Saturday, 28 May 2011

Maradona Vs Pele

Ever since the 80s, football fans (some of them anyway) have been comparing Maradona to Pele with some claiming that Pele was the better of the two while others that Maradona was the better player. Of course, for my part, I have always found this argument to be as pointless as comparing apples to oranges. It being a case that though Maradona and Pele were both football players, they played in different times; as Pele played from 1956 to 1977 while Maradona from 1976 to 1997. Of course, one must also take in to consideration that these two players played in almost completely different positions and also had different functions on their respective teams.

Maradona
was a midfield player, whose main job it was to set up goals for his teammates by going forward from the midfield. This is while Pele played as a forward, whose job it was to basically score goals. It being this last factor which accounts for his having scored more goals than Maradona, apart from his having played in a time when a lot more goals where scored than there were during Maradona's time.

In all this, one could also say as if all this was not enough to make comparisons pointless that Maradona and Pele played in different countries and against completely different players yet despite these factors; many insist on such arguments. This even leading to endless debates on youtube, polls taken by FIFA and several magazines based on the opinion of both fans and journalists as to who was the better player. Some saying that Pele had to have been better because he was on a team which won 3 world cups while Maradona's Argentina only won one world cup. Naturally, those who follow Maradona will say that Pele happened to be on great teams which would have won even if he had not played while Maradona practically won the world cup for Argentina in 86 single-handedly.


As we can see, many are the arguments that go back and forth which either say that Maradona was better or
Pele was better yet I ask why can't those who engage in these discussions just accept that these two were great players on their respective teams; who advanced the game and leave it at that? To me it is sort of like comparing Hannibal to Julius Caesar. This being pointless since they commanded armies in completely different times and against completely different enemies. Of course, I could also mention other cases of greats who came at different times and therefore never competed against each other but the point would basically be the same.

In all this however, I would say that Maradona was better yet not necessarily because he had more ability or skill but simply because by coming after Pele and was able to take what Pele gave to the game and add some of his own to it. Maradona, basically having grownup watching Pele play was able to further develop the skills he got from him along with those he got from several other players; such as Di Stefano, Puskas, Eusebio, Sivori and many others. This basically meaning that Maradona's advantage was not one of his own doing but of having been born after Pele which is basically the same advantage which can be claimed by Ronaldo (Brazil) and Messi over Maradona. All of which confirming the law which claims that all those who come after get to use what their predecessors left behind and improve upon it.


As I have already stated in this article, I find comparisons between Maradona and Pele as absurd as I do those, for instance between Mohamed Ali and Rocky Marciano or Ayrton Senna and Juan Manuel Fangio yet what I consider to be even more absurd is when athletes from totally different sports are compared. This being the case of those who declare a particular individual as "athlete of the century". As what possible criteria could one use to judge if Pele (or Maradona) was better than for example Jordan (basketball) or Foreman (boxing) or Phelps (swimming) or Senna (formula 1)? This in my opinion not even qualifying as comparing apples to oranges but apples to lasagna yet some remain of a mind to make such comparisons and to even handout what I consider to be meaningless awards to those they choose.


In conclusion, I would say the following. There are those who excel in particular activities such as sports, medicine, writing, singing, politics and many other things and there can even be an elite group of those who are or perhaps were amongst the best in a particular field. This in fact, being what I believe is the best solution to this whole dispute. To simply make out a list of all those whose accomplishments should put them in the top of their chosen fields yet never forgetting all is but a point of view. This however in my opinion being a much wiser choice than making direct comparisons as to who is the best or even making lists going down from lets say 100 to the best, which if one thinks about it rationally; is but a waste of time. It leading to endless debate and all to finish where it started from which is that at the end of the day; it is but a matter of opinion and nothing more.

Wednesday, 25 May 2011

How Chelsea FC Lost the Title

On the 30th of May 2010, fans of Chelsea FC didn't have a care in the world. They had just seen their side take a one-nil victory at Wembley to secure the league and cup double for the fist time in their 105 year history. In his first season as manager, Chelsea boss Carlo Ancelotti guided his team to both the Premier League and FA cup titles, scoring record number of goals in the process. So how is it that, one year on, Chelsea are reflecting on such a poor season, in which, for only the third time in Roman Abromavich's reign as owner, they have failed to win a single trophy?

