Well done Portugal.

Arr great now that England have finished "kicking a bag of wind around a field" we will hopfully see the end to the Chav flags on cars, hanging out of windows, drunken mobs in pubs and get back to normal life, hurray.

 

Beckam has done very good games. He didn't play that well throughout this tournament. As didn't Figo, as far as I can see. Sven should have had the courage that Scolari had and replace him. Figo should have been replaced long before he was, but rather late than never. Like Beckam, I think Figo's golden days are gone. Maybe they'll come back... i sure hope so, but he hasn't been at the level he once was.

All in all, i think it was tough that any of the teams had to lose. Portugal played well but was never that close to scoring for most of the game. England sure had a few dangerous oportunities and i actually thought Portugal would not be able to pull this game off. Shame for england that they were few, their chances.

In the end, I think England should have learned from the France game and not do the same thing again...

A great game, i was on the edge of my seat throughout, so credit to all for this. In the end, I am happy we won, but I am sad to see England go.

As for the disallowed goal, it may have been a bad call, it may not. I need to see it again, but if you are a referee, and have a glimpse of a doubt, you have to give the keeper the benefit of the doubt - and particularly in the circumstances... tough, but i can't see anyone doing otherwise. And i don't think the referee would be able to see it as clearly as we have on TV (if we have at all).

I think it was a brilliant game, and I would think the same way even if Portugal had lost. As they could have. We all know it was that close.

Shame it had to be a sole winner.

Jack

 

thanks for the account of the live action, you lucky lucky man!!! glad you had a great time, though!

i don't think we can discount the czechs or the dutch just yet but i sure have my hopes on the "tugas" now.

still, i couldn't agree with you more. whatever happens, the French MUST NOT win!!! :JOEL:
it would be unbearable. :chunder:


Jack

 

I thought that was normal life.


GTM

 

Extremely well. Both inside and outside the stadium there was no apparent trouble at all. Don't know if anything happened down in Albufeira though .

In my previous post I forgot to mention the Portuguese keeper Ricardo - what a save and what a penalty! He saved Vassel's penalty without his gloves on (not quite sure why he wasn't wearing them) and then shot probably the best penalty of all the players out there to win the game for Portugal.

Took a glance at the English tabloids on the newstands here this morning and they're typically full of BS. All this talk of being "robbed" - bullshit . I've seen the replay now and there's no way that goal was legal. The ref had blown his whistle before Campbell's 2nd (successful) attempt. The Daily Star couldn't even get the name right and claimed it was Vassel who scored the disallowed goal .

Michael.

 

Michael,

I can't remember how many replays I've seen but neither we (the whole family) nor any of the commentators (or the vast maojority of fans I imagine) heard the whistle, hence the controversy.

 

Its been going on so long, it has felt like it!

 

They might not be totally accurate, but we were robbed. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the goal that I can see, and 99% of people I've spoke to agree with that - I think you may be somewhat biased here, and the fact is, that we were robbed for that reason alone. England in normal time, did not play as well, but beat them in the areas that mattered - which is putting the ball in the back of the net. It was only for an incompetent referee that we arent in the semi's now.

 

So that ties in with what I said earlier about what the ref on Radio 5 Live was saying.

The question now is - who did Campbell foul when he went up for the first header that came back off the bar? Was it a defender? I don't remember the goalkeeper being anywhere near him for that header.

You've been re-examining it Michael - what went on in the run up to that first header that caused the ref to blow for a foul?

I think this is why there has been some talk of being robbed i.e. because people have been analysing the bit where Terry and Campbell jumped up next to the goalkeeper (thinking that's what the foul was given for) and found very little wrong with it, when in fact the infringement apparently happened prior to this.

Matt.

 

The foul may have happened before the goal-scoring header (which would explain a lot), but even if it weren't, surely the fact that Terry (?) had his arm over Ricardo's shoulder when he went up fro the header - thus preventing Ricardo from jumping up to catch it - should mean the goal was rightfully disallowed??

I thought the ref was generally a bit hard on England and I can sympathise with their lack of gruntle, but as far as I could see the goal was right to be disallowed.

Dunc

 

I hope the swiss television will come on this point this evening before the match France - Greece. I hope they will interview the referee Meier or say something more precise about it / what he said.

Neither in Italy, France nor in Germany they particurly discussed about this 'illegal' goal, as if it wasn't at all important or as if it was normal that it should have been disallowed. Strange isn't it?

