World Cup

[LamarCheeks]

Egypt scores. 

2-0. 

Can't take this one away (they might try, however)

 

 

[Hovadipo]

Ball don’t lie. Egypt is wearing these boys out. 

[CSP]

3 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

IMO?

1. The red card was a terrible call.
2. The last minute "appeal" that overturned it was also terrible, transparent, and very not okay. 

Both things can be true.

#2 makes zero sense if you're a fan of "getting things right" 

[Brass Cannon]

9 minutes ago, CSP said:

#2 makes zero sense if you're a fan of "getting things right" 

Rules have to be followed. If it’s a bad rule change it. Imagine how outraged we would be if that Miami defender who was suspended the first half of the NC appealed the first half suspension and got to play against us. 
 

FIFA should have been pressured to allow all red cards to be reviewed not just that one 

[Stuhoo]

2 minutes ago, CSP said:

#2 makes zero sense if you're a fan of "getting things right" 

I am a fan of following the established rules, which do not ever incoprorate a morning of the next match review of referee-issued red card.

Bad calls are part of the game. Some time bad calls stand when they are not corrected during the game through the established methods.

This would be the equivalent of appealing a hockey penalty after the game was over, and only after a political leader made a personal call to the head of the leauge, who that political leader has a personal and financial relationship with.  So I'll stick with ... the red card was a bad call, and the reversal of it was really bad too.

I'll go one farther - the red card reversal absolutely killed part of the joy for the US:

• That young US team had to deal with tons of non-game pressure and repeated interview questions about non-game issues. And then they came out flat as a pancake. Coincidence? Maybe - maybe not.
• Belgium is a top ten team that had underperformed until the US game. After they felt they were wronged? They played truly inspired soccer. Definitely not concidental - they ended their fourth and clinching goal with a team dance in the manner of who they felt they'd been wronged by.
• The reversal took the edge off of the hyper-pride by some (not all) US fans. Of course all still rooted for their country, but some felt kind of awkward about the whole incident; even those that felt the red card was an abomination (count me as thinking it was).

 

[Hovadipo]

Wow. 

[Stuhoo]

6 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Rules have to be followed. If it’s a bad rule change it. Imagine how outraged we would be if that Miami defender who was suspended the first half of the NC appealed the first half suspension and got to play against us. 
 

FIFA should have been pressured to allow all red cards to be reviewed not just that one 

Perfect analogy. And what if that Miami one half suspension had happened immediately after a political leader made a call to a friend that was heading the NCAA?

[CSP]

10 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Rules have to be followed. If it’s a bad rule change it. Imagine how outraged we would be if that Miami defender who was suspended the first half of the NC appealed the first half suspension and got to play against us. 
 

FIFA should have been pressured to allow all red cards to be reviewed not just that one 

I mean.. they didn't follow the rules to begin with lol.. this is simple. 

[Stuhoo]

3 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

Wow. 

An understatement: Old Man Messi is still pretty damn good at this. And Egypt is in complete meltdown mode against a sleeping giant of an opponent.

[CSP]

4 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

I am a fan of following the established rules, which do not ever incoprorate a morning of the next match review of referee-issued red card.

Bad calls are part of the game. Some time bad calls stand when they are not corrected during the game through the established methods.

This would be the equivalent of appealing a hockey penalty after the game was over, and only after a political leader made a personal call to the head of the leauge, who that political leader has a personal and financial relationship with.  So I'll stick with ... the red card was a bad call, and the reversal of it was really bad too.

I'll go one farther - the red card reversal absolutely killed part of the joy for the US:

• That young US team had to deal with tons of non-game pressure and repeated interview questions about non-game issues. And then they came out flat as a pancake. Coincidence? Maybe - maybe not.
• Belgium is a top ten team that had underperformed until the US game. After they felt they were wronged? They played truly inspired soccer. Definitely not concidental - they ended their fourth and clinching goal with a team dance in the manner of who they felt they'd been wronged by.
• The reversal took the edge off of the hyper-pride by some (not all) US fans. Of course all still rooted for their country, but some felt kind of awkward about the whole incident; even those that felt the red card was an abomination (count me as thinking it was).

 

They didn't follow the established rule of reviewing the play correctly. 

I don't particularly care what Belgium did. 

I can't actually believe I read it took away from the game for some. Check your pulse. 

[Stuhoo]

1 minute ago, CSP said:

I mean.. they didn't follow the rules to begin with lol.. this is simple. 

It was subjectively a bad call. But it was subjective. So they did follow the rules; the ref thought that the red card rule applied to Bolargun's foul.

[Stuhoo]

19 minutes ago, CSP said:

They didn't follow the established rule of reviewing the play correctly. 

I don't particularly care what Belgium did. 

I can't actually believe I read it took away from the game for some. Check your pulse. 

