The Official 2010 FIFA World Cup

[Main Street]

You can't judge a team on it's first game at the group stage, never mind Uruguay playing what was then a fancied team, when a draw was regarded as a positive result. But Uruguay do revel like pigs in shite when it comes to defending.

Tonight Uruguay were by far the more positive when the game was level. I lost count of the Dutch passing back from midfield to the back 4 to their goalie.

I don't believe we saw the best of Uruguay tonight, far from it. Though the subs did well, Uruguay badly missed 2 key players and Forlan was clearly off his game despite his goal.
That's life at the Finals, the strength of the squad plays an important role. I do believe an Uruguay first 11 would have beaten that Dutch team.

[paco]

Think the Dutch were being criticised for being "negative" in the same way that the Spanish were, i.e. playing 2 defensive midfielders. Van Bommel is no Van Der Vaart and Busquets is no Fabregas. I don't agree with people saying Uruguay played negatively either, they basically played a front 3 and the 2 full backs were constantly bombing forward, Maxi Perieira in particular played well throughout I thought.

[ballinaman]

Holland-Germany will be some game, the hate each other!! Nevermind this Germany-England shite that the red tops whip up, serious bad blood between these two countries on and off the park for alot of dutch people in particular. It'll obviously be Spain now but i hoping for Germany to set up a real cracker!

[Declan]

Was rooting for Uruguay tonight and they gave it a great effort. Fair play to them. Van Persie was offside but two other great goals by the Dutch. Van Bommell is some destroyer alright but Schneider and Robben are the lads who get things done for the Dutch. Depends on how tonights game goes but I'd prefer Spain or Germany to win it 

[Bogball XV]

You can't judge a team on it's first game at the group stage, never mind Uruguay playing what was then a fancied team, when a draw was regarded as a positive result. But Uruguay do revel like pigs in shite when it comes to defending.

Tonight Uruguay were by far the more positive when the game was level. I lost count of the Dutch passing back from midfield to the back 4 to their goalie.

I don't believe we saw the best of Uruguay tonight, far from it. Though the subs did well, Uruguay badly missed 2 key players and Forlan was clearly off his game despite his goal.
That's life at the Finals, the strength of the squad plays an important role. I do believe an Uruguay first 11 would have beaten that Dutch team.

I think you're bigging them up a wee bit too much, they were a decent side, no more than that.  Their front two were better than most sides there, they were very uninspiring in the middle (despite Arry wanting to sign Cavani) and reasonably solid at the back.  They were well organised too, but what game, south africa apart, were they truly convincing in?  In qualifying they lost 6 and drew 6 and won 6 of their 18 games and then scraped past costa rica controversially in a play-off.
The dutch may not have totally convincing tonight, but they were also missing key players in de jong and van der wiel.

[Tony Baloney]

An awful lot of shite being talked about the Dutch playing style. The fact is their recent record shows their current style is effective. I'm sure the players and fans would rather support the current setup and be challenging for the WC than playing open, expansive stuff and getting put out in the second round.

[thewobbler]

I don't like Holland at all but you have to respect what they've done here.

There is an obvious weakness, especially in pace, across the defence so the sensible thing to do is to protect it with midfielders.

But they've still got four players out every game whose sole purpose is more or less to attack, and as a result they've scored in every game, at an average of two goals per game. They've shown they can make and take chances, and shown they can come from behind.

It's balanced football. There might be an absence of wing play or prolonged periods of possession, but in my mind the Dutch play the same system as Brazil did in this World Cup, except better. Yellow fever means commentators can't complain about Brazil, so Holland appear to be catching all the flak.

[charlie stubbs]

I don't like Holland at all but you have to respect what they've done here.

There is an obvious weakness, especially in pace, across the defence so the sensible thing to do is to protect it with midfielders.

But they've still got four players out every game whose sole purpose is more or less to attack, and as a result they've scored in every game, at an average of two goals per game. They've shown they can make and take chances, and shown they can come from behind.

