RAWK Goes Into Meltdown (2011/2012)

Randall Flagg said:
If he hadnt, Reina would have stayed on the pitch.
Click to expand...
So it wasn't a sending off offence? Perch's reaction made it so?

Why should Perch allow an opposition player get away with that?
Click to expand...

It is not up to Perch to decide who gets away with what. That is why we have referees. Perch cheated to get a fellow pro sent off. You are not only fine with that, you actually support it. I find that odd.
 
Van Piorsing said:
Carroll tried to trick the ref into penalty, Perch tricked Reina and in result, the whole LFC.

Karma is bitch and Carroll is a poor actor.
Click to expand...


Well Carroll was a twat as he had a far better chance to simply score rather than collapsing in a heap. I think he lost his nerve in the final moment and decided going down was the better option.
 
Randall Flagg said:
I dont expect you to have read any of my previous posts. But I dont have any major issues with diving in football. I never have done.

No need to compare it to a real life situation. Because, well its not. It is football.

I believe Perch going down helped make the referee’s mind up on the red card. He could have run the risk of Reina getting away with it.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that from a side trying to win a football match.
Click to expand...
So you consider it clever rather than cheating??
 
Randall Flagg said:
I dont expect you to have read any of my previous posts. But I dont have any major issues with diving in football. I never have done.

No need to compare it to a real life situation. Because, well its not. It is football.

I believe Perch going down helped make the referee’s mind up on the red card. He could have run the risk of Reina getting away with it.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that from a side trying to win a football match.
Click to expand...

The ref saw Reina headbutt Perch.

It's a red card offence.

Simple.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
So it wasn't a sending off offence? Perch's reaction made it so?



It is not up to Perch to decide who gets away with what. That is why we have referees. Perch cheated to get a fellow pro sent off. You are not only fine with that, you actually support it. I find that odd.
Click to expand...

Why is it such an issue to gain an advantage such as this. Who cares if it is a fellow pro?

I don’t condone violence or heavy leg breaking challenges. But helping the ref to make a call in which he may very well miss is absolutely the right thing to do.

Just like inside the box, if there is a touch from a defender a player will go down. I would expect him to.
 
Randall Flagg said:
Why is it such an issue to gain an advantage such as this. Who cares if it is a fellow pro?

I don’t condone violence or heavy leg breaking challenges. But helping the ref to make a call in which he may very well miss is absolutely the right thing to do.

Just like inside the box, if there is a touch from a defender a player will go down. I would expect him to.
Click to expand...
It's quite simple, Randy, you have no morals, no scruples, no honour, and you are a big fat cheater. Live with it.
 
Randall Flagg said:
Well Carroll was a twat as he had a far better chance to simply score rather than collapsing in a heap. I think he lost his nerve in the final moment and decided going down was the better option.
Click to expand...

The irony is, he really fooled Krul who didn't want to make contact. He could easily finish it, but instead he dived like a complete twat, indeed.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
It's quite simple, Randy, you have no morals, no scruples, no honour, and you are a big fat cheater. Live with it.
Click to expand...

That means you must also think the same for about 95% of all footballers too.

This is not about morals. Morals for me are for real life situations.
 
I don't know what you mean. You seem to support cheating, but not in "real life." Cheating is cheating, as far as I am concerned.
 
You can get back into 7th, Liverpool, keep the dream alive!

Olly said:
ibpHmMqC1lp7EO.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Randall Flagg said:
I dont expect you to have read any of my previous posts. But I dont have any major issues with diving in football. I never have done.

No need to compare it to a real life situation. Because, well its not. It is football.

I believe Perch going down helped make the referee’s mind up on the red card. He could have run the risk of Reina getting away with it.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that from a side trying to win a football match.
Click to expand...

Randall Flagg said:
That means you must also think the same for about 95% of all footballers too.

This is not about morals. Morals for me are for real life situations.
Click to expand...

Of course it's about morals. You said it was the right thing to do. That's a moral statement.

