TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- UEFA Euro 2004
-- Portugal - England (Quarterfinals, 24 june)
Pages (16): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 »

quote:

Originally posted by RenderedDream if you read the complete article, you'll learn that they did a special press meeting were they explained the reasons it was disallowed..i wouldn't think the press would buy this argument "well, it was disallowed to get portugal even"..

I don't think anyone was expecting UEFA to come out and say their referee had got it wrong and their competition had therefore been tainted by controversy. Why would they do that? They did however promptly rule him out of the final after that game.

David Elleray, former top Premiership and international referee and known for his strict application of the rules, put it best in The Times:

quote:

When I first saw the incident, I could understand why Meier had disallowed the goal, but instinctively I felt that it was a harsh decision. Goalkeepers are the most protected species of footballer. In this country, they are cosseted but not to the extent that they are abroad, where they are effectively �untouchable�. I am sure that Campbell�s goal would have stood in most English matches but, on the Continent, the chances of it being disallowed were high. Meier gave an honest �continental� decision but replays clearly show that he was wrong. The ball comes back off the crossbar high in the air and is almost directly above Terry. Terry jumps vertically but Ricardo jumps diagonally towards the ball � in effect, entering Terry�s space. The resulting contact is caused by Ricardo jumping into Terry and not the other way around. Terry�s arm seems to be across Ricardo preventing him from jumping but, again, closer examination shows that this is not Terry�s fault. Ricardo jumps fractionally after Terry and jumps from underneath Terry into the gap between his arm and body, causing Terry�s arm to appear to be blocking him.

hum, legal goal or not, we were also robbed like this on the euro2000, so we understand english fans, but hey, everybody has his turn

quote:

Originally posted by RenderedDream hum, legal goal or not, we were also robbed like this on the euro2000, so we understand english fans, but hey, everybody has his turn

this happens to England too often for it to be their turn. Maradonna's Hand of God goal comes to mind in 1986 (punched the ball into the net), and of course Sol's disallowed goal in 98 and now 2004 on the exact same play. It seems a little suspicious...and my grandpa has been watching England since the early 50's and says it's almost always been this way.

Like the 3rd goal of the WCH '66, that a lot of people still think that it didn't go in? But then again, that's past... isn't it?

*puts on flame suit*

quote:

Originally posted by The Darklord Like the 3rd goal of the WCH '66, that a lot of people still think that it didn't go in? But then again, that's past... isn't it?

I always find it funny when people have to go back to 1966 (38 years ago) to point the finger back at England. That was 18 years before I was born, even my dad was just a kid then. What's your point?!

England probably have suffered more than most, but I bet there are other nations who could list a similar catalogue of bad decisions against them in international tournaments.

quote:

Originally posted by evil_bastard That was 18 years before I was born, even my dad was just a kid then. What's your point?!

maybe counter-argue at the supposed fact that england is being prejudiced since the early 50's?

The fact you have to go back 38 years in history to find your counter-argument tells its own story.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj Smitty20 and my grandpa has been watching England since the early 50's and says it's almost always been this way.

The fact he had to go back 54 years in history to find the first argument tells its own story.

quote:

Originally posted by evil_bastard The fact you have to go back 38 years in history to find your counter-argument tells its own story.

Didn't BBC make a 3-d rendering of the goal a couple of years ago to prove that it was still a goal...

quote:

Originally posted by paranoik0 The fact he had to go back 54 years in history to find the first argument tells its own story.

SINCE the early 50s. That's not going back 54 years to find an argument, that's finding multiple arguments spread from back then right up to this present day.

England have a difficult relationship with continental referees because there is a clear difference in attitude between referees in Europe and referees in Britain.

Given that everyone's judgement is fallible, and that during the game there will be some difficult decisions to be made, British referees are more inclined to let certain challenges go, unless they feel sure that a foul has been commited. Continental referees have a tendency not to allow the possible offender the benefit of the doubt. In other words, they're more inclined to blow up in case a foul has been commited.

In Britain we firmly believe in the 'innocent until proven guilty' approach, meaning if the referee has not seen enough or any of the incident, he must let it go. The continental attitude of referees is not very popular in Britain because it tends to produce far more 'simulation' (aka diving and cheating).

quote:

Originally posted by isoterra SINCE the early 50s. That's not going back 54 years to find an argument, that's finding multiple arguments spread from back then right up to this present day.

ok if you want to be picky lets go for it.

i just made an observation to 'defend' The Darklord cause he wasn't the one that brought the past into it. it's not about how old it is, it's about who bring it first

i'm not much interested about whether england has been prejudiced the last 50 years or not, however bringing back past arguments then bashing someone that counter-argued with past is lame (and yes, i know it was two different guys).

