Come on the Scum for tuesaday.
13 April 2003, 05:32 PM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
LOL yep agree with you there, well apart from Man U not getting away with more than other teams 
Now Wednesday, I really hope Wenger gives the team a kick up the backside cos on todays performance Ferguson must be rubbing his hands together. I haven't seen Arsenal play that badly for a very long time. Edu and Gilberto need to get out of there slow Brazilian pace and wake upto the Premiership. If Sheffield Utd can get possesion so easily they are gonna have one hell of a shock on Wednesday. Not a good form to be in with such a huge game looming. Hopefully it was a one off and its out the way and done with cos they can't play worse than that.
Wednesday for me pretty much decides the Championship, not so much on points but on moral and the boost its going to give to the winners. I just hope it doesn't turn into the previous player clashes and that it is a great display of English football. Just hope that both teams are at full strength so there are no excuses Should be interesting thats for sure.
Now Wednesday, I really hope Wenger gives the team a kick up the backside cos on todays performance Ferguson must be rubbing his hands together. I haven't seen Arsenal play that badly for a very long time. Edu and Gilberto need to get out of there slow Brazilian pace and wake upto the Premiership. If Sheffield Utd can get possesion so easily they are gonna have one hell of a shock on Wednesday. Not a good form to be in with such a huge game looming. Hopefully it was a one off and its out the way and done with cos they can't play worse than that.
Wednesday for me pretty much decides the Championship, not so much on points but on moral and the boost its going to give to the winners. I just hope it doesn't turn into the previous player clashes and that it is a great display of English football. Just hope that both teams are at full strength so there are no excuses
Should be interesting thats for sure.
13 April 2003, 05:48 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it will necessarily decide the championship - it depends on the result:
ManU win - Pretty much game over. Man U's title.
Draw - Anybody's title - I'd give the edge to Man U (but then I would)
Arsenal win - Most likely Arsenal's title, but not game over yet.
I definately agree on the type of game wanted. These are the two best football teams in the UK (cue the moans from north of the border!), and I want to see them play football, not try to kick each other off the park.
It's a shame TV coverage from Highbury is so pants - the cameras are way too low.
On Wednesday - may the best team win.
As for the title - the best team ALWAYS wins.
ManU win - Pretty much game over. Man U's title.
Draw - Anybody's title - I'd give the edge to Man U (but then I would)
Arsenal win - Most likely Arsenal's title, but not game over yet.
I definately agree on the type of game wanted. These are the two best football teams in the UK (cue the moans from north of the border!), and I want to see them play football, not try to kick each other off the park.
It's a shame TV coverage from Highbury is so pants - the cameras are way too low.
On Wednesday - may the best team win.
As for the title - the best team ALWAYS wins.
13 April 2003, 06:22 PM
#34
P1 – love it !! doesn’t take me anytime whatsoever to knock up a reply. Pretty nifty around the keyboard! Besides I love a good wind up. Always got time for that. As for being a closet fan, would eat my shorts first.
I don’t know which part of “I wasn’t bothered about the 4-0 result” you don’t understand ? As soon as the Riley took centre stage I knew it would be difficult for us. The fact that we held our own and even threatened at times during the first half suggested that we would have got something out of the game. Anyway, our season was over some time ago – admit that, only thing we could have got from the game was to give Gooners some advantage, but the ref kind of spoilt the game. Nevermind, I’ll settle for 6 wins out of past 8 knowing well that this game was probably lost under abnormal circumstances.
Its nice for Keane to say that you don’t get enough pens at the Toilet and then Riley gives you 6 in 4 games. If by the letter of the law Hyppia had to go then a week before Docherty did the same thing at Bolton – he already had a yellow, was not booked either. So who’s right and who’s wrong ? I can deal with it, just as long as you can deal with Real getting “support” from their council.
As for the statement about the 80s, well its not like I was banging on about it and Hmm, I suppose you never make any reference to the 90s ever or even your treble 99.
