Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

Uruguay vs. Ghana in World Cup 2010 quarterfinals

Uruguay takes on Ghana in today's second quarterfinal, with a semifinal matchup with the Netherlands at stake.

Ghana has Nelson Mandela in its corner.

Diego Forlan is the key for Uruguay.

Live stats here, in-game commentary here, shot chart here.

Streaming video of the game here.

By Matt Bonesteel  |  July 2, 2010; 1:55 PM ET
Categories:  2010 World Cup , Ghana , Uruguay  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: 'District 11': World Cup aliens invade South Africa
Next: Ghana vs. Uruguay: World Cup stunner as Uruguay wins on penalty kicks

Comments

I'm Ghana go with Uruguay. I don't see how Ghana can compete with their two top players on life support following their injuries during the U.S. game.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | July 2, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Uruguay that doesn't know what he is talking about. I expect a Victorino for them. Forlan is forearmed.

I've got Tagoe now, Mensah.

Posted by: Reignking | July 2, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Did John Harkes say tallyman when he meant talisman? I think he was talking about Forlan...

Posted by: jake77 | July 2, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

JABULANI!!

Posted by: Kev29 | July 2, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Jubalani strikes, indeed!

I was about to write "Payback's a b!tch" -- because I have no sympathy for Ghana's whining about Uruguay's faking -- but I guess they don't need my sympathy. What a goal!

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I have loved Forlan's driven corners and free kicks so far...

Posted by: Reignking | July 2, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

JABULANI!!

Posted by: Kev29 | July 2, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone have recommendations for a place to go for delayed viewing of today's matches, preferably in or near Prince Georges? I heard from someone whose job didn't even afford her a chance to follow the action on a 'puter. TIA.

Posted by: universityandpark | July 2, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Once again, soccer proving that cheaters do prosper...

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Only fair that Ghana did not score on that PK in extra time. Ref or linesman blew the free kick call leading up to the handball.

Posted by: tfshea | July 2, 2010 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I've had this thought before, but I think the refs should be allowed to award a goal when a deliberate handball keeps the ball out of the net. Awarding a penalty kick doesn't seem enough justice.

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Prediction: Uruguay 4 - 3 PK's...

Posted by: tfshea | July 2, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

I woke up from a nap whenever somebody scored and then for good in the 107th minute. Never say I don't have good timing.

Suarez: idiot or genius?

Posted by: JacobfromAtlanta-ish | July 2, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

"Suarez: idiot or genius?"

Considering it looked like he could have just headed it out, I vote idiot.

Makes me wonder what would have happened if the US had just played for PK's in OT.

Ghana's PK's were terrible.

Posted by: delantero | July 2, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Uruguay, Paraguay, what's the difference, WaPo?

Posted by: Playitagainsam | July 2, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Yeah - who writes the headlines for WaPo nowadays? Very sad

Posted by: NM1964 | July 2, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Suarez: idiot or genius?

----------------------------

If cheating is genius, then he's a genius. I guess DeMerit should have used his hands to pull the ball away from Gyan.

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

This is a great argument to allow the referee to award a goal in such a situation. Uruguay was rewarded for cheating. They fairly created an obvious goal-scoring chance, and the opponent obviously cheated to deny it. Clearly, the red card punishment isn't enough.

I am now returning to the real world.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | July 2, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Somebody tell Wesley Sneijder that he plays for Netherlands, not "Holland".

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Suarez: idiot or genius?

----------------------------

If cheating is genius, then he's a genius. I guess DeMerit should have used his hands to pull the ball away from Gyan.

----------------------------------

Not really. After all, Howard could have made a great save.

Posted by: tfshea | July 2, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

No sympathy for Ghana after their pathetic display of diving and time-wasting last match.

Did someone pay Mensah to miss his penalty, or did he think could surprise the keeper somehow? That was just bizarre.

Posted by: BooThisMan | July 2, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

There is no "cheating" here. Suarez smartly used the rules to his advantage. Cheating is when you are trying to deceive someone into thinking you're playing by the rules, when you're actually not. No deceit here.

Posted by: icehippo | July 2, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Suarez = idiot

No one has mentioned that he will now miss the game against the Netherlands. His goal scoring prowess could surely be used by Uruguay in that match...

I agree that there has to be some other form of punishment here though. A red card doesn't seem to do enough for some reason.

Posted by: rss317 | July 2, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Best match of the tournament if you like human drama, suffering shame.

