Uruguay - South Korea [R]
in [World Football]
|
Prev: Shall we expect excitement today? or we shall we wake up for the penalties?
Next: Shall we expect excitement today? or shall we wake up for the
From: Manx Gunner on 26 Jun 2010 11:27 On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:23:18 +0000 (UTC), Bruce D. Scott wrote... > Manx Gunner (goal(a)4thegunners!com) wrote: > : On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:06:01 -0700, Bob wrote... > > : > Ridiculous that he didn't give a pk for that handball; how could anyone deny > : > it wasn't deliberate. I have a hard time imagining that the ref couldn't > : > have seen it either. > > : Part of the problem is people thinking that it matters whether or not > : it's deliberate in all cases. It doesn't. > > Actually it does... the word intentional is pretty prominent in the > relevant clauses in the Laws. Actually it doesn't... such a word is very much open to interpretation. I've heard more than one official talking about this on Sky/BBC/etc, pointing out that when you leave your arms in the way of play, you don't really have an argument that you had no intention of them interfering. I do agree that FIFA need to tighten things up, by the way.
From: Diabolik on 26 Jun 2010 11:30 "Manx Gunner" <goal(a)4thegunners!com> wrote in message news:MPG.268fe293bee7944398d6e5(a)news-europe.giganews.com... > On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:06:01 -0700, Bob wrote... > >> Ridiculous that he didn't give a pk for that handball; how could anyone >> deny >> it wasn't deliberate. I have a hard time imagining that the ref couldn't >> have seen it either. > > Part of the problem is people thinking that it matters whether or not > it's deliberate in all cases. It doesn't. Of course it does. It has to be intentional.
From: ken.overton on 26 Jun 2010 11:31 On Jun 26, 11:25 am, b...(a)ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce D. Scott) wrote: > Well well well Korea get a lucky bounce in the air off the heads and > they put it in. A richly deserved 1-1. Now it is advantage to the > Koreans because they won't sit back and they've got the momentum. Agreed, then their goalie nearly conceded a goal catching a slow looping freekick with his feet behind the goal line. That was baffling how he played that. Uruguay's suddenly woken up now, creating 3 chances in a row.
From: Diabolik on 26 Jun 2010 11:32 "Manx Gunner" <goal(a)4thegunners!com> wrote in message news:MPG.268fe66efbfc01a998d6e9(a)news-europe.giganews.com... > On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:23:18 +0000 (UTC), Bruce D. Scott wrote... > >> Manx Gunner (goal(a)4thegunners!com) wrote: >> : On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:06:01 -0700, Bob wrote... >> >> : > Ridiculous that he didn't give a pk for that handball; how could >> anyone deny >> : > it wasn't deliberate. I have a hard time imagining that the ref >> couldn't >> : > have seen it either. >> >> : Part of the problem is people thinking that it matters whether or not >> : it's deliberate in all cases. It doesn't. >> >> Actually it does... the word intentional is pretty prominent in the >> relevant clauses in the Laws. > > Actually it doesn't... such a word is very much open to interpretation. No it isn't. It's either intentional or it isn't. > I've heard more than one official talking about this on Sky/BBC/etc, > pointing out that when you leave your arms in the way of play, you don't > really have an argument that you had no intention of them interfering. Yes you do. You can intentionally get your arm in the way of the ball, or not. > > I do agree that FIFA need to tighten things up, by the way.
From: Manx Gunner on 26 Jun 2010 11:35
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:30:59 GMT, Diabolik wrote... > > Part of the problem is people thinking that it matters whether or not > > it's deliberate in all cases. It doesn't. > > Of course it does. It has to be intentional. Of course it doesn't, as numerous officials have stated in the past. If your arm is away from your body and stops the ball on the line, it's a penalty - period, and with no whining arguing about whether or not you meant to cheat the other team out of a goal or not. |