I don’t know which part of “I wasn’t bothered about the 4-0 result” you don’t understand ? As soon as the Riley took centre stage I knew it would be difficult for us. The fact that we held our own and even threatened at times during the first half suggested that we would have got something out of the game. Anyway, our season was over some time ago – admit that, only thing we could have got from the game was to give Gooners some advantage, but the ref kind of spoilt the game. Nevermind, I’ll settle for 6 wins out of past 8 knowing well that this game was probably lost under abnormal circumstances.
Its nice for Keane to say that you don’t get enough pens at the Toilet and then Riley gives you 6 in 4 games. If by the letter of the law Hyppia had to go then a week before Docherty did the same thing at Bolton – he already had a yellow, was not booked either. So who’s right and who’s wrong ? I can deal with it, just as long as you can deal with Real getting “support” from their council.
As for the statement about the 80s, well its not like I was banging on about it and Hmm, I suppose you never make any reference to the 90s ever or even your treble 99.
13 April 2003, 06:36 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Totally agree with you there dharbige. Seeing Keane vs Viera would be entertaining again and hope both would be able to keep it clean. Unfortunately there seems to be a chance both of them may be unfit for the game. I hope not though as they are the 2 best defensive midfielders in Europe.
I hope the best team does win and the result doesn't revolve round a controversial decision like happened today. I doubt there wont be controversy though, its part and parcel of this fixture so it seems as its the biggest match in the Premiership it gets very heated. I also hope Van Nistlerooy doesn't do his diving acts and like wise with Jeffers if he plays at all. No need for it in any game from any player. Just spoils the game for me.
I would say Utd have the best form at the moment but Arsenal have been so inconsistent this 2nd half of the season they could pull out a blinder on Wednesday, I certianly hope so. We certainly haven't played as good football this 2nd half of the season as we did last season thats for sure. Wenger needs to buy a couple good players this summer to sort out the defence and I would say that Gilberto was a waste of money and he still hasn't found the ideal replacement for Petit to go alongside Viera. However its happened before where players were cr@p in their fist season at Highbury, for example Pires, then the 2nd season they show their true skill and value. I hope this is the case for Gilberto.
Can't wait to watch it, roll on Wednesday
I hope the best team does win and the result doesn't revolve round a controversial decision like happened today. I doubt there wont be controversy though, its part and parcel of this fixture so it seems as its the biggest match in the Premiership it gets very heated. I also hope Van Nistlerooy doesn't do his diving acts and like wise with Jeffers if he plays at all. No need for it in any game from any player. Just spoils the game for me.
I would say Utd have the best form at the moment but Arsenal have been so inconsistent this 2nd half of the season they could pull out a blinder on Wednesday, I certianly hope so. We certainly haven't played as good football this 2nd half of the season as we did last season thats for sure. Wenger needs to buy a couple good players this summer to sort out the defence and I would say that Gilberto was a waste of money and he still hasn't found the ideal replacement for Petit to go alongside Viera. However its happened before where players were cr@p in their fist season at Highbury, for example Pires, then the 2nd season they show their true skill and value. I hope this is the case for Gilberto.
Can't wait to watch it, roll on Wednesday
13 April 2003, 09:38 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ash,
You're still incisting that the ref spoilt the game between Liverpool and ManU. Does this mean that you STILL don't accept that Hyppia had to be sent off? There's only one person to blame for Hyppia being sent off - and that's Hyppia.
And 4-0 is a trouncing in anybody's book. Anybody sane at least.
(Oh, P.S. the ref in the Bolton game you refered to called into Sky at half time and said he was wrong not to send the player off. So that should answer your other question.)
You're still incisting that the ref spoilt the game between Liverpool and ManU. Does this mean that you STILL don't accept that Hyppia had to be sent off? There's only one person to blame for Hyppia being sent off - and that's Hyppia.
And 4-0 is a trouncing in anybody's book. Anybody sane at least.
(Oh, P.S. the ref in the Bolton game you refered to called into Sky at half time and said he was wrong not to send the player off. So that should answer your other question.)
