ITALY FAVORED BY REFS?
Tom Zuehlke
>From: dol...@nyc.pipeline.com (Juan Gonzalez)
>Subject: ITALY FAVORED BY REFS?
>Date: 6 Jun 1995 11:33:36 -0400
>I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
>watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
>fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
>was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
>them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
>they wish.
[deleted]
In WC '94, Italy had a keeper sent off in one game (Ireland?), and had Zola
sent off against Nigeria. The sending off of Zola was one of the most
unjustified ejections I have ever seen.
Juan Gonzalez
watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
added on to the 2nd over time was ridiculous. I think it was 15 min. added
at the end of the second 15 min half. Of course both teams could have
scored but Argentina had a man less and knew that Goycochea could stop a
few penalty shots. Not to mention the fact that they were playing in Italy
and if there was going to be a goal in the overtime, chances are it would
be the home teams. If Italy would have scored a goal in the 29 min of the
15 minute over time there would have been a lot said about that. I also
think the Check team was robed in the first round game. The U.S. was fouled
very hard with nothing called. Uruguay had every call go against them
untill they were finally dominated in the game. I realize that Italy was
the home team and they always seem to be favored by FIFA but It has
happened in other years as well. The way the referee's call these games it
just makes you dislike an otherwise interesting team.
///
(. .)
+-oOO-(_)-OOo------Juan Gonzalez (dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Peter Phung
On 6 Jun 1995, Juan Gonzalez wrote:
> I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
> watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
> fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
> was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
> them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
> they wish.
Hmmm...well what you say is not really true. I think all the teams are
treated the same. Do you remember The Red card to Zola? what was that for??
That what you get from a Mexican referee <Mexico and Italy could have met
in the semis> but i'm sure the Mexicans would have rather played Nigeria.
didn't matter, the Nigerians or the Spaniards would have probably taken
care of a waek Mexican team. Who knows.
The Spain 1/4-final was just a missed call by a bad official. But their
defenders just play with confidence because that is the best part of the
Italian game. If they didn't play with any confidence the Italian team would
be useless.I don't agree with the no penalties ever being called. Remember
the penalty called against Costacurta at the end of the 1st half vs Bulgaria
<1/2-final>. Half the stadia didn't even know it was a penalty until all
of a sudden the ref put the ball on the spot It put the bulgarians right
back into the game. I just think that the Italian defenders are very
experienced and that's why they rarely foul anyone in the penalty area.
And because of this. They get they're fair amount of Yellow Cards.
> Also in 1990 against Argentina, although they lost, the time
> added on to the 2nd over time was ridiculous. I think it was 15 min. added
> at the end of the second 15 min half. Of course both teams could have
> scored but Argentina had a man less and knew that Goycochea could stop a
> few penalty shots. Not to mention the fact that they were playing in Italy
> and if there was going to be a goal in the overtime, chances are it would
> be the home teams. If Italy would have scored a goal in the 29 min of the
> 15 minute over time there would have been a lot said about that.
I think you'd better double check that game. I still have the tape of it.
The 2nd period of extra time was almost Exactly 15 minutes. The first
period was about 24 minutes because of all the delays, including the 5
minute delay for the sending off of Giusti for bonking Baggio on the head.
NO team could score in the second period. The Argentines were going for
penalties because they were down to 10-men and half the Italian couldn't
even walk. Remember Ferri?
> I also think the Check team was robed in the first round game. The U.S.
> was fouled
> very hard with nothing called. Uruguay had every call go against them
> untill they were finally dominated in the game. I realize that Italy was
> the home team and they always seem to be favored by FIFA but It has
> happened in other years as well. The way the referee's call these games it
> just makes you dislike an otherwise interesting team.
Well. It's true that Italy were at home so the officials probably favored
the Italians a little but not much. The Italians did not have a penalty
shot in regulation throughout the tournament <except for one in the
third-place game>.
If you watch alot of Italian football, you'll find that the Italians are
far from a viscious team. They just have the stingiest and most
experienced defense that know how to foul without getting caught at times.
anyone else have any vivid memories onthis subject??
Peter Phung!
Eoin Wren
The one memory I have of a referee favoring aan Italian side, was when I
was watching the 1990 World Cup quarter finals.
Italy were playing Ireland. Ok I was very biased, but as far as I
remember, people here thought that a lot of decisions went the wrong way
that night ( the wrong way being to Italy).
Eoin Wren
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eoin Wren
2nd Year Computer Science Student
E- Mail : efw...@alf2.tcd.ie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M. J. P.
>
>I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
>watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
>fighting an uneven battle at times.
It happens all the time, with every team.
Jose M A Rodrigues
tzue...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Tom Zuehlke) writes:
|> In article <3r1sgg$3...@pipe2.nyc.pipeline.com> dol...@nyc.pipeline.com (Juan
|> Gonzalez) writes:
|> >From: dol...@nyc.pipeline.com (Juan Gonzalez)
|> >Subject: ITALY FAVORED BY REFS?
|> >Date: 6 Jun 1995 11:33:36 -0400
|>
|> >watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
|> >was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
|> >them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
|> >they wish.
|>
|>
|> In WC '94, Italy had a keeper sent off in one game (Ireland?), and had Zola
|> sent off against Nigeria. The sending off of Zola was one of the most
|> unjustified ejections I have ever seen.
|>
Well, in the same match Nigeria was denied two penalties...
Juan Gonzalez
>In article <3r1sgg$3...@pipe2.nyc.pipeline.com> dol...@nyc.pipeline.com
(Juan
>Gonzalez) writes:
>>From: dol...@nyc.pipeline.com (Juan Gonzalez)
>>Subject: ITALY FAVORED BY REFS?
>>Date: 6 Jun 1995 11:33:36 -0400
>
>>I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
>>watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
>>fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
>>was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
>>them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do
as
>>they wish.
>
>[deleted]
>
>In WC '94, Italy had a keeper sent off in one game (Ireland?), and had
Zola
>sent off against Nigeria. The sending off of Zola was one of the most
>unjustified ejections I have ever seen.
This isn't worth arguing I think Italy get more breaks than any other big
team and that is clearly evident. The keeper getting sent off was more than
justified and Zola not so much but it didn't cost them the game. In the
case of Spain the ref clearly cost them the game.
Michael Juan Pomar
dol...@nyc.pipeline.com "Juan Gonzalez" writes:
> I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
> watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
> fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
> was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
> them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
> they wish. Also in 1990 against Argentina, although they lost, the time
> added on to the 2nd over time was ridiculous. I think it was 15 min. added
> at the end of the second 15 min half. Of course both teams could have
> scored but Argentina had a man less and knew that Goycochea could stop a
> few penalty shots. Not to mention the fact that they were playing in Italy
> and if there was going to be a goal in the overtime, chances are it would
> be the home teams. If Italy would have scored a goal in the 29 min of the
> 15 minute over time there would have been a lot said about that. I also
> think the Check team was robed in the first round game. The U.S. was fouled
> very hard with nothing called. Uruguay had every call go against them
> untill they were finally dominated in the game. I realize that Italy was
> the home team and they always seem to be favored by FIFA but It has
> happened in other years as well. The way the referee's call these games it
> just makes you dislike an otherwise interesting team.
