Rank Hypocrisy

[Westman]

You missed my main point. Please read my response to Assassin.

[Westman]

Karl, the poor call did cause them the match. Nigeria's sub was not as effective as Onazi had been and France continued with 11 players instead of 10.

[Karl]

Karl, the poor call did cause them the match. Nigeria's sub was not as effective as Onazi had been and France continued with 11 players instead of 10.

Agreed!
...also saw where Nigeria should have had a penalty as a French defender hugged a Nigerian...a bear-hug really...while in the penalty-area.

[Westman]

The coach cited that as a specific example of unfairness. He cited that exact thing as being one of the things that the visiting match official discussed with Nigerians at their camp days before the match. Some say it wasn't a penalty because the ball was not near the player. The Nigerian coach's retort was that if the player wasn't held continuously, he might have the opportunity to move to where the ball went.

The ultimate offense was that the ref went to the offender after the play and warned him. So the point of the Nigerian coach was that if the ref could warn the player right after the offense, the ref should have made the call, especially since that was one of the specific examples of a deserved penalty and card as described by one of the match officials two days earlier.

[Westman]

Are you a noisy neighbor, by the way, HL?

[Karl]

The coach cited that as a specific example of unfairness. He cited that exact thing as being one of the things that the visiting match official discussed with Nigerians at their camp days before the match. Some say it wasn't a penalty because the ball was not near the player. The Nigerian coach's retort was that if the player wasn't held continuously, he might have the opportunity to move to where the ball went.

The ultimate offense was that the ref went to the offender after the play and warned him. So the point of the Nigerian coach was that if the ref could warn the player right after the offense, the ref should have made the call, especially since that was one of the specific examples of a deserved penalty and card as described by one of the match officials two days earlier.

Those who claim it was not a penal offence are talking through their arses!

The penal offenses that fall within the category of similar offense, require as per The Laws of the Game, merely to be committed within the penalty-area and with the ball in play. Those offenses are punishable by a DIRECT FREE-KICK...and the only direct free-kick that can be awarded within the penalty-area is a penalty. But also consider this: It was not even a 'pull and release' but a 'bear-hug'...a prolonged bear-hug. The player was held to prevent him from playing the ball...a ball that was played into the penalty-area!!! ...and he was only released after the danger had passed.

[Assasin]

I understand that, but it goes two way. Had Neymar been taken out earlier I bet the refs would have take precaution onwards. The refereeing has been poor. Definitely though steps should have been taken earlier on some of these refs.

[Willi]

Di reaction to di likkle vampyah bite is a joke now. Wha happened to Neymatr and Onazi (unfortunate name) was far worse and both may NEVER recover fully to their prime condition.

[Westman]

Willi, if you think that Onazi is an unfortunate name, carefully pronounce the name of the guy who took out Neymar.

[Willi]

If it was Fred and Oscar, we would see wild celebrations break out! LoL

[Assasin]

funny fi real. LOL

[Mosiah]

No Willi. Such tackles exist in the game. They happen all the time. Sometimes it results in a simple foul, sometimes it's a broken bone.

Biting now...

[HL]

Extremely!!

[Paul Marin]

Willi, if you think that Onazi is an unfortunate name, carefully pronounce the name of the guy who took out Neymar.

LOL!! Westman, only you could come wid dat!! Not in a million years did that one cross my mind. Too funny.

[Peter R]

The biting so far has resulted in what some teeth marks?!

What makes the biting appalling or dare I say unpalatable is that it really is an act that is TOTALLY unexpected. There is a genuine helping of shock effect associated with it.

We accept, to the extent that we do, a man jumping in another man's back, or the kind of reckless tackle (I didn't see it but reports I read characterised it as such) that ends up tearing a man's tendon, because we see these as part of the game. It's the risk associated associated with the profession you take, or even when running out for a Sunday afternoon sweat. These however in this WC, have resulted in a player out for at least three months (Onazi) and another at least that amount of time and more... and who knows how they will function once fit?!

Lest anyone thinks I'm making excuses for biting, I'm not, but in the grand scheme of things... the consequences for the bitten one is really inconsequential compared to those kinds of tackles that need to be eradicated from the game.