Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

World Cup 2010

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: World Cup 2010

    I have a couple questions as a novice soccer watcher for the more knowledgeable fans:

    Do you think that the game needs 3 umpires, one for each end of the pitch and one in the middle? They would cover zones and give more eyes to see things. The game seems to fast for one person.

    Second, why is offsides important? I equate it with not being able to take a outlet pass behind the defenders in basketball. Why is the offense responsible for not getting behind the defense instead of the other way around? I would appreciate more than a "that's just the rule" explanation as well. Thanks!

    Comment


    • Re: World Cup 2010

      I think that in basketball, cherry picking isn't really a viable strategy to win the game. You can't play 4 on 5 defense and pass it long to a player at the basket every time, it just wouldn't work.

      In soccer. You can defend without all your players, and you could just have a player stand by the goal and kick it long to him every time. Fun to play/watch tactics in soccer like keeping possession through the midfield and making diagonal runs and good passes to streaking players would be replaced.
      Play Mafia!
      Twitter

      Comment


      • Re: World Cup 2010

        Originally posted by SycamoreKen View Post
        Do you think that the game needs 3 umpires, one for each end of the pitch and one in the middle? They would cover zones and give more eyes to see things. The game seems to fast for one person. !

        Technically the game has 4 Referees. The two Linesmen not only look at offside and deadball linedecision, but also flag for fouls in open play. Their is also a 4th referee who is responsible for the area by the duggouts, with the two teams and coaching staff.

        However, yes a lot of the work is given to the one pimary referee, who has to do a crazy ammount of running over the course of the game. I think I read somewhere that most midfield players run between 9 and 12 km per game and a ref runs between 12 and 15 km a game.

        There has been a lot of talk recently about giving more support to the referee, particularly close to the penalty areas. Systems have been tried where two further referees are positioned, at each end, to the left of each goal. They would help with what are often seen as the most difficult and important decisions, like fouls when a player is through on goal and penalty decisions. This has actually been widely successful, partcularly as the angle they see the game from, for those decsions, is very good. This may well be introduced in the next few years from a lot of major competitions.

        There is also the arguement of video referals etc. but that's probably another discussion.

        You're right, it's a near impossible job for the primary ref to do. I do no envy them at all, they get very little praise when they get it right, but absolutely brated when they got it wrong.

        One example of the reaction to refereeing going markedly too far is 2004 England vs Portugal at the European Championship. Urs Meier (I think thats how you spell it from memory) disallowed a headed goal by Sol Campbel in the last few minutes that would have sent England through. England lost the game on penalties (6-5 I think). Anyway, following the game the Sun newpaper in the UK pulished the address and details of where the ref worked. He recieve constant death threats and had to be taken into hiding under police protection. He lost his job as a referee and had to move house permenantly, uprooting his family. ... kind of over the top for a football match!
        'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'
        Animal Farm, by George Orwell

        Comment


        • Re: World Cup 2010

          I always wondered why I had not seen Urs ref since then...never knew that info...

          Comment


          • Re: World Cup 2010

            Ok. I'm going to keep this relatively short (for my own sake ).

            1. I think Spain is a very worthy WC winner and if you add all things up I think they were slightly better then we were last night. It wasn't a big difference though IMHO, but they were a slight edge better and I like them winning it 10000000 times better then Brazil, Italy or Germany winning yet another one.

            2. the match was a HARD one, literally. De Jong could have been sent off, as could Van Bommel. However, I'm noticing a lot of media are mentioning THEM, but not Puyol and Ignietas, who just as likely could have been sent off. The former for hanging on to a broken through player and the latter for hitting another player (which is an automatic red card).

            3. the referee was utter garbage. Sorry, English posters here, but he seriously was. We got breaks, the Spanish got breaks, but he was spilling yellow cards like it was a ticker tape parade at certain moments later in the game. I will btw contest the first yellow card against Heitinga and the ones against Robben and Mathijssen. And he easily could have given the Spanish side several more yellow cards aswell if he had been just as strict on them as he was on us.

            If he were to referee matches like this in the Premiership then I'm sure he would have regular 9 vs 10 matches and so on.

            He missed the corner which the whole friggin' stadium saw we had to get (a freekick touched by both the Spanish players in the wall AND their keeper before going behind the line), resulting in a quick Spanish attack which resulted in the only goal.

