NFR - I have sympathy with Costa Rica

[LordNelson]

Yes, because it is certain that for the sake of the integrity of the game that Costa Rica would have protetested just as forcefully if they had won.  Por favor.  Get on with it then. :dft004:

[McBridefan1]

I remember the US playing a very important qualifier and it rained so bad there were puddles on the field and the game resembled beach soccer because the ball wouldn't roll everything was passed through the air. The ball was still rolling to a degree in the snow so after one team scored it would have been tough to cancel this game. Poor decision to play the game with snow in the forecast, but once it started and a team scored it would have been very difficult to call the game off. I was looking forward to a good game so the snow ruined that for me but to reschedule is difficult I imagine. Thank christ there is a good game on tonight, so I can't complain too much.

[McBridefan1]

[Senior Supporter]

I remember the US playing a very important qualifier and it rained so bad there were puddles on the field and the game resembled beach soccer because the ball wouldn't roll everything was passed through the air. The ball was still rolling to a degree in the snow so after one team scored it would have been tough to cancel this game. Poor decision to play the game with snow in the forecast, but once it started and a team scored it would have been very difficult to call the game off. I was looking forward to a good game so the snow ruined that for me but to reschedule is difficult I imagine. Thank christ there is a good game on tonight, so I can't complain too much.

I cannot agree that it would have been tough to cancel the game after one team had scored. If the pitch becomes unplayable cancellation is the correct decision, and there are many instances in our leagues where games have been abandoned with one team ahead.

[BarryP]

I think this snapshot more clearly illustrates the reasoning for protest:

Or rather, more accurately illustrates why the USA are fine with a game that was played under conditions so absurd there were ground staff on the field of play throughout the entire second half in order to keep the lines almost visible. Sore winning is just as tasteless as sore losing

So, do you believe the Costa Ricans would be protesting if the score was reversed? I don't for a minute.

Sore winning?! Seriously?! That's funny.  :54:

About as sure as I am that Sunil Gulati and Jurgen Klinsmann would be sending bushels of roses to the doorstep of everyone who let that game go ahead if the score was reversed.

It's a 'yes' or 'no' question CC. And since your answer wasn't 'yes', I must assume it was 'no'. And for the first time today, I agree with you. The protest is insincere and opportunistic.

Just as Jurgen Klinsmann and Gulati's insistence the field is playable. We're talking about football here, obviously the intentions are cynical, but given the circumstances Costa Rica is right to complain.

This isn't that difficult.  The pitch was not that bad in the first half and become awful in the second half. Costa Rica had/has a right to protest and I have no issue with that if it comes to light that they actually followed the procedures to protest during the match by notifying the referee and the US captain. If Costa Rica did not follow protocol then when put to the smell test it just smells like complaining after the fact because they had at least 35 minutes to make an official protest while the match was being played.  Right or wrong FIFA, not the US, decided the match should continue. Making a protest during the match when there was sufficeient time to do so and then protesting is far different than filing a protest after the match result is known.

[YankeeJim]

The only reason the game was not stopped is beacause US found a goal, a lucky one by the way.

I´m sure that in normal conditions US would have never won the match.

The lines could not be seen, external people and cars entered to the pitch during the game to clean... ridiculous.

CR representatives complained before, during and after the match, but the players had to show up, otherwise we coul be exposed to fines.

It´s simple, it had to be cancelled and postponed just like North Ireland/Russia match.

Several things come to mind:

1. Had CR been up by a goal & the match suspended, what would the response from Central America have been?
2. Gamesmanship is a CONCACAF way of life. Sad that the whining only starts when it goes against those south of the Rio Grande.
3. Want some cheese witn that whine?
4. Cue the Everly Brothers RE fairness in CONCACAF.
5. Its nice that the decision benefited the US for a change. Live by gamesmanship die by gamemanship.
6. I'm out of cliches.
7. Don't be surprised that dispite the fact that CR did not correctly follow the protest rules that a decision comes down favoring them. If so, lets schedule the replay in Fairbanks.
8. Pura Vida.

[ToodlesMcToot]

The Costa Ricans failed to follow the regulations for filing the protest. It was denied.

Done and dusted.

I noticed that they decided to forgo using their brand new stadium with the nice grass playing surface so that they could use the horrid pitch conditions at Saprissa to gain an advantage against the Jamaicans.

[CanadianCottager]

The Costa Ricans failed to follow the regulations for filing the protest. It was denied.

Done and dusted.

I noticed that they decided to forgo using their brand new stadium with the nice grass playing surface so that they could use the horrid pitch conditions at Saprissa to gain an advantage against the Jamaicans.

Unsuprising outcome, if FIFA didn't sympathize with the much more sorely aggrieved Irish they were never going to listen to this.

Your second paragraph is wrong on both of its assertions. The game against Jamaica will be played at their new stadium, and the "horrid plastic" pitch at the Saprissa is in fact the exact same kind of surface as is used at Gillette Stadium, Century Link Park and JeldWen Field, as well what BMO Field had to prior to selling Maurice Edu and thus where the 2007 U20 World Cup in Canada played its most important matches. It is therefore at a standard that many North Americans will be used to. It is in fact of a better quality than where Canada's club teams have played their Concacaf matches (i.e. Stade Olympique and the Rogers Centre). Very common myth about the Saprissa.