 

I remember watching this, and thinking the ball was in. Of course, as many times we think it's gone in and it's an optical illusion (angles are difficult to spot on TV), I just accepted it might have not gone in.

But if as you say Michael the ball was clearly in, I wonder why people just mention the english disallowed goal and make no mention of this one. It could just as much have been a deciding factor the other way...

You were totally right in pointing out that there have been close calls on both sides, and perhaps the referee made mistakes, like so often human beings do... it is now time to let go, and praise both teams for the great football game we had and the great heart they showed in the pitch, regardless of the outcome. I hope england will have a bit more luck next time.

And now I am going to focus on supporting the Greeks this evening. :JPS:

Jack

 

As Titian mentioned, it seems only to be the English who are making a big song and dance about the disallowed goal. Here in Portugal it's not even been mentioned as a point of controversy, and the Italian, French and German TV reports I watched didn't mention it either. The UEFA video highlights of the match (on www.euro2004.com - you have to subscribe) also didn't cover the incident at all. So, apart from in England, it's a total non-issue.

Michael.

 

Well, let's think about this.

Portugal are hardly going to argue that their win was anything but fair (and who can blame them, the reverse would be true).

Why the hell would France or Germany care? I'd imagine Germany are too busy nursing their wounds, and France are probably enjoying us going out as much as we enjoyed Germany's demise.

If Switzerland do take a side, and I'll avoid neutrality jokes here, then it would likely be with their man. Again, entirely understandable.

There have been many valid arguments that the decision was a good 'un. This is not one of them.

 

I have examined my motives for saying what follows, and I will be fair, and unbiased...

the reffing was poor, that is not sour grapes, it was dire, so many decisions portugals way, yellow cards on us, plain inconsistant, and downright wrong.

cynical hacks by portugal on vassel and others, ought to be sending of a deliberate trip when behind. no arguing

the goal, itself was fine, if you looked at terry, his eyes were always always to the ball, there was no intent of impeding the goalie, and as rightly said, you have to use your arms to jump.

contentious may well be a push prior, cannot comment on that, would explain a lot. Tho if the linesman thought it fair, perhaps it should have stood.

portugal were the better side, ronaldo temperament was superb,no nasty playing, figo has gone down in my esteem for diving, trying to get free kicks for nothing, that's pure cheating. he did this twice.

fair is fair, like I said, they scare me, they play urgently, with brio, with fire, again and I have said it a million times, I am becoming seriously frustrated with england, they just sit back and let them come, give them space, its the worst you can do, a goal WILL always come, period, you can't sit on it and let a storm ensue, you have to finish them, counter fire with fire. I don't think I can watch any more, its so poor.

our play, not brill, gerrard plain dire, passing giving the ball away, schoolboy errors, midfield was at fault. defence great. ours are meant to be some of the finest, household names. They do not play as such. Perhaps they are overtly hyped by the media. I really don't see what is so good about gerrard, and I am a liverpool fan. hesky plain awful, not that he played, thank god.

overall tournament, again defence great, solid, you can't blame them largely, and james coudln't have done anything against zidane's magic.

the fault lies with midfield, beckham was poor, gerrard, too.

I beleive that is 3 not 2 penalties beckham has missed. however what can you do if the ground gives way, and acrobatic barthez saves, it happens, can you apportion blame for that? I don't know.

Conclusions:

1/there needs to be independant verification of fouls, a ref to examine video footage and decide. It all happens to quick for one guy to decide.
With these stakes, this must happen, or the ref revewing stuff himself.

2/more reds for cynical fouls where no attempt is made to go for the ball
if a rule change is neccessary, so be it.

3/ england MUST not do backs against the wall.

4/ they must improve their control, and passing. it is piss poor at times.

5/ the ref was swiss, is that a conflict of interests with us putting them out? hmmm...

6/ penalties are not a way to decide tournaments, extra games should be the way, replays.

7/ if a ref gets if categorically wrong, there ought to be an inquiry, with fifa deciding to change the ruling, maradona's goal should have been stripped and they should have been disqualified for cheating.

8/ we looked tired, they had 3 days to recover, we had two. you cannot have that at this level, is 2 days enough?? I think not.

there is a rumour, that the ref. is getting timeshare in portugal if they were favoured, this seems unlikely, however look at the foulings.

for him to be one of the top refs., he wasn't very good. we needed collina. my fave.

there is so much hoo-haa over the goal, as from all points of view it seemed fair and valid, and from that point we would have won.

bloody hell, when will common sense prevail.