>
>
> ///
> (. .)
> +-oOO-(_)-OOo------Juan Gonzalez (dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
>
You've really got a thing into your head about biase in referees, I read
numerous posting from yourself on the 66 world cup. It just sounds like
sour grapes to me, look I am half Spanish, half English and naturally I was
cheering Spain on in the QF of World Cup 94 against Italy. I couldn't believe
it when the ref didn't give us a pen in the last minute, nor could I believe
how the ref in the 86 World cup QF England - Argentina didn't spot Maradona
punch into the goal. But refree's are only human and these sort of blunders
happen, to coin an old footballing pharse "these incidents will even them-
selves out over time", nothing could be more true, in one match the ref
may appear to be totally against your side and the next time the opposition
may feel he totally against them.
So Juan stop whinging, referees are not biased there just human.
Cheers
--
Michael Juan Pomar
Juan Gonzalez
You can say what you like but I think the top teams always recieve favors
from the refs and Italy recieves the most. I think most people agree with
me on this from the mail I've gotten. My post about 1966 was just a fair
question. Something that I thought was worth talking about in this group
and many people thought the same.
///
(. .)
+-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Enrico Savorelli
>I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
>watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
>fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
>was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
>them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
>they wish. Also in 1990 against Argentina, although they lost, the time
>added on to the 2nd over time was ridiculous. I think it was 15 min. added
>at the end of the second 15 min half. Of course both teams could have
>scored but Argentina had a man less and knew that Goycochea could stop a
>few penalty shots. Not to mention the fact that they were playing in Italy
>and if there was going to be a goal in the overtime, chances are it would
>be the home teams. If Italy would have scored a goal in the 29 min of the
>15 minute over time there would have been a lot said about that. I also
>think the Check team was robed in the first round game. The U.S. was fouled
>very hard with nothing called. Uruguay had every call go against them
>untill they were finally dominated in the game. I realize that Italy was
>the home team and they always seem to be favored by FIFA but It has
>happened in other years as well. The way the referee's call these games it
>just makes you dislike an otherwise interesting team.
>
>
> ///
> (. .)
>+-oOO-(_)-OOo------Juan Gonzalez (dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
You can't be serious about this! All you did was give examples about Italy, when in fact in recent world Cups, MANY GAMES looked as if they were in the hands of the referees.
Examples:
1990 England vs. Cameroon
What was up with that penalty?
the Maradona incident in 1994
he did not have to be thrown out the World cup. In Mexico 1986, a player was caught with drugs in his body, and he was suspended for 3 games. The expulsion of Maradona DRAMATICALLY CHANGED THE OUTCOMES OF THE WORLD CUP. Personally I think Argentina would have gone to the finals leaving Brazil behind. Think about it, Brazil could not score a goal against Italy in 90 minutes plus supplementaries, Argentinam which was undefeated until the incident, still passed and then lost to Romania. Maradona would have g
iven them the cup. But the corrupt referees DECIDED on their own the fate of Argentina. So don't talk to me about Italy.
Enrico Savorelli.
enr...@sgc.com
Claudio Serra
>In rec.sport.soccer Michael Juan Pomar <Mic...@mjpomar.demon.co.uk> said:
>
>
>>In article <3r1sgg$3...@pipe2.nyc.pipeline.com>
Yes, yes... indeed, Zola had a red card in the match against Nigeria in the last
WC for something that he never did(i'm sure you remember...). Nigeria was
leading 1-0 and was around the 80th minute. So, Italy one short and only
ten minutes to play. That was a big favour ....... come on, be serious.
Claudio
Simon Moore US/ESB4 60/3/155 #40593
|> In article <3rd64n$q...@pipe4.nyc.pipeline.com>, dol...@nyc.pipeline.com (Juan Gonzalez) says:
|> And what about in 1966 when the referee gave England the goal which bounced up
|> and down on the goal line a few times before being cleared. These ref's
|> are HUMAN and they are suseptible to making mistakes you know, but
Well in 1966 and all that, it was the linesman who made England's day - and he was Russian, for what it's worth. And no, it wasn't a goal.
Simon
--
Simon Moore, Alcatel SEL
WHOSH! Worldwide Hatters on the Super Highway (reques...@robots.ox.ac.uk)
Juan Gonzalez
>In article <3rd64n$q...@pipe4.nyc.pipeline.com>, dol...@nyc.pipeline.com
(Juan
>Gonzalez) says:
>>from the refs and Italy recieves the most. I think most people agree with
>>me on this from the mail I've gotten. My post about 1966 was just a fair
>>question. Something that I thought was worth talking about in this group
>>and many people thought the same.
>
>I agree with the referee's having favorites and all, but I know that Italy
is
>not the only country to receive these favor's. Yes in 1982 it was the
president
>of the Italian league who suggested to the president of FIFA to let a
certain
>referee ref the game against Argentina, knowing that this referee condoned
a
>strong style of marking, thus allowing Gentile to mark Maradona in a
strong
>manner. But this kind of persuasion and favors are being received by all
the
>favorite teams, and they are against all the non favorite teams. It
happens all
>the time.
Of course they have their favorites. It just seems to me that Italy has the
most influence of any team.
That game in 1982 is just another example. If Argentina played the way
Italy did in that game they would not be allowed.
>In 1990 the referee of the final game Germany vs. Argentina just happened
to be
>the brother in law of a high official at FIFA. Just like the referee that
was
>chosen for Brazil vs. Sweden was a referee that had been quite sympathetic
to
>Brazil in past games, and so on and so on. Argentina also had favoratism
in
>their refereeing in 1986 thats why we have all this talk about the goal
that
>should have never been (the Hand of God goal)
I believe the hand of God goal was an honest mistake. It wasn't till it was
shown in slow motion that everyone saw what happened. It was still the
greatest illegal goal I've ever seen and was then followed by the greates
legal goal. That game was refed evenly with only that big mistake.
The fact is that there is a lot of pressure on a ref to favor the big team
since the big teams have more influence in FIFA. Like I said before a bad
call against Cameroon is nothing but if they make a bad call against Italy,
it may cost a ref his international career. I also think they should change
the way refs are selected. Both teams should be in agreement not just one.
The ref plays a major role in a game and I'm tired of seeing the way they
favor the big teams.
If Argentina plays Italy. Italy will be favored 4 out of 5 times. If
Argentina plays Nigeria. Argentina will be favored 4 out of 5 times. This
is not right. I'm sorry to the Italians because I meant no offense to them
but from what I have seen their team is the most favored of any. That's
just my opinion. They also have the most influence in FIFA, what a
coincidence.
///
(. .)
