Uruguay [R]
in [World Football]
|
From: Alessandro Riolo on 2 Jul 2010 17:27 "Ll�o" <lleo_lm(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 ... -- ale http://ale.riolo.co.uk
From: Manx Gunner on 2 Jul 2010 17:30 [Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.riolo(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. -- "Look at the way teams play against Arsenal. They don't believe they can win. They don't believe." -- Jose Mourinho
From: d0asta on 2 Jul 2010 17:43 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.
From: Google Beta User on 2 Jul 2010 17:44 On Jul 2, 5:30 pm, Manx Gunner <goal(a)4thegunners!.com> wrote: > 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. There's a correcting mechanism called red card and penalty. The player decides if it's worth the risk, rather than allow the 100% goal, he trades himself for the 75% goal. You could say it was a tactical handball. It's a risk they take, you can tell by how the cards for goalline handballs aren't protested. I think some of those goalline happen reflexively on instinct. Have you EVER seen a player just watch it go in? The game is not played in slow motion.
From: Bob on 2 Jul 2010 17:52
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. |