of course, a situation where england was beneficiated doesn't valid out another couple of situations where they were prejudiced, but it shows that england isn't prejudiced all the time, and in fact the biggest trophy you guys won was slightly based on germany being "robbed" like your tabloids like to say.

now to bring up more past, here's a little story england certainly forgot but we didn't. in 1966 there was a semi-final between england and portugal that we lost. before the game, it was schedulled to some city (liverpool?) but it was suddenly moved to london where the english team was already based. due to that the portuguese players were forced to do a long trip (300km i think?) which considering the conditions of the transports at the time influenced the physical condition and confidence of the players.

of course this doesn't matter anymore, but here's another 'proof' that england isn't always prejudiced.

now about the disallowed goal of the last game. i haven't seen more replays, more videos or pics other than those that were posted on TA or those that were shown on TV the day of the game, and the day after that. i don't have a definite opinion, but am going to assume that in fact it was a valid goal. i also have to respect the extreme frustration that is to be taken off a goal that would make you win in the last minute. but one play doesn't make you robbed and doesn't make the referee the biggest wanker in the world, like the tabloids and some people even here on TA suggested, by bashing him with spam to his site and stuff like that. also, given that a few days have already passed, i find it weird that some people are still fueling up this story. i find it weird that everyone forgot about that possibly disallowed goal to portugal, even assuming that it wasn't a goal and it was fairly disallowed. to sum it up, get over it. you are out of the european cup. we did beat you, on penalties. you should be thinking about world cup 2006 now.

If you read my post above people are still talking about it because it is part of a wider issue of international refereeing and every growing frustration.

There is a clear difference between refereeing attitudes in England and those in southern Europe in particular. I'm not sure you understand that a lot of English people are basically sick and tired of the gamesmanship they see when they travel to Europe. Collina is one of the European refs we respect because he shares that tendency to let play go unless he feels sure a foul has occurred.

The newspapers you're talking about are generally regarded as trash in Britain. Nevertheless, you may not like the terminology but the fact of the matter is that decision robbed us of a certain 2-1 victory so they are entitled to publish it.

ok, that's fair.

i personally prefer "english refereeing" as well, stopping the game less times, therefore making the game flow better.

it all comes down to different interpretations of the rules.

quote:

Originally posted by evil_bastard The newspapers you're talking about are generally regarded as trash in Britain. Nevertheless, you may not like the terminology but the fact of the matter is that decision robbed us of a certain 2-1 victory so they are entitled to publish it.

the ******s published his address and his telephone number, are the tabloids allowed to do that?? I think that that is low, dirty and I think that the tabloids should be punished for stuff like that

and I think that it was a good decision, you can obviously see that Terry has his arm on the shoulder from Ricardo, which denies him from jumping to the ball

here are the pics to prove it







you can clearly see that Ricardo wants to save the ball but he can't reach it because Terry has his arm on his shoulder.

quote:

Originally posted by Blik the ******s published his address and his telephone number, are the tabloids allowed to do that?? I think that that is low, dirty and I think that the tabloids should be punished for stuff like that and I think that it was a good decision, you can obviously see that Terry has his arm on the shoulder from Ricardo, which denies him from jumping to the ball here are the pics to prove it you can clearly see that Ricardo wants to save the ball but he can't reach it because Terry has his arm on his shoulder.

If you had to look at those pictures on a pure basis of a decision, i think most people would agree that it was a foul. BUT pictures are not rolling motion. Ricardo jumped into Terry. With the ball coming back of the bar, Sol campbell was in motion with a header and used Terry to climb up. Ricardo jumped into Terry and in true Portugese style fell on the floor afterwards claiming a foul.

Might as well also say that it is wankers like Ronaldo and other European players that are actually making me extremely ennoyed about Football in European competitions. Take for example Ronaldo first. He is such a skillfull players, he is pacey, clevor, quick feet. He was made to be a winger. So why the fuck does he have to go down everytime a players tackles him. He even went down when there was a not even a claim of a foul he held his hands up. It disgusts me, and it wasnt just the England game. I saw so many times during the Portugal and spain match players laying and roling around on the floor when someone had tackled them. Why not just go down and not roll around like you have been shot. It is something that really angers me, and it isn't just attributed to Portugal, but also Italy, i think, do it quite a bit.

It is the worst part of football when a player intentionally decieves the referee saying "i am really injured, and he did that". Ref's were told before the tournament that if a player makes a challenge that could injure a player, then they should be carded. Nice cunning and "cheating" addition to the game for this actors!

grrr!!!

Oh and about the 4-2 win against Germany in 66'. No one can still prove whether it was over the line, but i dont think Germany really care now. THey've won a couple of championships since then. They have not had to go through bad luck, after bad refereeing, after penalty shoot outs etc...

