Ajaxtalk

what about doping ?

Good posts by both Ko and Monkey Tonk. In a lot of ways the game the other night was like watching Ajax over the last few seasons. Plenty of possession in the outlying areas but totally bereft of ideas in the crucial last quarter.

Too many times in the 2nd half the Dutch seemed intent on playing the ball down the middle of the pitch - there seemed to be a lack of people willing to take the ball wide.

In addition I thought MvB made a few tactical errors - should Boularhouz have been playing from the start, following the tragic events of the week would he have been in the mental state of mind for such a game. Engelaar blew hot and cold throughout the tournament - great against Italy, awful against France. Would it not have been better having Heitinga on from the start man marking Arshavin - his threat was well known by anybody who watched Zenits progress in the UEFA Cup as well as Russia's qualifying campaign. Finally all 3 subs had been used up by the 61st minute - was MvB still hoping to win the game in normal time. By using all 3 subs so early then you have to question the starting line up.

Overall the Dutch can be very very proud of their campaign at Euro 2008 as they did take the group stages by storm and qualifying for the knockout stages in such a manner was a joy to watch.

Wow Monkey Tonk, you and i saw completely different games.

I saw an inadequate defense that relied on has-beens like Ooijer, and never was's like Mathijssen, Melchiot and Tim not-good-enough-for-west-bromwich-albion De Cler to keep a rampant Russian attack at bay.

Even Ooijer when he was good (i.e. ten years ago) would have struggled to stay with the brilliant Arshavin. Your analysis also ignores the fact that with any other goalkeeper than the brilliant van der Sar between the sticks Holland would have lost 6 - 1. Russia were massively superior, and substituting a defensive midfielder like Heitinga into the back four wouldn't have changed that - even supposing that he has the speed to keep up with Arshavin (which he doesn't.)

Holland has a world-class midfield, a first rate attack (even with the over-rated van Persie and the chronically injured Robben) but absolutely no defense - the genius of van der Sar apart. To win a major tournament like this you need all three. So Oranje getting knocked out in the Q.F.'s was just about right.

The referees decision to rescind the second yellow card was brilliant and courageous. After the linesman told him that no foul had been committed, it took guts to admit openly that his initial decision to raise the yellow card had been premature in the extreme. Nevertheless, he had the right to do it, and more importantly the guts to do it.

The Purple Cow schreef:Wow Monkey Tonk, you and i saw completely different games.

I saw an inadequate defense that relied on has-beens like Ooijer, and never was's like Mathijssen, Melchiot and Tim not-good-enough-for-west-bromwich-albion De Cler to keep a rampant Russian attack at bay.

We saw completely different games? Huh.

Perhaps that is because, if I read your sentence correctly, Melchiot and De Cler didn't play against the Russians?

My analysis didn't mention Sar, because it was obvious that he played great. And of course the defense was the weak spot. Well known before the tournament.

For what it's worth, UEFA appears to disagree with your admiration for the ref. Apparently they would have leaned strongly towards a rematch if the KNVB had filed a protest. But the KNVB declined to do so....

Monkey Tonk schreef:For what it's worth, UEFA appears to disagree with your admiration for the ref. Apparently they would have leaned strongly towards a rematch if the KNVB had filed a protest. But the KNVB declined to do so....

Which incident does this refer to? I watched the match at a party with no sound, so I don't know what happened. Was it that foul on Sneijder at the end?

aveslacker schreef:

Monkey Tonk schreef:For what it's worth, UEFA appears to disagree with your admiration for the ref. Apparently they would have leaned strongly towards a rematch if the KNVB had filed a protest. But the KNVB declined to do so....

Which incident does this refer to? I watched the match at a party with no sound, so I don't know what happened. Was it that foul on Sneijder at the end?

It was the red card (a second yellow) the ref handed to the Russian defender -in the 92nd minute with the score 1-1-, but then decided to take back. Apparently, he didn't follow the rules in doing so. Don't ask me. I don't know the ref rules to that extent. But a protest from the KNVB would, if the rumor is correct, have had a good shot at a UEFA decision to replay the match.

It looks like there's a different set of rules in play for national teams and club teams, because I can't imagine Ajax not filing a protest to replay a CL quarterfinal with Real Madrid, if the ref made a mistake like this.

Mind you, it is not about whether or not the card was correct. But about whether or not the ref broke the rules by changing his mind after making that decision.

I agree with the sentiment that it looked a bit like an Ajax game from the last few years. Oranje was a team attacking, without much success, and vulnerable in defense and just didn't look like they showed up to the pitch to win. I don't agree with some of van Basten's decisions, but I think it mostly just came down to being outplayed by the Russians, they just played a better game than the Dutch.

The defense is hardly the best, but should have been able to keep the Russian's at bay enough to win, they almost did. There just weren't enough genuine chances offensively, the Dutch only had 4 corners, Russia 11. van Nistelrooy got very few balls, Sneijder was missing from the game until the end of normal time and still wasn't very effective (10 shots, maybe 1 on goal), van der Vaart played hard, but wasn't too effective.

I think Hiddink also gave Russia an advantage, I think he showed how to exploit the weaknesses (the Dutch defense primarily, but also in killing the attack by stifling the midfield creators with good hard play) and knew clearly what the weaknesses were going in. I think he knows how to coach a team, which is why he's been so successful, he can make a group play together better than an opposition with more individual talent, which is what he did here.

