Support NeoGAF

[doicare]

So basically, it’s not England’s fault that they couldn’t defend the German counter but rather, the ref’s.

I’ve never seen someone belittle two brilliant strikes down to an excuse of overextension.

No not at all. The point is it's the refs fault England were put in a situation were they had to play into the hands of the German counter attack. If the ref did his job then that would never have happened in the first place.

 

[perfectchaos007]

I'll answer the question for you. When a team through it's own good play takes the lead, playing counter attacking football is fine. When a team is ahead only because the referee has f*cked up which forces the other team to have to over extend thenselves with risky attacking football, scoring two goals with the only two decent attacks they managed in the entire half is cheap.

Apparently thats how yall like the football. Purists don't want replay. The officials mistakes are all part of the game. Sometimes calls go your way and other times they don't. Supposedly it evens out. However Americans will never like this sport until there is justice. Americans love justice. And its not because our last president was George W. Bush. Replay is in all of our sports now. It's time for football to get a little technology on their side. However, I don't think it will happen considering the football president said the good thing about not having replay is that a missed call will get people "talking". So by you griping about the missed call is apparently good for the sport! It's also why most Americans will never be soccer fans.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

:lol doicares meltdown is hilarious.

Germany shouldn't have played such offensive counterattacks It wasn't fair, England had to have shitty defense cause of the ref. therefore, ENGLAND WINS and didn't suffer their worst defeat ever at the hands of the germans.

If the ref did his job then that would never have happened in the first place.

you can't know that. I seem to remember germany sticking it too England really hard with 2 incredible goals before the refs bad decision as well.

It's funny how i'm the one who posts facts, stats and provides logical points whilst the people who disagree with me just post insults....

see but you don't. You posted the stats and then you post your opinions on the match, which I would argue are illogical. And really, people are arguing with you without insulting you, but you're making it hard, by being I think the only English fan in the whole of England who actually doesn't realise you guys GOT BEAT.

 

[neorej]

I'll answer the question for you. When a team through it's own good play takes the lead, playing counter attacking football is fine. When a team is ahead only because the referee has f*cked up which forces the other team to have to over extend thenselves with risky attacking football, scoring two goals with the only two decent attacks they managed in the entire half is cheap.

There were about 6 or 7 Englandplayers in front of the ball at the time of the free kick. The kick is bad, lands in the feet of an Englandplayer and instead of just kicking it for goal, he decides to go technical, allowing Germany to take over the ball. Meanwhile, all the other players are still standing in the box, wondering what the hell is going on. That's how England got the 3rd goal against, by not playing with their heads. The ref had nothing to do with that 3rd goal.

 

[giga]

No not at all. The point is it's the refs fault England were put in a situation were they had to play into the hands of the German counter attack. If the ref did his job then that would never have happened in the first place.

See, this is the problem with your argument. I’m sure if Gerrard had some Taco Bell before the game, he wouldn’t have made that beautiful cross for the header. I’m sure if Lampard hadn’t of been there at the center of the field, he wouldn’t have received that pass and made that shot.

Understand? Hypotheticals—if/what if/etc—are not a valid argument unless you’re a prophet of some sort.

 

[UnblessedSoul]

Sure the ref was to blame for not letting the goal in, but it was Englands terrible performance especially the defense that let in 4 goals

 

[Xater]

I'm so nervous for today, i think i'm gonna start smoking again.

I'll be rooting for you guys.

 

[Blablurn]

 

[Patrick Bateman]

No not at all. The point is it's the refs fault England were put in a situation were they had to play into the hands of the German counter attack. If the ref did his job then that would never have happened in the first place.

44 years of butthurt and bitter tears. :lol

Also put me to the Germans, OP, thanks!

 

[DieNgamers]

44 years of butthurt and bitter tears. :lol

Also put me to the Germans, OP, thanks!

Me too, please.

I'll answer the question for you. When a team through it's own good play takes the lead, playing counter attacking football is fine. When a team is ahead only because the referee has f*cked up which forces the other team to have to over extend thenselves with risky attacking football, scoring two goals with the only two decent attacks they managed in the entire half is cheap.

