Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: SHEV Date: 25-08-2004, 01:41	A f**king drama there Can anyone describe how everything was happening? Anita? Mark?

Author: mark
Date: 25-08-2004, 02:24

Hi everybody, welcome to the delayed live report from the Ramat-Gan stadium hosting the great teams of Maccabi Haifa and Rosenborg. At the first match Rosenborg won 2-1, so Haifa needs a 1-0 win or a two goal difference win to qualify, while rosenborg may lose by 1 goal as long as they score two, a 2-1 win for Haifa will send the teams to overtime.

The game started exactly as everybody was expecting. Haifa was playing a very calculated attacking game while keeping a close eye to ensure that rosenborg will not succeed to score in a surprise attack. Everything went as expected a ball was buzzing around the Rosenborg goal, with no real opportunity to score, but close enough for everybody to know that sometime somewhere Haifa will succeed to score.

Then came the 28 minute. The referee (a franch one, don't remember his name) which seemed nervous from the beginning of the match (maybe it was the heat and the humidity, but he started to complain about rosenborg waisting time at the second minute) decided to draw a red card to a Haifa player which had tackled from behind in what seemed to me as a no more then yellow card foul.

Haifa having only 10 players did not change the game at all and in the 31 and 38 minutes two balls which were buzzing around the Rosenborg goal had entered. This made Rosenborg to go to the offensive and Haifa to play a more defensive game.

At the beginning of the second half Rosenborg had replaced a midfielder with a striker, which cause the Haifa coache to make the mistake of the game and replace his striker with a defender. Without a point striker Haifa was pressed hard to its on goal and played and heroic defensive game with about 0% ball possession time, and Rosenborg had helped by playing the same attack over and over.

In the 55 minute and in the 85 minute there were two electricity blackouts which lasted 10 minutes each, and added to the nerves of Haifa, Rosenborg, the fans, and everybody which saw the game on TV.

It it will come as a surprise to you that when at the first minute of the extra time, when Rosenborg was awarded a free kick 17m directly in front of the goal I felt that I'm going to have an heart attack and switched channels to watch some Olympic sport. After a minute I switched back and was the Rosenborg players hugging each other

. So I switched back to Athens and missed the psychological collapse of Haifa which let Rosenberg score again at the 95 minute and in the 115 minute.

Conclusion: both teams are at about the same level of football, and whatever was the outcome it would have been fair.

Author: anita
Date: 25-08-2004, 02:38

mark, read my reply on other topic. Rosenborg the far better team in second half and 30 extra minutes, but Israelis not able to hold the lux for two hours. Hope that UEFA rules give a rematch.

Both Haifa goals scored 10 to 11, and Rosenborg surprisingly much better than Maccabi Haifa all the way, even that 11/10.

I hope for a rematch, and think you may admit that Rosenborg were so much better that Haifa will lose even more in a similar match.

But on the other hand, thats another match

Cheer up, mark. I didn't approve the red card (wrong decision of referee) and I thought all the twilight zone (twice) ruined the match.

Author: mark
Date: 25-08-2004, 02:56

Thanks Anita, but since I'm not a fan of any football team, but more a fun of a good football games, I don't realy need chearing up (and if you remember I wrote that IMO it is only good to the israeli football that Haifa did not qualify), I am more annoyed about losing the ranking point, as I was sure that the 90 minutes result count.

You write as a true fan that rosenborg is better, but I don't think so. It took them 87 minutes (combining the second half of the first game to the second half of this one) to score one goal when they controlled the ball all of the time. The results after 90 minutes were 2-1 and 2-1. Both are balanced teams with no real star. But this is only my opinion and you are entitled to have yours.

I hope there will be no rematch. The blackout was equaly bad for the two teams and didn't last to long, so the result is fair.

Author: anita
Date: 25-08-2004, 03:59

This is not right, mark, and you know it. Rosenborg had all the play when the lights went out. It was a 50-50 match, but after the break and 2-0 to Haifa after the undeserved red card for Haifa, Rosenborg was in the driving chair the whole time. No, I am not chauvinistic. Haifa backed too much in second half, giving Rosenborg too much room. Very wrong. But I predicted (hoped) that this would be a rematch after the second blackout, and I still hope it will be.