It's balanced football. There might be an absence of wing play or prolonged periods of possession, but in my mind the Dutch play the same system as Brazil did in this World Cup, except better. Yellow fever means commentators can't complain about Brazil, so Holland appear to be catching all the flak.

Very good poinrt wobbler.  Brazil play the same system as holland.  van miel/maicon bastos/van bronchhorst push forward down the flanks, then there is 2 holding players de jong/silva van bommel/ramires.  then the other 4 players are left to attack. this was the most un brazil like team ever to play in the finals. 

this may not be the best or most atttractive dutch side ever, but no one will care if they win on sun.  hard argue with their record in qualifying and at the finals, where they have won every game.  sign of a good team when they have been winning and not playing well!

[A Quinn Martin Production]

Holland are going to bore their way to the World Cup,  Never thought I'd say this but I hope they get stuffed in the final.

On another note any reason why ITV had no co-commentator last night??

[A Quinn Martin Production]

Holland are going to bore their way to the World Cup,  Never thought I'd say this but I hope they get stuffed in the final.

On another note any reason why ITV had no co-commentator last night??

It has been pointed out to me that Jim Beglin was laid low by an ear infection late in the day.

[Main Street]

You can't judge a team on it's first game at the group stage, never mind Uruguay playing what was then a fancied team, when a draw was regarded as a positive result. But Uruguay do revel like pigs in shite when it comes to defending.

Tonight Uruguay were by far the more positive when the game was level. I lost count of the Dutch passing back from midfield to the back 4 to their goalie.

I don't believe we saw the best of Uruguay tonight, far from it. Though the subs did well, Uruguay badly missed 2 key players and Forlan was clearly off his game despite his goal.
That's life at the Finals, the strength of the squad plays an important role. I do believe an Uruguay first 11 would have beaten that Dutch team.

I think you're bigging them up a wee bit too much, they were a decent side, no more than that.  Their front two were better than most sides there, they were very uninspiring in the middle (despite Arry wanting to sign Cavani) and reasonably solid at the back.  They were well organised too, but what game, south africa apart, were they truly convincing in?  In qualifying they lost 6 and drew 6 and won 6 of their 18 games and then scraped past costa rica controversially in a play-off.
The dutch may not have totally convincing tonight, but they were also missing key players in de jong and van der wiel.

I take it that you now accept that Uruguay, on the evidence of the game, were the most positive of the 2 teams last night and took the game to the defensively minded Dutch even when the scores were level.
I take it that you also agree that the first game in a WC group stage can be a 'careful affair' especially a minnow playing a big name team.
I am far from bigging up Uruguay, quite simply they have been the best coached team after Germany at the tournament. Their squad ls limited and there they were, battling with distinction for a place for a place in the Final. The evidence points to a remarkable run from a remarkable team.
If you were not impressed with Uruguay's performance in their games,  is there anything I can write? We have radically different   interpretations of games as they were played at that tournament. Did you see their game against Mexico when they had Lugano at CH?
If you appreciate an extremely well coached, disciplined resiliant team, with some very talented players, playing attractive attacking  football, combined with excellent controlled defensive play, ability to hold possession and spray the ball around, then Uruguay ticked many boxes.
Holland have a better squad with better quality players in reserve, it's no surprise that they can replace 2 players. Personally I thought Holland thoroughly deserved to beat Brazil, they exposed Brazil's weaknesses and exploited them to perfection.
Last night, Uruguay were running on fumes and still they managed to impress.

[A Quinn Martin Production]

You can't judge a team on it's first game at the group stage, never mind Uruguay playing what was then a fancied team, when a draw was regarded as a positive result. But Uruguay do revel like pigs in shite when it comes to defending.

Tonight Uruguay were by far the more positive when the game was level. I lost count of the Dutch passing back from midfield to the back 4 to their goalie.

I don't believe we saw the best of Uruguay tonight, far from it. Though the subs did well, Uruguay badly missed 2 key players and Forlan was clearly off his game despite his goal.
That's life at the Finals, the strength of the squad plays an important role. I do believe an Uruguay first 11 would have beaten that Dutch team.

