Media Discussion - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
peter.evans said:
Must be for reasons other than the world cup,otherwise how can they leave Lauen out !? She was England s best player by a mile at the WC.
Click to expand...

I thought the Ballon d'Or was changed to be based on seasons ending in July, not the calendar year.
So the WC is irrelevant to voting.
Have I got that wrong?
 
messi will win it even tho he doesnt deserve it and it will show what a sham of an award it is tbf, if its going to go to someone who won the world cup it should be martinez
 
Keeper! said:
It was clearly offside , any other interpretation is a crock.

VAR is superb IF used correctly.

Sadly the PL referees and execs are utterly and totally incompetent and VAR in this current format is helping to tarnish the spectacle of the beautiful game.
Click to expand...
Can only say had that decision been given against City would have been pig sick. Also offside against rags on Sunday harsh as near level as could be, what happened to giving benefit of doubt to attacker. Mind you rags have many decisions the other way including an overturned penno in the same match can't say I'm sympathetic.
 
mancboy said:
messi will win it even tho he doesnt deserve it and it will show what a sham of an award it is tbf, if its going to go to someone who won the world cup it should be martinez
Click to expand...
Its a fucking charade and Messi is the only name on the list in reality.
 
34yearsandstillgoingstrong said:
Further to the above, let us not forget, the faux outrage at Ake's goal is the media's attempt to divert attention away from the incessant corrupt decisions given in favour of the rags. "You point to bad decisions given in favour of ManU - what about that farcical decision given in favour of Man City ! "
The precise wording of the Offside Law is as follows :
A player in an offside position is not necessarily offside. That player is deemed offside in the following circumstances
(a) If interfering with play by ........ (his) touching a ball
(b) Interfering with play by playing ..... a ball
Interfering with an opponent by :
(c) preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision.
(d) challenging an opponent for the ball
(e) clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent...
...or (f) makes an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball.

Gallagher and Webb's contribution to the debate about Ake's goal are interesting.
The clown Dermot Gallagher - having received his instructions from above - and clearly being prompted by the presenter to toe the party line - denounces the decision to let Ake's goal stand ( " a really poor decision" ) Gallagher argues that (c) + (e) are relevant. But the t.v. view from behind the goal confirms the Fulham Keeper had a clear view of the ball from the moment it left Ake's head. And Sorry Dermot - Akanji does NOT attempt to play the ball - he does the precise opposite and takes avoiding action to ensure he does not play the ball.

What was the judgement of Howard Webb ?. He judges that it was a wrong decision to allow the goal because the keeper delays his dive as a result of Akanji's actions. Webb is rewording (f) to make a case. Akanji's presence may well have influenced the keeper's thought process and delayed his dive but Akanji in no way impacts on the keeper's ability to play the ball. ( That is the wording of the law ) If Webb's reasoning was valid then any goal scored with a player in offside position could be chalked off.
So Webb reinvents the Laws of Football ! Looking back at that most corrupt decision ever - the St Marcus / Ratface / Attwell goal < which was 100% offside (b) (c) (f) >. Webb's verdict at the time, however, was that the goal should stand "under the letter of the law" ( but was not "in the spirit of the law" ) Bizarrely, Webb then added that there was no need to rewrite the Laws of the Game because they confirmed his opinion that the goal should stand .

P.S.Still very little attention to Salah's offside in the Liverpool vs Villa game. Why's that Howard ?




:
Click to expand...
Clause (c) clearly rules out Rashfords goal, as he was obstructing Akanji’s view of the ball. This clause doesn’t only apply to goalkeepers as most pundits seem to think. How Webb could ignore such a clearly stated clause implies an astonishing level of incompetence, or, of course, clear bias, ignoring the clauses that don’t agree with his pre-formed decision.
 
The perfect fumble said:
Let's see if I understand this, Soriano is the only Premier League candidate, if elected he will be the sole Premier League representative on the European Clubs’ Association Board and would be tasked to represent the interests of said league, that would be the same league that's slapped City with 115 charges of breaching its financial rules.
Click to expand...
No. Arsenal and Spurs have people on the Executive Board.
 
Talulah said:
Clause (c) clearly rules out Rashfords goal, as he was obstructing Akanji’s view of the ball. This clause doesn’t only apply to goalkeepers as most pundits seem to think. How Webb could ignore such a clearly stated clause implies an astonishing level of incompetence, or, of course, clear bias, ignoring the clauses that don’t agree with his pre-formed decision.
Click to expand...
He's a total tit
 
I wasn’t aware Ferran had his Italian cousin on the executive board. Complete nepotism…
IMG_9890.jpeg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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.