The Match DO NOT START OTHER MATCH THREADS

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 3:58am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

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!

It doesn't matter if he told him or not - the ref applied the rules correctly as he saw fit at the time.

Stargate · 24-11-2009 3:59am

Malty_T wrote: »

So em what would taking a performance enhancing drug be?

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

Tell it like it is Malty_T

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 4:03am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

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

You need to read a bit more attentively.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 4:05am

starbelgrade wrote: »

It doesn't matter if he told him or not - the ref applied the rules correctly as he saw fit at the time.

And you accuse Malty of selective editing ???? where did the "as he saw fit at the time" come out of all of a sudden ?

The ref did not apply the rules correctly - FACT*.

* Disclaimer and Alternative ending : Henry is a lying cheating scumbag and didn't mention it to the ref.

But going on Henry's statement, someone should DEFINITELY tackle FIFA with this; either the rules apply and the precedent is sound, or else Henry gets shown up for trying to weasel himself out of it, condemning the ref to an inquiry, and bringing the game into even more disrepute!

RandolphEsq · 24-11-2009 4:07am

The funny thing is that there was no replay of the goal in the stadium so we didn't properly know what happened until afterwards. If there was a replay and everybody saw what actually happened the referee would have chnaged his mind.
The lads in charge of the video in the stadium are thus to blame too. I am on my way to killing somebody after this match. Is anyone else unable to get over the match and needs a release too?

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 4:07am

starbelgrade wrote: »

You need to read a bit more attentively.

Well, considering I read the actual rule book rather than the pitch specifications, forgive me if I need you to provide a link to back up that statement.

Like I said, the paragraphs above say "IF THE PLAYER COMMITS THE FOLLOWING..." not "IF THE PLAYER IS SEEN BY THE REF COMMITTING THE FOLLOWING..."

Back up your statement with an actual reference from the official rule book, or else retract that.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 4:10am

RandolphEsq wrote: »

The funny thing is that there was no replay of the goal in the stadium so we didn't properly know what happened until afterwards. If there was a replay and everybody saw what actually happened the referee would have chnaged his mind.
The lads in charge of the video in the stadium are thus to blame too. I am on my way to killing somebody after this match. Is anyone else unable to get over the match and needs a release too?

The crazy thing is that the replay wasn't even required.....of COURSE France's home-town replay controllers weren't going to show it - probably for "safety and crowd control reasons" :rolleyes:

But the fact is that Trap saw it, and the fourth official saw it, so it would have been simple for the ref to be made aware of it.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 4:11am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

And you accuse Malty of selective editing ???? where did the "as he saw fit at the time" come out of all of a sudden ?

The ref did not apply the rules correctly - FACT*.

* Disclaimer and Alternative ending : Henry is a lying cheating scumbag and didn't mention it to the ref.

But going on Henry's statement, someone shouljd DEFINITELY tackle FIFA with this; either the rules apply and the precedent is sound, or else Henry gets shown up for trying to weasel himself out of it, condemning the ref to an inquiry, and bringing the game into even more disrepute!

Patrice Evra summed it up perfectly -

In football there are injustices all the time. Titi doesn't deserve this. Leave him be.

When I think that certain politicians want to replay the match... They don't even know if the ball is round or oval and they would be the first to come and drink champagne in South Africa.

The replay, I'll do it when you want on a Playstation."

RandolphEsq · 24-11-2009 4:14am

starbelgrade wrote: »

Patrice Evra summed it up perfectly -

In football there are injustices all the time. Titi doesn't deserve this. Leave him be.

When I think that certain politicians want to replay the match... They don't even know if the ball is round or oval and they would be the first to come and drink champagne in South Africa.

The replay, I'll do it when you want on a Playstation."

"In football there are injustices all the time" automatically I dismiss the rest of what is said. Oh but everyone does it = it's ok. Bollox argument

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 4:16am

starbelgrade wrote: »

Patrice Evra summed it up perfectly -

In football there are injustices all the time. Titi doesn't deserve this. Leave him be.

When I think that certain politicians want to replay the match... They don't even know if the ball is round or oval and they would be the first to come and drink champagne in South Africa.

The replay, I'll do it when you want on a Playstation."

And all of that bull**** is relevant because.....what ? Because your argument has been completely and utterly shot through ?

What makes Evra's waffling more relevant than anyone else's ?

Oh, I know.....because they suit you! :rolleyes:

Funny how you were so vocal with bull**** until just then..... :rolleyes:

P.S. Still no backup for what was behind the "You should read more attentatively" waffle, either !!!! Ah well, guess it's hard to back posts up when you're just mouthing off.

I've researched, posted facts, quoted the rule book, "educated myself", etc; and a pathetic quote from a biased French mate of "Titty" is all you can come back with ?

So much for having a leg to stand on!!!!

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 4:19am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

And all of that bull**** is relevant because.....what ? Because your argument has been completely and utterly shot through ?

Funny how you were so vocal with bull**** until just then..... :rolleyes:

When the seagulls follow the trawler....

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 4:25am

starbelgrade wrote: »

When the seagulls follow the trawler....

We're discussing Henry, not Cantona with his obscure bull**** poems....

Either back up your earlier bull**** about reading more attentively and debate the facts that were posted, or quit it!

You asked me to research and I did. The least respect you should be showing is to acknowledge that and either post relevant discussion or else concede.

starbelgrade · 24-11-2009 4:44am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

We're discussing Henry, not Cantona with his obscure bull**** poems....

Either back up your earlier bull**** about reading more attentively and debate the facts that were posted, or quit it!

You asked me to research and I did. The least respect you should be showing is to acknowledge that and either post relevant discussion or else concede.

