Italy v Australia

[diver]

Crap.

[goldorak]

Well, the Australians deserved to loose.
They had a numerical superiority on the field and were incapable of scoring a goal.
In a direct elimination match you have to attack, attack and attack with 80% of the players, moreso in the last minutes of the match.
All things that the socceroos obviously didn't do.
So Totti chastised them.
Now bring on switerzland or ucraine and then Brasil.

[Egan]

Forza Azzurri!

Sorry to see Australia go out but with superiority in numbers they should really have tried more. To be honest, when I saw Materazzi was down to play I thought Oz would have put their fastest players up there. Old Marco has little in the way of pace these days and thats the way to get him. All academic anyway, I guess, with him getting sent off.

Ah well, perhaps Totti can begin to get somewhere near his potential in a major championship.

Luca Toni - what a star. Always a great buy for me in 'Football Manager.'

[joea]

WTF? That was bloody poor sportsmanship by the Italians.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by joea

WTF? That was bloody poor sportsmanship by the Italians.

No, the Australians have only themselves to blame.
Its not Italy's fault that the socceroos lack tactical finess.

[Skybird]

I had to work all day today and had not opportunity to watch this game. Only customers occaisonally told me the Aussies really set up a fight and the Italiansin first half were standing with their backs at the wall..!?

[joea]

Originally Posted by goldorak

No, the Australians have only themselves to blame.
Its not Italy's fault that the socceroos lack tactical finess.

You are mixing two different things...that the Aussies missed chances ok...just as the Swiss did afterward to go to the penalty shootout lottery. Still does not change the bad smell around the dive and penalty of Italy and the poor sports trying to defend that. The worst thing about this cup are the refs though no doubt.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by goldorak

In a direct elimination match you have to attack, attack and attack with 80% of the players.

As the Italians did.
They won because of the referee. It was aclear swalbe.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Fish

As the Italians did.
They won because of the referee. It was aclear swalbe.

Let the bashing begin. :rotfl:
The dutch should look at their disastrous situation and early elimination, before start bashing other teams.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by goldorak

Let the bashing begin. :rotfl:
The dutch should look at their disastrous situation and early elimination, before start bashing other teams.

Lots of faults in that game, and I blame my team for not b eing profesional, but they where not alone there (referee, Portugees).

PS: Still having problems to edit my posts?

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Fish

Lots of faults in that game, and I blame my team for not b eing profesional, but they where not alone there (referee, Portugees).

Yes, the referee did an awful job, he just couldn't control the match.
On the other hand, holland lost also because of tactical errors by Van Basten.
He is one of the greatest players ever (any my favorite since his days at the Milan AC ) but as a coach he sucks.

PS: Still having problems to edit my posts?

I'm not sure i understand.
I only quote the part of message to which i'm responding.
I'm not about to quote 4 different messages at the same time.

[Skybird]

I never understood how stubbornly football orthodox refuse to add video proofs to the tools available to the refs. Refs are only humans, too. In other professional sports it is common practice to help the referee to eliminate mistakes in his decisions. Refusing that for football is like demanding that unfairness and unsportsmanship shall have a chance to decide a game in favour of cheaters. I also never understood what they mean when talking of a "emergency foul". A Ref should decide if a foul was intentional, or unintentional. If it was intentional, then it deserves yellow, alwqys, no matter how tough or soft iot was. Becasue nowhere, as I believe, the football rules allow to bring down an opponent by means of a foul if technically he cannot be stopped. An intentional foul is not acceptable and violates the rules, always. It's a yellow one, always. In this detail, football is extremely inconsistent. Banning fouls in principle would allow for more tactical and tehcnical raffinesse in a match, the indiovidual abilities of the player would have more space to unfold, and if it leads to an easier job for attcking players and there are more goals: then it is so much better for the excitement of the audience.

[aaken]

Then complain with Sepp Blatter who, in case you didn't notice, is not italian.

[JScones]

Originally Posted by goldorak

Now bring on switerzland or ucraine and then Brasil.

Hehe, with Italy's performance against the "newbies" such as the socceroos (that's your quote), don't hold your breath.

Yes, perhaps Australia needed Kewell. Perhaps they did not take advantage of the situation. But remind me, how many World Cups has Australia won. That's right, none. What was the final score? That's right 1-0.

I would have expected that the 13th ranked team in the world would beat the 42nd rank team a little more than 1-0, without needing to "milk" a penalty? :hmm:

The scoreboard suggests hardly a "world class" performance from Italy. I'd be nervous if I were you.

Go Germany!

[Frenssen]

The Italians showed some cunning tactics. When they were down to 10 men they let Australia have possession and they had control in defence (mostly). Then in added time, just when the Australians were mentally prepared for extra time Italy attacked with tempo and many players and caught the Aussies totally off guard. And when Grosso got the chance to get am IMO legitimate penalty he took it. 99% of the players in the WC would go for a penalty in that situation.