Running, all-purpose World Cup thread

KP -- I'll watch the replay on DVR, but I thought that he was pointing to his shoulder and asking for an icepack. Nothing else which he did was consistent with a player who needed to be subbed.

 

First he refuses to answer questions after the game, now he claims he doesn't know what terrorist means?
Sacre bleu, he is gutless and a moron.

 

He doesn't know what the word means? He loses any credibility by saying that, on top of refusing to answer questions.

We don't know what provoked Zidane to do what he did. I believe something was said. How bad, I don't claim to know. He may have called him a pussy or something for all I know. But I think we can all agree that Zidane wouldn't have snapped like he did unless something awful was said to him.

If he was called anything remotely like a terrorist (I think it's a strong possibility something like that was said), Materazzi should be banned for a year.

 

C'mon, Ozzie. I mean, come the fuck on. Occam's Razor.

 

Points for honesty in saying he's ignorant....[/bitterEvertonian]

 

On PTI today, Wilbon used the argument that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up on here.

He said something to the effect of, "Just because he called you a dirty terrorist, is that cause for headbutting a guy like that?"

[Threadjack alert]
I remember back in late 2001/early 2002, Bush (the band, not the prez) had to change a lyric to the No. 2 track "Head Full of Ghosts" on their then-recently released album "Golden State" because it contained this lyric:

I stand around at american weddings
I stand around for family
At my best when i'm terrorist inside
At my best when it's all me

I remember they started to recall the album, then just reissued it with the line "At my best when I'm maverick inside." I had bought the first release as soon as it came out -- that's one of my favorite songs from that album, btw -- so I had a nice laugh when I heard that song on the radio with the word "maverick" instead of "terrorist" and felt kind of good that I had the original version instead.
[/end of threadjack]

Is Wilbon, and by extension are we, brushing off what the epithet "dirty terrorist" might mean to somebody like Zidane who has been all too close to the France-Algerian race riots, who has dealt with the real threat of terrorism long before we did in the States on and after 9/11, and are we shrugging off why that wouldn't hit closer to home for him than it does for us?

Just a thought ...

 

Buckweaver, my opinion is that lots of things get said on the pitch. Lots and lots of nasty things. I'm certain there is racism involved. I'm certain there is sister or mother statements. At the end of the day, you wait until the game is over and then you take it out. Had Zidane kept his cool and then promptly pummeled the Italian after the game people wouldn't be looking at the situation like they are now.

In a tournament that had some terrible refereeing and some horrible diving while also containing some of the most beautiful play, it will all be remembered for a man that was the best player in the tournament head butting someone on the other team.

 

Dr. Z on Zidane -- a bit rambling, but still good.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/dr_z/07/10/zidane/index.html

 

NFL, World Cup, running Chrysler ... is there anything Dr. Z can't do?

http://www.askdrz.com/

 

He also did Peter King's colonoscopy.

 

I merely implied it before, but here's the truth: the main reason so many here think Italy is the biggest bunch of floppers is because they were so disgraceful with the flopping against the U.S. of A.

Portugal, with their actions against the Dutch and English, was by FAR the worst team in the tourney as far as attempting to use their flopping to directly influence play. Dropping every time England had a counterattack was the worst flopping I have seen in a World CUp, EVER, and that includes the Italians and Argentines in 2002.

Italy allowed zero goals in the run of play. An own goal and a PK was it. They also had 10 different players score their 12 goals, so obviously the offense wasn't their usual Super Guy up front and a bunch of guys trying to counterattack (see 1994, 1998). In a world where we laud groups that "play as a team!" Italy would seem to fit the bill of a group that pulled together and got it done against tough odds and distractions. Great defense takes discipline and teamwork. Having 10 different scorers is more evidence of teamwork.

But of course, they played a disgraceful game against the U.S., so they deserve nothing.

 

I have no problems with penalty kicks deciding things at all.

My problems were with the refereeing/dramatic flops... and the games that ground down to almost a halt at the end and in overtime.

The refs have to handle the flopping and drama. Here's my solution for the other:

Unlimited substitution. Even during the run of play. Have the player check in and slap the hand of the outgoing player at midfield. As many as you want, in and out.

I kept hearing the players were tired. Tired. Tired. Then lets watch some fresh players.

Tell me whats wrong with my proposal.