|
On April 28 2011 23:37 ondik wrote:
So Pepe goes for ball, doesn't even touch Alves and still there people who claim the red card was right? I don't understand. Also what's the point in talking broken legs? Do you realize the chance of breaking an "active" (the one a player is not standing on) leg? It's very very slim.
I dont understand your reasoning. His move was dangerous as hell. If moves like this would not be a red card we would see these kind of fouls everywhere and thus really bad injuries as well.
This is SOCCER and not kung-fu.
Yea sure, he tried to kick the ball but this CANNOT be a reason; fouls with stretched legs have to be punished
I mean how can you play and control the ball with such a move? It was just a move which should hurt the opponent.
|
^ Players play for the ball like that allllllll the time.
|
And they are all red cards.
I don't get your argument this time either. This wasn't a red card but it was given. But similar tackles are not red cards because they aren't given?
Really, try not to make fallacious arguments. It will help you from not having to accuse people fro missing the point when they deconstruct your fallacy.
|
On April 29 2011 00:03 Stimp wrote:
^ Players play for the ball like that allllllll the time.
no they don't
and if they do they (usually) get punished for it
|
Where did I say that ?
They are usually yellow cards or no card at all.
edit: They usually do get punished. With yellow cards. I've watched enough football to know this.
|
The red card can be argued all day and night; its the refs decision.
We all have our own opinion; clearly IMO it shouldnt have been a red card and had a huge factor in the game.
The quality of football is awsome between these two teams; but the oscar winning acting is getting boring and tiresome to watch.
|
On April 29 2011 00:08 Stimp wrote:
Where did I say that ?
You make the statement to support your argument but now you claim it doesn't support your argument? So why did you say it?
Really, stop being a dishonest asshole. There's only one reason for you to make such a random short statement with multiple l's and that's because you think you had a point.
I don't think similar fouls are always given reds. Pepe made a similar one against Messi last game and didn't get a red.
In this case the ref had doubts too it seems. He may have finally decided to give red because it was Pepe. If so, this was smart of him and such a reasoning prevented him from making a big mistake.
|
On April 29 2011 00:14 Suisen wrote:You make the statement to support your argument but now you claim it doesn't support your argument? So why did you say it? Really, stop being a dishonest asshole. There's only one reason for you to make such a random short statement with multiple l's and that's because you think you had a point.
I have no idea what you are on about. Please tell me these statements so that I may stop being such a 'dishonest asshole'
|
On April 28 2011 23:58 Suisen wrote:
Yes, football is supposed to be feminine and soft. It's a low contact game. You can touch each other, give a bit of a shoulder push, but that's it. In football contact isn't banned, but that's about it.
At least that's how it was invented and that's how true football fans try to clean it up again. When de Jong didn't get a red this was a huge huge commotion.
+ Show Spoiler +In King Edward’s reign of England (1307-1327), laws were passed that threatened imprisonment to anyone caught playing soccer. King Edward’s proclamation said:” For as much as there is a great noise in the city caused by hustling over large balls, from which many evils may arise, which God forbid, we command and forbid on behalf of the King, on pain of imprisonment, such game to be used in the city future.”
Evidently judged to be vulgar and indecent, soccer was at times suppressed by the English sheriffs who followed royal orders describing the game as a useless practice. King Henry IV and Henry VIII passed laws against the sport, and Queen Elizabeth I “had soccer players jailed for a week, with follow-up church penance”
Laws, however, failed to stop the sport, which had earned official sanction in England by 1681. The game became so popular by 1800s that, in certain annual contests in northern and middle England, large groups roamed and raged through towns and villages. In 1829, an account of such match in Derbyshire spoke of “broken skins, broken heads, torn coats and lost hats.”
A record of the development of soccer in England shows that Eton college had the earliest known rules of the game in 1815, perhaps implying that until then, chaos was preferred over order. But order gradually came to the game, and standardized rules known as the Cambridge rules were adopted by England’s major colleges.
You sir, are a fool.
|
On April 29 2011 00:03 Stimp wrote:
^ Players play for the ball like that allllllll the time.
This.
You mean 'players play the ball like that all the time, but don't get red. Therefore it isn't red.'
It's a fallacy and you made it. Earlier when I deconstructed one of your fallacies, you accused me from missing the point because you also made a better argument which I also addressed. You cherry pick what you argue against. Dishonest debating tricks.
On April 29 2011 00:18 Megatronn wrote:
In King Edward’s reign of England (1307-1327)...
You sir, are a fool.
Maybe you are the fool. 1307-1327, come on now. Really!
Football is a minimum contact sport, barely above no contact. In no contact you are banned from touching your opponent in the slightest. Football is not at all a full contact sport or a semi-contact sport.
|
the 2nd goal Messi scored was , well i have no words it was soo perfect!!
|
Well I guess you could see it that way, when you add your bit on the end.
