NFR - I have sympathy with Costa Rica

[HatterDon]

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.

Indeed there have, and we lost 3 points and McBride 2 goals at Sunderland a few years back.

But here's the thing: There's no trick getting Fulham and Sunderland back at a later date -- their players are all based in England and there's club transportation set aside. In the case of CR @ USA, the only way the schedule would have been saved would be if they played the next day. Since the forecast at final whistle was for 10-12 hours more snow, that was a non-starter.

So, let's say they had abandoned the match and couldn't play it the next day. Well, both clubs have matches tonight, so this international break is over. I suppose FIFA/CONCACAF could have rescheduled for this coming weekend, but then there's that nasty agreement they have with the football leagues for only specified periods of time. Could they have played in the summer when the European leagues are finished? Sure, but there are other professional leagues -- Scandinavian and MLS -- where players from both teams make their living, and there's already a summer schedule of World Cup qualifiers. No, deciding not to start the game would have caused huge headaches to both countries and the entire Hexagonal system.

Finally, once the game starts, the decision of whether to abandon the match is solely the decision of the ref, and the ref makes his decision based solely upon the safety of the players. He could see his linesmen, he could see all the players, he could see both goals, and play continued with players cutting, turning, increasing pace, tackling, passing. Players had no trouble seeing where the ball was or reading its spin. And, NO PLAYER WAS INJURED BECAUSE OF THE FIELD CONDITIONS. In other words, the ref had no earthly reason to abandon the match. The fact that it was difficult to follow the ball on television has no impact on how the match is played or the safety of the players.

As to the "fluke goal" as characterized by my good Costa Rican friend, three Tico defenders ran to cover Altidore and still couldn't stop him from turning and shooting. The Tico keeper parried the ball and the only player anywhere near it was Dempsey. Based on the lack of defensive organization I've seen from Costa Rica during the qualifiers so far, this was not a fluke; rather it was pretty much business as usual. Also business as usual was a defender hacking Dempsey down in the penalty area to stop him from doing the same thing a few minutes later. Shoulda been a penalty. Should have been 2-0. Should have been game over. The reason it wasn't was that the Tico's mastered the field condition as good as or better than the USA did for the second half.

I guess I can't say anything different than I've said before, but I'll reiterate that I'm sorry I never got a chance to play in conditions like that. It looked like fun -- certainly more fun than playing in a mudbowl in driving rain, or on a dried out pitch that looked like desert, compete with lizards. Or, as has been characterized on this thread earlier: proper pitch conditions.

[McBridefan1]

England 1-1 with montenegro... I'm guessing the English could have used some snow today...  fp.gif  049:gif

[Azeedo]

Conditions were not the same for both teams, that's a poor excuse the first 20 minutes of the game were payable what came after that was a blizzard, the ball was not visible and the field was unplayable.  We are not asking for a do over, we'll give you your stinky goal back, all we are asking it's the opportunity to play a fair game of futbol.

[Azeedo]

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.

Yeah buddy that happens to be a concacaf approved stadium you have a complaint take to the authorities.  Man up and admit that you have stolen 3 points.

[Azeedo]

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.

It's funny you said that because when I look at it, only one thing comes to mind FAIR PLAY.

[BarryP]

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.

Yeah buddy that happens to be a concacaf approved stadium you have a complaint take to the authorities.  Man up and admit that you have stolen 3 points.

Just as soon as you man up and admit the match in Denver was a FIFA approved event.  If you have a complaint about the match take it to .... Oh wait that has already happened hasn't it. The US didn't steal points from Costa Rica anymore than Honduras did from the US or Costa Rica did from Jamaica.

In all seriousness though I am curious why you feel conditions were not the same for both sides? Feel free to PM me if you don't want to post your answer here. No windup I am just curious to hear your point of view.

[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.

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.

My apologies mccscratch, I wasn't aware of the generational differences in FieldTurf. I defer to your expertise.

[CanadianCottager]

I guess I can't say anything different than I've said before, but I'll reiterate that I'm sorry I never got a chance to play in conditions like that. It looked like fun -- certainly more fun than playing in a mudbowl in driving rain, or on a dried out pitch that looked like desert, compete with lizards. Or, as has been characterized on this thread earlier: proper pitch conditions.
[/quote]

It is and isn't fun. Its more or less the same as playing in the mudbowl, but at least you don't have to do laundry for the year to get your kit clean again. In my experience it becomes by and large a question of who is taller and stronger in the air and I was always a terrible header of the ball for my height so I can't say I terribly enjoyed my wintry games. Its beautiful to dive into the snow as a goalkeeper though or to celebrate a goal.

[McBridefan1]

Conditions were not the same for both teams, that's a poor excuse the first 20 minutes of the game were payable what came after that was a blizzard, the ball was not visible and the field was unplayable.  We are not asking for a do over, we'll give you your stinky goal back, all we are asking it's the opportunity to play a fair game of futbol.

I thought the cr were gonna score in the second half... I thought the snow gave them a better chance, without snow the us controls the ball with the snow the costas got quite a few chances. They actually looked much better in the second half... the game wasn't unplayable until the 85th minute, even then the cr's had a few chances. I'm not thrilled by the win, but I just rewatched the game and to be fair the cr gave it a go. Things didn't work out for them but they had plenty of chances. Now let's watch the US v Mexico...

[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)

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

Just like Atiba Hutchinson in 2007? Hahaha

[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.

Yeah buddy that happens to be a concacaf approved stadium you have a complaint take to the authorities.  Man up and admit that you have stolen 3 points.