+-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Simon Moore US/ESB4 60/3/155 #40593
|> In rec.sport.soccer p...@Direct.CA (M. J. P.) said:
|> I believe the hand of God goal was an honest mistake. It wasn't till it was
|> shown in slow motion that everyone saw what happened. It was still the
|> greatest illegal goal I've ever seen and was then followed by the greates
|> legal goal. That game was refed evenly with only that big mistake.
|>
Well, I was under the impression that the whole world simultaneously shouted
"handball", apart from the referee of course. I didn't see the incident as it
happened but was listening to it on the radio & the commentator was speechless
afterwards, without the need for slow motion.
|> The ref plays a major role in a game and I'm tired of seeing the way they
|> favor the big teams.
|>
Juan, whilst your conspiracy theories are interesting, they remain theories.
I think you'll find that it's swings & roundabouts and a bad decision against
your team will sooner or later be cancelled out by a bad one in favour. Even if
your team is Argentina. :-)
Regards
M. J. P.
>
>In rec.sport.soccer p...@Direct.CA (M. J. P.) said:
>most influence of any team.
>That game in 1982 is just another example. If Argentina played the way
>Italy did in that game they would not be allowed.
You seem to be picking on the incidents that you want to remember and
forgetting the rest. Argentina did play that way all through 1986 and
some of 1990, because it was tolerated, but when it wasn't tolerated
against Argentina you remember it.
>>In 1990 the referee of the final game Germany vs. Argentina just happened
>to be
>>the brother in law of a high official at FIFA. Just like the referee that
>was
>>chosen for Brazil vs. Sweden was a referee that had been quite sympathetic
>to
>>Brazil in past games, and so on and so on. Argentina also had favoratism
>in
>>their refereeing in 1986 thats why we have all this talk about the goal
>that
>>should have never been (the Hand of God goal)
>I believe the hand of God goal was an honest mistake. It wasn't till it was
>shown in slow motion that everyone saw what happened. It was still the
>greatest illegal goal I've ever seen and was then followed by the greates
>legal goal. That game was refed evenly with only that big mistake.
It could have been a mistake! The whole stadium saw it but the ref didn't.
Maybe it was the referee's positioning or maybe he just didn't want to see
it. I also remember Maradona saving a goal with his infamous Hand of God,
and that time the referee was standing about 5 yards away from him, and
clearly saw it. So again it goes both ways.
>The fact is that there is a lot of pressure on a ref to favor the big team
>since the big teams have more influence in FIFA. Like I said before a bad
>call against Cameroon is nothing but if they make a bad call against Italy,
or Argentina or Brazil or Germany, or any other favorite nation.
>it may cost a ref his international career. I also think they should change
>the way refs are selected. Both teams should be in agreement not just one.
>The ref plays a major role in a game and I'm tired of seeing the way they
>favor the big teams.
The favoratism will always be there. The ref's are not robots you know!
Besides you really can't say that you know what's going on behind the
scenes either. You don't know what kind of pressure is being put on the
ref's, or who is putting that pressure on them. But again it happens to
all the teams, maybe some more obvious than others, but it happens to all
of them.
>If Argentina plays Italy. Italy will be favored 4 out of 5 times. If
depending if Italy is in the plans, but if Argentina is in the plans it
will be in reverse.
>Argentina plays Nigeria. Argentina will be favored 4 out of 5 times. This
>is not right. I'm sorry to the Italians because I meant no offense to them
>but from what I have seen their team is the most favored of any. That's
>just my opinion. They also have the most influence in FIFA, what a
>coincidence.
If that influence part is right I don't think we would have seen the final
that we did this year.
Juan Gonzalez
>
>|> I believe the hand of God goal was an honest mistake. It wasn't till it
was
>|> shown in slow motion that everyone saw what happened. It was still the
|>
>greatest illegal goal I've ever seen and was then followed by the greates
|>
>legal goal. That game was refed evenly with only that big mistake. |>
>
shouted
>"handball", apart from the referee of course. I didn't see the incident as
it
>happened but was listening to it on the radio & the commentator was
speechless
>afterwards, without the need for slow motion.
you know anything
about football if you never saw that goal. I think most people will agree
the first time they saw it
that Maradona did it so fast that you had doubts about what you saw. If the
ref has a doubt he can't
call it a hand ball.
>|> The ref plays a major role in a game and I'm tired of seeing the way
they |>
>favor the big teams.
>|>
>
theories. I
>think you'll find that it's swings & roundabouts and a bad decision
against
>your team will sooner or later be cancelled out by a bad one in favour.
Even if
>your team is Argentina. :-)
It is a FACT, and
it is something that should never happen. I've said it many times before.
The refs are afraid to make
important calls against the top teams. Including Argentina when they play a
lesser team. I don't like
that at all. I just thought the last WC was BS when they didn't call that
clear penalty against Italy in the game against Spain. I don't care how
many Italians write to me about the game where their goaltender was red
carded or the game against Nigeria. That won't change my mind. None of
those calls can compare against that non-call in the game against Spain.
Juan Gonzalez
>>In rec.sport.soccer p...@Direct.CA (M. J. P.) said:
the
>>most influence of any team.
>>That game in 1982 is just another example. If Argentina played the way
>>Italy did in that game they would not be allowed.
>
>You seem to be picking on the incidents that you want to remember and
>forgetting the rest. Argentina did play that way all through 1986 and some
of
>1990, because it was tolerated, but when it wasn't tolerated against
Argentina
>you remember it.
game. Against Cameroon for example they were severly fouled. I have no
complaints with the Ref since he gave out enough red and yellow cards. As
far as 1986 you couldn't be more wrong.
>>>In 1990 the referee of the final game Germany vs. Argentina just
happened
>>to be the brother in law of a high official at FIFA. Just like the
referee that
>>was chosen for Brazil vs. Sweden was a referee that had been quite
sympathetic
>>to Brazil in past games, and so on and so on. Argentina also had
favoratism
>>in their refereeing in 1986 thats why we have all this talk about the
goal
>>that should have never been (the Hand of God goal)
team
>>since the big teams have more influence in FIFA. Like I said before a bad
>>call against Cameroon is nothing but if they make a bad call against
Italy,
>or Argentina or Brazil or Germany, or any other favorite nation.
Yes that is exactly my point. It is not just Italy.
>>it may cost a ref his international career. I also think they should
change
>>the way refs are selected. Both teams should be in agreement not just
one.
>>The ref plays a major role in a game and I'm tired of seeing the way they
>>favor the big teams.
>The favoratism will always be there. The ref's are not robots you know!
Besides
>you really can't say that you know what's going on behind the scenes
either.
>You don't know what kind of pressure is being put on the ref's, or who is
>putting that pressure on them. But again it happens to all the teams,
maybe
>some more obvious than others, but it happens to all of them.
>>If Argentina plays Italy. Italy will be favored 4 out of 5 times. If
>depending if Italy is in the plans, but if Argentina is in the plans it
will be
>in reverse.
I agree, it depends where the game is played. In 1982 the ref didn't call
anything Italy did in the game against Argentina. I can't say it mattered
much because I think Italy had a better team and they outplayed them anyway
and deserved to win. It just would have been nice of the ref to notice that
the players shirts were almost getting pulled off them. In 1986 the game
was fairly even, it finished in a tie with Argentina getting the best of
the play. In 1990 it took a monumental effort for Argentina to defeat Italy
and the Referee in penalty shots. Fortunatly for Argentina the lineman in
that game called every offside that Italy made.
