DISQUS

[quote comment="23231"]can I just say to all the muppets making anti united comments I watched the game and middlesburough played their strongest possible team on the night and united had half first team and half youngsters and united hammered them pretty much all night, middlesburough were lucky they didn't concede alot more[/quote]

man u played half "B" team because the "A" team hasn't exactly been kicking *** this season. when the "A" team can't do it, bring on the other players thus making your new A team.

[quote comment="23279"]
and daniel you sound like a plastic yank
shouldn't you be watching fagball in your country?[/quote]

what does this even mean? somehow you insinuate that being gay is an insult, but is simply a knee-jerk reaciton by a mind that is incapable of making a reasoned response. try harder next time.

all man u needs is for the opposing team's defenders to pass them ball for breakaways and then they can win a game. way to go man u. amazing stuff.

that's ****. should have been a tie. Macedonia's first goal was good. and i'm a Netherlands fan!

[quote comment="20127"]yeah i am racist so what i hate greasy wops olive skinned monkeys hairy chested apes gay looking faggots, pizza and pasta are disgusting and greasy[/quote]

again: you might take a look at "irony". by definition faggots are in fact, gay so it makes sense that they would look gay. there is actually no insult there as being gay is nothing to be ashamed of or to "insult."

[quote comment="20036"]All the Italian haters are a bunch of fucking racists and ignorant pieces of shit. None of you have any class, but you want to talk shit about the Italians not having any class and that they cheat. On top of things, you're all a bunch of internet tough guys that have no balls in reality so you resort to talking shit on the internet. Fucking pussies. And to the English limey cunts, you didn't even qualify with your shitty, pasty, ugly, mongo toothed national team. You need a fucking Italian to manage you now because you're hopeless. To the rest of you spics, niggers, bohunks, micks, chinks, sheenys, camel jockeys, brazilian transvestite AIDS infested faggots; GO FUCK YOURSELVES!
:d/:d/:d/[/quote]

dude: that's not cool. i thought you were going to be alright, but then you turned out to be racist. please don't post anythign like that anymore. 1) look up irony in the dictionary and then 2) get some counseling.

[quote comment="20032"]I just want to comment on the Penalty and the Abidal being sent off. Some of you made a comment saying French got penalized twice for one infraction.
Now, that may seem so when one is not too familiar with the rules of the game. What happened there is quite clear to me : First, it was a illegal tackle from behind (Foul) inside the penalty box, which is definately a PK. Next, it is a deliberate foul of "last hope ", which means that there was nobody left in front of the goal( except the goalie) to prevent Toni to prevent having a goalscoring opportunity. This is something that should be "awarded" by a card.
Similarly, there are multiple instance in football where you have what you call "getting penalised twice for one infraction." For instance, when a player gets harshly fouled in the middle of the park and the the fouling player gets 1) a free kick awarded against him and 2) a card for the harsh foul.
I see the same thing here. The REF did the RIGHT THING, imo. And I am by no means Italian, just a neutral football fan.[/quote]

dude, i understand the rules. i explicitly posted that in my first post where i asked the question, so please read and understand the whole thing before answering.

i think the thing is that a PK and RED card (awarding the exceptional goal chance and making them lose a player for the whole game) is what makes the situation unique and thus raises the question.

[quote comment="19985"]For Patrick:

"Question: should a team (in this case it was France) be penalized twice for one infraction? that is: should the defending team lose a player to a red card AND give up a penalty at once, in one infraction? i read somewhere–which i think is a good idea–that the defending team should only be hit once: lose the player or give the penalty, not both. because the way it is now, for one infraction you are hit essentially with two disciplinary actions."

I can understand that a penalty and a red card is a very heavy punishment, but I dont' agree with you: following what you're saying when there is a fault, the referee could not give a yellow card if he gives also a freekick.
And if he gives the yellow card he couldn't give the freekick.
It is not logic, dont' you think?
Bye[/quote]


i see what you're saying. it seems like making a team lose a man and give the penalty shot is harsh. i don't know what the solution would be. maybe the yellow and penalty? or just the penalty? that way the rest of the game could be played with 11 v 11 and thus more enjoyable.

[quote comment="19982"]Are you fucking serious? It was really clear penalty. If you are the last man and you take somebodys legs not touching the ball, of course its penalty and red card. Come on[/quote]

wow dude. chill out. apparently you can't read because i clearly laid out the question so that no one would repsond this way. but apparently you have the maturity of a three year old.

so: read the post again and then respond. i know what the rules currently are. i was aksing a question about how they should be. now try your post again.

so i scanned the above posts and wanted to know what you all thought of something. (also, i cannot claim to have thought of this argument because i read about it somewhere else).

Question: should a team (in this case it was France) be penalized twice for one infraction? that is: should the defending team lose a player to a red card AND give up a penalty at once, in one infraction? i read somewhere--which i think is a good idea--that the defending team should only be hit once: lose the player or give the penalty, not both. because the way it is now, for one infraction you are hit essentially with two disciplinary actions.

before people answer: i do know what the rules state and the ref made the perfectly right decision for the tackle. i do not mean to get in to a debate about that however... just the question above.

