World Cup 2010

[Van Basten II]

It's like the balk rule in baseball, everybody fakes understanding it

[neveronfriday]

This has got to be

a) the lamest and

b) nuttiest World Cup I've ever watched.

What a waste of time.

[J.A.W.]

I guess I don't understand the offside rule ...

It was hard to see, but I think he was not offside - but only just.

I also think that the French can book their tickets home. Another very disappointing performance from them. How about letting Domenech go (finally)?

[B. Goren.]

If this is the best football the French team can produce, it's a real shame.

How about letting Domenech go (finally)?

The next game will be his last one. Laurent Blanc will replace him.

Edited June 17, 2010 by B. Goren.

[J.A.W.]

How about letting Domenech go (finally)?

The next game will be his lasi one. Laurent Blanc will replace him.

Forgot about that. I guess Blanc should have taken over two years ago, after France's equally dismal performance at Euro 2008.

[neveronfriday]

Edited June 17, 2010 by neveronfriday

[brownie]

Just one more match (against South Africa) and France will finally bid ADIEU to Domenech. Good riddance!

[king ubu]

[Van Basten II]

How about letting Domenech go (finally)?

The next game will be his lasi one. Laurent Blanc will replace him.

Forgot about that. I guess Blanc should have taken over two years ago, after France's equally dismal performance at Euro 2008.

[brownie]

Perfect example of coach Domenech's doomed tactics. He starts this decisive game with a forward trio of Anelka, Govou and Ribery.

Govou and Anelka proved in the previous match that they were not fit to play in this World Cup. Ribery barely tried!

Mexico had a cohesive team and deserved to win!

[papsrus]

I'm pickin' Mexico to win the whole enchilada!

[J.A.W.]

I'm pickin' Mexico to win the whole enchilada!

Dream on

[Brad]

I didn't see the whole match but not a good effort from France. Mexico played a little better but nothing to get crazy about.

The only hope for either France or SA is for Uruguay or Mexico to beat the other. However, if those two decide to take it easy, France and SA are out. Moreover, there's nothing to indicate that France could beat SA or vice versa so those two are probably going home in any event (although I guess SA doesn't have far to travel )

[papsrus]

If there's a winner in the Uruguay-Mexico match, and France beats S. Africa, you'd have a tie for second place in the group, so I believe it comes down to goal differential. And France would have some ground to make up there.

Edited June 17, 2010 by papsrus

[J.A.W.]

If there's a winner in the Uruguay-Mexico match, and France beats S. Africa, you'd have a tie for second place in the group, so I believe it comes down to goal differential. And France would have some ground to make up there.

These are FIFA's rules:

The ranking of each team in each group will be determined as follows:

a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;

b) goal difference in all group matches;

c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.

If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their

rankings will be determined as follows:

d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the

teams concerned;

e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams

concerned;

f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams

concerned;

g) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee.

[papsrus]

If there's a winner in the Uruguay-Mexico match, and France beats S. Africa, you'd have a tie for second place in the group, so I believe it comes down to goal differential. And France would have some ground to make up there.

These are FIFA's rules:

The ranking of each team in each group will be determined as follows:

a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;

b) goal difference in all group matches;

c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.

If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their

rankings will be determined as follows:

d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the

teams concerned;

e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams

concerned;

f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams

concerned;

g) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee.

Has 'g)' ever happened?

[J.A.W.]

If there's a winner in the Uruguay-Mexico match, and France beats S. Africa, you'd have a tie for second place in the group, so I believe it comes down to goal differential. And France would have some ground to make up there.

These are FIFA's rules:

The ranking of each team in each group will be determined as follows:

a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;

b) goal difference in all group matches;

c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.

If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their

rankings will be determined as follows:

d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the

teams concerned;

e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams

concerned;

f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams

concerned;

g) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee.

Has 'g)' ever happened?

No idea.

[Brad]

As far as goal difference, right now Uruguay is sitting pretty. Even if they lose by a goal or two, France, to beat them, will have to do something they haven't yet done: score!

[kenny weir]

Sweet!

France thumped by a team wearing a strip virtually identical to that of ... Ireland.

[Brad]

I guess I don't understand the offside rule ...

When the ball is struck there has to be at least two defenders (including the goalie) between the offensive player and the goal. If the offensive player is slightly past, he's off sides. In every Cup they say that the refs are told to give the benefit of the doubt to the offensive player but it rarely seems to happen that way.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Brad

[papsrus]

I guess I don't understand the offside rule ...

When the ball is struck there has to be at least two defenders (including the goalie) between the offensive player and the goal. If the offensive player is slightly past, he's off sides. In every Cup they say that the refs are told to give the benefit of the doubt to the offensive player but it rarely seems to happen that way.

That's what I understood. Wasn't that Mexican player about 15 yards behind the defenders?

Also, I noticed on one of the Argentine goals that the forward on the weak side was behind the defenders while the player on the other side with the ball was not. The player with the ball then somehow got it to the player on the weak side for a goal. That looked like the weak-side player was offside to me as well. But it was a LOT closer than the Mexican goal.

At least, seemed to me. Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention to the whole "when the ball is struck."

Anyways, I know you guys say it's not the greatest tournament so far. I'm enjoying it. Thinking things will heat up considerably in the next round!

I don't really have a favorite, other than watching some good ball.

[Brad]

Replays seemed to show that the Mexican player was even with the defender as the ball was struck while he was making his run; he timed it perfectly.

[RiRiIII]

The Greeks are back in the running. After a dismal first game they showed some spirit. Exciting end to the this group as all the team will still be alive and all teams can be knocked out also. Argentina has obviously the simpler task, as long as they don't lose by more than two goals they are in while Nigeria needs some outside help big time to manage a way to squeeze in the second round. Korea and Greece will have to do some scireboard watching while delivering a result.

We are back and celebrated the whole day! N

[brownie]

France sinks to a new low:

That's Franck Ribery going down...

[B. Goren.]

France sinks to a new low:

That's Franck Ribery going down...

A good picture is worth more than a thousand words.