Ajaxtalk

Glad to see the back of WC 2006. I watched it,but was rarely excited by what I saw...save Ghana v. Czech Republic, US v. Italy, any Australia match, and France in the knock-out stages. The Netherlands were fair, US weak, England boring, and Australia fun to watch. Just not enough there there.

P.S. Penos suck as a way to decide a match. I'd rather see a return to golden goal. Let 'em play until a goal is scored. Mandate an additional sub for each side to help offset the cramping and other niggles that tend to occur in ET.

Blind3 schreef:P.S. Penos suck as a way to decide a match. I'd rather see a return to golden goal. Let 'em play until a goal is scored. Mandate an additional sub for each side to help offset the cramping and other niggles that tend to occur in ET.

:headbang: I'm for it... Especially in such big games as a World Cup final.

The explanations of Zidane will be broadcasted at 8 pm on TV (Canal+). Wouldn't be surprise if we don't learn anything, but we'll see.

The story is not finished anyway : he may lose the best player award, but Italy may also lose its trophy if Materrazi really used racist insults according to the FIFA law.
Beside, a french lawyer wants to cancel the final if the 4th referee actually used video to send Zidane off...

Cedric_AeF schreef:The story is not finished anyway : he may lose the best player award, but Italy may also lose its trophy if Materrazi really used racist insults according to the FIFA law.

Where did you get that idea? :huh:

It is based on this :
http://www.fifa.com/en/fairplay/index/0 ... eid=116246

The new provision in par. 4 stipulates that if any player, official or spectator behaving in a discriminatory or contemptuous manner can be attributed to a certain team, three points will automatically be deducted from that team for the first offence. In the case of a second offence, six points will be deducted, and after a further offence, the team will be relegated. In the case of matches played without points being awarded, the team in question will be disqualified.

I think this is quite clear, but I don't see it happen. We will have to prove Materazzi said a racist insult, and then FIFA must have the balls to apply this law... :nooo:

That would be very "funny" to watch that, but I fear it would be the start of WWIII

The FIFA would never do that. Not to Italy, not to Brazil, not to Australia and not to Afghanistan. Not after the final that is.

Penalties are not a great way to decide games but as much as l Like the idea of golden goals my soccer mad son reckons the WC would still be going on as Ukraine and Switzerland would still be playing.

I also think the final would have gone on for another hour or so as during the extra time neither side looked like breaking the deadlock.

The only certainty with penalties is that England will always lose them and Germany will always win them. And fans of Ajax and Holland ,well we do not want to even think about them.

PS I have only ever liked penalties once 2005 English cup final.Arsenal v Moan U . Moan U were in Arsenals half for 120 mins 0-0. Then of course Arsenal won the shootout.

SPL schreef:Penalties are not a great way to decide games but as much as l Like the idea of golden goals my soccer mad son reckons the WC would still be going on as Ukraine and Switzerland would still be playing.

Sorry been away on my (short) holidays.

Just tpo catch up.....yeah crap WC....still think Oranje learnt a lot and will do better in Euro '08 and has a team young enough to be a real threat in 2010 (Euro '06 under 21 Winners n'est pas?).......sad about the Italians winning (negative throughout and severely tested by Australia, Ukraine, last minute video to get rid of Frings kicked out and shenaninigins with ZZ)

I hate penos, but hey I'm Dutch so that's normal (2004 v. Sweden was nothing but an exeption).

Personally I think the best way to decide games is to reduce the numbers of players (say one every five minutes?) after full time, until a goal is scored (let's say minimum 5-a-Side) . This will (through increased open space) create more chances, and although not pure 11 v. 11 football, requires more technique to win than spot kicks.

it looks like materazzi is just a typical italian puss boy. works up the balls to mouth off to zidane, but falls over like a sack of potatoes, or rather, spaghetti when anything comes of it. did he need his momma mia to come and rub his little stomach after zidane headbutted him? i say italian puss boy materazzi and zidane for a bare-knuckle boxing match! get the magic sponges ready!!