Cheap? :lol Awesome! So basically we shouldn't have attacked so hard and effectively. That's one of the cases where the stats don't show the whole story: we have people like Klose, Podolski, Özil and Müller at the front. I don't think you can deny that overall you can't deny that Germany dominated the game.

 

[Windom Earle]

 

[doicare]

:lol doicares meltdown is hilarious.

O good, i have the complete set of insults now. Because i state facts and logic and don't go away when people post insults with no logical reply then that means i'm having a 'meltdown', sure....

Germany shouldn't have played such offensive counterattacks It wasn't fair, England had to have shitty defense cause of the ref. therefore, ENGLAND WINS and didn't suffer their worst defeat ever at the hands of the germans.

What complete rubbish, you can pretend till the end of time that Germany won 4-1 because they are a significantly better team then England and they deserved to win, but you'll never change the fact that England's defence was crippled by injuries and the Referee's decision to not give England the second goal that clearly crossed the line completly changed the game in favour of the German's which lead to there goals.

see but you don't. You posted the stats and then you post your opinions on the match, which I would argue are illogical. And really, people are arguing with you without insulting you, but you're making it hard, by being I think the only English fan in the whole of England who actually doesn't realise you guys GOT BEAT.

This is so sad, nobody cares how or why a team won all they care about is the result and then being a d*ck about it. At the end of the day England were beaten but if you can't admit England's injuries and bad refereeing changed the game then that's even more sad.

 

[norinrad]

Just got back from Berlin, Yesterday was amazing. Congrats to Germany

 

[doicare]

There were about 6 or 7 Englandplayers in front of the ball at the time of the free kick. The kick is bad, lands in the feet of an Englandplayer and instead of just kicking it for goal, he decides to go technical, allowing Germany to take over the ball. Meanwhile, all the other players are still standing in the box, wondering what the hell is going on. That's how England got the 3rd goal against, by not playing with their heads. The ref had nothing to do with that 3rd goal.

Had the game been 2-2 instead if 2-1 (which is all down to the refs mistake) then 7 England players wouldn't have been standing in the box trying desperately to equalise only to then be caught out on the counter, so yes wether you like it or not it is the refs fault.

See, this is the problem with your argument. I’m sure if Gerrard had some Taco Bell before the game, he wouldn’t have made that beautiful cross for the header. I’m sure if Lampard hadn’t of been there at the center of the field, he wouldn’t have received that pass and made that shot.

Understand? Hypotheticals—if/what if/etc—are not a valid argument unless you’re a prophet of some sort.

Pretending that injuries and disallowing perfectly good goals doesn't significantly change games is far worse then stating probable things which is only part of what i was saying.

 

[farnham]

Germany was awesome yesterday. I really liked Mueller when he played in the Champions League but he seems to be even better now.

Man Argentina vs. Germany is going to be awesome.

 

[Kurtofan]

Germany was awesome yesterday. I really liked Mueller when he played in the Champions League but he seems to be even better now.

Man Argentina vs. Germany is going to be awesome.

Yep this is going to be great football!

 

[Mael]

What a fucking disgrace, seriously I didn't expect any other outcome than England and Argentina passing but in this manner?
2 fucking horrible mistakes by the referees which shaped the whole matches?
What's the point of this competition if the only team passing are chosen by whether or not the refs are fucking blind or not?

Seriously for Argentina they stopped playing by 40min! After this good luck convincing that this sport is worth watching.

 

[DieNgamers]

What complete rubbish, you can pretend till the end of time that Germany won 4-1 because they are a significantly better team then England and they deserved to win, but you'll never change the fact that England's defence was crippled by injuries and the Referee's decision to not give England the second goal that clearly crossed the line completly changed the game in favour of the German's which lead to there goals.

This is so sad, nobody cares how or why a team won all they care about is the result and then being a d*ck about it. At the end of the day England were beaten but if you can't admit England's injuries and bad refereeing changed the game then that's even more sad.

