replay or a graphic to prove someone was off then you've got not reason to moan about a lino not getting it spot on. When the law was written, after all, I'm sure the weren't concerned about the problem of attackers being two or three inches ahead.

[Compo's Hat]

0-0 in reality though, as we know it's not possible to score goals like GvB's and Forlan's with this terrible ball.

It's really a 0-0 with a couple of good long-range strikes, isn't it? Quite a tame affair.

Nice to see Compo coming up with opinions of his own

Indeed i did as i quoted on something while reading through the thread and then put my own opinion at the bottom without reading the rest of it

[RoyalChicagoFC]

WRT the offside not given on the second Dutch goal:

On the eve of half-time, Sneijder (I think), with the ball at his feet in the centre of the park, played in Kuijt making a run up right, and the flag went up immediately

When the ball was played, the second last defender (or last defender not the 'keeper, as was the case) was a yard upfield of Kuijt --it wasn't even close (and in fact I think that there was a third defender playing Kuijt onside by half a yard or so)

Not saying he would've scored --how could anyone know-- but that was an absurd decision, and it was no matter of the TV angle not taking in all of the relevant action in the passage of play or anything like that

Indeed, thought the match officials had a rough day all round tbf

[Compo's Hat]

Apparently Forlan was carrying a thigh injury during the game.

[Archie's penalty]

Makes sense. Otherwise why would he have been subbed so early?

He really gave his all - one of the stars of the tournament no doubt.

[Silver Fox]

Still not massively impressed by Holland, as daft as that sounds, really think ze germans (hopefully) will ahve tons of fun against their defence and surely someone will finally notice Van Bommel being a pcunter? shame for uruguay, not just that they lost but that they didn't really try to do anything about it until a minute into time added on, ah well.

As for Beglin, it really shows how much he (or any other colour man) adds to proceedings when I didn't realise he wasn't there until Moyles mentioned it on the radio this morning, shame Tyldesley turned up of course.

[Row Z Royal]

Makes sense. Otherwise why would he have been subbed so early?

He really gave his all - one of the stars of the tournament no doubt.

So early? Weren't there only 7 or 8 minutes to go?

[Seal]

Really not convinced by this "Uruguay have been attacking & Netherlands have have defensive" stuff.

Uruguay have scored 7 goals, Netherlands 9.

Think all that's happened is Uruguay have been less defensive than normal and Netherlands less offensive. Net result is they've probably employed relatively similar tactics - relying on an excellent forward line picking off over committed teams on the break - and in Uruguay's case also heavily relying on the ability of Forlan at set pieces.

Hasn't been similar at all! Uruguay play a much more direct game to Holland's patient build up play.

AP i don't think you've watched any of this tournament based on your views. A lot of teams have sat back against the Dutch while Uruguay have tried to defend at times when clearly attack is there best form of defence.

Was out last night so just picking this up now.

I agree Uruguay are more direct, but I would not describe Holland as using 'patient build up play'. Spain and Argentina are in the vast minority in this tournament as the only teams who have really stuck to this principle. Holland are another example of an extremely good counter attacking side. Yes they knock the ball around a bit at the back, but that's not build up play that's possession. Most of their chances and or goals come from relatively swift counter attacks utilising the pace of their forward players. You can't play a 4-2-3-1 system and be intent on monopolising possession.

For that's the key theme of the World Cup. The most successful teams have been those who have mastered the 'blitz' (no pun intended) counter attack. Germany obviously being the prime exponents. Will make for a fascinating clash of styles tonight.

Also makes you cringe when thinking about England, who had no discernible tactics or style of play in any way.

[brendywendy]

Just seen the lino's view and it looks level to me - just his foot is offside.

Elaborate fishing, Dirkers? The law says any part of the player's body with which he could legitimately score a goal.

Still not sure if he should be given offside though. From memory, I think the law says you're offside if you play the ball, or have an opportunity to interfere with an opponent, or their ability to play the ball. So, should it have been given?

dont think you can argue he was very marginally off, and you cant argue that he was clearly active/interfering with play, just by distracting defender and keeper