In the other semi tomorrow, the Netherlands take on Sweden.
Reader Comments (92)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 02/07/2019 at 17:59:45
2 Posted 02/07/2019 at 18:28:55
It'll be a hellava lotta fun. I have to work, but my guess is my productivity will be close to zero.
So close to Treason Day! How perfect is this? C'mon Ladies from the melting pot! We don't lose to the Brits!
3 Posted 02/07/2019 at 18:37:45
You're playing the English, not the Brits!
4 Posted 02/07/2019 at 18:38:03
5 Posted 02/07/2019 at 19:30:55
Actually looking forward to the game especially since my 5-year-old daughter has started going on about "The Lionesses"
That Rapinoe is a lioness, so let's just hope the best team win!
6 Posted 02/07/2019 at 19:51:35
Treason is only applicable in a monarchy, of which we have none, thanks to Treason Day! Yippee!
But Trump is an asswipe.
7 Posted 02/07/2019 at 20:00:21
8 Posted 02/07/2019 at 20:22:03
9 Posted 02/07/2019 at 21:56:54
10 Posted 02/07/2019 at 21:59:49
Good game though, and the best team won imo.
11 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:03:11
12 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:06:13
13 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:07:34
But VAR definitely needs to speed the hell up! It took WAY too long.
Feel bad for England. They played wonderfully. Tough offside call, poor pen, could have went a different way.
In the end, the better team won. Sorry, but that's the way I saw it.
Pip is great. He's going to be one hell of a manager for a Premier League side one day. Classy fella, too.
14 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:11:26
15 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:12:26
16 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:16:30
The disallowed goal just sucked the joy out of the game. It was hardly a glaring error by the ref or linesman. Ditto for the penalty. Sure, you can argue that it makes the game fairer because every decision will be the correct one, but it doesn't half take the joy out of it.
17 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:18:33
18 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:21:56
VAR? Every time I looked at that penalty decision, I just felt that if they try 10 different angles, they might just be able to justify giving a penalty?
I'm not saying it wasn't offside Jamie, I just think they should introduce a 25-metre line or something similar for such tight decisions.
19 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:22:25
20 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:23:03
What happened to giving the attacker the benefit of the doubt? Technically I guess decision was correct but to the detriment of the flow of the game. Where does it end in the clamour to get every decision correct for the TV viewer? Fouls? Free kicks? Throw-ins? Sooner or later, games will end up being 2 hours or more.
21 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:24:40
The rule should be that if ANY part of the attackers body is level with ANY part of the second to last defenders body, it's onside.
That stops these stupid, off by a fingernail decisions. There could even be daylight between bodies, as long as a foot is level with a foot, it's onside.
That's what I think anyhow. This way, offside is CLEARLY offside.
VAR needs to be limited and defined. But it's in place to stop teams getting robbed.
And as the offside rule is currently written, that play today was 100% offside. Rough? Yes. But the correct call every time.
22 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:26:24
23 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:27:45
24 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:31:45
They say the benefit should go to the attacker. The current offside law doesn't allow that in the least.
If you change the law to the attackers entire body must be past the second to last defender, there's no vitriol if VAR calls it back because it's 100% clear. And it'll result in the benefit of the attacking team most of the time.
I'm sure someone will say it's a silly American idea, but for me, "my way" makes a lot more sense and will benefit the game on the whole.
VAR is an entirely positive thing. But it can not delay the game for minutes, turning it into a television viewing event as Michael above rightly points out. It needs to be defined and honed, and most importantly streamlined.
Today they reviewed the pen AFTER a sub! It took that long? Why?
25 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:31:54
26 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:36:05
VAR? God in Heaven – it's a game killer.
27 Posted 02/07/2019 at 22:59:27
Inlcuding the VAR decisions, it was all down to small margins. England were very good and would have beaten any other team in the competition, but the USA got over the line thanks to their superior fitness, technique, tactics and game management.
