Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Match **DO NOT START OTHER MATCH THREADS**

Options
1…2829313334

Comments

  • Options
    #902
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    SoupyNorman wrote: »
    Thats a hilarious feeling alright.


    Every fiber in my body wants for us to be going but nothing short of every team pulling out of the WC in protest is going to see it happen. FIFA are interpreting the rules as suits at the moment, they are doing it from from the top tier which leaves no avenues for arbitration.

    I dont know how any French player or supporter can get any enjoyment from supporting their country. Am I being naive I wonder?, will they support on in ignorance? Would we support on in ignorance if the roles were reversed?


    P.S. I'm still gutted.

    If I was in the position of a france supporter I wouldn't be happy about the way it happened but I would be looking forward to the world cup.


  • Options
    #903
    SoupyNorman
    Registered Users Posts: 4,257 ✭✭✭SoupyNorman


    dr.bollocko wrote: »
    If I was in the position of a france supporter I wouldn't be happy about the way it happened but I would be looking forward to the world cup.


    [Devils advocate to my own post:]To be fair to the French population the popular consensus was to have a replay, they like us were not listened to.


  • Options
    #904
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    SoupyNorman wrote: »
    [Devils advocate to my own post:]To be fair to the French population the popular consensus was to have a replay, they like us were not listened to.

    Yeah but they know they'll probably win the replay!


  • Options
    #905
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Assuming that you don't know you deserve it ?

    1) France could well not have been at the World Cup, so it's a case of making the punishment fit the crime....can you SERIOUSLY comment that it will be OK if Henry - as French captain - collects the 2010 "Fair Play" themed World Cup ?

    2) They should do, in order to stamp this crap out and bring back the game we used to love
    Perhaps you have a couple of years on me :P but I never remember a time when association football did not adhere, at least in part, to the culture of the 11th commandment, don't get caught. That is painfully obvious if you do a scenario by scenario comparisment with a sport like golf which genuinely does have a culture of fair play at its core.
    When a golfer resets his ball on the green, have you ever seen one trying to steal a few inches? Conversely in soccer, how often do you see a player NOT try to steal a few yards at a throw in or free? Have you ever seen a golfer try to claim an opponents ball (with a better lie) to be his? In soccer players routine claim a corner or throw that they know full well they are not entitled to it. Have you ever witnessed gamesmanship in golf where an opponent would make a noise when a player is about to take a shot, or deliberately walk in front of him when lining up a putt? Gamesmanship (which of course is a euphemism for cheating!), particularly goalkeepers trying to unsettle penalty takers is routine in soccer, as is time wasting or running down the clock as we like to call it. Granted these are small fry, more extreme examples have been given already, but they illustrate that the idea that football was somehow a pure pursuit before is was wickedly defiled by Henry last week is simply a myth. He did no worse than Duff admitted he would be prepared to do and Keane actually did do. The ongoing attempt to demonize him is a tad silly.


  • Options
    #906
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,524 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Right,
    With FIFA having decided that this match needs to be replayed on the 5th of December, think its time to start discussing teams/tactics etc.
    Scores are 0-1 to France from the first league.
    Early match preview from an online source:

    France are set to bring back Cantona, Zidane and Platini for this replay while Ireland are set to recall, Roy Keane, John Aldridge, Ray Houghton and Bonner.

    Keane has said he is delighted to be back to help the cause, while Cantona reckons there were too may seagulls last week and this time round its the fishes turn.

    I see Ireland shading this one with a Ray Houghton headed goal that goes in of Roy Keanes hand.






    [size=-4]Terms and conditions apply. This post may not be true in any way shape or form
    This satire has been put in AH for obvious reasons.[/size]


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #907
    copperfacegaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 126 ✭✭copperfacegaz


    ah we should give them the walk ... its only fair !


  • Options
    #908
    TheZohanS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,582 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    kippy wrote: »
    Right,
    Bla....






    [SIZE=-4]Terms and conditions apply. This post may not be true in any way shape or form
    This satire has been put in AH for obvious reasons.[/SIZE]

    Do that again and you're banned.