Many people would point out the fact that Chelsea let a number of experienced players leave the club in the summer of 2010. Players like Deco, Ballack and Belletti still had plenty to offer the Chelsea squad, regardless of their age. It was a mistake by Ancelotti to let them go for free, leaving the squad dangerously short of cover. Only two players (Brazilian international Ramires and Premier League veteran Yossi Benayoun) joined Chelsea to replace those that left and, although they have had good seasons, they haven't been enough to make up for all the quality lost. The January additions of Torres and David Luiz were too little too late, especially with the former in dismal form.

Another key factor in Chelsea's demise this season has been the sacking of popular and successful assistant manager, Ray Wilkins. He was seen as a necessary link between the manager and the players, having been at the club longer than Ancelotti. The decision to sack him last Autumn was inexplicable, and results turned soon after he left, with Chelsea thrashed three-nil by Sunderland the very next week. He will be sorely missed at the club and the board need to find a replacement sooner rather than later.

Injuries also took their toll on what is a small Chelsea squad. Important players including Alex and Benayoun enduring long spells on the sidelines along with key midfielder Frank Lampard. It is however, wrong to blame injuries alone - Manchester United and Arsenal suffered similar setbacks with Manchester United, in particular, taking them in their stride.

It seems that, sadly, the manager will be the one who pays the price for Chelsea's lack of success this year: Ancelotti, despite his achievements last season will almost certainly be sacked by the end of May. The new manager will still have a tough act to follow as the wily Italian has left a permanent mark on the Chelsea team.

The future for Chelsea is far from bleak, however. The managerial merry-go-round has had little effect on the squad on previous such occasions, and the high caliber players within the Chelsea squad are unlikely to allow themselves to be too disheartened by the departure of their gaffer. One thing is for sure - Abromovich will spend big to get his team back to the top, so only a fool would write Chelsea off for next season.

Friday, 20 May 2011

The Biggest Prize in Club Soccer?

Why is the Playoff Final worth more than the Champions League final?

Since its inception in July 1991, the Barclay's
Premier League has brought vast amounts of money into English football, mainly in the form of television money from Sky and the BBC. However, only clubs in the top division in England benefit form this revenue revolution, so a place in the Premier League is more valuable than ever.

The
Championship, which is the second tier in English football, sends three teams up to the Premier League each season, whilst receiving the three bottom teams from that League in return. The first two Premier League places are awarded via automatic promotion for the teams that finished first and second, which, this season, were Queens Park rangers and Norwich. The third place goes to the winner of the playoffs. This is a miniature knock-out tournament between the clubs that placed third, fourth, fifth and sixth in the Chamkpionship. This season Swansea, Cardiff, Reading and Nottingham Forest made the cut. Of those teams, Reading and Swansea have reached the Final, which will be played at Wembley Stadium on the 30th of May, two days after the Champions League Final at the same venue.

It is estimated that the team that wins the final on the 30th of May will receive over £90 million more in revenue than the losing club next season. TV money alone will be worth £37 million to the triumphant club after they become the third team to be promoted to the
Premier League. They will receive this sum for every season they survive in the top flight, meaning that the extra income the winner will earn depends on how long they can retain Premier League status. Even if they get relegated in their first season, Swansea or Reading will still receive parachute payments worth £48 million to soften the blow of relegation.

What will the game be like and how do the teams match up?


The match itself will be played in front of 90,000 fans at Wembley Stadium. It will likely have a better atmosphere than Manchester United and Barcelona's
Champions League clash because the number of seats used for corporate hospitality will be far lower in the Playoff Final, as it is not such a high profile match. Both teams go into the final in fantastic form, with Swansea having claimed 3rd place in the table on last day of the season and Reading having won 8 League games in a row during March and April. Extra spice will be added to the occasion by the fact that Reading will be up against their former manager in Brendan Rodgers, who has done a great job the get his team this far. The two teams that will walk out on to the Wembley pitch for the final were expected only to achieve mid-table mediocrity, but have confounded expectations.

Swansea have benefitted form their fearsome strike force this season. The two main strikers are Fabio Borini, who is on loan from giants
Chelsea, and their top scorer Scott Sinclair, who signed permanently from the same club last summer. Reading's main threat comes from in form striker Shane Long, who, after five years at the club, has enjoyed a fantastic season, scoring 21 League goals. It will be an entertaining game to watch as both teams have built their seasons on attacking rather than defending.

