Exact. It happens during a match. It's something that should have been sanctioned by the referee and it wasn't.
Sometimes errors benefit your team and sometimes it doesn't.
Thierry Henry is a cheat!
- Thread starter Candlelight
- Start date
Exact. It happens during a match. It's something that should have been sanctioned by the referee and it wasn't.
Sometimes errors benefit your team and sometimes it doesn't.
I wonder if this hand will end in a stupid song
Yes.
Yes it has.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skq3EibwrlQ
At least it's not going to be the summer hit like this one was in 2006
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWAJhUNj8Xg
(coup de boule = head butt)
And that was already a parody of another parodic song released before the world cup :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lpq9mIJb8c (not an official clip, I can't find one with the exact lyrics)
I admit that the "Anelka will play...only on his PSP" made me laugh
In the biggest sports story of 1999, the U.S. Women's Soccer team became the World Cup champions. Brandi Chastain famously shed her jersey as America erupted in celebration. It was the highest-profile and best-attended women's sports event in history, and the team's players became role models for thousands of young female athletes. There was only one little problem: They cheated. U.S. goalkeeper Briana Scurry illegally moved forward before Chinese player Liu Ying hit her penalty kick. That cheating won America the World Cup. Despite protests from the Chinese team and clear video evidence, the U.S. Women's Soccer team's cheating was virtually ignored.
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/080131-bad-sports-cheating.html
Monday, July 12, 1999
Scurry's a goalie on the move
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- U.S. goalkeeper Briana Scurry admits she may have bent the rules in making the lunging save on a penalty kick that helped her teammates beat China for the Women's World Cup.
"Everybody does it," Scurry told the Los Angeles Times. "It's only cheating if you get caught."
After China and the United States made their first two penalty kicks, Scurry took a few steps forward before Liu Ying struck the ball. That gave Scurry the angle she needed to dive to her left and block the shot.
That was the only penalty kick missed in Saturday's championship game at the Rose Bowl, and that was enough to give the United States the title.
Technically, a goalkeeper can move only laterally along the goal line before a penalty kick is attempted, but that's the strictest interpretation of the rules. Virtually all goalies inch forward, and such a violation is rarely called.
Scurry did not return a phone message left at her hotel in New York, and no one was reachable at the U.S. Soccer Federation in Chicago
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/080131-bad-sports-cheating.html
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/080131-bad-sports-cheating.html
Monday, July 12, 1999
Scurry's a goalie on the move
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- U.S. goalkeeper Briana Scurry admits she may have bent the rules in making the lunging save on a penalty kick that helped her teammates beat China for the Women's World Cup.
"Everybody does it," Scurry told the Los Angeles Times. "It's only cheating if you get caught."
After China and the United States made their first two penalty kicks, Scurry took a few steps forward before Liu Ying struck the ball. That gave Scurry the angle she needed to dive to her left and block the shot.
That was the only penalty kick missed in Saturday's championship game at the Rose Bowl, and that was enough to give the United States the title.
Technically, a goalkeeper can move only laterally along the goal line before a penalty kick is attempted, but that's the strictest interpretation of the rules. Virtually all goalies inch forward, and such a violation is rarely called.
Scurry did not return a phone message left at her hotel in New York, and no one was reachable at the U.S. Soccer Federation in Chicago
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/080131-bad-sports-cheating.html
We are lobbying to get Olympics-style voting for diving to be taken into account in the final result of the game.Of course an Italian would say that...
More seriously, we suffered from some horrible referee's decision sometimes (the game against South Korea in 2002 World Cup springs painfully to mind): we whined like everybody else would do in that situation, but in the end nothing came forth. It's part of the game, really.
We are lobbying to get Olympics-style voting for diving to be taken into account in the final result of the game.
Yeah, I agree actually. I understand why the Irish are upset, I would be too in their shoes, but that happens in football. And it usually happens to the underdog, that's football too...
Most English would agree with you there - it seems we tend to get through the group stages without complaint when we're playing 'minor' teams, then we'll hit Brazil or France or someone in the later stages and suddenly it seems the ref is watching a different game to us.
So give each team 1-3 "slots" per game to call for a video proof on a ref decision during the game.. if this proves a wrong decision it gets overturned by the video ref or somesuch and on goes the game.
Additionally the ref or his co-refs could call on the video if he wasn't in a position to make a good call and it's an important situation that maybe led to a goal.
Anyway.. it is way past time that video proof is to be introduced and maybe such disgraceful acts during the game would be lessened.