We care about how or why we won. Because we had the better team. We also missed Michael Ballack and in this game Cacau, btw. Maybe your team doesn't have enough fit players to compensate? One more reason why you lost. In this game Germany dominated England and deserved to win like this. It could have been even higher, I think. Could have...Who knows? Speculation is no excuse.
We had a bad game against Ghana last week and I think every German agrees. This weekend we had a "different" and fit team. Young and aggressive players that pushed Germany to the quarters!

 

[Fritz]

I'm afraid we will hear about this goal for a really, really long time

 

[giga]

Pretending that injuries and disallowing perfectly good goals doesn't significantly change games is far worse then stating probable things which is only part of what i was saying.

1. Injury excuses are for chumps. Ballack is injured. Essien is injured. Torres can barely do anything. Don’t fall back on this for an excuse for your loss. Your team is full of EPL players and several stars. Deal with it.
2. Yes the disallowed goal did hurt but you literally have no logical reason or proof to say that if it was allowed, then Germany wouldn’t have scored twice more on you.

 

[Kozak]

Oh god, the "if you know anything about football" speech :lol :lol

We've all used it at one point.

 

[S. L.]

I'm afraid we will hear about this goal for a really, really long time

unfortunately Germany won with more than one goal difference, else this would have provided lulz for the coming next 4 years :lol

 

[kottila]

This Castrol prediction stuff is broken. I had USA - Ghana at 1-1 and everyone knows that the full time scores is what counts when you predict the results, but for some reason they chose 2-1 as the official result.

 

[Mael]

1. Injury excuses are for chumps. Ballack is injured. Essien is injured. Torres can barely do anything. Don’t fall back on this for an excuse for your loss. Your team is full of EPL players and several stars. Deal with it.
2. Yes the disallowed goal did hurt but you literally have no logical reason or proof to say that if it was allowed, then Germany wouldn’t have scored twice more on you.

Well maybe because they wouldn't have put goals that way, although England putting everything on the offense was ballsy and stupid.
To argue it had no effect on the match whatsoever? you gotta be kidding :lol

 

[doicare]

We care about how or why we won. Because we had the better team. We also missed Michael Ballack and in this game Cacau, btw. Maybe your team doesn't have enough fit players to compensate? One more reason why you lost. In this game Germany dominated England and deserved to win like this. I could have been even higher, I think. Could have...Who knows? Speculation is no excuse.
We had a bad game against Ghana last week and I think every German agrees. This weekend we had a "different" and fit team. Young and aggressive players that pushed Germany to the quarters!

If this was the other way round with the injuries and bad refereeing all happening to Germany i would have no problem in admiting those things significantly changed the game.

1. Injury excuses are for chumps. Ballack is injured. Essien is injured. Torres can barely do anything. Don’t fall back on this for an excuse for your loss. Your team is full of EPL players and several stars. Deal with it.
2. Yes the disallowed goal did hurt but you literally have no logical reason or proof to say that if it was allowed, then Germany wouldn’t have scored twice more on you.

Again don't let the facts get in the way of you pretending the match was fair and injuries don't matter.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

If this was the other way round with the injuries and bad refereeing all happening to Germany i would have no problem in admiting those things significantly changed the game.

Again don't let the facts get in the way of you pretending the match was fair and injuries don't matter.

man you don't get it. England lost. So they were injured and couldn't field their best side.... AND?! They got beat by germany fair and square. The disallowed goal was a sucky point, and I think even the germans will agree, but then they made sure to make it 4-1.

If it was 2-1 end result, you'd have good reason to whinge.But let's not forget that Germany DESTROYED england 4-1 in this game, if you want to argue that Englands team wasn't given a total hiding that's going to be a hard sell for you, I wish you luck.

The fact you seem to ignore is how Germanys strikers treated your defense BEFORE the disallowed goal (hint, it was kind of exactly the same way they treated it after the disallowed goal. i.e no respect for it)

Again don't let the facts get in the way of you pretending the match was fair and injuries don't matter.