This fixture has produced some fantastic games of
football in recent years, most notably Blackpool's storming 3-2 victory over Cardiff in last year's Final. I certainly hope this match lives up to its £90 million price tag, and I'm everyone is looking forward to seeing one of these two very deserving teams in the Premier League next season

Wednesday, 18 May 2011

Soccer Stores - How to Choose the Right Soccer Shoes for Your Kid

Soccer stores today offer a wide variety of soccer shoes to choose from. They carry different brands and different types of shoes. You can have soccer shoes for turf court or shoes for grass court. They even offer indoor soccer shoes for playing soccer indoors. When I went to buy soccer shoes for my son I was kind of asking myself which one should I get? Does it really matter? Well the answer is absolutely YES.

Different court types requires different
shoes that are specially designed and adjusted for the specific court type. For instance, playing on a grass requires cleats so that the feet will have better holding on the surface and will prevent the player from sliding if the court is moist. Think of it just like car wheels/tires that you have to adjust or replace if you are going to drive on a snow. Wearing cleats to an indoor game will be a disaster since the player will not be able to run on the court with them, and if he/she does it will ruin the court and the shoe. That is also true for any other court. The key to choosing the right soccer shoes is knowing the court type.

The next thing you should consider is the weight. Since soccer players are in constant movement during a match it is vital that the shoe will be as comfortable and light as possible. Different soccer stores carry different brands so it is very important to try a couple of them. kids usually will go with the looks of the shoe and the popularity of the brand but as a parent you need to look for the health of your kid and what is best for protecting it. Comparing two or more shoes will allow you to get a feeling of what will be an average weight, how is the shoe designed etc, and eventually will allow you to make a better choice. If you got your little player "locked" on a shoe it will be very difficult to convince him/her to switch but you must remember this is not about the looks. Do not be afraid to be different then the other parents and go with a show you think will be the right choice for your
kid. Most people do not realize how important it is to pick the right shoe and not just the most popular Shoe and what might be the implications of a bad choice. soccer stores always offer assistance, usually from people who know the sport and that is always a good reference to consult with if you are not sure.

Sunday, 15 May 2011

2011 FIFA Women's World Cup - Where Is the Media Coverage?

If you have noticed all the news about the upcoming women's FIFA World Cup then you have been looking in places that the rest of us have not.

The first
Women's World Cup was held in 1991 and is recognized as the most important event in the women's football calendar. It is held every four years. The last World Cup was held in 2007 in the United States after an out break of SARS in the original planned host country of China forced the change of venue. The German team were the eventual winners beating Brazil 2-0 after not dropping a single point throughout the tournament. It will be held in Germany in summer 2011.

There is, in comparison to the same time before last year's
men's FIFA World Cup, little in the press about it and relatively numerous negative jokes about women's football, even by a female radio presenter on the country's number one radio station, Eins Live.

The male game makes much more money than the female game but in this day and age is this obvious sex discrimination?
Germany seems to be leading the charge away from the Women's World Cup even though they have the most to gain in revenue. These are dedicated athletes like any others. Do they have the "misfortune" to be female at a time when the men are earning top dollar in their sport? Not even the famous British underdog support mentality seems to be coming to help. In the current champions language, German, "Schadenfreude", a word that does not seem to have an English translation but is means the enjoyment of watching others being put down, is evidently in force.

When I investigated I was told by the television stations I have asked that they think that there are far too many other more important sporting events coming up in the summer. A
World championship, in which countries compete, is not, it seems automatically headline. No war no death and only healthy competition? We complain that other societies consider women to be second-class citizens, are guilty of the very same crime?

I will be following the game and I am sure at some point when people do realize that the ladies are just as able to wake excitement, commitment and competition as
men, the rest will follow.

The
Women's FIFA World Cup begins on 26 June 2011, in the city of Sinzheim, Nigeria v France.

Sunday, 8 May 2011

The Champions League Final 2011: Manchester United V Barcelona, Wembley Stadium, 28th May 2011

On May 28th 2011 the World's 'best' team, Barcelona, travel to Wembley Stadium in London to take on the power of Manchester United. After destroying Real Madrid and Schalke in their semi-finals, these two giants of World football will do battle for the premier prize in club football. On display will be some of the planet's most talented players in Xavi, Iniesta, Pique, Villa, Bojan, Mascherano, Alves, Rooney, Vidic, Ferdinand, Hernandez, Berbatov, Van der Saar, Evra, and, of course, the very best of all in the Argentinean genius Lionel Messi.

