World Cup 2010

[eFestivals]

Just "an element of fair play" ralph?

See, I haven't got you wrong. You're happy enough with cheating, when it works for your team, or doesn't bother you.

As you've already demonstrated today - but very strangely, not included in your quoting. I wonder why - you don't let it drop when it works against your team.

See, I haven't got you wrong.

[eFestivals]

Where did I say I think its better or worse? Outside of a select few referees (Howard Webb, Lee Mason and I even have some time for Mike Dean now) the standard is appalling - Prem. teams outside the top 7/8 will consistently get the worst on offer from the elite class (Andre Marriner, Keith Stroud, Stuart Atwell). For the Championship the standard is more consistent, in that they're all terrible, and its remarkable that the FA are trying to push on refs at the very incompetent standards of Stroud and Atwell to the highest level of the game.

You said it "concerns" you.

Yet it's getting better at all levels, of this there's absolutely no doubt. I've watched it happen with my own eyes over decades.

All of what you post is irrelevant.

[ralph250]

It's not Utd I hate, it's the constant pathetic bollocks they spout. Just reference ralph today - cheating's fine, but it's outrageous that Utd were cheated out of the title.

[eFestivals]

READ!!!!!

I do, and I don't forget either. I'm just less fussed about quoting.

You applauded Valencia's dive for a penalty against Liverpool.

Quote all you like, but you never quote those ones do you?

[Gre]

That's simply not true.

Some offences or calls are clear, but others are not and need a 3rd party to decide which way it should go - for example, where a ball bounces on the legs of opposing players several times before going out of play,

[ralph250]

Just "an element of fair play" ralph?

See, I haven't got you wrong. You're happy enough with cheating, when it works for your team, or doesn't bother you.

As you've already demonstrated today - but very strangely, not included in your quoting. I wonder why - you don't let it drop when it works against your team.

See, I haven't got you wrong.

[eFestivals]

Then, if all the players are 'Fair Play' mode, the one who it hit last would know. In all the sport I've played I've never had an instance where I've not known if the ball hit me last.

I'd say that's probably true for me too, tho there's occasions I've had to think about it, by counting the bounce noises.

I'm pretty sure there have been fierce tackles since the dawn of the sport. Hence why there has always 'needed' to be a referee. Football no longer being a 'gentleman's game' is to at least an extent a heavily nostalgic view. The Battle of Santiago is an obvious counter example.

The idea of fairplay existed in the English game for far longer.

In fact, pretty much up until it ceased being a sport and became a business - in 1992 for your youngsters, if not later. To my mind, the single act which changed things forever, the tipping point if you like, was Klinnsman and his comedy dive after scoring his first goal for Spurs. It turned diving from always abhorrent into something acceptable.

Its not pretty, but its part of the game and has been for decades. I read not so long ago about some player from the 20s who was banned for a season or so because of deliberately dangerous tackles.

and back around the time of the FA being formed, there was a call for kicking players on the shins to be within the rules.

(When it wasn't agreed to, the team that was pushing for it most buggered off and became a rugby team ).

All that aside, I suggest you read up on how football became the worldwide sport that it has done. It wasn't due to cheating.

This is professional sport.

And I'm (from one angle) a professional journalist. Would you consider a journo who wrote bullshit - cheating his readers - as being honourable in any way?

Then why give that level of approval to cheating footballers?

[eFestivals]

Neil, it works against my team more than for.

That's right. Poor old hard done by Utd, everyone is against them. The BBC, the FA, referees, the Prem hierarchy, and every other fan.

Nothing that happens to them is ever the result of what their players do - or the cheating that their manager approves of - or the bollox their fans spout. Spout rather like you just have in fact.

It's football, teams bend the rules, to gain an advantage or make it an even footing.

Yes, I know. And when they cheat by doing this, I call them cheats.

Do tell me where I've got that wrong, and do show me where I've got the rules of footie wrong with that.

There's no parity of team ability in the main so the likes of Bolton will use the rules against Arsenal or Utd to make it a game more suited to them.

Playing within the rules to the dislike of the opposing team isn't wrong. "Parking the bus" isn't wrong (tho I wouldn't pay to watch it).

Doing things outside of the rules is wrong.

