Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

Euro 2020


Jimmy James
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Cozmic Kid said:

Yeah right.

 

Atleast those who think it was a penalty can stop complaining about the "hand of god" as it was not a handball.

No. One was blatant and not given. The other was 60 / 40 and given.

  • Bruuuuce! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://uk.yahoo.com/sports/news/why-denmarks-free-kick-goal-162118863.html

So, forget the dodgy penalty, let us talk about the dodgy free-kick that made England chase the game and need two goals to progress to their first major final in 55 years.

According to the laws of the game, as contained on the FA website, the way Denmark’s players lined up in front of the defensive wall, helping to block goalkeeper Jordan Pickford’s view, was not allowed.

In section 13 of the law book dealing with free-kicks, it is made clear that “where three or more defending team players form a ‘wall’, all attacking team players must remain at least 1m (1yd) from the ‘wall’ until the ball is in play”.

Denmark did not do this, clearly standing too close to the English wall, so as good as Mikkel Damsgaard's dipping free-kick was - going over the wall before coming down at speed to dip under the crossbar and beat goalkeeper Jordan Pickford - it should not have been allowed to stand.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such is England’s history of failure it seems strangely like a free hit for them on Sunday and the pressure is off them. 
World Cup semi finalists and a place in the final of the Euros over the last 3 years means their place at the top table of international football is already assured for the next few years. And the way they celebrated the other night seemed to show they feel they have shrugged off that fear of failure and they just see Sunday as a chance to put icing on the cake. For nations used to winning, then losing a final would be a disaster. But England aren’t used to winning and it seems like they just want to enjoy the occasion. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, doesthisbusstop said:

Such is England’s history of failure it seems strangely like a free hit for them on Sunday and the pressure is off them. 
World Cup semi finalists and a place in the final of the Euros over the last 3 years means their place at the top table of international football is already assured for the next few years. And the way they celebrated the other night seemed to show they feel they have shrugged off that fear of failure and they just see Sunday as a chance to put icing on the cake. For nations used to winning, then losing a final would be a disaster. But England aren’t used to winning and it seems like they just want to enjoy the occasion. 

Yes, before the tournament began getting to the final would have been seen as a huge achievement (which it is) and is more than I expected.

I'm predicting a 2-0 win for Italy but even if it happens, the tournament will have been a success for England. There are a lot of young players in the squad who could be around for the next two World Cups.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

England can't afford to start off like they did against Denmark - they looked over-excited and rushed like they were chasing a goal in the last five minutes not 0-0 with the whole game to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With crowds back in stadiums home advantage is massive.  in an empty stadium or a neutral ground Italy would be favourites, home advantage I think England should win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Cozmic Kid said:

Yeah right.

 

Atleast those who think it was a penalty can stop complaining about the "hand of god" as it was not a handball.

I spent 15 years refereeing up to the level of semi-Professional football. I'm able to separate my support from England from my understanding of the laws of the game and how they're interpreted. There isn't a VAR on the planet who, looking at the clips, would overturn that decision. Knee to knee contact from first defender, body to body contact from Jansen. 

They impeded an opponent and involved contact. The sanction is a direct free kick. Law 12.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, bigbonesbilly said:

With crowds back in stadiums home advantage is massive.  in an empty stadium or a neutral ground Italy would be favourites, home advantage I think England should win.

Where is the final being played for those of us who went paying attention?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Daisey Jeep said:

Where is the final being played for those of us who went paying attention?

Wembley.

I predict (hopefully, not a riot) England 2 Italy 1 ...  Italy down to 10 men.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, thomam said:

I spent 15 years refereeing up to the level of semi-Professional football. I'm able to separate my support from England from my understanding of the laws of the game and how they're interpreted. There isn't a VAR on the planet who, looking at the clips, would overturn that decision. Knee to knee contact from first defender, body to body contact from Jansen. 

They impeded an opponent and involved contact. The sanction is a direct free kick. Law 12.

There also is not a VAR on the planet that would have overturned a decision to not award a penalty, had the referee made such a decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Archie Hunter said:

There also is not a VAR on the planet that would have overturned a decision to not award a penalty, had the referee made such a decision.

Don't necessarily agree. You're then into the question of whether it would have been a "clear and obvious error" or a matter of judgement.

What would PROBABLY have happened is VAR inviting the ref to review the decision himself to see if the pictures aligned with whatever his thought process was in not awarding. Effectively saying "not clear cut, you might want to have another look at this".

At which point I think a majority would decide it was a penalty - because that angle gave a much clearer view of the actual contacts involved.

The law merely states that impeding an opponent involving contact is a direct free kick. There is no "magnitude" involved. Your only question would be whether Sterling was, in fact, impeded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Archie Hunter said:

There also is not a VAR on the planet that would have overturned a decision to not award a penalty, had the referee made such a decision.