Tonight I will endure the Copa America semi-final between the Latin America giants Brazil and Argentina. I'm really not expecting to be entertained. I can honestly say the Women's World Cup has been far more entertaining than the Copa America. Three 0-0 quarter-finals, all decided on penalties.
Thankfully, I don't think this tournament will impact negatively on our two representatives. Richarlison played the first two games, was dropped to the bench for the next game and is now ruled out of the tournament due to mumps.
Mina, by contrast, has probably benefitted from playing every minute of Colombia's games. He needed some minutes in his legs and the Copa America has effectively given him a pre-pre-season.
28 Posted 02/07/2019 at 23:13:04
Also, I was reading how many of the England squad played for Everton ladies at one time of another, why are we bottom of the league then? Sounds like we're the Southampton of the women's game?
29 Posted 02/07/2019 at 23:23:33
The offside rule wasn't invented for that fractional, marginal nonsense. The lino was in the perfect spot and made the right call. I now can understand those who are concerned about the impact of VAR — it could be disastrous.
After that, the ref let it all go to her head and the USA team were pretty despicable towards the end. Pity as they played some great stuff earlier. Bad luck, England, and great effort.
30 Posted 02/07/2019 at 23:25:23
But talk about making it easy for the Yanks. If you're unsure or nervous, just fucking blast it for fuck's sake!
31 Posted 02/07/2019 at 23:32:45
Honestly, I did that every time and smashed it as hard as I could and it never went straight down the middle and I struggled to keep it down, but it never went high enough or wide enough to miss and amateur keepers aren't often lucky enough to keep out a rocket.
32 Posted 02/07/2019 at 23:55:22
Having said that the Yanks were better than us. Fitter, faster and more athletic. Not by a huge margin but better all the same.
33 Posted 03/07/2019 at 01:01:06
Brian and Steve, I salute your courage. I took over 200 pens in competition over the years and never once had the bollocks to go down the middle, either hard or Panenka. Always had the mental picture of the keeper staying there and just catching the ball.
34 Posted 03/07/2019 at 02:02:12
I'm sure Unsworth was a lot more accurate than me, but that's how he described his technique.
35 Posted 03/07/2019 at 02:53:56
36 Posted 03/07/2019 at 03:09:45
How are you and your family doing?
37 Posted 03/07/2019 at 03:21:32
38 Posted 03/07/2019 at 03:44:40
People forget (don't know?) how big the women's game is in the US and if you have a bigger pool to draw from you will generally end up with more of the physically gifted.
I thought the English girls have closed the gap markedly and as in Rugby League against the stand-out Aussies the British team at the next Olympics may actually be good enough to best them.
I didn't think the offside was anything like half a body length Jamie. I presume you actually mean half the width which is a bit of a nonsense as that depends on which way you are leaning. I agree that it should be every part of the body beyond the second to last defender; however, at the moment it is what it is and attackers are just going to have to err on the side of caution. If VAR is only supposed to overrule clear and obvious officiating mistakes, then it is being used wrongly.
39 Posted 03/07/2019 at 06:18:35
Also, if we change the offside rule, the problem won't go away – the problem is simply shifted to "is there a gap of any sort between the last defender and the attacker". Just as marginal.
40 Posted 03/07/2019 at 06:35:21
I just had a look at the old world without VAR, and it sucked. There's no VAR in the Gold Cup, and Mexico just beat Haiti in the semis 1-0 on a Raul Jimenez penalty in extra time. VAR would have revealed the pen to what seemed obvious even to the naked eye – a no-touch flop on the ball by Raul that swayed the partially-unsighted referee.
Underdog Haiti courageously earned, and thoroughly deserved, a chance to at least get to pens. Instead, Mexico was gifted a trip to the finals, where we again get to listen to their lowlife fans chant their homophobic obscenities to a worldwide TV audience, embarrassing their country and befouling the sport with the tacit consent of the gutless Mexican Football Federation.
If I'm in the small minority on VAR, fuck it, I'll take it. VAR is here to stay, and I'm glad. If we see fewer injustices like tonight, all the hassle is worth it. And then some.