Barcelona,
given their comprehensive victory over United in 2009 and their awesome pedigree over the past few seasons, will go into the final as strong favorites to lift the trophy and conquer Europe for a second time in three years. Their La Liga form has again been outstanding this season as they have pulled away from the big spending Ronaldo / Kaka led Real Madrid at the top of the table. David Villa, after a slightly slow start by his very high standards, has started regularly find the net and shown the form he did for previous club Valencia. Add to that the masterful passing and possession of Iniesta and Xavi, the vision, skill and finishing of Messi and it's easy to see why Barca score so many goals. Lionel Messi has scored 52 goals so far this season in all competitions - that, by anyone's standards is amazing and will be giving Alex Ferguson and his players countless sleepless nights.

Manchester United's form has gathered pace as the season has progressed. After a slow start, with a number of draws against lower table sides, they have established themselves at the summit of the Premier League table going into the remaining 3 games of the season. They face a massive test against title rivals Chelsea on Sunday 08th May at Old Trafford. Should they win or draw that match they will be highly likely to win the Premier League title, which would see them surpass Liverpool's record for the most league titles.

In Wayne
Rooney and Hernandez United have two strikers in red hot form. So much so that they are keeping top scorer Berbatov on the sidelines. It will be interesting to see how Alex Ferguson addresses Barcelona's midfield masters in the final. I expect him to pack the midfield with five players, and play Rooney alone upfront. That may mean Hernandez is limited to a cameo role.

Thursday, 5 May 2011

Cristiano Ronaldo Vs Lionel Messi

Arguably two of the best footballers of the current decade, both are, at glance, very similar players. They're both attackers, great with a ball, and both play for a Spanish club. However there can only be one winner, so here's the comparison: Lionel Messi vs Cristiano Ronaldo.

Lionel Messi
Lionel is only 24 years old and currently plays for fc Barcelona. Born in Rosario, Messi started playing football at the age of 5, under his father's wings, at a local club. He then rolled into the Barca youth team where he worked his way up from C-B teams to the main squad in rapid pace. His debut in the highest class of football began at the age of 16, during a friendly against FC Porto.

Now in 2011 it's time to analyse his style of play and it becomes crystal clear that he's a master with the ball. Thanks to his short length and fast legs, any opponent will have a hard time keeping up with him. However unlike most magicians, he's also a terrific team player.

Cristiano Ronaldo
Cristiano is 26 years old and is a Real Madrid player. Ronaldo started his career at Sporting (2002) and in 2003 he guided his team to a win against the big Manchester United. The players of Man U knew that they would rather play with him than against him, so they contracted Ronaldo for the start of the 2003 season. After countless of successes, he became the most expensive player ever when he transferred to Real Madrid in June of 2009, the price: 94 million euro.

Ronaldo is a very fast and strong player. He took sprint lessons from the Olympics champion and is clearly a player "from the streets", pulling more tricks with a ball than any party clown could ever aim for. This quality is further emphasised by a great shooting technique that makes him an excellent asset during set pieces.

Versus
Now it's time to compare the two players and pinpoint a winner, in my respectful opinion. First it's clear that both players are terrific assets to any team, and both share a lot of qualities. For one they can both outplay several opponents and make a difference when the opposition is tight.

However a winner has to be chosen and in my opinion that winner is Cristiano Ronaldo. At this point Messi might have the edge on the field, but Ronaldo has great free kicks and is clearly stronger physically. The trade off being that Messi is the better team player. I remember Ronaldo when he played for Manchester United and back then he was, without a doubt, the best player in the world. His way of attacking suited the wing-play of Manchester United perfectly, and while less obvious in Madrid's style of play, his past years are to be considered. Also in Ronaldo's favour is his great charisma off the pitch. Messi is a pure footballer and doesn't have that same level of personality away from the field, something past greats (Cruijff, Maradona) did have.

And that's it for this comparison. Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi share a lot of qualities; especially the ball technique of both is ground breaking. And while Messi currently has the edge, in my opinion Ronaldo is the more complete footballer in the long haul, not partly thanks to his great charisma both on and off the pitch. However they're both very young so in the coming years this slight favour can definitely swing both ways.

Wednesday, 4 May 2011

Memories Of France VS Germany (Spain 82)

It was back in 82 and Italy had just beaten Poland to reach the final of the world cup "Spain 82" and what a thrill it was for me just 15 years of age at the time to have seen it! I would be seeing Italy play in the final for the very first time. This unlike in "Mexico 70" when my three years of age at the time prevented me from enjoying the match, not that with Italy loosing; this was something which I would have done but at least I could have tasted the thrill of seeing them defeating Germany in that historical semifinal match. I was in high spirits for Germany Vs France which promised to be a great one and one which I would truly enjoy. This to a certain extent more than I did when Italy played, due to the fact that during Italy's matches; I always wanted Italy to win and concentrated more on wishing their victory in my mind than just sitting back and watching the game. Of course even suffering when Italy lost while going in to extreme delight when Italy won yet hardly ever just enjoying the game for its own sake.

