On April 29 2011 10:10 tyCe wrote: Wtf? So many Barca anti-fans who thought that the play-acting by Barca was poor sportsmanship?
Have you seen Mourinho teams play against Barca? Every single game that a Mourinho team has played against Barca, his players commit assault and battery on the pitch. The tackles, the shoves, the flying kicks are atrocious blights on football. When you saw Madrid play Barca last year, there was none of that shit and the games never heated up this much.
Mourinho creates an "us vs all" mentality by his very personality and intentions, and he uses that to drive his players to commit ridiculously violent acts on the pitch and say stupid things in interviews. When the referee decides to show that he's still the ref and the boss of the match, Mourinho and his band of thugs will of course try to be aggrieved at "incorrect" and "biased" umpiring decisions as they can clearly not admit that Barca was better, that they played like thugs or that their strategy was to kick, hack, and chop Barca players for 65 minutes until they can send on Kaka for Khedira and decide to attack for 25 minutes at their home stadium.
What is Barca to do against that? Are they supposed to be bullied in the press conference by Mourinho's bullshit; calling out the ref, putting the spotlight on refereeing decisions and placing unnecessary pressure on the ref to favour his team? Are they supposed to accept that being assaulted on the pitch by Madrid players to the scale of criminal violence is the way things should be? Every Chelsea and Madrid fan on these forums that believed in the "Stamford Bridge scandal" bullshit should search youtube for the video showing Iniesta's legs after the 2nd leg of the semi between Barca and Chelsea 2 years ago. He had cuts strewn across both shins and knees and thighs, some of them half a centimetre deep. That's right Drogba, your team played like a "fucking disgrace" (to quote yourself) in that match, just as Madrid are doing in the recent clasicos.
Barca players play-act because they don't stand up to the bullshit violent tactics that Mourinho employs. They over-dramatise fouls because they want to show the referee that they have been fouled, or stamped, or hacked or slashed. I could be naive as I was when I was playing football up until my college years and try to get up after every violent tackle I was given, but guess what? Half the time that I got up from a foul, I didn't get the foul awarded. Don't you blind Madrid "football fans" see? Barca wants to play a fair game against Madrid, partially because they believe that they are better than Madrid. But if Mourinho tells his players to chop Barca players down and pressures the ref before and after the game to not give out any cards even for conduct that could lead to gaol-time off the pitch, then I think Barca is well justified to play-act when they get the slightest foul. This pressures Madrid to not be as violent on the pitch as they will be walking a fine line. For the fools who continue to be violent and then actually commit a card offence, the play-acting is to increase the chance that the card is actually awarded.
Further, you cannot deny that there is malice or at the very least, intent, in the carded offences in the last few clasicos. Pepe's challenge was high, late and it was a studs-up offence. By definition in the rulebook, this warrants a straight red card. But suppose Alves didn't play-act; then Pepe would not be sent off even though he deserved it. The ref is smart enough to know that Barca (and football players in general) play-acts, and accordingly with this frame of reference in mind, if Alves did not make a meal out of the challenge, he would have though that the challenge was not a red-card offence despite it being so.
TLDR: 1. Madrid was coached by Mourinho to play like thugs in the recent clasicos; this is a tactical play and part of the overall strategy to stifle Barca's passing game and make them too nervous to play to their usual standard 2. Barca players play-act because they do not want to be hacked in the match because if they play-act then Madrid players will need to be careful about their fouling 3. The ref is not stupid like 99% of people here and on every other football forums assume he is; he knows Barca play-act and he knows Mourinho teams play dirty; he will assume that if there is no play-acting, then perhaps no contact even occured since Barca players will fall down at every foul
Final words: It is ridiculous to see so many "fans" of the game condone violent and malicious tackling and blaming the ref on the dismissal. I haven't seen a single red card given unjustly for a Mourinho team against Barca. Pepe's foul was a studs-up tackle, high, late and committed while Alves was in the air. That is a straight red even without some of the aggravating elements of the tackle. Similarly, Arbeloa's challenge in the Liga clasico, Ramos in the clasico before that, Thiago Motta in last year's semi; they were all red card offences. Should the ref not give a red card because it's "not fair" to always send off one of Mourinho's men, even if they deserve it? Play-acting has become a necessary evil when the alternative is to risk long-term injury, especially when the default position is that a player who actually got fouled will play-act (and you cannot blame this on Barca, it has been this way since the Pele days). Every football fan here will know of the double leg breaks that have happened from similar studs-up sliding tackles that some Madrid players have been trying - see Eduardo, Aaron Ramsey and co.
Pretty accurate i'd say of the situation. How else are Barca players supposed to play against a team like RM? They try to play football but get hacked the entire game under the excuse of "we have to play tactical and slow down barca" LOL you mean, you have to NOT play football?
Wtf? So many Barca anti-fans who thought that the play-acting by Barca was poor sportsmanship?
Have you seen Mourinho teams play against Barca? Every single game that a Mourinho team has played against Barca, his players commit assault and battery on the pitch. The tackles, the shoves, the flying kicks are atrocious blights on football. When you saw Madrid play Barca last year, there was none of that shit and the games never heated up this much.