I think you're bigging them up a wee bit too much, they were a decent side, no more than that.  Their front two were better than most sides there, they were very uninspiring in the middle (despite Arry wanting to sign Cavani) and reasonably solid at the back.  They were well organised too, but what game, south africa apart, were they truly convincing in?  In qualifying they lost 6 and drew 6 and won 6 of their 18 games and then scraped past costa rica controversially in a play-off.
The dutch may not have totally convincing tonight, but they were also missing key players in de jong and van der wiel.

I take it that you now accept that Uruguay, on the evidence of the game, were the most positive of the 2 teams last night and took the game to the defensively minded Dutch even when the scores were level.
I take it that you also agree that the first game in a WC group stage can be a 'careful affair' especially a minnow playing a big name team.
I am far from bigging up Uruguay, quite simply they have been the best coached team after Germany at the tournament. Their squad ls limited and there they were, battling with distinction for a place for a place in the Final. The evidence points to a remarkable run from a remarkable team.
If you were not impressed with Uruguay's performance in their games,  is there anything I can write? We have radically different   interpretations of games as they were played at that tournament. Did you see their game against Mexico when they had Lugano at CH?
If you appreciate an extremely well coached, disciplined resiliant team, with some very talented players, playing attractive attacking  football, combined with excellent controlled defensive play, ability to hold possession and spray the ball around, then Uruguay ticked many boxes.
Holland have a better squad with better quality players in reserve, it's no surprise that they can replace 2 players. Personally I thought Holland thoroughly deserved to beat Brazil, they exposed Brazil's weaknesses and exploited them to perfection.
Last night, Uruguay were running on fumes and still they managed to impress.

I have to agree MS, I was impressed by Uruguay, a much better team than most people give them credit for with a savvy coach too.  But it looked like their legs had gone on the last 20 mins.  Pereira, and Arevalo Rios probably won't make the team of the tournament but they had great tournaments

[nrico2006]

Holland are a very workmanlike side, very surprised to see them beat Brazil but then again it was more a case of Brazil shooting themselves in the foot rather than great play by the Dutch.  The Dutch seem to lack that bit of flair, with Robben as predictable as ever coming in from the wing.  I couldn't believe the chances Holland missed towards the end of the Brazil game when the Samba boys were chasing the equaliser.  One instance sticks in my mind when a Dutch forward had the ball on the floor near the end line with 2 players in support and one defender, it seemed like he had 3 or 4 seconds to decide to score himself or square it to a team-mate yet it was messed up.  Schneider's goal last night was another fortunate one on top of the ones against Brazil, their luck will end come Sunday.  I am also sick of reading that RVP is one of the best players in the world, where has this came from?  He needs everything to be set-up on his left foot and he has done very little at these finals aswell.  On Forlan, some of the goals the man scores are unbelievable, not too often you see a player who can bang a ball into the net from 30 yards of either foot, what is exactly what he does.

Tonights game should be a cracker, and I honestly believe this is the game where we will see Spain finally click.  So far they have been playing teams who have been more happy to put 11 men behnind the ball, but I can see this being more open tonight which should benefit the Spaniards.  They have been very unlucky injury wise coming into this tournament with Iniesta, Torres and Fabregas all coming back after long lay-offs, which means we haven't seen the best of any of these guys yet, and Xavi has been playing with an injury for months which has been restricting him.  It would be great to see a fully fit and full strength Spanish side in action, the World Cup would be won alot easier if that were the case.

On another note, I don't see as many Journalists spouting off this week about the demise of South American football.  Last week all we read was how weak European football had become with the number of teams in the last 16 down on previous years, yet 3 of the 4 semi-finalists were Europeans sides and we will now have the Second All European Final World Cup in a row, with two different teams in this final than were in the last one.

[delboy]

delboy, in all seriousness I think the concept of a penalty goal is ballix.  There is a saying in political/legal circles that law made on the hoof is bad law.  So whenever the Sun or Daily Mail complained about some law and order issue the last UK goverment would pass a law that more often than not had unintended consequences.  Whenever there is a controversial incident in a game there is a mad rush from the media to demand changes in the laws.