Henry is Tuna

Sardines may follow. That is the risk , The risk of the fools who do not understand football & try rule it.. rule it by dictionaries, semantics & politics. Fools who do not understand the game or the dictionaries, senantics or politics that rule the game.

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 5:06am

starbelgrade wrote: »

Henry is Tuna

And I am Malty.:)

Glad we could agree on something.

So what does constitute cheating in your book?
Perhaps we could work backwards from that point?

fcussen · 24-11-2009 7:03am

Does anyone know is it possible to get a video of the entire 2nd leg from start to finish?

Turtwig · 24-11-2009 7:27am

fcussen wrote: »

Does anyone know is it possible to get a video of the entire 2nd leg from start to finish?

Rte Player.

TheZohanS · 24-11-2009 10:20am

starbelgrade wrote: »

You need to read a bit more attentively.

So do you. I gave you an in-thread warning not to post in this thread but you continued.

fcussen · 24-11-2009 10:59am

Malty_T wrote: »

Rte Player.

I'm in South Korea and can't use that

OutlawPete · 24-11-2009 11:13am

fcussen wrote: »

I'm in South Korea and can't use that

Overplay.net is used by lots of Irish people abroad.

lugha · 24-11-2009 11:16am

Geez, am I the only one who went to bed last night? :)Anyway, as the rule book has got a good seeing to perhaps I could try floating this baby again.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Do we*have*to do this*again*??

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

Haven't gone through it at all yet. You are not looking at the Keane incident I am referring to.
You can view it here round about 46:50 (clip time) or about 90 (match time)

Liam Byrne wrote: »

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

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

Keane was dealt with as the referee saw appropriate.

That Keane was dealt with and Henry not, means that justice was done in the first case and not in the second. No arguments with that. My question is why you think it reasonable to label Henry a cheat but not Keane, especically in light of your subsequent comment.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

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

stovelid · 24-11-2009 11:22am

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.

But they don't have our moral fibre. If we got into the WC on the back of a gammy ref decision, the FAI, players and public would refuse to take the place in South Africa.

Perhaps.

lugha · 24-11-2009 11:28am

stovelid wrote: »

But they don't have our moral fibre. If we got into the WC on the back of a gammy ref decision, the FAI, players and public would refuse to take the place in South Africa.

Perhaps.

Did you forget the :rolleyes: ? :P

Fate can be a funny fellow. I expect we might find ourselves face to face with that challenge before long and we will see.

OutlawPete · 24-11-2009 11:30am

stovelid wrote: »

But they don't have our moral fibre. If we got into the WC on the back of a gammy ref decision, the FAI, players and public would refuse to take the place in South Africa.

God, you've changed your tune very quickly.

stovelid wrote: »

Embarrassment on a cosmic scale.

I knew by the end of the week I would swing from genuine outrage to detesting the Irish "football public", government, tabloid rags and other bluffers that are getting involved:

stovelid · 24-11-2009 11:34am

lugha wrote: »

Did you forget the :rolleyes: ? :P

OutlawPete wrote: »

God, you've changed your tune very quickly.

I was being sarcastic. Obviously incompetently.

OutlawPete · 24-11-2009 11:56am

stovelid wrote: »

I was being sarcastic. Obviously incompetently.

Read the Charter. Posts containing sarcasm are not allowed before midday. People do need to be given the chane to wake up you know

lugha · 24-11-2009 12:25pm

stovelid wrote: »

I was being sarcastic. Obviously incompetently.

I know. But you have to be looking forward to a future game if when Ireland get a result because of the rub of the green, when a great time will be had by all with back-peddling and insistence that "that was completely different" or even "listening to" the most vocal attackers of Henry now, keep stum.

Liam Byrne · 24-11-2009 1:26pm

lugha wrote: »

Haven't gone through it at all yet. You are not looking at the Keane incident I am referring to.
You can view it here round about 46:50 (clip time) or about 90 (match time)

That Keane was dealt with and Henry not, means that justice was done in the first case and not in the second. No arguments with that. My question is why you think it reasonable to label Henry a cheat but not Keane, especically in light of your subsequent comment.

I had a look, and it's a grey one alright; the defender was right up against him.

So I'd take your point in relation to it being a possible intended cheat, but it's definitely not a 100% clear-cut one; was his dropping the shoulder related to trying to control the ball, dropping the shoulder to turn the defender, or a push ? Hard to tell. But yes, like I said, it's a grey one.

That's why I'd say "ref dealt with it; move on". Because you can't 100% argue either way, but the resultant handball was an offence.

The issue with Henry's is that it's 100% blatantly obvious, so there's no shade of grey whatever.

Do you have a point ? Possibly. Is it anywhere near as clear or indisputable ? No.

If he was standing on his own and did the same, like Henry was, then I'd be 100% behind you.

pH · 24-11-2009 1:48pm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I had a look, and it's a grey one alright; the defender was right up against him.

Strange that fouls committed by your team are always innocuous grey incidents, while those committed by the opposition are outrageous acts of blatant cheating, ever wondered why that is?

OutlawPete · 24-11-2009 1:51pm

pH wrote: »

Strange that fouls committed by your team are always innocuous grey incidents, while those committed by the opposition are outrageous acts of blatant cheating, ever wondered why that is?

For God sake man. The whole footballing world was outraged at what Henry did. It wasn't just the Irish. You make it sound like this happens in important matches all the time and only the Irish people complained it would have been ignored.

stovelid · 24-11-2009 2:04pm

True.

I remember the outrage that swept Ireland when Diego Maradona committed the Hand of God against the Brits.

It was touching the way that, as a nation, we stood shoulder to shoulder with our neighbours to denounce the outrageous slur on sportsmanship and fair play*

* may not be true

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

Comments

The Match DO NOT START OTHER MATCH THREADS