Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
Maybe. It would have changed the game though. Even at 0-0 Spain didn't score until 70 odd minutes and it's quite feasible they'd have been taking a few more risks at the back if they had been 1-0 down going into the last half hour. Germany's game was all about counter-attack so it's believable Spain might have been undone before they could equalise.
Pedro should have passed whatever the score was. He was a silly boy.
True, but maybe Germany wouldn't have reached the semi if it weren't for an Uruguayan linesman
* The above is posted in my opinion. Feel free to disagree.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
They will go down as all-time greats for sure. Both the current Spain and Barca sides will go down in history - it's a privilege to watch them.
True, but Spain have really not been a pleasure to watch in the WC, they passing and keep hold of the ball superbly, but this WC, they have passed too much without threatening to be exciting.
Germany were denied a clear-cut penalty at the end of the first half.
Saw this 3 times and I can safely say it was just outside the box. The only thing clear cut was that Spain could have been 3-0 up before they scored - Germany were never in the races apart the last 15 minutes when Spain tried to protect their lead.
OK. It was a clear-cut penalty if it had been inside the box which it probably wasn't but it still might have completely changed the shape of the match, if Germany had scored which they probably wouldn't have done.
I think that's clear-cut.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
Comment