[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Exactly. I’ve no idea where the “Muslim” reference came from. It sounds like something that gets said by athletes in all sports. Thanking God when they win, etc…[/quote]
Yeah, plenty of athletes publicly blame God when they screw up! It’s all the rage now (pun intended).
Thanking God when things go well is humble; saying it was how He wanted things to happen when you screw up is irresponsible and retarded.
Very different.
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
A stupid question: is it against current FIFA rules for 10 guys to lock arms and surround the keeper as he dribbles downfield, then suddenly split apart while he fires in a shot?
DB [/quote]
Yes it is, it is an obstruction, a player who does not have possesion of the ball is not allowed to intentionally block an opponent from challenging for said ball.
Interesting, did not know that. Dont know why they would vote prematurely but it sure does explain it better.
[quote]Gene86 wrote:
Amsterdam Animal wrote:
Dahum I must be smart then b/c I pulled that shit out of the air.
As far as Zizou getting the golden ball. I see where you are coming from but I cant help but think that the sentimental retirement plans that were hyped up during the entire wc played a big part in the minds of the voters.
Yes, he had a big part in taking France this far which makes his action even more moronic regardless of whether we agree or understand why he did it. I am sure the French players were not happy to see their leader leave the game at such a crucial point. Would it have made a difference during the PK shootout? I doubt it but we will never know.
But when a leader of a team abondons and fucks his team over like he did, that kinda behavior does not spell out MVP for me. As much as I did not care for the Italian style of soccer, they must have had someone just as deserving on their side that did not lose his head (no pun intended).
hspder wrote:
Amsterdam Animal wrote:
Anyone has any thoughts on Zizou still winning the golden ball? Should his red card display prevented him from getting the MVP recognition.
I’m split on that. On one hand, it is pretty stupid to give him that recognition the day after he gets expelled in that shameful display, but, on the other, he had a huge part in getting France to the final and it might serve as much needed damage control. It might also backfire… Only time will tell.
Amsterdam Animal wrote:
Hspder - this is your queue to start talking about the political ramifications of this in France society and its impact on children and teenagers in the south eastern Europeans slums.
That’s almost a straight quote for a couple of newspaper articles I read today, which means you have read them too, so I’ll let you post the links instead if you want to… They summarize it pretty well. If somebody wants to discuss that in greater depth, they can always open up a thread in the appropriate forum…
Ironically, the MVP vote happened at half time according to Sky Sports, before he was sent off. Obviously it backfired.[/quote]
[quote]Stuey wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
A stupid question: is it against current FIFA rules for 10 guys to lock arms and surround the keeper as he dribbles downfield, then suddenly split apart while he fires in a shot?
DB
Yes it is, it is an obstruction, a player who does not have possesion of the ball is not allowed to intentionally block an opponent from challenging for said ball.[/quote]
Thanks. So, if it had happened in this WC, there likely would have been 8 or 9 yellows issued and 1 or 2 reds.
Believe it or not, I really do like to watch soccer at the top levels. This WC set me back a little bit though bc (1) the US sucked and (2) the on-field shenanigans (diving and inconsistent carding, ridiculous awarding of penalty kicks) seemed to be worse than ever. I really would like to see FIFA address these issues in some way. And I want to see Klinsmann as coach of the U.S. squad.
DB
[quote]hspder wrote:
Thanking God when things go well is humble; saying it was how He wanted things to happen when you screw up is irresponsible and retarded.
[/quote]
hence Muslim???
[quote]hspder wrote:
juninho wrote:
And why would anyone want ammo against Muslims unless they were inherently racist??
What world do you live in? Your statement makes it sound like there is little racial tension in Europe with regards to Muslims…
[/quote]
not to the extent that people would connect one footballers fatalist ideas with Muslim fanaticism.
In my experience, most people who take the “all Muslims are fanatics” line, are so retarded they wouldn’t have the mental dexterity to connect up the dots.
[quote]hspder wrote:
Yeah, plenty of athletes publicly blame God when they screw up! It’s all the rage now (pun intended).
Thanking God when things go well is humble; saying it was how He wanted things to happen when you screw up is irresponsible and retarded.
Very different.
[/quote]
What the fuck is this? Show me a religious person who doesn’t believe in fate, just as juninho mentioned. You’re trying to make something out of completely nothing.
[quote]juninho wrote:
Thanking God when things go well is humble; saying it was how He wanted things to happen when you screw up is irresponsible and retarded.
hence Muslim??? [/quote]
Oh, for crying out loud! No! I never said that! But Zidane, specifically, IS a Muslim. He has said it many times. EVERYBODY knows that.
[quote]bg100 wrote:
holifila wrote:
Way off topic and forgive my ignorance, but this is the third or fourth post that refered to different rules and leagues in Australia. Anyone willing to give me the Cliff’s Notes explination?
Soccer is a minority sport in Australia when it gets to the pro level (although it’s the biggest junior sport) compared to the two rugby codes and Australian Rules football, which are of course vastly different to soccer in how physical the game is. Australians are brought up on these games and one of the major turn-offs when it comes to soccer has been the diving and “acting” to get a penalty. After you get used to seeing two rugby players crunch each other in tackles and then bounce back up straight away to keep playing it’s no wonder soccer is called the “sissy sport” in Oz.
Soccer has just received a huge boost with Australia making the final 16 of the WC, but the fact that Italy won a penalty by diving to beat us confirmed a lot of Aussies’ suspicions about the game. I read somewhere that half of the goodwill built up by the WC was lost in the moment Grosso dived. This is why you have seen this mentioned a few times on this thread.
Hope this explained it for you.[/quote]
Thanks for the reply but I really meant that I’m not sure I understand the two codes statement for Rugby. Are they two completly different games? Do players play in both?
