At first, I would not want to comment about anything about World Cup except maybe the final games but after watching a match between Czech Republic and Ghana (17 June 2006), I feel like I need to voice my opinion. But the definite decision came when I saw the article that was public the next day (18 June 2006) on The Star, Malaysia.
Okay, about the match, there is nothing wrong with the player at first but judging from the way the referee doing his responsibility, I would says that there are two possibilities of why the outcome is like that.
The referee, Horatio Elizondo of Argentine are certainly in favour of Ghana by the way he judge tackle and honouring freekicks and penalties. There are two possibilities of this would happened, that is either he has been bribe by Ghana or the international bookies. The other possibilities would be for the FIFA itself that want at least an African country that could reaches the second round.
Anyone who watched the match would agree with me that the referee has not done a good job and should be investigate on the possibility of match-fixing.
If you want me to let you know what I think the referee has done wrong, I would say that Ghana penalty kick should not have been awarded (no contact between playere); a few Ghana free kick should not have been awarded as well (no contact between players); Ghana offside not called (the second Ghana goal to be particular); Czech's should be awarded some freekicks (player down on purpose by Ghana's player) and at least a penalty (player down on purpose by Ghana's player).
The only real goal of the game is the first Ghana goal. In my opinion, the result should be a 1-1 draw.
And about the article published on The Star:
"World Cup debutants Ghana kicked some life back into African football yesterday with a well-deserved 2-0 win over the Czech Republic..."
I really felt that this paragraph are overly written and somehow, I guess the fella who has written the article did not watch the game.
Mind my if I am wrong but this is what I felt.
Okay, about the match, there is nothing wrong with the player at first but judging from the way the referee doing his responsibility, I would says that there are two possibilities of why the outcome is like that.
The referee, Horatio Elizondo of Argentine are certainly in favour of Ghana by the way he judge tackle and honouring freekicks and penalties. There are two possibilities of this would happened, that is either he has been bribe by Ghana or the international bookies. The other possibilities would be for the FIFA itself that want at least an African country that could reaches the second round.
Anyone who watched the match would agree with me that the referee has not done a good job and should be investigate on the possibility of match-fixing.
If you want me to let you know what I think the referee has done wrong, I would say that Ghana penalty kick should not have been awarded (no contact between playere); a few Ghana free kick should not have been awarded as well (no contact between players); Ghana offside not called (the second Ghana goal to be particular); Czech's should be awarded some freekicks (player down on purpose by Ghana's player) and at least a penalty (player down on purpose by Ghana's player).
The only real goal of the game is the first Ghana goal. In my opinion, the result should be a 1-1 draw.
And about the article published on The Star:
"World Cup debutants Ghana kicked some life back into African football yesterday with a well-deserved 2-0 win over the Czech Republic..."
I really felt that this paragraph are overly written and somehow, I guess the fella who has written the article did not watch the game.
Mind my if I am wrong but this is what I felt.
No comments:
Post a Comment