3883 réponses à ce sujet

[the_one_54321]

I wonder what it must be like to be Blatter. To know that at the very least 50% of the world population hates your guts.

[Druss99]

People give Blatter too much credit, he doesnt have final say on everything does he? I dont really know how it works but I assume theres voting involved.

Its not just things that camera's would fix that are bothering me, if you used them to try to stamp out all the blatant cheating going on then you would end up with games lasting over 2 hours.

Its a whole list of things that just make it not live up to being the world cup. Theres the half empty stadiums, the big players failing to really turn it on, all the cynical play, the f*cking vuvuzela, the dour defensive play in alot of the games, teams not so much winning matches as letting the other team beat themselves.

Then the referee's. I'm honestly not in favour of camera's ref's are human and you expect the occassional mistake its all part of the spectacle. Who doesnt love seeing a team they hate getting robbed? But how many f*ckin awful decisions have we seen in the last month? Its shocking.

Its all cynical and dirty and souless. To quote Danny Glover..I'm too old for this sh*t. It doesnt have the magic of the world cup of years gone by. Maybe I'm just looking back through rose tinted glasses.

Modifié par Druss99, 06 juillet 2010 - 08:50 .

[DragonRageGT]

Adriano87 wrote...

Van Persie didn't touch the ball, I saw it from 2 meters of our 42" TV ... and Paraguay and Uruguay didn't deserve to reach higher rounds. go blame Brazil and Argentina

Read this!

Druss99 wrote...

He didnt have to touch it he just had to be in play. Putting his foot in the flight path of the ball that close to it made him active and in play. He was offside.

Exactly! It was not a passive offside. He clearly made an attempt at the ball. Doesn't matter if he didn't touch it.

Paraguay and Uruguay didn't deserve? What do they deserve? Another combo apology from Mr. Blatter? Like England and the US? That should happen even if they all had won their matches!

Modifié par RageGT, 06 juillet 2010 - 08:51 .

[the_one_54321]

That's what happens when you develop a sport with a "win at all costs" mentality. It's happened to basketball and American football since long ago, minus all the diving. It renders most regular games unbearable to watch, and the post-season only relatively exciting most of the time. When sports gets industrialized, it looses all its art. When it looses all its art, it becomes an obvious bore to all those who are old enough to remember when it was artful.

[DragonRageGT]

Adriano87 wrote...

BTW, the Victory suits Netherlands ... one of our commentators said that Uruguay came up by chance: Korea and Ghana, with penalties and he was right. He was once one of our best players: Peyrowani

So what? Italy had 3 draws in their group stage in 1982 and they won the cup. Argentina didn't score a single goal, IIRC, in 1990, after tthe 1 Batistuta goal vs Brazil and made to the finals. And many other examples I won't bother to remember.

Uruguay was playing much better against an horrible Netherlands when they suffered an irregular goal. Who deserved what? The ones who benefit from irregularities? Again?

[Chaos-fusion]

I did enjoy tonight's game, even if I was slightly hoping for Uruguay to win it. Either way, congratulations to Holland!

Druss99 wrote...

I have to be honest I'm really not liking this world cup. Its kind of giving football a bad name.

It has reminded me of why I stopped watching it to begin with. Too many bad calls, too much cheating.. At least this offside was very close to call and easy to miss, some of the decisions so far have been shocking.

[Druss99]

@ The_One

Not really. Club football still has some great games. Its just this world cup hasn't lived up to being the world cup. I look forward to next month to the domestic season kicking off again. I blame Mourinho. He is the scum of the earth and a scurge on football.

Modifié par Druss99, 06 juillet 2010 - 08:56 .

[the_one_54321]

The world cup is the big "win at all costs" event though, isn't it?

[DragonRageGT]

@Druss FIFA can only propose stuff. The International Board is the one who decides. And their members are ultra-conservative very old people with rotten ideas and souls!



@The One When we have the five individual fouls exclusion rule and the Past 10 collective fouls it's a free kick at the Penalty mark rule, it may change. Also because every faking will be called a foul against the faker!