Mourinho creates an "us vs all" mentality by his very personality and intentions, and he uses that to drive his players to commit ridiculously violent acts on the pitch and say stupid things in interviews. When the referee decides to show that he's still the ref and the boss of the match, Mourinho and his band of thugs will of course try to be aggrieved at "incorrect" and "biased" umpiring decisions as they can clearly not admit that Barca was better, that they played like thugs or that their strategy was to kick, hack, and chop Barca players for 65 minutes until they can send on Kaka for Khedira and decide to attack for 25 minutes at their home stadium.
What is Barca to do against that? Are they supposed to be bullied in the press conference by Mourinho's bullshit; calling out the ref, putting the spotlight on refereeing decisions and placing unnecessary pressure on the ref to favour his team? Are they supposed to accept that being assaulted on the pitch by Madrid players to the scale of criminal violence is the way things should be? Every Chelsea and Madrid fan on these forums that believed in the "Stamford Bridge scandal" bullshit should search youtube for the video showing Iniesta's legs after the 2nd leg of the semi between Barca and Chelsea 2 years ago. He had cuts strewn across both shins and knees and thighs, some of them half a centimetre deep. That's right Drogba, your team played like a "fucking disgrace" (to quote yourself) in that match, just as Madrid are doing in the recent clasicos.
Barca players play-act because they don't stand up to the bullshit violent tactics that Mourinho employs. They over-dramatise fouls because they want to show the referee that they have been fouled, or stamped, or hacked or slashed. I could be naive as I was when I was playing football up until my college years and try to get up after every violent tackle I was given, but guess what? Half the time that I got up from a foul, I didn't get the foul awarded. Don't you blind Madrid "football fans" see? Barca wants to play a fair game against Madrid, partially because they believe that they are better than Madrid. But if Mourinho tells his players to chop Barca players down and pressures the ref before and after the game to not give out any cards even for conduct that could lead to gaol-time off the pitch, then I think Barca is well justified to play-act when they get the slightest foul. This pressures Madrid to not be as violent on the pitch as they will be walking a fine line. For the fools who continue to be violent and then actually commit a card offence, the play-acting is to increase the chance that the card is actually awarded.
Further, you cannot deny that there is malice or at the very least, intent, in the carded offences in the last few clasicos. Pepe's challenge was high, late and it was a studs-up offence. By definition in the rulebook, this warrants a straight red card. But suppose Alves didn't play-act; then Pepe would not be sent off even though he deserved it. The ref is smart enough to know that Barca (and football players in general) play-acts, and accordingly with this frame of reference in mind, if Alves did not make a meal out of the challenge, he would have though that the challenge was not a red-card offence despite it being so.
TLDR: 1. Madrid was coached by Mourinho to play like thugs in the recent clasicos; this is a tactical play and part of the overall strategy to stifle Barca's passing game and make them too nervous to play to their usual standard 2. Barca players play-act because they do not want to be hacked in the match because if they play-act then Madrid players will need to be careful about their fouling 3. The ref is not stupid like 99% of people here and on every other football forums assume he is; he knows Barca play-act and he knows Mourinho teams play dirty; he will assume that if there is no play-acting, then perhaps no contact even occured since Barca players will fall down at every foul
Final words: It is ridiculous to see so many "fans" of the game condone violent and malicious tackling and blaming the ref on the dismissal. I haven't seen a single red card given unjustly for a Mourinho team against Barca. Pepe's foul was a studs-up tackle, high, late and committed while Alves was in the air. That is a straight red even without some of the aggravating elements of the tackle. Similarly, Arbeloa's challenge in the Liga clasico, Ramos in the clasico before that, Thiago Motta in last year's semi; they were all red card offences. Should the ref not give a red card because it's "not fair" to always send off one of Mourinho's men, even if they deserve it? Play-acting has become a necessary evil when the alternative is to risk long-term injury, especially when the default position is that a player who actually got fouled will play-act (and you cannot blame this on Barca, it has been this way since the Pele days). Every football fan here will know of the double leg breaks that have happened from similar studs-up sliding tackles that some Madrid players have been trying - see Eduardo, Aaron Ramsey and co.
Mourinho is a cancer to football.Barcelona acting is not as worse as Madrid's criminal tackles if we go about the Magnitud of situations. Why is no one talking about the latter? Because Mourinho doesn't talk about them, conveniently.
I still remember how he made Anders Frisk quit as a referee by suggesting and putting pressure on him, resulting on death threats. Such a great referee he was.
On April 29 2011 10:10 tyCe wrote: Wtf? So many Barca anti-fans who thought that the play-acting by Barca was poor sportsmanship?
Have you seen Mourinho teams play against Barca? Every single game that a Mourinho team has played against Barca, his players commit assault and battery on the pitch. The tackles, the shoves, the flying kicks are atrocious blights on football. When you saw Madrid play Barca last year, there was none of that shit and the games never heated up this much.
