Borussia Dortmund (A) - CL QF | Post-Match Thread

Sunderland fan who probably has a voodoo doll of Toure/Nasri. RAWK is in meltdown with us, Chelski and PSG in the semis - we're breaking the cartel clubs.

Highlight of his day is when he gets home and picks out which dildo his wife is going to fuck him with that night. Looks like a right little ****. **** journalist for a cunts paper. Fitting
 
The term "sportswashing" is just a fake narrative with no evidence to back it up. The Guardian would have you believe that the entire creation of the City Football Group with clubs across the world is just an attempt by Sheikh Mansour to improve the reputation of his nation. Is that why he invested billions in Barclays Bank? Is that why he has invested hundreds of millions in the tech and science sectors, and health, and education, and renewable energy, and has a property portfolio of more than £500m in the UK? Is that why our owner has invested in football teams in Japan and Girona?
Given that he has already trebled the value of his total investment in Manchester City (let alone his other investments) is it possible that he may just be interested in making profits like every other business in the world?
Is it too much to expect that a journalist like Jonathan Wilson should spend some time on Google doing basic research so he doesn't produce such drivel? Is he incompetent or, like so many others, is he just malicious?
Not to mention investment in the poorer areas of manchester
 
The term "sportswashing" is just a fake narrative with no evidence to back it up. The Guardian would have you believe that the entire creation of the City Football Group with clubs across the world is just an attempt by Sheikh Mansour to improve the reputation of his nation. Is that why he invested billions in Barclays Bank? Is that why he has invested hundreds of millions in the tech and science sectors, and health, and education, and renewable energy, and has a property portfolio of more than £500m in the UK? Is that why our owner has invested in football teams in Japan and Girona?
Given that he has already trebled the value of his total investment in Manchester City (let alone his other investments) is it possible that he may just be interested in making profits like every other business in the world?
Is it too much to expect that a journalist like Jonathan Wilson should spend some time on Google doing basic research so he doesn't produce such drivel? Is he incompetent or, like so many others, is he just malicious?
Even if you go along with the fake narrative what about the Emirates sponsorship at Arsenal? Is that just rubbish “sportswashing”?
 
But this is my main problem with the handball rule, they've taken a common sense approach, which admittedly makes the rule greyer in terms of consistency and application, and tried to apply a series of multiple nested if, but and when clauses that try to legislate for a near infinite amount of possibilities.

Extracted from the fa rule (the whole thing is nearly unreadable);


It is an offence if a player:

even if accidental, immediately:
touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

--Few lines later--

Except for the above offences, it is not an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)


So which rule takes precedence?!?! They are in contradiction of each other given last night's incident with Can. For me it's pen all day long and thankfully the ref had interpreted with unnatural body position but the law clearly states for both interpretations. How worrying.

Clattenburg is a total tool so I cringe to quote him, but for what it's worth, he said that a key factor is whether the ball was anyway going to hit the arm. Which in Can's case, it clearly was.

The interesting thing for me is our CL ref'ing has been much better this year than in previous years. We have got a pretty fair deal overall. It just makes my blood boil to think of the decisions in the Scouser quarter, Llorente'S handball goal, and the foul in the lead-up to Lyon's second goal.

While I think Can's was a penalty, it could easily have not been given. TAA's at Anfield was 10x more a penalty.
 
Last edited:
Clattenburg is a total tool so I cringe to quote him, but for what it's worth, he said that a key factor is whether the ball was anyway going to hit the arm. Which in Can's case, it clearly was.

The interesting thing for me is our CL ref'ing has been much better this year than in previous years. We have got a pretty fair deal overall. It just makes my blood boil to think of the decisions in the Scouser quarter, LlorenteWhile

While I think Can's was a penalty, it could easily have not been given. TAA's at Anfield was 10x more a penalty.
Right ok, interesting twist on whether it was going to hit anyway.

It's really unbelievable this is under scrutiny, or was, in previous years it wouldn't even been a consideration of not being a handball. At footy today, a very high proportion of lads said no pen, come of his head. I mean what?? Previous years none of them would have commented at all
 
Right ok, interesting twist on whether it was going to hit anyway.

It's really unbelievable this is under scrutiny, or was, in previous years it wouldn't even been a consideration of not being a handball. At footy today, a very high proportion of lads said no pen, come of his head. I mean what?? Previous years none of them would have commented at all
If the rule was rigidly adhered to then in theory it would allow a defender to punch the ball clear after it had deflected down off his head onto his fist. It was a clear handball. That said I thought the kick on Rodri's knee was a clear penalty in the first leg and would have been given if Rodri hadn't over-egged it by clutching his face.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.