If facing Barcelona, teams will try to knock them off their rhythm. It's the same in any team based sport. I'm not for a second advocating legbreakers or anything of the sort but teams will utilise tactical fouling to stop a break/reduce the opportunity to concede a goal. It happens up and down the country in all divisions/from all ages. I played u12,13s,14s,15s etc in my town and you see it all the time.

I played in teams upto u16s (which would have been 1980), and 5-a-sides for a few years after. It probably did happen back then (tho I can't remember a single case), but very definitely not "all the time".

People I played with (and maybe me) had fouls awarded against them for saying "oi" or "yours" or "mine", and for not using the players name. That was (still is?) in the rules as unsporting conduct.

Fouls are defined in the rulebook. They are part of the game.

No, they are something that is defined as being OUTSIDE of the game. That's why they're fouls, and not permissible play.

The post about the Chelsea game was the first time I've mentioned it, other than at the time of the game (search drogba or offside under my post history).

that's not correct. It's at least the 2nd time you've posted about it since the season finished - and is why I've picked on it today.

Edited July 6, 2010 by eFestivals

[ralph250]

I do, and I don't forget either. I'm just less fussed about quoting.

You applauded Valencia's dive for a penalty against Liverpool.

Quote all you like, but you never quote those ones do you?

[eFestivals]

Valencia dived. He was fouled, but had been fouled (past tense) and it was over when he suddenly fell over having crossed the line into the box. You thought that OK.

The ref shouldn't have fallen for it, but he did. He did because Valencia acted up.

It was cheating. You don't need to be a genius to know that. But you do have to not be a blinkered Utd fan to be able to utter the words.

[ralph250]

That's right. Poor old hard done by Utd, everyone is against them. The BBC, the FA, referees, the Prem hierarchy, and every other fan.

Nothing that happens to them is ever the result of what their players do - or the cheating that their manager approves of - or the bollox their fans spout. Spout rather like you just have in fact.

[ralph250]

that's not correct. It's at least the 2nd time you've posted about it since the season finished - and is why I've picked on it today.

[eFestivals]

Neil, did I say that United don't do it. No. Scholes has done it all his career. Just saying that it will happen more against us than for.

Number of cards given last year, outside a couple anomalies, bit of a trend.

That proves nothing.

And not surprisingly so. Utd players in Fergie's time are very adept at committing 'cheating' fouls (fouls for the purpose of gaining an advantage, as opposed to fouls that are simply poorly timed tackles) but at a severity that's low enough to not get a card.

Hows about giving the stats for fouls conceded? Tho to get the true context from that, they'd need to be weighted by the amount of non-possession for every team, to give a "one foul for every X minutes of non-possession" figure.

Here's betting that stats compiled in that far more meaningful way don't suggest Utd are hard done by to anything like the extent you like to believe.

Edited July 6, 2010 by eFestivals

[ralph250]

Valencia dived. He was fouled, but had been fouled (past tense) and it was over when he suddenly fell over having crossed the line into the box. You thought that OK.

The ref shouldn't have fallen for it, but he did. He did because Valencia acted up.

It was cheating. You don't need to be a genius to know that. But you do have to not be a blinkered Utd fan to be able to utter the words.

[ampersand]

handicap betting tonight. tie +1. does that mean that if either team win by a single goal, they pay out?

[ralph250]

Pick that out!

[minute5072]

BOOM!

[Paul ™]

Oooftt what a goal.. can Rangers sign him again please?

[ralph250]

Shake Shake Shake The Room!!!

[G-Stud]

Oooftt what a goal.. can Rangers sign him again please?

[ampersand]

goaaaaaaaalllllllsss

[oafc0000]

Two cracking goals

[pink_triangle]

Did anyone else find tyldeslys constant moaning about van bommel not getting a yellow card very irritating?

[oafc0000]

Well done Holland... Cracking game in the end I thought with some good goals...

[ralph250]

FFS!

Townsend: "and we'll see another great decision from the linesman"

Southgate: "um, yeah but technically he's offside"

Townsend: "nah"

Southgate: "well yeah, his foots out, letter of the law it's offside"

Townsend: "ah, but the linesman can't see that from 25 yards"

Congrats to the Dutch!!!