Football (Soccer)

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm talking when they played last time. Inter twice, never scored until Inter had a critical defender sent off.

The time they won? They beat Chelsea by a goal that wasn't a goal, then in the finals, when losing, Gerrard dived to get a penalty.

These are facts. I mentioned them before and you didn't reply cos you're a moron.

-AC

The ball went over the line, John Terry admitted even it in a recent interview, besides Chelsea never scored and never looked like scoring.

Gerrard had his shirt pulled so it was a foul, granted he went, so does every player, still a foul on Gerrard though.

Maldini scored from a free kick which was'nt a foul, but i suppose you turn a blind eye to that.

And the fact all you can do is call people a moron or a idiot just shows how little you know about football, because it's the first thing you say when someone post's something you disagree with.

Originally posted by Nihilist
SO THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM WINNING THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.

The ball went over the line, John Terry admitted even it in a recent interview, besides Chelsea never scored and never looked like scoring.

Gerrard had his shirt pulled so it was a foul, granted he went, so does every player, still a foul on Gerrard though.

Maldini scored from a free kick which was'nt a foul, but i suppose you turn a blind eye to that.

And the fact all you can do is call people a moron or a idiot just shows how little you know about football, because it's the first thing you say when someone post's something you disagree with.

Go watch the videos of it.

Gerrard dived, blatantly. Hardly any contact whatsoever.

The goal did NOT go over the line, hence why it's still contentious.

Still, Liverpool's two recent victories came on the lottery of shootouts, cos they weren't gonna do it any other way.

You are the biased one.

You know the least on this forum about football. Your opinions have NO backup, ever, and when confronted, all you do is retreat.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Go watch the videos of it.

Gerrard dived, blatantly. Hardly any contact whatsoever.

The goal did NOT go over the line, hence why it's still contentious.

Still, Liverpool's two recent victories came on the lottery of shootouts, cos they weren't gonna do it any other way.

You are the biased one.

You know the least on this forum about football. Your opinions have NO backup, ever, and when confronted, all you do is retreat.

-AC

The simple facts are Liverpool won the trophies because they was better penalty takers,kept going to end, did a proffesional job, something you cant seem to understand, but you will still tyr to bend it into your jealous point of view.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Everything you said again is your opinion, come back when you have FACTS son.

They're facts, child.

Is that all you've got?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They're facts, child.

Is that all you've got?

-AC

Originally posted by Nihilist
Show me the HARD facts that Gerrard dived and the ball never crossed the line AND that Liverpool didnt deserve to win on penalty's despite scoring more in the shoot out...remember hard facts.

Go watch the video. Your facts are there.

As for the line, it's widely agreed that it didn't cross. If there's no evidence to suggest it DID, the correct decision by reffing standards, is to assume it didn't.

Show me John Terry's quote.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Go watch the video. Your facts are there.

As for the line, it's widely agreed that it didn't cross. If there's no evidence to suggest it DID, the correct decision by reffing standards, is to assume it didn't.

Show me John Terry's quote.

-AC

Widely agreed by who? again show me the hard evidance that it did not cross the line, you do know that more tah half the ball over the line is a goal.

As for the John Terry quote it was in a recent Chelsea program.His words were "i thought the ball crossed the line, but you still contest the decision".

Originally posted by Nihilist

Widely agreed by who? again show me the hard evidance that it did not cross the line, you do know that more tah half the ball over the line is a goal.

And yes, the Dutch use the same rules as the English, the whole world does for that matter...

Originally posted by Slay
I was planning to stay out of this, but this is completely false. It's only a goal, or a throw-in for that matter, when the ball has completely passed the line.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Its more than half, because more of the ball is either in or out of play.

Originally posted by Slay
I don't know who told you that, but it's wrong. I'd give you 'hard facts', but I doubt you'd accept them anyway.

Originally posted by Nihilist
So a referee is wrong now.

A goal counts when the ball is completely OVER the line. If only a centimeter of the ball touches the line, it is still in play.

im not talking about a centimeter over the the,so if a ball is 3/4 over the line its no goal.

Originally posted by Nihilist
im not talking about a centimeter over the the,so if a ball is 3/4 over the line its no goal.

Originally posted by Slay
If only a centimeter of the ball touches the line, it is still in play.

So no, the ball being 3/4 over the line is not a goal.

Originally posted by Slay
I didn't say ''When the ball is only a cm over the line'', I said:

So no, the ball being 3/4 over the line is not a goal.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Funny Because plenty of goals get given for more or less being over the line, so its clear the rules are open to interpretation.

Same for players being given offside when they're clearly not, or players not being given offside, while they clearly are.

Originally posted by Slay
No, they're not. Those goals are given because in most of those scenario's the ref or linesmen don't get a good view of the situation. If the FIFA would start working with camera footage for the ref to consult during a match, they wouldn't be given as goals anymore.

Same for players being given offside when they're clearly not, or players not being given offside, while they clearly are.

Originally posted by Nihilist
So at this moment in time it's open to interpretation and judgement.

Originally posted by Slay
No, THE RULES aren't open for interpretation. The ref might make the WRONG decision, because he doesn't get a good view of the situation. Which is basically what happened in that LFC - Chelsea game. It shouldn't have been counted as a goal, but it did, because of a mistake from the referee. Which brings us to AC's argument, of LFC getting lucky.

Are you bitching about an incident in a Liverpool game that happened 4 years ago? 😕 No, you're not at all bitter...

Originally posted by Kovacs86
Are you bitching about an incident in a Liverpool game that happened 4 years ago? 😕 No, you're not at all bitter...