I didn't feel this victory righteous because of the blackouts, but noone can say it was undeserved (Gee, I hate that "undeserved/deserved" expression). Being very childish and immature, do you mean that both Haifa goals were deserved and all three Rosenborg were undeserved?

Anyway, seemed that the heat and humidity striked both ways. Again, hope for a rematch. I like fair play.

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: anita Date: 25-08-2004, 04:05	My evil twin sister asks: How many goal chances did Maccabi Haifa have in second half compared to Rosenborg?

Author: mark
Date: 25-08-2004, 06:54

anita, I think that once again you had to much to drink. I never said that rosenborg did not deserve to score the goals. What I wrote was that the Rosenborg attack was unimaginative and it is no suprise that they scored the most important goal from free kick. Football is about scoring goals, and since Rosenborg scored more goals they deserved the win.

Is rosenborg better then haifa? since they won the tie the answer is yes. By how much? try to ask yourself what you would have thought if Haifa had qualified, was it a natural result of the matches? my answer is yes. But this is realy a pointless argument, you have a set of criteria by which you think rosenborg was better and I have different set of criteria, and both are probably valid.

Author: anita
Date: 25-08-2004, 08:09

Its hard to be imaginative when opponent have 10 players in defence. Wrong tactics of Maccabi in second half, but almost success. Lucky 1-2 goal from Rosenborg. But unlucky chances before that. In the goal post. After full time Rosenborg was untouchable. Maccabi obviously tired and worn out mentally and physically.

As you write, mark, even teams, and Rosenborg getting the better of it "when the tough got going". Would want to wish Maccabi good luck in UC, but Israel is an opponent to Norway on the ranking, so wish only you good luck, mark

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: manecar Date: 25-08-2004, 09:39	I have one question. Who won 1 point in UEFA ranking for win in this game? Israel or Norway?

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: anita Date: 25-08-2004, 10:26	As far as I know, Norway win one point, Israel zero. If a penalty shootout, the result before the shootout will stand. I am pretty sure I'm right, but will surely be corrected if there are other rules this year. Don't think so.

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: mark Date: 25-08-2004, 14:17	Anita, I hope we will have a rematch in UC round 3 and then we will be able to decide which is a better team

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: anita Date: 25-08-2004, 15:42	I have talked with several people today that may know something about the rules. Re-match very unlikely, since the referees let the match go on, but of course may have consequences for Israeli home matches in the future. We'll see.

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: Forza-AZ Date: 25-08-2004, 17:35	I thought the rule was that a match should be played again if it's halted for a period of more than 30 minutes. I don't know how long it was halted yesterday?

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: mark Date: 25-08-2004, 18:00	20 minutes, but it felt a lot more

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: anita Date: 25-08-2004, 21:48	Rosenborg confitm that they would have delivered protest to UEFA if they hadn't won, requiring a re-match. No allegation of foul play, of course, but the two blackouts gave ten tired Maccabi-players time to recover from Rosenborgs relatively constant pressure in second half.

Re: Maccabi-Rosenborg
Author: Kronsky Date: 26-08-2004, 00:08	congrat. to Norway and Rosenborg

Author: vladyslavo
Date: 26-08-2004, 00:34

Hi, i'm new here. First of all I'd like to introduce myself - I'm vlad, an Ukrainian who's currently living in Israel.

I saw this match on TV yesterday. During the second blackout, it was said that RBK were asking the referee to end the match, because (as they said) if the if the blackout repeats, the match has to be stopped. The referee said it will only be done if the lights wouldn't lit after 20 minutes. But then uefa's supervisor came to the referee and said that it is 45 minutes and not 25.
I guess no-one knows exactly uefa's rules, even the uefa guys themselves =)

anita,
I still don't understand why do you think there has to be a rematch. RBK are completely satisfied with the result. And the home side cant complain about somethink that was in the responsibility. Suppose they were losing, some-one could deliberately disrupt the light so they would have a rematch. To avoid speculations of this kind, it is just must not be played.

By the way, im glad to here you're norwegien. I started learning this language few weeks ago (dont ask why!)
=)