goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Great game. Watching Portugal lose was almost as good as seeing England win. And Ronaldo blubbing his eyes out was the icing on the cake. Come on the Blues.
France v Portugal, Wednesday 5th July, 8 pm, BBC1
- Thread starter William of Walworth
- Start date
iROBOT said:
Yeah, in the chest...not the face.
The fact that Henry could be so focused enough in those few seconds after the challenge to execute his sly little manouevre proves that the severity of this "body check" couldn't have been too high either.
= cheat. end of.
poului said:
Excuse me?
See this is what i mean when I pointed out selective memory, you just wipe any incidents that don't sit with you from your mind.
What about the incident involving viera that erupted into an exchange of words and gestures with the Spanish manager?
Involving a Spanish player barely being touched around the shoulder throat area as a player ran away and flinging himself to the ground clutching his face and rolling around like someone had poked his eyeball out?
That didn't happen? Not 10 minutes before Henry did it to the Spanish?
How did that incident not fit your 'simulated' and 'designed to get the opposing player sent off' ?
Relahni said:
He didn't dive he was impeded and the ball was not at his feet. Penalty. In the spain game thuram accidentally trod on (forget player's name) a spanish player and a penalty was awarded. Ronaldo blatently dived in the box with no one near him. He should have been red carded for it. I don't blame henry. He usually stays on his feet and even went for the ball when he was fouled in the box.
muser said:
so you are saying that from that kick, his body reacted like it did soley from that kick. Henry did not simulate any other movement in any other way.
If you reply and say yes. I won't believe you. If you reply and say no - he milked it, he performed dramatice, he did a dying swan or what I say, he dived, then I will believe you.
But, the fact of the matter is I don't really care how you reply. I know what he did and I know what he is. He dived and he is a cheat.
iROBOT said:What even though the defenders admitted to fouling him in the box and that the ref should have played advantage????..
You're obviously on an agenda that takes no account of the defenders position this morning.
Whatever.....JESUS!!!!!!! This place is so idiotic at times
I agree. Unbelievable. Does do justice to some mothers do have 'em
iROBOT
CURRENTLY RE-BOOTING
Diving by definition is cheating....he was fouled therefore he wasnt cheating, he just made sure he got the decision by being over dramatic (not saying I like that btw)Relahni said:Look -- we aren't debating whether it was a penalty. We are debating whether Henry dived, milked it, performed dramatice, cheated, did a dying swan after he was clipped.
fuck sake! <bangs Musers head> Wake up lad!
You and others have been accusing him of cheating...which he plainly wasnt by the confession of Carvalho.
Relahni said:Look -- we aren't debating whether it was a penalty. We are debating whether Henry dived, milked it, performed dramatice, cheated, did a dying swan after he was clipped.
fuck sake! <bangs Musers head> Wake up lad!
In the spain v france thread I said that Henry was right to go down under puyol's challenge, I also gave reasons. Henry was right to go down like a dying swan, as if he had stayed on his feet then the ref is likily not to give the penalty, even though a foul had been commited.
It wasn't diving or cheating, it was merely helping the ref do his job. And as supporters we applaud his efforts.
leftistangel
Well-Known Member
William of Walworth said:Not sure about that, I think you're wrong to exonerate Carvalho entirely, but I'll let the proper technical experts of the U75 footy forum adjudicate
Exonerate him from what? A slightly mis-timed challenge which resulted in a miniscule ammount of contact, certainly not enough to result in Henry reacting like he did. I didn't see any malicous intent.
The 'technical experts' are trying to have it both ways, narrowing the parameters of what is considered a foul to such an extent that football is a non contact sport, then whinging when Portuguese players start taking advantage of precisely that fact. One or the other, but not both.
iROBOT
CURRENTLY RE-BOOTING
You dont get this football malarkey do you?...Carvalho has admitted to fouling him, minimum/miniscule contact is still contact because football is a NON CONTACT SPORT...and contact in the box means a penalty....even Carvalho said so, by wanting the advantage played.leftistangel said:
JESUS!!!!! This is not rocket science!!!
leftistangel
Well-Known Member
iROBOT said:
Oh I get it, doesnt mean I accept it. Thanks for admiting football is a non contact sport, less physical than even basketball and all the more worse because of it. And even Allah can see its also not rocket science to see how inconstistant it is to agree with such rules, then moments later criticising players who will inevitably take advantage of them.
iROBOT
CURRENTLY RE-BOOTING
What? You dont accept that Carvahlo has confessed to fouling Henry...that's par for the course on this thread.leftistangel said:
The debate ends when one party admits guilt...just as Carvalho has.
Contact was minimal during the Italy/Germany game and, in my opinion, much the better for it.
leftistangel
Well-Known Member
I don't agree that such a miniscule ammount of contact - you'd probably feel more force from a gust of wind - constitutes a foul. Those who think it does are being hypocritical when they complain of players collapsing after the slightest touch.
Where has he admitted guilt?
I thought Germany-Italy had a lot more contact and thank god the referee didnt enforce the rules, which would have resulted in a blizzard of cards.
Where has he admitted guilt?
I thought Germany-Italy had a lot more contact and thank god the referee didnt enforce the rules, which would have resulted in a blizzard of cards.
William of Walworth said:Utter bollocks. What 'Little Ingerlander twerps' -- where, here on this forum/thread??? Such as those that are full of criticissm for England, Sven and various players here? And critical of the media hype and biased commentary? Like me?
Portugal are a moderate team with one or two excellent players. Get your head round the FACT that plenty of people are criticising their lack of cutting edge (which I agree with YOU about) and, to an extent, their 'gamesmanship'**, for reasons that are nothing to do with England. Not all the critics are England supporters (inconvenient fact for YOU?), and of those that are, most (here) will fully accept that England deserved to go out. So please stop being a fucking tramline-'minded' twat.
**Euphemism
FFS
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!
Brockway said:ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!
Thing is, we'd probably agree about a lot of criticisms of England. Just that most of those are irrelevant to other games, and some ABEs insist on dragging them in as confrontationally as possible, in order to tar all supporters with the same brush.
Pain in the arse frankly.
