[WC] World Cup 2010 - General Talk Thread (52 Viewers)

[BillyG]

aaah fuck the suspension. i am in the finale and 1-1 and am scored a goal in the last minute cause i pressed and am the better team and some fucker manged to fuck me up with this hand ball. why u give me a freakin' penalty and it's either 50% inside and 50% outside when it should been 100% onside.

my point exactly

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Enron]

aaah fuck the suspension. i am in the finale and 1-1 and am scored a goal in the last minute cause i pressed and am the better team and some fucker manged to fuck me up with this hand ball. why u give me a freakin' penalty and it's either 50% inside and 50% outside when it should been 100% onside.

Why not just make the penalty?

 

[Bjerknes]

well that is the gamble Suarez took and won! I said it at the time he did it that is was a gamble and i acknowledged that he knew what he was doing.

but having the chance of missing the ensuing penalty which happens (in accordance with the rules) is a kick in the stones. cud you have gone from a 100% certain goal to a probability, for the team awarded the penalty that is.

I know i haven't explained it properly, but u catch what i'm trying to say? I'm not goin to get in on the whole was it right was it wrong but i can see and agree with both sides of the argument.

The two sides are the rules and persistent crybabying. Suarez deliberately handled the ball, got sent off, and Ghana had a chance to win the game at the death. They failed. Suarez, and Uruguay, were also punished today with the suspension. The rules and karma won, crybabying lost.

 

[Enron]

Yes, they do. I'd say, call for the goal and let Suarez play the game. In Australia-Ghana game, Kewell handled the ball off the line. It was a goal. Call for the goal then and let Kewell continue playing.

What about a foul in the box? Penalty there or rack one up on the score board.

 

[BillyG]

The two sides are the rules and persistent crybabying. Suarez deliberately handled the ball, got sent off, and Ghana had a chance to win the game at the death. They failed. Suarez, and Uruguay, were also punished today with the suspension. The rules and karma won, crybabying lost.

so eloquent with the words there andy

 

[JuveJay]

This discussion reminds me of the professional foul, like the one Solskjær made once in the final minutes with his team protecting one goal for Man Utd, a striker ran through and he just tripped the guy up as he could never make a good tackle to stop him. Solskjær just jogged off the pitch as he knew he would be sent off and the home fans clapped him for taking one for the team. Is it different because a certain goal is stopped, on the line like Suarez did? Surely you play to the rules. Maybe there should be a 'penalty goal' in future.

 

[king Ale]

So you want to award Ghana a goal in that case? What if the shot was higher and looked like it could have hit the post? Would you still give them the goal? What if in another situation the handball wasn't deliberate?

You're entering the world of fiction more so than that of regulation.

Nah, stop bringing so many "if"s into the rule. If the player thinks it's going to hit the post, he must not handle the ball.

Like the goaltending violation: 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.

When a player blocks the ball on its way to the basket, they call for goal even though it's not 100% certain whether the ball is going to enter the basket or hit the rim.

All in all, this would be making much more sense compared to denying a GOAL and changing it to only a goal opportunity.

 

[BillyG]

What about a foul in the box? Penalty there or rack one up on the score board.

don't be absurd. that IS NOT the same thing as stopping a ball going into the net on the goal line with ur hand

 

[bianconero]

That is two completely different things.

Put a ref behind the goal to watch in and out. Problem solved. Lampard scores, England's happy.

The second argument is for changing a rule for a 1 in a million situation. Maybe FIFA should rewrite the goal to say exactly this:

If in the case of an intentional handball in the penalty area, occurring near the goal line, at extra time of the 120th minute of a match, a penalty is not given. Instead the referee should signal "goal scored" for the shooting team and display a red card to the offending player.

If the technology is there to see if the ball is over the line it can be used in this event too. Goal given at any stage of the game.

 

[Enron]

don't be absurd. that IS NOT the same thing as stopping a ball going into the net on the goal line with ur hand

So we have to have different rules for every single infraction in the 18? What if it is an unintentional handball on the goal line? Or an intentional handball just inside the box?

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Nah, stop bringing so many "if"s into the rule. If the player thinks it's going to hit the post, he must not handle the ball.

Like the goaltending violation: 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. When a player blocks the ball on its way to the basket, they call for goal even though it's not 100% certain whether the ball is going to enter the basket or hit the rim.

All in all, this would be making much more sense compared to denying a GOAL and changing it with only a goal opportunity.

Yes, but allowing 2 points in basketball, which amounts to 2% or 3% of a team's points versus one goal which is normally 50% or 100% of a team's points is very different.

I mean, you SHOULD score a penalty kick. They don't call it a penalty because it's really difficult to do.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Soccer would be so much more fun if there was a 30 second shot clock.

 

[BillyG]

Yes, but allowing 2 point, which amounts to 2% or 3% of a team's points versus one goal which is normally 50% or 100% of a team's point.

I mean, you SHOULD score a penalty kick. They don't call it a penalty because it's really difficult to do.

of course it's difficult. it's the pressure!

it's a penalty because it's an uninterrupted shot shot against the keeper from a relatively close distance

 

[bianconero]

The two sides are the rules and persistent crybabying. Suarez deliberately handled the ball, got sent off, and Ghana had a chance to win the game at the death. They failed. Suarez, and Uruguay, were also punished today with the suspension. The rules and karma won, crybabying lost.

People try to have a rational debate, and all you bring to the argument are insults.

Pathetic really.

 

[king Ale]

What about a foul in the box? Penalty there or rack one up on the score board.

NO FOUL in the box can deny a team from a 100% goal Aaron. No one on one goal opportunity is a goal.

I'm merely speaking about handling the ball off the line. The rule can be easily changed. Two of such cases happened only in this world cup. I'd say the rule must call for a goal letting the player stay on the pitch. That would be much more fair.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

of course it's difficult. it's the pressure!

it's a penalty because it's an uninterrupted shot shot against the keeper from a relatively close distance

That's different per player.

Some might have no pressure at all. You can't use that.

 

[Azzurri7]

Soccer would be so much more fun if there was a 30 second shot clock.

 

[BillyG]

So we have to have different rules for every single infraction in the 18? What if it is an unintentional handball on the goal line? Or an intentional handball just inside the box?

ur just being difficult now. We're talking about players intentionally handling the ball on the line to prevent a SURE goal! this has nothing to do with any other infraction inside the area which all constitute POTENTIAL goalscoring OPPORTUNITIES... NOT SURE GOALS

i highlighted the key words to make it easier for u to understand since ur clearly missing the point

 

[HAZEM]

Why not just make the penalty?

why u don't count the goal?! and u can give the player a red card or not cause i don't give a shit about him (even he should be suspended for something illegal, playing with his hand i suppose)

 

[Enron]

If the technology is there to see if the ball is over the line it can be used in this event too. Goal given at any stage of the game.

I wasn't talking about technology.

I'm against it (technology) because I think it will slow down the flow of the game. There's no way they will be able to determine things like that in a timely manner (scope out a hockey game). So players will either be forced to stop until a decision is made or they'll be thinking back the whole time wondering if the questionable goal will or won't count.

As for the goal line handball issue, I guess you could change the rule for all ball certain goals the are blocked via the hand along the goal line. But penalties would still need to be the status quo for any other infraction in the box. Unintentional handballs would be an issue as well.

Seems to be a bit of a pandora's box to me. Could just be easier to employ top rated officials at the World Cup.