I'll give you an (admittedly anecdotal) example: My nephew is a mid-20s professional soccer ref in his spare time. He works nights and weekends through high school, college, and semi-pro leagues. He was an excellent player and he's a true soccer junkie - takes international trips and such. He doesn't know about nor care about politics.

He lives in Seattle so I asked him if he scored a ticket for last night's game (he's already been to one WC game). 

This is a direct cut and paste of the convo between me and him at 7 pm last night:

• Me: "Did you find a way into the game?"
• Him: "Not for 2 grand no. also now backing Belgium for the integrity of football."

 

[Brass Cannon]

18 minutes ago, CSP said:

I mean.. they didn't follow the rules to begin with lol.. this is simple. 

What rule did they not follow

[American HoosierX]

29 minutes ago, CSP said:

They didn't follow the established rule of reviewing the play correctly. 

I don't particularly care what Belgium did. 

I can't actually believe I read it took away from the game for some. Check your pulse. 

You can't believe that someone would have a different opinion than you? Interesting.

[CSP]

4 minutes ago, American HoosierX said:

You can't believe that someone would have a different opinion than you? Interesting.

Do you generally struggle to read? 

[CSP]

The best analogy, the Miami suspension was a poor one, would be when we got removed from the BTT game during the Covid year by the already established rule for that season. 

I didn't have a problem with that at all... because... they got it right. Ohio St should have been in that game and not us.. 

Same thing here. The dude SHOULD have played. 

[spe317]

9 minutes ago, CSP said:

Do you generally struggle to read? 

Yes, I do like the color red—why do you ask?

[American HoosierX]

17 minutes ago, CSP said:

Do you generally struggle to read? 

Reading? No. Condescension? Yes.

You seem to be concerned only with the outcome while minimizing the process it took to get there, you are certainly entitled to that opinon. And I agree the outcome was correct. But with a political leader openly touting putting his thumb on the scales, the process was at best not very transparent and at worst shady. I don't think it's outrageous for people to be questioning it.

[Stuhoo]

4 minutes ago, CSP said:

The best analogy, the Miami suspension was a poor one, would be when we got removed from the BTT game during the Covid year by the already established rule for that season. 

I didn't have a problem with that at all... because... they got it right. Ohio St should have been in that game and not us.. 

Same thing here. The dude SHOULD have played. 

It is clearly within the rules to use VAR to judge whether it's a red card. For you, Balogun should have played because you thought that Balogun's conduct did not consitute violent or abusive play (that's the definition of a red card). 

Admittedly this is an AI summary, but with sourced references: 

In soccer, raking down the back of an opponent’s leg or ankle is normally deemed serious foul play and usually results in a straight red card. Under the IFAB Laws of the Game, any challenge that uses excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned with a sending-off. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Whether it warrants a red card depends on a few specific variables evaluated by referees: [1]

• Excessive Force: If a player uses their studs to rake down the calf with significant weight and follow-through, it is considered a dangerous motion that can cause severe injuries like ACL tears or ankle sprains. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Endangering Safety: Even if the contact is deemed accidental or the player's momentum just carried them into the back of the defender, the letter of the law dictates that a tackle endangering an opponent's safety is a red card. [1, 2]

So was this a red card-worthy foul? I would say "no," but I would also say it is subjective and bad calls are part of the game. And here's the kicker; VAR is considered the final review - there are no grounds for appeal after that if the ref makes the subjective decision that play was red card worthy.

[Stuhoo]

7 hours ago, CSP said:

 

I can't actually believe I read it took away from the game for some. Check your pulse. 

Here’s three guys who clearly state it took away from the game for them. The last three US National Team head coaches, one of whom has his son on the current team, should apparently “check their pulse:”

"When it starts going into levels of FIFA and the president is calling ... come on, it's ruining our game," said Bradley, who coached the U.S. at the 2010 World Cup. "I'm sorry."

"We can't get to the point where the integrity of the game is totally thrown out the window. When FIFA handles it the way they did and puts out different statements to try and cover themselves, the game loses."

Gregg Berhalter, who coached the U.S. at the 2022 World Cup and has a son, Sebastian, on the roster, was most direct in stating that the scandal had a potentially negative effect on Monday's game. "It was a strange decision, really unprecedented in a tournament," Berhalter said.

"I think it could have inspired and motivated Belgium. Because now all the chips were against them ... I think it could have hurt our position a little bit."

Bruce Arena, who coached the U.S. at the World Cup in 2002 and 2006, has been steadfast in his opinion that Balogun committed "a bad tackle" that could have broken the Bosnian players' ankle.

In Arena's eyes, the only question was whether it was a yellow or red card and any retroactive suspension was "a mistake" that potentially made it look like FIFA was supporting the U.S. soccer team.

"Those are the rules of the game by which we all play," Arena said. "I don't blame U.S. soccer or, I guess, the president calling FIFA and trying to get it overturned, and I guess he did. But I think it was bad for the game."