Mourinho creates an "us vs all" mentality by his very personality and intentions, and he uses that to drive his players to commit ridiculously violent acts on the pitch and say stupid things in interviews. When the referee decides to show that he's still the ref and the boss of the match, Mourinho and his band of thugs will of course try to be aggrieved at "incorrect" and "biased" umpiring decisions as they can clearly not admit that Barca was better, that they played like thugs or that their strategy was to kick, hack, and chop Barca players for 65 minutes until they can send on Kaka for Khedira and decide to attack for 25 minutes at their home stadium.
What is Barca to do against that? Are they supposed to be bullied in the press conference by Mourinho's bullshit; calling out the ref, putting the spotlight on refereeing decisions and placing unnecessary pressure on the ref to favour his team? Are they supposed to accept that being assaulted on the pitch by Madrid players to the scale of criminal violence is the way things should be? Every Chelsea and Madrid fan on these forums that believed in the "Stamford Bridge scandal" bullshit should search youtube for the video showing Iniesta's legs after the 2nd leg of the semi between Barca and Chelsea 2 years ago. He had cuts strewn across both shins and knees and thighs, some of them half a centimetre deep. That's right Drogba, your team played like a "fucking disgrace" (to quote yourself) in that match, just as Madrid are doing in the recent clasicos.
Barca players play-act because they don't stand up to the bullshit violent tactics that Mourinho employs. They over-dramatise fouls because they want to show the referee that they have been fouled, or stamped, or hacked or slashed. I could be naive as I was when I was playing football up until my college years and try to get up after every violent tackle I was given, but guess what? Half the time that I got up from a foul, I didn't get the foul awarded. Don't you blind Madrid "football fans" see? Barca wants to play a fair game against Madrid, partially because they believe that they are better than Madrid. But if Mourinho tells his players to chop Barca players down and pressures the ref before and after the game to not give out any cards even for conduct that could lead to gaol-time off the pitch, then I think Barca is well justified to play-act when they get the slightest foul. This pressures Madrid to not be as violent on the pitch as they will be walking a fine line. For the fools who continue to be violent and then actually commit a card offence, the play-acting is to increase the chance that the card is actually awarded.
Further, you cannot deny that there is malice or at the very least, intent, in the carded offences in the last few clasicos. Pepe's challenge was high, late and it was a studs-up offence. By definition in the rulebook, this warrants a straight red card. But suppose Alves didn't play-act; then Pepe would not be sent off even though he deserved it. The ref is smart enough to know that Barca (and football players in general) play-acts, and accordingly with this frame of reference in mind, if Alves did not make a meal out of the challenge, he would have though that the challenge was not a red-card offence despite it being so.
TLDR: 1. Madrid was coached by Mourinho to play like thugs in the recent clasicos; this is a tactical play and part of the overall strategy to stifle Barca's passing game and make them too nervous to play to their usual standard 2. Barca players play-act because they do not want to be hacked in the match because if they play-act then Madrid players will need to be careful about their fouling 3. The ref is not stupid like 99% of people here and on every other football forums assume he is; he knows Barca play-act and he knows Mourinho teams play dirty; he will assume that if there is no play-acting, then perhaps no contact even occured since Barca players will fall down at every foul
Final words: It is ridiculous to see so many "fans" of the game condone violent and malicious tackling and blaming the ref on the dismissal. I haven't seen a single red card given unjustly for a Mourinho team against Barca. Pepe's foul was a studs-up tackle, high, late and committed while Alves was in the air. That is a straight red even without some of the aggravating elements of the tackle. Similarly, Arbeloa's challenge in the Liga clasico, Ramos in the clasico before that, Thiago Motta in last year's semi; they were all red card offences. Should the ref not give a red card because it's "not fair" to always send off one of Mourinho's men, even if they deserve it? Play-acting has become a necessary evil when the alternative is to risk long-term injury, especially when the default position is that a player who actually got fouled will play-act (and you cannot blame this on Barca, it has been this way since the Pele days). Every football fan here will know of the double leg breaks that have happened from similar studs-up sliding tackles that some Madrid players have been trying - see Eduardo, Aaron Ramsey and co.
Your wall of text may have held some water if you didn't conveniently ignore the benefits Barca get against NON-Mourinho teams. It just so happens that Mourinho consistently give Barcelona problems, so the rescue referees respond frequently against him. You are now claiming that Wenger's Arsenal, Hiddink's Chelsea (You seem confused, it was not Mourinho in the Ovrebo game), whoever coaches Copenhagen (no disrespect, just a gap in my own knowledge), were all sent out to kick Barcelona players into the ground? What a joke of a theory that is, Wenger and Hiddink in particular are not known for physical tactics.
LOL Arsenal physical Ha! Farcelona is team with full of Oscar winning actors who dive all the time and coerce the ref to hand out bookings. If Real Madrid doesnt win which will most likely happen. It's up to Fergie to take these cheats head on, and this is coming from an Arsenal ugh.
On April 29 2011 03:33 ilj.psa wrote: What Pepe did is the SAME EXACT SHIT like this
Ref didn't noticed it, not even a yellow. but this time the ref did. Good for football.
No. Different direction, different height. Ball was on the ground.