Why should football be separated from the rest of life? It's part of life. That's why you don't condone violent play - because violence is wrong and if we tolerated it generally we'd have chaos.

It's wrong to lie and cheat to gain some advantage for yourself. Football is supposed to test players' ability, speed, strength, flair, desire. Not their ability to deceive, game the system and fool refs. We test that sort of skill in games like poker, not football.

If you do it in football you make it harder to judge who won the real contest: did the forward use his skill and pace to overcome the defender's anticipation and athleticism? We don't know, because he fell over clutching his shin, so all we know is that one of them cheated. That's a shit spectacle, and football's a spectacle.
 
Randall Flagg said:
I would consider a player who fails to take advantage of such a situation as naive.
Click to expand...
I personally don't know how a professional player can go down like he did, I never would but at the same time, many players do that and I personally consider it to be clever(eventhough I personally never would).
As for the poster saying you have no morals etc... he must have never cheated in his life.I have in one way or other(and I consider every small thing which is not legal or against the rules cheating) and I consider it to be clever. As long as you are not harming someone directly its well and ok imo.
Players sometimes pull other players shirt which isn't allowed in the game but we don't consider it cheating because we expect ref to spot that. I remember a freekick on which berba(I guess) scored from 5 yards. Before the freekick vidic or some other defender said something in his ears and then blocked the defender marking berba. Everyone said it was clever but had the referee spotted that it would have been given foul.
My point is that the same thing applies when a player dives. If referee spots someone diving he gives him a yellow card. I know pulling shirt and diving is totally different thing but there's nothing as such as half cheating. Either you call every person who pulls shirt to deliberately take advantage a cheat or don't call any person a cheat. People make more fuzz about a player diving then a player making a bad tackle. 95% of footballers are cheat if we go by definition, I am sure that atleast 10% of them have morals.
 
Plechazunga said:
Of course it's about morals. You said it was the right thing to do. That's a moral statement.

Why should football be separated from the rest of life. It's part of life.

It's wrong to lie and cheat to gain some advantage for yourself. Football is suppose to test players' ability, speed, strength, flair, desire. Not their ability to deceive, game the system and fool refs. We test that sport of skill in games like poker, not football.

If you do it in football you make it harder to judge who won the real contest: did the forward use his skill and pace to overcome the defender's anticipation and athleticism? We don't know, because he fell over clutching his shin, so all we know is that one of them cheated.
Click to expand...
Problem is Plech that footballers cheat all the time in ways many seem to deem acceptable: holding, pushing (over), deliberate fouling etc.

If you want to set a consistent high moral standard for player behaviour we would be watching a very different game. Actually, at one time, the fact that such a large percentage of each game was conducted contrary to the supposed 'rules' rather turned me off watching football for a while. I eventually decide to re-accept it on its modified 'terms'.
 
Perch wasn't deceiving anyone, he was highlighting what had happened. I'm with Randall on this, it would have been an injustice if Reina had stayed on, and if Perch hadn't gone down then that could have happened.
 
Plechazunga said:
Of course it's about morals. You said it was the right thing to do. That's a moral statement.

Why should football be separated from the rest of life? It's part of life. That's why you don't condone violent play - because violence is wrong and if we tolerated it generally we'd have chaos.

It's wrong to lie and cheat to gain some advantage for yourself. Football is supposed to test players' ability, speed, strength, flair, desire. Not their ability to deceive, game the system and fool refs. We test that sort of skill in games like poker, not football.

If you do it in football you make it harder to judge who won the real contest: did the forward use his skill and pace to overcome the defender's anticipation and athleticism? We don't know, because he fell over clutching his shin, so all we know is that one of them cheated.
Click to expand...

That’s loser talk.

Seriously though, I have had this argument on a few occasions on the Caf so I am just repeating myself.

I have no issue with players attempting to gain an advantage by diving. Especially in this situation were Perch was not the player in the wrong. But he ran the risk of allowing his opponent get away with breaking a rule which is an automatic red card.

