h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think almost everyone's first match was rubbish, and that rather dampened things down so that, when later matches were actually pretty good, it was kinda tinged by the disappointment.

Wasn't that 4-3 to Belgium Orcus?

The games I mentioned were the cream of the crop, but there were quite a few others that were magnificent spectacles. From 2006, Italy-Germany was a classic I think, but probably the only one. Can't remember any from 2002, Argentina vs England and Holland in 1998*, Argentina-Romania in 1994. Probably outnumbered by the classic games of the 2 WCs in the 1980s.

Just not enough goals - if Spain-Germany had been 3-2 it could well have been a classic, the standard of the football was certainly high enough.





*not at the same time, natch.

Well I was only one goal out, it was 24 years ago.

"Just not enough goals"

I think that's the problem ... for all their quality Spain have reached the final without scoring more than 2 goals in a game.

If they could have matched the quality of their possession football with actual goals they'd probably be one of the all-time greats.

Not a bad third/fourth place game going on just now.

I thought it was a pretty good match. I sort of kept my breath until the referee's whistle stopped it.

Interesting story that FIFA are putting "extreme pressure" on Nelson Mandela to attend the final ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/10589713.stm

Surely a man who withstood the tyranny of apartheid and spent 20+ years in jail is immune to pressure from a football world governing body ... or has Sepp Blatter got connections ...

Maybe Blatter knows his parole officer.

Well done Spain - as an Evertonian it feels strange backing a winning team.

Holland were extremely lucky to have been able to finish the match, they could have easily lost 4/5 players.

Yep, Spain. I'm just so glad they won because it appeared to me that Holland had gone out with a plan to disrupt the Spanish passing game and rhythm by roughing up tactics. I presume they guessed that the ref wouldn't want to send someone off if possible and spoil the game. Lets face it if Holland had gone down to 10, Spain would have been near dead certs. Pretty cynical I'd call their approach. The Dutch may also have hoped to provoke Spanish retaliation and get one of theirs sent off. And for all we know the ref was lent on by FIFA to avoid at all costs an early sending off. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. I think any ref given the obvious Dutch tactics in a world cup final would have found that a horrible game to have to referee. So good on yer mate.

Holland certainly won't be my fave team in future. They lose playing total football and they still lose playing thuggery. Shame.

Once more. Viva Espana

Oh did anyone else think it was a bit off the way Blatter strode towards the Spanish team with the World Cup..the SA President trailing behind him. Blatter presented the cup and allowed the President to just about get his finger nails on it as the trophy was handed over.

I thought the SA President was supposed to have presented it?

"Netherlands coach Bert van Marwijk criticised English referee Howard Webb after his side were beaten 1-0" BBC News "I don't think the referee controlled the match well," said Van Marwijk. "Both sides committed fouls."



What's the Dutch word for chutzpah?

I thought Spain played some fantastic football and that they were the outstanding team of the tournament, but I can't go along with the view that they're footballing heroes and the Dutch villains.

Spain put in plenty of very poor tackles of their own, and could easily have had players sent off too - especially for some very crude off the ball retaliation and for dissent. They also got away with a lot of play acting and haranguing the referee into booking or sending off opponents - it was like watching Liverpool or Manchester United in that respect.

Maybe I'm biased, or perhaps I haven't seen the right replays, but I thought Heitinga's second yellow was very soft. If he was pulling his player back, I've not seen any evidence on any reply. If Puyol had gone for that, the reaction would have been very different. Also, Spain's goal followed immediately after two very baffling decisions at the other end of the field.

Having said that, the best team won overall. But I just can't warm to a team which can't seem to get a free kick without surrounding the ref trying to get opponents booked....

First and foremost, I'm glad it was an entertaining game, if not always for the right reasons. The whole 120 minutes plus seemed a quarter the length of the horrendous match between (I think) South Africa and Uruguay, which dragged interminably.

"Having said that, the best team won overall. But I just can't warm to a team which can't seem to get a free kick without surrounding the ref trying to get opponents booked...."

I think that is a fair point. Although I would suggest that said characteristic is far from unique to Spain.

Interestingly I thought the least "cheaty" team in the tounament were USA, I cant remember them taking the mickey or brandishing imaginary cards at all.

One thing I think is clear though in other places they clearly see the game differently culturally. In spain football isn't really a contact sport in the way it is in Norther Europe, and I guess in that respect the Spanish players are products of the environment they play in.

FB

What would have happened if Holland would have lost the 4/5 players a lot of pundits were saying they should have?

Can the World Cup Final be abandoned, or would Spain simply have been given the win?

<>


I agree that it was soft, but I suspect that Webb was conscious that he should by that stage probably have sent off a couple of Dutch players.


<>

Well I suppose they thought if you can't beat them you might as well join them, especially if the ref isn't going to send you off. I was actually rooting for Holland, but I have to say the right team won.

I thought most of Spain's rash tackles were early on, with the exception of the incident where a player on the wing retaliated with a judo-style throw. Maybe they twigged to what Holland were doing, and decided not to play that game.
Incidentally, genuine props to Howard Webb. He really had no choice about the number of cards he gave, and did his best to keep it going as a football match. This meant he seemed on the lenient side at times, but still well within the interpretation of the rules.

I am reminded of what Graeame Souness once said about the Liverpool team of the 80s.
"You could play football with us or you could fight with us. Either way you'd lose."

The old Netherlands went out to kick Spain and still lost. The result was definitely fair.
I suspect if the ref had sent a Dutch player off early - for example - for kicking spaniards square in the chest with studs out () then they would have maybe had to change their style. Only an idiotic team would persist with violent tactics if the ref showed that it would not be tolerated.

It was interesting what one pundit said too at half time when they were showing a guy going through foul after foul through to the opponents penalty area but staying on his feet. It is indeed no wonder they dive when, if you stay on your feet, the ref gives no foul.

<>

He might have needed to issue fewer of them if he'd sent someone off in the first half, although I'm actually kind of glad in a way that he didn't.