Them V Columbia

[WeighorstsWang]

19 minutes ago, Cobra said:

I'm no expert on the rules but according to the Mail... "After previous attempts at this World Cup by other teams there had been a suggestion that one player must be on the field of play or a quick kick-off could be taken to catch the celebrating team out.

"However, that notion is false with play only being able to start at the referee's discretion.

"And in this case the referee had not given a signal for kick-off to be taken."

Something had to be said at this World Cup as there has been a few examples of teams scoring and one player having to remain on the field of play. 

According to the description here, FIFA have stated it. 

 

[steven dee]

1 hour ago, HK Blues said:

All fair points Cobra, but how many of those you mention would challenge for a place in any of Europe's top top clubs despite their price tag - Kane perhaps.  The others may be household names for us but perhaps not outside the UK. 

They made it to a stage beyond what many expected so I'd say they overachieved.

The mass hysteria we have seen the last few weeks made it all the more sweeter when they lost ( just like they were always going to ). 

The disrespect they showed to Croatia was an absolute disgrace. They had it won before it had even kicked off.

This is a Croatia team full of players playing at a much higher level than England so it's not a surprise to me that Croatia won. 

[chomp my root]

58 minutes ago, HK Blues said:

All fair points Cobra, but how many of those you mention would challenge for a place in any of Europe's top top clubs despite their price tag - Kane perhaps.  The others may be household names for us but perhaps not outside the UK. 

They made it to a stage beyond what many expected so I'd say they overachieved.

It's been a successful campaign for them, no doubt and fair play to them. They had an element of luck but you need that and it will have given the players a big boost. Having said that, when you break it down they beat Tunisia, Panama and Sweden, drew with Columbia in 90 minutes (120 if you want to be picky) and got beat by Belgium and Croatia. I would guess this isn't lost on Southgate and something he'll want to work on. We might be going through this all again in a couple years and they might be that bit better.......

[HK Blues]

10 hours ago, chomp my root said:

It's been a successful campaign for them, no doubt and fair play to them. They had an element of luck but you need that and it will have given the players a big boost. Having said that, when you break it down they beat Tunisia, Panama and Sweden, drew with Columbia in 90 minutes (120 if you want to be picky) and got beat by Belgium and Croatia. I would guess this isn't lost on Southgate and something he'll want to work on. We might be going through this all again in a couple years and they might be that bit better.......

I don't disagree with any of that. But, to put another spin on it they beat what was put in front of them until the Croatia game and COULD argue they deliberately lost to Belgium to secure an easier passage to the final.

They did better than many expected. With a whole lot of luck in their favour t.b.f. Does it make them potential champions going forward - nothing we saw would suggest yes. I'd have expected both Belgium and France to win comfortably against them.

[HK Blues]

10 hours ago, steven dee said:

The mass hysteria we have seen the last few weeks made it all the more sweeter when they lost ( just like they were always going to ). 

The disrespect they showed to Croatia was an absolute disgrace. They had it won before it had even kicked off.

This is a Croatia team full of players playing at a much higher level than England so it's not a surprise to me that Croatia won. 

It's the English way and why they have so few allies. I was not at all surprised to see a better Croatia beat them.

[dblair]

18 hours ago, Cobra said:

I find it amazing that England tried to score while Croatia were still celebrating down to the other end of the park. Do they not know the rules?

https://old.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/8y7nr8/englands_attempt_to_score_after_croatias_winning/

 

What’s even funnier is that the pass forward meant that I think it was rashford was offside

[dblair]

Just now, dblair said:

What’s even funnier is that the pass forward meant that I think it was rashford was offside

Pretty sure the rule is that the other team has to be back in there own half UNLESS they are off the field then the game can restart at the refs discretion if at least one player is on the field. (Their keeper was)

[WoodStein]

The picture at that point unfortunately isn't very sharp, but that would have been hilarious had the ref not pulled them back to wait.....he hadn't blown his whistle for them to take a kick-off anyway, so this type of move isn't valid.   

[HK Blues]

3 hours ago, dblair said:

Pretty sure the rule is that the other team has to be back in there own half UNLESS they are off the field then the game can restart at the refs discretion if at least one player is on the field. (Their keeper was)

I read something about this recently - it seems that it all depends on the existing rules about the minimum number of players being on the pitch for the game to continue.  Each association has its own rules although many are under the impression this is 7 but it's not a FIFA rule rather a recommendation.  The ref has the discretion to stop play or allow advantage if less than 7 players are on the field and the remainder left deliberately.