Sunday, May 6, 2007

Amazing Final

-Norway beat Ireland 4-3 in overtime in today's final. The best final anyone could have hoped for, as Norway went up 2-0 early besides domination by Ireland. Their first goal was a beauty as it hit the crossbar and went into the net. Ireland kept up dominating the game though and battled back to tie it 2-2. Near the end of the game Norway had the lead 3-2 when with about 6 minutes left Ireland tied it. In overtime, Adam Payette beautifully headed a cross over the Ireland keeper and into the net.


-It was great game to watch, but one thing that wasn't too classy of some fans was booing Ireland every time they touched the ball. Yeah, it was kinda funny, but those guys out there are trying hard and it does get the team down. There's really no need to insult the team. The reffing was very one-sided against Ireland and the entire crowd save for a few people were pro-Norway.

-On a positive note, it's great that Norway won and toppled the mighty Ireland. The game was awesome and it's good to see that having the best players doesn't necessarily make a team the best. Ireland was hated by many and it's good for the tournament to see a different team win this year.

-The bronze medal game was another good game with Jamaica winning 3-1 over Laos. Laos just couldn't pull together and Jamaica was able to match their quickness.

23 comments:

Solskjaer said...

NORWAY! Great game and it was awesome to see them win. The reffing wasn't too good either way though...that penalty shot was bull and Collins should have been tossed for that dirty knee-to-groin on Stephen Vancha. No sympathy for his getting booed he deserved it for whining, being arrogant, and being a poor loser. I feel bad for the rest of Ireland becasue they are nice guys and played with a lot of heart in coming back.

Good to see Bachelu and Payette take home the golden boot and MVP awards respectively. They were the msot dangerous strikers in the tourney by far. I thought Evan Campbell should have recieved top goalie honors. I mean Laos was good but made it as far as they did becasue of his outstanding play.

Back to the final...it was very exciting and I honestly thought the better TEAM won. Ireland has outstanding individuals but tehy were lacking some things that Norway possessed.

Throughout th tournament the Norweigians were bashed by a lot of people (see some other blogs that say they have egos and will lose in quarterfinals!)but in all honesty they played the most consistent of all teams. Their onyl blemish was against Canada in theening round robin: they were just hitting their stride and honestly outplayed Canada but couldn't finish. Their lack of scoring however ran dry and they finally started to bury some of their endless chancesin the prevailing 5 games.

It may be biased but Norway was clutch. Three consecutive 1 goal wins proves that they have big-game individuals who step up. Their come-from-behind victories over Greece and Jamaica showed some of the best soccer played the last two weeks and provided exccitement for fans. The final was fantastic. CONGRATS NORWAY!

Anonymous said...

LONNNNNNG Blog solskjaer but well said!

Anonymous said...

The crowd was not booing ROI, they were booing Mike Collins because of the cheap shot and his attitude. I didn't hear anyone booing when Bachelu got the ball.

The booing was more than deserved.

Anonymous said...

i agree with the previous post.

Anonymous said...

vancha totally deserved to be elbowed or kneed or whatever happened to him. he was actually sticking his finger up their butt holes. see what your reaction to a finger in the poop shoot.


at first the booing was just for collins, but it spread to the whole team and it became cheering for norway when they touched it and booing for ireland when they touched it.



not to take anything from norway, but ireland really dominated the final. ireland had the best opportunities by far but couldn't get any decent shots on net. norway by contrast had about 6-7 shots and scored on 4. All four goals were beautiful and the overtime goal was one of the best.


and payette for mvp? i don't know about that, but i guess you basically have to pick someone from the winning team to be mvp. he came up huge in the final though and deserved some recognition.

Anonymous said...

Ireland had the best oppurtunities but couldnt get shots on net? What do you call an oppurtunity. Irelands goalie made at least 3 saves that could have been goals. Ireland couldnt hit the net but tehy did have possession...that was Norway's streategy-to let Ireland think they were winning

Collins said...

Well I should put in my 2 cents since I always do. Props to Norway for winning they played well. Good for them. I will touch on a few of Solkjaers points. Whining - even neutral fans thought the reffing was biased who wouldn't complain. The knee - if you dish it out be prepared to get it back. Multiple Irish players dealt with that all game so don't complain when it happens to you. The penalty shot was a penalty shot I got hacked in the box. Anyway Congrats to Norway. Don't worry I'll be further stacking Ireland next year to ensure we get the trophy back.

Michael Collins

Anonymous said...

Well Congrats to Norway, they played well. But I believe that the fans were the deciding factor in that game. This is nothing but a small picture of what soccer is like. The fans pumped norway, they affected the reff and they affected irland in a negitive way. I think mike is a good player, but that game I think the fans got to him. Shit same would have happened to me if I was playing. About the game situations, hey it is all a part of the game. I think if all take away the whining part and babysitting style of the NORTHAMERICAN soccer, then you will realize that you have experienced a good soccer match. Imagine the preasure world class reffs and players go through when they have 50,000 people yelling at them. lol. This tournament ended the best way possible in my oppinion. Mike will deal with it, so will irland and all will be a new cup next year. Congrats from me to adam for best goalie, He had a very consistant tournament. I am dipressed as the excitment is done and we have to wait one more year to feel that atmosphere.

Noor Mitri

Anonymous said...