End of rant. For the moment, anyway.
41 Posted 03/07/2019 at 07:15:50
42 Posted 03/07/2019 at 07:17:48
43 Posted 03/07/2019 at 07:18:12
44 Posted 03/07/2019 at 07:20:48
45 Posted 03/07/2019 at 07:27:30
It sounds like Haiti were robbed? That's how I felt when England were awarded a penalty last night, and I was glad the American keeper saved it.
If you have to stop the game and look at a decision 10/20 times from numerous angles, to try and find a foul, and also keep everyone waiting for 4/5 minutes in the process, then I'm not sure it's what people want, and it's something that definitely needs looking at.
Make it exciting: give teams three calls a game on any decision they choose (a bit like tennis) and let's just get on with playing football.
46 Posted 03/07/2019 at 08:35:13
The biggest change though has to come by allowing a player whose toe, knee, or any other legally scoring appendage is marginally ahead of a defender to be deemed on-side. If there is no clear space between bodies, then the goal should stand. It used to called giving the benefit to the attacker. After all, even goal-line technology (which is great) dictates that the whole of the ball needs to be over the line in order for the goal to stand.
47 Posted 03/07/2019 at 09:10:30
48 Posted 03/07/2019 at 09:49:50
And, Offside, like a photo in the 100m sprint, it is judged on only the Torso.
49 Posted 03/07/2019 at 10:44:39
50 Posted 03/07/2019 at 11:02:47
And re making it the same as the goal-line rule (ie the entire ball needing to be over), well it already is the same because the entire body of the attacker needs to be one side of the "line of offside"; if even one cm of the attacker is on the wrong side of the line made by the defender then the goal doesn't count. Just depends how you read it?
51 Posted 03/07/2019 at 12:46:28
SHOOT FROM DISTANCE!!!
52 Posted 03/07/2019 at 14:52:48
I actually thought that VAR worked really well for the penalty but don't know why the ref took so long to award it. Once you clearly saw the defenders knee thunk into the attacker's leg in the act of shooting it had to be a pen. Anyone who has played knows it doesn't take much to completely wreck your chances of converting the chance. The contact was enough that it threw the defender off balance as well and she ended up flat on her face.
53 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:10:30
Did it seem weird to be cheering on women playing football? It didn't last night, for me anyway. By the end I was hurling as much abuse at them as I do at the men. That's equality for you.
54 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:12:27
And as I've said ad nauseum, VAR will get better after its initial deployment difficulties. We've seen it repeatedly over the last two decades in baseball, NFL, rugby, hockey, basketball etc. etc. -- the process becomes more efficient, the delays shorter, the use of replay wiser. It's a process. And years from now we will all wonder what the hoo-hah was all about.
55 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:13:56
Even the commentator was moved to apologize for it!
56 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:25:48
And re your comment at #42, hockey fans have gotten accustomed to occasionally celebrating in vain. The train whistle roars, the lights flash, the goal song pounds, the crowd dances, the goalscorer high-fives the bench, and then after a nervous delay (sometimes several minutes) the ref signals no goal because replay has determined that the original attack was a fraction of an inch offside, sometimes 10 seconds before the goal was scored.
And you know what? The NHL has survived and thrived -- never more popular -- and the fans are used to it. Footy fans will get used to it as well.
57 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:29:31
58 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:36:04
I thought that all goals were subject to VAR?
59 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:42:15
60 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:42:25
Early days yet but I doubt a partisan Premier League crowd will not be as forgiving as the spectators at a women's match.
Mike #39 and 50, very good point re the case against "clear space" but surely such a rules would transfer the advantage back to the attacker – which after all is in the spirit of the game?
I've seen two matches where a heel (of a player going backwards!) and a big toe have caused a goal to be disallowed! Neither player had been attempting to derive an unfair advantage and were in fact both attempting to stay in line with the last defender.
61 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:44:52
I am sure Mike Gaines will be able to correct me if I am wrong.
