Tackles, balls and Seaman - The footie thread

[Jim]

Whether it was a penalty or not is moot; you never get anything at Old Trafford.

Anyway. How about that Nani, eh? Yet another worthy addition to the beautiful game!, at this rate it won't be too long before football becomes a non-contact sport.

[Shoco]

Whether it was a penalty or not is moot; you never get anything at Old Trafford.

if it was a penalty im sure the ref would have given it, just like he gave one to arsenal at old trafford last season, and bolton also

so thats 2 penos against us last season at old trafford  so i dont see your point

[MadmanDan]

I understand the frustration of losing a game after missing many opportunities of winning it, but claiming that it was a penalty on Brown is beyond ridicoulous...

[slash666]

[Jim]

I understand the frustration of losing a game after missing many opportunities of winning it, but claiming that it was a penalty on Brown is beyond ridicoulous...

I know that English is not your first language, but who exactly is that aimed at? Who here claimed that it was, and as such who here is "beyond ridiculous?"   *

if it was a penalty im sure the ref would have given it...

Unlike Pedro's goal, eh, and we both know that had it been down the other end then it would have gone your way. This isn't me whinning and bitching, believe me, the match was the age old case of "we deserved a point." Nothing more, nothing less. The reason that whether it was a penalty or not is moot is because the fact is that we (youself, the "mad man" and such) have reached the conclusion after countlessly revisiting the incident. The referee (and his assistants, ahem), had just the one chance, and given that it looked 50/50 (though I would be inclined to say that at the time it looked more 40/60) we all knew which way it would go. Throw any "good refereeing" rubbish out of the window, that he happened to make the right call merely coincides with the fact that "the right call" went United's way.


*edit: If anybody! I foresaw your comeback on posting! (a general retort to those from outside of London...................................... )

[MadmanDan]

who exactly is that aimed at? Who here claimed that it was

P.S. GOD I wish Stevie G would do the same, in the opposite direction !!? ?

Aye, I'm sure he'd go down a treat at Old Trafford.

He gets on great with referees.

  I read between the lines...and I don't know why I'm still discussing this, EVEN IF the ball hit his hand, according to the new FIFA regulations, it still wouldn't had been a penalty, because of the lack of intention...pointless discussion, can we please move on?


     Apparently Ole Gunnar Solskaer retired from Football because of recurring knee injury...a sad day for all United fans

[Jim]

What on God's green Earth does intention have to do with anything? In football you cannot use your arm because it is an extension of your body... Whether you intend (or there is a "lack" thereof) to or not it is still an extension of your body that defies the laws of the game!, surely intention only becomes relevant when dishing out a card?

[2NaFish]

What on God's green Earth does intention have to do with anything? In football you cannot use your arm because it is an extension of your body... Whether you intend (or there is a "lack" thereof) to or not it is still an extension of your body that defies the laws of the game!, surely intention only becomes relevant when dishing out a card?

hand-ball has to be seen as intentional. its the law.

Usually football fans are very well versed in the finer points of the laws, but this is one (sort of like 'he was the last man, so he has to be sent off' view. the law says denying a clear goalscoring opportunity. not last man) that most don't comprehend.

However, i would say that had the ball hit brown on the arm (which it didnt) it would have been intentional given the manner (john terry??) with which he threw himself down and the positioning of his arms.

Still, 7 penalties against ManYoo in 15 years at old trafford speaks volumes.

[Skeba]

Yeah, according to the rules it has to be deliberate, and I also agree that when a player throws himself at the ball with his arms by his sides and not in front (in effect, making himself block a larger area of the goal) it is a penalty if the ball touches the hand.

The rules for football do leave a lot of room for interpretation, but the wording of that rule does use the wording "handles the ball deliberately".

[Jim]

Is there not a difference though between intentionally touching the ball with your hand and intentionally not intentionally avoiding letting the ball hit your arm? Surely it's open to all sorts of interpretations, and in my view the latter should surely be a penalty.

I've seen plenty of freek kicks given because the ball has hit the arm of a man in a wall, even though they have clearly been by his side. Intentional? But then of course I've seen, plenty of times, the same kick not be given. Surely it is like the current offside "interpretation," whereby it appears to be at the discression of the officials then and there whether the activeness of a player is taken into account...

[MadmanDan]

   People who complain about the lack of penalties given to visitors at Old Trafford should actually watch all the games played there....Tottenham was a rare exception of a team that comes here and actually plays Football, not apply the 5-5-0 formation, hoping for a 0-0 and dreaming of a winning goal...how can any team except Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea or Spurs dream of getting a penalty at OT when they enter the penalty box for 20 seconds in an entire game??

[Shoco]

i stand corrected, wigan also got a penalty at old trafford last season

so 3 penos against us at old trafford in a single season, guess we'll have to give the officals more money this season

[Jim]

Or just let Alex have a word.

[2NaFish]

spurs fans - how much would be "too good to turn down" for Berbatov?

?25mil?
?30mil?
?40mil??

bearing in mind you paid ?11mil last year, you've already got a plethora of attacking options and you need a better midfield.

[Skeba]

spurs fans - how much would be "too good to turn down" for Berbatov?

?25mil?
?30mil?
?40mil??

bearing in mind you paid ?11mil last year, you've already got a plethora of attacking options and you need a better midfield.

As a fan there's no amount of money that I'd sell him for. I mean none of the money would make my life any better, so I'd rather see good players at the club than really rich club owners.. If I've understood correctly there's a possibility that the board might be willing to spend another 10m on a left midfielder, so I really see no reason to sell him at all.

[2NaFish]

tee hee. zat knight caught in drugs raid hours before being unveiled at Villa. well, you've got to do something with your signing on fee

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_2695101,00.html

[MadmanDan]

Holy shit, it seems Mourinho has left/was sacked  !!

[Jim]

spurs fans - how much would be "too good to turn down" for Berbatov?

?25mil?
?30mil?
?40mil??

bearing in mind you paid ?11mil last year, you've already got a plethora of attacking options and you need a better midfield.

Aye, but the money for a better midfield doesn't need to come from the sale of Berbatov. He has what few players do, in that his presence in a team could convince others to jump on board once money alone isn't enough to broker a deal.

As far as too good to turn down goes, I'm never stepping foot into that territory again. I thought that 18 million was too good to turn down for Carrick, but hell, the void that was left by his departure was a 20 million gap at least. Of course, the 18 million in that particular instance was just a case of the best that we could get for him, seeing as he wanted to leave...

But the Carrick case is a good example of the structural importance of a team, rather than individual players. With the team that we had at the time, Carrick was worth at the very least ?18 million, but at the moment it looks very unlikely that United are going to get eighteen million pound's worth. Especially with the Hargreaves buy.

[Shoco]

but then utd havent payed ?18m for him YET, but il be more il be more than happy if he ends up costing us another few million

[MadmanDan]

Carrick will earn his transfer fee when Scholes retires...he'll be great in a more offensive role, with Hargeraves guarding him