13 April 2003, 11:08 PM
#37
My own thoughts and also thoughts of other TV soccer pundits was that yellow card and pen was sufficient. The rule itself needs to be used with some common sense and you have to understand why it was first introduced. It was aimed at last man charging in on goal and being deliberately hacked down. The foul by Hyppia was not a cynical or deliberate attempt to hack the player, if anything it was a clumsy challenge. If this is how the rule is to be applied then it has to be applied in every context and applied with the same consistency. And there is no point in coming on TV afterwards and saying they were wrong.
14 April 2003, 07:36 AM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do you know WHY the rule was introduced? Are you privvy to the internal discussions at FIFA? I think not.
And you think TV pundits are the ultimate authority on the rules of the game? Yeah, right.
In any case, there are SOME rules where their application is open to a certain amount of interpretation or common sense (dangerous play, unsporting behavior, discent etc.). In this particular rule, the only bit open to interpretation is "Was it an obvious goal-scoring chance?". If the answer is Yes, and it was a foul, the fouling player MUST be sent off with a straight red. Even if the foul wouldn't normally have justifed a yellow card.
In this particular case, Hyppia had a handful of Ruud's shirt and was dragging him back. Ruud's a big strong lad, though, and may probably still have scored. Hyppia then tripped Ruud from behind, making no attempt to play the ball. It was as cynical a challenge as you could see. Even by your own (unofficial, non-FIFA) set of rules, Hyypia had to go.
However, I do agree that inconsistency in refereeing is where the problem lies. The rules DO have to be applied in every case the same way, and appologising on TV after the fact does not help. The problem is that a referee can only rule of what (s)he sees, and despite certain evidence to the contrary, referees are only human.
And you think TV pundits are the ultimate authority on the rules of the game? Yeah, right.
In any case, there are SOME rules where their application is open to a certain amount of interpretation or common sense (dangerous play, unsporting behavior, discent etc.). In this particular rule, the only bit open to interpretation is "Was it an obvious goal-scoring chance?". If the answer is Yes, and it was a foul, the fouling player MUST be sent off with a straight red. Even if the foul wouldn't normally have justifed a yellow card.
In this particular case, Hyppia had a handful of Ruud's shirt and was dragging him back. Ruud's a big strong lad, though, and may probably still have scored. Hyppia then tripped Ruud from behind, making no attempt to play the ball. It was as cynical a challenge as you could see. Even by your own (unofficial, non-FIFA) set of rules, Hyypia had to go.
However, I do agree that inconsistency in refereeing is where the problem lies. The rules DO have to be applied in every case the same way, and appologising on TV after the fact does not help. The problem is that a referee can only rule of what (s)he sees, and despite certain evidence to the contrary, referees are only human.
14 April 2003, 08:10 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arborfield, Berkshire
Posts: 12,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ash's problem is that the sending off is a viable excuse as to why they lost so hes sticking to it. Every team gets players sent off but most get on and deal with it.
If you think that refereing is ever going to be 100% consistent then more fool you. Referees are human - they will interpret situations differently, they always have done - its not something that has happened over night.
Good result last night. A nice crack in the Real armour away from home. 4-1 down in the first half away at Sociedad. Got it back to 4-2 but shows they arent as invincible as people think. Especially seeing as Sociedad play an ex Sheff Weds striker!!
Simon.
If you think that refereing is ever going to be 100% consistent then more fool you. Referees are human - they will interpret situations differently, they always have done - its not something that has happened over night.
Good result last night. A nice crack in the Real armour away from home. 4-1 down in the first half away at Sociedad. Got it back to 4-2 but shows they arent as invincible as people think. Especially seeing as Sociedad play an ex Sheff Weds striker!!
Simon.
14 April 2003, 10:41 AM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Real ManU game last week, along with the Liverpool/ManU game and the Newcastle/ManU game, prove just one thing to me...
When two top class teams play each other ANYTHING can happen!
Don't ya just love football!
When two top class teams play each other ANYTHING can happen!
Don't ya just love football!
