Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Wanted: Suarez - video proof of diving


Lapskaus
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 518
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I love Lurtz telling my my opinion is a "crock of shit" then playing the victim when challenged on his opinion being wrong. Great stuff.

 

What you said was a crock of shit. Sorry if you don't like it but it was. And what's this "playing the victim" bollocks then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Contact isn't a foul. I'm not sure how many more time I'd have to say this before you'd think about it.

 

Simulation is pretending to be fouled. So...pretending to be tripped when you've had slight contact. If you can't see that most of the tackles in these clips have not knocked Suarez off balance at all' date=' and that he could have carried on running with no problem at all (ergo, he wasn't tripped, merely brushed), then no amount of words from me will make you see it.

 

I love Lurtz telling my my opinion is a "crock of shit" then playing the victim when challenged on his opinion being wrong. Great stuff.[/quote']

 

Spot on. One of the things I hate most in the modern game is people saying a free kick or penalty should be given because "there was contact". No there shouldn't, football is (for the time being) a contact sport and contact itself isn't illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So whilst the debate about whats a dive and what isn't rages on.

 

Can we all at least agree Suarez has been vilified in a manner which many other chronic divers havn't.

 

Surely we can all see theres a problem there? No matter what side of the fence you're on surely you can see that an agenda has been pursued against Suarez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you said was a crock of shit. Sorry if you don't like it but it was. And what's this "playing the victim" bollocks then?

 

You called my opinion a crock of shit. You then moaned about people not allowing you an opinion.

 

Then you negged me like a mong.

 

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rodwell00bkl.gif

 

Foul or not?

 

Infact, dive or not? would be a better choice of words.

 

You could quite easily call that a foul or not based on an individual referees interpretation of the force of Rodwell's tackle. I'd say it's not a foul, the ball was won cleanly with little force by the time they connected.

 

There's enough of a knock to make me think Suarez needed to jump over it but it's simulation. You can't book him because of the little doubt that he actually has hurt himself that much but deep inside you know that's a very, very slim cance.

 

The reaction is embarrassing. I'd send him off to get treatment and forget to let him back on the pitch for about five minutes, at which point his leg miraculously unbreaks and he's sprinting again.

 

Just to note, he jars his ankle that badly in the tackle that he uses it to land on. Not likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing being made of Barnett asking for a yellow when he KNEW he fouled Suarez. That is as big, if not bigger issue than diving as it is attempting to be every bit as deceiving as a diver.

 

And that Mike Jones has no case to answer for that shocker of a non-decision (I'd rather Jones booked Suarez for simulation instead of not making a decision either way, just highlights the incompetence of that moment.) Terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how Suarez reacted to that elbow in the Norwich game.

Didn't throw up his arms and didn't even appeal to the ref. Just pulled his socks up and got on with it.

I think he's realised he'll never get a decision over here and that the waters have been poisoned by influential managers. If he reacts by scoring goals then great as those managers and hacks in the media have just pissed off a very good player.

It will also embarass the FA and refs and there's nothing wrong with that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You called my opinion a crock of shit. You then moaned about people not allowing you an opinion.

 

Then you negged me like a mong.

 

Cheers.

 

Read it again. I said we are allowed opinions.

 

And now you're complaining like a big ponce about being negged. Diddums. Who's playing the victim now? I negged you for being so up your own arse you must be able to see out of your own nose. It's a position in which you spend much of your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon about 10% of the people who watch and play football understand most of the laws.

 

I played against a player in our 5aside Powerleague the other week who - and I shit you not - thought a direct free-kick meant you HAD to shoot on goal. The goon.

 

The worst thing was he was a decent player too. Just an absolute braindead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing being made of Barnett asking for a yellow when he KNEW he fouled Suarez. That is as big, if not bigger issue than diving as it is attempting to be every bit as deceiving as a diver.

 

And that Mike Jones has no case to answer for that shocker of a non-decision (I'd rather Jones booked Suarez for simulation instead of not making a decision either way, just highlights the incompetence of that moment.) Terrible.

 

Good point. And whilst Chris Foy is banished to Accrington for spoiling Ferguson's day, the ever-incompetent Mike 'beach ball' Jones gets to referee - West Brom vs QPR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
Overeaction to contact!

 

It wasn't a foul which is the most important point. But he did catch him.

 

No foul, no dive. His foot gets trapped as he's jumping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of seasons ago when berbatov's foot was brushed by agger at OT, he fell over, won the penalty, they scored.

 

There was certainly contact but nothing that would cause a man to fall over. One is allowed to make contact with another player because it is a contact sport. contact is not necessarily a foul.

 

This was a dive (IMO)

 

However what annoys me is when co-comentators suggest that 'if he's not given a pen then he needs to book him for diving'

 

No he fucking doesn't. if its not a pen then the refs opinion is that there wasn't enough force in the contact to cause him to tumble, but there's enough doubt to let play go on. It doesnt HAVE to be one or the other. I think its this projected necessity for it to be either a pen or a dive that causes much of the uproar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of seasons ago when berbatov's foot was brushed by agger at OT, he fell over, won the penalty, they scored.

 

There was certainly contact but nothing that would cause a man to fall over. One is allowed to make contact with another player because it is a contact sport. contact is not necessarily a foul.

 

This was a dive (IMO)

 

However what annoys me is when co-comentators suggest that 'if he's not given a pen then he needs to book him for diving'

 

No he fucking doesn't. if its not a pen then the refs opinion is that there wasn't enough force in the contact to cause him to tumble, but there's enough doubt to let play go on. It doesnt HAVE to be one or the other. I think its this projected necessity for it to be either a pen or a dive that causes much of the uproar.

 

Makes for great telly that skyfan mongs can get up and shout at the ref through their tv's about though doesn't it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...