Originally posted by 2Bullish:
<strong>And theres never been a Liverpool player guilty of that?
What a pointless thread this has become. Its only point is to deflect attention away from Owen being shite at penalties and RVN being the best.
"yes hes a good penalty taker but hes a cheat, and anyway Owens going through a bad patch" boo hoo.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The thread was never about who was better at penalties...I totally agree that RVN is better at them than Owen...
This is just your little defence re RVN being a cheat, in a similar way to Giggzy's thickness..
Penalties
- Thread starter Wibble
- Start date
Originally posted by spinoza:
<strong>
Because the difference is a matter of degree. Its like saying stealing a £1 mr whippy is okay but stealing a £20,000 car isn't.
Make up your mind. I for one believe that all strikers make the most of any situation. If you punish for one you shouldn't punish for the other. In any case I give Van Nistelrooy the benefit of the doubt. As I said, you CAN fall down without anyone touching you. Try playing as a striker and see.</strong><hr></blockquote>
what utter bollocks.
go and read the post again and try to understand the difference between "being fouled" and "not being touched".
Tell you what Mancs..just to make this extremely difficult theory easier for you..
Forget Owen for a minute, if you deem him a cheat then fine...
The thread was about why you didn't get a pretty blatant penalty on Sat - after the foul on RVN
Now the refs no doubt saw RVN cheat ( or whatever you want to call someone when they dive without being touched ) against Ipswich last season. They would also have seen him go down very easily against Boro - tho he was tugged in this instance..
Is this likely to affect their opinion on the player's honesty, and thus their liklihood to give him the benefit of the doubt?
Forget Owen for a minute, if you deem him a cheat then fine...
The thread was about why you didn't get a pretty blatant penalty on Sat - after the foul on RVN
Now the refs no doubt saw RVN cheat ( or whatever you want to call someone when they dive without being touched ) against Ipswich last season. They would also have seen him go down very easily against Boro - tho he was tugged in this instance..
Is this likely to affect their opinion on the player's honesty, and thus their liklihood to give him the benefit of the doubt?
Originally posted by michael owen's mum:
<strong>
what utter bollocks.
go and read the post again and try to understand the difference between "being fouled" and "not being touched".
My opinion is my opinion. If you read my posts I state that I give Van Nistelrooy the benefit of the doubt, i.e. he fell over on his own. Should the ref have given the penalty? No. Is it cheating? Not if he fell over on his own.
Is diving cheating? yes. Is exaggerating cheating? Yes, if diving is cheating. Both are play acting aren't they.
Double standards. that's what your opinion is.
Bollocks
Its not
Which is why you've become upset....
Which is why you've become upset....
trophyhead...
take your silly myopic comments back to the gen.
(Owens still a cheating cnut tho')
take your silly myopic comments back to the gen.
(Owens still a cheating cnut tho')
Davo, you believe RVN has a rep as being a cheat. You believe this because it is what you feel as a biased Welsh nobend.
You havent spoken to referees about this, you have no inside knowledge, there hasnt been a press campaign to back up your claim.
The bottom line is, you are obsessed with UTD and have made it your lifes passion to get into any debate, however trivial, about your true love, Manchester United.
Sad cnunt
You havent spoken to referees about this, you have no inside knowledge, there hasnt been a press campaign to back up your claim.
The bottom line is, you are obsessed with UTD and have made it your lifes passion to get into any debate, however trivial, about your true love, Manchester United.
Sad cnunt
and yet no-one's answered davo's direct question yet.
What question?
What question?
Originally posted by 2Bullish:
<strong>This thread seems to have derailed, I thought it was about penalties, of which Owen is shite and RVN is the best. Purely on stats ofcourse, as Owen is having one of his bad patches, he'll come out of it.
It has been derailed onto a branchline of the Liverpool-Manchester line - a your striker is a bigger cheat than ours nah nah na na nah special service.
The original point was to discuss why we are getting fewer penalties this year and I did have in mind RVN being perceived as a diver by refs. I'm sure quite a few of us secretly think that. I know that it was the first thing I thought of when the penalty was denied.
Now the refs no doubt saw RVN cheat ( or whatever you want to call someone when they dive without being touched ) against Ipswich last season. They would also have seen him go down very easily against Boro - tho he was tugged in this instance..<hr></blockquote>
feck me. Are you listening.
No I do not believe the referee thought to himself,
"I think he cheated during the game against Ipswich, therefore, because I am cheating referee, I am not going to award a penalty on this instance because I am now biased"
You daft cnut
I don't give a toss about definitions. If RVN's behaviour legal or otherwise is detrimental to us (and not being awarded blatent penalties falls into this category) then I would very much like it if he could cut it out.
If we had drawn 0-0 against Spurs it could have been a very costly perception irrespective of your definition of cheating.
If we had drawn 0-0 against Spurs it could have been a very costly perception irrespective of your definition of cheating.
So wibble, you believe that the referee didnt give us a penalty becuase he is now biased against RVN?
Obviously not Giggzy, its all a conspiracy by the refs becuase we are now a team full of cheats.
I don't know for sure but I have a feeling that refs might be starting look out for RVN playing for the penalty. Especially since he can be so difficult to disposses. My first though when the penalty was disallowed was that the ref thought he had gone down too easily and that he might be gettign a rep. And I wasn't alone in thinking this judging by the comments in the pub I was in.
No proof but maybe he should make sure that he is beyond reproach.
No proof but maybe he should make sure that he is beyond reproach.
Doesn't it speak volumes for United when we get other supporters finding it worth their while to be an active member of a United forum?
Like the lonely kid at school who finds others lives more interesing.
Like the lonely kid at school who finds others lives more interesing.
Originally posted by great_se7en:
<strong>Doesn't it speak volumes for United when we get other supporters finding it worth their while to be an active member of a United forum?
Like the lonely kid at school who finds others lives more interesing.
or perhaps like the rubber-necking spectators who cannot help but look at a car crash?