>>Argentina plays Nigeria. Argentina will be favored 4 out of 5 times. This
>>is not right. I'm sorry to the Italians because I meant no offense to
them
>>but from what I have seen their team is the most favored of any. That's
>>just my opinion. They also have the most influence in FIFA, what a
>>coincidence.
>If that influence part is right I don't think we would have seen the final
that
>we did this year.
I'm not saying it happens every game. It won't happend in a Final with
Italy and Brazil, but it happens much to often and what bothers me most is
that people don't complain about it. Maybe this is because the top nations
are favored more often than not.
M. J. P.
>You can say what you like but I think the top teams always recieve favors
>from the refs and Italy recieves the most. I think most people agree with
>me on this from the mail I've gotten. My post about 1966 was just a fair
>question. Something that I thought was worth talking about in this group
>and many people thought the same.
I agree with the referee's having favorites and all, but I know that Italy
is not the only country to receive these favor's. Yes in 1982 it was the
president of the Italian league who suggested to the president of FIFA
to let a certain referee ref the game against Argentina, knowing that this
referee condoned a strong style of marking, thus allowing Gentile to mark
Maradona in a strong manner. But this kind of persuasion and favors are
being received by all the favorite teams, and they are against all the non
favorite teams. It happens all the time.
In 1990 the referee of the final game Germany vs. Argentina just happened
to be the brother in law of a high official at FIFA. Just like the referee
that was chosen for Brazil vs. Sweden was a referee that had been quite
sympathetic to Brazil in past games, and so on and so on. Argentina also
had favoratism in their refereeing in 1986 thats why we have all this talk
about the goal that should have never been (the Hand of God goal)
And what about in 1966 when the referee gave England the goal which bounced up
and down on the goal line a few times before being cleared. These ref's
are HUMAN and they are suseptible to making mistakes you know, but
then on the other hand they are HUMAN and they are also suseptible to
bias and persuasion. You don't have to look far to nitice this, it happens
all the time EVEN IN LITTLE LEAGUE! I coach a youth soccer team and we
see stuff like that all the time, and probably are even guilty of it
ourselves sometimes.
>
> ///
> (. .)
>+-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Riccardo Fabio Biondini
>I wonder what other people think about this. I've gotten the feeling
>watching Italy in the last few WC's that to play against them you are
>fighting an uneven battle at times. The game against Spain in the last WC
>was a big example. They just don't get crucial penalties called against
>them and their defenders seem to play with this added confidence and do as
>they wish. Also in 1990 against Argentina, although they lost, the time
>added on to the 2nd over time was ridiculous. I think it was 15 min. added
>at the end of the second 15 min half. Of course both teams could have
>scored but Argentina had a man less and knew that Goycochea could stop a
>few penalty shots. Not to mention the fact that they were playing in Italy
>and if there was going to be a goal in the overtime, chances are it would
>be the home teams. If Italy would have scored a goal in the 29 min of the
>15 minute over time there would have been a lot said about that. I also
>think the Check team was robed in the first round game. The U.S. was fouled
>very hard with nothing called. Uruguay had every call go against them
>untill they were finally dominated in the game. I realize that Italy was
>the home team and they always seem to be favored by FIFA but It has
>happened in other years as well. The way the referee's call these games it
>just makes you dislike an otherwise interesting team.
>
>
> ///
> (. .)
>+-oOO-(_)-OOo------Juan Gonzalez (dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Not only are you are sour grapes but you make your fellow countrymen
look like bad sports, have a look at WC '62 and then tell me if
we were favoured.
Would you like some fish with that chip on your shoulder?
r.
--
"Now if you don't want to know the score 'cause you've taped the game while
you're out getting shitfaced and chasing chicks and you've only just woken up
and haven't had time to watch the tape yet look away now..... Oh, **** me
drunk. What a drubbing!"-Ian Maurice. Parma mailing-list g...@blaze.cs.jhu.edu
Juan Gonzalez
said:
>Not only are you are sour grapes but you make your fellow countrymen look
like
>bad sports, have a look at WC '62 and then tell me if we were favoured.
>Would you like some fish with that chip on your shoulder?
you have to go back so far to find a WC when Italy was not favored then you
just prove my point. Maybe the title of the article was too anti-Italian. I
was wrong to choose those words. It should be more anti-FIFA since they are
the ones to blame. Not the refs and not Italy. The fact is that the top 4
teams are allways favored against lesser teams, and I believe Italy is
favored a little more than the other teams becuase they have more influence
in FIFA. I don't think it's becuase they need the most help but who knows,
everyone can make that judgement for themselves.Sour grapes? Why? my team
also gets favored. Except when playing Italy of course. Even then I just
consider that a handicap you have to deal with if you play Italy in Europe.
What I'm afraid of is that all of this influence on hand picking the
referees that suit you most ,will ruin the nature of the game. You can't
deny that Italy has the most influence. In 1994 they got to choose where
they played before anyone else did. Everyone knew that Italy would get to
choose the New York - New Jersy area. I don't think there is anything wrong
with the top teams getting to choose, but why does Italy get 1st choice. I
think it should go acording to recent performance in World Cups. If that
were the case Italy would choose behind Germany and Argentina. Why always
the special treatment? The answer is MONEY of course, but that just doesn't
seem like Fair Play to me.
M. J. P.
>I'm not saying it happens every game. It won't happend in a Final with
>Italy and Brazil, but it happens much to often and what bothers me most is
>that people don't complain about it. Maybe this is because the top nations
>are favored more often than not.
I guess when a favorite team is in an important game, and it is favorable
that they advance, whether it be Brazil, Argentina, Germany or Italy, then
we will see some of that happening. Fifa has to give the world what it wants
to see.
M. J. P.
>It's not a theory that some teams get to chose who referees a certain game.
>It is a FACT, and
>it is something that should never happen. I've said it many times before.
>The refs are afraid to make
>important calls against the top teams. Including Argentina when they play a
>lesser team. I don't like
>that at all. I just thought the last WC was BS when they didn't call that
>clear penalty against Italy in the game against Spain. I don't care how
>many Italians write to me about the game where their goaltender was red
>carded or the game against Nigeria. That won't change my mind. None of
>those calls can compare against that non-call in the game against Spain.
It's pretty obvious to me that you are picking your spots to analyze. In
other words when somone is looking for something they usually find it, but
when their eyes are closed they will miss the obvious. You are obviously
looking for this when Italy plays, and keeping your eyes closed when Argentina
or any other team plays. That play against Spain, while it was a justafiable
penalty and Spain should have gotten a penalty kick, the ref had his back
turned to the play. Now you are saying that if the ref had a doubt against
the HOG goal of Maradona he can't call it. Well what the hell is the ref
supposed to do when his back is turned?? These kind of incidents happen
all the time in sports. I see it all the time in Hockey, when one team's
goon looks around to see if anyone is looking then punches another teams
star in the face (it's an intimidation technique) They are hopeing that i
will shake up the stars game. While it is different in soccer, you will
have to agree that many players (not only Italian players) will try to get
away with more when the ref's head is turned!Tassotti did get suspended for
the remained of the World Cup with an 8 game suspension from FIFA (more
than Leonardo got *4games* for cracking Ramos's skull) So where does this
favoring come in?