[YankeeJim]

Belarus? Really?

You can return the dig after Mexico spanks us in that shine to fairness, Assteca.  :012:

[mccscratch]

I think another aspect that is being wholly ignored is that the stadium was sold out... In America it is very very rare outside of baseball to call a game of when the paying fans have turned up at the gates after paying full freight... It is just matter of fact in Europe with frozen pitches and what not but the fact of the matter is the pitch was not frozen at all and the field passed inspection by FIFA prior to the match...

I think the game was farcical but as everyone has pointed out... playing games at Saprissa stadium on the rock hard turf that used be the surface there while drunk and vile fans throw vomit and piss bags onto players taking throw ins and corners is farcical as well... I also watched the Honduras match where the grass was in upwards of 4-5 inches and played in the afternoon heat in effort to tire the Americans.

as it is the game stands per FIFA ruling already today... and truth be told Costa Rica would not have protested if they had drawn or won the game...

Also @ Costa Rican White... I love ya but to say that Costa Rica was going to get a result in the US in good conditions is probably a stretch... how long has it been since Costa Rica won in the States in qualifying?

[mccscratch]

The Costa Ricans failed to follow the regulations for filing the protest. It was denied.

Done and dusted.

I noticed that they decided to forgo using their brand new stadium with the nice grass playing surface so that they could use the horrid pitch conditions at Saprissa to gain an advantage against the Jamaicans.

Unsuprising outcome, if FIFA didn't sympathize with the much more sorely aggrieved Irish they were never going to listen to this.

Your second paragraph is wrong on both of its assertions. The game against Jamaica will be played at their new stadium, and the "horrid plastic" pitch at the Saprissa is in fact the exact same kind of surface as is used at Gillette Stadium, Century Link Park and JeldWen Field, as well what BMO Field had to prior to selling Maurice Edu and thus where the 2007 U20 World Cup in Canada played its most important matches. It is therefore at a standard that many North Americans will be used to. It is in fact of a better quality than where Canada's club teams have played their Concacaf matches (i.e. Stade Olympique and the Rogers Centre). Very common myth about the Saprissa.

Candian Cottager... you are 100% off base on this... the turf used in those stadiums is 2010 or later technology... the pitch at Saprissa is much older technology and very very very hard.... I should know... I have played on it...

[CanadianCottager]

Belarus? Really?

You can return the dig after Mexico spanks us in that shine to fairness, Assteca.  :012:

Hey but they have, umm you know, Hleb or something!
Hahaha touche, very fair rejoinder, we'll see how it goes in Tenochtitlan. For now we'll be hoping to repay you for last Gold Cup in 2013 (by likely rolling over once again if we play you)

[CanadianCottager]

The Costa Ricans failed to follow the regulations for filing the protest. It was denied.

Done and dusted.

I noticed that they decided to forgo using their brand new stadium with the nice grass playing surface so that they could use the horrid pitch conditions at Saprissa to gain an advantage against the Jamaicans.

Unsuprising outcome, if FIFA didn't sympathize with the much more sorely aggrieved Irish they were never going to listen to this.

Your second paragraph is wrong on both of its assertions. The game against Jamaica will be played at their new stadium, and the "horrid plastic" pitch at the Saprissa is in fact the exact same kind of surface as is used at Gillette Stadium, Century Link Park and JeldWen Field, as well what BMO Field had to prior to selling Maurice Edu and thus where the 2007 U20 World Cup in Canada played its most important matches. It is therefore at a standard that many North Americans will be used to. It is in fact of a better quality than where Canada's club teams have played their Concacaf matches (i.e. Stade Olympique and the Rogers Centre). Very common myth about the Saprissa.

Candian Cottager... you are 100% off base on this... the turf used in those stadiums is 2010 or later technology... the pitch at Saprissa is much older technology and very very very hard.... I should know... I have played on it...

It's all FieldTurf since 2006. Check it online.

[YankeeJim]

Belarus? Really?

You can return the dig after Mexico spanks us in that shine to fairness, Assteca.  :012:

Hey but they have, umm you know, Hleb or something!
Hahaha touche, very fair rejoinder, we'll see how it goes in Tenochtitlan. For now we'll be hoping to repay you for last Gold Cup in 2013 (by likely rolling over once again if we play you)

Just to clear up a point of contention, I have looked at the replay a dozen times and each time the US player is clearly on sides.   086.gif

[YankeeJim]

Is the Gestopo asleep? Usually the mods would have moved any North American theme thread to the second class citizens board by this time.

[mccscratch]

The Costa Ricans failed to follow the regulations for filing the protest. It was denied.

Done and dusted.

I noticed that they decided to forgo using their brand new stadium with the nice grass playing surface so that they could use the horrid pitch conditions at Saprissa to gain an advantage against the Jamaicans.

Unsuprising outcome, if FIFA didn't sympathize with the much more sorely aggrieved Irish they were never going to listen to this.