62 Posted 03/07/2019 at 15:56:30
63 Posted 03/07/2019 at 16:00:30
Can I just ask, are we offended by everything these days? Personally I don't understand the fuss.
64 Posted 03/07/2019 at 16:06:58
I wondered what that celebration was about to be honest, but guessed it was a piss take of the English in some way.
Personally I wouldn't be offended by those sort of actions. I'd be angry and, had I been playing in the game, I'd have sought out the "offender" and carried out a "robust challenge" by way of a thankyou! Sunday league justice if you will!
On a footnote, why make a point about something that happened in 1776 ffs?
65 Posted 03/07/2019 at 16:11:55
Terry #62, I have no idea. That was certainly the original intent, but who knows what FIFA is telling the referees now.
Ray #60, in other sports where the replay system cannot or does not alert the referee, one solution that has worked well is the coach's challenge. It's a staple of the NFL and baseball. The coach is allotted a certain number of challenges and the call goes to the replay system then. Sounds like that would have worked well in the rugby example you cited.
66 Posted 03/07/2019 at 16:42:12
My understanding is the video panel advise the referee on various situations happening during the game and then he looks at the monitor to give a decision and the constant badgering from players increase the time it takes for a decision.
Other people may like it but I don't. To me, we will end up with robots going up and down the line.
Maybe it is because I am 78 years old that I think it is taking the excitement from the game that a group of people watching monitors have more power than the referee.
Watching the England penalties, they nearly always put their shots low to the keeper's right.
67 Posted 03/07/2019 at 16:52:25
Ice hockey is more faster but even then you have breaks in that due to players suddenly deciding to knock 7 bells out of each other.
Football doesn't want or need the kind of VAR stoppages. Momentum is everything in football. Have a stoppage for 5 minutes and it visibly affects the momentum of a game. It's horrible for the game and also the match going fans.
VAR is primarily for the TV audience. I don't want matches going on for 2 hours or so. It's a 90-minute game. Sometimes minutely dissecting decisions is not in the best interests of the game and if you have to minutely dissect a decision it should automatically go with the original ref's call.
As we have seen on this thread, people are still unsure exactly who was right and who was wrong regarding last nights decisions. They're not clear cut and it just makes it an opinion. It's not exciting for the match going fans and just makes the stoppages a farce.
68 Posted 03/07/2019 at 17:12:19
I agree it doesn't need much of a shove to put an attacker off-balance, but I never saw enough of that for last nights penalty incident; if that was the case, why all the replays?
VAR, is great when you get the decision, but not so good if it goes against you, so has anything really changed up to this point, considering we are all still having the same disagreements?
69 Posted 03/07/2019 at 17:31:50
Have you been to a football match where VAR was used, or talked to fans who have? I haven't, so I have no way of knowing whether it's "horrible" for them. But I do know first-hand that hockey fans -- and the players and referees as well -- love having a replay system that reduces unjustified outcomes. They put up with the delays as well worth the price of "getting it right".
You're more than entitled to your opinion, but if past sports history is any indication, VAR will eventually be fully accepted as a part of football.
70 Posted 03/07/2019 at 17:44:42
I am with William (#66) regarding players "swarming" officials. I thought that this had been "outlawed" but apparently not when I see the crowd approach a referee who is trying to make, I hope, an unbiased decision. If players do not retreat ,I would produce a yellow card to each and every one of them.
71 Posted 03/07/2019 at 17:47:44
That said, I'm old school and have been going to football for years and like the lack of stoppages during games. I suspect that the younger audience and obviously the TV audience will adore it.
My big issue is that for a good few years now we have mourned the lack of white hot atmosphere at games and that is not endemic to Everton but of all clubs. Slowly clubs are finding ways to create good atmosphere again and I fear that the introduction of VAR will significantly dampen that atmosphere due to lengthy stoppages. I was very frustrated last night watching the game with the delays and that was just on TV, let alone actually being at the game.
I watch hockey occasionally as a mate of mine is bang into it but not often but it is a fast game I agree. Its perhaps the mumblings of someone who just doesn't want this change but I feel it will detract from football. I guess the proof will be in the pudding during the coming season but I fear the worst.