B-B-But INJURIES. Everyone has injuries, it's part of the game, if you want to win a world cup, you have to navigate the tourney with enough depth to cover such happenings. England made it to the final 16 and that's where they stopped, looking at their performance over the tournament, it's about right.

 

[Mael]

man you don't get it. England lost. So they were injured and couldn't field their best side.... AND?! They got beat by germany fair and square. The disallowed goal was a sucky point, and I think even the germans will agree, but then they made sure to make it 4-1.

If it was 2-1 end result, you'd have good reason to whinge.But let's not forget that Germany DESTROYED england 4-1 in this game, if you want to argue that Englands team wasn't given a total hiding that's going to be a hard sell for you, I wish you luck.

The fact you seem to ignore is how Germanys strikers treated your defense BEFORE the disallowed goal (hint, it was kind of exactly the same way they treated it after the disallowed goal. i.e no respect for it)

You're sure the 2nd half would have been the same had England been back to 2-2 before the half time?
you can't be for real if you think that.

edit : and injuries have to be coped with, saying they lost because of that is pretty stupid. Heck what if scenarii like that you can claim whatever you want going that way

 

[Windom Earle]

You're sure the 2nd half would have been the same had England been back to 2-2 before the half time?
you can't be for real if you think that.

edit : and injuries have to be coped with, saying they lost because of that is pretty stupid. Heck what if scenarii like that you can claim whatever you want going that way

We will never know. England got extremely lucky with the 1-2 to begin with. That goal came out of nowhere.

 

[Roxas]

I see Lampards disallowed goal is covering up the cracks for some fans, that England were fucking abysmal the whole tournament. Never mind that they scraped through the easiest group in the tournament by the skin of their bollocks. Its all the linesmans fault that mighty England were dumped out.

Infact, the Germans probably did you a favour, because if a pretty average German side could do that to you, i dread to think what Argentina would of done.

 

[Tf53]

I'll answer the question for you. When a team through it's own good play takes the lead, playing counter attacking football is fine. When a team is ahead only because the referee has f*cked up which forces the other team to have to over extend thenselves with risky attacking football, scoring two goals with the only two decent attacks they managed in the entire half is cheap.

This was the case with Germany yesterday. With better finishing, the game would've been 4-0 before England even started playing.

I agree that it would've been a lot more interesting if England would've pulled back even in 2 minutes, but Germans aren't averse to tough conditions. Fuck, as a Finn I should know. In the qualifiers, we were ahead against Germany 4 times, but were forced to accept ties in both matches. With how Germany was playing, England was never going to win.

Again don't let the facts get in the way of you pretending the match was fair and injuries don't matter.

Here's a fact for you: you play with the best team you can field. Playing the injury card is also a cheap copout. Injuries happen, and you have to deal with them. You can bitch and moan all you want, but England was the worse team.

 

[Mael]

We will never know. England got extremely lucky with the 1-2 to begin with. That goal came out of nowhere.

Still it was a legitimate goal, the refused goal was legitimate too.
The match would have been way different if it happened, they wouldn't have thrown everything n the offense that way.
Whether or not the mannschaft would have cracked open the defense would have been far more interesting than the parody we were served.
And to boot it's not even sure it would have ended with Germany on top.
Instead we got a shitty ref that shaped the match the second he decided to refuse the goal (and the assistant saw nothing, what the hell was he doing?).

I don't even give a crap that England got bitchslapped or not (seriously serves them rght, overated team if you ask me), it's just it's a fucking shame they get to lose that way.
I fully expect the final to end when someone is wrongly thrown out by a red card now.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

You're sure the 2nd half would have been the same had England been back to 2-2 before the half time?
you can't be for real if you think that.

We'll NEVER know the outcome of that. And no, the second half would have been different, but germany would have been trying to score goals and they had the defense of england in tatters.

I think it would have been 4-2 or 3-2 with germany winning in normal time if england had have scored. Germany was too good for England yesterday.