I don't begrudge portugal, they were better on the night,( not like the blasted frogs, whos footballing arrogance I frown on, but who's country and methods I think are superior) but we really need to use technology on rulings, there is too much at stake, and its all a big lottery, it would be fairer for everyone.
all that is by and large unbiased and a fair reflection, I hope.

 

But that's just natural isn't it - if any of the other countries you mention above had what looked like a reasonable goal ruled out then they would be quite rightl complaining and the English wouldn't care. I wouldn't expect any other country to care about or to debate whether the Campbell goal should have been given and, no doubt, if England had won on penalties then they wouldn't be bothered about it either.

Whether Terry had his hand across the keeper is irrelevant if, as seems to be the case, the whistle had been blown before this. I would just be interested to see what the foul was actually given for if it related to Campell's first header - some comments from the ref would be good.

I appreciate this doesn't change anything and, as I said before, on the ballance of play Portugal deserved to win, it would just be nice to know that the disallowing of the Campbell 'goal' was justified.

Matt.

 

Sorry, Data, but your post comes across to me as fairly reeking of sour grapes. The little asides about the referee being Swiss and conflicts of interest hmmm and having timeshare in Portugal hmmm are unworthy of you. Do you really think that referees at this level are so easily swayed? I doubt it very much. I'd imagine that it would be more than their job's worth. Now I'm no football expert, but I didn't see the referee as being biased or bad, in fact I thought he did quite a good job and kept the play flowing smoothly, and I didn't think he penalised England more than he did Portugal. But then I'm not English, so I had no emotional stake one way or the other. I actually would have liked to have seen England win, because they haven't won anything since 1966 (is that right?), but the better side won, so justice was done.

As to errors in refereeing, as long as you entrust three human beings, you will always get errors. Perhaps there should be some sort of instant replay available to referees, where the ref can call up a variety of different and closer views. However, the problems would be cost (I presume that official cameras would be needed, rather than TV ones) and spoiling the flow of the game.

 

I just think that most people seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill in relation to the disallowed goal and concentrating on that and the penalty spot that "moved" instead of focusing on why they really lost the game. If it really had been a very dubious decision then I think the foreign press would have at least mentioned it.

Portugal had as many players booked as England and the ref took a dim view of one or two Portuguese players diving, judged a couple of fouls that were borderline in the area to be outside the area, didn't notice a Portuguese goal in the middle of a kerfuffle when the ball had actually crossed the line (but no one is discussing that one) and a number of other things. If you're on the losing side it's always very easy to see bias in a ref and ignore the things he did in your favour and vice versa.

As for 4th ref, video decisions, alternatives to penalties etc. Those debates come up every 2 years at the Euro and World Cup and have done for years. No one has so far come up with a solution and I don't think anyone will. It's part of football.

Michael.

 

Tony, granted on the timeshare bit, that's a rumour and perhaps I ought not to have aired it. Sounds like rubbish to me.

Some of the refs decisions WERE hugely poor, even before the goal. We were getting penalised for fouls and portugal weren't.

The goal by Portugal was deemed not to have crossed.

And it is a conflict to be reffed by a country you have put out, days earlier. That is not unreasonable. Is it?? I didn't make that assertion, I heard it, and it does seem to be a valid point.

I have given him the benefit of the doubt on the contentious goal. Inconclusive, cannot comment without reviewing.

Naturally I am disappointed, I am not above anyone else in moral stakes, but I have tried to have been objective, look how I have criticised england.

 

Reading your post, Michael, I just had a quick peek at the match report in today's "Basler Zeitung". It says that when the ball crossed the line, the referee had already signalled for a foul by Terry. That's the sole mention. The BaZ was in no doubt that there was no goal. Ditto the Swiss TV commentators last night, but they commented drily, "Of course, this will be seen differently on the other side of the Channel". Oh, yes... Did you see the BBC reports on the attacks on Portuguese premises?

P.S. Have you seen this disgraceful thing in "The Sun"?

YOU can tell bungling ref Meier just what you think of his decision  on his own website.
Go to www.ursmeier.ch/referee/ and click on the feedback section. Under “vorname†enter your first name, under “nachname†enter your surname. Then fill in your email address  and let rip.