P.S. for all the people who say winning is everything and praise Italy for their style should go read Eduardo Galeano. he'll make a better case than me on that point.

OK, this is the last one. let's say the defender was knocked out past the line by his keeper and was just on the edge of the line, just off the field. the ball comes flying in towards the striker who's about to deflect it into the goal. BUT, the seemingly injured defender sees this and lurches toward the forward, swinging his leg and is able, while off the field, to just get a touch on the ball as the striker hits it to stop the goal... what do we do? do we penalise the defender for coming back onto the pitch without the official's consent? no. he was active the whole time, no offside, no foul play. we can't penalise one side and not the other.

[quote comment="19314"][quote comment="19305"]agung: don't do that please.

1) the goal was correct. whereas an offensive player could not gain from being off the field, out of play (there is already a "passive offsides" rule), a defensive player could gain from it by being sneaky and drawing everything from corner kicks to free kicks offside simply by stepping off the field. thus, Panucci was still active; the ref did not let him or make him leave the field of play. and i'm sure if Panucci had thought he could have intervened against Nistleroy, he would have simply stood up and done just that. if that happened, we would hear no uproar about how Panucci illegally stepped back onto the field (remember: the ref did not let or make him leave the field of play and was thus still involved). in the name of the most important "fair play" law in the good book (NOT the bible), the play should stand.

2) people have seemed to forget that later in the game, Van Persie would have been through leaving the closest Italy defender 15 meters back had it not been wrongfully flagged by the linesman. thus, it all ended up right in the end either way you argue.[/quote]
There is one flaw in your logic, and this is what Dutch fans don't seem to compehend. You keep saying that the rule is there to prevent defenders from simply "stepping off the field." I completely agree with you, however, Panucci did not "step off the field," he was knocked off. The rule includes the word "deliberate" for a reason. If the defender is off the field not of his own accord, than he cannot be expected to assist in defense and therefore cannot be considered "active." This is the case with Panucci. He does not fit into the required description of "deliberately" off the field for a goal to be upheld, and as such, the goal should have been disallowed.

In any case, it doesn't matter now. I would encourage everyone to stop focusing on this one call and worry about the upcoming games instead.[/quote]

i understand your interpretation of "deliberate," but his own teamate knocked him out which i think has to be considered (and the team was punished for his poor play). second, play can continue (and does) if the player is only slightly injured. you can't tell me Panucci had a concusion or something. moreover, if he was officially injured, the referee would have had to let him re-enter the field once play had restarted (from the ensuing kick-off). really, play couldn't stop if a defense just decides to stop playing defense and thus became innactive. that would be ridiculous.

again, i think the "fair play" rule is most important. we can't penalise the attacking team for the mistake of the defending goalkepper and the defender.

agung: don't do that please.

1) the goal was correct. whereas an offensive player could not gain from being off the field, out of play (there is already a "passive offsides" rule), a defensive player could gain from it by being sneaky and drawing everything from corner kicks to free kicks offside simply by stepping off the field. thus, Panucci was still active; the ref did not let him or make him leave the field of play. and i'm sure if Panucci had thought he could have intervened against Nistleroy, he would have simply stood up and done just that. if that happened, we would hear no uproar about how Panucci illegally stepped back onto the field (remember: the ref did not let or make him leave the field of play and was thus still involved). in the name of the most important "fair play" law in the good book (NOT the bible), the play should stand.

2) people have seemed to forget that later in the game, Van Persie would have been through leaving the closest Italy defender 15 meters back had it not been wrongfully flagged by the linesman. thus, it all ended up right in the end either way you argue.

Spain's coach is still a racist curmudgeon. with that said, i love the players. very stylish play. he at least lets them play a fluid and attacking game which, like the Dutch and Brazilians, do very well.

[quote comment="12766"]keepers all suck ;P[/quote]

sorry again, but you too have it wrong. i've seen many goals like this scored in Seria A, Primera, Premier, and Bundesliga (just check out those goal compilations)... leagues many of these players play in.

[quote comment="12437"]boring... except from drogba's every goal looks the same. all they have is strike power[/quote]

pardon my directness, but you're an idiot. kalou's goal was superb (in my opinion it should be #1). and ronaldo couldn't have hit a better rip as goal #2.

super sweet video(s)! the only critique i agreed with so far was that some replays might be cool--especially on the super-sweet plays and footwork. i also liked that you put some good saves in there--kepps never get any credit!

[quote comment="18628"][quote comment="18547"]apparently, the bundesliga only allows goals from distance? number 21 was better than most of the following.[/quote]
Bundesliga Goalkeepers are probably pretty good against short distance shots ;)... but I admit I'm very surprised to see that many long range goals[/quote]

yea, i'm not saying A LOT of them aren't awesome, or that scoring a goal from a ways out isn't hard. i'm just saying that not as impressive when you watch some 20+ of them in a row. you start to wonder how hard it is and that ain't right.

apparently, the bundesliga only allows goals from distance? number 21 was better than most of the following.

well, i think it was scored on aston villa. but i can't tell who the team that scored it is.

walcott's run and cross was awe inspiring. top 10 goals/plays of the year for sure. he needs to be made a starter next season.