[the_one_54321]

Wait, what? Remember that I am not a follower of club football/soccer, so I don't know what differences there are.

[DragonRageGT]

Adriano87 wrote...
"Van Persie didn't hinder the two defense and the SEEING of Goal keeper, so it hasn't done something to change the result ..." - second commentator

Again, it does not matter. The only chance for that to be a passive offside was if he stood still or moved away from the ball. He did the contraire and attempted to hit the ball making it an active offside. Rules are clear. Doesn't matter what commentators say. And they don't have the line of sight of the keeper to say he wasn't in it!

[Druss99]

Adriano87 wrote...

RageGT wrote...

Exactly! It was not a passive offside. He clearly made an attempt at the ball. Doesn't matter if he didn't touch it.

Paraguay and Uruguay didn't deserve? What do they deserve? Another combo apology from Mr. Blatter? Like England and the US? That should happen even if they all had won their matches!

"Van Persie didn't hinder the two defense and the SEEING of Goal keeper, so it hasn't done something to change the result ..." - second commentator
no Both of them totally aren't as strong as Brazil

Yeah he didnt really hinder the keepers vision but by swinging his foot towards the ball the keeper has to factor that in to his attempt to make the save. By moving his foot he gave the keeper something else to think about when diving therefore he was interfering with play.

[Mister Mida]

Compliments of Ghana, Uruguay. Bye.

[Druss99]

RageGT wrote...

@The One When we have the five individual fouls exclusion rule and the Past 10 collective fouls it's a free kick at the Penalty mark rule, it may change. Also because every faking will be called a foul against the faker!

Can you explain that Rage? Its the first time I have heard of this.

[Druss99]

Do you mean tipping the puck in Ice Hockey Adriano?

If it was intelligence he would have just got out of the way because by flinging his leg at it he was breaking the rules.

You said you used to be a goalkeeper I think. Ok lets say you were in goal and someone was standing offside as a shot came in, your in the process of diving for the initial shot but the guy swings his leg at it to try and deflect it but misses. Wouldnt that put you off in your attempt to save it?

[Mister Mida]

And about that supposed off side by Van Persie: the way I see is that Sneijder tried his luck to shoot the goal, the player of Uruguay hit the ball which made it change the direction it would go, making it hit Van Persie, making it change direction again, ending up in the goal. So Van Persie wasn't off side because the ball wasn't intented for him. Of course people will not agree with me. But in the end, it does not matter. It has been written. It has been done.

[Druss99]

Doesnt matter if it was intended for him Mister Mida he was offside when Sneijder struck the ball towards the goal. Deflection doesnt count, its the initial shot. If the rule was the way you described it then what would stop forwards from just standing infront of the keeper waiting for a rebound or hoping for a deflected shot?

It didnt even hit Van Persie he missed it, but the fact he tried to touch it makes him active and therefore offside.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

I'm not really enjoying this WC too. Well, I didn't enjoy 2006 and 2002 that much either. Makes me miss 1994 and 1998. At least in my head they were better.

[the_one_54321]

I'm still in confusion over RageGT's last comment.

[Druss99]

Adriano87 wrote...

If he averted the Balls way to Goal I would protest but I am ready to catch the ball (or knock it) in every situation, so I guess he won't touch the ball ... as every professional keeper catches the ball. whether it is offside or not.
also it was a worst day for stecklenburg ... I hope he don't make those mistakes anymore.

But theres your answer. The very fact that you now have to guess and hope he doesnt touch ball, you arent fully aware of where the ball is going to go because of him throwing his leg at it. You knew where it was going then he threw his leg at it leaving you having to guess, what if you guessed wrong? Therefore he is interfering with play because you had to make that guess.

That and he had a chance to touch the ball which automatically makes him active anyway.

[Druss99]

Rage is probably counting the points The_One he might explain later. I think it might be some new rules they are trying out in the Brazilian league. They arent afraid to experiment there like they are in alot of countries. I'm eager to find out what he meant too.