World Cup 2022

malvolio

malvolio

Senior Member
Horatio said:
It was Hernandez. Don't see Boufal stepping on his ankle. I do now see that Theo got to ball first before taking out Boufal. Dunno anymore. But the yellow is weird. Did he step on him after?
Click to expand...

Probably the ref thought that Boufal intentionally extended his leg to make contact with Hernandez.
 
BBZ8800

BBZ8800

Senior Member
raskolnikov said:
I disagree with those conspiracies. If that were true they would have let Brazil win. Or dont give England a second penalty.

Why didnt they send of mexicans when Argentina were on risk of bring eliminated?

Big teans tend to get into more positions to get calls usually.

The world cup would also be legendary if Croatia won. Or if Marocco won?
It can be blatant, like korea in 2002. But why would they care about France? Its basically boring if they win again.
Hakimi and Neymar are also Qatar players and Argentina could have easily lost the penalty shootout.
Its notbas fixed as some ce7 fanboys like to imply. Clutching at straws scared that Messi might pull it off.
Click to expand...

The best cheating is subtle cheating.
The best serial killers and corporate cheaters are subtle, genius criminals.

So, you can't make it plain obvious since nobody would watch matches anymore.
For example, I am on the verge of hating Brazil/Argentina/France/Real/Barca/EPL teams because a lot of top matches are rigged in their favor.

In matches small vs big, these are scenarios how matches develop (if the big team needed to win).
Let's say Argentina-Croatia in Qatar/Psg connections/Messi's final WC chapter:

Scenarios:
1. if Messi/Argies score 1-2 goals early on = ref don't interfere. They'll win either way. No one can whine. Win-win for refs and a big team
2. if the match is 0:0 in the 85th minute and you have a foul like on Alvarez in Croatia's box = ref will give a pen. Argies will probably score, it will end 1:0. No one can say that there wasn't a contact. It wasn't a stone-wall pen, but there was a contact.
So, you can reply to anyone who says it is cheating: lol, there was a contact.
3. on the other hand, imagine 0:0 in the 85th minute and the SIMILAR contact on Perisic in Argie's box. Let's be honest, what will happen? The ref will say: play on, this was not a pen! Isn't it?
Fans will reply: well, it was a 50:50 call. It could have gone either way. The ref thought it was not a pen. No cheating here.
4. on the other hand, if Croatia somehow manages to score 2-3 early goals from an open play without offsides or fouls in attack, the ref can't do anything = a small team will win.
5. also, if the match is 0:0 or 1:0 for Croatia and Croatia has 70:30 possession and Argies can't get to Croatia's box or can't even get into a position for a cross (and a contact in the box) or they can't even get to a box and try a dribble (and fall down) = a small team will win.

So, when you guys pull some examples like: but in 2004 a small team has won.
Fine, but how many chances there was for a ref to give a pen in that match?
Since this is usually not a blatant cheating but a subtle cheating in 50:50 duels.
If big teams can't even get close to a box of a small team and they are losing 0:3, then oh well = nothing can be done. Small team will win the WC/semis/final.

Have you never watched Juve in early 00s or Real Madrid in the last 10-15 years?
Juve got soft pens ONLY if the score is 0:0 or losing 0:1 in the 85th minute.
If Juve is winning 6:0 against Empoli, why on Earth would a ref give stupid pens?
Also, if Juve is somehow losing 0:3, nothing can be done. Even the refs won't interfere.
** Btw, Juve was literally demoted to lower divisions because cheating with refs.

The same is with Madrid.
Do they get soft pens+free kicks in a minute 2 or in the minute 92?
The goal of the ref is not to interfere if possible.
The best scenario is if a top team can win on it's own.
Refs enter and interfere only if a top team is in problems or if the score is 0:0 without too many chances.

I mean, let's make a bet.
I am not a time traveller.
It's 2 hours before a match Morocco-Croatia.
I have give you my view that Morocco will be favored by the Qatarian ref due to: Africa, North Africa-Middle East-Persia connection, religion, bigger population than Croatia.

If that happens, what will you guys reply?
The same as always: well, there was some contact.
Or, it was just a bad ref, a single person. It's a human mistake, it doesn't have to do anything with FIFA as a whole. This is not a part of a bigger plan, this is just a mistake of one person.

