World Cup - Worst referee of the tournament election

Rik Meleet said:
Can 1 very very very very wrong decision qualify a referee for this title ??

If he shows 2 yellows for the same player, yes! ;) I think that's impossible to beat, Poll already won!
 
Yeah, every other ref is just gunning for second place now. Poll won with the third yellow, which was the final touch on the impressive resume he built over the game.
 
Rik Meleet said:
Can 1 very very very very wrong decision qualify a referee for this title ??
It's not as if the others (except Poll...) would have made significantly more "very very very very wrong" decisions. And except for Amarilla none of them decided about the course of the tournament.
Plus I think the red card for Italy was far too harsh.

Overall though Poll clearly wins, as said in my first post in this thread. That performance will hopefully be unbeatable.

But the impact of others, such as Cantalejo, was higher.
 
Rik Meleet said:
Can 1 very very very very wrong decision qualify a referee for this title ??
I think yes, if it counts as mistake that causes the whole result go around.

Nowadays I don't even blame the refs anymore from penalties and such because I know it's impossible to see these things. I blame the FIFA as they won't change the rules to allow more referees to the matches. The game is so quick now that it's basically impossible to make correct decisions. It's not simply referees fault anymore. It would be time to someone to wake up. Tell you the truth I don't care anymore. I guess it's part of the game this all nonsense about referees and their decisions.

Even though it's cruel way to go out from the tournament as Australia did I think they should have scored earlier to end it. They couldn't and Italy did it what they do it best, go through with the most least effort possible.

Hitro said:
Plus I think the red card for Italy was far too harsh.
Are you serious?
Materazzi could have hacked someone's legs off with that tackle.
It was way over the top. I don't understand what he was thinking.
 
C~G said:
Are you serious?
Materazzi could have hacked someone's legs off with that tackle.
It was way over the top. I don't understand what he was thinking.
But the tackle got nowhere really close to his opponent, instead he even hit his teammate. I agree that if he would have hit closer to the opposing player a red card would have been inevitable, but this way I think yellow would have been allright.
 
Like I said in the other thread I didn't watch the game, but I'd be suprised if Materazzi could survive a whole match without a red card. That would be almost a record for him...
 
There is a prize for the second and third place too..

What should it the 'statue' be for the winner? The paper whistle or something?
 
MCdread said:
Like I said in the other thread I didn't watch the game, but I'd be suprised if Materazzi could survive a whole match without a red card. That would be almost a record for him...

True, he's a madman. And does anyone else here think that Materazzi is actually Cramer from Seinfeld?
 
Hitro said:
But the tackle got nowhere really close to his opponent, instead he even hit his teammate. I agree that if he would have hit closer to the opposing player a red card would have been inevitable, but this way I think yellow would have been allright.
Yes, I understand that is matter of degree how you see it.

It was however very dangerous play, tackle made with that speed towards someone that is running means that someone is going to get hurt. Does the tackle really need to hurt then someone before the referee should react?

I guess Lippi had said that they must defend the goal to the point of death.
It wasn't only reckless it was to the point of being suicidal, which it in a way was.
After all Materazzi flew out.
 
Being angry won't change the decision and it looked like he quickly realised how much he had let the rest of the team down.
 
Dell19 said:
Being angry won't change the decision and it looked like he quickly realised how much he had let the rest of the team down.

Judging by the way soccer players often react for just a foul, if you get red carded and you dont feel you deserved it your going to pe pretty pissed off.
 
But Materazzi is a madman. You can't use him as example for anything. ;)
 
azzaman333 said:
So a madman doesnt react to a red? I'm confused :crazyeye:

No. He'll coldly go after the ref a few years later, when the dust is settled, and he's no longer recognised on the street. :nya:
 
Hitro said:
But the tackle got nowhere really close to his opponent, instead he even hit his teammate. I agree that if he would have hit closer to the opposing player a red card would have been inevitable, but this way I think yellow would have been allright.

This is what really, REALLY sucks to us Americans about 'soccer'---

Now just take this instance: Hardish tackle try just about completely misses
opponent- opponent falls down pretending he was fouled- tackle does hit
team member- team member DOES NOT even flinch- missed tackle gets red
card- Now if the team member would have had the ball and barely been hit
like that- he would have acted like his leg was broken :mad: . Don't you
guys have any ideas that would stop this kind of stuff. It is becoming a
sport where it is better to be a 'good actor' than a 'good athlete' :cry: .
 
dgfred said:
This is what really, REALLY sucks to us Americans about 'soccer'---

Don't you guys have any ideas that would stop this kind of stuff. It is becoming a sport where it is better to be a 'good actor' than a 'good athlete' :cry: .
The same thing is said aloud by many people from Great Britain and from Scandinavian countries example.

It is quite often said that the "southern countries" tend to favor this kind of behaviour more.
And I agree.
 
Top Bottom