yellow cards are the equivalent of a technical foul in basketball.
I find some of these teams/players who flop around and play dead from someone blowing on them insulting and disrespectful. They’re clearly are taking advantage of the refs and it’s hard to watch. It’s disrespectful to the game, every player on the pitch, the fans, basically it’s an insult and a slap in the face to everyone involved.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
You are telling me this is worthy of a red card ? A fucking RED card ?[/quote]
Max - I think it’s a soft red, but it’s a stupid f’n play right in front of a ref who is very well know for handing out yellows and reds like candy on Halloween. He’s studs up with absolutely no intention of making a play on the ball. Again, soft in my opinion because he doesn’t go in with much force, but a play like that leaves the ref an option that you don’t want to leave him with.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Fair to say that refs probably have more power given to them by discretionary rules than almost any other sport? At least it seems that way to me. [/quote]
I don’t know enough about sports in general to say anything definitive, but I’d agree with that assessment.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
I find some of these teams/players who flop around and play dead from someone blowing on them insulting and disrespectful. They’re clearly are taking advantage of the refs and it’s hard to watch. It’s disrespectful to the game, every player on the pitch, the fans, basically it’s an insult and a slap in the face to everyone involved. [/quote]
Oh, for sure a lot of them are exaggerating it, but I think people underestimate just how much damage can be done by having someone run into you.
They look at like like football and say “oh, you can get up fine from getting smashed!” But football players are armored.
Plus, getting hit when you don’t really expect it can be a blow that hits hard at that moment, but you’re fine a minute or two later. So, just because someone gets up and walks around fine doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re exaggerating.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]Aggv wrote:
I find some of these teams/players who flop around and play dead from someone blowing on them insulting and disrespectful. They’re clearly are taking advantage of the refs and it’s hard to watch. It’s disrespectful to the game, every player on the pitch, the fans, basically it’s an insult and a slap in the face to everyone involved. [/quote]
Oh, for sure a lot of them are exaggerating it, but I think people underestimate just how much damage can be done by having someone run into you.
They look at like like football and say “oh, you can get up fine from getting smashed!” But football players are armored.
Plus, getting hit when you don’t really expect it can be a blow that hits hard at that moment, but you’re fine a minute or two later. So, just because someone gets up and walks around fine doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re exaggerating.[/quote]
I understand that things happen, and especially when you’re running full speed it doesnt take much to knock you on your ass. My issue is the histrionics and acting as though they were hit with sniper fire, only to be up and full speed as soon as they realize theyre not getting the call. Or the time wasting when a team is up, that’s just bush league. It’s not gamesmanship when there are 900 cameras catching every angle of every play, and everyone can see the bullshit.
dont even get me started on needing a stretcher to get off the field…
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]Ironwarrior25 wrote:
It has been a really odd world cup. England, Spain and Italy all out. There have been some amazingly entertaining games as well as some of the most boring games. The refereeing standard though has been shocking. So many dives and soft penalties, yet when Suarez goes cannibal the ref lets it go!
[/quote]
I can see being surprised by Spain but, Italy and England? Italy failed to pass to the next round last WC as well and England made it due to draws. They then got there asses handed to them by Germany.
I do not know why people mention soft penalties. It has nothing to do with how hard it is. A penalty is not granted due to yellow or red cards but, for fouling in the box. [/quote]
You are telling me this is worthy of a red card ? A fucking RED card ?[/quote]
Yes, that is a red card. He is not going after the ball and intentionally strikes the other player. Cleats up striking the shin…dirty.
[quote]dcb wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
You are telling me this is worthy of a red card ? A fucking RED card ?[/quote]
Max - I think it’s a soft red, but it’s a stupid f’n play right in front of a ref who is very well know for handing out yellows and reds like candy on Halloween. He’s studs up with absolutely no intention of making a play on the ball. Again, soft in my opinion because he doesn’t go in with much force, but a play like that leaves the ref an option that you don’t want to leave him with.
[/quote]
But, he does not only go studs up at :16 you can clearly see he kicks. It was uncalled for and malicious.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]dcb wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
You are telling me this is worthy of a red card ? A fucking RED card ?[/quote]
Max - I think it’s a soft red, but it’s a stupid f’n play right in front of a ref who is very well know for handing out yellows and reds like candy on Halloween. He’s studs up with absolutely no intention of making a play on the ball. Again, soft in my opinion because he doesn’t go in with much force, but a play like that leaves the ref an option that you don’t want to leave him with.
[/quote]
But, he does not only go studs up at :16 you can clearly see he kicks. It was uncalled for and malicious.[/quote]
And? That’s pretty much what I said right? My quote: “He’s studs up with absolutely no intention of making a play on the ball.”
[quote]dcb wrote:
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]dcb wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
You are telling me this is worthy of a red card ? A fucking RED card ?[/quote]
Max - I think it’s a soft red, but it’s a stupid f’n play right in front of a ref who is very well know for handing out yellows and reds like candy on Halloween. He’s studs up with absolutely no intention of making a play on the ball. Again, soft in my opinion because he doesn’t go in with much force, but a play like that leaves the ref an option that you don’t want to leave him with.
