EPTMadrid - Barca game was bad-tempered and plenty of cynical fous on both sides, though imo Real did more as a ploy to break up play. Mou's Chelsea did the same to Arsenal to the same effect. Amazed it finished square though, thought Real were by far the better team, but I guess that shows how dangerous Barca are. Simply amazing that Valdes didn't concede a penalty and get a yellow for his blatant trip on Ronaldo - since it wasn't a red card offence can it be reviewed and he receive a ban?
2011-2012 football (soccer) thread - Page 21
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Sanctimonius
United Kingdom861 Posts
Madrid - Barca game was bad-tempered and plenty of cynical fous on both sides, though imo Real did more as a ploy to break up play. Mou's Chelsea did the same to Arsenal to the same effect. Amazed it finished square though, thought Real were by far the better team, but I guess that shows how dangerous Barca are. Simply amazing that Valdes didn't concede a penalty and get a yellow for his blatant trip on Ronaldo - since it wasn't a red card offence can it be reviewed and he receive a ban? | ||
|
Xorphene
United Kingdom492 Posts
On August 15 2011 18:04 Solas wrote: Gervinho should've been given a penalty when Joey Barton started messing around with him. The ball was still in play. That depends what the referee stopped play for. | ||
|
Xorphene
United Kingdom492 Posts
On August 15 2011 18:10 Klive5ive wrote: Oh yeah. What level do you referee at? Because I watch "qualified referees" every week in the football league and lots of them are terrible. Level 2/3. | ||
|
Xorphene
United Kingdom492 Posts
On August 15 2011 18:58 Rebs wrote: yes because if he did Abidal would have a concussion right now.. you cannot go up with flying kicks like that whether it hit the player or not.. and besides even if they did "just scratch him" it hurts a fucking lot dude, not enough to knock you out but itll sting.. sooo dragging someone up by the collar (and hence provoking them) is only grounds for a yellow and throwing a palm out is red ? Ok I get the latter, but shouldnt the former be equally bad ? I personally agree both should be a red card offence. However, the laws of the game suggests otherwise... they left common sense at the door when they wrote them. | ||
|
Xorphene
United Kingdom492 Posts
On August 15 2011 21:07 Sanctimonius wrote: Hard to see how Barton didn't deserve to be sent off, and as others have said the ball was still in play - last time I checked assault was a foul, and a foul in the box is a penalty. If Gervinho did dive (why wasn't that a card for simulation unless the ref did think he was touched or lost balance?) then Barton certainly earned the penalty for Arsenal. The situation boiled over as the ref hadn't dealt with the situation. Madrid - Barca game was bad-tempered and plenty of cynical fous on both sides, though imo Real did more as a ploy to break up play. Mou's Chelsea did the same to Arsenal to the same effect. Amazed it finished square though, thought Real were by far the better team, but I guess that shows how dangerous Barca are. Simply amazing that Valdes didn't concede a penalty and get a yellow for his blatant trip on Ronaldo - since it wasn't a red card offence can it be reviewed and he receive a ban? Referees don't like to give cautions for simulation unless it is crystal clear. Too many referees have liberally cautioned for it in world football and been vilified by their respective FA. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
TonyL2
England1953 Posts
Tottenham (H) Arsenal (H) Bolton (A) Chelsea (H) Stoke (A) | ||
|
EchoZ
Japan5041 Posts
On August 15 2011 22:01 TonyL2 wrote: Wow 3 of the 1st team defenders out for United with the next 5 matches being: Tottenham (H) Arsenal (H) Bolton (A) Chelsea (H) Stoke (A) United really need a class Midfielder. | ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
T_______________________T | ||
|
Zhiroo
Kosovo2724 Posts
| ||
|
Hassybaby
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On August 15 2011 22:01 TonyL2 wrote: Wow 3 of the 1st team defenders out for United with the next 5 matches being: Tottenham (H) Arsenal (H) Bolton (A) Chelsea (H) Stoke (A) Well Vidic will probably be only out for a week, hopefully. Him and Chris Evans should be able to hold the fort for a while I miss Rafael though. Oh wait, him and Fabio are the same person, nvm | ||
|
kakaman
United States1576 Posts
| ||
|
TranceStorm
1616 Posts