14 April 2003, 10:56 AM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dharbige
"deliberate handball outside the area" is why barthez should have been sent off...that's sticking to the letter of the law...
hope real madrid give you lot another good football lesson next week...and arsenal stuff you on wednesday..
"deliberate handball outside the area" is why barthez should have been sent off...that's sticking to the letter of the law...
hope real madrid give you lot another good football lesson next week...and arsenal stuff you on wednesday..
14 April 2003, 11:38 AM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crowt,
Which law would that be then? (This is actually a serious question, rather than an argumentative response.)
I was also under the impression that handball outside the area was a red card offence for a goalkeeper (indeed, I'm sure I've seen a keeper sent off for it), but I checked the rules, and can't see any mention of it. So now I'm not so sure.
And thankyou for your kind thoughts regarding our upcoming fixtures.
Which law would that be then? (This is actually a serious question, rather than an argumentative response.)
I was also under the impression that handball outside the area was a red card offence for a goalkeeper (indeed, I'm sure I've seen a keeper sent off for it), but I checked the rules, and can't see any mention of it. So now I'm not so sure.
And thankyou for your kind thoughts regarding our upcoming fixtures.
14 April 2003, 04:35 PM
#44
Firstly I was around when they introduced that rule. It was aimed at players that fouled with intent, meaning that all they wanted to do was hack the player from stopping them scoring. That seemed like a fair rule as what used to happen was that as last man defenders just went for the player and not the ball (this also happened many times outside the box) and all they were ever given was a yellow card. The rule was then introduced so that if such an instance occurred then the player would recieve a red card for it. This kind of balanced things up as defenders knew that they could not just go for the man anymore.
Second point - I did not see the red card as the only reason why we lost. The 2nd pen was an awful decision and one that was outside the box. Now before you start to hack the keyboard, have a close look at it first.
Right, now that we've put that right, who's next ?
Second point - I did not see the red card as the only reason why we lost. The 2nd pen was an awful decision and one that was outside the box. Now before you start to hack the keyboard, have a close look at it first.
Right, now that we've put that right, who's next ?
14 April 2003, 04:54 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ash,
So you were around when the rule was changed were you?
Gosh, that means you are over 13 years old! Damn, that means you MUST have more insight into the rules that most other people on this board.
And the wording of the rule is STILL unequivocal, and it STILL has nothing to do with intent. And you are still wrong. :P
The second penalty was definately a foul - and I have looked at it closely. I'd admit to it being DEBATABLE as to whether it occurred in the box or out. It looked to be pretty much on the line to me, and therefore a penalty.
I do agree that the red card was not the only reason you lost. The reason you lost was because we scored 4 goals, and you scored none.
So you were around when the rule was changed were you?
Gosh, that means you are over 13 years old! Damn, that means you MUST have more insight into the rules that most other people on this board.
And the wording of the rule is STILL unequivocal, and it STILL has nothing to do with intent. And you are still wrong. :P
The second penalty was definately a foul - and I have looked at it closely. I'd admit to it being DEBATABLE as to whether it occurred in the box or out. It looked to be pretty much on the line to me, and therefore a penalty.
I do agree that the red card was not the only reason you lost. The reason you lost was because we scored 4 goals, and you scored none.
14 April 2003, 05:49 PM
#46
Shouldn't your username be garbage ? Yes I am over 13 years old - not sure what your point is here, but then thats nothing new on these posts.
So I take it you studied the video again before coming back with you answer. By saying its debateable you are admitting it was not a pen, then you go on to say it was - make your mind up. Pants I tell yer.
So I take it you studied the video again before coming back with you answer. By saying its debateable you are admitting it was not a pen, then you go on to say it was - make your mind up. Pants I tell yer.
14 April 2003, 06:35 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ash,
Gosh what an original insult! And such an intelligent one too!
What an amazing rhyme you've discovered. I bet all the 4 year-old kids I was at school with wished THEY could have thought that up.
Perhaps, as a repost, I could suggest that your username be changed to "Babbling Idiot".