[/quote]
But, he does not only go studs up at :16 you can clearly see he kicks. It was uncalled for and malicious.[/quote]
And? That’s pretty much what I said right? My quote: “He’s studs up with absolutely no intention of making a play on the ball.”
[/quote]
I know but, in my opinion it is not a “soft” red. Intent to cause harm with no play on the ball is pretty much what red cards are. Calling it “soft” makes it seem like it could have gone either way when to me it is blatantly clear.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
This entire sport is played by vaginas, my beef is someone trying to Mike Tyson the guy, inevitably leading to a score.
Also, the red card given was ridiculous. I have seen soft porn more offensive than that. [/quote]
at least Suarez was banned for quite a bit, rightfully so.
Apparently the red card given to the Italian was justified by the rules, but I think most refs would have yellow’d that.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
This entire sport is played by vaginas, my beef is someone trying to Mike Tyson the guy, inevitably leading to a score.
Also, the red card given was ridiculous. I have seen soft porn more offensive than that. [/quote]
at least Suarez was banned for quite a bit, rightfully so.
Apparently the red card given to the Italian was justified by the rules, but I think most refs would have yellow’d that.[/quote]
Can’t agree here. He has no intention of getting the ball, only of hurting the other player. that can be excused, thought. (i have trouble saying this in english) the way he angles(?) his foot is not. even if you have no bad intentions, going to the ball that way, cleats first, is almost always red carded.
BTW, i was able to be in the stadium for argentina-iran. i’ve been waiting since korea-japan for this and it was crazy. almost died from a heart attack.
[quote]andresarpi wrote:
BTW, i was able to be in the stadium for argentina-iran. i’ve been waiting since korea-japan for this and it was crazy. almost died from a heart attack.[/quote]
That is awesome man. I’m hoping for Argentina to take it all. I would give my left leg to see Messi score in person. Pa mi, Messi no es el mejor del mundo. Es el mejor de la historia.
[quote]andresarpi wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
This entire sport is played by vaginas, my beef is someone trying to Mike Tyson the guy, inevitably leading to a score.
Also, the red card given was ridiculous. I have seen soft porn more offensive than that. [/quote]
at least Suarez was banned for quite a bit, rightfully so.
Apparently the red card given to the Italian was justified by the rules, but I think most refs would have yellow’d that.[/quote]
Can’t agree here. He has no intention of getting the ball, only of hurting the other player. that can be excused, thought. (i have trouble saying this in english) the way he angles(?) his foot is not. even if you have no bad intentions, going to the ball that way, cleats first, is almost always red carded.
BTW, i was able to be in the stadium for argentina-iran. i’ve been waiting since korea-japan for this and it was crazy. almost died from a heart attack.[/quote]
I guess, as an American, I just don’t understand. It looked like he barely bumped into the other player while going for the ball. Maybe my perception is just skewed since I watch a lot of football (American football that is).
Plus, the U.S. ties a game and losses a game, but they’re doing good/advance to the next round… Does not compute.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Plus, the U.S. ties a game and losses a game, but they’re doing good/advance to the next round… Does not compute. [/quote]
ofc it does! They won enough games to afford to lose one.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Plus, the U.S. ties a game and losses a game, but they’re doing good/advance to the next round… Does not compute. [/quote]
lol, I thought the same thing. If we don’t at least win 2 games, we don’t deserve to go on.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I guess, as an American, I just don’t understand. It looked like he barely bumped into the other player while going for the ball. Maybe my perception is just skewed since I watch a lot of football (American football that is). [/quote]
Again, keep in mind that football players wear a lot of armor.
I’ve read an article that says that the armor is so much that they generally don’t even feel the impact. And that this is actually counterproductive, because it causes people to not realize that they have concussions, smash people even harder, just be rougher in general.
You may not feel it, but your body suffers in the long run.
Anyways, if you want to experiment how painful it is to run into something, you can always just get a buddy and run straight into one another.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Plus, the U.S. ties a game and losses a game, but they’re doing good/advance to the next round… Does not compute. [/quote]
lol, I thought the same thing. If we don’t at least win 2 games, we don’t deserve to go on.[/quote]
doesn’t make sense to say this. Points are relative.
If you have 0.5pts, and everyone else has 0pts,
… 0.5 pts is not that much, but it’s enough.
Can’t be that hard to understand so stop trolling
Once again, Ann Coulter shows why she is one of the bright shining stars of US journalism. I think the rest of the world can learn from her insight and wisdom.
I’ve held off on writing about soccer for a decade ? or about the length of the average soccer game ? so as not to offend anyone. But enough is enough. Any growing interest in soccer can only be a sign of the nation’s moral decay.
? Individual achievement is not a big factor in soccer. In a real sport, players fumble passes, throw bricks and drop fly balls ? all in front of a crowd. When baseball players strike out, they’re standing alone at the plate. But there’s also individual glory in home runs, touchdowns and slam-dunks.
