EPT2013 - 2014 Football Thread - Page 624
| Forum Index > Sports |
Time to move on to the next thread http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sports/460943-2014-2015-football-thread | ||
|
ZeroChrome
Canada1001 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Terminal
United Kingdom2109 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
On February 17 2014 02:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So it's Arsenal versus Everton. That's great. Now we won't have to go back to the Etihad. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18770 Posts
| ||
|
anomalopidae
Slovenia549 Posts
On February 17 2014 04:19 sharkie wrote: Arsenal were impressive vs Liverpool? Not really sure, they were better than last week, wouldn't say they were brilliant or anything. Defense was a lot better, although I'd say Liverpool were a lot more dangerous. Fabianski put in a really good perfrmance :D | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On February 17 2014 05:07 anomalopidae wrote: Not really sure, they were better than last week, wouldn't say they were brilliant or anything. Defense was a lot better, although I'd say Liverpool were a lot more dangerous. Fabianski put in a really good perfrmance :D They were better, they were not too impressive. The takeaways were that they were exceptionally clinical. Suarez was taking Brosc to school all game. Defense splitting pass after defense splitting pass. If Sturridge doesnt have a shocker Liverpool canter that game. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
haitike
Spain2744 Posts
But Jesé is quite impressive. already 8 goals and it is his first season in the main team. And he plays in Ronaldo / Bale position. | ||
|
Azza
China650 Posts
| ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
On February 17 2014 05:28 Rebs wrote: They were better, they were not too impressive. The takeaways were that they were exceptionally clinical. Suarez was taking Brosc to school all game. Defense splitting pass after defense splitting pass. If Sturridge doesnt have a shocker Liverpool canter that game. Yeah, if anything these games were two extremes. Liverpool took their chances in the first game, and it turned into a romp, and while they cut Arsenal open just as often in the second game, they couldn't finish their chances (credit to Fabianski; he was brilliant). On February 17 2014 08:48 Azza wrote: The first Suarez penalty was just him trying to con the ref and he got it. The second he deserved and guess what his dirty rep cost him. Either way one penalty and 2-1, nothing to cry about. Go watch it again, Podolski kicked Suarez in the heel for the first penalty. The second penalty shout was even more legit, but splashing around like a fish out of water is probably what cost him. | ||
|
Azza
China650 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
![[image loading]](http://fat.gfycat.com/GenuineScentedHamadryad.gif) | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On February 17 2014 10:33 Azza wrote: I did watch it, my opinion is it was soft, don't deny the contact. I'm saying he just lifted his legs up and fell to the floor. He felt the touch and went down, conned the ref. He was not brought down from the tackle, he choose to go down. There is a difference. Doesnt matter, as a defender you knock your feet into a player in the penalty box from behind. Contact is contact, whether he stays up or down at that point is Suarez's prerogative at that point because that much contact is illegal, and its illegal because it disrupts the attacker. If he stays up he doesnt get a whistle, if he doesnt he gets one; so he goes down. There is no conning its just the reality of how penalties are won, that is the culture of the sport as it is. If you have a problem with that, thats a seperate debate but both penalty shouts were extremely legitimate. There is no grey, there is no interpretation, they were penalties. As for the contact being soft, maybe but any amount of contact hard or otherwise can disrupt a player illegally. Maybe the posture and his footing were upset by the tackle, maybe they werent but you make those claims based on replays. The referee has to call the contact, he doesnt have the benefit of anything else. And thats why the rule is as it is. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On February 17 2014 10:58 Rebs wrote: Doesnt matter, as a defender you knock your feet into a player in the penalty box from behind. Contact is contact, whether he stays up or down at that point is Suarez's prerogative at that point because that much contact is illegal, and its illegal because it disrupts the attacker. If he stays up he doesnt get a whistle, if he doesnt he gets one; so he goes down. There is no conning its just the reality of how penalties are won, that is the culture of the sport as it is. If you have a problem with that, thats a seperate debate but both penalty shouts were extremely legitimate. There is no grey, there is no interpretation, they were penalties. As for the contact being soft, maybe but any amount of contact hard or otherwise can disrupt a player illegally. Maybe the posture and his footing were upset by the tackle, maybe they werent but you make those claims based on replays. The referee has to call the contact, he doesnt have the benefit of anything else. And thats why the rule is as it is. And the reality is that this sport rewards people for being weak and deceiving the referees. Just because it's the culture of the sport doesn't mean it's right. In fact, it's probably the #1 thing that turns Americans off from it so much. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On February 17 2014 11:14 Stratos_speAr wrote: And the reality is that this sport rewards people for being weak and deceiving the referees. Just because it's the culture of the sport doesn't mean it's right. In fact, it's probably the #1 thing that turns Americans off from it so much. Americans can get turned of by whatever, I dont think the footballing culture cares about what turns Americans off. And thats hardly fair to say considering the NBA is rife with a similar activity, it just matters less in the overall context of games. At the end of the day its the rule. He got clipped even if he doesnt fall it disrupts him, to get a whistle he has to go down. You think refs will call it if he doesnt and just puts his hands up ? No. Fouls dont get called if you dont go down. So you go down simple. Obviously if you dont get disturbed and you fall, thats not going to fly, that is deception. Going down under contact that is disruptive, is not. And like I said, the fact that players need to go down to get a whistle when they are illegally disturbed is a separate debate and has nothing to do with the fact that those 2 instances were penalties under the laws of the game. Its still a foul whether he smashes his leg to pieces are brushes him so his balance is upset. Obviously it seems some people can't relate to how infuriating it is as a player to get clipped from behind. It irks me too when players get fouled, dont go down and dont get calls; but what are you going to do to change that ? Nothing, because you cant, its ingrained in the sport at every level over decades. You can dislike it all you want its not going anywhere. | ||
|
Craze
United States561 Posts
On February 17 2014 11:18 Rebs wrote: Obviously it seems some people can't relate to how infuriating it is as a player to get clipped from behind. From an armchair it looks like no big deal, but getting a proper kick or a soft ground soccer spike on the heel can be really painful. edit: and sterling needs to check himself, Webb will deck his ass. | ||
|
Azza
China650 Posts
On February 17 2014 11:18 Rebs wrote: Americans can get turned of by whatever, I dont think the footballing culture cares about what turns Americans off. And thats hardly fair to say considering the NBA is rife with a similar activity, it just matters less in the overall context of games. At the end of the day its the rule. He got clipped even if he doesnt fall it disrupts him, to get a whistle he has to go down. You think refs will call it if he doesnt and just puts his hands up ? No. Fouls dont get called if you dont go down. So you go down simple. Obviously if you dont get disturbed and you fall, thats not going to fly, that is deception. Going down under contact that is disruptive, is not. And like I said, the fact that players need to go down to get a whistle when they are illegally disturbed is a separate debate and has nothing to do with the fact that those 2 instances were penalties under the laws of the game. Its still a foul whether he smashes his leg to pieces are brushes him so his balance is upset. Obviously it seems some people can't relate to how infuriating it is as a player to get clipped from behind. It irks me too when players get fouled, dont go down and dont get calls; but what are you going to do to change that ? Nothing, because you cant, its ingrained in the sport at every level over decades. You can dislike it all you want its not going anywhere. You clearly don't watch football. Of course you can be given fouls without going to the ground. Plenty of players get contacted and don't go down, it's a physical sport. He played for the penalty, instead of being brought down by the challenge. What are you talking about it's a foul if you are knocked off balance, go watch cricket man. User was warned for this post | ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
dam giroud just got owned by some model. | ||
| ||
