World Cup 2018 Fred sponsored by Unfounded Optimism followed by Abject Disappointment | Page 60 | Vital Football

World Cup 2018 Fred sponsored by Unfounded Optimism followed by Abject Disappointment

The French gifted a two goal lead by two shocking decisions. Cheating buggers. That final ruined what had been a great World Cup, who said cheats don't prosper?
 
The scoreline totally flattered France. The first two France goals were the direct result of two shocking decisions. Croatia were actually the better side but were then chasing the game and were picked off by two further France goals. France's name was on it.
 
The scoreline totally flattered France. The first two France goals were the direct result of two shocking decisions. Croatia were actually the better side but were then chasing the game and were picked off by two further France goals. France's name was on it.

I agree. I thought Croatia were superb in the first half. They kept possession brilliantly, were threatening, snapped into tackles whenever they lost the ball and showed real desire in the way that they came back after two questionable decisions. France were rattled. Croatia deserved to be in front at half time.

I suppose thereafter you have to give France credit for the way they counter attacked and the decisive finishes ultimately merit the win. I was glad to see the Mbappe goal to round it off, but I’d have felt sickened at the course of the game if I was a Croat.

It’s strange how the same game can be viewed differently by two people. I’ve heard some say that they thought France were in control throughout. Whereas for me the final hinged on the decisions that led to the first two French goals and the result could have been different.
 
Last edited:
The scoreline totally flattered France. The first two France goals were the direct result of two shocking decisions. Croatia were actually the better side but were then chasing the game and were picked off by two further France goals. France's name was on it.

Have to say I'm at a loss.

First goal was a free kick which was turned in by their own player. What was 'shocking' about any part of that?

The second was a penalty that was not only reviewed by VAR but by the ref himself- twice.

He didn't make a split second decision. He spent about 5 minutes watching it over and over before coming to a professional decision. I personally don't like those handball penalties, but that's one for FIFA to work on with the rulebook. The ref watched it again and again and interpreted it as effectively a foul.

Had the ball hit the players arm and been diverted anywhere else on the pitch, would handball have been given? Yes, it would.
 
The free kick for the first goal was an obvious dive from the replays. He had both his legs in the air and was on his way down before he was touched.

Still have to convert the free kick into a goal though.

The penalty could be debated for hours. His arm moves toward the ball and I am guessing that is what has been construed as deliberate. Most pundits are agreed it isn’t a penalty but the ref did take a long hard look at it before giving it.

For all Croatia’s early dominance though and regardless of those decisions, the French looked pretty much in control from start to finish. They were just too good.

Pity some of their fans in Paris and Marseille weren’t so good... ?
 
Have to say I'm at a loss.

First goal was a free kick which was turned in by their own player. What was 'shocking' about any part of that?

The second was a penalty that was not only reviewed by VAR but by the ref himself- twice.

He didn't make a split second decision. He spent about 5 minutes watching it over and over before coming to a professional decision. I personally don't like those handball penalties, but that's one for FIFA to work on with the rulebook. The ref watched it again and again and interpreted it as effectively a foul.

Had the ball hit the players arm and been diverted anywhere else on the pitch, would handball have been given? Yes, it would.

The first goal came from a free kick which followed an obvious dive by Griezman. I said at the time the ref gave that as a foul, I hope they don't score from this, as the player was cheating. They did score and it was totally unjust.

As for the penalty, the fact that the ref took so long to reach his decision, and even had to go back and have another look, indicates that it was NOT a clear and obvious decision. It has to be that under VAR. Yet inexplicably, he gave a penalty in the World Cup final, the biggest game that you can have.
 
I agree with pope but the quality of refs is probably the worst aspect of what has generally been an enjoyable world cup. There have been less sending off but plenty of controversial var decisions, mainly due to inconsistency. It's tough to be a ref but wot a pity the brit took a well paid job in the middle East so no British refs.
 
The rules are quite clear:

From Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct.

Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm.

The following must be considered:
  • the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
  • the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
  • the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
  • touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an offence
  • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an offence
The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. Inside their penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any related sanction but can be guilty of handling offences that incur an indirect free kick.

The first three bullet points are the only ones applicable in this instance.

Did the hand move towards the ball - Yes, there's no doubt about it

The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) - the distance was not great, which is the reason most people think the decision is harsh, but could anyone seriously claim that it was an unexpected ball?

The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence - I would take that to cover instances where the player is taking action to prevent the ball hitting him in the face or in the gonads - in this instance the player clearly moves his arm to a position adjacent to his thigh and towards the ball.

I cant see any other decision other than penalty.

If that decision had happened against us (that's Forest not England) people would be up in arms if a penalty had not been awarded; and quite rightly in my view.
 
I would add that I think VAR has added value to the whole experience; it's a massive subject for discussion. Also it helps refs achieve more right decisions and eliminates many poor decisions. That's got to be a bonus.

Just occasionally though, a VAR decision is really subjective, like the one in the final, but I guess no system can be perfect.
 
I was sad enough to watch the rerun of England v Croatia (the 90 minutes anyway, then I'd had enough). On reflection, Lovren and Rebic should both have been booked in the first half and could both have received second yellows.