I would be furious if that was Smalling for example and he stayed on his feet allowing Reina to get away with no red card. For me the most important thing is winning the game. I would gladly accept a Utd victory if a game hinged on a dive from one of our players.


If The FA or FIFA get tough and bring in retrospective punishments for anyone deemed diving. Then I will have an issue with a Utd player doing it. As I would not like to see them banned.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Problem is Plech that footballers cheat all the time in ways many seem to deem acceptable: holding, pushing (over), deliberate fouling etc.

If you want to set a consistent high moral standard for player behaviour we would be watching a very different game. Actually, at one time, the fact that such a large percentage of each game was conducted contrary to the supposed 'rules' rather turned me off watching football for a while. I eventually decide to re-accept it on its modified 'terms'.
Click to expand...

So I can see the argument, which pete put in a thread a while back, that realistically as a forward you have to make it clear to the ref that you've been fouled, because defenders are clever at it and will do it subtly. Also that if you don't either fall over or kick them back, they will take advantage and foul you a lot and so dominate you.

I think it's understandable that players look at it that way, but at the same time I think it mustn't be condoned. In the same way that you can understand, say, someone who's being bullied getting his mates to beat up the bully, but you have to set standards higher than that.

Those images of George Best having his ankles clipped by player after player, keeping his balance and keeping on running - that's the standard. That's what you're meant to do. You can understand players not doing it, but it should be regarded as weaker and less noble.

Someone once said that a society without lies is impossible, but so is a society in which lies aren't deprecated.
 
If it's a foul I am happy for a player to go to ground easily to illustrate to the ref that there was contact. This is not because I condone cheating perse, but because referee's seem to rarely give important decisions whereby a play stays on his feet.

If referee's gave fouls irrespective or whether a player hurled himself to the ground or stayed on his feet but stumbled (costing him the chance), then diving in these situations would be pointless.
 
kietotheworld said:
Perch wasn't deceiving anyone, he was highlighting what had happened. I'm with Randall on this, it would have been an injustice if Reina had stayed on, and if Perch hadn't gone down then that could have happened.
Click to expand...

He absolutely was deceiving. His acting makes it look like he was headbutted powerfully enough to send him reeling to the floor. In fact he was barely touched.

Randall Flagg said:
That’s loser talk.

Seriously though, I have had this argument on a few occasions on the Caf so I am just repeating myself.

I have no issue with players attempting to gain an advantage by diving. Especially in this situation were Perch was not the player in the wrong. But he ran the risk of allowing his opponent get away with breaking a rule which is an automatic red card.

I would be furious if that was Smalling for example and he stayed on his feet allowing Reina to get away with no red card. For me the most important thing is winning the game. I would gladly accept a Utd victory if a game hinged on a dive from one of our players.
Click to expand...

Well you sound very proud of your cynicism but in fact it's pretty despicable
 
Plechazunga said:
He absolutely was deceiving. His acting makes it look like he was headbutted powerfully enough to send him reeling to the floor. In fact he was barely touched.


Well you sound very proud of your cynicism but in fact it's pretty despicable
Click to expand...

I'm with Plech on this - on 606 on Sunday one of Roberts or Reid was justifying it as "professionalism", rather than "diving". To which I say, bullshit. I accept that a player going through on goal doesn't have to struggle to stay on his feet if he's been fouled - but that's it, in any other scenario going down "easily" is cheating, and either infuriates or shames (when it's a Utd player) me.
 
Plechazunga said:
He absolutely was deceiving. His acting makes it look like he was headbutted powerfully enough to send him reeling to the floor. In fact he was barely touched.



Well you sound very proud of your cynicism but in fact it's pretty despicable
Click to expand...

Well that is where you and I differ. Despicable morals for me would be, for example - benefit cheats hence the reason why I try to separate football and what I consider real life.

Diving is something that occurs in a sport that I love. It has been in football for as long as I recall. I accept it is part of the game and is not a very important issue for me.
 