Your second paragraph is wrong on both of its assertions. The game against Jamaica will be played at their new stadium, and the "horrid plastic" pitch at the Saprissa is in fact the exact same kind of surface as is used at Gillette Stadium, Century Link Park and JeldWen Field, as well what BMO Field had to prior to selling Maurice Edu and thus where the 2007 U20 World Cup in Canada played its most important matches. It is therefore at a standard that many North Americans will be used to. It is in fact of a better quality than where Canada's club teams have played their Concacaf matches (i.e. Stade Olympique and the Rogers Centre). Very common myth about the Saprissa.

Candian Cottager... you are 100% off base on this... the turf used in those stadiums is 2010 or later technology... the pitch at Saprissa is much older technology and very very very hard.... I should know... I have played on it...

It's all FieldTurf since 2006. Check it online.

WRONG.... Field Turf was installed in 2010... the stuff the US played on there from 2004-2010 was rock hard first gen variant of the newer tech field turf... I import FieldTurf materials in the US and am very up to date on when and where pitches are being installed because I am the one shipping them there.

[ToodlesMcToot]

The Costa Ricans failed to follow the regulations for filing the protest. It was denied.

Done and dusted.

I noticed that they decided to forgo using their brand new stadium with the nice grass playing surface so that they could use the horrid pitch conditions at Saprissa to gain an advantage against the Jamaicans.

Unsuprising outcome, if FIFA didn't sympathize with the much more sorely aggrieved Irish they were never going to listen to this.

Your second paragraph is wrong on both of its assertions. The game against Jamaica will be played at their new stadium, and the "horrid plastic" pitch at the Saprissa is in fact the exact same kind of surface as is used at Gillette Stadium, Century Link Park and JeldWen Field, as well what BMO Field had to prior to selling Maurice Edu and thus where the 2007 U20 World Cup in Canada played its most important matches. It is therefore at a standard that many North Americans will be used to. It is in fact of a better quality than where Canada's club teams have played their Concacaf matches (i.e. Stade Olympique and the Rogers Centre). Very common myth about the Saprissa.

You're right on both counts, though I did read an erroneous report just today that the match was scheduled for Saprissa. The turf was only replaced in 2010, so I can understand why the myth persists. My apologies to the Costa Ricans for the pitch comments.

[YankeeJim]

Having spent two weeks touring Costa Rica a couple of years ago I can attest to the fact that Costa Ricans are some of the nicest people on the planet, Imperial La cerveza de Costa Rica is a fine beer although not a great one, the country has a wide range of natural beauty, it is neat as a pin everywhere, San Jose has no street signs, rice & beans are served at every meal but in such a variety of flavors they seem new most of the time, pura vida is a nice, common greeting and a way of life and all the above is put aside when the Ticos take to the pitch. The change is much like that when a child is attacked in the presence of its mother.

[costarican white]

I think is sad the protest was denied based on the form it was presented and not the issue per se.

We all know as soon as the game finishes we have nothing against our adversaries, this whole thing do not define our botherhood with the US.

One good thing for us from this is that we are more united than ever, full aforum today vs Jamaica.

[BarryP]

I think it is proper that the protest was denied because FIFA rules for protesting a match were not followed.   I can't imagine the number of protests that FIFA would have to reply to if the regulations were not in place.

To be fair though I don't blame Costarican White or any other Coasta Rican fan for being upset with the playing conditions in the second half.  However, if the US Federation had not filed a protest before a match started, did not file a proper protest about the playing conditions through the Captain during the match and did not communicate with FIFA until two days after the match an awful lot of my irratitation would be directed at the US Federation.  There is no way if I am managing a team down 0-1 and the playing conditions reached those conditions so early in the second half that I don't have someone in the right officials ear asking what I need to do to protest the match.

ZURICH (AP) -- FIFA has dismissed Costa Rica's protest against losing 1-0 to the United States in a World Cup qualifying match played in a snowstorm because it was not filed correctly.

"Therefore, the result of the match played on March 22 stands and is considered as valid,'' FIFA said Tuesday in a statement.

FIFA referred to a clause in its 2014 World Cup Regulations, which Costa Rica had to fulfill to force a replay of last Friday's match in Commerce City, Colorado.

The Costa Rica delegation could have complained about the field in writing to match referee Joel Aguilar of El Salvador before kickoff.

Team captain Bryan Ruiz was required to "immediately lodge a protest'' with the referee if he believed the field became unplayable during the match. Opposing captain Clint Dempsey also needed to be present for the protest.

Protests must also be filed in writing to FIFA's administration "no later than two hours after the match,'' the regulations state.

"FIFA received a letter via email and fax from the Costa Rica FA on March 24 with regards to the 2014 FIFA World Cup qualifier played on March 22 between USA and Costa Rica,'' FIFA said. "The conditions established in the regulations for an official protest have not been met by the Costa Rica FA.''

Costa Rican officials issued a statement Sunday saying the match "went against the sporting spectacle (and) the physical integrity of the officials and players.''

Grounds staff cleared snow during the match to keep play going.

Dempsey scored the only goal in the 16th minute.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/news/20130326/costa-rica-appeal-rejected-fifa-usmnt.ap/#ixzz2OfhiPgcA