  • Options
    #909
    uprising
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭uprising


    I think Trap should consider going into the geneology of Phil Mitchell and Les Battersby, I think they would be just what we need in midfield.
    But all in all It's great the match is back on.....
    "Give it a lash Jack...never,never,never say no"


  • Options
    #910
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    lugha wrote: »
    He did no worse than....... Keane actually did do. The ongoing attempt to demonize him is a tad silly.

    Was with you all the way until you trotted out this old false chestnut again!


  • Options
    #911
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Was with you all the way until you trotted out this old false chestnut again!
    Hardly old, it's been less than a week! :P
    And you have still to give your take on the last of Keane's handballs, the one in the last minute of normal time. There is little or no difference between that and Henry's. Except the latter led to a goal which put us out. If it hadn't , or the goal made no difference, it would have been a nothing incident, immediately forgotten, as we all know full well, and Henry's reputation would be unblemished.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #912
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    lugha wrote: »
    Hardly old, it's been less than a week! :P
    And you have still to give your take on the last of Keane's handballs, the one in the last minute of normal time. There is little or no difference between that and Henry's. Except the latter led to a goal which put us out. If it hadn't , or the goal made no difference, it would have been a nothing incident, immediately forgotten, as we all know full well, and Henry's reputation would be unblemished.

    Do we have to do this again ??

    Henry double-handled (upper arm and hand-tap onto foot) deliberately.

    Henry was not dealt with, and cost us the game.

    Keane half-handed (combination of shoulder plus upper arm) once.

    Keane was dealt with as the referee saw appropriate.


  • Options
    #913
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Anyone who thinks there is any chance of a replay is either demented or has absolutely NO clue about football.

    Anyone who thinks Henry is a cheat, the same.

    Cheating does not exist within football. There are rules - you do not foul, or you will be punished, you do not dive, or you will be punished, you do not handle the ball, or you will be punished --- all providing that your misdameanours are seen by the match officials.

    Either way, referee's decison is FINAL.

    If you don't understand that, you dn't understand football. If you have an objection to that, then move on to another sport that you think is fairer.

    MOVE ON.


  • Options
    #914
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    starbelgrade wrote: »

    Anyone who thinks Henry is a cheat, the same.

    So what the hell do you call a player who guides a football with his hand to give his team an unfair advantage when the ball was heading out of play?


  • Options
    #915
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    Cheating does not exist within football. There are rules - you do not foul, or you will be punished, you do not dive, or you will be punished, you do not handle the ball, or you will be punished --- all providing that your misdameanours are seen by the match officials.
    According to that definition, cheating cannot exist in any sport or game? :confused:
    And I'm not sure if there are specific rules against gamesmanship, provided you don't do the dog on it.
    OT but I have always been astonished that a player seeing a ball out and preventing an opponent playing it or running down the clock at the corner flag are not expressly against the rules, specifically ungentlemanly conduct. They are certainly against the spirit of the game.


  • Options
    #916
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Ulysses Gaze wrote: »
    So what the hell do you call a player who guides a football with his hand to give his team an unfair advantage when the ball was heading out of play?

    A rule breaker.


  • Options
    #917
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    Either way, referee's decison is FINAL.

    Interesting. If you put it in capitals does it somehow magic away the Bahrain v Uzbekistan overturn ?

    I mean, the ref's decision wasn't very FINAL there, now was it ?


  • Options
    #918
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    A rule breaker.

    Prone to contradicting yourself, are you ?
    *cheat : verb : to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.

    So would you care to revisit
    starbelgrade wrote: »
    Cheating does not exist within football

    *from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cheat


  • Options
    #919
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    lugha wrote: »
    According to that definition, cheating cannot exist in any sport or game? .

    That depends entirely on the game. Games are ruled by their own set of rules.

    In football, fouling, diving & handling the ball (by anyone except the goalkeeper & a player taking a throw in), are all against the rules. They are not considered as "cheating", but simply a breaking of the rules. Fouls, dives & ball handling may be unsporting behaviour, but they are part & parcel of the game.

    The whole Henry "cheating^ thing is just a moral wave of indignation started by people who have no understanding of the rules that govern the game & has been carried up by fools that like to ride like seagulls who follow trawlers because seagulls they think sardines will be thrown into the sea.


  • Options
    #920
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    They are not considered as "cheating", but simply a breaking of the rules.