Are you gonna also point out it was different leg too? -__-
Amazing , im done arguing can't believe I wasted this much time
No, you said it was the SAME EXACT SHIT
It's quite clearly not. How is it the same? How is it (cringe) good for football
On April 29 2011 10:31 AngryLlama wrote: Pretty accurate i'd say of the situation. How else are Barca players supposed to play against a team like RM? They try to play football but get hacked the entire game under the excuse of "we have to play tactical and slow down barca" LOL you mean, you have to NOT play football?
Granted, but it's difficult to assess how 'hacked' they are getting when they treat every tackle like a gunshot. And as far as hack jobs go, Try playing away at stoke or blackburn.
To me , that guys posts is a gross exaggeration. Violent acts? Blights on football? Pepe wasn't late either. Madrid players were sliding in studs up? Criminal violence! Suddenly the Stamford Bridge screw job was justified?
On April 29 2011 10:10 tyCe wrote: Wtf? So many Barca anti-fans who thought that the play-acting by Barca was poor sportsmanship?
Have you seen Mourinho teams play against Barca? Every single game that a Mourinho team has played against Barca, his players commit assault and battery on the pitch. The tackles, the shoves, the flying kicks are atrocious blights on football. When you saw Madrid play Barca last year, there was none of that shit and the games never heated up this much.
Mourinho creates an "us vs all" mentality by his very personality and intentions, and he uses that to drive his players to commit ridiculously violent acts on the pitch and say stupid things in interviews. When the referee decides to show that he's still the ref and the boss of the match, Mourinho and his band of thugs will of course try to be aggrieved at "incorrect" and "biased" umpiring decisions as they can clearly not admit that Barca was better, that they played like thugs or that their strategy was to kick, hack, and chop Barca players for 65 minutes until they can send on Kaka for Khedira and decide to attack for 25 minutes at their home stadium.
What is Barca to do against that? Are they supposed to be bullied in the press conference by Mourinho's bullshit; calling out the ref, putting the spotlight on refereeing decisions and placing unnecessary pressure on the ref to favour his team? Are they supposed to accept that being assaulted on the pitch by Madrid players to the scale of criminal violence is the way things should be? Every Chelsea and Madrid fan on these forums that believed in the "Stamford Bridge scandal" bullshit should search youtube for the video showing Iniesta's legs after the 2nd leg of the semi between Barca and Chelsea 2 years ago. He had cuts strewn across both shins and knees and thighs, some of them half a centimetre deep. That's right Drogba, your team played like a "fucking disgrace" (to quote yourself) in that match, just as Madrid are doing in the recent clasicos.
Barca players play-act because they don't stand up to the bullshit violent tactics that Mourinho employs. They over-dramatise fouls because they want to show the referee that they have been fouled, or stamped, or hacked or slashed. I could be naive as I was when I was playing football up until my college years and try to get up after every violent tackle I was given, but guess what? Half the time that I got up from a foul, I didn't get the foul awarded. Don't you blind Madrid "football fans" see? Barca wants to play a fair game against Madrid, partially because they believe that they are better than Madrid. But if Mourinho tells his players to chop Barca players down and pressures the ref before and after the game to not give out any cards even for conduct that could lead to gaol-time off the pitch, then I think Barca is well justified to play-act when they get the slightest foul. This pressures Madrid to not be as violent on the pitch as they will be walking a fine line. For the fools who continue to be violent and then actually commit a card offence, the play-acting is to increase the chance that the card is actually awarded.
Further, you cannot deny that there is malice or at the very least, intent, in the carded offences in the last few clasicos. Pepe's challenge was high, late and it was a studs-up offence. By definition in the rulebook, this warrants a straight red card. But suppose Alves didn't play-act; then Pepe would not be sent off even though he deserved it. The ref is smart enough to know that Barca (and football players in general) play-acts, and accordingly with this frame of reference in mind, if Alves did not make a meal out of the challenge, he would have though that the challenge was not a red-card offence despite it being so.
TLDR: 1. Madrid was coached by Mourinho to play like thugs in the recent clasicos; this is a tactical play and part of the overall strategy to stifle Barca's passing game and make them too nervous to play to their usual standard 2. Barca players play-act because they do not want to be hacked in the match because if they play-act then Madrid players will need to be careful about their fouling 3. The ref is not stupid like 99% of people here and on every other football forums assume he is; he knows Barca play-act and he knows Mourinho teams play dirty; he will assume that if there is no play-acting, then perhaps no contact even occured since Barca players will fall down at every foul
Final words: It is ridiculous to see so many "fans" of the game condone violent and malicious tackling and blaming the ref on the dismissal. I haven't seen a single red card given unjustly for a Mourinho team against Barca. Pepe's foul was a studs-up tackle, high, late and committed while Alves was in the air. That is a straight red even without some of the aggravating elements of the tackle. Similarly, Arbeloa's challenge in the Liga clasico, Ramos in the clasico before that, Thiago Motta in last year's semi; they were all red card offences. Should the ref not give a red card because it's "not fair" to always send off one of Mourinho's men, even if they deserve it? Play-acting has become a necessary evil when the alternative is to risk long-term injury, especially when the default position is that a player who actually got fouled will play-act (and you cannot blame this on Barca, it has been this way since the Pele days). Every football fan here will know of the double leg breaks that have happened from similar studs-up sliding tackles that some Madrid players have been trying - see Eduardo, Aaron Ramsey and co.