Manneken Pis schreef:
Personally I think the best way to decide games is to reduce the numbers of players (say one every five minutes?) after full time, until a goal is scored (let's say minimum 5-a-Side) . This will (through increased open space) create more chances, and although not pure 11 v. 11 football, requires more technique to win than spot kicks.

I've heard a similar variation on this idea, and I kind of like it...

1. Get rid of PK shoot-outs altogether.

2. After 90 minutes, give each team one additional substitute to bring on fresh legs for the extra-time.

3. 10-minute silver-goal extra-time sessions... i.e. if one team scores, the other has the remainder of that 10-minute session to equalize.

4. For the first four of the extra-time sessions (if it goes that far), one player from each team is removed each time. So eventually, after 40 minutes, you end up with only six outfield players per side, conceivably allowing for much more open spaces and chances. During each subsequent extra-time session, the teams remain seven-a-side and no additional players are removed.

Per schreef:In regards to Aveslacker not accepting the argument: "Everyone else is doing it so it's fine" I take it you are referring to some of my bitter remarks?

If so, that was not my intention of those. My intention was to get the point across that : Everyone else is doing it so I don't get why Portugal and Italy are taking so much stick for it.

Anyone with self critisism has seen their team do it. I gave a couple of examples in an earlier comment and I bet you that I can give examples on most of the teams.

My personal hate one is when faking injuries. This was something that Germany did on four occassions against Sweden. I've rarely been so frustrated in my life.

So in short: No it's not ok, and everyone is doing it.

Just to be clear: I wasn't referring to anyone in particular. But there are a lot of people (go read the Italy and Portugal forums on Bigsoccer, for example) who take that attitude.

But I agree with you: everyone is doing it, and it is not ok.

portugal are taking all the piss for all of the diving they did against france. but to be honest, it was probably the "great" henry's dive for the penalty that set that all in motion. the portugese were going for the obligatory "make up call" that usually does come in those situations. look at villareal v arsenal! but hey, the diving was pathetic. but the portugese weren't the only ones, by a longshot. i still think henry is getting off light for going down so easily v portugal, and the dive v spain....disgusting. and the funny thing about it is, he deflects the criticism with psychology. when asked why he dove v spain, he launched an attack on the press (a jedi mind trick). so he never really addressed the question. he said he is not a cheater, but we all know better.

If the Portuguese diving act had started in the final, or even during this tournament, you may have been right. However, as far as I can judge they have been doing this for years and imo they deserve every bucket of piss that they are receiving at the moment.

Exactly. The Portugese were taking dives way before Henry did it against them in their one on one confrontation. The Portugese completely deserve their bad name.

mick schreef:portugal are taking all the piss for all of the diving they did against france. but to be honest, it was probably the "great" henry's dive for the penalty that set that all in motion. the portugese were going for the obligatory "make up call" that usually does come in those situations. look at villareal v arsenal! but hey, the diving was pathetic. but the portugese weren't the only ones, by a longshot. i still think henry is getting off light for going down so easily v portugal, and the dive v spain....disgusting. and the funny thing about it is, he deflects the criticism with psychology. when asked why he dove v spain, he launched an attack on the press (a jedi mind trick). so he never really addressed the question. he said he is not a cheater, but we all know better.

You really think Portugal need an excuse to dive ? What a joke... X'D Portugal was by far the most vicious team of the tournament. :pukey:
You're right about Henry though. :yes:

Manneken Pis schreef: Personally I think the best way to decide games is to reduce the numbers of players (say one every five minutes?) after full time, until a goal is scored (let's say minimum 5-a-Side) . This will (through increased open space) create more chances, and although not pure 11 v. 11 football, requires more technique to win than spot kicks.

How about adding an extra ball every five minutes?

According to german tabloid Bild Italy can lose their gold medals, because of Materazzi's words. The newspaper says that according to the new FIFA rules (these about fighting with racism) it is possible.

AsgAarD_xxx schreef:According to german tabloid Bild Italy can lose their gold medals, because of Materazzi's words. The newspaper says that according to the new FIFA rules (these about fighting with racism) it is possible.

That will IMO never happen. Think of the consequenses. And anyways, Zidane never said anything about Matterazzi saying something racist did he? I reckon it was a good old sexual implication.