[quote]holifila wrote:
bg100 wrote:
holifila wrote:
Way off topic and forgive my ignorance, but this is the third or fourth post that refered to different rules and leagues in Australia. Anyone willing to give me the Cliff’s Notes explination?
Soccer is a minority sport in Australia when it gets to the pro level (although it’s the biggest junior sport) compared to the two rugby codes and Australian Rules football, which are of course vastly different to soccer in how physical the game is. Australians are brought up on these games and one of the major turn-offs when it comes to soccer has been the diving and “acting” to get a penalty. After you get used to seeing two rugby players crunch each other in tackles and then bounce back up straight away to keep playing it’s no wonder soccer is called the “sissy sport” in Oz.
Soccer has just received a huge boost with Australia making the final 16 of the WC, but the fact that Italy won a penalty by diving to beat us confirmed a lot of Aussies’ suspicions about the game. I read somewhere that half of the goodwill built up by the WC was lost in the moment Grosso dived. This is why you have seen this mentioned a few times on this thread.
Hope this explained it for you.
Thanks for the reply but I really meant that I’m not sure I understand the two codes statement for Rugby. Are they two completly different games? Do players play in both? [/quote]
There is rugby union (the original form of rugby), and rugby league (which is a game formed orignally for professionals to play in the early 1900s. Union didn’t turn professional until the 1990s. The games are similar in the fact that the goal posts and field dimensions are the same, the aim of the game is to score tries (a form of touchdown) and goals. The main differences are the number of players (two more per team in union), and in the ruck/tackle area, plus union has a lineout when the ball goes out whilst league has a scrum.
Players do move between the two codes, at the moment a lot of league players are moving to union in Australia, but the skill sets are different and take time to learn. I would say it is easier to learn to play league.
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Stuey wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
A stupid question: is it against current FIFA rules for 10 guys to lock arms and surround the keeper as he dribbles downfield, then suddenly split apart while he fires in a shot?
DB
Yes it is, it is an obstruction, a player who does not have possesion of the ball is not allowed to intentionally block an opponent from challenging for said ball.
Thanks. So, if it had happened in this WC, there likely would have been 8 or 9 yellows issued and 1 or 2 reds.
DB[/quote]
Unlikely as an obstruction is not a bookable offence, I suppose the referee could book them for unsportsmanlike behaviour or some such…
Repeated offending also warrants a card so if they kept doing it then cards could be issued.
Okay, now everyone’s decided to even turn THIS thread into a religious argument, it might be time for the most fun game I’ve played in ages…
[quote]juninho wrote:
hspder wrote:
Well, if anyone wanted ammo against Muslims, Zidane is a non-stop source of heavy artillery:
“I tell myself that if things happened this way, it’s because somewhere up there it was decided that way,” he told TF1 television. “And I don’t regret anything that happened, I accept it.”
Yeah, that’s it. Brilliant strategy: try to look as much as you can as a crazed muslim fundamentalist to win the public’s favor.
Yap. That will work.
That sounds nothing like a “crazed muslim fundamentalist” whatsoever. It merely sounds like someone with a strong belief in fate.
And why would anyone want ammo against Muslims unless they were inherently racist??[/quote]
That WAS an interesting little leap Hspder made there, wasn’t it?
HH
[quote]hspder wrote:
juninho wrote:
Thanking God when things go well is humble; saying it was how He wanted things to happen when you screw up is irresponsible and retarded.
hence Muslim???
Oh, for crying out loud! No! I never said that! But Zidane, specifically, IS a Muslim. He has said it many times. EVERYBODY knows that.
[/quote]
CYA, almost ‘Clintonesque’ in timing and subtlety.
HH
[quote]bg100 wrote:
holifila wrote:
bg100 wrote:
holifila wrote:
Way off topic and forgive my ignorance, but this is the third or fourth post that refered to different rules and leagues in Australia. Anyone willing to give me the Cliff’s Notes explination?
Soccer is a minority sport in Australia when it gets to the pro level (although it’s the biggest junior sport) compared to the two rugby codes and Australian Rules football, which are of course vastly different to soccer in how physical the game is. Australians are brought up on these games and one of the major turn-offs when it comes to soccer has been the diving and “acting” to get a penalty. After you get used to seeing two rugby players crunch each other in tackles and then bounce back up straight away to keep playing it’s no wonder soccer is called the “sissy sport” in Oz.
Soccer has just received a huge boost with Australia making the final 16 of the WC, but the fact that Italy won a penalty by diving to beat us confirmed a lot of Aussies’ suspicions about the game. I read somewhere that half of the goodwill built up by the WC was lost in the moment Grosso dived. This is why you have seen this mentioned a few times on this thread.
Hope this explained it for you.
Thanks for the reply but I really meant that I’m not sure I understand the two codes statement for Rugby. Are they two completly different games? Do players play in both?
There is rugby union (the original form of rugby), and rugby league (which is a game formed orignally for professionals to play in the early 1900s. Union didn’t turn professional until the 1990s. The games are similar in the fact that the goal posts and field dimensions are the same, the aim of the game is to score tries (a form of touchdown) and goals. The main differences are the number of players (two more per team in union), and in the ruck/tackle area, plus union has a lineout when the ball goes out whilst league has a scrum.
Players do move between the two codes, at the moment a lot of league players are moving to union in Australia, but the skill sets are different and take time to learn. I would say it is easier to learn to play league.
[/quote]
Thanks for the info, I just have no experience with rugby or Aussie rules football.
This is the thread that never ends;
it just goes on and on my friends;
some people started writing it,
not knowing what it was;
And they’ll continue writing it forever
just because…this is the thread that…