Uruguay [R]
in [World Football]
|
From: Bob on 3 Jul 2010 17:08 Bruce D. Scott wrote: > Bob (Bob(a)Bob.com) wrote: >> d0asta wrote: >>> On 2 Juli, 23:52, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> 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. >>> >>> Of course it's the current rules that we talk about, and yes >>> breaking them occasionally pays. Such as a foul in the midfield. >>> >>> And neither is cheating. > >> It is cheating to break the rule on purpose, whether it is >> sanctioned or not. > > It is fair enough to take that position as long as you allow others to > disagree. I don't have to allow or disallow others to disagree; that's a pretty strange way of thinking. I personally think that accounting for whether it is sanctioned to declare it cheating or not is ethical relativism and claiming that all fouls are cheating is reductionist because it doesn't allow for incidental contact. > But for consistency given your position you should be just > as much up in arms over a shirt pull that is just enough to put a > player who might score, offside. Or to stop a dangerous situation on > a corner. Either way, there is no attempt to harm the other player. as I said I consider all purposeful rule breaking cheating. > > For me, the love tap on the ankles from behind is far worse. there is cheating and violent cheating > > I _hate_ the English color men on ESPN always saying a yellow is too > harsh because the guy simply missed the ball. The attempt is > sanctionable and is taken with a calculated risk of harming the > opponent. English don't seem to understand this, it is a problem in > their league, and they don't understand why they have trouble > internationally with it.
From: HASM on 3 Jul 2010 18:17 William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> writes: > Exactly - this is vastly preferable to a legitimate goal being nullified Almost goal ... > There are no "endless arguments" in rugby, which has the kind of law that > soccer should. But soccer doesn't, and not every one agrees with you. I respect your opinion but this was never considered, and I don't think it will anytime soon. > The goal should stand in any situation in which a goal would have been > scored but for the illegal play. Respectfully disagree, -- HASM
From: Bob on 3 Jul 2010 19:41 Jim Goloboy wrote: > On Jul 2, 6:31 pm, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: >> 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. > > Is there any penalty that would deter a player from handling the ball > in this situation? From Uruguay's standpoint, nothing could be worse > than allowing the ball to go into the net. Even if the penalty a goal > line handball was an awarded goal, it still would have been the > correct play due to the chance of the referee not making the call. Good points. Short of a lengthy ban (and even that) there is probably nothing.
From: MH on 3 Jul 2010 19:26 Mark V. wrote: > On Jul 2, 2:27 pm, "Alessandro Riolo" <alessandro.ri...(a)gmail.com> > wrote: >> "Ll�o" <lleo...(a)lycos.com> wrote in message >> >> news:i0llai$n3o$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> ... >> >>> Why? >> .. >>> Why not? >> I second Ll�o question. >> >> I'd probably still like to see the Dutch to finally win a WC (I love orange >> BTW, that would give me the pefect excuse to put orange shirts at the office >> without people thinking I am working for the nearby supermarket), but I'd >> not complain if Uruguay win it all. >> >> 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 ... > > A free kick from the penalty spot isn't an automatic goal. That ball > was on its way in and it was stopped by an illegal action. The kick > did not ensure that Ghana was done justice. Justice is hard to attribute in cases like this. The free kick should probably not have been given, and I still have suspicions an offside occurred. So Ghana did not have a 100 % undeniable right to that goal either. > > I'm not sure that I'd call what Suarez did "cheating", nor do I think > that referees should flagrantly bend rules. But I'd hope that almost > anybody who is a fan would be capable of seeing the gray matter here. Grey area ? Grey matter is what I don't have enough of any more due to greying elsewhere.
From: MH on 3 Jul 2010 19:20
d0asta wrote: > On 3 Juli, 01:07, MH <MHnos...(a)ucalgary.ca> wrote: >> d0asta wrote: >>> 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? >> Yes. By definition, breaking the rules is cheating. > > Not in my book. But aren't you glad that the cheating team of Ghana > got kicked out then? Only six more team of cheaters to get rid > of... ;-) Only four now ! :-) In any other aspect of life, we consider breaking the rules to be cheating, so why would that not apply to sports? Obviously, based on the posts here, people have different opinions on this. Some examples: Most people would consider making false declarations of income tax to be cheating. Or running a red light. Or copying off someone else's exam (note that this is still cheating if you get caught and punished). |