The Official FIFA World Cup 2022 Megathread

[jd1981]

Lloris dealt with it perfectly fine.

Hernandez's actions were absolutely brainless, there was absolutely no need for him to do what he did. England didn't earn that penalty, France gifted it to them.

Compare it to the first one, where England should get a shot away and maybe score without that challenge being made, if Hernandez doesn't make that challenge for the 2nd penalty then it would have had zero impact on the game.

So it’s not charity then is it? As I said it’s a poor decision at a crucial time.
The origins of this debate were who was the better side in that moment France made a terrible decision, doesn’t matter whether Lloris dealt with the cross as the offence had already committed.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Hate people putting it down the middle. If the keeper doesn't dive it's got no chance of going in, at least make the keeper save it.

Wouldn't compare the situations but I've taken a few in cup finals etc and always go high to the keepers left, doesn't need much power if it's anywhere in that top right quadrant it's not being saved.

It's not a play I'd usually advocate but watching the Netherlands/Argentina game and seeing the saves Martinez made on the first two it looked an obvious solution. He was committing early and diving fairly low which gave him a good opportunity to save the ones where we gambled the right way. Anything in the top half of the goal stood a chance of beating him as a result and going down the middle is the safest attempt at that.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

So it’s not charity then is it? As I said it’s a poor decision at a crucial time.
The origins of this debate were who was the better side in that moment France made a terrible decision, doesn’t matter whether Lloris dealt with the cross as the offence had already committed.

The origins of our debate was you saying penalties shouldn't be dismissed as charity in terms of a chance. That penalty couldn't be a better example of charity.

It's nothing to do with who was or wasn't the better side overall, that was one of England's best chances and was a pure gift, they didn't create it or earn it, it was purely a French error and cannot be used to determine how well England performed.

 

[WsWolf]

It's not a play I'd usually advocate but watching the Netherlands/Argentina game and seeing the saves Martinez made on the first two it looked an obvious solution. He was committing early and diving fairly low which gave him a good opportunity to save the ones where we gambled the right way. Anything in the top half of the goal stood a chance of beating him as a result and going down the middle is the safest attempt at that.

It's easily saveable though if they don't go. Going to either side doesn't even have to be in the corner, just an arm's width off centre and it's in.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

It's easily saveable though if they don't go. Going to either side doesn't even have to be in the corner, just an arm's width off centre and it's in.

As I said it's not something I'd generally do but in a shootout you can see more of a pattern what keepers are doing. Martinez committed every time and gave himself a good chance of making a save if he went the right way, banging it down the middle wasn't something he was protecting against.

As a one off penalty mid game or if a keeper is being more varied in their approach then it's more of a gamble but in that one game Martinez showed enough of a trend to be taken advantage of.

 

[jd1981]

The origins of our debate was you saying penalties shouldn't be dismissed as charity in terms of a chance. That penalty couldn't be a better example of charity.

It's nothing to do with who was or wasn't the better side overall, that was one of England's best chances and was a pure gift, they didn't create it or earn it, it was purely a French error and cannot be used to determine how well England performed.

But it can be used to determine how well France played? No
This debate involves both sides.
The 1-1 Kane had, Maguire header Bellingham effort, couple of goal mouth scrambles that France cleared away, it wasn’t a case of England had 2 penalties and that was it.
The game was probably just edged by England but it wasn’t an injustice that we lost.
Is every error charity?

 

[North Shropshire Lad]

But if you look at footage from Italia 90, there are still tons of Union Flags:

Mine was a Union flag at Italia 90

 

[MARKakaJIM]

But it can be used to determine how well France played? No
This debate involves both sides.
The 1-1 Kane had, Maguire header Bellingham effort, couple of goal mouth scrambles that France cleared away, it wasn’t a case of England had 2 penalties and that was it.
The game was probably just edged by England but it wasn’t an injustice that we lost.
Is every error charity?

I wasn't talking about how well France played, I was talking about the point you made about dismissing a penalty as a charity chance.

An unforced error, such as Hernandez yesterday, is as charitable as you're ever likely to see in a professional sports match.

 

[AndyWolves]

Should rabiots chance be dismissed as charity because England's defence parted?

 

[jd1981]

I wasn't talking about how well France played, I was talking about the point you made about dismissing a penalty as a charity chance.

An unforced error, such as Hernandez yesterday, is as charitable as you're ever likely to see in a professional sports match.

As I said you’re confusing charity with a poor decision.
Was France first goal charity because VAR failed to spot a foul in the build up?

 

[Alan]

Are we arguing that PKs count for less than open play goals?

 

[jd1981]

Are we arguing that PKs count for less than open play goals?

Apparently the second penalty was just a charitable donation because it was a big error by Hernandez.

 

[jd1981]

The only way the second penalty is charity is if the defender wanted to give away a penalty, if not it’s an error on his behalf.
Firstly what caused him to make the error? It was a ball into the French box that was intended to ask questions, regardless of how good the ball was.

 

[WsWolf]

The only way the second penalty is charity is if the defender wanted to give away a penalty, if not it’s an error on his behalf.
Firstly what caused him to make the error? It was a ball into the French box that was intended to ask questions, regardless of how good the ball was.

Nothing caused it other than his own stupidity.

There was zero danger, ball had gone over mounts head he just wanted to leave one on him for some unknown reason.

 

[jd1981]

Nothing caused it other than his own stupidity.

There was zero danger, ball had gone over mounts head he just wanted to leave one on him for some unknown reason.

Was it a penalty?

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Are we arguing that PKs count for less than open play goals?

It counts less towards a measure of a teams creativity in some instances.

Last night the first was the result of good at by England forcing a mistake which rewarded a penalty in place of a likely shooting opportunity. The second was an absolute gift through terrible defending in a situation which didn't even require any intervention.

The first I would give England credit for, the second is pure luck on their part.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Was it a penalty?

A gift of one, yes.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

The only way the second penalty is charity is if the defender wanted to give away a penalty, if not it’s an error on his behalf.
Firstly what caused him to make the error? It was a ball into the French box that was intended to ask questions, regardless of how good the ball was.

So all those toss crosses by Shaw in the dying stages were decent play because getting the ball in the box could've resulted in another gift of a penalty through a French brainfart?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Must tell everyone who scored against Wolves between 2009 and 2013 that their goals have been downgraded by 25% as Ronald Zubar is a fucking moron who was constantly at fault for most of them.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Must tell everyone who scored against Wolves between 2009 and 2013 that their goals have been downgraded by 25% as Ronald Zubar is a fucking moron who was constantly at fault for most of them.

Sturridge can definitely put himself on that list.