            During that attack Ignieta was offside the first time his teammates tried to reach him with a pass, I think it was Torres, the ball deflected back and he then again reached for Ignieta, to dub that Ignieta wasn't a hindrance or actively participating during that first pass would be an absolute travesty.

            Why was this guy actually the referee? Aren't the referees supposed to come from other continents and even if not then still why him? He had allready reffed an earlier game in the tournament with Spain in it and was wildly critisized by the Spanish side in that game for dissallowing, I think, a goal. That alone before the match even started put enormous pressure and distrust from one of the two sides on the referee.

            Then figure also that he was the referee that before this match even started had handed out allready the most yellow cards of any ref in the tournament.

            I'm also wondering why I hear no one talking about diving this time around. Was it because the Spanish were the ones by far diving the most this time? Like Van der Wiel (lol who never dives, dives one time and gets yellow immediately earlier in the tournament).

            There was a time recently when asking for someone else to get a card would earn the "asker" one himself. I guess Webb conveniently forgot about that aswell.

            Either way, it wasn't a pretty match, but it was a suspensefull one, that's got to count for something. This was WC final part 3 that we played in. IF anyone ever talks about us not beying the most deserving nation on planet earth to win it once I think I would have to do some pretty "unthinkable" things. I just might hire Samuell Jackson for that .

            Again. Congrats to Spain . A worthy and a first time winner. I'm sure the whole country is in a collective state of extacy there now.

            PS: I guess my post wasn't as brief as I has initially planned it to be
            Last edited by Mourning; 07-12-2010, 09:42 AM.
            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

            Comment


            • Re: World Cup 2010

              yea i was confused why the refs were not enforcing the law regarding the players who try to pursuade the ref to show yellow cards to the opposition player...in Turkey they are very strict about enforcing that rule and it has helped a lot...players do not rush to the ref like they used to and have themselves a mini camp like the players were doing last night with the ref...

              i don't think the ref had total control of the match to be honest - it was NOT the easiest match to refree - but it is what it is...

              to put the whole blame on the ref though is not really the solution...specially when we've seen so many more worse situations earlier on in this world cup...

              till Blatter leaves FIFA and we actually get someone proper to run the game and allow aid when it comes to officiating...this is what we're left with...

              Comment


              • Re: World Cup 2010

                Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
                i don't think the ref had total control of the match to be honest - it was NOT the easiest match to refree - but it is what it is...

                to put the whole blame on the ref though is not really the solution...specially when we've seen so many more worse situations earlier on in this world cup...
                It was a very difficult match to referee, no question the man wasn't up to the task.

                Also for the record I'm not putting the whole blame on the ref. We could have scored ourselves several times, the Spanish just as much aswell. Both teams could have been running around with 9 or 10 players. I do blame him for starting to throw all kinds of non-yellow cards around and keeping those in his pockets in likewise or worse situations the other way around.

                And mostly I do blame him for screwing up three times in the two minutes leading up to the goal. I forgot to mention he forgot to give a card to a Spanish player who made a harsh foul aswell against one of our players. He got away completely clean. Were he Dutch he would have gotten a guaranteed yellow card. The yellow card against Robben and particularly the first one against Heitinga were utter crap.

                So, to say he decided the game is a little far-fetched, but to deny that he didn't severely influence the game and it's outcome is just not true either.

                Again just my own opinion.

                Btw. Blatter should be send into retirement or something like that immediately. Ugh. Can't stand the senile little fart with his "the referee and the human element have to influence the game"-shyte.

                PS: sorry just lost it a bit there
                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                Comment


                • Re: World Cup 2010

                  Btw I want to, again, emphasize the respect I have for the Spanish team. The passing game they play is a beauty to the eye.
                  2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                  Comment


                  • Re: World Cup 2010

                    Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                    During that attack Ignieta was offside the first time his teammates tried to reach him with a pass, I think it was Torres, the ball deflected back and he then again reached for Ignieta, to dub that Ignieta wasn't a hindrance or actively participating during that first pass would be an absolute travesty.
                    Iniesta (since that's his name, not "Ignieta") wasn't offside on the first pass.