Henry should be ashamed of himself and he did a grear disservice to France by cheating while wearing their colors and being an ambassador to his country.
American football (college-level, not sure about NFL) does have a system that allows for both the referees and the coaches of each team to call a challenge on the ruling on the field, and this could serve as a possible model for soccer. Under this system, all plays are eligible for video review by the refs if there's any reason to question the ruling on the field. Each coach also gets one challenge (I THINK it's per game...could be per half--not sure). If they are proven right, the ruling on the field is overturned. If evidence does not prove the coach's point, they lose a time-out as their penalty.
The standard of evidence is that the video replay must offer conclusive evidence that the ruling on the field is wrong. You can't overturn the ruling on a "maybe."
I wonder if something like this could work in soccer?
The standard of evidence is that the video replay must offer conclusive evidence that the ruling on the field is wrong. You can't overturn the ruling on a "maybe."
I wonder if something like this could work in soccer?
He is ashamed and he seriously thought ending his international career. But naaaah, he will play his 4th world cup
We don't see our team like that. They're only good players who happen to be French.
The NFL also has a challenge/review system.
Each team gets three timeouts each half. Anytime during the half (EXCEPT for during the last minutes of each half) a coach can challenge a ruling by the Ref. If the call on the field is overturned after review, so be it. All is well. If the call on the field stands after review, the team is charged one of their timeouts. If they have no timeouts left, they can not challenge the play.
During the two minute warning, only the refs in the booth can call for review on questionable plays.
It's possible - Tennis has implemented a similar system using a computer system called Hawkeye, and players are given a set number of 'challenges' to use as they wish for line calls and the like. Someday, I'm fairly sure a similar system will be used for football. I would welcome it, the only point is it can't be used retrospectively to forfeit matches already completed as the Irish are trying to push for here. This match just needs to be used as evidence that such a setup would be beneficial.
It would need some thought - I could see it being used as a disruptive or delaying tactic - time wasting for things like throw ins is a bookable offence in football because players can move around the pitch at all times, so wasting time allows your players to get into strategic positions. So there would either need to be a serious limit on its use, or as you suggest some penalty for use if you're wrong - I don't know what though, ceding a free kick maybe.
I had forgotten that about soccer--the American football system works so well because you have defined plays, and you have to line up in formation again at the start of each play (so it doesn't matter that people will be moving around--they'll be doing that anyway, and as long as you don't wind up with an illegal formation...i.e. too many men on the field, or the wrong number of people on the line of scrimmage...you're fine). I imagine, though, that it could be modified...perhaps handled like a time-out, and only charged to you AS a time-out if the ruling on the field stands?
I suppose they could just add the time taken to review a call onto stoppage time at the end of the second half, but that could end up making games ridiculously long. There'd have to be a severe limitation to how many times a coach can challenge something. Maybe even only once per half; if you give them ninety seconds to review like in the NFL, then the most that could possibly be added to stoppage time would be three minutes. But since the stoppage time is always added in whole minutes (as far as I know), maybe it should only be sixty seconds per review.
Well football doesn't have time-outs except half-time so that wouldn't work - but I'm sure some system could be concocted to make it disadvantageous to use a challenge unless you think it has a real chance of an overturn.
In some ways, it is likely that a low number of challenges would suffice by itself as a controlling measure. Goals are fairly low numbered in football as I'm sure you know, and I suspect most teams would want to use their challenges for goals - these would be good times to use the challenge as there is a slim chance of revoking the goal, while the match is not disrupted as play is stopped anyway while the opposing team celebrate.
Alternatively, as Skywalker suggests, the time taken for challenges could be added to the stoppage time at the end, and if the review time and number of challenges is kept nice and low, it shouldn't lead to more than about 6 minutes extra time played. Of course, some matches rack that up anyway, so we're then onto 12 minutes extra, which is beginning to push into ridiculous zone.
Henry répond à Lizarazu sur RTL
http://www.leparisien.fr/sports/henry-repond-a-lizarazu-sur-rtl-23-11-2009-721727.php
Thierry Henry repeats the opinion of Bixente Lizarazu recognizing that "Ireland played better than us."
Raymond Domenech says it did not matter how well they played because France was written in the stars, Jupiter and the Moon had astrological influence
http://www.leparisien.fr/sports/henry-repond-a-lizarazu-sur-rtl-23-11-2009-721727.php
Thierry Henry repeats the opinion of Bixente Lizarazu recognizing that "Ireland played better than us."
Raymond Domenech says it did not matter how well they played because France was written in the stars, Jupiter and the Moon had astrological influence
Similar threads
- Locked
