England v Denmark | Euro 2020 Semi Final

What will the result be?

  • Total voters
    282
  • Poll closed .
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
You fail to post videos in support of your view and continue to attack me without reason on a purely subjective point of view whereas I've stated that I'm open to reassessment of the Kane incident save that there's no slow motion replay of this.

So, I must conclude - WTF?!?!?!?!

You seem to be - sorry to say - a fucking asshole. Unwilling to engage in simple debate - overconfident in your own biased opinion - and unwilling to back said opinion up with evidence in spite of the fact that I've stated numerous times that I'm open to discussion.

Here's a final thought... fuck you!
Click to expand...
Attack you? Biased opinion?

You just spewed a load of accusations about me not backing up my claims, I told you I was at work, I posted earlier from a layby at the side of the road off my phone whilst on a tacho break.

Now you call me an asshole lol

No denial about being that other thundercunt though.
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
Won’t be supporting, but telling everyone on here they’re not supporting.

The height of attention seeking!

“LOOK AT ME, I DON’T SUPPORT ENGLAND BECAUSE IT’S A BIT ALTERNATIVE NOT TO SUPPORT ENGLAND AND I WANT TO BE SEEN AS DEAD COOL… LOOK… NO, LOOK AT ME!”
Click to expand...
The truth is somewhere down the middle
 
hilts said:
A poor decision
Click to expand...
I thought so too.
Poor man management.
The team management/formation change can be argued about as correct or not, but I thought someone else could have been brought off if that was what he wanted. Keep fresh players on and take off someone who has already run their lungs out.
 
bluealf said:
Attack you? Biased opinion?

You just spewed a load of accusations about me not backing up my claims, I told you I was at work, I posted earlier from a layby at the side of the road off my phone whilst on a tacho break.

Now you call me an asshole lol

No denial about being that other thundercunt though.
Click to expand...
I think it best that we put each other on ignore. I went out of my way to engage in rational discussion based on reexamination of game footage - and indeed I reviewed footage and rewatched the Kane incident to insure that I hadn't missed something - out of respect for your opinion.

Having gone out of my way to supply posts in support of my view -and having done the extra mile to review game footage of the Kane incident where I could not find any replay evidence - and then having invited evidence-based rebuttal - what do I get from you?

Abuse.

So, welcome, Bluealf - you've achieved the distinction of being the first and only - so far - member of Bluemoon on my ignore list.

Why? Not because I disagree with you - hell I disagree with Bigga far, far more - but he's not on my ignore list.

Why? Because you revert to insults as a means of rebuttal - incapable or unwilling to post thoughtful responses.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
I think it best that we put each other on ignore. I went out of my way to engage in rational discussion based on reexamination of game footage - and indeed I reviewed footage and rewatched the Kane incident to insure that I hadn't missed something - out of respect for your opinion.

Having gone out of my way to supply posts in support of my view -and having done the extra mile to review game footage of the Kane incident where I could not find any replay evidence - and then having invited evidence-based rebuttal - what do I get from you?

Abuse.

So, welcome, Bluealf - you've achieved the distinction of being the first and only - so far - member of Bluemoon on my ignore list.

Why? Not because I disagree with you - hell I disagree with Bigga far, far more - but he's not on my ignore list.

Why? Because you revert to insults as a means of rebuttal - incapable or unwilling to post thoughtful responses.
Click to expand...
You stay in your fantasy land, I never swore or called you an asshole.

You continually refused to answer if you had even seen Kane kick the defender.

So, again if you can't see Kane kick the defender, it was pointless to continue but as of now you have said you can't even see Kane kick the defender then you are blind as fuck, I said this earlier far nicer and said good day to you, you then called me out for not supplying video footage, I told you I was at work, you then call me an asshole.

And you put me on ignore lol

Cya later Washington you utter gimp.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Mostly agree.

But, if given any contact in the penalty box - then going down - is that diving? Or is going down absolutely called for as a team player?
Click to expand...

I don't think he dived, I went into it in greater detail in another post.

It happens though and players have been doing it since football began. Remember good old Franny Lee? Well he wasn't the only one. When players stay on their feet and are kicked and pushed in what is a clear penalty that isn't given, you can't blame them in taking the 50/50 option and going down
 
paulchapo said:
I don't think he dived, I went into it in greater detail in another post.

It happens though and players have been doing it since football began. Remember good old Franny Lee? Well he wasn't the only one. When players stay on their feet and are kicked and pushed in what is a clear penalty that isn't given, you can't blame them in taking the 50/50 option and going down
Click to expand...
Cheers - and I agree with you. Sterling going down in Demark's box - not at all a dive since contact obviously occured.

At the same time, the contact wasn't sufficient to merit a penalty - not even close IMO.

Maybe the Sterling penalty call was a makeup for the Kane incident earlier - who knows?