Your wall of text may have held some water if you didn't conveniently ignore the benefits Barca get against NON-Mourinho teams. It just so happens that Mourinho consistently give Barcelona problems, so the rescue referees respond frequently against him. You are now claiming that Wenger's Arsenal, Hiddink's Chelsea (You seem confused, it was not Mourinho in the Ovrebo game), whoever coaches Copenhagen (no disrespect, just a gap in my own knowledge), were all sent out to kick Barcelona players into the ground? What a joke of a theory that is, Wenger and Hiddink in particular are not known for physical tactics.
well I dunno about all the games but the red card for Arsenal was correct. Van Persie played the ball although the referee had already whistled. He also did it with his right foot which he never does and the game after he got the ball at the exact same spot but shot with his left leg instead.
And what are the referee's gonna do? Not send them off with a red card because if benefits Barca? People should drop these theories that all referee's want barca to win and just watch the game instead...
On April 29 2011 10:10 tyCe wrote: Wtf? So many Barca anti-fans who thought that the play-acting by Barca was poor sportsmanship?
Have you seen Mourinho teams play against Barca? Every single game that a Mourinho team has played against Barca, his players commit assault and battery on the pitch. The tackles, the shoves, the flying kicks are atrocious blights on football. When you saw Madrid play Barca last year, there was none of that shit and the games never heated up this much.
Mourinho creates an "us vs all" mentality by his very personality and intentions, and he uses that to drive his players to commit ridiculously violent acts on the pitch and say stupid things in interviews. When the referee decides to show that he's still the ref and the boss of the match, Mourinho and his band of thugs will of course try to be aggrieved at "incorrect" and "biased" umpiring decisions as they can clearly not admit that Barca was better, that they played like thugs or that their strategy was to kick, hack, and chop Barca players for 65 minutes until they can send on Kaka for Khedira and decide to attack for 25 minutes at their home stadium.
What is Barca to do against that? Are they supposed to be bullied in the press conference by Mourinho's bullshit; calling out the ref, putting the spotlight on refereeing decisions and placing unnecessary pressure on the ref to favour his team? Are they supposed to accept that being assaulted on the pitch by Madrid players to the scale of criminal violence is the way things should be? Every Chelsea and Madrid fan on these forums that believed in the "Stamford Bridge scandal" bullshit should search youtube for the video showing Iniesta's legs after the 2nd leg of the semi between Barca and Chelsea 2 years ago. He had cuts strewn across both shins and knees and thighs, some of them half a centimetre deep. That's right Drogba, your team played like a "fucking disgrace" (to quote yourself) in that match, just as Madrid are doing in the recent clasicos.
Barca players play-act because they don't stand up to the bullshit violent tactics that Mourinho employs. They over-dramatise fouls because they want to show the referee that they have been fouled, or stamped, or hacked or slashed. I could be naive as I was when I was playing football up until my college years and try to get up after every violent tackle I was given, but guess what? Half the time that I got up from a foul, I didn't get the foul awarded. Don't you blind Madrid "football fans" see? Barca wants to play a fair game against Madrid, partially because they believe that they are better than Madrid. But if Mourinho tells his players to chop Barca players down and pressures the ref before and after the game to not give out any cards even for conduct that could lead to gaol-time off the pitch, then I think Barca is well justified to play-act when they get the slightest foul. This pressures Madrid to not be as violent on the pitch as they will be walking a fine line. For the fools who continue to be violent and then actually commit a card offence, the play-acting is to increase the chance that the card is actually awarded.
Further, you cannot deny that there is malice or at the very least, intent, in the carded offences in the last few clasicos. Pepe's challenge was high, late and it was a studs-up offence. By definition in the rulebook, this warrants a straight red card. But suppose Alves didn't play-act; then Pepe would not be sent off even though he deserved it. The ref is smart enough to know that Barca (and football players in general) play-acts, and accordingly with this frame of reference in mind, if Alves did not make a meal out of the challenge, he would have though that the challenge was not a red-card offence despite it being so.
TLDR: 1. Madrid was coached by Mourinho to play like thugs in the recent clasicos; this is a tactical play and part of the overall strategy to stifle Barca's passing game and make them too nervous to play to their usual standard 2. Barca players play-act because they do not want to be hacked in the match because if they play-act then Madrid players will need to be careful about their fouling 3. The ref is not stupid like 99% of people here and on every other football forums assume he is; he knows Barca play-act and he knows Mourinho teams play dirty; he will assume that if there is no play-acting, then perhaps no contact even occured since Barca players will fall down at every foul
Final words: It is ridiculous to see so many "fans" of the game condone violent and malicious tackling and blaming the ref on the dismissal. I haven't seen a single red card given unjustly for a Mourinho team against Barca. Pepe's foul was a studs-up tackle, high, late and committed while Alves was in the air. That is a straight red even without some of the aggravating elements of the tackle. Similarly, Arbeloa's challenge in the Liga clasico, Ramos in the clasico before that, Thiago Motta in last year's semi; they were all red card offences. Should the ref not give a red card because it's "not fair" to always send off one of Mourinho's men, even if they deserve it? Play-acting has become a necessary evil when the alternative is to risk long-term injury, especially when the default position is that a player who actually got fouled will play-act (and you cannot blame this on Barca, it has been this way since the Pele days). Every football fan here will know of the double leg breaks that have happened from similar studs-up sliding tackles that some Madrid players have been trying - see Eduardo, Aaron Ramsey and co.