M. J. P.
>the ones to blame. Not the refs and not Italy.
Your right! The teams shouldn't be picked on.
Argentina should be blamed for allowing Maradon to compete since 1986 under
the influence of banned substances FIFA should. It's just that they didn't
want Maradona to be kicked out during those World Cup's because he was
instrumental to their (Argentina's) victories, and with out him, they(Argentina)
were nothing more than mediocre. Instead FIFA chose to embarass Maradona
this year, when he wasn't a part of the plans and therefore the could
afford to make him look silly. It doesn't hurt that Maradona had publicly
pointed the scandalous finger at FIFA, but that's besides the point, I'm
sure FIFA was just trying to do the right thing (YEAH RIGHT!)
My point is that they knew before, but it didn't matter, because if FIFA
doesn't want to catch someone (From ANY COUNTRY) on drugs then they won't.
So when Maradona received the false promise from FIFA last year to do what
it takes to get back into playing shape, he automatically assumed that
he would be a protected player again. Nope, not this year!
>The fact is that the top 4
>teams are allways favored against lesser teams, and I believe Italy is
>favored a little more than the other teams because they have more influence
>in FIFA.
I beleive Mr Havelange is Brazilian, so i can't see how he would favor
Italy more than any other team.
I also know that he is trying to rid an European influence from FIFA before
he loses his presidency, which makes you last comment quite invalid.
>I don't think it's becuase they need the most help but who knows,
I think your views are completely one-sided.I have no problem admitting
that Italy are amongst the top four who do receive some special treatment.
I would never say that Argentina is the only one! That would be very
biased. If I was biased I would just look at 1986 and say, "Well Argentina
won because of the ref's favoritisms in that World Cup, because they
clearly weren't the better team!" But that would be wrong to say, because
Argentina is not the only team to receive special treatment, just
because they did in 1986. Other teams who are in the plans get it in other
World Cups.
>everyone can make that judgement for themselves.Sour grapes? Why? my team
>also gets favored. Except when playing Italy of course. Even then I just
Except for the semi final in 1990.
>consider that a handicap you have to deal with if you play Italy in Europe.
>What I'm afraid of is that all of this influence on hand picking the
>referees that suit you most ,will ruin the nature of the game. You can't
>deny that Italy has the most influence. In 1994 they got to choose where
>they played before anyone else did. Everyone knew that Italy would get to
>choose the New York - New Jersy area. I don't think there is anything wrong
>with the top teams getting to choose, but why does Italy get 1st choice. I
Why did Brazil play most of their games in the California region? Because
that's where the most Brailians resided in the US. The same goes for Italy
when they play in New York.
>think it should go acording to recent performance in World Cups. If that
>were the case Italy would choose behind Germany and Argentina. Why always
>the special treatment? The answer is MONEY of course, but that just doesn't
>seem like Fair Play to me.
Me neither, I hated it when in 1990 Italy couldn't win the cup at home,
since they were the best team in the tournament. I suppose all the money
in the World couldn't buy the cup from Germany since it was Germanies
time to win it.
Medved Michael
: In WC '94, Italy had a keeper sent off in one game (Ireland?), and had Zola
: sent off against Nigeria. The sending off of Zola was one of the most
: unjustified ejections I have ever seen.
Sending Pagliuca off was a completely justified referee's decision, in
the game against Norway, after he handled the ball and prevented a certain
goal outside his box.
As for Zola, his sending off was a complete bullshit of decision from the re-
feree's side, right as you say: "one of the most unbelievable and unjustified
ejections" all over the time. But remember the other unbelievable decision of
the same game -- Yekini makes his way towards one-to-one with Marchegiani and
towards making it 2:2, Maldini crashes his 20 meters from his net, from be-
hind, and gets booked instead of being sent off!
Nothing can be said about the refereeing pro or contra Italy in WC'94, except
the above-mentioned. Italy wasn't preferred or biased against a year ago. But
there were three teams to be severely fucked from behind. Cutting the genious
rebirth of Maradona was a tremendous knock-down for Argentina, a knock-down
they weren't able to cope with. Klinsmann's perfect goal was disallowed vs
South Korea because of an imaginative offside, and he was booked (though then
it didn't really matter, and the Germans won); and then Voeller's perfect go-
al was disallowed vs Bulgaria, leading it to 1:2 afterwards instead of 2:0
then. And Belgium had been had twice -- once, when Kurt Rottlisberger (sp?)
didn't pay attention for a foul of Germans of Yossip Weber, making one of the
most erroneous decisions of the last WC. And the second case...
Many people appreciate the keeper's genius of Toni Schumacher, and many people
despise him strongly after his dreadful fall on Battiston in WC'82 and wonder
about referee's lack of any reaction then. But 12 years have passed, and the
most dreadful fall of the keeper ever (at least, in serious International com-
petitions) takes place. Weber gets the ball in one-to-one with Khalil Azmi of
Morocco, the referee whistles for the offside, Weber doesn't hear and tries to
pass the keeper, and the latter crashes him down in a good wrestling exercise.
Both lay 5 (!) minutes on the ground, and then Weber stands up, and the keeper
is carried away, nearly unconscious. 88 minutes have passed, 2-3 minutes are
left, with Belgium leading 1:0, and the keeper isn't able to continue; so, we
can see a certain human factor in not giving the keeper a red card. But book-
ing Weber for playing after the whistle?
Referees can be mistaken in any game, and sometimes it results in a serious
damage to a certain team. But sometimes the most dreadful mistakes are taken
in not so important games. It's worthless to seek for prejudice everywhere.
The mistakes happen, but I don't think it's directed for or against the cer-
tain teams. The last WC, the side who suffered most from the mistakes was
Belgium, and nobody thought it's able of catching any high place.
MICHAEL MEDVED.
Arthur Michael Mandel
Medved Michael <c045...@techst02.technion.ac.il> wrote:
> and then Voeller's perfect go-
>al was disallowed vs Bulgaria, leading it to 1:2 afterwards instead of 2:0
>then.
Just a quick correction -- Voeller's goal was properly disallowed --
a ball hit the post (but, importantly, not the Bulgarian goalkeeper,
Mihailov), and Voeller hit the rebound in, but he was judged to be
in an offside position.
There was a lot of discussion here on RSS
after that call -- Voeller was clearly beyond the last defensive
player, but people wanted to know whether he should still be called
offside if the ball hit the post. Indeed, the consensus was that
Voeller was offside; if Mihailov had touched the ball, Voeller would
not have been offside, but since he missed it, the call was correct.
