Matterazzi

kaimera · 20-02-2008 04:42PM

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

It was in the second half. The ball hit his arm as Reina was coming to collect it, Hyypia panicked and hoofed the ball skyward.

The one that hit his chest?

Can't seem to find a vid of it

RE*AC*TOR · 20-02-2008 04:45PM

nipplenuts wrote: »

What of Sami Hyypia's handball?

Liverpool didn't score until 10 minutes from the end - and it was a deflected shot. That gave them the confidence to go for the second which, it appears, was also deflected. But hey, that's the breaks in football.

In all likelihood Inter will play two up front in the return and should have no bother scoring at least two without reply.

I find it interesting that persons who excuse simulation when "their" teams players do it, are so quick to condemn Torres when they post here.

I don't remember Hyppia handballing at any stage. I don't think either shot was deflected - not that it matters particularly.
Whether Inter will have what it takes to score two without reply at the San Siro remains to be seen. Based on their performance last night I would be surprised. Plus if they end up playing a more adventurous style that should leave more room for the likes of Torres to catch them on the break.

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 04:48PM

Sherifu wrote: »

Yes but what is proper football?

For me, it's probably free flowing attacking football...

That's not saying don't defend...you can have amazing attacking matches that still end up 1 - 0 or even 0 - 0. I enjoy the pace of the premiership, and i also equally love la liga where possession is generally what counts...

Let's not beat around the bush, Chelsea in my opinion are the worst team to ever watch...

Sherifu · 20-02-2008 04:52PM

The proper football comment you made was in relation to Liverpool. Chelsea aren't the most exciting alright.

MrJoeSoap · 20-02-2008 04:52PM

RE*AC*TOR wrote: »

I don't remember Hyppia handballing at any stage. I don't think either shot was deflected - not that it matters particularly.
Whether Inter will have what it takes to score two without reply at the San Siro remains to be seen. Based on their performance last night I would be surprised. Plus if they end up playing a more adventurous style that should leave more room for the likes of Torres to catch them on the break.

Second goal wasn't deflected but if you didn't see the deflection on the first one you mustn't have seen the game...

RE*AC*TOR · 20-02-2008 04:57PM

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Second goal wasn't deflected but if you didn't see the deflection on the first one you mustn't have seen the game...

Initially I thought it was deflected, then looking at some of the replays it looked like Kuyt just drove it into the ground. It is possible that it spun off the studs, but I wouldn't be certain of it.

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 05:33PM

Sherifu wrote: »

The proper football comment you made was in relation to Liverpool. Chelsea aren't the most exciting alright.

Yeah what's your point though? They are still **** to watch in my opinion...and never really try to play attractive.

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 05:35PM

StickyMcGinty wrote: »

shallow way of looking at things tbh. i thought it was stylish the way liverpool broke down a team that defended with 10 players behind the ball.

if last night was a poor game, that was Inters doing. they we're playing negative football for 90 mins.

1) Liverpool were at home so should be expected to attack

2) The ref ruined the game

3) You only made progress when their best player on the pitch got an injury and went off (Cordoba)

stooge · 20-02-2008 05:38PM

RE*AC*TOR wrote: »

Initially I thought it was deflected, then looking at some of the replays it looked like Kuyt just drove it into the ground. It is possible that it spun off the studs, but I wouldn't be certain of it.

kaimera wrote: »

The one that hit his chest?

Can't seem to find a vid of it

FFS, lol.

Come on guys, stop defending obvious things like hyppia's handball, Kuyts goal being deflected, and Materazzi's sending off being harsh. You got your win and will most likely go through. Fair play. But coming out with the stuff above just makes it look as if you have total blinkers on.

I'm not trying to take the win away from Liverpool, sometimes you get the breaks, sometimes you don't. Last night you got the breaks (sending off, cordoba going off, deflected goal).

Sherifu · 20-02-2008 05:49PM

cheesedude wrote: »

Yeah what's your point though? They are still **** to watch in my opinion...and never really try to play attractive.

There, you said it. In your opinion they are **** to watch. Just say that instead of that proper football rubbish, everyone has an opinion of what 'proper football' is. There's no point playing attractive and losing. I enjoy watching them play for the drama as much as anything else[The CL final against Milan being the pinnacle of that drama].

leninbenjamin · 20-02-2008 05:54PM

RE*AC*TOR wrote: »

Initially I thought it was deflected, then looking at some of the replays it looked like Kuyt just drove it into the ground. It is possible that it spun off the studs, but I wouldn't be certain of it.

i think it's pretty certain it was deflected. he scuffed the shot but the flight of the ball was almost straight at the keepr until goes through the players' legs, so unless it hit a divet i can't see what could have raised it up so much.. either way it was a lucky goal.

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 05:56PM

cheesedude wrote: »

For me, it's probably free flowing attacking football...

But i gave my opinion there...

Champions League should be winners playing winners...Liverpool haven't won the league in years...they can't even conquer England yet they were European Cup Champions in 2005...they did deserve to win overall but my point is how they got there in the first place...it should be the top two teams of each league or something...

Thanx 4 The Fish · 20-02-2008 06:12PM

cheesedude wrote: »

But i gave my opinion there...

Champions League should be winners playing winners...Liverpool haven't won the league in years...they can't even conquer England yet they were European Cup Champions in 2005...they did deserve to win overall but my point is how they got there in the first place...it should be the top two teams of each league or something...

Are you serious ? How could you argue that Liverpool should not be in the competition because they did not win the league and then go on to say that it should be the top two. Surely the team in second could not qulaify under your new and improved tournament :rolleyes:

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 06:15PM

Well the top 4 is a bit ridiculous in my opinion especially considering how far behind points wise they actually get...