Your wall of text may have held some water if you didn't conveniently ignore the benefits Barca get against NON-Mourinho teams. It just so happens that Mourinho consistently give Barcelona problems, so the rescue referees respond frequently against him. You are now claiming that Wenger's Arsenal, Hiddink's Chelsea (You seem confused, it was not Mourinho in the Ovrebo game), whoever coaches Copenhagen (no disrespect, just a gap in my own knowledge), were all sent out to kick Barcelona players into the ground? What a joke of a theory that is, Wenger and Hiddink in particular are not known for physical tactics.
well I dunno about all the games but the red card for Arsenal was correct. Van Persie played the ball although the referee had already whistled. He also did it with his right foot which he never does and the game after he got the ball at the exact same spot but shot with his left leg instead.
And what are the referee's gonna do? Not send them off with a red card because if benefits Barca? People should drop these theories that all referee's want barca to win and just watch the game instead...
I am going to beat a dead horse here and say that was not a red card for RvP -_- He hit it one second later because he didn't hear the whistle in a ground of (no idea lol but most prob above 50K) bustling shouting people. How do you expect him to hear it when he is at the corner of the barca half where he is even more closer to fans? The interviewer told him after the game that he hit the ball one second later which is how he knew it was one second later. Also, I have seen many such instances without any yellow cards appearing. I am not saying barca had anything to do with that, but it was unnecessarily harsh by the ref.
Also, I don't get why a lot of people hate Mourinho. He just expands one part of the game and uses it to its fullest potential. Specifically, he employs this style because it is the only style that disrupts Barcelona's passing play. It isn't antifootball. You call cheese antistarcraft? Lol no it isn't antistarcraft.
And at the person saying Arsenal are physical etc, LOL get your head out of your ass.
To be fair, Arsenal had one shot at goal in that match and it was the shot that got RvP sent off. Sure it was perhaps too harsh to card him for that but it never would've been a red in the first place without RvP slapping some barca player in the face in the first half.
It's funny how Barca fans always say that their team plays real football but what they have shown in that game was completely disgusting. They're good, passing, dribbling, teamwork, cool, no one can deny that they're a world-class team, but to include diving and crying in the "real football" is a bit wrong tbh. I'm a ManU team so i'm not being biased or anything. Real's plan is to play defend to prevent barca from scoring away goal, that's not dirty, that's smart, in football you don't have to attack all the time, denfending is also an art like attacking. Barca has been always one of my favourite team to watch but sometimes the most annoying team to watch as well. Also, the ref seems to be favouring them a little bit (not intentionally) because they play "beautiful football" not strength oriented like english clubs. But anyway, i hope that real come up with something to make the second match a bit more interesting and i hope that barca does not use the little girl pedro.
On April 29 2011 19:48 Khz wrote: To be fair, Arsenal had one shot at goal in that match and it was the shot that got RvP sent off. Sure it was perhaps too harsh to card him for that but it never would've been a red in the first place without RvP slapping some barca player in the face in the first half.
to be fair, Arsenal didn't need to shoot, cause they were winning 2-1 on aggregate
On April 29 2011 10:10 tyCe wrote: Wtf? So many Barca anti-fans who thought that the play-acting by Barca was poor sportsmanship?
Have you seen Mourinho teams play against Barca? Every single game that a Mourinho team has played against Barca, his players commit assault and battery on the pitch. The tackles, the shoves, the flying kicks are atrocious blights on football. When you saw Madrid play Barca last year, there was none of that shit and the games never heated up this much.
Mourinho creates an "us vs all" mentality by his very personality and intentions, and he uses that to drive his players to commit ridiculously violent acts on the pitch and say stupid things in interviews. When the referee decides to show that he's still the ref and the boss of the match, Mourinho and his band of thugs will of course try to be aggrieved at "incorrect" and "biased" umpiring decisions as they can clearly not admit that Barca was better, that they played like thugs or that their strategy was to kick, hack, and chop Barca players for 65 minutes until they can send on Kaka for Khedira and decide to attack for 25 minutes at their home stadium.
What is Barca to do against that? Are they supposed to be bullied in the press conference by Mourinho's bullshit; calling out the ref, putting the spotlight on refereeing decisions and placing unnecessary pressure on the ref to favour his team? Are they supposed to accept that being assaulted on the pitch by Madrid players to the scale of criminal violence is the way things should be? Every Chelsea and Madrid fan on these forums that believed in the "Stamford Bridge scandal" bullshit should search youtube for the video showing Iniesta's legs after the 2nd leg of the semi between Barca and Chelsea 2 years ago. He had cuts strewn across both shins and knees and thighs, some of them half a centimetre deep. That's right Drogba, your team played like a "fucking disgrace" (to quote yourself) in that match, just as Madrid are doing in the recent clasicos.