Interestingly, the "expert" American commentator during the
halftime of the following game (whose name I forget, but was a truly
awful commentator -- very stiff) also thought that the call was
incorrect. I hope he finds success in another profession.
Sincerely,
Arthur Mandel
man...@cuhhca.hhmi.columbia.edu
Alessandro Pezzati
>
> Referees can be mistaken in any game, and sometimes it results in a serious
> damage to a certain team. But sometimes the most dreadful mistakes are taken
> in not so important games. It's worthless to seek for prejudice everywhere.
> The mistakes happen, but I don't think it's directed for or against the cer-
> tain teams. The last WC, the side who suffered most from the mistakes was
> Belgium, and nobody thought it's able of catching any high place.
>
>
> MICHAEL MEDVED.
I think people complain too much about favoritism towards Italy.
I am an Italian fan, so my opinion is biased, but I don't think they
get any more favoritism than Germany, and I think that some of the
favoritism towards Germany has been pretty blatant at times. And there
are examples when refs have made clear errors in judgment that have
been against Italy, as in the expulsion of Zola in Nigeria-Italy
(Italians complained during WC94 that Havelange had a bias *against*
Italy).
The most unforgettable mistake against Italy, however, came
in WC90, Italy-Argentina, though the mistake was made by a linesman.
Schillaci had been caught offsides almost all day, but in one of his
last attacks against the Argentinian goal he was called offsides after
finding himself alone against Goycoechea (sp.?). It was a goal he
would not have missed. On the replay it was obvious that Schillaci
had moved after the pass, and even Norberto Longo of Univision (who is
from Argentina) temporarily stopped his rantings against Italy and
admitted that the linesman had made a mistake. This bad call may
have cost Italy the cup. But it happened, and that's all you can say.
I don't believe the linesman favored Argentina, I just think he was
not a good linesman. But then I am waiting for the day when linesmen
learn to call offsides properly.
But *please* stop complaining about favoritism. Italy is simply a
good team (one of the teams to beat in any tournament), notwithstanding
their style that may make them look like a second-class team on occasion.
Alex Pezzati
Juan Gonzalez
>The most unforgettable mistake against Italy, however, came in WC90,
>Italy-Argentina, though the mistake was made by a linesman. Schillaci had
been
>caught offsides almost all day, but in one of his last attacks against the
>Argentinian goal he was called offsides after finding himself alone
against
>Goycoechea (sp.?). It was a goal he would not have missed. On the replay
it
>was obvious that Schillaci had moved after the pass, and even Norberto
Longo of
>Univision (who is from Argentina) temporarily stopped his rantings against
>Italy and admitted that the linesman had made a mistake. This bad call
may
>have cost Italy the cup. But it happened, and that's all you can say. I
don't
>believe the linesman favored Argentina, I just think he was not a good
>linesman. But then I am waiting for the day when linesmen learn to call
>offsides properly.
favor just like every other game in WC 90. What did they want every call,
and every offside in their favor? Why didn't they just hand them the WC
without even having to play.
Gabriele Marcotti
OK, I'm sorry but I can't resist talking about the game at least a little
bit. I know Argentina was extremely unpopular with the refs and got
ripped off in the final - there was no penalty, although Germany was
probably the better team overall.
However, in addition to the Schillaci offside there was another
questionable incident which helped Argentina: Giusti (I think) handled
the ball intentionally during the overtime period. The referee called a
free kick and went for his card (under the guidelines at the time, an
intentional hand ball had to be punished with a yellow card). However, he
realized Giusti had already been booked and would have been sent off, so
he put the card away, without booking him. Argentina with ten men could
have very well lost the game in OT.
Gabriele
p.s. Not to mention the Ferri, perhaps Italy's best penalty taker (along
with Baggio) was unable to walk by the end of the game. If it had been
him instead of Donadoni, things might have been different...
:
: ///
Juan Gonzalez
What game did you watch. Argentina did finish the game with 10 players
since Giusti was later sent off. The ref even added about 10 minutes to the
15min over time. When have you ever heard of even adding 10 minutes to a 45
minute half let alone a 15 minute one. Italy was playing at home and should
have one that game despite everything. The refs even gave Italy more calls
than Argentina in that game. I won't list every one because I don't think
that's important. The fact is that Italy was outplayed for most of the
game. After the goal that tied the game, they played very nervously the
rest of the game, as if expecting to lose. That is not the attitude of a
champion.
M. J. P.
>Please lets not talk about that game, Italy got most of the calls in their
>favor just like every other game in WC 90. What did they want every call,
>and every offside in their favor? Why didn't they just hand them the WC
>without even having to play.
Notice how all the messages with Italy in the heading brings over all
these other jelous soccer fans. Why is it when Argentina is in the
heading you don't get any Italian fans coming into the discussions and
making poor excuses for Argentina's victories. Well it's because we have
nothing to be hatefull about! Don't read anymore of the articles with
Italy in it if it's going to make you resentful and biased it's not
worth your ime to write about it or read it. And if the world was fair
which it is not, Italy would have won that game against Argentina because
in that particular World Cup as in this one ITALY was far better than
Argentina.
JAF06
M. J. P.
>What game did you watch. Argentina did finish the game with 10 players
>since Giusti was later sent off. The ref even added about 10 minutes to the
>15min over time. When have you ever heard of even adding 10 minutes to a 45
>minute half let alone a 15 minute one. Italy was playing at home and should
>have one that game despite everything. The refs even gave Italy more calls
>than Argentina in that game. I won't list every one because I don't think
>that's important. The fact is that Italy was outplayed for most of the
>game. After the goal that tied the game, they played very nervously the
>rest of the game, as if expecting to lose. That is not the attitude of a
>champion.
It's funny how some people see things differently and expect the rest of
the world to see things through their eyes also.
Juan Gonzalez
Yeah very funny, it goes both ways.
Peter Phung
On 26 Jun 1995, Juan Gonzalez wrote:
> In rec.sport.soccer p...@Direct.CA (M. J. P.) said:
>
> >>What game did you watch. Argentina did finish the game with 10 players
> >>since Giusti was later sent off. The ref even added about 10 minutes to
> the
> >>15min over time. When have you ever heard of even adding 10 minutes to a
> 45
> >>minute half let alone a 15 minute one. Italy was playing at home and
> should
> >>have one that game despite everything. The refs even gave Italy more
> calls
> >>than Argentina in that game. I won't list every one because I don't think
>
> >>that's important. The fact is that Italy was outplayed for most of the
> >>game. After the goal that tied the game, they played very nervously the
> >>rest of the game, as if expecting to lose. That is not the attitude of a
> >>champion.
well, if guisti had gotten his sorry ass off the field than there
wouldn't have been 10 minutes added to the end the the 1st period of
extra time...the ref just stops his watch and starts it whenever play starts.
and i don't think argentina had more fouls...the post-match stats were
dead even...whith italy having more offsides...
Ruggeri only tackled Donadoni about 15 times beofre finally getting
booked late in the second half and Batisa got booked after 2 indentical
fouls on donadoni and serena...Argentina was a bad team that year and
play very rough during the world cup and got away with lots....and were
given lots ex....jugoslav player sent off after 30 mins in the 1/4 finals
after 2 maradona dives....