Thanx 4 The Fish · 20-02-2008 06:18PM

But if for example Man United finished in fourth I am fairly confident you would be happy for them to be in the CL. Here's an idea, when you take over as head of FIFA you can implement your changes to reduce the revenue of some of the biggest clubs in europe.

I am sure it will fly through.

ibh · 20-02-2008 06:30PM

stooge wrote: »

FFS, lol.

Come on guys, stop defending obvious things like hyppia's handball, Kuyts goal being deflected, and Materazzi's sending off being harsh. You got your win and will most likely go through. Fair play. But coming out with the stuff above just makes it look as if you have total blinkers on.

I'm not trying to take the win away from Liverpool, sometimes you get the breaks, sometimes you don't. Last night you got the breaks (sending off, cordoba going off, deflected goal).

Yea L'pool really got the breaks last night. If that effort from Julio Cruz from 45yrds had gone in instead of hitting the corner flag, or if Hyppia had made 2 professional fouls in the first half and got sent off then i'd say Inter could have gone on to win it.....

Get a grip will you. There may have been a deflection for 1st goal, there was only 1 team in the game from the first minute. Defo peno turned down and there was only one team ever going to score.
Hyypia 'handball' was anything but obvious. I didn't think there was a handball at all and Inter players did fcuk all protesting about it so it was anything but obvious...

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 06:39PM

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

But if for example Man United finished in fourth I am fairly confident you would be happy for them to be in the CL. Here's an idea, when you take over as head of FIFA you can implement your changes to reduce the revenue of some of the biggest clubs in europe.

I am sure it will fly through.

Well you see there is the problem...

Money and it's a pity...

And being honest, after all these years of fourth placed teams being put in the CL, I would be a bit pissed off if United finished fourth and couldn't get in...but it doesn't seem right for any team to finish fourth and end up in the CHAMPIONS league...

Maybe set up another European tournament or else dump them all in the Uefa cup for all the **** teams who can't compete in their league and sort out tv rights etc...

Like look at the state of Ac Milan this season in their league, current form suggest they won't be in it next year...but they are the most successful Italian team to play it and can win it anytime...but they don't deserve to be in it because they are playing shocking football in Serie A.

Nailz · 20-02-2008 06:40PM

Very very harsh red card for Materazzi! His dirty reputation got the better of the referee. And I never noticed how big of a girl Torres was about it.

Edit: BTW this thread is about the Materazzi red card not the state of the CL seedings from the league! Start your own thread if you want to discuss it!

RE*AC*TOR · 20-02-2008 06:44PM

stooge wrote: »

FFS, lol.

Come on guys, stop defending obvious things like hyppia's handball, Kuyts goal being deflected, and Materazzi's sending off being harsh. You got your win and will most likely go through. Fair play. But coming out with the stuff above just makes it look as if you have total blinkers on.

I'm not trying to take the win away from Liverpool, sometimes you get the breaks, sometimes you don't. Last night you got the breaks (sending off, cordoba going off, deflected goal).

GFY

Aquos76 · 20-02-2008 06:47PM

RE*AC*TOR wrote: »

GFY

Can we assume GFY stands for Go F*ck Yourself and have I misinterpeted it:eek:

Thanx 4 The Fish · 20-02-2008 06:50PM

Let's go for something else like Good for you and not try and have a user banned eh ?

Aquos76 · 20-02-2008 06:54PM

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Let's go for something else like Good for you and not try and have a user banned eh ?

May well be that, but just as to be sure, maybe the poster may clarify himself.

Thanx 4 The Fish · 20-02-2008 06:58PM

Aquos76 wrote: »

May well be that, but just as to be sure, maybe the poster may clarify himself.

Why does he have to clarify himself to you. :rolleyes: I know it is probably not my place to ask so let's call it curiosity eh.

Aquos76 · 20-02-2008 07:04PM

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Why does he have to clarify himself to you. :rolleyes: I know it is probably not my place to ask so let's call it curiosity eh.

Maybe not to me to to the other users on here. That sort of language is out of order and against the charter may I add. That is if is suppose to me what I suggested it may mean, If not then theres no problem then.

LegacyUser · 20-02-2008 07:06PM

Aquos76 wrote: »

May well be that, but just as to be sure, maybe the poster may clarify himself.

and

Maybe not to me to to the other users on here. That sort of language is out of order and against the charter may I add. That is if is suppose to me what I suggested it may mean, If not then theres no problem then.

Stop causing trouble...your acting like a geek and embarrassing yourself. Why don't you contribute to the thread instead of being pathetic?

Only an hour to go before kick off...So many good matches on tonight...i'd love to see all of them if i could.

RE*AC*TOR · 20-02-2008 07:07PM

Aquos76 wrote: »

Maybe not to me to to the other users on here. That sort of language is out of order and against the charter may I add. That is if is suppose to me what I suggested it may mean, If not then theres no problem then.

Exactly. TTFN

Sherifu · 20-02-2008 07:11PM

Aquos76 wrote: »

Maybe not to me to to the other users on here. That sort of language is out of order and against the charter may I add. That is if is suppose to me what I suggested it may mean, If not then theres no problem then.

Childish and trying to get someone else banned. You expect anyone to come and say they mean Go Fuck Yourself so they can pick up a ban? :rolleyes:
I quite like T4TF's version.

mayordenis · 20-02-2008 08:06PM

cheesedude wrote: »

Champions League should be winners playing winners...Liverpool haven't won the league in years...they can't even conquer England yet they were European Cup Champions in 2005...they did deserve to win overall but my point is how they got there in the first place...it should be the top two teams of each league or something...

i half agree with you as a liverpool fan - but what i would say is if you were to go down that road it has to be black and white - only the champion of the respective league no 2nd place either keep with the big teams or just the winner.

Matterazzi

Comments