Screen grab of USA offside goal?
in [World Football]
|
From: Mark V. on 24 Jun 2010 07:06 On Jun 24, 6:50 am, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: > Huw Morris wrote: > > Mark V. wrote: > >> I'm highly skeptical that the US fan reaction HAS been any worse (or > >> better than) the reaction that any other team's fans would have (how > >> do you think Spanish or Italian fora were in 2002?) been. > > I think people have become aware that a flood of outcries may affect future > refereeing decisions so the US reaction, with the US media in the lead, may > have been conscious of that possibility. Aren't we trying to dispel conspiracy theories in this thread? :-)
From: Bob on 24 Jun 2010 07:25 Mark V. wrote: > On Jun 24, 6:50 am, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: >> Huw Morris wrote: >>> Mark V. wrote: >>>> I'm highly skeptical that the US fan reaction HAS been any worse >>>> (or better than) the reaction that any other team's fans would >>>> have (how do you think Spanish or Italian fora were in 2002?) been. >> >> I think people have become aware that a flood of outcries may affect >> future refereeing decisions so the US reaction, with the US media in >> the lead, may have been conscious of that possibility. > > Aren't we trying to dispel conspiracy theories in this thread? :-) Well, referees do get marching orders from FIFA about the emphasis of the day and referees' perceptions are likely to be affected by media coverage of prior matches. Otherwise, a conspiracy usually entails some kind of concerted forethought, whereas in the real world, people with a common interest often act together relatively spontaneously. So conspiracies aren't really needed to explain these kinds of phenomena. :-)
From: Diabolik on 24 Jun 2010 07:46 >Stay off the other message boards, then. The US fans on RSS have been > fine! Fine? Are you for real??? What a joke! lol! They're been the biggest whiners in the history of football!
From: Jim Goloboy on 24 Jun 2010 07:47 On Jun 24, 5:17 am, Huw Morris <n...(a)spam.please> wrote: > Per capita, you're probably right. It's just that there are more and more > Americans with each major tournament. Surely the number of Americans (and everyone else) on RSS has declined with each major tournament. Here's a pic, angle isn't great but it's the only I've seen: http://theoriginalwinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Picture-35.png When they drew the line on the television broadcast his feet were definitely onside, but the way he was standing I thought maybe his knee was offside. Impossible to tell from that angle, and certainly the linesman, even with a better angle, wouldn't have been able to call that win any certainty. Very close. It all worked out in the end so I think we can move on.
From: Dwight Beers on 24 Jun 2010 08:34
On 06/24/2010 04:47 AM, Jim Goloboy wrote: > On Jun 24, 5:17 am, Huw Morris<n...(a)spam.please> wrote: > >> Per capita, you're probably right. It's just that there are more and more >> Americans with each major tournament. > > Surely the number of Americans (and everyone else) on RSS has declined > with each major tournament. > > Here's a pic, angle isn't great but it's the only I've seen: > http://theoriginalwinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Picture-35.png > > When they drew the line on the television broadcast his feet were > definitely onside, but the way he was standing I thought maybe his > knee was offside. Impossible to tell from that angle, and certainly > the linesman, even with a better angle, wouldn't have been able to > call that win any certainty. Very close. > > It all worked out in the end so I think we can move on. My question: did he actually, gain an advantage from his position. It seems to me that all Dempsey did was help along another Herculez goal. In other words, I think it would have gone in if Dempsey hadn't even been there. |