Posted by: NICKYNUNYA | July 2, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Suarez = idiot

No one has mentioned that he will now miss the game against the Netherlands.
Posted by: rss317 | July 2, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

...yeah but there wouldn't have been a game against the netherlands if he hadn't done what he did...

Posted by: birdynumnum | July 2, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

I agree that there has to be some other form of punishment here though. A red card doesn't seem to do enough for some reason.

Posted by: rss317 | July 2, 2010 5:44 PM
-------------------------------------------------

Because the point shouldn't be just to punish. There should be a remedy. Sometimes, a PK is the appropriate remedy. In this case, it seems inadequate and produced a monumentally unjust result. Cheating (sorry -- this was cheating, as it was a delibreate, blatant violation of the rules to totally reverse the outcome) was rewarded, in this case.

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Cheating (sorry -- this was cheating, as it was a delibreate, blatant violation of the rules to totally reverse the outcome) was rewarded, in this case.

Posted by: fischy | July 2, 2010 5:52 PM

So is a foul to stop a breakaway in hockey or basketball cheating? Is an intentional late hit on a QB cheating? No...they're blatant violations of the rules, and they are punished accordingly. Using performance enhancing drugs is cheating. Throwing a spitball is cheating. You can certainly argue that the ref should be able to award a goal in that situation, but there is no cheating.

Posted by: icehippo | July 2, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

There is no "cheating" here. Suarez smartly used the rules to his advantage. Cheating is when you are trying to deceive someone into thinking you're playing by the rules, when you're actually not.

What about intentionally trying to injure players on the other team? In theory it could be done in full view of the ref, with no intention to deceive, but I'm pretty sure we'd all consider it cheating.

I agree that Suárez didn't cheat here, though.

Posted by: BooThisMan | July 2, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I agree that there has to be some other form of punishment here though. A red card doesn't seem to do enough for some reason.

===

Yeah. They should have given Ghana a one-vee-one shot at goal from say a dozen yards out. Ghana have to be able to score from there, right?

Posted by: mason08 | July 2, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

I agree that there has to be some other form of punishment here though. A red card doesn't seem to do enough for some reason.

Posted by: rss317 | July 2, 2010 5:44 PM
-------------------------------------------------

Because the point shouldn't be just to punish. There should be a remedy. Sometimes, a PK is the appropriate remedy. In this case, it seems inadequate and produced a monumentally unjust result. Cheating (sorry -- this was cheating, as it was a delibreate, blatant violation of the rules to totally reverse the outcome) was rewarded, in this case.

------------------------------------

If FIFA would initiate "Instant Review" of all WC goals and, in this case, handball violations, a goal can be allowed by the Instant Review. Lottsa luck on this one...

Posted by: tfshea | July 2, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

So is a foul to stop a breakaway in hockey or basketball cheating? Is an intentional late hit on a QB cheating? No...they're blatant violations of the rules, and they are punished accordingly. Using performance enhancing drugs is cheating. Throwing a spitball is cheating. You can certainly argue that the ref should be able to award a goal in that situation, but there is no cheating.

Posted by: icehippo | July 2, 2010 6:00 PM

The most equivalent thing to his would be goal tending in basketball in which they award a GOAL not make them take a free throw. That's the underlying problem with your theory. It was straight cheating. End. Of. Story.

Posted by: Btwnparenthesi | July 2, 2010 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Ha! Suarez didn't cheat??!

Are you crazy? That kind of garbage play--swatting at the ball like a gnat--instead of attempting legal play with one's head, is pathetic.

Thierry Henry, Suarez, even that pathetic lout "Hand of God" Maradona . . are all cheaters! The idea isn't to deceive the refs. Play under the rules like it states.

Posted by: delantero | July 2, 2010 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Suarez cheated, but yes the ref got it right, ejected the cheater and awarded a PK. If Gyan hadn't blown it, would you be so adamant about it? If the ball had gone into the net, would you be complaining about the Ghana player who dived to earn the free kick in the first place?

I don't think the rules need to be changed. In this case, they worked the way they should have...it's just too bad Ghana's PK taking abilities weren't up to snuff today.

Posted by: mercurysnake77 | July 2, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Btwnparenthesi:

The most equivalent thing to his would be goal tending in basketball in which they award a GOAL not make them take a free throw. That's the underlying problem with your theory.

