The Match DO NOT START OTHER MATCH THREADS

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 2:25am

starbelgrade wrote: »

His decision wasn't final

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.

starbelgrade wrote: »

Either way, referee's decison is FINAL.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 2:39am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.

The deciscion of the ref is only final if he implements the rules correctly. Stop ignoring the facts & the rules. Especially as you seem to either mis-understand or ignore both.

Rest your case there if you will, it makes & will make no difference,

If you want to have a proper understanding of the rules, then I'm more than willing to engage.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 2:46am

starbelgrade wrote: »

The deciscion of the ref is only final if he implements the rules correctly. Stop ignoring the facts & the rules. Especially as you seem to either mis-understand or ignore both.

That's kinda rich, coming from someone who redefines dictionary words to suit themselves.

FACT 1 : Cheating <==> breaking the rules
FACT 2 : The referee's decision is either (a) not final, or (b) variable depending on whether he implemented them correctly. On Wednesday, he didn't implement them correctly

I won't choose (a) or (b) .... I'll leave that to you,since you've claimed both.

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 2:49am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's kinda rich, coming from someone who redefines dictionary words to suit themselves.

FACT 1 : Cheating <==> breaking the rules
FACT 2 : The referee's decision is either (a) not final, or (b) variable depending on whether he implemented them correctly. On Wednesday, he didn't implement them correctly

I won't choose (a) or (b) .... I'll leave that to you,since you've claimed both.

The ref's decision is FINAL, provided he doesn't violate his own rulebook.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 2:52am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's kinda rich, coming from someone who redefines dictionary words to suit themselves.
.

You are mixing up dictionary definitons & semantics with the rules of football. That's where your problem lies.

Is fouling cheating? No. It is a punishable offence (if spotted by the match officials)

Is diving cheating? No. It is a punishable offence (if spotted by the match officials)

Is handballing cheating? No. It is a punishable offence (if spotted by the match officials)

Is offside cheating? No. And it is NOT a punishable offence (if spotted by the match officials)]

Is a foul throw cheating? No. And it not punishable offence (if spotted by the match officials).

You judge a gane by the games by which it us governed & not by the head ,or the heart, or indeed by dictonary meanings.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 2:53am

Malty_T wrote: »

The ref's decision is FINAL, provided he doesn't violate his own rulebook.

I saw no such caveat in starbelgrade's original post.

And considering his redefinition of words to suit himself, can we even be sure that it is a "rulebook" ?

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 2:57am

starbelgrade wrote: »

You are mixing up dictionary definitons & semantics with the rules of football. That's where your problem lies.

How is it "my" problem ?

Maybe it's "your" problem that you choose to distance football from the real world ?

Either way, you're not going to convince me, and I seriously doubt that you have any interest in living by the rules of the real world, as highlighted by your continued replies.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 2:59am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I saw no such caveat in starbelgrade's original post.

And considering his redefinition of words to suit himself, can we even be sure that it is a "rulebook" ?

If you don't understand football & the rules that govern the game, then educate yourself or get over it. Or add something to the discussion beyond antagonisation.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:04am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

How is it "my" problem ?

Maybe it's "your" problem that you choose to distance football from the real world ?

Either way, you're not going to convince me, and I seriously doubt that you have any interest in living by the rules of the real world, as highlighted by your continued replies.

You don't understand football. It is not the "real world". it's football. itz footie

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:10am

starbelgrade wrote: »

If you don't understand football & the rules that govern the game, then educate yourself or get over it. Or add something to the discussion beyond antagonisation.

"educate yourself" :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

And don't blame me that you didn't put in your caveat before diving in with a pompous, capitalised "FINAL"; the way that Malty explained it was fairly understandable, and I'd accept it.

But as for arbitrarily deciding that it suits your case to ignore dictionary definitions.....

I mean, if the rulebook says that each team is comprised of 11 men (players, but since there's a male game and a female game, some rulebook must say "men") - so does it contain its own definition of a "man" ?

I can understand it specialising definitions of some things - like what is acceptable for a "ball" (given that there's different specs for golf balls, rugby balls, etc) or a pitch (dimension, etc) but I sincerely doubt that it redefines "cheating".

That said, if you can show me precisely where it does, with no vague interpretations required, I'll stand corrected.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:11am

starbelgrade wrote: »

You don't understand football. It is not the "real world". it's football. itz footie

I don't understand YOUR INTERPRETATION of [association] football (a.k.a soccer). If we were talking about football then Henry wouldn't have cheated by handling the football.

P.S. The dictionary doesn't contain the letter pattern "itz" either. :rolleyes:

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:17am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

if you can show me precisely where it does, with no vague interpretations required, I'll stand corrected.

There you go - read the rulebook. If you can find me the word " cheating", then ket me know. Happy reading.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/pitchequip/fqc_requirements_manual_march_2006_326.pdf

Judge the game by it's rules. Not your own rules.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:20am

starbelgrade wrote: »

There you go - read the rulebook. If you can find me the word " cheating", then ket me know. Happy reading.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/pitchequip/fqc_requirements_manual_march_2006_326.pdf

So having previously suggested that the rule book redefined the word, you're now saying that it isn't even mentioned in there ?

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:22am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

So having previously suggested that the rule book redefined the word, you're now saying that it isn't even mentioned in there ?