This however would be different as Italy was already in the final and all I had to do was enjoy the game with no tension; just to see whom Italy would be facing. I, for my part had a slight preference to see France in the final and this not because of any particular liking toward the French or even because I believed they would be an easier team for Italy. As at this level all teams are generally speaking great but due to wanting to see another team in the final. Germany, all things considered had won the world cup in 74, come in third in 70 and been runner-up in 66. France on the other hand, had never been in a final and the best they had ever done in a world cup was back in 1958 when they came in third; beating Germany by 6-3 in their match for third place. As a matter of fact that had been the last time these two teams had met in a world cup and if this encounter were to be any where near what I can only imagine that one had been; than this was going to be great one.

Naturally, Germany and France both contained great players and were solid in just about every position. As both teams had been building up their formations since Argentina 78 and though neither was really successful in that world cup; their players had at least gained experience. As for Germany's and France's starting lineups, they went as followed on that particular day:

Federal Republic Of Germany:
Schumacher
Kaltz
Stielike
K. H. Forster
B. Forster
Briegel
Dremmler
Breitner
Magath
Littbarski
Fischer
Head Coach: Derwall
with notable such as Rummenige and Hrubesch on the bench
France:
Ettori
Amoros
Janvion
Tresor
Bossis
Tigana
Giresse
Platini
Genghini
Rocheteau
Six
Head Coach: Hidalgo

I remember thinking how great it would be to watch a game, not caring who won but just wanting to see a great match; to appreciate the talent of both sides. This unlike when I saw Argentina Vs Brazil, where I wanted Argentina to win so Italy would not have to win against Brazil yet this was another situation. I also wanted to see a long exhausting match so the winner would be tired and perhaps not be at 100% when they faced Italy on Sunday. I do not really know why but I expected to see something fabulous sort of like another "Italy Vs Germany" like in Mexico 70 but this time; it would be in my generation and not in the one that had been. It even being a case that not even one player remained from that German team which Italy defeated despite only 12 years having gone by.
I, at the time not wanting to watch the game on my lonesome went to a cousin's house, who was not far from my own to see the game with him and his wife; whom I knew to be of German descent. This creating a situation that she though not a great fan of Germany went for Germany while he really preferred France. I having no real preference though had a slight desire to see France in the final given the above mentioned factors.

The game got under way in Seville which made all 6 of us in the room mere spectators through the magic of television of what was happening so far away yet was close to our emotions at the time. I had never seen a semifinal live as the first world cup I saw live was Argentina 78 in which there was no semifinal. It being the case of teams qualifying directly from the quarterfinals to the final or the match for third place without having to play a semifinal encounter. Germany 74 had been the same with the last semifinal having been played in Mexico 70 which saw what many consider to be the greatest game in the history of the world cup. This when Italy defeated Germany by a score of 4-3 in a match which took excitement to an all time high in what has to a large extent become the yardstick by which other great games must measure up to.

The game started and all talk stopped in the room as France and Germany had taken center stage in our lives or at least for the next 90 minutes or so. Germany quickly went on attack in their typical methodical way which though hardly ever brilliant or quick at least is consistent and relentless however France was able to control them. It however did not take long for France to show some of the attacking skills which had allowed them to slip four goals past Northern Ireland and their legendary goalkeeper (Jennings) in their previous match. It being French skill which like their game in those days came in sparks which though at times brilliant was not consistent.

It being these sparks which were visible when Giresse was almost able to filter a ball to Platini which would have left him one on one with Schumacher had it not been for Stielike's opportune intervention. France even created another chance at the start of the game which forced Schumacher to punch the ball for a corner. It being clear even early on how the game would be played and by whom. It being France's midfield which dominated play as Platini, Tigana and Giresse were clearly playing well. This even if their forwards Rocheteau and Six were being taken out of the game by Germany's defense.

As for Germany, it was Breitner who was clearly the driving force behind their attack. Breitner seeming relentless in his drives forward with Litbarski and Fischer who were clearly given the French defense all they could handle. This in contrast to the Forster brothers and Magath who were clearly lost on the field of play.