Maybe he was just really, really dizzy? Has nobody even considered how badly Perch could have been injured? Concussion is no laughing matter.
 
The Neviller said:
Maybe he was just really, really dizzy? Has nobody even considered how badly Perch could have been injured? Concussion is no laughing matter.
Click to expand...

I suppose he could have poked himself in the eye in the rush to clutch at his face.
 
Plechazunga said:
...

Someone once said that a society without lies is impossible, but so is a society in which lies aren't deprecated.
Click to expand...

I'd agree - but I think people could do with recognising the way in which in football some lies (cheating) are deemed more 'acceptable' than others, and the real reasons behind this.
 
There has to be a line drawn somewhere here.

IMO blatant diving in the box is 100 times worse than accidental or niggly fouls and should be met with straight red cards. If i'm the last man and I hack down the attacker im getting sent off for denying a goal scoring opportunity and the chance to influence the result of that game.
I see no difference in a blatant dive in the box by the attacker trying to generate a penalty by cheating thus getting an unfair chance to score and influence the result.

For me it comes back to the TV debate. A TV ref would could this shit out in a flash.
What player in his right mind would cheat baltantly knowing that there is a TV ref there to back up the ref on the field for direct clarifications.

If there was a TV ref yesterday he would have confirmed that the ref was correct.
Reina red and Perch yellow.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
I'd agree - but I think people could do with recognising the way in which in football some lies (cheating) are deemed more 'acceptable' than others, and the real reasons behind this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's a whole macho thing going on where meaty fouls are considered morally better than the deceitful stuff, which is considered, daftly, 'foreign'. I think that's bullshit, though I sometimes find myself buying into it in the heat of the moment.

Presumably from Randall's POV it's all the same - there's nothing wrong at all with tripping a player through on goal, just as there's nothing wrong with pretending you've been tripped.

It begs the question, Why bother with rules at all, apart from those against violent conduct?
 
gutted for Pepe but we should appeal.Perch is a cheating twat.what`s the latest standing on the golden gloves trophy?This ban might put pay to Pepe`s chances
Click to expand...


:lol:
 
Damn. Look at us on a United forum with the top 3 topics being about Liverpool.

Obsessed much?





















Yes. feck 'em anyway.

37.jpg
 
Can only find team info. We have the most clean sheets, with 15. Not sure how that's split between DDS and Lindegaard though. City have 13 (probably all Hart), Swansea 12 (ditto Vorm), and Scousers are tied with Spurs and Newcastle on 11.
 
Plechazunga said:
So I can see the argument, which pete put in a thread a while back, that realistically as a forward you have to make it clear to the ref that you've been fouled, because defenders are clever at it and will do it subtly. Also that if you don't either fall over or kick them back, they will take advantage and foul you a lot and so dominate you.

I think it's understandable that players look at it that way, but at the same time I think it mustn't be condoned. In the same way that you can understand, say, someone who's being bullied getting his mates to beat up the bully, but you have to set standards higher than that.

Those images of George Best having his ankles clipped by player after player, keeping his balance and keeping on running - that's the standard. That's what you're meant to do. You can understand players not doing it, but it should be regarded as weaker and less noble.

Someone once said that a society without lies is impossible, but so is a society in which lies aren't deprecated.
Click to expand...
That would be alright if defenders using illegal means, hacking etc would have been condemned in similar manner. For some reason, especially in England, a bad tackle is not as bad as diving when it is the former that actually carries more threat of physical harm. Diving may generate an unfair advantage but cynical tackling, shirt pulling etc. are aimed at denying advantage to the other side unfairly as well. But for defenders it is now an acceptable attribute to be sneaky and use tricks like shirt pulling to stop the forwards from scoring.

Standard should be Maradona's run in 86 when none of the English defenders tried to stop him by a hack like what Nesta pulled off in against Messi the other night. Though I have head and read several English condemn those for not doing that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.