    ....which is precisely what the word "cheating" means, FFS! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #921
    CCCP^
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭CCCP^


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    That depends entirely on the game. Games are ruled by their own set of rules.

    In football, fouling, diving & handling the ball (by anyone except the goalkeeper & a player taking a throw in), are all against the rules. They are not considered as "cheating", but simply a breaking of the rules. Fouls, dives & ball handling may be unsporting behaviour, but they are part & parcel of the game.

    The whole Henry "cheating^ thing is just a moral wave of indignation started by people who have no understanding of the rules that govern the game & has been carried up by fools that like to ride like seagulls who follow trawlers because seagulls they think sardines will be thrown into the sea.

    Hello.

    What planet do you come from?

    Thanks, bye.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #922
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Interesting. If you put it in capitals does it somehow magic away the Bahrain v Uzbekistan overturn ?

    I mean, the ref's decision wasn't very FINAL there, now was it ?

    There's a difference there, subtle as it may be - in that game the refreree failed to implement the rules of the game. In the match on Wednesday, the referee failed to see the breaking of the rules & made the correct decision based on his view of what happened.


  • Options
    #923
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    ....which is precisely what the word "cheating" means, FFS! :rolleyes:


    Not in football. There are rules and there are breaking of the rules. Semantics have no place in the game.


  • Options
    #924
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    ....which is precisely what the word "cheating" means, FFS! :rolleyes:

    In YOUR words, but not in the terminology that governs the game. And you cannot govern a game by your own terminology. THAT is cheating.


  • Options
    #925
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    There's a difference there, subtle as it may be - in that game the refreree failed to implement the rules of the game. In the match on Wednesday, the referee failed to see the breaking of the rules & made the correct decision based on his view of what happened.

    I'm not debating the difference between that and Wednesday.

    I'm debating your "The referee's decision is FINAL". Incorrect decision or not, if your assertion was true, then that game would not have been replayed.

    So - on at least one occasion - the referee's decision was NOT "FINAL", or even "final". FACT.


  • Options
    #926
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    In YOUR words, but not in the terminology that governs the game. And you cannot govern a game by your own terminology. THAT is cheating.

    They're not my words; did you miss the link to the dictionary ? :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #927
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    They're not my words; did you miss the link to the dictionary ? :rolleyes:

    I don't need to refer to a dictionary for the rules of football - they are clearly laid out in Fifa's rulebook. As I said, rules & punishments apply to the game, not semantics.


  • Options
    #928
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    I'm not debating the difference between that and Wednesday.

    I'm debating your "The referee's decision is FINAL". Incorrect decision or not, if your assertion was true, then that game would not have been replayed.

    So - on at least one occasion - the referee's decision was NOT "FINAL", or even "final". FACT.

    No - the referee in the Bahrain game failed to implement the rules as laid down by Fifa. His decision was not final because he did not implement the rules.


  • Options
    #929
    TheZohanS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,582 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    I don't need to refer to a dictionary for the rules of football - they are clearly laid out in Fifa's rulebook. As I said, rules & punishments apply to the game, not semantics.


    Don't post in this thread again, thanks.


  • Options
    #930
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    I don't need to refer to a dictionary for the rules of football - they are clearly laid out in Fifa's rulebook. As I said, rules & punishments apply to the game, not semantics.

    OK, we'll agree to differ on that, because the dictionary is fine by me, and I doubt FIFA redefined words.

    But let's go back to your other faux-pas (assuming you're not doing a FIFA and trying to ignore the fact).

    Was the referee's decision "FINAL" in that case ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #931
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    OK, we'll agree to differ on that, because the dictionary is fine by me, and I doubt FIFA redefined words.

    But let's go back to your other faux-pas (assuming you're not doing a FIFA and trying to ignore the fact).

    Was the referee's decision "FINAL" in that case ?


    In the case of Wednesday's match - yes . The match officials did not (or if you are a conspiracy theorist) choose not to see the offence. They ruled it was a goal & it stood - happens all the time, but the rules were applied correctly.

    In the Bahrain match, a penalty was awarded, but was enroached. Instead of a re-take of the penalty, a free-kick out was awarded instead. The ref in that match clearly didn't implement the rules & the game was wide open to subjection. His decision wasn't final because his decision didn't follow the guidelines that govern the game. The rules weren't applied correctly.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement