| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 1:46 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I just came across this:
| Quote: |
Many commentators have noted that 999 footballers out of 1,000 would have done as Uruguay's Luis Su�rez did in the 122nd minute when he raised his hand to block a goal-bound shot, but that does not make his instinctive reaction the right one. Poor Gyan's inability to convert the penalty that would have made them Africa's first semi-finalists turned this into the biggest distortion of justice at any World Cup since West Germany eliminated France in the 1982 semi-final after Harald Schumacher's assault on Patrick Battiston.
Almost as sickening was the sight of Su�rez wildly celebrating Gyan's misfortune in the tunnel, when under the laws of the game he should already have been banished to the dressing room. It was a spectacle whose distastefulness was compounded by the victory parade at the end of the shoot-out, when the young striker was carried around the pitch in triumph on the shoulders of the team's reserves. A little sympathy for the losers might have been appropriate at that point, but he then started talking about "the real hand of God". He is a good footballer but he is not Diego Maradona, or entitled to claim the same moral exemptions.
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/jul/04/world-cup-2010-germany-ghana
I didn't like the way he carried on, either. He could at least have pretended to feel contrite. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
I just came across this:
| Quote: |
Many commentators have noted that 999 footballers out of 1,000 would have done as Uruguay's Luis Su�rez did in the 122nd minute when he raised his hand to block a goal-bound shot, but that does not make his instinctive reaction the right one. Poor Gyan's inability to convert the penalty that would have made them Africa's first semi-finalists turned this into the biggest distortion of justice at any World Cup since West Germany eliminated France in the 1982 semi-final after Harald Schumacher's assault on Patrick Battiston.
Almost as sickening was the sight of Su�rez wildly celebrating Gyan's misfortune in the tunnel, when under the laws of the game he should already have been banished to the dressing room. It was a spectacle whose distastefulness was compounded by the victory parade at the end of the shoot-out, when the young striker was carried around the pitch in triumph on the shoulders of the team's reserves. A little sympathy for the losers might have been appropriate at that point, but he then started talking about "the real hand of God". He is a good footballer but he is not Diego Maradona, or entitled to claim the same moral exemptions.
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/jul/04/world-cup-2010-germany-ghana
I didn't like the way he carried on, either. He could at least have pretended to feel contrite. |
Why would he feel contrite, its soccer. The German goal keeper was just as shameful when he bragged how he tricked the referee during the controversial non goal call during the England match. There just seems to be a whole different ethos in Futbol than in popular North American sports and I think most Anglo sports fans find it distasteful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sector7G
Joined: 24 May 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
I just came across this:
| Quote: |
A little sympathy for the losers might have been appropriate at that point, but he then started talking about "the real hand of God". He is a good footballer but he is not Diego Maradona, or entitled to claim the same moral exemptions.
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/jul/04/world-cup-2010-germany-ghana
I didn't like the way he carried on, either. He could at least have pretended to feel contrite. |
So suddenly English sports writers are ok with Maradona's " hand of God" goal, because he had a moral exemption?? What a crock!
Contrite? For what? Putting the guy to the free throw line?? If the Ghananianianan would have done his job, we would not even be discussing this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulsanchris
Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Location: take a wild guess
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| PatrickGHBusan wrote: |
| ulsanchris wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Give it a rest, no one was cheated. The only people that Ghana can blame is themselves for missing a golden opportunity with that penalty with 10 seconds to go and then for failing in the shootout. |
They were cheated out of a goal. If they weren't then what's his nuts wouldn't have been given a red card and sent off. Ghana can blame Suarez, because his cheating cost them the game. How can having a 100% chance at success taken away and replaced with 90% chance of success be considered fair? |
What is your solution?
Allowing an instand goal?
Hanging Suarez from the crossbar and letting Ghana hit him with sticks?
The rule is simple: hand ball in the box is a red card and an automatic penalty shot.
The ref applied the rules correctly.
Poor Ghana missed the golden chance of a glorious penalty with 10 seconds remaining.
Now suarez, arguably Ururguays best striker, will miss the semi-final game.
Personally, I think the rule should be two game for handling the ball like he did but you cannot just give the other a team a goal for that.
What Suarez did was unsportsman like and he fully deserves to be blamed....outside of that, the rules were applied. |
I was taking exception to your comment that no one was cheated, when quite clearly somebody was. In a situation like that it should be an automatic goal, just like in hockey when someone tries to block a shot by throwing a stick. However FIFA seems to enjoy crappy decisions by incompetent refs, tolerates the presence of match fixers at the world cup (which might explain some the questionable refereeing) and has bizarre aversion to technology, so it isn't very surprising that, for them, taking away a sure goal and replacing it with a only a chance at getting a goal is preferable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Gipkik
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Look his kids in the eye? He's lucky to look at anything after that thunderous strike to his face. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd assume he'd say...I was trying to get the guy sent off and they would understand. As far as I know there was little to no condemnation of the dive in Brazil.
Rivaldo is one of the greatest players ever produced by Brazil and that is saying a lot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the ireland
Joined: 11 May 2008
Location: korea
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sector7G wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
I just came across this:
| Quote: |
A little sympathy for the losers might have been appropriate at that point, but he then started talking about "the real hand of God". He is a good footballer but he is not Diego Maradona, or entitled to claim the same moral exemptions.
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/jul/04/world-cup-2010-germany-ghana
I didn't like the way he carried on, either. He could at least have pretended to feel contrite. |
So suddenly English sports writers are ok with Maradona's " hand of God" goal, because he had a moral exemption?? What a crock!
[size=9]Contrite? For what? Putting the guy to the free throw line??[/size] If the Ghananianianan would have done his job, we would not even be discussing this. |
What????? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sector7G
Joined: 24 May 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the ireland wrote: |
| Sector7G wrote: |
| Contrite? For what? Putting the guy to the free throw line?? |
What????? |
I was comparing the situation to NBA basketball players who intentionally foul a player to prevent a sure basket and make it so he has to shoot from the free throw line - which means he could miss. Some players, like Shaquille Oneal, miss a lot more than others. A player can commit 5(6?) fouls before he has to leave the game, so it can be worth it. It's a strategy that has been accepted as part of the game.
In soccer, the kicker taking the penalty shot has a much higher rate of success, at least over 70%. The violator(for using hands) has to leave that match immediately, and sit out at least the next match as well(possibly more). So, the stakes are much higher for the violator in soccer. In this case, for Uraguay, it was worth it.
Is this strategy considered acceptable in soccer? It depends on who you ask.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/18/sports/soccer/18score.html?ex=1308283200&en=67391adea0395a75&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sector7G
Joined: 24 May 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You know what? Forget everything I said above. The more I think about it, I realize I am comparing apples to oranges.
But there is this incident, which can not be changed, and the rules, which can be. Maybe they should think about awarding penalty goals. And maybe they should consider getting instant replay too.
Just saying.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I was taking exception to your comment that no one was cheated, when quite clearly somebody was. In a situation like that it should be an automatic goal, just like in hockey when someone tries to block a shot by throwing a stick. However FIFA seems to enjoy crappy decisions by incompetent refs, tolerates the presence of match fixers at the world cup (which might explain some the questionable refereeing) and has bizarre aversion to technology, so it isn't very surprising that, for them, taking away a sure goal and replacing it with a only a chance at getting a goal is preferable. |
Ghana was clearly robbed by Suarez, but Ghana was sufficiently compensated with a penalty kick. The ref acted within the rules of the game. It's not the best solution but it was the fairest.
And in Hockey, stick throwing doesn't equate to automatic goals. The only time an automatic goal would be awarded would be when the goalie is pulled and the defender throws a stick at the puck heading for the open net.
Fifa didn't take away the sure goal, Suarez did and Fifa punished him and compensated Ghana. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Why would he feel contrite, its soccer. |
Look up the word 'humour' in your dictionary. The use of italics should have been a clue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Murakano
Joined: 10 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JMO wrote: |
I'd assume he'd say...I was trying to get the guy sent off and they would understand. As far as I know there was little to no condemnation of the dive in Brazil.
Rivaldo is one of the greatest players ever produced by Brazil and that is saying a lot. |
Whilst we see it as blatant cheating......South Americans regard diving/feigning injury/conning the referee etc as "being clever" from what I've heard by South Americans .....so no surprise at the lack of condemnation over there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sector7G wrote: |
| the ireland wrote: |
| Sector7G wrote: |
| Contrite? For what? Putting the guy to the free throw line?? |
What????? |
I was comparing the situation to NBA basketball players who intentionally foul a player to prevent a sure basket and make it so he has to shoot from the free throw line - which means he could miss. Some players, like Shaquille Oneal, miss a lot more than others. A player can commit 5(6?) fouls before he has to leave the game, so it can be worth it. It's a strategy that has been accepted as part of the game.
In soccer, the kicker taking the penalty shot has a much higher rate of success, at least over 70%. The violator(for using hands) has to leave that match immediately, and sit out at least the next match as well(possibly more). So, the stakes are much higher for the violator in soccer. In this case, for Uraguay, it was worth it.
Is this strategy considered acceptable in soccer? It depends on who you ask.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/18/sports/soccer/18score.html?ex=1308283200&en=67391adea0395a75&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss |
I'd say the infraction is most comparable to "goaltending". In the NBA, the points are awarded to the person who shoots, regardless of whether it goes in or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