Barca players play-act because they don't stand up to the bullshit violent tactics that Mourinho employs. They over-dramatise fouls because they want to show the referee that they have been fouled, or stamped, or hacked or slashed. I could be naive as I was when I was playing football up until my college years and try to get up after every violent tackle I was given, but guess what? Half the time that I got up from a foul, I didn't get the foul awarded. Don't you blind Madrid "football fans" see? Barca wants to play a fair game against Madrid, partially because they believe that they are better than Madrid. But if Mourinho tells his players to chop Barca players down and pressures the ref before and after the game to not give out any cards even for conduct that could lead to gaol-time off the pitch, then I think Barca is well justified to play-act when they get the slightest foul. This pressures Madrid to not be as violent on the pitch as they will be walking a fine line. For the fools who continue to be violent and then actually commit a card offence, the play-acting is to increase the chance that the card is actually awarded.
Further, you cannot deny that there is malice or at the very least, intent, in the carded offences in the last few clasicos. Pepe's challenge was high, late and it was a studs-up offence. By definition in the rulebook, this warrants a straight red card. But suppose Alves didn't play-act; then Pepe would not be sent off even though he deserved it. The ref is smart enough to know that Barca (and football players in general) play-acts, and accordingly with this frame of reference in mind, if Alves did not make a meal out of the challenge, he would have though that the challenge was not a red-card offence despite it being so.
TLDR: 1. Madrid was coached by Mourinho to play like thugs in the recent clasicos; this is a tactical play and part of the overall strategy to stifle Barca's passing game and make them too nervous to play to their usual standard 2. Barca players play-act because they do not want to be hacked in the match because if they play-act then Madrid players will need to be careful about their fouling 3. The ref is not stupid like 99% of people here and on every other football forums assume he is; he knows Barca play-act and he knows Mourinho teams play dirty; he will assume that if there is no play-acting, then perhaps no contact even occured since Barca players will fall down at every foul
Final words: It is ridiculous to see so many "fans" of the game condone violent and malicious tackling and blaming the ref on the dismissal. I haven't seen a single red card given unjustly for a Mourinho team against Barca. Pepe's foul was a studs-up tackle, high, late and committed while Alves was in the air. That is a straight red even without some of the aggravating elements of the tackle. Similarly, Arbeloa's challenge in the Liga clasico, Ramos in the clasico before that, Thiago Motta in last year's semi; they were all red card offences. Should the ref not give a red card because it's "not fair" to always send off one of Mourinho's men, even if they deserve it? Play-acting has become a necessary evil when the alternative is to risk long-term injury, especially when the default position is that a player who actually got fouled will play-act (and you cannot blame this on Barca, it has been this way since the Pele days). Every football fan here will know of the double leg breaks that have happened from similar studs-up sliding tackles that some Madrid players have been trying - see Eduardo, Aaron Ramsey and co.
Your wall of text may have held some water if you didn't conveniently ignore the benefits Barca get against NON-Mourinho teams. It just so happens that Mourinho consistently give Barcelona problems, so the rescue referees respond frequently against him. You are now claiming that Wenger's Arsenal, Hiddink's Chelsea (You seem confused, it was not Mourinho in the Ovrebo game), whoever coaches Copenhagen (no disrespect, just a gap in my own knowledge), were all sent out to kick Barcelona players into the ground? What a joke of a theory that is, Wenger and Hiddink in particular are not known for physical tactics.
No, I was not confused with Hiddink's Chelsea and if you read my wall of text, you'd have seen that I didn't say that the Chelsea of 08/09 was coached by Mourinho, but I did say they played with violent intent, which is what Mourinho teams are set out to do against Barca. I think it's a joke that you claim that Chelsea were not violent in that match, because they were extremely physical to the point of violent bullying. Hiddink is a fantastic coach, as an Australian football fan would tell you, and I was quite shocked at the violent tactics he employed in that match, even after going a man up.
Wenger's Arsenal is a great team with suberb technical ability but if you wish to talk about the 2nd leg at the Nou Camp, you would do well to recall that Wenger explicitly stated that Arsenal would play more physically than otherwise against Barca. I do seem to recall that the game was strewn with some bad tackles but the RVP red card was induced by a second yellow for a late kick after the whistle had gone for off-side, if I recall correctly. That was a mistake by the ref, and while it could be argued that it was technically accurate (I don't believe that RVP's kick was an honest mistake; he has a tendency to do this - see the WC final as a case in point), I think it was overly harsh and ruined the match. Also, I may be wrong but I seem to remember that Barca had a couple penalty shouts in the first leg at the Emirates. Not sure though.
In any case, I don't know what you're trying to say. My point is that Mourinho and his teams have it coming to receive fouls, warnings and cards because that is the way they play against Barca. I also said that the only reason we have to focus on the refereeing issues rather than the match itself (and the footballing shortcomings of either side), is because Mourinho puts the spotlight on the ref when he loses and on himself and his team when he wins.