In regards to some of the comments I will give my 2 cents, the reffing was one sided in the first half against Ireland but after that it was fair. Ireland can't complain when they were awarded a penalty kick. It was an even game. Ireland probably outplayed Ireland but not by much. In overtime, Norway was the better team. Ireland looked tired as the game wore on. I think they only used 1 sub for the wohole game and at least 4 or 5 of the players played the entire game. Playing 60 minutes plus extra time without a sub is just idiotic. No wonder Norway got the golden goal. It was a good game to watch though. I thought the atmosphere was even better than last year.

Anonymous said...

In My opinion The Republic of Irelend and Italy should have been in the Final. Throughout They have played real football these two teams, technically they were superb, attitude they were too. They both were clean teams in their play not physical. An also I think the best players I have ever seen in Regina, are few players who played for RepOf Ireland and Italy.

Anonymous said...

all I want to say is, thanks to kevin for doing this for a third year and thanks for putting up with all the bullshit that came with doing it thanks !
norway #1

Anonymous said...

HA HA, thats funny that Collins wants to further stack his team. Your team was already through the roof with talent and lost. The difference between Norway and Ireland is heart. Ireland is the Brazil or New York Yankees of this tournament and ended up the same way those teams did. You can end up having the best players all around and still not win. Credit is well deserved to both sides for giving one of the best finals of the WCP cup though. I'm hoping to see more teams next year and hopefully get an even better turn out!

Anonymous said...

a comment to the moron who thinks that playing 60 minutes of football straight is "idiotic"...you have obviously NEVER played a full 90 minute match in your life! players play way more and way harder than 60 minutes on a field half the size of the regular one. Get a bloody grip man! the ROI team didn't need to make more subs b/c their team's actually in shape and didn't just come out of retirement for this tourny.

Anonymous said...

I think I will respond to the guy who called me a moron. You're right, I have never played a 90 minute INDOOR game. I didn't know they had such a thing but a super cool guy like you obviously has played them. Wait a second, you probably mean outdoor. Comparing an outdoor soccer game to the indoor game is just plain stupid. I don't have the time or space to point out the differences and reasons why you need subs in indoor and you would be too stupid to understand anyways. I will try to keep it simple for you. Ireland was the most talented team in the tournament by far. They lost. Why? Norway had less talent but used subs and won. They were obviously fresher in the extra time. What is your reason why Ireland lost? Probably the excuse of losers, you will blame the refs. Another simple point. I watched a lot of the games during the World Cup and I didn't see any other team play most of their players the entire game (with the possible exception of Laos). Look how well Greece did with much less talent but substitutions. You play your best players for most of the game but they need breaks, well everyone except for a superhero like you.

Anonymous said...

To your comment in the words of Edward Herman ex-coach of the NY Jets "You play to win the game"

Anonymous said...

Using that logic why doesn't the NFL play the best atheletes on offence and defence? Who cares if they get tired as long as the best players are playing. In fact, the same goes for all sports, why have subs. Hockey and football players should play the full 60 minutes.

Anonymous said...

Well said...It's my strong belief that Norway won becasue they had subs. They were clearly fresher. This emphasizes some other information on this blogspot: 1) The fact that Norway had great depth on their team and could rotate quality players throughout and that 2) TEAM's win games not individuals; norway had 16 (or however many players they had) busting their asses. Good on them and good to them victorious!

Leigh S. said...

This is to the people talking about the reason Norway won was because they made subs. I play for Ireland and Norway won because they deserved to win. They earned the win through the way they played. They knew they had to play the best they could, they competed, and they did that. They deserved to win, they outplayed us, end of story. I wasn't going to post on here but this talk of making subs made me frustrated. In the final game of a tournament, the purpose is to play to win the game. There is no games the next day, there is no need to rest any players. To win, you need to put out the players who will perform the best for you. Some players are fit and will perform better for the full game than some of the players from the bench will play even if they are fresh. When players, such as myself, have been playing 90 minute games all year round, playing a 60 minute final on a half sized pitch is not a problem. I am not saying that the players that played the whole game are better than those on our bench, but I am saying that according to the views of the coach, the players that played were more effective than it would have been to bring a fresh player off the bench, whether this is based on talent, fitness, or simply that a certain player is more effective at attacking/defending the player they are matched up with. To be honest, Norway would have still beat us if we made subs, maybe even worse than they did. In hockey, they make subs because it is more effective if they have their players take 1 min shifts, than if they stayed on longer. Having said that, there are certain players who will never be on the powerplay, or penalty kill no matter how tired other players are; This is because the tired players are still more effective than the fresh players at doing what they do, giving their team the best chance of winning. You will never see a fresh wide reciever coming off the bench to play in place of Terrell Owens because a tired Owens gives his team a better chance of winning than a fresh 2nd or 3rd string player. Norway had the luxury of having a team of players who were all of fairly equal talent and skill and they were able to make changes. They made subs because it gave them the best chance of winning and it worked. We didn't make many subs because it gave us the best chance of winning. Norway was the better team on the day and that's why they won. It had nothing to do with subbing.

Anonymous said...

well said leigh! i fully agree with ur statement.

Anonymous said...

i heard norway is putting there team in the PSL next yr

Anonymous said...

HAHA sure throw the El Salvador womens team in there too. They can battle it out for last.

Anonymous said...

ES is a great team, i am sure they can compete at that level

Anonymous said...

In this beautifull sport our emotions as fans get in the way. And like in this final the crowd expressed their emotions and if you ask me thats just the way it is. Great game ! Please dont pull that the crowd is not classy for booing or cursing or whatever. Obviously most people around here havent been to a rowdy futbol game.Thats because we live in Canada.