[WC] World Cup 2010 - General Talk Thread (51 Viewers)
- Thread starter Tommy
- Start date
Nah. Baseball sucks.
It's loaded with balls-and-strikes calls that are very unscientific and imprecise, and out calls at the bases without instant replays.
It's loaded with balls-and-strikes calls that are very unscientific and imprecise, and out calls at the bases without instant replays.
Want to know which side has to win in 2010?
Conspiracy theory alert! 
If that were the case, England would have had to win this year... and just about every Cup for that matter.
If that were the case, England would have had to win this year... and just about every Cup for that matter.
It's Germany.
You are right, bad refereeing is rining world cup. It already has. And I'm all for changing the rules, using ANYthing to minimize the errors. But your way of seeing things is sad.
How could the referee of Italy-France game influence the penalty kicks? What did he have to do with Grosso scoring his penalty kick? How was he responsible for Trez' shot hitting the post?
How could the referee of Italy-France game influence the penalty kicks? What did he have to do with Grosso scoring his penalty kick? How was he responsible for Trez' shot hitting the post?
Seven you can't be serious?I think FIFA should take the first step by changing/modifying some of the rules. I'm mostly disappointed with the way Ghana missed out on a place in the semifinal. Yes, Suarez handed the ball, the ref saw it and he did everything he could do based on the rules: a red card for the player and a penalty kick for the opponent but it's exactly how you fool the rules. What happens is in compliance with the law but it is unfair. You deny a team from having a goal, a 100% goal (not a 99% goal opportunity but a plain clear goal) and you give them a 90% goal opportunity instead. You also give them the advantage of playing with one man more which is absolutely useless for them as it is the 120th minute of the game.
In basketball, goaltending is the violation of interfering with the ball when it is on its way to the basket and it is (a) in its downward flight, (b) entirely above the rim and has the possibility of entering the basket, and (c) not touching the rim. If goaltending is called for interference with a field goal, the shooting team is awarded the points for the field goal as if it had been made.[1][2]
Why can't we have this in football? When a player prevents the ball from going into the goal by making a foul (like handling the ball), the shooting team must be awarded with a goal. No red card, nothing more except the goal.
Harry Kewell stopped the ball with his hand in Australia-Ghana game. Whether it was intentional or not, give Ghana the goal and let Kewell stay on the pitch. Suarez stopped the ball with his hand off the line, call for the goal then because this is the only thing which could treat Ghana fairly.
In basketball, goaltending is the violation of interfering with the ball when it is on its way to the basket and it is (a) in its downward flight, (b) entirely above the rim and has the possibility of entering the basket, and (c) not touching the rim. If goaltending is called for interference with a field goal, the shooting team is awarded the points for the field goal as if it had been made.[1][2]
Why can't we have this in football? When a player prevents the ball from going into the goal by making a foul (like handling the ball), the shooting team must be awarded with a goal. No red card, nothing more except the goal.
Harry Kewell stopped the ball with his hand in Australia-Ghana game. Whether it was intentional or not, give Ghana the goal and let Kewell stay on the pitch. Suarez stopped the ball with his hand off the line, call for the goal then because this is the only thing which could treat Ghana fairly.
