Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DaveR Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > "You chose to spend your money on your family,

> I

> > spend mine on the match. Everyone has a

> choice."

> >

> > That seems like a sensible perspective. Keef,

> > stop wasting your money on that kid and start a

> > standing order to the Rafa Transfer Fund.

>

>

Rafa transfer fund? Blimey you're trying to pay people to take him off your hands, that's a bit drastic!!!!

that was cheating end of. Doesn't matter about contact/no contact in this instance. He was still in full control of the ball and realised he was getting too close to another Brum defender. Carsley was stupid lunging in as he didn't need to, but how anyone can look to justify that with "intent" is ridiculous.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If there is intent to commit a foul, it's a foul.

> That is why intent is important.

>

> But I did not see it, so no idea on the specific

> incident.



But there wasn't intent to commit a foul. Intent to commit a foul was McManus against Hearts a couple of weeks back. This challenge was an intent to get the ball, nothing else.

There was absolutely no need for him to go down, he was still in control of the ball. In fact, he didn't just go down, he went up and then down!!!!

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If there is intent to commit a foul, it's a foul.

> That is why intent is important.

>

> But I did not see it, so no idea on the specific

> incident.


MM, if you click my Agog link you'll get a Youtube video of the whole sorry affair.

SCSB79 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> that was cheating end of. Doesn't matter about

> contact/no contact in this instance. He was still

> in full control of the ball and realised he was

> getting too close to another Brum defender.

> Carsley was stupid lunging in as he didn't need

> to, but how anyone can look to justify that with

> "intent" is ridiculous.


Or Carsley assumed N'Gog was going to pull the ball back and dived in to block. N'Gog read his intention and dived over him.

In fairness all of the clubs we support have players who have been guilty of a similar offence in recent years, for example Van Nislerooy, Rooney, Pires, Eduardo, Gerrard, Cole et al. So I think to be fair we shouldn't blow it out of all propotion. As undeyfying as it is, we all know it goes on. If i'm honest the worst I've seen which effected my own club, has to be Rooneys dive to gain a penalty at old trafford when we were on for a 50 game unbeaten run. But hey ho, that's life. Ngog was still out of order. Unfortunately I don't think it will be the last we see of such behaviour.

Just tried to click on the link and it has been deleted due to a copyright by Liverpool football club!


Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If there is intent to commit a foul, it's a

> foul.

> > That is why intent is important.

> >

> > But I did not see it, so no idea on the

> specific

> > incident.

>

> MM, if you click my Agog link you'll get a Youtube

> video of the whole sorry affair.

matthew123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bloody hell, "Germany and Hannover 96 goalkeeper

> Robert Enke has died after being hit by a train in

> an apparent suicide on Tuesday, police have

> confirmed" -

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internati

> onals/8353733.stm


Saw this report last night. Very sad.

Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> did you not see what happened to all the companies

> that tried to show Scottish football in England?

> They folded because noone wanted to watch.


SP. Setanta folded because of over paying for its EPL rights (if you meant setanta).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • It was normal cyclists, in rush hour traffic, in the dark, in the rain. Just really want people to realise it’s that time of year even more careful and to get kitted out.
    • The other consideration is that users of Lime bikes and similar, plus younger pedal cyclists, probably don't view themselves as 'cyclists' as such and so don't get kitted out or even consider that they need to. I also agree that earlier nights are another factor for the casual or hire bike user more used to cycling in the summer. I don't think I have ever seen a hire bike or scooter user wearing a helmet or reflective gear- presumably that is because the bike is just viewed as a transport tool for short term use and users do not want to be encumbered by any of the safety gear? Before anyone jumps on me for anecdotal evidence and speculation, this is just what I have seen round here, there may be hordes of similar users elsewhere that are kitted out.
    • Well apolitical if that is an OK word for you.  Sorry if my choice of words was incorrect.  But on my original point if it wasn't for the Telegraph dragging this up, and yes they do have an agenda, an no they are not apolitical/impartial whatever, we;d be none the wiser. But as it made no difference to Trump's election campaign that why would he have a case in the American courts? Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the programme
    • If she took a bus, has she tried contacting the bus company? Long shot, but you never know!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...