POWERED BY

Uncategorized

Brazil 1, South Africa 0: The game-winning goal

Dani Alves (GettyImages)

South Africa fought hard and pushed Brazil to the brink in Thursday's Confederation's Cup semifinals, but ultimately a questionable free kick call and a brilliant shot by Barcelona's Dani Alves kept South Africa from pulling off the second upset of the semifinals.

Now we could focus on Ramires going down like a sniper shot him (U.S. fans will remember these same antics leading to the free kick that produced Brazil's first goal vs. the United States), but instead we will watch Alves hit a beautiful free kick.

What did you think of the goal? Disappointed to see that free kick called? Are you liking the U.S. national team's chances in the final after seeing Brazil struggle vs. South Africa?

Share your thoughts below.

67 comments
  • ko'd

    BossTweed,

    You’re right. When you have nothing substantive on which to base your argument, you are “reduced” to name-calling. You said it.

    “Your initial comment, to which I was referring, HAD no context.”

    Oops. You are wrong. My comment stated:
    ———————-
    “Paulo, you have no support for that assertion. None. And the only evidence we have is what you have said so far on this blog. I won’t even make the directly contradictory statement that I am a bigger fan than you are because 1) I have no support for that because I don’t know you and 2) how do you measure that type of thing.

    The only real evidence we have is that you are predicting a loss based on “realism.” The team must love that attitude.”
    —————-
    I was responding to
    —————-
    ko’d:

    I’m a bigger fan of Team USA then you’ll EVER be, believe me …
    —————–

    And when I said that I still don’t believe that “real fans” predict a loss, I still agree. I didn’t say that the win wouldn’t be an upset. Those are two different things, although it is clear that you are simply too dense to understand nuance.

    We have sparred in the past. You have failed miserably. I predict that you will continue to lose. But the difference is I don’t think name-calling is appropriate, especially when we are just having a discussion and I acknowledge that I am stating my own opinion, which others are entitled to disagree with.

    The great thing about being a “fan” that predicts a loss is that you can never lose. If they win, you can revel in it. If they lose, you can say “I told you so.” It’s fun to never be wrong, huh?

    By the way, you can argue against my opinion. For example:

    1) KO’d, I disagree. True fans understand the team’s weakness. I predicted a loss, based on the knowledge I have, but that doesn’t mean I won’t cheer my tail off for them and believe they can win. I merely predicted a FACT, based on what I knew. I still love this team and will watch the game knowing they can win if they do the right things.

    My opinion is neither irrational nor unassailable. You just resorted to name-calling because it was easier and involved lower levels of thinking.

    Like

  • chg

    Post-game reviews are the easy answer to all the flopping. Diving still would go on in finals, but it would be greatly curtailed in other games. All cards should also be reviewed post-game. The obvious next step is to base ref assignments on how often an official was tricked by a dive or handed out bad cards.

    I really don’t understand why this hasn’t been implemented already. I know US sports leagues are at the forefront of applying technology to sports, but it’s shocking the rest of the world is literally an entire generation behind and still hasn’t recognized an easy solution to often lamented problem.

    Like

  • Brett

    It sucks but when you win 5 world cups, you earn the benefit of the doubt that when you go down, you were fouled.

    Is it fair? No. Such is life…

    The key is to leave no doubt.

    Like

  • BossTweed

    Ko’d,

    Just an aside: “…involved lower levels of thinking.” This type of comment is what garners responses that you have a “holier-than-thou” attitude, which I would not dispute. I am guilty of the same, but I readily admit that, for better or for worse.

    Secondly, we are not on the same page as to what this argument is even about. I could care less if you or Paulo is the bigger fan. That’s kind of a silly argument to have, but not one with out a definitive answer — one of you HAS to be the bigger fan, by any definition. What I’m arguing is your reasoning that real fans can’t predict losses. Let’s just lose the term “real fans” because nobody knows what that means, and just summarize your argument as “fans don’t predict losses”. I am, sincerely, not trying to oversimplify your argument as a means of disputing, just trying to clarify.

    While your “clarification” of your argument came later, the initial post to which I was referring, which, still, has no context was:

    “And Paulo…last time I checked, the majority of the people on this blog said that the U.S. would lose to Egypt. And to Spain. You don’t get to say “Go Red, White, and Blue” after a comment like “I think we’ll lose (Brazil will likely rebound from a moribund performance). Not trying to be pessimistic … just realistic.”

    Once again, this boils down to (and tell me if I’m oversimplifying), a fan cannot predict losses.

    Tell me where I go wrong in this logic:

    1) If you are a fan (by your definition), you do not predict the US to lose, ever

    2) Assuming you maintain some sort of prediction, if you are a fan, you predict the US to win (or tie), always.

    3) If this prediction is, in fact, an intelligent one (and here is where I deem you an idiot; that is, one lacking intelligence), you believe the odds are in your favor in predicting a win, always.

    4) If you believe the odds are stacked in your favor, you would be willings to risk something more substantive, and thereby, more rewarding, than your mere word on the fate of a USMNT game.

    Suppose, hypothetically, the USMNT schedule for this summer was Brazil, Spain, Netherlands, Germany; ten games a piece against each opponent. I refuse to believe that even the most delusional of US fans (even YOU ko’d!) would risk anything of value on that fact that the US would win all 40 games.

    If your prediction is that the US would win anything less than all 40 games, you are predicting a US loss, and by your definition, are not a fan.

    If your prediction is that the US WOULD win all 40 games, than I think you are an idiot — one lacking intelligence — and you would lose a lot of money.