As I said earlier, we on this thread are still arguing about the validity of the decisions last night and if we can't agree how can those delays be justified? I feel it hasn't made things better, just muddied the waters even further.
72 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:00:27
1. What happens if a dubious decision goes to VAR but not until after the ball has gone up to the other end of the pitch and ended up in the other net? This could happen as play is not always stopped straight away.
2. If a ref actually blows for offside based on a linesman's decision, would it ever be advisable for the attacking side to carry on play just in case VAR reverses the offside decision?
73 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:13:49
Tony #68, it took three very slow-motion replays and a head's up from John Pierce on the live forum before I spotted the contact myself. It was quick and partially hidden. But even through my US partisan eyes, once I saw it, it was clear, and VAR got it right.
74 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:49:08
1. The VAR will take place after the play stops and can reverse the "goal" at the other end of the pitch. The first decision will supersede the second.
2. The linesman (or 4th official) has been instructed NOT to raise the flag for offside until the play is over. So, in your instance, play would continue until it is ended, and only then with the VAR check for offside if necessary.
Over to you, Mike G.
75 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:49:52
The point is hockey has given the officials confidence to make calls without the artificial intervention that VAR has. For me VAR stays with smaller scope and under a challenge system, from the players to prevent a huge injustice, eg, Henry's handball vs Ireland.
76 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:52:54
On the matter of clarification of VAR 'guidelines', can anyone tell me how far back a VAR review can go when an offside is at issue?
Would a Manchester City goal, scored after 50 passes and 5 minutes of unbroken possession, be chalked off if the first pass saw the recipient offside but undetected by the linesman? If it's not going to be the whole of a scoring move that is to be reviewed then how far back should the VAR official take it? Only the last pass? The penultimate pass? Three, four, five passes back?
(And please don't provide an answer that includes an explanation in which the non-sensical term 'final phase' is used.)
77 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:52:54
I could argue the English girl approached the ball all wrong, Mike, and that's why this very, very, very slight contact has sent her sprawling?
No good arguing though, because once a decision has been made, it becomes final, and that's why I think this VAR, needs looking at properly now, because it just doesn't feel right at the minute.
78 Posted 03/07/2019 at 18:57:34
79 Posted 03/07/2019 at 19:12:26
80 Posted 03/07/2019 at 19:18:25
81 Posted 03/07/2019 at 19:55:11
There were (and always will be) debatable decisions, for example, the Clive Thomas debacle in 1977, but we learned to live with the injustice. He was the only one who saw an infringement, but to remove the human element from the game is a backward step.
The laws of the game apply to all, including clubs, at a lower level than the Premier League, who do not have VAR, nor can they afford it. Presumably they will be expected to soldier on as usual, there is obviously an uneven playing field.
82 Posted 03/07/2019 at 20:07:57
83 Posted 03/07/2019 at 20:37:48
84 Posted 03/07/2019 at 20:47:11
85 Posted 03/07/2019 at 20:50:18
86 Posted 03/07/2019 at 22:57:50
87 Posted 03/07/2019 at 23:47:04
88 Posted 04/07/2019 at 01:33:24
What we have here is the VAR 'tail' wagging the Referee 'dog'.
VAR is not there to pull the Referee on what he missed or 'saw wrongly' - again; The Rules basically state The Referee is 'right' even when, he makes a mistake and was in fact 'wrong.' This is what we seem to have now.
The Referee should decide if he needs VAR to Re-see what he thought he saw.
Tail > Wag > Dog = Wrong.
89 Posted 04/07/2019 at 08:01:58
“TO THE LAND OF THE FREE, AND THE HOME OF THE BRAVE” with not a punchline in sight...! Have a great day gentlemen.
90 Posted 04/07/2019 at 09:48:06
It was a tight affair, a shot from distance by Jackie Groener in extra-time decided it.
91 Posted 04/07/2019 at 14:15:48
92 Posted 05/07/2019 at 16:08:33
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.