BBC Home

Explore the BBC

16 comments

user rating: 5 star

USA 2 - 2 Slovenia

by BuckUUTeeth (U14314590) 18 June 2010
Date:
18 June 2010
Venue:
Ellis Park
Competition:
World Cup
comment on the article

I have to say I felt a little robbed there at the end, but we probably shouldn't have backed ourselves into a corner they way we did.

I do have to ask the question, are there many teams out there with more heart than the USA?

It's still good knowing that we are very much in control of our own destiny. Regardless of results from any other match, we know that if we beat Algeria by 2 goals, then we're through.

Come on you Yanks!

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Jun 18, 2010

If you look closely at the slow motion replay you will realize that it was an excellent call by the referee. In slow-motion you can clearly see Bocanegra holding back the defender who would have covered Edu's run. The ref had blown his whistle before Edu got the ball meaning that technically it wasn't even a "disallowed" goal as play had already been stopped by the ref.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 19, 2010

It was a poor decision by the referee to disallow the goal, but it was just as poor to give the free kick in the first place. Altidore clearly dived for it, as the Americans had been doing a lot in that match.

Justice was done.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 19, 2010

It is not a disallowed goal. The whistle having been blown, play should have come to a stop. Technically player who still carried on could be yellow-carded.

The only issue here is if there was sufficient cause for play to have been stopped. It was a melee with lots of jostling. View is subjective and since the Malian had the discretion to exercise judgment there is no way he can be challenged. The only process available is he can be excluded from being a future menace, if he is found to have been one here.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 19, 2010

Such a shame that the England team don't seem to want to play with the same passion that the USA team does (or most of the others for that matter).

USA definitely robbed of a winning goal (I think I saw 5 US players being held in the box or wrestled to the ground). They can feel aggrieved at the injustice, unlike Rooney with his petulent comments at the end of England's game.

Well done USA, and I only hope that England can join you in the knockout stages (I'm fairly certain USA will be there)

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 19, 2010

It seems like, he bring in the politic and personnal matter into the game. He know exactly with only few minutes left that Solvenia won't be able to score another goal. He hates the American and don't want them to win advance to the group stages. FIFA is a big joke that let him to be the referee in such important game. he should be sacked and pack his personal belonging back to mali to become a pirate.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 19, 2010

There was nothing wrong with the goal that was ruled out and it wasn't the only mistake the ref made. It has to be asked how a ref from Mali who is probably used to taking charge of sunday league football is given important World Cup games? The tournament this far has had decent officials with yesterdays games involving Germany and the USA being really poor and as such these refs should not be given another game and sent somewhere to learn how to apply the rules of the game.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 19, 2010

I'm anything but a fan of the US but I saw four infringements in the penalty area, any one of which should have resulted in a penalty if the US hadn't scored.
I didn't see anything that should have resulted in the goal being disallowed.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by tmason (U14525955)

posted Jun 19, 2010

The face of the matter is, FIFA doesn't care. It has never cared when things like this happen. It never will care. The ref will never have to explain himself. They've already said in the past that they like the controversy. Why? It's front page news. People claim the refs should be removed from high level play and that FIFA should appoint new refs. This treats the symptoms, but not the disease. The disease is FIFA. It is FIFA that allows these problems by neglect.

The sport needs to be cleaned up from top to bottom. FIFA needs to be discarded. A new organization should be formed along similar lines but with measures taken to ensure the shame of FIFA is washed away. FIFA allows players to act badly; running around with their arms out calling for fouls and taking dives left and right. It's funny, when there's no one between a player and the goal, he doesn't fall down with he's touch, put a chance of him losing the ball in there and he magically falls down rolling around holding his ankle. If the ref doesn't say anything he gets up. Every time a player calls for a foul with he arms out, he should be carded. Players are there to play the game, not officiate the game.

When player go down to the ground, if they don't get back up shortly, they should be removed from play as an injured person on a stretcher. When the medics run out with a little bit of water and holy prayers to bring them back in the current situation, it's just a farce to make it look like an injury. If you're injured get off the field.

Rugby players regularly get hit a lot harder than association football players, yet manage to stay standing. Why? There's no advantage to falling down. Under FIFA, the best thing you can do for your team, is roll around on the ground crying. How can two athletes from the same species be so completely different in their ability to remain on their feet? One of them is diving regularly. FIFA's attempt to clean that up was just a farce. It's still going on.

There's no excuse for less than 5 officials at a World Cup match. Seven would be better. FIFA tells us that that's the way it's always been done so there's no need for more. Absolute monarchies are the way it's always been done, so does FIFA want a return to that? With the way FIFA defends it's refs, I believe so. FIFA makes claims that one official has always been good enough and 3 is really all that's needed at this level of play. One was only ever good enough in a schoolyard. Even then one was questionable. I've reffed teenagers and elementary school kids. You can't see everything. More officials make better calls. Look at how many officials are on a basketball court for an NBA finals game. They've got enough to field their own basketball team and there's only 10 players total on a court that's far smaller than the pitch. But it's already been said, FIFA wants controversy. FIFA doesn't care about the game being fair and a contest between athletes. FIFA wants a contest against the ref. We could just pull a random fan from the stadium and have them officiate the game. The quality of Reffing would be just as good and if we sold raffle tickets to get selected to officiate, the money could be donated to charity. That's better than what FIFA does now.

FIFA has built the cult of the godref. The ref is unquestionable. The ref is the only one who ever really knows how much time there is. The ref is the only one who ever really knows anything. He is omnipotent and omniscient. He can blow the whistle, award a penalty and never explain what he blew the whistle about. That's a recipe for bribing. There's a court has to charge a person with a crime and not just hold the person indefinitely. Refs are the judge, jury and executioners who need to explain their motive as none of those roles. The referee's defense of the time needs to be removed. FIFA claims that "play is continuous" which is a bold faced lie. Stoppage time is added which by it's very name is an admission that the clock was stopped. In other major sports the referee notifies the sidelines to adjust the clock appropriately. How many times has the ref shaved a few seconds off or added a few seconds to favor one team or the other? We'll never know, but you know it has happened and I know it as happened. FIFA would tell you that the referee is infallible. FIFA uses the continuous play argument for why officials shouldn't confer and why extra officials shouldn't be added. Instead of 3 minutes of stoppage time, there might be 4 or 5, but the calls would be right more often. The clock should count down. The vast majority of professional sports count down. FIFA is different for the sake of being different, no other reason. But extra officials might have us thinking that the ref is less than perfect and FIFA couldn't allow that.

If the sport were a person, FIFA would be arrested for the way it has treated the game. Instead it's allowed the run amok like some kind of twisted monster, continuing it's abuse.

So long as FIFA runs the sport, it cannot be beautiful.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 100.00%
    2 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1
    0 votes

average rating:
5.00 from 2 votes