Zidane didn't say it was a racist remark. He was a bit vague about it and didn't want to repeat Materazzi's words. According to the latest stories it had something to do with Zidane's mother, who is in hospital.

Zidane said that he wanted to apologize to the French people, but not to Materazzi. He said he doesn't regret what he did. Sounds like a bit of a paradox to me, but anyway. He said something like: "He insulted me two, three times and he used very evil words. And then I reacted. I am a football player, but I'm also a man and I don't regret what I did."

I can't believe he really feels about it that way. I mean come on! The score was 1-1, the game was about to go into extra time and France were the more dangerous side when it happened. They were absolutely and totally in the race for the World Cup. Did Zidane really think it was more important at that point to headbutt Materazzi than to go for the trophy...? If that's the case he's a pretty sad nutjob.

I would have said to Materazzi: "I'll deal with you later, my friend. Mark my words." I would have finished the game and scored the winner for France in the last minute. And then I would have hammered Materazzi's teeth out of his trap with the f**king World Cup! 'What do you mean suspension? I am quitting anyway!' :D :D

K.

LOL! :D

Kowalczyk schreef:Zidane didn't say it was a racist remark. He was a bit vague about it and didn't want to repeat Materazzi's words. According to the latest stories it had something to do with Zidane's mother, who is in hospital.

Zidane said that he wanted to apologize to the French people, but not to Materazzi. He said he doesn't regret what he did. Sounds like a bit of a paradox to me, but anyway. He said something like: "He insulted me two, three times and he used very evil words. And then I reacted. I am a football player, but I'm also a man and I don't regret what I did."

I don't think there's a paradox : Zidane said he doesn't regret because if he does, it would mean that Materrazi was right to say what he said. It has to do with Zidane's sister and mother who spent a day or two at hospital but is now out. So he is trying to say it was deserved, even though he knows it wasn't the best way to respond... Yours is way better, :xyxthumbs: but I don't think that Zidane was able to think when he turned back... :fundamentje: :D

Kowalczyk schreef:Zidane didn't say it was a racist remark. He was a bit vague about it and didn't want to repeat Materazzi's words. According to the latest stories it had something to do with Zidane's mother, who is in hospital.

Zidane said that he wanted to apologize to the French people, but not to Materazzi. He said he doesn't regret what he did. Sounds like a bit of a paradox to me, but anyway. He said something like: "He insulted me two, three times and he used very evil words. And then I reacted. I am a football player, but I'm also a man and I don't regret what I did."

I can't believe he really feels about it that way. I mean come on! The score was 1-1, the game was about to go into extra time and France were the more dangerous side when it happened. They were absolutely and totally in the race for the World Cup. Did Zidane really think it was more important at that point to headbutt Materazzi than to go for the trophy...? If that's the case he's a pretty sad nutjob.

I would have said to Materazzi: "I'll deal with you later, my friend. Mark my words." I would have finished the game and scored the winner for France in the last minute. And then I would have hammered Materazzi's teeth out of his trap with the f**king World Cup! 'What do you mean suspension? I am quitting anyway!' :D :D

K.

As a sidenote, Materazzi is a complete wanker AND a liar. He stated in the press a few days after the final that he hadn't insulted Zidane's mother because "he lost his mom at 15, and the mom is sacred". Sacred my ass. Asshole.

And why is Materazzi a lier? Maybe he's telling the truth and Zidane is the lying wanker! Only Materazzi and Zidane know, and for now I rather believe Materazzi then someone who has to defend his actions. Don't forget that Zidane had more stunts like this in his career.

Everybody's view



French view



Italian view



Pentagon view



Jackie Chan view

Henk de Gier schreef:And why is Materazzi a lier? Maybe he's telling the truth and Zidane is the lying wanker! Only Materazzi and Zidane know, and for now I rather believe Materazzi then someone who has to defend his actions. Don't forget that Zidane had more stunts like this in his career.

And Materazzi hasn't had stunts in his career? Give me a break.

You can believe that Zidane needs to defend his actions, but there is also probable cause for Materazzi to have to defend his actions.