Five Things We Learned in Swissaustria, June 9th

gonagoni! that shit is brilliant.

btw, a nice beginning for your euro editor fantasy match up today.

Unbelievable result for the Netherlands. My Group C predictions are looking very poor indeed right now, but it makes the group incredibly interesting. Holland is 1/3 of the way to shutting us all up a bit.

My Euro 2008 bracket is looking pretty good about now. I have the Oranje going all the way and this result has me smiling. Since when do Italian central defenders not know how to mark someone in the box (talking about Sneijder’s goal)?

I propose a Domenech-for-Donadoni swap.

Posted from  United States

From Channel4 regarding the first goal:

“There was also a great deal of controversy over the opening goal, as Ruud Van Nistelrooy was considered to be onside because Panucci was off the field injured.

However, under new laws this is only classified as an active position if the player is standing off the field of play by choice. This situation certainly did not apply to Panucci, who was on the ground in clear pain following a collision with Gigi Buffon.”

The first goal was a travesty, but congrats to Holland who played a brilliant game and deserved the victory. Hopefully Italy will have a chance at a redo in the final.

6. gio van bronckhorst could still cut it in a “big” league.

Posted from  United States

Sam, why? One incompetent arrogant jerk who favors his former team for another?

Posted from  United States

The 3-0 scoreline makes any “controversy” about Holland’s first goal completely irrelevant. The Dutch put on a clinic today.

If there’s one thing we know about the Dutch, however, it’s that they’ll have a meltdown and self-destruct in at least one game. It happens every tournament, and it usually dooms their chances of winning.

Dex it wasnt even the centerbacks, it was a midfielder and a right wing, I dont even know where the centerbacks were!!

Posted from  United States

“There was also a great deal of controversy over the opening goal, as Ruud Van Nistelrooy was considered to be onside because Panucci was off the field injured.

However, under new laws this is only classified as an active position if the player is standing off the field of play by choice. This situation certainly did not apply to Panucci, who was on the ground in clear pain following a collision with Gigi Buffon.”

If that’s the rule, its a terrible one. I can just see players suddenly running of the end of the field injured or with cramps as a quick offsides trap. OH BUT I’M HURT REFEREE. i believe the goal should stand.

Posted from  United States

to be frank, we did not play our best game, as we can conclude by the score, but that first goal WAS an offside goal, and its just terrible that a stupid by-law withing the rules made it possible. However i’m not giving the team sympathy, the CD were terrible, Matrix never fully recovered from his injury (after he was subbed he was icing his calf) and barz wasn’t playing to par as what was expected from him. We need speed in the back especially against Mutu who can probably tear up our D like no bodies business. The only glimmer of hope was when ADP and Cassano came on and lite up the friggn pitch. That wasted one-on-one between Toni and Van Der Sar came from Cassano’s genius passing, of which is FAR more superior than Camoranesi’s. The mid has to change entirly, i.e. take Ambrosini out and slap in DDR for extra aid in the centre. Ambro had a great year, im not taking anything away from that, but he’s not part of the puzzle that we need to get out of this group. Pirlo had few bright opportunites but they were shadowed by the fact that he was forced to play D a majority of the game. But what a free kick he took, props to van der sar for an awesome one handed save, wow. Di Natale had a good game, i wouldnt say he squandered the chances that he had, but he should of looked at other options, the same can be said of Toni, the guys looking for the goal and trying too hard.

In all honesty, start Cassano and Toni and sub Toni later on for ADP, put in DDR and go back to 4 mid, we need DDR to help out the sluggish CD cause thats where were hurting the most right now.

oh, and Buffon is god.

Posted from  Canada

and that goal SHOULD not stand, whether it is against Italy or not, it was offside

i mean common, right after the goal RvN wasnt even sure if he should be celebrating or not?!?!?!?
he was confused for half the time!!!!

no goal, the got away with it and it changed the whole tempo of the game. but holland still deserved to win. imagine, they did all that WITHOUT robben…scary

Posted from  Canada

Fifa Law 11.11:

“A defender who leaves the field during the course of play and does not immediately return must still be considered in determining where the second to last defender is for the purpose of judging which attackers are in an offside position. Such a defender is considered to be on the touch line or goal line closest to his or her off-field position. A defender who leaves the field with the referee’s permission (and who thus requires the referee’s permission to return) is not included in determining offside position.”

Its crystal clear right there. It wasn’t offside. Whether van Nistelrooy wasnt sure about the rule or not has nothing to do with whether the goal should count or not, Fabio. The rules state clearly that it should count. There you go.

Posted from  Canada

NOT

FUCKING

OFFSIDE

FOR

CHRIST’S

SAKE

no offside..no stop crying and think about romania game

Posted from  India

Not offside, doesnt matter any more anyway. Holland deserved the win over 90 minutes. (and I predicted they top the group and reach the final) It may have changed the game, but I think they were attacking better anyway. RVN could have got a penalty beforehand, but chose to stay on his feet, and therefore deserved the luck

Posted from  United Kingdom

More unanimous official opinion that it wasn’t offside:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/euro_2008/7445476.stm

Posted from  Italy

6. The offside rule & cursing go hand-in-hand

Some guy posted this on another thread… I thought it was really helpful.

Buffon and Panucci collided to create the situation in the first place. It’s entirely their fault. The only reason this is controversial is because the rule was not widely understood by the common fan (nor apparently the ESPN commentators).

However, this scenario is routinely covered in training for referees and line judges. Typically it’s presented as a defender rushing off the field to “create” an offside, but either way, it’s always emphasized that a player who has left the field of play, but does not need the referee’s permission to return is considered in any offside decisions.

Why the player has left the pitch is irrelevant. As long as they are free to return to play at any point without the referee’s position, they need to be considered in any offside decisions, whether an attacker or a defender.

Note: they must be CONSIDERED in any offside decisions. It’s not automatic. This situation is complicated when it is an attacking player, because being in a offside position is NOT, by itself an offense.

The laws of the game state that “A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
interfering with play, interfering with an opponent, or gaining an advantage by being in that position.”

A attacking player off the pitch may be judged not to be interfering with play, interfering with an opponent, or gaining an advantage by being in that position, and thus not penalized for being offside.

The crew yesterday made the correct call and should be commended for their efforts.

Posted from  United States