For all the games in the tournament, the Dutch have been relying on a midfield to create and it just didn't happen. With that being the case, why didn't van Basten play Robben? TV here mentioned a possible injury, but I hadn't seen anything else. I don't get the Boulahrouz-Heitinga switch, Boulahrouz wasn't playing great, but was still solid. At this point in the game I don't think it makes sense to bring in a defender for him if he's going to be subbed at all.

van Basten also has to keep in mind the possibility of the game going to extra time, which I think could have been managed better; using the final sub in 2/3rds of the way through normal time.

Overall, I think it was a good game from a spectator standpoint. I think the Russians deserved to win.

Monkey Tonk schreef:

aveslacker schreef:

Monkey Tonk schreef:For what it's worth, UEFA appears to disagree with your admiration for the ref. Apparently they would have leaned strongly towards a rematch if the KNVB had filed a protest. But the KNVB declined to do so....

Which incident does this refer to? I watched the match at a party with no sound, so I don't know what happened. Was it that foul on Sneijder at the end?

It was the red card (a second yellow) the ref handed to the Russian defender -in the 92nd minute with the score 1-1-, but then decided to take back. Apparently, he didn't follow the rules in doing so. Don't ask me. I don't know the ref rules to that extent. But a protest from the KNVB would, if the rumor is correct, have had a good shot at a UEFA decision to replay the match.

It looks like there's a different set of rules in play for national teams and club teams, because I can't imagine Ajax not filing a protest to replay a CL quarterfinal with Real Madrid, if the ref made a mistake like this.

Mind you, it is not about whether or not the card was correct. But about whether or not the ref broke the rules by changing his mind after making that decision.

I don't think the second yellow was deserved, and I think the officials did the fair thing by not awarding it in the end.

Regardless of the specifics of whether or not the ref acted according to regulations in rescinding it, he did the correct thing in not awarding a yellow. The ref taking it away was not why Russia won or why the Dutch lost.

Filing a protest for something that seems to be such an inconsequential technicality would just make the Dutch look like sore losers with the way the game ended up. The players on the field all had 30 minutes after that incident to play knowing where things stood and they still let in two goals, and generally just didn't look like the better team for the whole game.

I'm curious if anyone does have the specific rules in which the referee was in violation of as I'm not aware of them.

gordonvandekamp schreef: Filing a protest for something that seems to be such an inconsequential technicality would just make the Dutch look like sore losers with the way the game ended up. The players on the field all had 30 minutes after that incident to play knowing where things stood and they still let in two goals, and generally just didn't look like the better team for the whole game.

I just don't think it's "inconsequential" to play with 11 players against 10 between the 90 and 120 minute. You just don't know what would have been the consequence, but sending off a player is always a turning point in a game (in a bad way or not).

Now I agree that filling a protest would have been a bit 'lame' from the KNVB.

As for Robben : he was definitely injured. And if I remember well, Boulahrouz injured himself during the game, this is why he was replaced by Heitinga.

"Perhaps that is because, if I read your sentence correctly, Melchiot and De Cler didn't play against the Russians?"

You clearly didn't read my sentence correctly, I'm fully aware that they didn't play against Russia.

**

"My analysis didn't mention Sar, because it was obvious that he played great. And of course the defense was the weak spot. Well known before the tournament."

Which completely misses the point I was making of course. Your assertion that Holland only lost because Ooijer had cramp doesn't stand up to the fact that Oranje's defense was good enough.

**

"For what it's worth, UEFA appears to disagree with your admiration for the ref. Apparently they would have leaned strongly towards a rematch if the KNVB had filed a protest. But the KNVB declined to do so...."

Sorry, but this complete bollocks.

Cedric_AeF schreef:

gordonvandekamp schreef: Filing a protest for something that seems to be such an inconsequential technicality would just make the Dutch look like sore losers with the way the game ended up. The players on the field all had 30 minutes after that incident to play knowing where things stood and they still let in two goals, and generally just didn't look like the better team for the whole game.

I just don't think it's "inconsequential" to play with 11 players against 10 between the 90 and 120 minute. You just don't know what would have been the consequence, but sending off a player is always a turning point in a game (in a bad way or not).

Now I agree that filling a protest would have been a bit 'lame' from the KNVB.

As for Robben : he was definitely injured. And if I remember well, Boulahrouz injured himself during the game, this is why he was replaced by Heitinga.

The inconsequential technicality I was referring to was whatever rule/protocol the referee may have violated in rescinding the yellow, not the act of awarding it.

This from what I understand, is what the KNVB would be protesting against.

I total agree with you that 11 against 10 for extra time could have made a huge difference.

''

I see that Colin Richards the footballer from Leytenstone has gone from Colin Richards to Colin-kazim Richards to Colin Kazim-Richards to Kazim Kazim all in the space of three years!

He's also playing football for Turkey, which is good going for a kid with an Antiguan dad and a Cypriot mom.

He's the Lew Alcindor of football!

Congrats to Spain. Deserved winners imo.

They were not only the most consistent team during the tournament, but the much, much better side in the final.

Now roll on the Dutch season ASAP please

DanK schreef:Congrats to Spain. Deserved winners imo.

They were not only the most consistent team during the tournament, but the much, much better side in the final.

Yeah, Footballers 1:0 Oafs.

dws schreef:

DanK schreef:Congrats to Spain. Deserved winners imo.

They were not only the most consistent team during the tournament, but the much, much better side in the final.

Yeah, Footballers 1:0 Oafs.

Thankfully the footballing gods smiled on the competition.

Now lets start the eredivisie season!

Damn am I late or what, been on holiday but doubt no one missed me

anyways, congrats to Spain. Didn't I say they were the ones to watch?

As for Oranje, good run but not good enough. Basically lost to a Russian side that played Dutch football.

Echoing the post ahead, let's start the Eredivisie!