___
Peter Phung (Quoc Viet) // <<\
University of Calgary || <<\ _
pqvp...@acs.ucalgary.ca / \ //
_---------------------------------------------|{0}______/|
<_ <----------------------------::::::::::{@}|/////////////]
---------------------------------------------|{0}~~~~~~\|
\ / \\
|| <</ ~
\\ <</
^^^
M. J. P.
Amen!
Juan Gonzalez
>>well, if guisti had gotten his sorry ass off the field than there
>>wouldn't have been 10 minutes added to the end the the 1st period of
>>extra time...the ref just stops his watch and starts it whenever play
starts.
add 10 minutes to a 15 minute extra time. It is rediculous. It's never even
done in a 45 min. half.
>>and i don't think argentina had more fouls...the post-match stats were
>>dead even...whith italy having more offsides...
>>Ruggeri only tackled Donadoni about 15 times beofre finally getting
>>booked late in the second half and Batisa got booked after 2 indentical
>>fouls on donadoni and serena...Argentina was a bad team that year and
>>play very rough during the world cup and got away with lots
more guts than them and a team that outplayed them. It wasn't the a good
Argentina team but it was good enough to beat an inferior Italy team. They
wanted to have that cup handed to them for playing at home, too bad.
///
(. .)
+-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
M. J. P.
>
>In rec.sport.soccer p...@Direct.CA (M. J. P.) said:
>
>>>well, if guisti had gotten his sorry ass off the field than there
>>>wouldn't have been 10 minutes added to the end the the 1st period of
>>>extra time...the ref just stops his watch and starts it whenever play
>starts.
>
>Since when have the refs ever done that in reality? There is no way you can
>add 10 minutes to a 15 minute extra time. It is rediculous. It's never even
>done in a 45 min. half.
However ridiculous it may seem to add 10 minutes to a 15 minute OT, HOW
THE HELL DOES THIS WORK IN ITALY"S FAVOR? I would like to know how you can
say that by adding more time on the clock did the ref give Italy an
advantage, besides the fact that the crook Giusti was sent off. Both
teams were dead and no scoring opportunities were arising for either.
>>>and i don't think argentina had more fouls...the post-match stats were
>>>dead even...whith italy having more offsides...
>>>Ruggeri only tackled Donadoni about 15 times beofre finally getting
>>>booked late in the second half and Batisa got booked after 2 indentical
>>>fouls on donadoni and serena...Argentina was a bad team that year and
>>>play very rough during the world cup and got away with lots
>
>Yeah and Italy are saints, come on. They were beaten by a team that had
>more guts than them and a team that outplayed them. It wasn't the a good
>Argentina team but it was good enough to beat an inferior Italy team. They
>wanted to have that cup handed to them for playing at home, too bad.
You don't know what you are talking about. Watch the goals! Italy's goal
was beautifully executed, it was a nice tic-tac-toe goal with the ball
flowing right into the net. Italy penetrated Argentina's defence with
ease, whereas Argentina's goal was a result of a poor judgment made by
goalie Zenga. He was half commited to the ball in the air, and should he
have put both hands up he surely would have caught the ball. But Argentina
got away with a truly cheesy goal, and then beat the BEST team in the
tournament in a cheesy fashion, by a cheating save from goycochea.
OH well, they got what they deserved in the final.
Gabriele Marcotti
: In article <Pine.A32.3.91.950626...@acs3.acs.ucalgary.ca>, Peter Phung <pqvp...@acs.ucalgary.ca> says:
:
: >On 26 Jun 1995, Juan Gonzalez wrote:
: >> In rec.sport.soccer p...@Direct.CA (M. J. P.) said:
:
: >> >>What game did you watch. Argentina did finish the game with 10 players
: >> >>since Giusti was later sent off. The ref even added about 10 minutes to
: >> the
: >> >>15min over time. When have you ever heard of even adding 10 minutes to a
: >> 45
: >> >>minute half let alone a 15 minute one. Italy was playing at home and
: >> should
: >> >>have one that game despite everything. The refs even gave Italy more
: >> calls
: >> >>than Argentina in that game. I won't list every one because I don't think
:
: >> >>that's important. The fact is that Italy was outplayed for most of the
: >> >>game. After the goal that tied the game, they played very nervously the
: >> >>rest of the game, as if expecting to lose. That is not the attitude of a
: >> >>champion.
: >well, if guisti had gotten his sorry ass off the field than there
: >wouldn't have been 10 minutes added to the end the the 1st period of
: >extra time...the ref just stops his watch and starts it whenever play starts.
: >and i don't think argentina had more fouls...the post-match stats were
: >dead even...whith italy having more offsides...
: >Ruggeri only tackled Donadoni about 15 times beofre finally getting
: >booked late in the second half and Batisa got booked after 2 indentical
: >fouls on donadoni and serena...Argentina was a bad team that year and
: >play very rough during the world cup and got away with lots....and were
: >given lots ex....jugoslav player sent off after 30 mins in the 1/4 finals
: >after 2 maradona dives....
: Amen!
Ruggeri, Batista, Giusti... ugh!! How could the same country that produced
Maradona, Bochini, Di Stefano also produce these butchers? Did they learn
soccer from former Uruguay captian Perdomo?
:
Juan Gonzalez
>>>>well, if guisti had gotten his sorry ass off the field than there
>>>>wouldn't have been 10 minutes added to the end the the 1st period of
>>>>extra time...the ref just stops his watch and starts it whenever play
>>starts.
can
>>add 10 minutes to a 15 minute extra time. It is rediculous. It's never
even
>>done in a 45 min. half.
>However ridiculous it may seem to add 10 minutes to a 15 minute OT, HOW
THE
>HELL DOES THIS WORK IN ITALY"S FAVOR? I would like to know how you can say
that
>by adding more time on the clock did the ref give Italy an advantage,
besides
>the fact that the crook Giusti was sent off. Both teams were dead and no
>scoring opportunities were arising for either.
Argentina has 10 men on the field. Argentina has Goycochea in the net.
Obviously Italy did not want the game to go to penalties.
>>>>and i don't think argentina had more fouls...the post-match stats were
>>>>dead even...whith italy having more offsides...
>>>>Ruggeri only tackled Donadoni about 15 times beofre finally getting
>>>>booked late in the second half and Batisa got booked after 2 indentical
>>>>fouls on donadoni and serena...Argentina was a bad team that year and
>>>>play very rough during the world cup and got away with lots
>>Yeah and Italy are saints, come on. They were beaten by a team that had
>>more guts than them and a team that outplayed them. It wasn't the a good
>>Argentina team but it was good enough to beat an inferior Italy team.
They
>>wanted to have that cup handed to them for playing at home, too bad.