So even though England faded badly (even then, Kane missed the chance to win it in the last few minutes), I won't shed any tears over Croatia getting a couple of bad decisions in the final.

The challenge on Griezmann does look like a foul from one angle, but in any case (as the pundits pointed out) once it's given it's up to Croatia to defend the free kick better.

The penalty wasn't nearly as harsh as some given against Forest - he was facing the ball and could predict its flight. His arm was away from his body and moved towards the ball.

France looked the best side in the tournament so they deserved it. Il vient chez nous, il vient chez nous, il vient chez, football vient chez nous.
 
I was sad enough to watch the rerun of England v Croatia (the 90 minutes anyway, then I'd had enough). On reflection, Lovren and Rebic should both have been booked in the first half and could both have received second yellows.

So even though England faded badly (even then, Kane missed the chance to win it in the last few minutes), I won't shed any tears over Croatia getting a couple of bad decisions in the final.

The challenge on Griezmann does look like a foul from one angle, but in any case (as the pundits pointed out) once it's given it's up to Croatia to defend the free kick better.

The penalty wasn't nearly as harsh as some given against Forest - he was facing the ball and could predict its flight. His arm was away from his body and moved towards the ball.

France looked the best side in the tournament so they deserved it. Il vient chez nous, il vient chez nous, il vient chez, football vient chez nous.

Some excellent points

I always say this- whether a free kick or corner is given correctly or not, you just have to defend it. Same as when the referee fails to give a foul on the half way line and the team comes forward and scores; it's your team's responsibility to play with the hand they are given. Free kick or not, Croatia put the ball in their own net. Their fault.

We have indeed had far softer ones. Remember Andy Reid at West Ham being blasted with the ball at point blank range while effectively having his back turned and conceding a penalty? I remember one where Andy Johnson clearly headed the ball only to have handball given as well in the early 00's
 
I was sad enough to watch the rerun of England v Croatia (the 90 minutes anyway, then I'd had enough). On reflection, Lovren and Rebic should both have been booked in the first half and could both have received second yellows.

So even though England faded badly (even then, Kane missed the chance to win it in the last few minutes), I won't shed any tears over Croatia getting a couple of bad decisions in the final.

The challenge on Griezmann does look like a foul from one angle, but in any case (as the pundits pointed out) once it's given it's up to Croatia to defend the free kick better.

The penalty wasn't nearly as harsh as some given against Forest - he was facing the ball and could predict its flight. His arm was away from his body and moved towards the ball.

France looked the best side in the tournament so they deserved it. Il vient chez nous, il vient chez nous, il vient chez, football vient chez nous.


You could say football has gone home, certainly in a World Cup context; the competition was Jules Rimet's brain child after all.
 
Sorry Pope, but that first goal came from a blatant dive by Greaseman. There was zero contact from the defender. He cheated plain and simple. I agree it should have been defended better, but it should never have been given in the first place. The cheating in this World Cup has ruined what was otherwise an excellent competition.
 
Sorry Pope, but that first goal came from a blatant dive by Greaseman. There was zero contact from the defender. He cheated plain and simple. I agree it should have been defended better, but it should never have been given in the first place. The cheating in this World Cup has ruined what was otherwise an excellent competition.

It wasn't a penalty. It was a free kick. What statistically do you think is the % chance of scoring a free kick? Less than 20% I would imagine. It wasn't even in a shooting area. It was more dangerous than a corner but no harder to defend.

They fucked up by scoring an own goal. That's their fault. Saying that the chance was created by a wrongly given free kick is no different to blaming it on the last Croatian to give away possession. Unless it is a penalty or a direct free kick scored then it is up to the opposition to do their jobs and ensure there is no 'injustice' if they see it that way.
 
Pope, I'm more commenting on the actions of the French player, with his blatant dive. It is ruining football. What has otherwise been a brilliant competition has been spoiled by the actions of players like this. It has become so common that commentators barely mention it at times. You see it in every game we watch and pundits even make excuses for it now. How many times do you hear them saying things like "he earned that", or "he was clever there", or even "well there was contact, he was entitled to go down". It makes me sick. No other sport in the world excuses cheating on the scale that football does. It's embarrassing and you're endorsing it when maKing excuses for it like you have just done.
 
Pope, I'm more commenting on the actions of the French player, with his blatant dive. It is ruining football. What has otherwise been a brilliant competition has been spoiled by the actions of players like this. It has become so common that commentators barely mention it at times. You see it in every game we watch and pundits even make excuses for it now. How many times do you hear them saying things like "he earned that", or "he was clever there", or even "well there was contact, he was entitled to go down". It makes me sick. No other sport in the world excuses cheating on the scale that football does. It's embarrassing and you're endorsing it when maKing excuses for it like you have just done.


Harry Kane was doing it as well. Not just him either.

I agree that this has been the worst world cup for it and it is disgusting. Neymar obviously has been the worst single culprit to the point where you can't trust anything he does.

It's so simple to solve as well. Any dive with no contact like we have been seeing gets a 1 match ban on review. That doesn't help in the final but it would in the other rounds