No, that's not a problem with his theory at all. It just means that similar actions are punished differently under the rules of two different sports. It says nothing about whether Suárez's actions should be considered cheating.

If a guy goes up for a clear dunk and is wrapped from behind, no one calls the defender a cheater. In fact, he's usually praised by the announcers for playing "smart basketball", even though he has intentionally violated the rules. Now, the analogy isn't perfect, as dunks are missed from time to time, but it's pretty close.

Delantero:

Ha! Suarez didn't cheat??!

Are you crazy? That kind of garbage play--swatting at the ball like a gnat--instead of attempting legal play with one's head, is pathetic.

Maybe, but the question isn't whether it's pathetic, but whether it's cheating.

The idea isn't to deceive the refs. Play under the rules like it states.

I doubt Suárez thought he was going to slip that one by the refs. And he was playing under the rules. The rules state that infraction X result in consequences Y, not that no player may ever intentionally commit an infraction. Here the consequences included a red card, a penalty kick, and the ire of blog commentators the world over (excepting Uruguay). He correctly calculated that giving his team a small chance of progressing was worth the consequences. How could any rational actor do anything else in the circumstances (assuming he thought he had little to no chance of making a save with his head)?

But ultimately, this is just a semantic debate. The real issue is whether the rule should be changed to award a goal and red card the offender, thereby removing all motivation for this type of action. It seems obvious to me that it should be.


Posted by: BooThisMan | July 2, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Suarez? Awesome. He made a split-second decision to sacrifice himself for the 10% chance to save his team, and it worked.

Posted by: Reignking | July 2, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse

No cheating by Suarez. The game was over, only seconds left. That is the only situation where what he did was a "smart" play. The other option is to let the ball go in and your team loses. He stopped the ball on the small chance that the PK would be missed, and it was. Uruguay got the chance to go to PKs and we all know what happenned.

In most game situations you could argue that the PK and red card for a handball on the line is too harsh. If it happends in the first half not only does the team get a goal (85% of the time) but the offending team has to play a man down the rest of the game. The are doubly punished.

Posted by: Golden_Child | July 2, 2010 11:35 PM | Report abuse

How is it not cheating? Because it was a blatant infraction and a game-saving illegal play? So, diving is cheating because it's more deceptive, whereas the most blatant infraction anyone's ever seen isn't "cheating"? That's the most ridiculous argument I can imagine.

Handling the ball is against the rules. Doing it deliberately to prevent a goal is cheating, under any definition. Any deliberate infraction is cheating, but this was an incredibly cynical and blatant example. I'm glad he can live with it.

By the way, if you think he wasn't trying to deceive, watch the replays -- look at Suarez's "Who? Me?" reaction when the red card comes out.

Posted by: fischy | July 3, 2010 1:11 AM | Report abuse

How is it not cheating? Because it was a blatant infraction and a game-saving illegal play?
===

Yeah. It was so blatant that there wasn't any deception. Deception is a necessary condition for cheating, and thus, since he didn't take anything from anyone by deception, he didn't cheat. He hit the ball with his arm - denying an obvious goal-scoring OPPORTUNITY, and his action was detected.

Result: Red Card. PK. Crossbar.

It's not Suarez's fault that Ghana just plain sucks at PKs. They were what, 4 for 7 in the tournament?

You do not want refs calling goaltending. That's a solution in search of a problem.

Posted by: mason08 | July 3, 2010 2:21 AM | Report abuse

Ghana had been 2 for 2 before that in PKs.

So would a tackle from behind on a breakaway also be "cheating" according to those on their high horses?

Posted by: Reignking | July 3, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Handling the ball is against the rules. Doing it deliberately to prevent a goal is cheating, under any definition.

Actually, a definition has been proposed under which it is not cheating. I'm not completely in agreement with that definition, as I noted above, but it's definitely better than your formulation:

Any deliberate infraction is cheating

Then please explain all the examples already given of deliberate infractions that pretty much no one considers cheating.

Look, if you want to call it cheating fine. It's open to interpretation. But don't call the argument that it's not cheating ridiculous, when your own definition is patently absurd.

but this was an incredibly cynical and blatant example. I'm glad he can live with it.

Yeah, tough to live with putting your team through to the semis on a play that the vast majority of players probably would have made.

The real problem is that the rule isn't strong enough to avert this kind of behavior.

Posted by: BooThisMan | July 3, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company