Ok, let's see.

** About France-England, lol.
France is more important than England on FIFA's tier list, but it is not as if England is Burkina Faso or something.
They are two teams from a similar tier.
This is a classic ref's 50:50 pen in favor of big teams, Argentina-Poland:

A question for you: it was a key match, both teams could have gone through or get KO'd.
Imagine a similar situation at 0:0 in Argentina's box.
Do you think that it would have been a pen, on a Messi's final WC, which also happens to play in Psg's Qatar?

Yeah, sure
 
Last edited:
KingLeo10

KingLeo10

Senior Member
BBZ, what do you think of Messi's WC so far, in terms of performances?

For a player you thought was the WOAT and worse than Braithwaite, he has been the player of the tournament in terms of classic dribbles, classic assists, and big moment penalties (scored 2 v Dutch, 1 v Croatia).

Maybe the big teams are favored over smaller teams by a decent bit (I actually don't argue against this much, at NT or club level) but the referees aren't the ones dribbling multiple players and making assists like Messi did v Holland or Croatia

Part of our issue on footballing matters has always been that you're unreasonable and only take black or white (binary) positions. You've committed to the "corrupted WC" narrative and while that may be true to some extent, you're unable to separate that narrative from genuine class performances by players. Instead of embracing the possibility of the latter (like I embrace the possibility of the former), you double down on the former and never admit you were wrong on a given football assessment
 
T

Temptation

Well-known member
KingLeo10 said:
BBZ, what do you think of Messi's WC so far, in terms of performances?

For a player you thought was the WOAT and worse than Braithwaite, he has been the player of the tournament in terms of classic dribbles, classic assists, and big moment penalties (scored 2 v Dutch, 1 v Croatia).

Maybe the big teams are favored over smaller teams by a decent bit (I actually don't argue against this much, at NT or club level) but the referees aren't the ones dribbling multiple players and making assists like Messi did v Holland or Croatia

Part of our issue on footballing matters has always been that you're unreasonable and only take black or white (binary) positions. You've committed to the "corrupted WC" narrative and while that may be true to some extent, you're unable to separate that narrative from genuine class performances by players. Instead of embracing the possibility of the latter (like I embrace the possibility of the former), you double down on the former and never admit you were wrong on a given football assessment
Click to expand...

Mbappe completed most dribbles...
 
T

Temptation

Well-known member
BBZ8800 said:
The best cheating is subtle cheating.
The best serial killers and corporate cheaters are subtle, genius criminals.

So, you can't make it plain obvious since nobody would watch matches anymore.
For example, I am on the verge of hating Brazil/Argentina/France/Real/Barca/EPL teams because a lot of top matches are rigged in their favor.

In matches small vs big, these are scenarios how matches develop (if the big team needed to win).
Let's say Argentina-Croatia in Qatar/Psg connections/Messi's final WC chapter:

Scenarios:
1. if Messi/Argies score 1-2 goals early on = ref don't interfere. They'll win either way. No one can whine. Win-win for refs and a big team
2. if the match is 0:0 in the 85th minute and you have a foul like on Alvarez in Croatia's box = ref will give a pen. Argies will probably score, it will end 1:0. No one can say that there wasn't a contact. It wasn't a stone-wall pen, but there was a contact.
So, you can reply to anyone who says it is cheating: lol, there was a contact.
3. on the other hand, imagine 0:0 in the 85th minute and the SIMILAR contact on Perisic in Argie's box. Let's be honest, what will happen? The ref will say: play on, this was not a pen! Isn't it?
Fans will reply: well, it was a 50:50 call. It could have gone either way. The ref thought it was not a pen. No cheating here.
4. on the other hand, if Croatia somehow manages to score 2-3 early goals from an open play without offsides or fouls in attack, the ref can't do anything = a small team will win.
5. also, if the match is 0:0 or 1:0 for Croatia and Croatia has 70:30 possession and Argies can't get to Croatia's box or can't even get into a position for a cross (and a contact in the box) or they can't even get to a box and try a dribble (and fall down) = a small team will win.