On August 15 2011 22:59 kakaman wrote: I'm not a Gunner fan by any means, but the team got screwed over big time. Barca's buyout clause for Fabregas is 200 Euros, which means they got Cesc for 1/5 of what they value him. That is just fucked up. What? Buyout clauses are always much much higher for highly valued players and are always higher than the transfer fee. The reason is simply that the top teams do not wish to lose their top players at nearly any price. If they actually wanted to sell Fabregas, he would go for a similar price to his current transfer fee. Barcelona don't actually value Fabregas at 200 million Euros. That's merely the price at which they would be forced to sell Fabregas (if anyone ever stumped up that much money). And who wouldn't sell Fabregas for 200 million Euros? For example, rumors are exist that Ronaldo's buyout clause is roughly $1 billion . (Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-18/ronaldo-to-be-tempted-by-move-to-manchester-city-mirror-says-roundup.html). Would you say that United got a raw deal? | ||
|
kakaman
United States1576 Posts
On August 15 2011 23:04 TranceStorm wrote: What? Buyout clauses are always much much higher for highly valued players and are always higher than the transfer fee. The reason is simply that the top teams do not wish to lose their top players at nearly any price. If they actually wanted to sell Fabregas, he would go for a similar price to his current transfer fee. For example, rumors are exist that Ronaldo's buyout clause is roughly $1 billion . (Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-18/ronaldo-to-be-tempted-by-move-to-manchester-city-mirror-says-roundup.html). Would you say that United got a raw deal? http://www.insideworldsoccer.com/2009/06/cristiano-ronaldo-real-madrid-contract.html This site makes it seem like the $1bn figure is an aberration, but I get your point. Still, totally unfair to Arsenal, Liverpool got a lot more for Torres earlier this year. | ||
|
Stimp
South Africa780 Posts
edit: Why do they think they NEED such a high buyout? Do they not trust Fabregas to stay and not proclaim his love for Arsenal and that he has Arsenal DNA? | ||
|
isleyofthenorth
Austria894 Posts
| ||
|
TranceStorm
1616 Posts
On August 15 2011 23:10 kakaman wrote: http://www.insideworldsoccer.com/2009/06/cristiano-ronaldo-real-madrid-contract.html This site makes it seem like the $1bn figure is an aberration, but I get your point. Still, totally unfair to Arsenal, Liverpool got a lot more for Torres earlier this year. Yeah, but the transfer market is always crazy. Torres was sold for such a high amount because Chelsea immediately wanted Torres at the end of the January transfer window and therefore did not negotiate with Liverpool all that much (they talked in the summer, but that didn't come to much). Whereas Fabregas was relentlessly targeted by Barcelona for two years and Barcelona persistently refused to pay Fabregas' asking price on the basis that they didn't 'need' him. As some other posters have said, the fact that Fabregas only had eyes for Barcelona and not any other club also kept his price low because there was no competition for his signature. Its really difficult to rationalize the transfer market since we don't really know what happens behind the scenes. Disparities in transfer prices always exist and transfer shouldn't really be considered against each other. Remember that Ozil went to Real Madrid for only 15 million euros (!!!!) and Van der Vaart went to Spurs for a very cheap price as well last year. At the same time Carroll was sold for 35 million pounds as a result of Torres' move - but that was a result of the conditions surrounding his transfer. | ||
|
Thezzphai
Germany1145 Posts
| ||
Twisted
Netherlands13554 Posts
Seems logical when a sub-par striker like Carroll gets sold for 35 million pounds. | ||
|
kakaman
United States1576 Posts
On August 16 2011 02:08 Twisted wrote: I heard that English teams pay eachother more than they would pay foreign teams ;o. Seems logical when a sub-par striker like Carroll gets sold for 35 million pounds. Yes, this is a policy set by the FA to nurture home grown talent, which hilariously some English poster some pages back blamed FIFA for as a conspiracy. http://dominicpollard.blogspot.com/2010/07/fas-new-squad-regulations-step-in-right.html | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg737/scaled.php?tn=0&server=737&filename=9twtf.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