It did not take Germany long to let everybody know just how capable they were of scoring when after a foul by Platini on Briegel; Littbarski hit the French crossbar of a free kick on which Ettori was clearly beaten. France had dodged a bullet yet they would not be so fortunate 18 minutes in to the match. This being when Breitner made another one of his runs through the French midfield to pass the ball ever slightly with the side of his foot to the on coming Fischer; who forced Ettori in to a fine save only to set up a goal for Littbarski. It being Littbarski who hit the ball right in between several players to give Germany the lead at 1-0.

France perhaps at this point thoroughly started controlling the midfield and going forward and it was not long before matters were once again level. France's goal starting when Kaltz fouled Genghini to set up a Giresse free kick which he floated in to the German penalty box for Platini's header which found Rocheteau who left Briegel with no other option then to pull him down for an apparent penalty.

A penalty and who else but Platini to take it for France? The pressure was on and Platini knew it better than anybody as he stepped up and kissed the ball for good luck. Platini took his run and scored with no problems what so ever as Germany's Tony Harold Schumacher was sent the wrong way. The score was tied at 1 a piece and what a match this one was shaping up to be!

The match was intense as the anxieties of semifinals and such matches which let one team progress further while leaving the other out had returned to world football. Tensions were also raised when Six made a challenge on Schumacher which the German goalkeeper did not take too kindly to and let it be known. This in spite of playing together with Didier Six on the same team in Germany but it was clear that on that day; friendships did not exist.

The first half ended tied at one with everybody getting ready for the second half while all I could do was wonder who would I rather see Italy play against. Of course, Italy had beaten France 4 years earlier in Argentina 78 yet this French team was much improved. On the other hand Italy had only drawn with Germany in that very world cup yet again that was the past which did not by any means have to repeat itself.

The second half started with France dominating and even scoring a goal when Rocheteau got put the ball past Germany's Schumacher yet all in vain. As the play was ruled to have been off-sides yet looking at the reply; I believe the line judge was wrong. France was having its moment and perhaps if Six and Rocheteau had been playing up to their usual standards; they would have gone a head in the score board.

I was enjoying the match as so much was still unsettled yet just at this moment strategy started coming in to play when Germany brought in Hrubesch in place of Magath. This substitution even seeming strange to me at the time that a player from Hamburg SV would replace another yet Magath had not really been playing up to his usual standards. France, for its part brought in Basttiston to replace Genghini; who was clearly tired and also not having a good game though he had scored a wonderful goal against Austria in France's 1-0 victory.

The half would continue with both teams showing the best of their football and though much has been said about French flair Vs German tactics; I would also say it was inspiration VS consistency. Germany getting a good chance off a Briegel shot only to see Ettori come up with a fine save.

It was however ten minutes after Battiston entered the field that one of the most memorable moments in world cup football would occur as well as one of the most controversial. It being when Platini, taking advantage of a huge whole in the German defense sent in a through ball to Battiston. It being a bouncing pass which Battiston managed to tap by Schumacher and come perhaps within half a meter of scoring yet it was after his touch on the ball that Schumacher ran in to Battiston and basically knocked him out. This forcing France to have to substitute him for Lopez, who had scored a spectacular goal against Hungary just four years earlier in the world cup in Argentina.

Many might say that Schumacher's play should have earned him the red card and France a penalty yet I would disagree with both accounts. My first reason being because in football contrary to basketball, if the foul is committed after the play is over than no free kick or penalty is given. Of course there maybe a card for the player who has committed the in fraction but not a foul for the team.
I, for what concerns me; I am not nor was I ever a fan of Schumacher. I believing him not to be amongst the friendliest people ever to play the game yet in all honesty; I must say he did have his qualities not only as player but as an individual. He did help Hugo Sanchez with a cramp he suffered during Germany's match against Germany in 86 and even helped Maradona up during the final of the same world cup when Argentina was already in the lead by 3-2. As for this play what I saw is the following:

Platini had sent a through ball to Battiston and Schumacher saw that Battiston was basically unmarked and would score if he got to stop the ball and take his time to set up a good; so what he did is what goalkeepers are basically trained to do in such situations. This being to come out of their goals and try to make the player rush his shot by either intimidating him or simply closing down the angel. Now in all this very few have ever mentioned the fact that Schumacher jumped in the air and was moving toward Battiston after having jumped. All of which making it impossible for him to avoid the collision with Battiston which came as a result of his jump. Many said he did not even try to avoid the collision yet I ask how could he? He was in mid flight and the moment was but a split second. Schumacher also did not go for the ball but his strategy was to rush the shot more than save it which did work because Battiston in fact shot the ball before Schumacher even touched him and did miss without being touched which I believe is the reason no penalty was given on the play.