>You don't know what you are talking about. Watch the goals! Italy's goal
was
>beautifully executed, it was a nice tic-tac-toe goal with the ball flowing
>right into the net. Italy penetrated Argentina's defence with ease,
whereas
>Argentina's goal was a result of a poor judgment made by goalie Zenga. He
was
>half commited to the ball in the air, and should he have put both hands up
he
>surely would have caught the ball. But Argentina got away with a truly
cheesy
>goal, and then beat the BEST team in the tournament in a cheesy fashion,
by a
>cheating save from goycochea.
It depends how you look at the game. If you are a fan of Argentina you like
the Argentine goal and if you are a fan of Italy you like the Italian goal.
I for one can say that I enjoyed the Argentine goal very much, especially
because it was a mistake by that idiot Zenga. I agree with you on that. He
is a crybaby and the first thing he did was yell at his defense and want to
blame it on them. Then he gets beaten in the penalty shots. It was great to
watch his misery and great to see Goycochea stop the penalty shots. Cheesy
goals as you call them, are the best goals if it's your team who scores
them. There is nothing more fun than watching the other team suffer.
>OH well, they got what they deserved in the final.
At least they made it there.
Juan Gonzalez
>l...@netnews.upenn.edu> <3sv98q$7...@pipe1.nyc.pipeline.com>: Distribution:
>
>Juan Gonzalez (dol...@nyc.pipeline.com) wrote: : In rec.sport.soccer
>marc...@mail1.sas.upenn.edu (Gabriele Marcotti) said:
>
>:
>: >Ruggeri, Batista, Giusti... ugh!! How could the same country that
produced
>:
>: >Maradona, Bochini, Di Stefano also produce these butchers? Did they
learn
>
>: >soccer from former Uruguay captian Perdomo?
>:
>: Butchers to you, great players to others. Rugieri always made it to the
>: finals without 2 yellow cards. If you were the coach of any team you
would
>: be satisfied if your players had half the guts these guys had (I will
>: exclude Batista except for 1986 when he was great). You could also
mention
>: a couple more from Argentina: Passarella, Gallego, and to many to even
>: mention from Uruguay. It's called "huevo" and in the rio de la plata
they
>: like to put it on the field.
>
>I think they are great players in the sense that they fill a role on a
team and
>are very good at what they do. It's just that their style of play was so
>fundamentally dirty that they contrasted greatly with Maradona, Bochini &
co.
I don't think you can say Batista and Ruggeri were dirty in 1986 and they
may have commited some dirty looking fouls after 86 but it was mostly due
to the fact that they couldn't run anymore and would get to the ball late.
Giusti is another story. This guy is really an incredible player who runs
up and down the field like a horse and doesn't tire. He just keeps going.
That's why Bilardo had him on the team. As for dirty? I'm not sure, maybe
you can give me a few examples. I know he has been known to be a little
tricky at times but I've seen him play for years at Independiente and I
don't think he played dirty.
///
(. .)
+-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Juan Gonzalez
>Ruggeri, Batista, Giusti... ugh!! How could the same country that produced
>Maradona, Bochini, Di Stefano also produce these butchers? Did they learn
>soccer from former Uruguay captian Perdomo?
Butchers to you, great players to others. Rugieri always made it to the
finals without 2 yellow cards. If you were the coach of any team you would
be satisfied if your players had half the guts these guys had (I will
exclude Batista except for 1986 when he was great). You could also mention
a couple more from Argentina: Passarella, Gallego, and to many to even
mention from Uruguay. It's called "huevo" and in the rio de la plata they
like to put it on the field.
///
(. .)
+-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Gabriele Marcotti
Distribution:
Juan Gonzalez (dol...@nyc.pipeline.com) wrote:
I think they are great players in the sense that they fill a role on a
team and are very good at what they do. It's just that their style of
play was so fundamentally dirty that they contrasted greatly with
Maradona, Bochini & co.
:
: ///
: (. .)
: +-oOO-(_)-OOo------(dol...@pipeline.com)----------+
Alessandro Pezzati
Although it may be common for home teams to get some advantage from
refs, it is not particularly an Italian problem. I don't think the
ref gave Italy an unfair advantage over Argentina in 1990, though
the injury time in extra time was a little exaggerated. As Longo
commented on Univision, however, the ref was doing that more to make
it *his* show than to help any team in particular. He was so out of
control that neither team could depend on the game being run smoothly
and efficiently. Both teams were tired and nervous, and that is why
they went to penalties.
My opinion may be biased, but I believe that Italy was the best team
in WC90. The reason they lost was due to their tactics. Except in
their first game against Austria, they managed to score early in every
game, and then they would all bunch up in defense until the end. They
did this even against the US and Ireland, and almost got screwed for
it. Only against Uruguay did they score a second goal. But against
Argentina this plan did not work, because on the one play Argentina
made all game they tied. By then Giannini had been taken out (and he
was the playmaker for the team), and the Italians got so nervous and
scared that they couldn't come back. They were not prepared
psychologically to have to come back and win at the end.
I blame all of this on the coach Vicini, who, although he brought
together a great team and made them play well together, was of the
mindset that one goal is enough to win a game. That if you score
early all you have to do is defend the lead for the next 70 minutes.
That you can take some of your best players out of the game at half
time so they can rest for the final. But he did not plan on not
getting to the final.
So if Italy lost or won in 1990, it had nothing to do with the refs.
And I believe that no Argentinian should claim lack of preference
from refs after what happened against England in WC86, and against
Russia in WC90. And you can also look back at Argentina-Peru in
WC78. However they did get screwed by the ref in Germany-Argentina,
WC90, who gave the Germans a penalty that did not exist.
Italy has a good team and many good players. They also have a lot of
experience. If refs favored them half as much as people say, then
they should have won a lot more than they have. Please, let's talk
about soccer without so much Italy-bashing.
Alex Pezzati
M. J. P.
>It depends how you look at the game. If you are a fan of Argentina you like
>the Argentine goal and if you are a fan of Italy you like the Italian goal.
If you are a fan of quality soccer, then you would like the Italian goal
unless you are an anti-Italian, then you would like the fact that Argentina
got lucky.
>I for one can say that I enjoyed the Argentine goal very much, especially
>because it was a mistake by that idiot Zenga. I agree with you on that. He
I for one enjoyed the Italian goal, especially the build-up of the goal
and watching the Argentinians run around like a bunch of lost sheep. I
especially liked the goal by Schilacci, especially because he miss-kicked
the ball, but Oh well he had the whole net to shoot at since Goycochea
was completely out of the picture.
>is a crybaby and the first thing he did was yell at his defense and want to
>blame it on them. Then he gets beaten in the penalty shots. It was great to
>watch his misery and great to see Goycochea stop the penalty shots. Cheesy
>goals as you call them, are the best goals if it's your team who scores
>them. There is nothing more fun than watching the other team suffer.
I guess that goes the same when in the final the world got to see Maradona
cry like the whining coke-head that he is, and all of Argentina cry foul
as Germany scores on a penalty shot with less than five minutes remaining.
Your right, there is nothing better than watching a loser suffer.
>>OH well, they got what they deserved in the final.
>At least they made it there.
Yeah I guess so, and that means alot.