|
fatbury
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 14:43:43 » |
|
i smell a Spurs man!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DV
Has also heard this
 Offline
Posts: 33908
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #31 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 14:47:40 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fatbury
|
|
« Reply #32 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 14:57:05 » |
|
yeah we kno !  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
oxford_fan
Offline
Posts: 6764
|
|
« Reply #33 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 18:08:03 » |
|
sky went on about how the goals were dodgy, personally i thought the officials were spot on.
henry was offside and interfering if you watch makelele. How was he interfering?, the rules state that if he touches the ball the flag should then be put up as he is interfering with play, he didnt touch the ball it went to Van Persie who wasnt offside. where do the rules say that then spuddy, cos i'm a qualified ref and i don't remember seeing that anywhere. don't believe all the shit the pundits on sky come out with, i was getting angry at the tv with all of the factually incorrect stuff they were saying. remember that thing about there having to be 'air' on offside decisions? that was made up by andy gray and everyone took it as gospel - turns out its not remotely true. gray is the worst, he makes the ref's job much harder with all the mixed messages he gives fans. it was offside. henry was pulling defenders away from van persie (?), like i said if you watch makelele he moves away from the scorer due to henrys presence, therefore henry is interfering with play. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
STFC Village
|
|
« Reply #34 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 18:10:25 » |
|
Surely then OF, this case could be argued in nearly every case and the offside rule has changed very little from its original state?
A question, not an argument btw....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reeves4england
Offline
Posts: 16128
We'll never die!
|
|
« Reply #35 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 18:13:58 » |
|
Basically I hate Arsenal for not being remotely English. I don't like Chelsea because of Essien, and I don't like Robben's attitude on the pitch either. He is a cheat. The football league is where the real football is  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
oxford_fan
Offline
Posts: 6764
|
|
« Reply #36 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 18:43:13 » |
|
Surely then OF, this case could be argued in nearly every case and the offside rule has changed very little from its original state?
A question, not an argument btw.... don't really understand your point mate - what can be argued in nearly every case? interfering? being offside is a matter of fact - you're either in an offside position or not. interfering is where subjectivity comes into it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
STFC Village
|
|
« Reply #37 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 18:51:50 » |
|
Surely then OF, this case could be argued in nearly every case and the offside rule has changed very little from its original state?
A question, not an argument btw.... don't really understand your point mate - what can be argued in nearly every case? interfering? being offside is a matter of fact - you're either in an offside position or not. interfering is where subjectivity comes into it. Yeah, i guess i didn't make that very clear. I was meaning that, you could argue, that any player who is offside is interfering with play indirectly i.e. pulling players away from the attacking player with the ball. Is their anything about this in teh rules? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Spud
|
|
« Reply #38 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 20:47:45 » |
|
sky went on about how the goals were dodgy, personally i thought the officials were spot on.
henry was offside and interfering if you watch makelele. How was he interfering?, the rules state that if he touches the ball the flag should then be put up as he is interfering with play, he didnt touch the ball it went to Van Persie who wasnt offside. where do the rules say that then spuddy, cos i'm a qualified ref and i don't remember seeing that anywhere. don't believe all the shit the pundits on sky come out with, i was getting angry at the tv with all of the factually incorrect stuff they were saying. remember that thing about there having to be 'air' on offside decisions? that was made up by andy gray and everyone took it as gospel - turns out its not remotely true. gray is the worst, he makes the ref's job much harder with all the mixed messages he gives fans. it was offside. henry was pulling defenders away from van persie (?), like i said if you watch makelele he moves away from the scorer due to henrys presence, therefore henry is interfering with play. Poor you  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DMR
|
|
« Reply #39 on: Monday, December 19, 2005, 21:49:12 » |
|
I fucking hate Michael Essien.
Fucking rash, dirty, cheating, square headed cock.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ben Wah Balls
Offline
Posts: 5972
|
|
« Reply #40 on: Tuesday, December 20, 2005, 01:51:54 » |
|
I quite like Essien to be honest, tough but talented. The first challenge on Van Persie was nothing, Van Persie is doing exactly the same to him, just Essien is stronger. Not a booking.
For the elbowing a booking was a bit harsh, Lauren was making the most of it and the kick on Van Persie was nothing, he barely touched him. Van Persie is just a diving twat exaggerating the faintest touch.
To be honest Arsenal were lucky not to give away a penalty at the start when Drogba took it round the keeper and was fouled. Then senderos was pulling his shirt again to stop him being clean through on goal, which should've been a booking and Senderos's other foul which he was booked for was at least a booking so Rob Styles should've senthimoff definitely.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Spud
|
|
« Reply #41 on: Tuesday, December 20, 2005, 05:58:29 » |
|
I quite like Essien to be honest, tough but talented. The first challenge on Van Persie was nothing, Van Persie is doing exactly the same to him, just Essien is stronger. Not a booking.
For the elbowing a booking was a bit harsh, Lauren was making the most of it and the kick on Van Persie was nothing, he barely touched him. Van Persie is just a diving twat exaggerating the faintest touch.
To be honest Arsenal were lucky not to give away a penalty at the start when Drogba took it round the keeper and was fouled. Then senderos was pulling his shirt again to stop him being clean through on goal, which should've been a booking and Senderos's other foul which he was booked for was at least a booking so Rob Styles should've senthimoff definitely. Take off those Spurs coloured glasses ffs!, Essien swung his elbow out at Lauren and whether he hit him or not is a different matter, the intent was there and the cunt should have been booked. Even a bloke at work who doesnt follow Arsenal or Chelsea said Essien should have went. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Iffy's Onion Bhaji
petulant
Offline
Posts: 15863
|
|
« Reply #42 on: Tuesday, December 20, 2005, 08:57:59 » |
|
essien is a dirty player end off
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
McLovin
|
|
« Reply #43 on: Tuesday, December 20, 2005, 09:46:16 » |
|
I hate Essien, and his elbow did hit Lauren (didn't they say he would lose a front tooth because of it? :shock: ), but i don't think it was intentional.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