Read the rulebook. Football is governed by the rules, not your, or my suggested interpretations. Find me "cheat"!

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:23am

P.S. I did a search for the word "offside" too, and got a "no matches were found" message.....

Weird or what ? I guess there's no "offside" in soccer, either ? :rolleyes:

I've copped why, but it's more fun not to say

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:27am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

P.S. I did a search for the word "offside" too, and got a "no matches were found" message.....

Weird or what ? I guess there's no "offside" in soccer, either ? :rolleyes:

I said "read it", not "word search" it. Not everything is wikepedia. Some things have to be read, digested & eventually, possibly, understood. When you've read it & made some attempt to understand it & digest it, get back to me,

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:30am

starbelgrade wrote: »

I said "read it", not "word search" it.

:rolleyes:

starbelgrade wrote: »

If you can find me the word " cheating", then ket me know.

starbelgrade wrote: »

Find me "cheat"!

So you're saying that they somehow define terms without actually mentioning the word ? Why did you ask me to find the word cheating, then ?

Make up your mind, FFS! :rolleyes:

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:37am

Because, the word, definition, or term, does not exist in the rules of football. There are rules & breaking of the rules, but there is no cheating. Them's the rules. Everything or anything beyond that is just a moral ./ emotional / indignant response.. that's what I expect the rules are meant to evoke, but that's football.

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 3:41am

starbelgrade wrote: »

Because, the word, definition, or term, does not exist in the rules of football. There are rules & breaking of the rules, but there is no cheating.

So em what would taking a performance enhancing drug be?

I'm sorry but breaking the rules and getting away with it is cheating.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:45am

OK, I'll put you out of your misery; a document about pitch turf won't contain any of the rules! :P

The OFFICIAL rulebook, however, offers the following:

A player is cautioned and shown the yellow card if he commits any of the
following seven offences:
• unsporting behaviour
• dissent by word or action
• persistent infringement of the Laws of the Game
• delaying the restart of play
• failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner kick, free kick or throw-in
• entering or re-entering the fi eld of play without the referee’s permission
• deliberately leaving the fi eld of play without the referee’s permission

Note how NONE of the above say "if the referee catches you"; they say if he (the player) commits. According to the above, letter of the law, it could be a linesman, a fourth official, or, indeed, a camera; literally ANYONE, even the player themselves.....the offence is doing it, not "getting caught".

Therefore, if Henry had said to the ref "I handled it", the ref would have been OBLIGATED, according to FIFA's OWN RULE BOOK, to act.

So someone's lying!!!!

There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player:
• deliberately and blatantly handles the ball to prevent an opponent gaining possession
• attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball

Again, no indication in the rule book as to who needs to see this, or being "caught". The OFFICIAL FIFA RULE BOOK says "a player should be cautioned when a player.....attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball".

So the action is again the issue; NOT the "getting caught".

I think - having just gone through the ACTUAL rule book, I can certainly rest my case now.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:46am

Malty_T wrote: »

breaking the rules and getting away with it is cheating.

I don't speak for other sports, but breaking the rules in football & getting away with it is a fault of the match officials.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:49am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

OK, I'll put you out of your misery; a document about pitch turf won't contain any of the rules! :P

The OFFICIAL rulebook, however, offers the following:

Note how NONE of the above say "if the referee catches you". According to the above, letter of the law, it could be a linesman, a fourth official, or, indeed, a camera.

Again, no indication in the rule book as to who needs to see this.

You could be a lawyer. Good work! The problem though, lies in that the referee's descison is final (if correctly applied).

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 3:49am

starbelgrade wrote: »

I don't speak for other sports, but breaking the rules in football & getting away with it is a fault of the match officials.

It is still cheating.
What would you say about a soccer player taking Performance Enhancing Drugs is doing?

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:51am

Malty_T wrote: »

It is still cheating.

By your own definition. Not by the rules / laws that govern the game. Therein lies the difference.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:53am

Malty_T wrote: »

It is still cheating.
What would you say a soccer player taking Performance Enhancing Drugs is doing?

Adding yr own edits after the fact / after the replies - is THAT cheating?

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 3:53am

starbelgrade wrote: »

By your own definition. Not by the rules / laws that govern the game. Therein lies the difference.

So what is doping then?

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 3:54am

starbelgrade wrote: »

Adding yr own edits after the fact / after the replies - is THAT cheating?

No it's called common courtesy to fix errors and re-illustrate a point that you've dodged on at least two occasions now.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:55am

Malty_T wrote: »

So what is doping then?

Sideswiping?

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:57am

Malty_T wrote: »

No it's called common courtesy to fix errors and re-illustrate a point that you've dodged on at least two occasions now.

F*ck me - what do you want to know -do I think doping is cheating, or was Henry doped up? Or some other general answer?

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 3:57am

starbelgrade wrote: »

You could be a lawyer. Good work! The problem though, lies in that the referee's descison is final (if correctly applied).

And......AS I SAID......

If Henry did tell the ref - AS HE CLAIMED HE DID - then the ref DID NOT APPLY THE RULES CORRECTLY.

Folks, I've just found the OFFICIAL cause for an appeal!

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the rule book that says that the ref needs to see it.

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

Comments

The Match DO NOT START OTHER MATCH THREADS