 

[Mael]

We'll NEVER know the outcome of that. And no, the second half would have been different, but germany would have been trying to score goals and they had the defense of england in tatters.

I think it would have been 4-2 or 3-2 with germany winning in normal time if england had have scored. Germany was too good for England yesterday.

Why was the defense of England so shity? Because they kept attacking making them vulnerable on the defense.
Had they come back before halftime, would they have been on the offense like they did or would they have tried to regroup and be effective on the defense?

Same way with Mexico, without the fucking mistake it's quite clear that Argentina would have won, but at least they wouldn't have phoned it in before halftime.

Football is not interesting because one team rape another, it is certainly not interesting to see a match with so crappy refs either.
As it is to say they deserved to pass is an over statement, if I was for Germany or Argentina I would be angry that the refs stole the victories that way.

 

[kitch9]

man you don't get it. England lost. So they were injured and couldn't field their best side.... AND?! They got beat by germany fair and square. The disallowed goal was a sucky point, and I think even the germans will agree, but then they made sure to make it 4-1.

If it was 2-1 end result, you'd have good reason to whinge.But let's not forget that Germany DESTROYED england 4-1 in this game, if you want to argue that Englands team wasn't given a total hiding that's going to be a hard sell for you, I wish you luck.

The fact you seem to ignore is how Germanys strikers treated your defense BEFORE the disallowed goal (hint, it was kind of exactly the same way they treated it after the disallowed goal. i.e no respect for it)



B-B-But INJURIES. Everyone has injuries, it's part of the game, if you want to win a world cup, you have to navigate the tourney with enough depth to cover such happenings. England made it to the final 16 and that's where they stopped, looking at their performance over the tournament, it's about right.

This is Knockout football, tactics are VERY different if you are 2-2 all square, than if you are 2-1 behind.

The fact is the goal should have been allowed, England would have been on the ascendancy and the Germans psychologically would have had to get over the fact they squandered a 2 goal lead. Teams have been known to cave under the pressure when that happens. (Liverpools champions league final a few years back is a classic example.)

Yes Germany were the better team, but the ref did not allow us to see how headstrong they really were when the chips were down, and the lead was lost. There could have been a big difference to the German mindset.

I don't think I'll be as eager over the next world cup, the officiating seems to be deteriorating every time and its making the games a lottery.

 

[Kogepan]

Still it was a legitimate goal, the refused goal was legitimate too.
The match would have been way different if it happened, they wouldn't have thrown everything n the offense that way.
Whether or not the mannschaft would have cracked open the defense would have been far more interesting than the parody we were served.
And to boot it's not even sure it would have ended with Germany on top.
Instead we got a shitty ref that shaped the match the second he decided to refuse the goal (and the assistant saw nothing, what the hell was he doing?).

I don't even give a crap that England got bitchslapped or not (seriously serves them rght, overated team if you ask me), it's just it's a fucking shame they get to lose that way.
I fully expect the final to end when someone is wrongly thrown out by a red card now.

Yes it was a bad decision. But its not a excuse for a team to basically give up and completely bail out. Nobody would be making fun if they went down fighting.

 

[Mael]

Yes it was a bad decision. But its not a excuse for a team to basically give up and completely bail out. Nobody would be making fun if they went down fighting.

But they went fighting, that's the fucking reason the other team scored 2 more!!

 

[Deleted member 1235]

Why was the defense of England so shity? Because they kept attacking making them vulnerable on the defense.
Had they come back before halftime, would they have been on the offense like they did or would they have tried to regroup and be effective on the defense?

Not sure, but it sure helped Germany get 2 goals before the controversy.

Englands defense was bad anyway. If they put more defense, not sure it would have helped much of anything.

Teams have been known to cave under the pressure when that happens.

Germans aren't very prone to this IMO. They continue to stick to the plan and play their game right to the end.

 

[NaughtyPrawn]

Either way you look at it England were dominated the whole game.

 

[Socreges]

We will never know. England got extremely lucky with the 1-2 to begin with. That goal came out of nowhere.