There is an issue with what the laws say and how they are implemented.  On sky news they used to have a slot called Ref Watch where things like this were looked at and his answer whenever a penalty like this  or even more obvious was not given the answer was "not enough for me". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that there is a lot of agreement across many countries, this from The Guardian : -

The award of the spot-kick won by Raheem Sterling that led to the winning goal has been widely criticised in Europe

Kasper Hjulmand, Denmark’s impressive head coach, said he would require a few days to process the penalty decision that ended his country’s involvement at Euro 2020. For England fans, and a sweeping generalisation is probably legitimate in this instance, a nanosecond sufficed.

Reactions to the decisive spot-kick won by Raheem Sterling in Wednesday’s European Championship semi-final split along predictable lines, with European media – already aggrieved by a fixture schedule weighed heavily in England’s favour – seizing the chance to criticise English hypocrisy.

“They always say how bad it is when a foreign player tries to deceive the referee with a dive,” said an editorial in Marca in Spain. “In pure English football, this does not happen. Apart from, of course, in a European Championship semi-final. It would be nice for English football to stop giving lectures to the rest of the continent about diving.”

L’Équipe in France was more restrained, describing the extra-time tumble as “a questionable, not least generous, penalty”, while Gazzetta dello Sport in Italy warmed up for Sunday’s final with a suggestion Uefa was “returning a favour” to Boris Johnson for his opposition to the European Super League. “It’s a shame they get these little bits of help because they don’t need it.”

The former Germany midfielder Dietmar Hamann weighed in: “They won with a penalty which was a blatant dive. England always prides itself on being the home of fair play and no diving.”

There was common consensus among former referees, players and managers past and present, however, that this had been another bad night for VAR. They have been few and far between at this tournament, with its sparing use and the speed of decisions reinforcing how badly it has been employed in the Premier League. But with Pol van Boekel failing to advise the referee Danny Makkelie even to review his crucial decision on the pitch-side monitor the value of VAR was undermined yet again.

“No penalty,” Arsène Wenger, Fifa’s head of global football development, said on beIN Sports. “I don’t understand why they don’t ask the referee to have a look at it. In a moment like that, it’s important that the referee is absolutely convinced it was a penalty. It was not clear enough to say, ‘Yes it is’, and at least he should have had a look on the screen.

“VAR has let the referee down, not Denmark. Denmark is a bit unfortunate. I understand that it’s difficult for the referee, but he must have a look at it.”

José Mourinho concurred on TalkSport: It is never a penalty. At this level, especially at this level, the semi-final of a Euros, I don’t understand the referee’s decision and I don’t understand even more why VAR didn’t get the referee to go to the screen or overturn the decision.

The former Swedish referee Jonas Eriksson, who officiated at the 2012 and 2016 Euros, claimed it was “far too cheap a penalty for a Euro semi-final. I am mostly surprised and annoyed that the VAR doesn’t tell the referee. This decides which team goes through.”

Hjulmand was also unhappy Makkelie awarded the penalty when there were two balls on the pitch. The Dutch referee either failed to spot the other ball, that Sterling raced past on his way into the area, or decided it was not interfering with play. “You cannot pass by the ball on the pitch which has so much influence on the game,” Hjulmand said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, dr winston oboogie said:

It seems that there is a lot of agreement across many countries, this from The Guardian : -

The award of the spot-kick won by Raheem Sterling that led to the winning goal has been widely criticised in Europe

Kasper Hjulmand, Denmark’s impressive head coach, said he would require a few days to process the penalty decision that ended his country’s involvement at Euro 2020. For England fans, and a sweeping generalisation is probably legitimate in this instance, a nanosecond sufficed.

Reactions to the decisive spot-kick won by Raheem Sterling in Wednesday’s European Championship semi-final split along predictable lines, with European media – already aggrieved by a fixture schedule weighed heavily in England’s favour – seizing the chance to criticise English hypocrisy.

“They always say how bad it is when a foreign player tries to deceive the referee with a dive,” said an editorial in Marca in Spain. “In pure English football, this does not happen. Apart from, of course, in a European Championship semi-final. It would be nice for English football to stop giving lectures to the rest of the continent about diving.”

L’Équipe in France was more restrained, describing the extra-time tumble as “a questionable, not least generous, penalty”, while Gazzetta dello Sport in Italy warmed up for Sunday’s final with a suggestion Uefa was “returning a favour” to Boris Johnson for his opposition to the European Super League. “It’s a shame they get these little bits of help because they don’t need it.”

The former Germany midfielder Dietmar Hamann weighed in: “They won with a penalty which was a blatant dive. England always prides itself on being the home of fair play and no diving.”

