You are right that a penalty COULD have been called at the end of the first half against Spain…but it wasn’t. just like the American attackers COULD have scored one of the many chances that they had against Ghana in regulation during the round of 16 game and put us into the quarterfinals…but they didn’t. looks like you know soccer, so you know this is just par for the course.

You are of course right, but it’s one thing to miss your own chances (i.e. could’ve), and quite another to be denied that chance by the officials after a foul (i.e. should’ve). It’ll also never be known if Germany would even have converted from 12 yards had it been given (although you gotta suspect they would’ve).

The one interesting thing the commentators did point out during the game last night is that in the modern game, when you get two very fit, very able and very well drilled sides, there very often isn’t even a cigarette paper between them. In games such as these, the referees need as much assistance to get as many decisions correct as possible. Germany knew they weren’t going to get many chances against Spain unless they scored first, so what they were relying on was taking one of their few chances while preventing Spain from taking the many chances they would inevitably create. In this instance their best chance was denied them by a poor piece of refereeing. FIFA have said they’re now prepared to at least discuss video technology being used, although I find it hard to believe they’ll do an about turn on the issue, but this is another example of a team being penalised by a poor decision, and in a World Cup semi final no less.

whoever wins on Sunday, don’t you just want to see a great game? aren’t both sides deserving to lift the trophy?

Of course. I want to see a great match, and I’d like the best team to win. Certainly Spain can be thought of as the better side in their semi-final, but I think that misses the point of football, or sport in general. The best teams aren’t always deserving to win, and often a team of weaker resources can prevail by better tactics, superior team play, or by having more “nerve”. Doubtless Barcelona were the “better” team in their Champions League semi final this season, but they were beaten because Inter Milan bested them in exactly these areas. It might not have been pretty, but it was deserving of victory.

Equally, I get fed up of listening to all the Spanish fan-boys wax lyrical about how omnipotent Spain are, when the truth is that while they might have the best players that doesn’t give them a divine right to win the world cup. If Holland play a defensive, organised and disciplined match on Sunday and win, will that be any less deserving than if Spain tear them apart with an awesome display of attacking football? Only on a superficial level.

Yeah, I was a little disappointed by some of the German play. I think there were 3 main factors there. Firstly, and let’s make it clear, Spain are a very good side. They know what they’re doing, which is more than Argentina could muster, and they’ve got quality players all over the park which is more than can be said for England. Secondly, the Germans spent a lot of time attacking down their right flank, which was a tactic used in previous matches, leaving Podolski free to cause havoc at the back post. Unfortunately the suspension of Mueller meant they had first a wasteful Trochowski then an ill Kroos on the right, which scuppered their plans. Finally, as I think Sam mentions in the main article, this is a very young German side. They’ve got this far partly on ability, partly on the exuberance of youth. The downside of that is that any nerves are exemplified in knockout football, and in that one off match some of those players froze. Frankly, Puyol was granted the freedom of Durban to head in the winner, which means someone didn’t track him, which was an error and can be attributed to panic in that young German team. Shame really.