Extremely lucky? How is a perfect setpiece (in the fluid sense) execution "extremely lucky"?

The game would have fundamentally changed had England tied it 2-2. Would they have won? Probably not. Germany is the better team. But at the same time they would have had momentum and it would have been a tie game.

And I firmly subscribe to the Anyone-But-England philosophy. I <3 Germany, too. But I have to be honest.

 

[Always-honest]

The game would have been different at 2-2.

But Germany was far better and would have most likely won anyway.


Doesn't change the fact that 2-2 would have been a different game and might have resulted in penalties or a victory for england.

 

[Dennis]

There some very delusional english fans in this thread. You played bad in every single game and you had by far the easiest group.

Back to the drawing board.

 

[Mike Works]

Yikes the amount of bias and the amount of Italy bashing in this thread is absolutely ludicrous. If people were genuinely true football fans and had a clue about what they were talking about, then they wouldn’t be saying half of the bad things they are about Italy and they’d also know these 3 simple facts:

1). To begin with yes, Italy in this world cup have had a terrible group, but despite the best efforts of some to say the reason why is Italy just ‘dives, hurr hurr hurr’, the inconvenient truth is the Italian group has been crippled by underdogs. Fabio Cannavaro is arguably the best defender in the entire world and even if you don’t want to concede to that fact then if you are a true football fan the worst you could say about him is he is one of the worlds very best defenders. Not only was Fabio Cannavaro in a cursed Nike commercial but also so was Drogba, and that dude broke his arm. Then if that wasn’t bad enough Gianluigi Buffon, Italy's best goaltender and also Italy's best player of the past 2 world cups was also injured. Now I don’t care what team in the world you are but if you remove a teams best defender, the guy who was going to replace him and then you also remove your best goaltender who has been your best player then you will have a significantly worse defence and overall a worse team. And that’s not even mentioning the injuries to Roberto Baggio and Super Mario.

2). Anybody who knows anything about football can clearly see that the Italy manager Marcello Lippi played the wrong formation and used the wrong tactics as well as playing the wrong players from the start. This is not the fault of the Italian players and it clearly handicapped them and made their jobs even harder. Every top team in the world plays some variation of the DIVE DIVE DIVE formation yet despite the fact most of the Italian players play that formation for their clubs as well, Lippi forced players to play out of position and stay on their feet, unlike Germany and other successful WC teams. So before any more Italian player and Serie A bashing takes place, bashers get your facts straight and stop insulting things you have no clue about.

3). Despite Italy's defence being crippled by injuries and despite Italy having a manager who made all the wrong decisions, the main reason Italy lost 3-2 is the referee didn’t give Italy the win even tho they're clearly a more famous country than Slovenia or whoever it was that "won". Yes there were large patches in the first half Italy where very poor but by the letter of the law at half time Italy should have been 2-2 not 2-0 down. And you can say what you like about Somalia or whoever going on to win 3-2 but you’ll never change the fact that a team at 2-0 instead of being at 2-0 has to then play a very attacking and risky game leaving gaps at the back where counter attacks can happen. And that’s all that did happen, two cheap counter attacks and the game was over. Given what actually happened in the game Italy didn’t deserve to lose 3-2, they scored 2, then wrongly weren't gifted the game the Swaziland keeper pulled off two world class saves from close rang and only a last ditch cheating maneuver denied Italy at the end. Believe it or not on the day Italy were the better team, bad luck and bad injuries lost Italy this game. The stats don’t lie:

 

[Mael]

edit : ^^^^^^ that was random

Not sure, but it sure helped Germany get 2 goals before the controversy.

Englands defense was bad anyway. If they put more defense, not sure it would have helped much of anything.

That still doesn't put it in stone, there's plenty of examples of worse turnaround.
And they sure would not have defended that way after the half time if the coach is any better than fucking Domenech.