Battiston, in my opinion should have been watching out and gotten out of the path of Schumacher, who was air born yet took his eye of Schumacher; to follow the path of this shot. I sometimes wonder if the French would have complained so much about this if Battiston had scored despite his collision with Schumacher and if they had won the match because of this goal. Of course, it would have been very strange to see a player being taken off on a stretcher after having scored a goal. Battiston however did not score and the French as we all now know were not given a penalty nor Schumacher a red card which in my opinion was just even if it was unlucky for the French. Schumacher would even visit Battiston in the hospital to let him know there had been no ill feelings on his part and Battiston even accepted his apology as something that sometimes happens in football.
After this regrettable incident which will live long in the memories of many, both France and Germany had their chances at wining the game. France's chance coming when Amoros's long range effort hit the bar after Schumacher had been clearly beaten in what in fact also put France and Germany level with regards to hitting the post. Litbarski having done likewise in the first half. Germany however came close when Breitner's shot was brilliantly saved by Ettori, who also had presence of mind to get to the rebound he left just a split second before the ever opportunistic Fischer was able to score Germany's second goal of the match. Ettori almost resembling a cat as he scrambled to that ball and just in the nick of time managed to swat the ball away for a corner; just before Fischer.

The match ended and overtime was upon us with many feeling France had deserved to win because of Schumacher's foul or supposed foul on Battiston yet I felt otherwise with regards to this incident. It being sort of like when Beckenbauer injured his shoulder against Italy in Mexico 70 that it was basically through falling badly more than what Italian defenders did to him. I did not really care for my own who won as long as there was something to watch and was there ever.

France despite their apparent fatigue started well and in fact were up after only two minutes in the match when Tresor (name meaning treasure in French) volleyed the ball past Schumacher to give the team of the rooster the lead. It was a spectacular shot off a free kick which set the French in to wild celebrations as well as those around me and why not they were up by 2-1.
It was at this point that Rummenige came in to the match in place of Briegel, who though not really playing badly had basically worn himself out running. I, for my part applaud Derwall's choice as to whom he took out as very often to get more offense coaches will take out a forward who in fact is playing well yet he kept Fischer, Hrubesch and Litbarski on. France however would continue with their sparks which though not consistent were bright. France would even increase their lead to 3-1 when 99 minutes in to the match, Platini passed the ball to Rocheteau who sent it across to Six. It being Six who waited just the right amount of time to hit the small get powerful Giresse, who blasted his shot past Schumacher and off the post to give what at the time seemed to be France's pass in to the finals. I even started eyeing an Italy-France in the final yet life had taught me that the game only ends when the referee says so and not a second sooner.

Germany much to their credit did not despair and continued with their solid if not brilliant game. After all, they did have quality players and 21 minutes in which to at least get two goals. Of course there was also the chance that France might have scored a fourth goal which definitely would have made things very bleak indeed for the Germans and ended it all. I was even surprised that France was wining because the game was basically even with regards to who was playing better yet this at the end becomes academic next to the score line. Germany took but two minutes to get a goal when Fischer made a sensational jump in which he bent his body in the air to get to a ball which he managed to put away in the back of the French net. A sensational goal or so it would have been had it not been ruled out for an off-sides which I personally did not see yet such is the game. Germany however had sent a message that this was not the end.

Germany would create a nice play however two minutes later at the 102 minute mark of the match when Littbarski who had been having an outstanding match found Rummenige in the penalty box; who simply tapped it in past Ettori to bring hope back to Germany. This making the score 3-2 in France's favor. This in fact being how regulation time would end. Looking back one could say if this had been France 98 then France would have won as Tresor's goal would have been considered the golden goal which would have given them victory. Of course if this had been the era of the silver goal, they also would have won as they were leading at the half by 3-2 yet this was not that time.

The second half started and I must admit, I was having a great time with no pressures. This as Italy was not playing and had nothing to win or loose regardless of who won or lost. This making the game but a sheer joy to watch. As for Germany, it was not so much a matter of their pressure which was not constant yet was never really absent which tied the game. I, at the time feeling that perhaps this was were Platini failed not so much as a player but as a captain. Platini not providing either order or calm to his team as that is what a captain really should do at such moments. France at this point started giving the ball away easily and could not really make time go by which made things easier for Germany.