In soccer, the blame is dispersed and almost no one scores anyway. There are no heroes, no losers, no accountability, and no child’s fragile self-esteem is bruised. There’s a reason perpetually alarmed women are called “soccer moms,” not “football moms.”
Do they even have MVPs in soccer? Everyone just runs up and down the field and, every once in a while, a ball accidentally goes in. That’s when we’re supposed to go wild. I’m already asleep.
? Liberal moms like soccer because it’s a sport in which athletic talent finds so little expression that girls can play with boys. No serious sport is co-ed, even at the kindergarten level.
? No other “sport” ends in as many scoreless ties as soccer. This was an actual marquee sign by the freeway in Long Beach, California, about a World Cup game last week: “2nd period, 11 minutes left, score: 0:0.” Two hours later, another World Cup game was on the same screen: “1st period, 8 minutes left, score: 0:0.” If Michael Jackson had treated his chronic insomnia with a tape of Argentina vs. Brazil instead of Propofol, he’d still be alive, although bored.
Even in football, by which I mean football, there are very few scoreless ties ? and it’s a lot harder to score when a half-dozen 300-pound bruisers are trying to crush you.
? The prospect of either personal humiliation or major injury is required to count as a sport. Most sports are sublimated warfare. As Lady Thatcher reportedly said after Germany had beaten England in some major soccer game: Don’t worry. After all, twice in this century we beat them at their national game.
Baseball and basketball present a constant threat of personal disgrace. In hockey, there are three or four fights a game ? and it’s not a stroll on beach to be on ice with a puck flying around at 100 miles per hour. After a football game, ambulances carry off the wounded. After a soccer game, every player gets a ribbon and a juice box.
? You can’t use your hands in soccer. (Thus eliminating the danger of having to catch a fly ball.) What sets man apart from the lesser beasts, besides a soul, is that we have opposable thumbs. Our hands can hold things. Here’s a great idea: Let’s create a game where you’re not allowed to use them!
? I resent the force-fed aspect of soccer. The same people trying to push soccer on Americans are the ones demanding that we love HBO’s “Girls,” light-rail, Beyonce and Hillary Clinton. The number of New York Times articles claiming soccer is “catching on” is exceeded only by the ones pretending women’s basketball is fascinating.
I note that we don’t have to be endlessly told how exciting football is.
? It’s foreign. In fact, that’s the precise reason the Times is constantly hectoring Americans to love soccer. One group of sports fans with whom soccer is not “catching on” at all, is African-Americans. They remain distinctly unimpressed by the fact that the French like it.
? Soccer is like the metric system, which liberals also adore because it’s European. Naturally, the metric system emerged from the French Revolution, during the brief intervals when they weren’t committing mass murder by guillotine.
Despite being subjected to Chinese-style brainwashing in the public schools to use centimeters and Celsius, ask any American for the temperature, and he’ll say something like “70 degrees.” Ask how far Boston is from New York City, he’ll say it’s about 200 miles.
Liberals get angry and tell us that the metric system is more “rational” than the measurements everyone understands. This is ridiculous. An inch is the width of a man’s thumb, a foot the length of his foot, a yard the length of his belt. That’s easy to visualize. How do you visualize 147.2 centimeters?
? Soccer is not “catching on.” Headlines this week proclaimed “Record U.S. ratings for World Cup,” and we had to hear ? again about the “growing popularity of soccer in the United States.”
The USA-Portugal game was the blockbuster match, garnering 18.2 million viewers on ESPN. This beat the second-most watched soccer game ever: The 1999 Women’s World Cup final (USA vs. China) on ABC. (In soccer, the women’s games are as thrilling as the men’s.)
Run-of-the-mill, regular-season Sunday Night Football games average more than 20 million viewers; NFL playoff games get 30 to 40 million viewers; and this year’s Super Bowl had 111.5 million viewers.
Remember when the media tried to foist British soccer star David Beckham and his permanently camera-ready wife on us a few years ago? Their arrival in America was heralded with 24-7 news coverage. That lasted about two days. Ratings tanked. No one cared.
If more “Americans” are watching soccer today, it’s only because of the demographic switch effected by Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration law. I promise you: No American whose great-grandfather was born here is watching soccer. One can only hope that, in addition to learning English, these new Americans will drop their soccer fetish with time.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I guess, as an American, I just don’t understand. It looked like he barely bumped into the other player while going for the ball. Maybe my perception is just skewed since I watch a lot of football (American football that is). [/quote]
Again, keep in mind that football players wear a lot of armor.
I’ve read an article that says that the armor is so much that they generally don’t even feel the impact. And that this is actually counterproductive, because it causes people to not realize that they have concussions, smash people even harder, just be rougher in general.
You may not feel it, but your body suffers in the long run.
Anyways, if you want to experiment how painful it is to run into something, you can always just get a buddy and run straight into one another.[/quote]
It’s not like the two soccer players were running full force into each other and the “armor” football player wear doesn’t mute the entirety of the impact of a tackle. That’s a pretty crazy assertion by your article.