                    And I understand the disappointment resulting from losing the final of the WC (has happened to me before), but Dutch players or fans have no business whatsoever complaining about the referee disfavoring them (complaining about the ref being bad overall is a different story).

                    De Jong, van Bommel and possibly Sneijder (for his tackle on Busquets) should have been sent off before half-time.

                    You do realize that Busquets and Ramos got the same punishment (yellow cards) in the first-half for fouls that weren't nearly as hard as the ones committed by De Jong and van Bommel, right?

                    Robben and van Persie also should have been carded for kicking the ball in the net after the ref had blown his whistle (Iniesta, on the other hand, did get carded for taking his shirt off after his goal). If some yellow cards were unwarranted, then these were the ones received by Spanish players.

                    Oh, and do you think Iniesta should have been sent off for his "shove" on van Bommel?

                    van Bommel is the biggest ***** in all of soccer, and is a disgrace both to this sport and to the Netherlands (or should be, at least). There's playing hard (see Gattuso, Heinze or Boulahrouz, for a Dutch example) and then there's playing dirty (see van Bommel, Materazzi or Lee Bowyer). There's no way anybody should be defending van Bommel.

                    It doesn't matter whether the dude is your brother, your idol or just your fellow countryman: soccer is worse off with players like van Bommel.

                    Comment


                    • Re: World Cup 2010

                      Originally posted by Pingu View Post
                      Iniesta (since that's his name, not "Ignieta") wasn't offside on the first pass.

                      And I understand the disappointment resulting from losing the final of the WC (has happened to me before), but Dutch players or fans have no business whatsoever complaining about the referee disfavoring them (complaining about the ref being bad overall is a different story).

                      De Jong, van Bommel and possibly Sneijder (for his tackle on Busquets) should have been sent off before half-time.

                      You do realize that Busquets and Ramos got the same punishment (yellow cards) in the first-half for fouls that weren't nearly as hard as the ones committed by De Jong and van Bommel, right?

                      Robben and van Persie also should have been carded for kicking the ball in the net after the ref had blown his whistle (Iniesta, on the other hand, did get carded for taking his shirt off after his goal). If some yellow cards were unwarranted, then these were the ones received by Spanish players.

                      Oh, and do you think Iniesta should have been sent off for his "shove" on van Bommel?

                      van Bommel is the biggest ***** in all of soccer, and is a disgrace both to this sport and to the Netherlands (or should be, at least). There's playing hard (see Gattuso, Heinze or Boulahrouz, for a Dutch example) and then there's playing dirty (see van Bommel, Materazzi or Lee Bowyer). There's no way anybody should be defending van Bommel.

                      It doesn't matter whether the dude is your brother, your idol or just your fellow countryman: soccer is worse off with players like van Bommel.


                      I just wrote:

                      2. the match was a HARD one, literally. De Jong could have been sent off, as could Van Bommel. However, I'm noticing a lot of media are mentioning THEM, but not Puyol and Ignietas, who just as likely could have been sent off. The former for hanging on to a broken through player and the latter for hitting another player (which is an automatic red card).


                      IMHO the first pass to Iniesta (sorry for the initial wrong spelling ) IS offside. It could be that I missed a sub rule on the offside rule, but I don't think I did. As far as I know it doesn't matter if the receiving player actually receives it or not. He's behind the last defender and actively participating in the game. Maybe I'm wrong, but if not then the goal should have been ruled offside (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0uFy23vR3s, after 1:03 sec).
                      Again, I give you that De Jong and van Bommel could have had been sent off


                      Robben got a yellow card for complaining to the ref after he was grabbed from behind during a breakthrough the Spanish defence. Puyol? Nothing. Normally that gets you yellow atleast. Acceptable to you? Spanish players continously asking for cards? That's normal and totally acceptable to you? I remember people hitting on Robben for diving (and mostly rightfully so when he dived), but the same criticism applied to Iniesta is off-limits for some sort of reason? Ramos diving like hell? Totally cool?

                      Also thank you for showing that clip. Iniesta was clearly hurt, so hurt he was up and standing faster then I have ever seen someone get up after getting "hurt", clearly he was hurt... and I don't care what you call what he did to van Bommel there, but a yellow card at the least it is.