Germany's equalizer was truly dazzling, it coming at the 109 minute mark of the game when all those who had kept Germany in the game pooled their talents to come up with a goal. It first being Littbarski who centered the ball to Hrubesch who headed it back to Fischer, who simply outdid himself with a bicycle kick to make the score 3-3. It was an incredible goal, the kind most teenagers dream of making when lying in bed and thinking of simply getting on to that cross and acrobatically putting it in the net in overtime to either give their teams the lead or at least a draw. This being precisely what Fischer had done.

I must say, I was amazed first that France had been able to score two goals and get the lead yet also that Germany had been able to draw level. Of course, one must remember this was another time when most people did not think about penalties like they do today. After all, no match in a world cup had ever gone to penalties before and in fact; this practice was unheard of at the time though everybody basically knew there was such a possibility. Penalties having been presented as an alternative to a coin toss or replaying the match in the previous world cup.

The match went on with both teams playing like neither really wanted to win it. Almost as if they were saying that this is as far as they could go or would go. Time would run out on this match which was the first one to ever end in a tie after 120 minutes since the world cup in 38 yet unlike in those days; this game would not be replayed. Penalty kicks being sort of like the French revolution which many had thought could happen but were still surprised when it actually did.

Hidalgo and Derwall, naturally had to pick out their five penalty takers and this being in a time when I can imagine neither of them went in to the match with a list already made out. This after all, was the first time their had ever been a need for such a method to settle a world cup match. Tensions were high and for me, it was strange as I never really thought this would ever be the way to settle a semifinal match but here we were; about to take penalties.

For France it was Giresse who came first and scored thus becoming the first player in a world cup to score a goal in a penalty shoot out. It being strange that it was also a French man who was the first to score a goal in the history of the world cup back in Uruguay 30. Germany's Kaltz then scored for Germany to make the score 1-1. Kaltz in fact being the regular penalty taker for his team Hamburg SV. Amoros then scored for France to see Breitner, who had scored off a penalty in the 74 final do likewise to make the score 2 a piece. Rocheteau then converted and it was then that the first ever missed penalty in a penalty shoot out came or at least as far as the world cup was the issue. Stielike shot weakly and Ettori guessed rightly. This was a break for France and the despair showed on Steilike. He had missed and till this day remains the only German player to ever have missed a penalty kick for Germany in a penalty shoot out.

The TV was still showing Stielike's miss when Six also failed to score. Germany once again had been saved while France once again had let victory slip through their hands. Littbarski then calmly scored to make it 3-3. With the score tied, it was up to Platini to deliver, who did just that by sending Schumacher the wrong way though four years later he would miss against Brazil but like they say; that is another story. For now, it was up to Rummenige to keep Germany in it and like Platini; he too scored to make it 4-4.

Five penalty kickers had come and still the issue was not solved, nervous, mind games; all factors now. Bossis then came for France and Schumacher comes up big yet does not celebrate wildly but only puts up his arm with a fist. All as if to say this is but a small step. Of course in this match, how could one ever be sure of anything let alone victory. Hrubesch then came and despite his massive physique just calmly slotted the ball past Ettori, to put what I considered to be the greatest match I had ever seen to an end and Deutschland in the final. For France, it was what might have been and perhaps even should have been while for Germany; it was Italy and the finals. This setting up another match between Germany and Italy in just a few days.

Germany had won and though one could always argue forever as to which had been the better team and who deserved to win. I however feel that it was penalties which decided not who had been the better team, for this had been equal or at least in my opinion but who would play Italy in the final.

Of course today penalties are a part of the game with teams even practicing just in case yet in those days, this not being the case; I am fully convinced that both teams tried their hardest to win. This making the contest what I would in my opinion if nobody else's call a draw with penalties serving only to choose which one of these two great teams would play Italy.

Germany would go on to loose by 3-1 to Italy in the final, perhaps partially due to the fatigue from this game which undoubtedly played its part; like it did with Italy in the final in Mexico 70 when they lost to Brazil; after they too had been taking in to an exhausting over time by Germany. France would go on to win the European Cup in 84 with Platini having a superb tournament. As for Germany and France, they would go on to play each other one more time in the semifinal of Mexico 86 with Germany once again beating France. Germany on that occasion winning by 2-0 in a match paling in comparison to this one which was the one I have come to hail as my generation's "Italia-Germania 4-3".