[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
When you get a chance to see it again, more calmly, and preferably from the camera behind the net, perhaps you will see that there is obstruction. Until then, we will simply disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure when I will see it again. But Terry is standing under the ball. No way is this obstruction. The foul was given for him pushing the keeper. It was wrong. I doubt their will be an until then [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
The major change has to do with fouling on the pitch, not on the keeper. Since FIFA started promoting more severe refereeing, we are seeing definitely better football and more skills. The keeper is still pretty much protected as he used to be, maybe a little more now. But the major change is that players like Zidane can show off their talents without fearing "Chopper" Harris ending their career with a tackle from behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree outlawing the tackle from behind has been a major benefit to the game but the protection of goalkeepers is just getting ludicrous, any fan or player will argue this with you.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see any other player I the squad that is capable of the things Rooney is

[/ QUOTE ]

He's good but not the finished article. You have seen Henry, Van Nilstroy and even Shearer play? England have 3 world class players - Becks, Scholes and Ferdinand. Rooney will hopefully join their ranks but as yet he is not, as far as I'm concerned he had a spectacular tournament and the jury is still out. I remember the same hyperbole over Owen when he scored against the Argies (not to mention Barnes) and he has failed to deliver on the grandest stages.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid this is results-guided thinking instead of percentages-guided thinking. Listen : A good penalty is a penalty that manages to do at least one of these things : (a) make the keeper dive the wrong way (b) hit the side of the net or (c) hit the upper corner of the net.

The England penalties looked good because the Portuguese keeper kept falling (see 'a' above) when he shouldn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

a - only if it goes in
b - the back or side (as long as it the inside) of the net
c - actually bottom corner is just as good.

Whos being results orientated? If James dives the opposite ways to which he did he would have had a good chance of saving at least 3. (I guess the Portuguese are just excellent foolers with their fancy run ups)

[ QUOTE ]
No joke. I was a Gazza acolyte. How heavy must Rooney get before you realize that the weight is catastrophic? This is not the Puskas era, you know. Weight is the downfall for footballers when so much running is required. (And skilful players cannot apply their skills when they are out of breath.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Gazza had his problems but even so he was still one of the greatest footballers ever. Would he have been the same player if his demons had been suppressed? I doubt it. They are people not machines. I don't read the British papers often (and when I do it is only for sport) but I'm unaware that Rooney has a weight problem. He's a big lad yes but being able to run at 100mph for 90 minutes is not the be all and end all of football, control is what matters.

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. England have lost in shootouts in the last four or five major tournaments they were involved! This is called a pattern. Something is wrong - and needs fixing. My opinion is the coach should've taken this psychological burden of past shootout losses off the players' minds - and have them practice for God's sake.

PENALTY SHOOTOUTS ARE LIKE FOOTBALLERS PLAYING A ROUND OF TENNIS AFTER THE FOOTBALL GAME! It's a whole different ball game (excuse the pun) but also a crucial part of today's game. I'm continually surprised at coaches who don't pay the required attention to it.

You think Sven had his players practice penalty kicks? I would bet not - he would probably consider this as too pessimistic.

As to Beckham's penalties (that have cost England dearly once more), the less said the better.

[/ QUOTE ]

They pratice.