RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FA Cup 6th Round Draw...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Karl View Post
    A flying GUNNERS and a resilient BoyU?
    ...well my money is on my GUNNERS! Suffered one unfortunate whapping at the hands of BoyU aredi! ...It should be all about evening the score!!!
    Which whapping that? The 8-2? You still have that on your mind dude?
    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Lazie View Post
      Unuh a hypocrite from long time. Fortunately I don't listen to unuh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc1OSa6XOwk

      Fast Forward to 2:15 and remind me of your opinion on that goal?

      Rooney did not play the ball, made no attempt to play the ball, was not blocking the keeper's view. How you get offside?
      By the mere fact of him standing there relative to the goalie, IMO, is interference as (and Karl pointed this out) the goalie doesn't know that he (Rooney) is standing in an offside position or not, so has to ALSO anticipate that he might play the ball. If that's not interference then I don't know what is.
      Peter R

      Comment


      • #18
        That game should be grounded out to a thrilling 1 - 0 in our favor.
        Hey .. look at the bright side .... at least you're not a Liverpool fan! - Lazie 2/24/10 Paul Marin -19 is one thing, 20 is a whole other matter. It gets even worse if they win the UCL. *groan*. 05/18/2011.MU fans naah cough, but all a unuh a vomit?-Lazie 1/11/2015

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Peter R View Post
          By the mere fact of him standing there relative to the goalie, IMO, is interference as (and Karl pointed this out) the goalie doesn't know that he (Rooney) is standing in an offside position or not, so has to ALSO anticipate that he might play the ball. If that's not interference then I don't know what is.
          Interference how? The keeper dived after the initial shot. If he had set himself for a shot from Rooney you may have had a case ... but as usual ... I am right and you wrong.
          "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

          Comment


          • #20
            Interference can occur by letting the ball run past as Rooney did; he could have played the ball and opted not to. That IS interference. I am not wrong... the ref was!
            Peter R

            Comment


            • #21
              At the end if the day,the advice to the keeper is ignore the opponent deemed offside,he was one of the early protesters so he knew...
              How many times have you seen a pass to an offside player and that player removes himself from the play,why on occasions as such,offside is not called?
              Last edited by Rockman; February 17, 2015, 06:22 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Lazie View Post
                Unuh a hypocrite from long time. Fortunately I don't listen to unuh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc1OSa6XOwk

                Fast Forward to 2:15 and remind me of your opinion on that goal?

                Rooney did not play the ball, made no attempt to play the ball, was not blocking the keeper's view. How you get offside?
                So if a ball is played between my legs or under my arm or above my head or by my right knee or by my gut and I am in an OFFSIDE POSITION on each of those occasions it is your view that I am not OFFSIDE as I did not play the ball and made no attempt to play the ball and did not block the keeper?

                Is that your position?
                "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

                Comment


                • #23
                  I think we played a match this season...where, in Jamaica parlance, wi baaall unnuh han unnuh whap wi? Are you having a Shady Pines moment?
                  "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Look for 'physicality' and long balls from united

                    Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. Thomas Paine

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gamma View Post
                      Look for 'physicality' and long balls from united
                      Do you complain about physicality from Chelsea and City? No? Since when there is a problem with long ball in football? When Barca dweet Ray Hudson call it "a peach of a pass!" When Cesc does it, it is referred to as "on the money!" ... but when MU dweet it is long ball? Or is it the excuses start compiling already?
                      "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        If you examine the "tape" you'll observe the goalie move late on the ball, his dive was way out of time. Why? He anticipated Rooney playing the ball and he was defending that option... ergo Rooney interfered. Now, we are talking about offside which is subject to interpretation. IMO, the ref blew that one. And I hope you are not of the a mind like Jangle that my position is based upon hatred for ManU, which I do not harbour, I just "hate" to see you win!

                        My position really is from an appreciation of the game and how reffing errors can influence an outcome. It works both ways, but still doesn't make it right. There is no reason why there can't be a review a la NHL.
                        Peter R

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Look,there are recourse availabke for terrible calls by referees,it it will not be xplored because at best it is a borderline situation(it could have went any way),so your gripe is it did not go your way,it is not as clear cut as you make it to be.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            What recourses? just out of curiosity... I didn't know that those existed.

                            I don't dispute it was judgment/interpretation call (you say borderline).
                            Peter R

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Did I say either was a problem? It is an oft employed tactic against arsenal and we just have to learn to prevent that from being effective

                              Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. Thomas Paine

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                The referee can be penalized,that does not change the score but it may deter other refs from making such a 'blunder'.Like I said,it wasn't as clear cut..or that would have been explored.
                                Change 'are' to 'is' thereby making 'recourse' okay,lol.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X