Anyhow, England were the better side - and advanced.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Cheers - and I agree with you. Sterling going down in Demark's box - not at all a dive since contact obviously occured.

At the same time, the contact wasn't sufficient to merit a penalty - not even close IMO.
Click to expand...
To summarize. It wasn't a dive and there was contact. Therefore the contact was enough to cause Sterling to fall on the ground but that is not a penalty.
 
Keeper! said:
Never a penalty in a million years, he looked for it, got it and we scored and won, end of story.

Cheating/simulation has always gone on in the game (Lee 1 Pen) but it's becoming far too much a problem, time the authorities got a grip on it
Click to expand...
Nah, it's time people stop trying to make out if it's not a pen then it must be dive... I agree it wasn't a pen. The point stands though and I've yet to see anyone counter it. If he wanted to look for it, then he could have made it a nailed on pen because the player left his leg out infront of him while he was already traveling in that direction. Go look at the evidence(real live footage), the leg is out in front of him, the ball is past the defender, yet the defenders leg ends up grazing him... Make that make sense to me, if he's "looking for it", as you put it. It doesn't make sense at all because he wasn't looking for it, he was put off balance, and at best decided after that, that he has a right to go down. Where's your criticism of the defender not making an honest attempt to play the ball, focused on the player instead? It's so annoying how quick people are to lay the boot in on Sterling.
 
Last edited:
Barcon said:
To summarize. It wasn't a dive and there was contact. Therefore the contact was enough to cause Sterling to fall on the ground but that is not a penalty?
Click to expand...
You're summary is spot on. With any contact whatsoever, however slight, attackers will go down in the penalty box - creating a huge problem for referees.

Should any contact whatsoever in the penalty box be called as a foul?
===
Such calls are obviously going to be controversial - for me - Sterling went down too easily - not a penalty - but maybe the ref had second thoughts about the 72nd minute Kane incident and non-penalty call and thus decided to award a penalty here as makeup - who knows?
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Cheers - and I agree with you. Sterling going down in Demark's box - not at all a dive since contact obviously occured.

At the same time, the contact wasn't sufficient to merit a penalty - not even close IMO.

Maybe the Sterling penalty call was a makeup for the Kane incident earlier - who knows?

Anyhow, England were the better side - and advanced.
Click to expand...

The contact was enough to halt his progress so it's a penalty.

All irrelevant though now, it was given, we won, end of story. Only in England could reaching our first final in 55 years be overshadowed by people anguishing whether it was deserved or not, or whether the winning goal should have been scored due to the validity of the penalty award.
 
kalouk said:
I think social media is skewing the general feeling about the England team. My son went to a pub in Cardiff to watch the game and the whole place was getting behind England. In other years maybe it wouldn't have happened but after the time we have all had with Covid I think people just want something positive to get behind. It helps that none of the team are unlikable in other years the Rooney scream every time he touched the ball made me turn off the tv. I may be getting sentimental as I get older but the thought of Phil, Raheem, Kyle and John playing a big part of winning Englands first trophy in decades makes me happy and lets be honest whats not to like about players like Rice, Saka, Phillips etc. I said before the tournament I thought you could do something, Wales are out so i'm with you all the way. It blows my mind that people on here want Italy to win (unless your Italian of course). Its one more game why not have a kum ba yah moment and get behind them ;)
Click to expand...
I hope you don't have that shithouse attitude when the six nations is on ;-)
 
BuzLightyear said:
Jack came on and set up both goals against Germany. Otherwise he's not had much game time. What Southgate did to him last night was nasty. He wouldn't have done that to any of his Teacher's Pets. Look forward to Jack in the sky blue shirt this season. : )
Click to expand...
He didn't set up both goals, he was involved in the first(same as Kane) but that first goal was set up by Sterling, assisted by Shaw and scored by Sterling. I said he does have an assist elsewhere and he's won freekicks(meh) but he's normally creating much more and taking players on more.

I do agree that the game time has a lot to do with it(how they've looked compared to their club form) for Grealish and Foden and being played in different position in Foden's case but Saka to his credit, took his chance the first time he was brought on and has looked better out on the right. Besides Kane being able to play his way into form up top, it's hard to argue with making team selections based on how people are performing currently.

I think Saka has faded in games though, when he'd started and Southgate has been too reluctant to hook him. He could have brought him off for Foden(and switch Sterling onto the right for a bit) at half time and said he planned it. Sancho hasn't even got a look in yet either as a sub. Anyone know why that is?
 
Last edited:
paulchapo said:
All irrelevant though now, it was given, we won, end of story. Only in England could reaching our first final in 55 years be overshadowed by people anguishing whether it was deserved or not, or whether the winning goal should have been scored due to the validity of the penalty award.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think that's true. I can't imagine for one second that such a debate would happen in Spain, Italy, France or Germany. But maybe that's something positive? You can certainly spin it like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top