What I meant was
Players play for the ball like that alllll the time.
And it's a yellow card at best.
|
You just confirmed I added that correctly. And without me adding that, it has no meaning in this context.
Maybe you don't understand the difference between 'no red card' and 'a yellow at best' in this context. There is none.
|
On April 29 2011 00:14 Suisen wrote:You make the statement to support your argument but now you claim it doesn't support your argument? So why did you say it? Really, stop being a dishonest asshole. There's only one reason for you to make such a random short statement with multiple l's and that's because you think you had a point. I don't think similar fouls are always given reds. Pepe made a similar one against Messi last game and didn't get a red. In this case the ref had doubts too it seems. He may have finally decided to give red because it was Pepe. If so, this was smart of him and such a reasoning prevented him from making a big mistake.
The assistant referee gave him a signal to give him red I think.
edit: atleast thats what the dutch commentator said.
|
At least that's how it was invented
You're wrong.
|
my 2cense on the game:
Barca played extraordinary football and controlled the game exactly how they planned. They babied and cried their way alot of the time, which for me, someone who likes barca because of the beautiful football they play, annoyed the fuck out of me. Every single god damn time a foul on barca or real for that matter was commited you got 10 players surrounding the ref. it really was an embarrassment.
About pepe, i'm sorry to say guys, i guess this is my opinion though but, it could of gone either way red/yellow. reason i say that is because technically cleats up like that should be a direct red but it really seemed like Pepe really did try to go for the ball (not that that really relevant actually but i tend to sympathize more) but i believe by the rule books say that is definitely 100% a red card. (dani alves obv simulated though)
but lets not take away from the main beauty of all this and that's barca's on the ball play. absolutely phenomenal. completely controlling real. it was sad to see real even get the ball because they couldn't hold on to it for more than ten seconds. truly dominated at home. humbled.
MESSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
that goal was too much for me! i was sitting on the floor and after every player he passed, my body slowly began to lift from the ground until i saw the ball slowly start to roll in past casillas to which i just exploded with joy because that goal was a masterpiece ^_____^ classic messi at his finest !! (even though he was pretty quiet most of the game)
ronaldo played pretty well, his attitude stinks still, but nonetheless barca played so much with the ball they never really gave real and ronaldo a chance to get into a rhythm. true dominance by the superior team indeed.
looks like barca manu final again, going to be way more cleaner definitely than real-barca so hopefully we will see a game with less stopping, fouls, and pointless acting
GG Barca, Real got pwned.
|
Football started with Cambridge rules. Any craziness whole towns engaged in has nothing to do with it.
Football is a very limited contact sport and many of the things we see in modern day football are very very odd in this context. How many body checks and wrestling I see in matches every week. it is not limited contact at all.
Remember, futsal is no contact. Field football is just above that. The difference between no contact and what we actually see on the pitch with football every day is huge. It's wrong and against the rules. If rules are applied correctly, many matches will end because of so many fouls one team will no longer have 8 players.
Imagine if they give 6 yellow cards the coming CL final during the first corner kick because suddenly the ref starts applying the real rules again.
|
and i love how so many people here try to pull the "UR A BARCA FAN BOY" if you disagree with them about barca being awesome even though they dive or they get help from refs or whatever other reasons. is it really that hard to believe that some people just love Barca because they play football amazingly? i mean, just watch yesterday's game. so many times barca came close to losing the ball but remained composed and with a accurate flick pass maintain possession and even find a hole to push up? i mean, they're awesome, no other teams do plays like that as consistent and with as much finesse as barca. Also, they don't pass the ball back and forth like so many claim, they keep the ball yes but they also press up as much as they can. (though in this game they actaully played pretty deep defense to counter real's turtle/counter attack strategy) but yea... a few times in the first half theyd pass back and forth in the defense it seemed to annoy real and try to bring them out of their 10 man defense a little, but other than that they're all about attacking which is eye candy for a football lover like myself.
also, did anyone notice in the first half when ronaldo was running around chasing the ball and then realized that none of his teammates were helping him and got really angry and gave up? followed by throwing a little tantrum and throwing his arms up in the air like "WTF R U GUYZ DOING" lol that was funny. then the immediate play after two barca players (forgot who) passed the ball back and forth to eachother like 5 times in a row just to show off/ get him steamed up even more! lol !
edit: haha there's a GIF in the football thread of it!! Lol!!
|
lookinf for Real Madrid to hack down messi before they play Man utd in the final 
|
^ and so many people pull the UR A MADRID FAN BOY.
For all the lovely tippy tappy football, barcelona showed AGAIN last night why some of us find it hard to like them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