My point, which obviously passed way over your head, was that "being around when they introduced that rule" is a qualification of anybody over 13 years of age, and is not therefore a very strong argument for knowing what you're talking about. Which, by the way, you don't.
No, I have not examined the video again, as I examined it closely the first time. And if you actually understood the English language, you would realise that I said that it was DEBATABLE as to whether it occured in the box or out, meaning (concentrate now) that it was open to debate, i.e. it could be argued either way. This is not an admission of anything. I then went on to state MY position (which is something that occurs during a debate), which is that it was, indeed, a penalty.
Would you like me to break it down into words of less than 3 syllables?
Gosh what an original insult! And such an intelligent one too!
What an amazing rhyme you've discovered. I bet all the 4 year-old kids I was at school with wished THEY could have thought that up.
Perhaps, as a repost, I could suggest that your username be changed to "Babbling Idiot".
My point, which obviously passed way over your head, was that "being around when they introduced that rule" is a qualification of anybody over 13 years of age, and is not therefore a very strong argument for knowing what you're talking about. Which, by the way, you don't.
No, I have not examined the video again, as I examined it closely the first time. And if you actually understood the English language, you would realise that I said that it was DEBATABLE as to whether it occured in the box or out, meaning (concentrate now) that it was open to debate, i.e. it could be argued either way. This is not an admission of anything. I then went on to state MY position (which is something that occurs during a debate), which is that it was, indeed, a penalty.
Would you like me to break it down into words of less than 3 syllables?
14 April 2003, 09:42 PM
#48
Sounds like you've taken this debate thing the wrong way and upset about something (not even managed a smilie on your post!).
And all because you have a different opinion to someone else. Its like there is only one opinion that counts - yours. In that case, in order to avoid any more insults from you (I've seen the red mist) then I am willing to give in to your superior knowledge on football and no doubt intelligence.
If you want to resort to names then thats your call - kinda childish though, but incidently does follow the theme of your posts about kids and teenagers.
Get well soon.
And all because you have a different opinion to someone else. Its like there is only one opinion that counts - yours. In that case, in order to avoid any more insults from you (I've seen the red mist) then I am willing to give in to your superior knowledge on football and no doubt intelligence.
If you want to resort to names then thats your call - kinda childish though, but incidently does follow the theme of your posts about kids and teenagers.
Get well soon.
14 April 2003, 10:08 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ash,
I'm not upset. I was quite enjoying the cut-and-thrust of friendly banter. I was a bit disappointed when you resorted to name-calling, and I'm a bit surprised that you are calling me childish. Perhaps you should re-read your previous post before attempting to take the moral high ground.
But anyway, this has all gone a bit off topic, and frankly got a little tedious. You don't seem to be able to tell the difference between fact and opinion, and I for one can't be bothered to try to explain it to you anymore.
I'm not upset. I was quite enjoying the cut-and-thrust of friendly banter. I was a bit disappointed when you resorted to name-calling, and I'm a bit surprised that you are calling me childish. Perhaps you should re-read your previous post before attempting to take the moral high ground.
But anyway, this has all gone a bit off topic, and frankly got a little tedious. You don't seem to be able to tell the difference between fact and opinion, and I for one can't be bothered to try to explain it to you anymore.
14 April 2003, 10:17 PM
#50
My reference to names was an attempt at humour, two clues here, the question mark and also the smilie on the post. Thought your post was more in haste than actual thought (just seemed to have aggression all over it) and also the fact that you're not willing to listen to other opinions (tried to explain why the last man rule was introduced etc - but all I get is rule 54, para 2 etc, sometimes not everything is as black and white as the rule book).
Oh, and my references to childish behaviour was more tongue and cheek I'm afraid. Thought I would carry on the theme you know.
Laters.
[Edited by ash1 - 4/14/2003 10:20:43 PM]
Oh, and my references to childish behaviour was more tongue and cheek I'm afraid. Thought I would carry on the theme you know.
Laters.
[Edited by ash1 - 4/14/2003 10:20:43 PM]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
pslewis
Non Scooby Related
31
24 September 2002 07:43 AM