                      I don't care about what others think about van Bommel. To me he's a great defending midfielder who gets under opposing players skin if need be. He gives this team some extra grit when needed. All our great teams had players like that. Only having finesse players gets you nowhere. Besides a lot of those tackles he makes are hard, but by far most are on the ball. That's why a lot of times I don't get the hate he receives from english soccer fans. He's almost the prototypical hard defensive midfielder that English and particularly Italian teams love to have on their team. So, yes, I will defend him.

                      I thought De Jong is another great defensive midfielder, but almost always once a match he makes an unnessary hard foul. Not always redcard worthy, but twice this tournament he should have. The first in the match against Denmark and the second last night.

                      I think your remark about Schneijder deserving a red card... well let's just say if he deserved a red card then several Spanish players also deserved it. And I don't think they did either. Yellow? Absolutely.

                      Sure, Robben should have been carded for hitting the ball in the net. But, IF we start to get into those kind of formal fouls then again the pretty much half the Spanish team should have been send off asking for cards and diving.

                      I didn't get your comment on the error made by the referee just before the goal. The 100% corner that wasn't given and allowed a fast breakaway from the Spanish side.

                      But, I get it. The Dutch are the "dirty" team and the Spanish are the saints.

                      Btw this is final number three, so I think I can say I'm more then just a little dissappointed.

                      Eitherway, I don't want to make this a fight, so IF I offended you then I'm sorry, but it would be nice to see the critique on the Dutch team also applied to the dozens of Italian and German teams that played very conservative and a lot of times "hard". Or to the Brazilians in 1994 when they played like machines and relied on Romario and Bebeto up front to create. I'm seeing a lot of double standards applied when it comes to this Dutch team.

                      When we play the free flowing attacking and fast paced soccer we are praised but go out in the last 4 or 8 and get the "underachieving" remarks, usually after losing against a side that played like we did this tournament. IF we play more conservative, but get to the final we are boring or whatever the ****. It's getting really old and annoying.
                      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                      Comment


                      • Re: World Cup 2010

                        One more thing. I also stated when all things are added up I think the Spanish team deserved it a little bit more. I have a lot of respect for that team, but that doesn't mean they were treated rather favourably the second half.

                        I totally forgot. That first card for Heitinga. Yellow? Deserved?
                        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                        Comment


                        • Re: World Cup 2010

                          To me, the match boils down to these two incidents:

                          Robben's through on goal, and Puyol clearly holds him back. If he goes down, that's a foul and likely a straight red for the guilty party. Admirably, he stays on his feet for the attempt at goal and Puyol gets away with it.

                          Iniesta, also through on goal, goes down after the merest of touches on his shoulder by Heitinga. Red Card. Seven minutes later, Iniesta, who would have normally been covered by Heitinga, is open and grabs the winning goal.

                          Oh well. Such has been Spain's tournament.

                          Comment


                          • Re: World Cup 2010

                            I still have to insist that Span and Holland did not play the beautiful flowing soccer for which both nations have come to be known in that game.

                            Were the refs below average? yes, but no worse than they have been all tourney long. This was far from the worst officiated game of the tournament.

                            Spain and Holland both played not to lose as opposed to win this game. With the exception of Robben's two break aways the game was a snoozer and a disappointment, and Holland and Spain shouldn't get off the hook because the ref was poor. They played ugly soccer in this final. Frankly, Spain played ugly soccer through much of the tourney. Talent wise they deserved it, but they played well below their normal quality.


                            Comment


                            • Re: World Cup 2010

                              Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                              Eitherway, I don't want to make this a fight, so IF I offended you then I'm sorry, but it would be nice to see the critique on the Dutch team also applied to the dozens of Italian and German teams that played very conservative and a lot of times "hard". Or to the Brazilians in 1994 when they played like machines and relied on Romario and Bebeto up front to create. I'm seeing a lot of double standards applied when it comes to this Dutch team.
                              Ok I don't want to make this a fight either, we obviously see things from very different angles.

                              Two things though:

                              - Iniesta really wasn't offside on the first pass from Torres:



                              At worst, he's on the same line as the last Oranje defender, and the ball is already well out of Torres' feet.

                              - Iniesta sure did flop, and so did van Bommel right afterward. But everybody flops in soccer, here's the proof :

                              Comment


                              • Re: World Cup 2010

                                ah come on man...why you gotta drag my team Galatasaray in to the fight?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X