Uruguay [R]
in [World Football]
|
From: Manx Gunner on 2 Jul 2010 18:12 [Bob <Bob(a)Bob.com>] [Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:52:26 -0700] : : d0asta wrote: : > On 2 Juli, 23:30, Manx Gunner <goal(a)4thegunners!.com> wrote: : >> [Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.ri...(a)gmail.com>] : >> [Fri, 2 Jul 2010 22:27:40 +0100] : >> : >>> This night they did what they had to do, WC are won any way you can : >>> really, and as already stated, this wasn't cheating, Ghana got the : >>> chance to right it, and squandered it ... : >> : >> I'm sorry, Alessandro, but to say that's not cheating is just plain : >> stupid. Of *COURSE* it is bloody cheating! The fact that the rules : >> don't adequately punish it doesn't make it any less dishonourable. : > : > Eh, the fact that the event was punished according to the rules, means : > it of *COURSE* wasn't cheating. : : No, it just means that with the current rules, cheating occasionally pays. Bingo. -- "Look at the way teams play against Arsenal. They don't believe they can win. They don't believe." -- Jose Mourinho
From: MH on 2 Jul 2010 18:12 d0asta wrote: > On 2 Juli, 23:30, Manx Gunner <goal(a)4thegunners!.com> wrote: >> [Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.ri...(a)gmail.com>] >> [Fri, 2 Jul 2010 22:27:40 +0100] >> >> : This night they did what they had to do, WC are won any way you can really, >> : and as already stated, this wasn't cheating, Ghana got the chance to right >> : it, and squandered it ... >> >> I'm sorry, Alessandro, but to say that's not cheating is just plain >> stupid. Of *COURSE* it is bloody cheating! The fact that the rules >> don't adequately punish it doesn't make it any less dishonourable. > > Eh, the fact that the event was punished according to the rules, means > it of *COURSE* wasn't cheating. It was cheating. That is why it was punished to the full extent of the law by the referee.
From: MH on 2 Jul 2010 18:14 Bob wrote: > d0asta wrote: >> On 2 Juli, 23:30, Manx Gunner <goal(a)4thegunners!.com> wrote: >>> [Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.ri...(a)gmail.com>] >>> [Fri, 2 Jul 2010 22:27:40 +0100] >>> >>>> This night they did what they had to do, WC are won any way you can >>>> really, and as already stated, this wasn't cheating, Ghana got the >>>> chance to right it, and squandered it ... >>> I'm sorry, Alessandro, but to say that's not cheating is just plain >>> stupid. Of *COURSE* it is bloody cheating! The fact that the rules >>> don't adequately punish it doesn't make it any less dishonourable. >> Eh, the fact that the event was punished according to the rules, means >> it of *COURSE* wasn't cheating. > > No, it just means that with the current rules, cheating occasionally pays. > > Occasionally? Do you really think a team that stayed entirely within the rules 100 % of the time would have a prayer of winning (at football or many other sports). For that to work, referees would have to be more astute than is humanly possible, and would have to call everything. Even then, our angelic team would have to be technically far better than their opponents to get away with it.
From: d0asta on 2 Jul 2010 18:24 On 3 Juli, 00:12, MH <MHnos...(a)ucalgary.ca> wrote: > d0asta wrote: > > On 2 Juli, 23:30, Manx Gunner <goal(a)4thegunners!.com> wrote: > >> [Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.ri...(a)gmail.com>] > >> [Fri, 2 Jul 2010 22:27:40 +0100] > > >> : This night they did what they had to do, WC are won any way you can really, > >> : and as already stated, this wasn't cheating, Ghana got the chance to right > >> : it, and squandered it ... > > >> I'm sorry, Alessandro, but to say that's not cheating is just plain > >> stupid. Of *COURSE* it is bloody cheating! The fact that the rules > >> don't adequately punish it doesn't make it any less dishonourable. > > > Eh, the fact that the event was punished according to the rules, means > > it of *COURSE* wasn't cheating. > > It was cheating. That is why it was punished to the full extent of the > law by the referee. Is every player who commits a fouls a cheater?
From: Bob on 2 Jul 2010 18:31
MH wrote: > Bob wrote: >> d0asta wrote: >>> On 2 Juli, 23:30, Manx Gunner <goal(a)4thegunners!.com> wrote: >>>> [Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.ri...(a)gmail.com>] >>>> [Fri, 2 Jul 2010 22:27:40 +0100] >>>> >>>>> This night they did what they had to do, WC are won any way you >>>>> can really, and as already stated, this wasn't cheating, Ghana >>>>> got the chance to right it, and squandered it ... >>>> I'm sorry, Alessandro, but to say that's not cheating is just plain >>>> stupid. Of *COURSE* it is bloody cheating! The fact that the rules >>>> don't adequately punish it doesn't make it any less dishonourable. >>> Eh, the fact that the event was punished according to the rules, >>> means it of *COURSE* wasn't cheating. >> >> No, it just means that with the current rules, cheating occasionally >> pays. >> >> > Occasionally? Do you really think a team that stayed entirely within > the rules 100 % of the time would have a prayer of winning (at > football or many other sports). For that to work, referees would > have to be more astute than is humanly possible, and would have to > call everything. Even then, our angelic team would have to be > technically far better than their opponents to get away with it. I agree, but more often than not the penalty for cheating should be sufficient to dissuade cheaters (if the rules are enforced) but in this is one case cheating is always worse the risk of getting caught because the aggrieved team trades a sure goal for a pk. |