Suarez deliberately handled the ball in the box.  He was sent off, banned for the next game and Ghana were awarded a penalty.  Fair enough I say, those are the rules and the media and the two teams (and most of us) knew this before the game.  The controversy has only arisen because the penalty was in the last seconds of the game and Ghana subsequently missed the penalty and also because before the game the media had decided that the story was a Ghana win (for Africa)

For me, just as you cannot give a corner or throw in when the ball has not crossed the line neither should you award a goal when the ball has not crossed the line.  Most footballers at all levels of the game are cheats.  I dunno if you played the game much but did you ever appeal for a throw in or corner when you knew the ball had come off you??  Did you ever play on when you knew you had handled the ball or fouled an opponent??  Did you ever let the opponent's hanky ball player "know you were there" in the tackle??

The main thrust of many of the arguments for change are because they "do it in rugby" a completely different sport where (IMHO) the constant knee jerk tampering of the rules is making the game worse (source B Glendenning) and don't start us on the hand pass in GAA!

The concept of a penalty goal would be difficult to implement in soccer.  One of the appeals of soccer is its simplicity.  Consider these two scenarios.  A player is running through 12 yds out with the goalkeeper to beat, he is pulled back by a defender.  Currently red card and penalty would this be a penalty goal?  A player is 12 yds out and the goalkeeping is out of position and not in the goal and he is pulled back, penalty goal because it was an open goal or is it only goal line offences that would result in a penalty goal??

I would advocate a penalty goal only in the circumstance such as happened in the ghana match, ie ball which was about to go over the line stopped in an illegal matter, the other scenarios you mention would be a no for me as the scoring of a goal is still very much in question.

I know what you are saying about football being a simple game and i agree with you but it also has rules changes (quite often). Unlike the arguement against technology ie it would slow the game and it couldn't only be used in big money leagues, this wouldn't be a probem, it would be down to the discretion of the referee so sunday league football could adapt it without any additional costs. Also it wouldn't slow the game down, if anything it would be quicker as the goal would be awarded and the game restarted without all the fannying about that is part and parcel of a penalty.   

[Bogball XV]

I take it that you now accept that Uruguay, on the evidence of the game, were the most positive of the 2 teams last night and took the game to the defensively minded Dutch even when the scores were level.

No, they set out to defend, that game plan changed after the first goal.  The second half, neither side particularly impressed until the dutch scored their two goals.

I take it that you also agree that the first game in a WC group stage can be a 'careful affair' especially a minnow playing a big name team.

I can accept that, but in saying that Uruguay are hardly a minnow.

I am far from bigging up Uruguay, quite simply they have been the best coached team after Germany at the tournament. Their squad ls limited and there they were, battling with distinction for a place for a place in the Final. The evidence points to a remarkable run from a remarkable team.

They undoubtedly did well, but remarkable progress?  They drew with France (ranked above them) and beat Mexico (ranked 1 place below them), their other victories were against S Africa (67 places below them), South Korea (31 places below them) and Ghana (16 places below them)

If you were not impressed with Uruguay's performance in their games,  is there anything I can write? We have radically different   interpretations of games as they were played at that tournament. Did you see their game against Mexico when they had Lugano at CH?
If you appreciate an extremely well coached, disciplined resiliant team, with some very talented players, playing attractive attacking  football, combined with excellent controlled defensive play, ability to hold possession and spray the ball around, then Uruguay ticked many boxes.

I was impressed in places, I was disappointed for them last night, as I was for Ghana on Friday night. 
[/quote] Holland have a better squad with better quality players in reserve, it's no surprise that they can replace 2 players. Personally I thought Holland thoroughly deserved to beat Brazil, they exposed Brazil's weaknesses and exploited them to perfection.
Last night, Uruguay were running on fumes and still they managed to impress.
[/quote]
My main point was that the final will be bettrer for Holland's presence than for Uruguay's, and that Holland whilst not settng the world alight are worthy of their place there