    If you think this hypothetical schedule has no place in this argument, than you are admitting that being a fan is dependent on schedule.

    I rest my case.

    Like

  • ko'd

    Tell me what is wrong with this picture, BossTweed.

    “I am reduced to namecalling because there is no substantive debate that could possibly sway you. This is an “opinion” so ridiculous that it can’t even be argued against.”

    Then you said…

    “Tell me where I go wrong in this logic:
    1) If you are a fan (by your definition), you do not predict the US to lose, ever
    2) Assuming you maintain some sort of prediction, if you are a fan, you predict the US to win (or tie), always.
    3) If this prediction is, in fact, an intelligent one (and here is where I deem you an idiot; that is, one lacking intelligence), you believe the odds are in your favor in predicting a win, always.
    4) If you believe the odds are stacked in your favor, you would be willings to risk something more substantive, and thereby, more rewarding, than your mere word on the fate of a USMNT game.

    Suppose, hypothetically, the USMNT schedule for this summer was Brazil, Spain, Netherlands, Germany; ten games a piece against each opponent. I refuse to believe that even the most delusional of US fans (even YOU ko’d!) would risk anything of value on that fact that the US would win all 40 games.

    If your prediction is that the US would win anything less than all 40 games, you are predicting a US loss, and by your definition, are not a fan.
    If your prediction is that the US WOULD win all 40 games, than I think you are an idiot — one lacking intelligence — and you would lose a lot of money.
    If you think this hypothetical schedule has no place in this argument, than you are admitting that being a fan is dependent on schedule.”

    So please reiterate why name-calling is appropriate, when you so ably deconstructed my assertion? Hey, I am not contending that I am incontrovertibly right (that’s why we have discussion boards). But you took the easy way out by calling me a name.

    I still disagree with you, but am tired of fighting this battle. I am ready to move on, now.

    Like

  • ko'd

    Oh, and BossTweed, if you are going to go all “dictionary” on me, here is what Merriam-Webster’s has to say about “name-calling.”:

    “the use of offensive names especially to win an argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or project) without objective consideration of the facts”

    Ding, ding, ding!

    Like

  • BossTweed

    I suppose I sold myself short; I didn’t think I’d be able to construct an argument against such a “low level of thinking”. But I did, and you just refused to respond to it because you’re “tired”. It doesn’t take much on your part, just enumerate 1, 2, 3, or 4, where my logic went wrong, and tell me why.

    Like

  • ko'd

    BossTweed, I have been arguing my position for a week and a half. I have already wasted too much time today doing this. I actually should be working. SO, if you are willing to wait until after work and save your “see you can’t come up with anything” counter, I will be happy to address, point-by-point, why I feel that I am correct.

    Honestly, though, you have proven to be more acrimonious than interested in having a discussion.

    Like

  • BossTweed

    ko’d,

    That’s fine by me. If you write something tonight after work, I will read it, and respond.

    Like

  • ko'd

    Happy to. By the by, I appreciate the fact that you are either a) a philosophy major or b) attend(ed) law school. Maybe I am off base…but if you meet either criteria, I am really disappointed that you chose to call me an idiot right off the bat.

    Like

  • Roman

    It was a foul, the close-up replay makes it clear. Yes the Samba boys flop, but that one was a faoul at a bad time . . . and an absurd free kick.

    That said I was hoping Brazil would win. Our boys need to be tested by the best early and often to progress. To be the best you have to beat the best. One down, one more to go.

    Like

  • James

    Anyone else think that photo should be a “you write the caption” or whatever its called?

    Like

  • JReinhold

    KO’d,
    Someone on the internet that you will never meet called you a name, who cares.

    Anybody who thinks the US doesn’t flop is delusional, they just don’t have terrible MLS ref’s calling these games that will award them for it =P. Donavon’s flop at the end of the Spain game, that led to the yellow for dissent, was pretty good though. He made a tap look like Shaq hit him in the face with a tree trunk. Anyways, we can’t complain about flopping in soccer while Manu is still in the NBA.

    Go US! =)

    Like

  • Peter Bering

    The dumb and misguided “flopping”-obsession on this thread is annoying. Many years ago dirty players could destroy both games and careers of more talented ones with no consequences. Reforms have made most games far better. Good referees usually see through the real fakers. That some fall extra hard in order to underline real fouls is not a problem, just a slightly comical sideshow. Referees care about the action and not about the results of them.

    Like

  • Jack K. - SBI MAFIA ORIGINAL

    I agree that Brazil does tend to flop, but I always hear the same about the Nats. My English friend is talking about the high number of penalties called in our favor. Also, the Italians are infamous for flopping but we are also infamous for complaining about everything, just look at the comments here.

    Always complaining about referees, non calls, red cards, flopping, unsportmenship… the list goes on. I could make a longer list about the complaining we do we ever we play in the Azteca.

    Like

  • ko'd

    JReinhold,

    Forgive my belief in a sense of respect, no matter the form of media.

    “Which led to the yellow for dissent”? Yes, Donovan was clearly responsible for Pique opening his mouth.

    “we can’t complain about flopping in soccer while Manu is still in the NBA”? Manu is from Argentina.

    Like

  • LD576

    Didn’t anybody here see Donovan pull a Dida when he was tapped against Spain. He deserves an Oscar for that acting. It sounds like the majority of US fans are homers and turn a blind eye when one of their own does it, but love to accuse other countries as they take a high moral ground and say, “one of our boys would never do such a thing, its just un-american”

    Like

Add your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More from SBI Soccer

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,104 other followers