So, when you guys pull some examples like: but in 2004 a small team has won.
Fine, but how many chances there was for a ref to give a pen in that match?
Since this is usually not a blatant cheating but a subtle cheating in 50:50 duels.
If big teams can't even get close to a box of a small team and they are losing 0:3, then oh well = nothing can be done. Small team will win the WC/semis/final.

Have you never watched Juve in early 00s or Real Madrid in the last 10-15 years?
Juve got soft pens ONLY if the score is 0:0 or losing 0:1 in the 85th minute.
If Juve is winning 6:0 against Empoli, why on Earth would a ref give stupid pens?
Also, if Juve is somehow losing 0:3, nothing can be done. Even the refs won't interfere.
** Btw, Juve was literally demoted to lower divisions because cheating with refs.

The same is with Madrid.
Do they get soft pens+free kicks in a minute 2 or in the minute 92?
The goal of the ref is not to interfere if possible.
The best scenario is if a top team can win on it's own.
Refs enter and interfere only if a top team is in problems or if the score is 0:0 without too many chances.

I mean, let's make a bet.
I am not a time traveller.
It's 2 hours before a match Morocco-Croatia.
I have give you my view that Morocco will be favored by the Qatarian ref due to: Africa, North Africa-Middle East-Persia connection, religion, bigger population than Croatia.

If that happens, what will you guys reply?
The same as always: well, there was some contact.
Or, it was just a bad ref, a single person. It's a human mistake, it doesn't have to do anything with FIFA as a whole. This is not a part of a bigger plan, this is just a mistake of one person.

Ok, let's see.

** About France-England, lol.
France is more important than England on FIFA's tier list, but it is not as if England is Burkina Faso or something.
They are two teams from a similar tier.
This is a classic ref's 50:50 pen in favor of big teams, Argentina-Poland:

A question for you: it was a key match, both teams could have gone through or get KO'd.
Imagine a similar situation at 0:0 in Argentina's box.
Do you think that it would have been a pen, on a Messi's final WC, which also happens to play in Psg's Qatar?

Yeah, sure
Click to expand...

Agree with a lot of what you say here. Some decisions have conveniently been due to blatant favouritism which justifies the scandalous amount of penalties. The Qatar move was a calculated one as were the cringeworthy crocodile tears. While I don't agree with all of what you're saying, you might have a point regarding some aspects.
 
P

Porque

Senior Member
Horatio said:
It was Hernandez. Don't see Boufal stepping on his ankle. I do now see that Theo got to ball first before taking out Boufal. Dunno anymore. But the yellow is weird. Did he step on him after?
Click to expand...

Ah. Just seen the video you posted. So Hernandez did contact the ball first but Boufal didn't catch his ankle. The yellow as you say is the outlier then. I must have imagined it being the same action where Boufal stepped on Mbappe ankle (no card btw and on a yellow) and merged the two in my mind (uff).

But not a penalty because it is the case of an open ball and Hernandez getting there first. Then he contacts Boufal after stopping (clearing the ball from him) in a non malicious way (Goes through him with studs down).

Thing is if you award penalties where the defender clearly reaches the ball first but then touches the attacker then you remove tackling from football. And we have already removed tackling from behind (where you get the ball first and then touch the player after- or even if you don't touch the player if you slide). Imagine removing too from head on challenges. It means you can't touch an attacker anymore and football becomes basketball.
 
KingLeo10

KingLeo10

Senior Member
Temptation said:
Mbappe completed most dribbles...
Click to expand...

I never said he had the most dribbles. Just his ones have been more classic/iconic. It's like RVP's goal v Spain. Robben was the better player in that game stats wise, but everyone remembers RVP's goal first about that game.
 
KingLeo10

KingLeo10

Senior Member
Temptation said:
Agree with a lot of what you say here. Some decisions have conveniently been due to blatant favouritism which justifies the scandalous amount of penalties. The Qatar move was a calculated one as were the cringeworthy crocodile tears. While I don't agree with all of what you're saying, you might have a point regarding some aspects.
Click to expand...

Hilarious how this "objective" assessment is centered on Messi and Messi alone (crocodile tears, calculated PSG move LMAO) while the stuff you don't agree with probably relates to France and any team not containing Messi

:lol: Predictably obsessed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Home of Barca Fans

Top