World Cup
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Dodgy pen for Holland perchance, or a 'second yellow' like the Klose ref, just by coincidence falling against the Uraguay (we shouldn't be here) side? 
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 25
|
By:
No?
|
|
By:
Could be the other way around, I am sure FIFA would love two teams from different continents.
|
|
By:
I expect a
DIRTY match The dutch are notorius for the bad defending Plenty of cards But they only count from this match on  |
|
By:
cant really imagine they would ref this any less impartially than any other game, however im sure fifa are wincing at the prospect of suarez going up to lift the trophy, proving that cheats do prosper sometimes!
|
|
By:
How exactly is he a cheat please?
|
|
By:
If Suarez isn't playing ....who's in goal ?
|
|
By:
there is no chance that there is any cheating especially at the highest level
they tend to get by just on blatters incompetence alone |
|
By:
FIFA didn't seem too bothered about Maradona 'prospering' in 1986. Added to which the Suarez incident is far removed from that.
|
|
By:
Conspiracy theorists obsessing again I see
|
|
By:
Well if they were considering changing the rules on his ban, hardly see why they'd favour them at least.
|
|
By:
What rules were they considering changing?
|
|
By:
Extending the normal ban to two games not one.
|
|
By:
It's standard stuff though, reviewing all red cards to see if they warrant an additional ban AFAIK.
If they were going to extend the ban, FIFA could have used the fact that Suarez came back onto the field of play after the match was over, which he is not allowed to do. Whatever about the merits of the handball etc, his behaviour afterwards was in bad taste IMO, joking about it on the pitch after the match. All while the Ghanians (incl Gyan) were still on the pitch absolutely devastated. |
|
By:
I just have a feeling they wouldn't exactly mind seeing the back of Uraguay today, given the bad press they've already had in this WC.
Never known so many bad (joke) decisions or contentious cases in one tournament. |
|
By:
are you old enough to remember 2002 world cup ?
|
|
By:
Yes, why?
|
|
By:
If Harry Kewell got suspended for one match, why would the Suarez case be any different.
|
|
By:
I know there's always some dodgy decisions - but the number and scale of bad decisions in this one takes some beating.
|
|
By:
2002 was far worse than this one for controversy
|
|
By:
It shouldn't be frizli, but they were discussing whether to increase it.
|
|
By:
2002 had the rivaldo incident where he fell to the ground clutching his face after a turkish player kicked the ball at his knee.
5 FIVE disallowed goals against the host nation south korea,2 each from spain and italy,all were perfectly good goals. |
|
By:
technically you could say handballing on the goal line is a foul and not cheating.
i was thinking that maybe justice would be if a rule was brought in whereby...deliberate or other wise hand ball on the line resulted in a goal for the attackers rather than a penalty .then no one would feel cheated. for me the win at any cost,bending rules,timewasting players getting ref to hand out cards etc,all under the umbrella of professional gamesmanship,has meant i' dont follow corrupt sports as football. apart fromworld cup,but this is also tainted now. |
|
By:
but ribotman, what if it's 10 cm before the line, where's the limit, what if it could have been saved somehow else. That kind of rule would require more precision which would mean more bad calls.
|
|
By:
i was just thinking similar frizli.
maybe hand ball in the 6 yard box could be the cut off point. |
|
By:
do you guys know why uruguay has firmed in the betting late? was there some news about a player in/out?
|