Brazil appeal Thiago Silva's yellow card

[Willi]

Hehehehehhehhehe

Woeiiiiiieeee

Forum sweet!

[Mosiah]

Mo, nuh you seh when the shopkeeper bouncing the ball its fair game???

My point was that Eto'o's action was different from what Thiago did. And later, having reviewed the rules I saw where I WAS WRONG, and even took the time to point out that rule too!

That's the difference between me and Karl. I'm not going to take 40 more posts and 20,000 characters to justify and rationalize my incorrect views, for what is as clear as daylight to most people, except you and him.

I see where Karl has again changed his position (3rd time) and said that I was correct. But immediately after that, he posted with 21 questions and permutations as to why I may still not be! Good Lord!!!

[Willi]

Lol, I see that and I am entertained.

In truth I see the rule you posted and while I think its a silly modification to the old rule, I do get your point. In any case, the yellow was the dissent part of it, ie picking the ball into the goal after the whistle.

I also agree about the Scolari face....

[Mosiah]

Lol, I see that and I am entertained.

In truth I see the rule you posted and while I think its a silly modification to the old rule, I do get your point. In any case, the yellow was the dessent part of it, ie picking the ball into the goal after the whistle.

I also agree about the Scolari face....

Why do you insist that was the reason for the yellow? I'm not hearing that from anyone, Yankee or otherwise. I've seen this on several occasions, where players are carded for interfering with the goalkeeper like that. And that is what the commentators kept repeating.

Don't be like Karl, Willi. When yuh wrong, yuh wrong! Even I was wrong, so who is you to shun that possibility!?

[Willi]

All the BBC commentators said it was the dissent. This was especially so with this overlenient ref.

All this talk about conspiracy when the last foul count I heard was 31 against Col and 23 against Brazil. Fouling was rampant and James got more than his fair share, but these were "regulation" fouls, not meant to do damage. What Zunyiga did was disgusting. I think it was him same one who stamped Hulk in the knee and the BBC man dem seh how potentially dangerous it was, but how Hulk frame was so sturdy, it was lucky it was him and not a small frame like Neymar and later you see how him use him knee fi Stiletto Neymar.

[Mosiah]

"Regulation" fouls that cause no damage can and should be punished by the issuing of cards if they are persistent, either by a player or on a particular player.

The ref failed horrifically in carrying out his sworn duties. His actions may have caused Neymar's injury.

Of course, I'm not excluding Zuniga. However, I don't believe he meant to cause serious hurt to Neymar, and for that his actions don't deserve to be reviewed.

[Bricktop]

jeezas...and you were a referee?

[Willi]

I agree about the ref and persistent fouls as I indicated above, BUT Zuniga had 2 potentially career ending infringements, one against Hulk's knee that the commentators spoke about and the other that took Neymar out.

[Willi]

Instant red card this:

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/7885...er-star-today/

[Willi]

First words out of Neymaar's mouth after the tackle was "I CANT FEEL MY LEGS". Likkle most the man coulda get paralysed!

Zuniga went in to hurt. No attempt to play the ball. This worse than Chewbaca!

Steeuuups.

It the same happened to Ha-Mess, mi would ball same way too. Star ballers need powdering!

[Mosiah]

I agree, he meant to hurt but not to break backs. Players aim to hurt every 10 seconds in football.

[Mosiah]

I would not have shed a tear if Zuniga had seen a red card in the previous match.

[Mosiah]

Had the advantage rule not been played when the foul occurred, maybe Zuniga would have received a card. Or maybe not, given how horribly the ref was officiating.

[Paul Marin]

This could be old, of course!

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.........is ongly Karl dat ol' ...

[Paul Marin]

ESPN, yuh mean Yankee man aggo teach mi ball now. LoL

Willi - interfering with the goal keeper getting the ball back into play is a foul and a cardable offense. Period. End of story... etc. etc. Brazil's appeal is highly unusual because typically, only red cards can be appealed. I have no idea what grounds they are basing it on, but as Mo says, this world cup which started which such great promise is being reduced to a farce, primarily because of officiating inconsistency and incompetence. This is only another chapter in that unfortunately long treatise on FIFA and their appalling adjudication methods and motives.