South Africa v Uruguay

User avatar
Row Z Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10365
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 20:01
Location: LOLandmarks come and go. There'll only ever be one "Clickety Clique"

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Row Z Royal » 16 Jun 2010 23:37

Speaking of immediate hangings...

User avatar
paultheroyal
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 12837
Joined: 04 Mar 2005 12:59
Location: Hob Nob Reality TV Champ 2010/2011

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by paultheroyal » 16 Jun 2010 23:38

Red card was correct decision. End of he day he is three yards from the centre of goal, keeper to beat and he is brought down. No further discussion needed regardless of where ball is heading. Although he was caught the attacker waited for touch then dived. Interesting point no-one has mentioned but when ball played through he is onside but did that other attacker touch it on way through or did he step over it, because if touch was made he would of been clearly off side.

User avatar
paultheroyal
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 12837
Joined: 04 Mar 2005 12:59
Location: Hob Nob Reality TV Champ 2010/2011

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by paultheroyal » 16 Jun 2010 23:39

Oh and these horns, why does everyone think they will now stop? Most tickets bought are in the hands of South Africans and surely they will
keep blowing oh er and good on them I say!

User avatar
Row Z Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10365
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 20:01
Location: LOLandmarks come and go. There'll only ever be one "Clickety Clique"

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Row Z Royal » 16 Jun 2010 23:40

paultheroyal Red card was correct decision. End of he day he is three yards from the centre of goal, keeper to beat and he is brought down. No further discussion needed regardless of where ball is heading. Although he was caught the attacker waited for touch then dived. Interesting point no-one has mentioned but when ball played through he is onside but did that other attacker touch it on way through or did he step over it, because if touch was made he would of been clearly off side.


We watched over several times - looked like the No.7 in the middle touched it, making Suarez off-side.

Naturally, not spotted by the commentary team.

1960
Member
Posts: 537
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 16:29
Location: Downtown

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by 1960 » 16 Jun 2010 23:43

He did touch it, making it offside, therefore no penalty and no sending off and only 1-0 instead of 2-0 and 11 men still on the pitch. Match not over. A huge wrong call from the ref/lino. First big ref boo-boo of the tournament. What I couldn't believe was that Mowbray and Lawro both pontificated away about it being the right decision without even looking at the possibility of offside.


Big Foot
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8336
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 15:19
Location: #MagicOfTheCup #RoadToWembley

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Big Foot » 17 Jun 2010 08:34

Thank fcuk for that. I know the Sef Afrikan's had a terrible time with Mandela etc but to have it shoved down our throat with patronising bullshit comments about how "it's a miracle to have the World Cup here" etc is pathetic. Glad Sef Afrika are out and I believe the term to be "c ya fanks"

User avatar
soggy biscuit
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8524
Joined: 04 Nov 2004 20:29
Location: BURNING VARIOUS NATIONAL FLAGS

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by soggy biscuit » 17 Jun 2010 08:50

Row Z Royal We watched over several times - looked like the No.7 in the middle touched it, making Suarez off-side.

Naturally, not spotted by the commentary team.


Not to mention the ridiculously dramatic dive by Suarez. Really wish there was a way for the ref to award a pen (if that is the correct decision) yet also book the player for exaggerating the incident.

User avatar
PieEater
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 6707
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 15:42
Location: Comfortably numb

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by PieEater » 17 Jun 2010 08:59

Suarez was doing it all game and was lucky not to get booked for it. 'greed about the offside, the ball was clearly nudged on after the initial pass.

Tony Le Mesmer
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3404
Joined: 17 Jun 2005 20:37
Location: Dundee in my bare feet

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Tony Le Mesmer » 17 Jun 2010 10:36

cmonurz
Tony Le Mesmer
The rule should be changed anyway. Unless you are denying a goal, not just an opportunity, pen should suffice.


So if they brought in this rule, and you were a defender, about to lose an attacker through on goal, why would you not foul him?


Well if you foul a player who is 1 on 1 in the area, a pen is advantage attacking team. They have more chance from the spot (say 85%) than a 1 on 1 (less then 50%). So from that sense, why would you intentionally foul someone?


User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Hoop Blah » 17 Jun 2010 10:50

You'd foul them because you might get away with it, or you might get lucky and get the ball in a challenge that you know it's unlikely to come off in your favour but you dive in out of desperation.

Either way it's still a foul and one that is made hundreds of times a season so they must see some advantage in it.

Ian, as for the 'last man' bit. It's not stated in the rules but it's a good rule of thumb to apply because if you've beaten the last man you're generally 1-on-1 with the keeper and that's a pretty damn clear goal scoring opportunity (unless, for example, you're stuck by the corner flag with other defenders getting back in time to cover).

If you're going to be that pedantic about it you'll have to point out where flloyd said 'according to the rules he beat the last man so it's a red.'

User avatar
Royal Lady
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 13769
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 10:17
Location: Don't mess with "my sort". Cheers then.

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Royal Lady » 17 Jun 2010 13:37

South Africa aren't actually out yet btw.

User avatar
RoyalChicagoFC
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2498
Joined: 09 Jan 2006 16:34
Location: In your dreams and everywhere else #apparently

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by RoyalChicagoFC » 17 Jun 2010 14:14

^ I made the same point yesterday on my superdooperkickass FB live match thread and got LOL'd @

But it's true nonetheless

Stranded
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 20744
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:42
Location: Propping up the bar in the Nags

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Stranded » 17 Jun 2010 14:33

Royal Lady South Africa aren't actually out yet btw.


No, but they are really, aren't they?


User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Ian Royal » 17 Jun 2010 20:45

Much as I hope they beat France, I can't see it happening.

User avatar
Gus the teenage cow
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1030
Joined: 28 Jul 2004 19:18
Location: "God is dead"-Nietzsche 1882................."Nietzsche is dead"-God 1900

Re: South Africa v Uruguay

by Gus the teenage cow » 17 Jun 2010 22:41

pienaar has been an awful let-down, hasn't he and mccarthy may be unfit but unlike all there other strikers he has the ability to finish

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 132 guests

It is currently 19 Jul 2025 13:31