Didn't know about Portugal having to move their base or whatnot in 66' as well. What reason did they come up with for the reason of change? Im sure it would have been some legitamate reason?

quote:

Originally posted by TiestoFanMatt If you had to look at those pictures on a pure basis of a decision, i think most people would agree that it was a foul. BUT pictures are not rolling motion. Ricardo jumped into Terry. With the ball coming back of the bar, Sol campbell was in motion with a header and used Terry to climb up. Ricardo jumped into Terry and in true Portugese style fell on the floor afterwards claiming a foul.

no, he reaches for the ball but finds Terry on his way and Terry held him down so he couldn't reach the ball, pictures and rolling motion says so...

(Campbell did nothing wrong)

What you dont see in these pictures is how far outta position Ricardo is in. He clearly jumped into Terry. You guys are unbelievable. It was clearly a bad call. England got screwed again. I'm just waiting to see how we get screwed in 06 cuz it will happen.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ.MD What you dont see in these pictures is how far outta position Ricardo is in. He clearly jumped into Terry. You guys are unbelievable. It was clearly a bad call. England got screwed again. I'm just waiting to see how we get screwed in 06 cuz it will happen.

his position has got nothing to do with it. The goalkeeper is protected in the area the ball is in on that moment. When someone blocks the goalkeeper with their arms or hands in that area it is a foul. And you can clearly see that Terry blocks him.

ah, who am I kidding, I can not convince you. But who cares anyway...

quote:

Originally posted by DJ.MD What you dont see in these pictures is how far outta position Ricardo is in. He clearly jumped into Terry. You guys are unbelievable. It was clearly a bad call. England got screwed again. I'm just waiting to see how we get screwed in 06 cuz it will happen.

Dont go on about this "foul", its just pathetic, bad losers mentality! The whole point is that England didn't play great football and they lost, well better luck next time.
And don't start about the Dutch playing shit football, cause obviously they didn't perform like they should, but fact is that they are in the semis, so they must have performed better than the English...

quote:

Originally posted by Rudy but fact is that they are in the semis, so they must have performed better than the English...

I would consider that a naive statement since all there was to separate you guys and Sweden going through was a single saved penalty, exactly the same as with us & Portugal. Neither of the results were reflective of the teams' performances (I'm not saying England played well; they didn't, but neither did Portugal. Nor Holland & Sweden for that matter), so it's probably best to think before making assumptions like that. Don't get me wrong, now England are out I'm supporting Holland more than any of the other final 4, but do not believe their performance to be vastly superior to what England's was, regardless of the fact they're through to the final four. It's not all down to skill unfortunately.

Holy Shit you guys are still discussing it

The video footage tells us something those pictures don't, which is why video footage is always more valuable than a still image.

Here, again, are former referee David Elleray's thoughts. Watch the video and tell me if you disagree with any of this...


"Meier gave an honest �continental� decision but replays clearly show that he was wrong. The ball comes back off the crossbar high in the air and is almost directly above Terry. Terry jumps vertically but Ricardo jumps diagonally towards the ball � in effect, entering Terry�s space. The resulting contact is caused by Ricardo jumping into Terry and not the other way around.

Terry�s arm seems to be across Ricardo preventing him from jumping but, again, closer examination shows that this is not Terry�s fault. Ricardo jumps fractionally after Terry and jumps from underneath Terry into the gap between his arm and body, causing Terry�s arm to appear to be blocking him."

quote:

Originally posted by Blik the ******s published his address and his telephone number, are the tabloids allowed to do that?? I think that that is low, dirty and I think that the tabloids should be punished for stuff like that

I agree it was unnecessary, and it wasn't just the tabloids. The national news showed a video of the incident and then provided his web adress for anyone wanting to complain. But you can't really punish them for it because all they've done is published the address of his website which anyone could find anyway. If he doesn't want negative feedback he shouldn't have a feedback page.

quote:

Originally posted by Blik his position has got nothing to do with it. The goalkeeper is protected in the area the ball is in on that moment. When someone blocks the goalkeeper with their arms or hands in that area it is a foul. And you can clearly see that Terry blocks him. ah, who am I kidding, I can not convince you. But who cares anyway...

Terry is blocking him because HE IS GOING FOR THE BALL!!!! He didn't know Campbell was already there so he jumped up too! How can it be a foul when he is simply trying to put the ball in the net? So if we take your meaning, we can't have headers in football anymore because everyone has to get out of the way to make room for the goalie! How stupid is that...it was INCIDENTAL contact at best, caused because Ricardo was out of position and had to jump into Terry and Campbell to get to the ball. The video footage shows that Campbell and Terry were already in the air going for it...and Ricardo jumped after...so how can that be a foul?

You Europeans are so pussy...many of you have made the game a sport for whiney little girls who can't stand a bit of contact. According to the rules of the FA and FIFA, shoulder charges and slide tackles are supposed to be allowed, but are almost ALWAYS called nowadays, even if the ball is won first before contact.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.