If you'd read ALL my posts you'd know that I already apologized for my mistake regarding the pitch at Saprissa. I'm sure that plenty did complain about that pitch prior to 2010.

How bout you accept that you let a goal in, didn't make anything out of the many chances you created in the game (more than the US did, despite the conditions), failed to follow procedure in filing your 'get out of jail free' card, and beat yourselves at every opportunity.

We didn't steal anything. We showed up. We played in the exact same conditions. We played by the same rules. We scored. You didn't.

If anyone needs "manning up" here, it's you.

[costarican white]

Just a few last points from my end:

1, I´m tired of this topic and a little ashamed as this is a FULHAM FORUM!!!!

2, USA won the game well and fair as both teams were exposed to the same conditions.

3, However, the game had indeed to be suspended at least in the half time, as it could have happened in any other part of the world, same thing happened this very week in Russia, it´s simply common sense.

4, FIFA rejected the protest because it was received after the 2 hours post-match deadline, not because the field was fine... think about that.

That´s it, 100% focused on Fulham from now on.

COYW

[BarryP]

Just a few last points from my end:

1, I´m tired of this topic and a little ashamed as this is a FULHAM FORUM!!!!

I don't think there is any need to be ashamed.  It is a Fulham forum but is also a football forum.  There are pleanty of other football topics discussed with serveral a week on other PL teams.  We are after all passionate about our football and our countries as well as our Fulham.

2, USA won the game well and fair as both teams were exposed to the same conditions.

3, However, the game had indeed to be suspended at least in the half time, as it could have happened in any other part of the world, same thing happened this very week in Russia, it´s simply common sense.

4, FIFA rejected the protest because it was received after the 2 hours post-match deadline, not because the field was fine... think about that.
COYW

I wouldn't argue with any of those points.  I thought the first half was pretty playable and the second half an awful mess.   

[ToodlesMcToot]

Just a few last points from my end:

1, I´m tired of this topic and a little ashamed as this is a FULHAM FORUM!!!!

2, USA won the game well and fair as both teams were exposed to the same conditions.

3, However, the game had indeed to be suspended at least in the half time, as it could have happened in any other part of the world, same thing happened this very week in Russia, it´s simply common sense.

4, FIFA rejected the protest because it was received after the 2 hours post-match deadline, not because the field was fine... think about that.

That´s it, 100% focused on Fulham from now on.

COYW

Only commenting on point 1. As BarryP has said, there's no reason feeling shame about discussing this topic. It's even Fulham related since it includes Bryan, who I'm happy to root for again after Friday.

It's actually great that we can have an American (North, Central, South) conversation and still have it relate to Fulham......or not.

[Forever Fulham]

This just in:

"The Canadian Ministry of Sport has scheduled a friendly for the women's national soccer team to play Bermuda at the Sven Ollie Bjornsson High School stadium in Banff, Alberta Thursday next week.  According to John Hightower, the Bermuda Commissioner of Sport, "The location wasn't our first, or even second choice, to be honest.  But the ladies were promised two all-day passes on Mt. Norquay plus nice rooms at the Banff Springs Hotel.  Several girls have expressed a desire to try their hand at skiing."  AP International.

[btings]

The thing I want to talk about is how bonkers the Hex currently is:
5 pts: Panama (???)
4 pts: Costa Rica, US, Honduras (possibly not that order - I don't remember GD)
3 pts: Mexico (!!!)
2 pts: Jamaica

[ToodlesMcToot]

The thing I want to talk about is how bonkers the Hex currently is:
5 pts: Panama (???)
4 pts: Costa Rica, US, Honduras (possibly not that order - I don't remember GD)
3 pts: Mexico (!!!)
2 pts: Jamaica

Have a feeling that this table will be very tight this go 'round. Teams that would've been able to qualify for WC in past Hex's won't make it to Brazil. It's going to be very competitive.

[McBridefan1]

The thing I want to talk about is how bonkers the Hex currently is:
5 pts: Panama (???)
4 pts: Costa Rica, US, Honduras (possibly not that order - I don't remember GD)
3 pts: Mexico (!!!)
2 pts: Jamaica

Have a feeling that this table will be very tight this go 'round. Teams that would've been able to qualify for WC in past Hex's won't make it to Brazil. It's going to be very competitive.

as it should be... the preparation european teams get by playing so many qualifying games serves those teams well... I am proud that concacaf is getting more competitive. If the US don't make it then shame on us, but I will still be wishing the other concacaf teams well.

[HatterDon]

The thing I want to talk about is how bonkers the Hex currently is:
5 pts: Panama (???)
4 pts: Costa Rica, US, Honduras (possibly not that order - I don't remember GD)
3 pts: Mexico (!!!)
2 pts: Jamaica

Have a feeling that this table will be very tight this go 'round. Teams that would've been able to qualify for WC in past Hex's won't make it to Brazil. It's going to be very competitive.

as it should be... the preparation european teams get by playing so many qualifying games serves those teams well... I am proud that concacaf is getting more competitive. If the US don't make it then shame on us, but I will still be wishing the other concacaf teams well.

as will I ... except for Mexico, of course.

I sure am glad we don't have to play those tough European teams -- Scilly Isles, Luxembourg, Andorra, Montenegro -- and just have the CONCACAF laughers.

[McBridefan1]

Hey hatty, am I the only one who is a little proud the Mexos won gold at the Olympics? Don't get me wrong I wish it was us, but it validates concacaf a bit in my opinion.