Speaking of which, I don't seem to recall Pep talking about Milito's offside goal at the San Siro last year, and another goal - I think it was Sneijder's - which came from a blatant foul in the box in the build-up, both of which were missed by the referee. According to that, the scoreline would have been Barca 1: Inter 1 in the first leg at Inter's home, putting Barca into a prime position to make the finals last year. Further, the Chelsea "scandal" which was claimed to have 5 penalties missed by the ref, only legitimately had one - a Pique handball, while Abidal was wrongly sent off because Anelka tripped on his own ankle, and Henry was denied a legitimate penalty in the first leg.
Anyway, my agenda here is just to set the record straight. I don't see any particular favouritism from refs or UEFA for Barca, rather I see the natural errors of human judgment in a high-pressure situation. Overall, I don't see that the balance of refereeing errors necessarily benefitting Barca. All I see is unfair criticism and pressure, even bullying, placed on the refs by Mourinho, and similarly unfair, unsportman-like thuggery on Barca's players by Mourinho's teams. Placed in such a situation, I think play-acting and over-dramatising is a necessary evil for Barca if they want to square the odds and ironically enough, play a fair match against Mourinho's Madrid.
On April 29 2011 20:19 brachester wrote: It's funny how Barca fans always say that their team plays real football but what they have shown in that game was completely disgusting. They're good, passing, dribbling, teamwork, cool, no one can deny that they're a world-class team, but to include diving and crying in the "real football" is a bit wrong tbh. I'm a ManU team so i'm not being biased or anything. Real's plan is to play defend to prevent barca from scoring away goal, that's not dirty, that's smart, in football you don't have to attack all the time, denfending is also an art like attacking. Barca has been always one of my favourite team to watch but sometimes the most annoying team to watch as well. Also, the ref seems to be favouring them a little bit (not intentionally) because they play "beautiful football" not strength oriented like english clubs. But anyway, i hope that real come up with something to make the second match a bit more interesting and i hope that barca does not use the little girl pedro.
I don't know if you even watch Barca's games live or you just watch the highlights or "Barca dives" youtube trash.
I watch a lot of games of football and a lot of Barca's games in particular. I admit that Barca players generally overreact to tackles and contact, but I don't think that this should be the key point here. In fact I think everyone is missing the point when they say that Barca players overreact.
The key point should always be that they reacted to something. In other words, they reacted to a foul.
A foul deserves a free-kick. It's that simple. The reaction should never matter. This is an argument both for and against Barca and its haters.
In a perfect world, Barca players should not need to overreact when they are fouled. The ref should see the foul and award it accordingly. However, it should be remembered that the important thing here is the foul, which is awarded to punish the offending player for violent or unsportsman-like conduct. Whether overreaction is unsportsman-like is debatable when the current default position is that of overreaction (not just Barca, but every single decent European team out there). It is certain that diving is unsportsman-like and rightly so, it leads to a caution. However, overreacting has become so normal, that it is like a signal to the ref that somebody has been fouled. Madrid players overreact all the time when they get the chance, as do Man U players (especially in European competition where refs are stricter), Arsenal, Chelsea, both Milans and need I name more?
The only reason why Barca is "overreacting" so much is because they are being fouled so much. Much of this is unintentional - tackles are often late especially once players become fatigued and even more so when the other team has such good technical ball-keeping skills like Barca. However, much of this is also intentional, as we saw in the recent Clasicos.
One more point. I cannot believe how many fans believe that referees are absolutely stupid and don't see, at the very first glance, that an overreaction is an overreaction. There are 3 officials on or near the field, and at least 2 will be close to the foul when it is committed. The refs are not stupid and they do not take overreactions seriously. The overreaction is a signal but the refs, at the most elite level, have the ability to decide when a foul is a foul. They have more ability than you, the viewer on TV or youtube, and the bandwagoner who decides that there is always a conspiracy somewhere, somehow. How else do you explain the fact that the ref didn't respond to Pedro's play-acting when he was stamped in the box by Arbeloa (?) - if the ref responded to overreactions, he would have red-carded Arbeloa and given a penalty, the right choice in that situation, but instead he didn't respond to the play-acting because he didn't see the foul. This is but one proof that refs generally trust their own eyesight over the play-acting of the players.
Anyway, I just cannot believe that people here think that overreacting is a bigger blight to football than intentional violence. Rule out the latter and you rule out the former. The former is a necessary evil to protect against the latter. Mourinho is the disgrace here (by inciting violence and thuggery from his teams, not for his tactics) and football fans are disgraceful for believing in his nonsense.
This Australian guy sucking Barca's dick is pathetic. Football is a contact sport, except for when Barca play apparently. This is why I respect the EPL so much more then other leagues, whatever, i'll get behind Man U for the final again. The ref can't fuck up the final, Barca might actually have to not ask the ref for free cards, should be a good game ;D.
@tyCe: Stop writing walls of text, I pretty much stopped reading after you said Chelsea bullied Barca in the semis, obviously they didn't deserve those 3-4 penalties since they were bullying poor Barca right? Aww
EPT