There was common consensus among former referees, players and managers past and present, however, that this had been another bad night for VAR. They have been few and far between at this tournament, with its sparing use and the speed of decisions reinforcing how badly it has been employed in the Premier League. But with Pol van Boekel failing to advise the referee Danny Makkelie even to review his crucial decision on the pitch-side monitor the value of VAR was undermined yet again.

“No penalty,” Arsène Wenger, Fifa’s head of global football development, said on beIN Sports. “I don’t understand why they don’t ask the referee to have a look at it. In a moment like that, it’s important that the referee is absolutely convinced it was a penalty. It was not clear enough to say, ‘Yes it is’, and at least he should have had a look on the screen.

“VAR has let the referee down, not Denmark. Denmark is a bit unfortunate. I understand that it’s difficult for the referee, but he must have a look at it.”

José Mourinho concurred on TalkSport: It is never a penalty. At this level, especially at this level, the semi-final of a Euros, I don’t understand the referee’s decision and I don’t understand even more why VAR didn’t get the referee to go to the screen or overturn the decision.

The former Swedish referee Jonas Eriksson, who officiated at the 2012 and 2016 Euros, claimed it was “far too cheap a penalty for a Euro semi-final. I am mostly surprised and annoyed that the VAR doesn’t tell the referee. This decides which team goes through.”

Hjulmand was also unhappy Makkelie awarded the penalty when there were two balls on the pitch. The Dutch referee either failed to spot the other ball, that Sterling raced past on his way into the area, or decided it was not interfering with play. “You cannot pass by the ball on the pitch which has so much influence on the game,” Hjulmand said.

No mention of the Danes being too close to the England wall for their goal I notice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Johan14Cruyff said:

Diego said it best. Football is a game of deceit. 

Perhaps it's a good game, tainted by deceitful players.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

International media are reporting about a petition going around asking for next Monday to be a holiday in England because of Sunday match…

I’ve always considered myself to be among the least superstitious people on this planet, but boy… I really must be an amateur in this respect…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Frank said:

International media are reporting

You don't need that - tune in to our very own Palace ... Loose Ends. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jimmy James said:

OK, I'll keep this as short as possible. Shit this has to be about 35 years ago. Anyway myself and 3 buddies(mates) took the train one weekend to Chicago for a Blues v Blackhawks hockey game. No tickets, were going to buy when we got there. Went to the ticket window with all our Blues gear on. Told the gal at the window we want the best 4 tickets for tonight's game. She said I won't sell you the best tickets for your own good. These tickets are much better for you guys. We said what the hell, we want the best. She told us she was doing us a favor. So after some thought we said OK, give us though tickets. 

Now keep in mind Old Chicago Stadium where the Blackhawks played was a old type stadium(arena) with cantilever seating. Which meant a large portion of the upper deck came over the top of the lower bowl. The gal at the window gave us tickets up under the cantilever section of the lower bowl. So when the Blues scored the first goal, all the Blues fans jumped up and cheering, the one's not under the cantilever section (out in the open from the section above) got drenched in beer. Us under the cantilever were fine. Then we understood why the gal at the ticket window sold us the seat that she did. Went back to thank her but she was gone.   

Atleast it was beer, could have been worse :lol:;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jimmy James said:

How the hell did the ball go forward then? 

Shit since we are talking about VAR, after reviewing the VAR he should have been shown a Red card and sent off. 

Maybe the wind.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Born To Walk said:

https://uk.yahoo.com/sports/news/why-denmarks-free-kick-goal-162118863.html

So, forget the dodgy penalty, let us talk about the dodgy free-kick that made England chase the game and need two goals to progress to their first major final in 55 years.

According to the laws of the game, as contained on the FA website, the way Denmark’s players lined up in front of the defensive wall, helping to block goalkeeper Jordan Pickford’s view, was not allowed.

In section 13 of the law book dealing with free-kicks, it is made clear that “where three or more defending team players form a ‘wall’, all attacking team players must remain at least 1m (1yd) from the ‘wall’ until the ball is in play”.

Denmark did not do this, clearly standing too close to the English wall, so as good as Mikkel Damsgaard's dipping free-kick was - going over the wall before coming down at speed to dip under the crossbar and beat goalkeeper Jordan Pickford - it should not have been allowed to stand.

I guess that is evened out by the countless dives by Harry Cane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, thomam said:

I spent 15 years refereeing up to the level of semi-Professional football. I'm able to separate my support from England from my understanding of the laws of the game and how they're interpreted. There isn't a VAR on the planet who, looking at the clips, would overturn that decision. Knee to knee contact from first defender, body to body contact from Jansen. 

They impeded an opponent and involved contact. The sanction is a direct free kick. Law 12.

Then how do you get this fake pen so wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...