 

[farnham]

i dont get all the people talking about the equalizer

sure it was a mistake a grave mistake even

but still the score would be 4 to 2 not 1 to 2

 

[Kurtofan]

Yikes the amount of bias and the amount of Italy bashing in this thread is absolutely ludicrous. If people were genuinely true football fans and had a clue about what they were talking about, then they wouldn’t be saying half of the bad things they are about Italy and they’d also know these 3 simple facts:

1). To begin with yes, Italy in this world cup have had a terrible group, but despite the best efforts of some to say the reason why is Italy just ‘dives, hurr hurr hurr’, the inconvenient truth is the Italian group has been crippled by underdogs. Fabio Cannavaro is arguably the best defender in the entire world and even if you don’t want to concede to that fact then if you are a true football fan the worst you could say about him is he is one of the worlds very best defenders. Not only was Fabio Cannavaro in a cursed Nike commercial but also so was Drogba, and that dude broke his arm. Then if that wasn’t bad enough Gianluigi Buffon, Italy's best goaltender and also Italy's best player of the past 2 world cups was also injured. Now I don’t care what team in the world you are but if you remove a teams best defender, the guy who was going to replace him and then you also remove your best goaltender who has been your best player then you will have a significantly worse defence and overall a worse team. And that’s not even mentioning the injuries to Roberto Baggio and Super Mario.

2). Anybody who knows anything about football can clearly see that the Italy manager Marcello Lippi played the wrong formation and used the wrong tactics as well as playing the wrong players from the start. This is not the fault of the Italian players and it clearly handicapped them and made their jobs even harder. Every top team in the world plays some variation of the DIVE DIVE DIVE formation yet despite the fact most of the Italian players play that formation for their clubs as well, Lippi forced players to play out of position and stay on their feet, unlike Germany and other successful WC teams. So before any more Italian player and Serie A bashing takes place, bashers get your facts straight and stop insulting things you have no clue about.

3). Despite Italy's defence being crippled by injuries and despite Italy having a manager who made all the wrong decisions, the main reason Italy lost 3-2 is the referee didn’t give Italy the win even tho they're clearly a more famous country than Slovenia or whoever it was that "won". Yes there were large patches in the first half Italy where very poor but by the letter of the law at half time Italy should have been 2-2 not 2-0 down. And you can say what you like about Somalia or whoever going on to win 3-2 but you’ll never change the fact that a team at 2-0 instead of being at 2-0 has to then play a very attacking and risky game leaving gaps at the back where counter attacks can happen. And that’s all that did happen, two cheap counter attacks and the game was over. Given what actually happened in the game Italy didn’t deserve to lose 3-2, they scored 2, then wrongly weren't gifted the game the Swaziland keeper pulled off two world class saves from close rang and only a last ditch cheating maneuver denied Italy at the end. Believe it or not on the day Italy were the better team, bad luck and bad injuries lost Italy this game. The stats don’t lie:

than Slovenia or whoever it was that "won".

:lol

 

[Mael]

i dont get all the people talking about the equalizer

sure it was a mistake a grave mistake even

but still the score would be 4 to 2 not 1 to 2

A match cannot be looked only by the score board, we should all know that by now.

 

[Dresden]

:lol

i think u getting trolled

 

[Duki]

the 2-2 WOULD HAVE CHANGED EVERYTHING argument is kind of retarded because england didnt play any differently at 0-0, 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, 3-1 or 4-1.

they were equally shit at everything the entire time. they didnt change into some risky super attack football which led them to getting burned by germany, they were just fucking shitty period. no imagination, no ideas and probably worst of all, not even equal athleticism.

you got run ragged the whole game. 2-2 wouldnt change that.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

A match cannot be looked only by the score board, we should all know that by now.

yes, but almost everyone agrees that Germany outclassed england in almost every category there is.... They simply played a much better game and one bad call by the ref wouldn't have changed that outcome drastically enough to matter.

 

[Kogepan]

But they went fighting, that's the fucking reason the other team scored 2 more!!

Really? You call that fighting the good fight? Too bad the players aren't putting as much of a fight as you are in this thread.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...the-pundits-rated-Englands-World-cup-woe.html