Jump to content

Recommended Posts

maxxi Wrote:

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

> A "come and get me" for January.

>

> http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premie

> r-league/jermain-defoe-says-transfer-from-west-ham

> -to-tottenham-was-a-massive-mistake-8922251.html

>

> Vaz Te and Downing out - Defoe and Ba in? Sounds

> like a plan.



Dream on.

Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> Jeez! Just seen that twat Ashley Young do what he

> is best at. Diving. What an embarrassment he must

> be to Man Utd fans. The fact the referee bought it

> as well. Shocking.


He won't be at Utd for much longer, pity we won't get ?80m for him...

It's time for a complete review of the penalty rules (which of course will never happen as football seems to take pride in retaining original rules fundamental to the game)


Whether its a foul on Ashley Young or not, a penalty normally results in a goal. Most times the person fouled never looked remotely likely to score a goal. Hence the punishment is not appropriate and becasue of this people will always dive to get a goal from nothing.


Its outdated and causes so many problems in the modern game.


The penalty try in rugby is given where a try would almost certainly have been scored but for the foul. Football should adopt something similar. Too many boheheads in charge.

Not so sure Mick. What if Hernandez had been fouled last night before he fluffed it from 1 yard out? Nothing is 100% certain. You'll also get farcical situations where a team is awarded a free kick instead of a penalty a couple of yards from the goal line. The only way to limit diving is to retrospectivly punish players clearly found guilty by TV replays. The FA have just started doing this re. violent play missed by the ref, i.e. Riether's stamp on Januzaj. It won't stop it as these tend to be 'heat of the moment' incidents, but at least something is being done...

Mick Mac Wrote:

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


> The penalty try in rugby is given where a try

> would almost certainly have been scored but for

> the foul. Football should adopt something similar.

> Too many boheheads in charge.


Would you have awarded a penalty goal if Hernandez had been tripped just as he was about to take a kick at the ball?

red devil Wrote:



> Would you have awarded a penalty goal if Hernandez

> had been tripped just as he was about to take a

> kick at the ball?


If he has a clear shot on goal when fouled within the box, yes.


At the moment you get a penalty/goal if the player fouled is not even in possession eg Ashley Young. Ridiculous.

Mick Mac Wrote:

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


> If he has a clear shot on goal when fouled within

> the box, yes.


He did have a clear shot on goal....and missed. That's the beauty of football.



> At the moment you get a penalty/goal if the player

> fouled is not even in possession eg Ashley Young.

> Ridiculous.


It's simple. Don't commit a foul inside the box. Same for both teams...

If the game is stopped for a penalty maybe the opposing side should have the opportunity to appeal (like cricket and US football - 2 per team per game?) and ask the third official to judge via the slow-mo replay (the game has stopped anyway) with the penalty for diving (if that's the case) being a card.

Otta Wrote:

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

> So are penalties won by diving fair game then? If

> the ref didn't see it it's okay to cheat, it's

> only cheating if you get caught.


No, no, and no.


> A ref SHOULD be able to ref a match in the

> knowledge that players will play it fair.


Yes...

maxxi Wrote:

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

> If the game is stopped for a penalty maybe the

> opposing side should have the opportunity to

> appeal (like cricket and US football - 2 per team

> per game?) and ask the third official to judge via

> the slow-mo replay (the game has stopped anyway)

> with the penalty for diving (if that's the case)

> being a card.


Maybe, but the problem with that is that Young did have his shirt tugged, so then you are getting into what level of tugging constitutes a foul, as well as other factors such as the speed the player was travelling at, ground conditions, was it slippy. Nothing is failsafe, and ultimately it comes down to one man's interpretation, the ref or a.n.other.


What gets me in all this, is that it's always the attacking player that is branded the cheat, never the defender. Tugging on a shirt is not exactly playing the game in a fair spirit, but it seems to be accepted. Last night Vidic was elbowed off the ball as he went up for a corner, a foul and penalty, but the defender got away with it. Is he not a cheat too in the spirit of the game?...

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

    • Direct link to joint statement : https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-bogota-en/?link_id=2&can_id=2d0a0048aad3d4915e3e761ac87ffe47&source=email-pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogota-breakthrough&email_referrer=email_2819587&email_subject=pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogot_-breakthrough&&   No. 26 | The Bogotá Breakthrough “The era of impunity is over.” That was the message from Bogotá, Colombia, where governments from across the Global South and beyond took the most ambitious coordinated action since Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza began 21 months ago. Convened by The Hague Group and co-chaired by the governments of Colombia and South Africa, the Emergency Conference on Palestine brought together 30 states for two days of intensive deliberation — and emerged with a concrete, coordinated six-point plan to restrain Israel’s war machine and uphold international law. States took up the call from their host, Colombian President and Progressive International Council Member Gustavo Petro, who had urged them to be “protagonists together.” Twelve governments signed onto the measures immediately. The rest now have a deadline: 20 September 2025, on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly. The unprecedented six measures commit states to:     Prevent military and dual use exports to Israel.     Refuse Israeli weapons transfers at their ports.     Prevent vessels carrying weapons to Israel under their national flags.     Review all public contracts to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation.     Pursue justice for international crimes.     Support universal jurisdiction to hold perpetrators accountable. “We came to Bogotá to make history — and we did,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro. “Together, we have begun the work of ending the era of impunity. These measures show that we will no longer allow international law to be treated as optional, or Palestinian life as disposable.” The measures are not symbolic. They are grounded in binding obligations under international law — including the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation unlawful, and September 2024’s UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, which gave states a 12-month deadline to act. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory Francesca Albanese called them “a momentous step forward.” “The Hague Group was born to advance international law in an era of impunity,” said South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Ronald Lamola. “The measures adopted in Bogotá show that we are serious — and that coordinated state action is possible.” The response from Washington was swift — and revealing. In a threatening statement to journalists, a US State Department spokesperson accused The Hague Group of “seeking to isolate Israel” and warned that the US would “aggressively defend our interests, our military, and our allies, including Israel, from such coordinated legal and diplomatic” actions. But instead of deterring action, the threats have only clarified the stakes. In Bogotá, states did not flinch. They acted — and they invite the world to join them. The deadline for further states to take up the measures is now two months away. And with it, the pressure is mounting for governments across the world — from Brazil to Ireland, Chile to Spain — to match words with action. As Albanese said, “the clock is now ticking for states — from Europe to the Arab world and beyond — to join them.” This is not a moment to observe. It is a moment to act. Share the Joint Statement from Bogotá and popularise the six measures. Write to your elected representative and your government and demand they sign on before 20 September. History was made in Bogotá. Now, it’s up to all of us to ensure it becomes reality, that Palestinian life is not disposable and international law is not optional. The era of impunity is coming to an end. Palestine is not alone. In solidarity, The Progressive International Secretariat  
    • Most countries charge for entry to museums and galleries, often a different rate for locals (tax payers) and foreign nationals. The National Gallery could do this, also places like the Museums in South Kensington, the British Library and other tax-funded institutions. Many cities abroad add a tourist tax to hotel bills. It means tourists help pay for public services.
    • Having just been to Co-op to redeem a 50p off Co-op members' card voucher on an item that is now 50p more than it was last week, Tesco can't come soon enough
    • Surely that depends on the amount.  It can be quite piffling.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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