quote:

Originally posted by evil_bastard If Germany don't win and Latvia beat Holland, Latvia will be through!

Don't let that happen!!

___________________
Even if you can not hear my voice, I'll be right beside you dear

quote:

Originally posted by Turbonium But when you think of the horrible lack of calling the offside on the Netherlands, I guess that makes it sort of even.

that was absolutely not offside. BBC showed a tape which is shown to referees prior to the tournament where they explain some rules that should be followed. the tape showed a situation identical to the van nistelrooy goal, and they said explicitly that this is never offside.
so that's bullshit.
the referee practically gave the victory to the czechs. They played very very well, but so did the dutch. I don't think a 3-2 win for the czechs is a good reflection of the game

___________________
I was five and he was six, we rode on horses made of sticks, he wore black and I wore white, he would always win the fight, bang bang. He shot me down, bang bang, I hit the ground, bang bang, that awful sound, bang bang, my baby shot me down...

Dominik Eulberg - Flora & Fauna

Strictly according to the rules they were not offside but we all know this new rule is a disgrace to football.

As Schmeichel said, how can a player not be active if he is standing right in front of the goalkeeper?! And UEFA claiming that the player has "not gained an advantage" is bullshit, Van Nistelrooy isn't known for his pace, he might not have got to the cross first had he not been waiting miles offside.

These rules are removing common sense from the beautiful game.

that was an awesome match... best match i've watched in a long time

___________________
music is my wine

quote:

Originally posted by evil_bastard Strictly according to the rules they were not offside but we all know this new rule is a disgrace to football. As Schmeichel said, how can a player not be active if he is standing right in front of the goalkeeper?! And UEFA claiming that the player has "not gained an advantage" is bullshit, Van Nistelrooy isn't known for his pace, he might not have got to the cross first had he not been waiting miles offside. These rules are removing common sense from the beautiful game.

Well said, I agree 100%. That rule is a disgrace.

i think this 'new rule' is good for the game! if it's considered offside then when exactly would nistelrooy be allowed to touch the ball again? it would be ambiguous. plus this allows a couple more goals

and i still think the ref was bad for holland, heitinga did nothing to be sent off

___________________
sempre contra a corrente do jogo

Well this was for sure the best game on Euro 2004 yet.. what a hell of a match! Not the best outcome though imo a draw would've been deserved.

To be honest I actually didn't even care that much about the loss. Actually I felt a lot better yesterday than after the game vs Germany, because NL played their best game since the quarter final against Yugoslavia on Euro 2000 (6-1) and put themselves on the map of soccer again. Too bad Dickie also showed his skillz once more....

I still think NL will go through ...(imo it would be a shame if they don't), coz I doubt if Germany can win (score?) against Czechia, even when Czechia play with a B-team.
Of course I do see NL winning vs Latvia, also because Latvia has to win this game so they have to attack, but when Latvia scores a quick first goal it will get really tough.

We'll see it wednesday :>

oh yeah and that ref needs some assfuck

quote:

Originally posted by paranoik0 i think this 'new rule' is good for the game! if it's considered offside then when exactly would nistelrooy be allowed to touch the ball again? it would be ambiguous. plus this allows a couple more goals

The new interpretation makes it more difficult for linesmen and referees.

In reality if you are anywhere in the 18-yard box you are active because you are causing a problem for the goalkeeper.

In answer to your question, it is up to Van Nistelrooy to beat the offside trap by timing his run correctly and losing his marker, not standing 15 yards behind the Czech defenders and hoping the referee lets him get away with it. It would be far less ambiguous to keep the old interpretation, if a man is offside he is offside. It is the new interpretation which creates the ambiguity because the referee has to decide if a player is in an "active" position or not. When the first ball was played Van Nistelrooy was certainly in an offside position, but as the ball was not played directly to him then he was technically "not interfering with play"....at that specific moment. But as the goal proved, he was interfering, he recieved the ball after the winger beat the full back and put it into the net, all the time standing right in front of the goalkeeper.

Nobody in football really understands this rule, we often see ex-footballers arguing amongst themselves after the game as to why the ref allowed a goal. If the footballer don't know what this rule is about, who does?

Last edited by evil_bastard on Jun-21-2004 at 00:48

quote:

Originally posted by Plastick HAHAHAH HOLLAND! Why are they always like this in major compys!!

LoL, says a man with a signature of the SPANISH team , which is already out

___________________
"Life is all about choices & respect"

This was the best match of the tourney yet!
I feel sorry for the dutch, but what a bad move by advocaat.
Holland should have won the match already in the first 30 minutes...
Too bad...

___________________


Best of the best:
Laurent Garnier - sambu