HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

OT: Official Euro 2008 Thread II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-09-2008, 06:52 PM
  #51
Galchenyuk x 27
Registered User
 
Galchenyuk x 27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,807
vCash: 1976
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
Yes. But they didn't just start slow... they're in reverse right now.

By the time they get to "slow".. it might be too late. They are not in an easy group.
they had a good 2nd half with many chances.
maybe donadoni realised Grosso and DP need to play!

Galchenyuk x 27 is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 06:55 PM
  #52
Beakermania*
 
Beakermania*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kingston or Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
Yes. But they didn't just start slow... they're in reverse right now.

By the time they get to "slow".. it might be too late. They are not in an easy group.
The tie in the other game helps them... they still control their own destiny.... two wins and they are assured to go through.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaydee96 View Post
they had a good 2nd half with many chances.
maybe donadoni realised Grosso and DP need to play!
I hope so... and get Cammorenasi (SP?) out of there ASAP

Beakermania* is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:03 PM
  #53
AD
Registered User
 
AD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bigassofficetower
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 14,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beakermania View Post
The tie in the other game helps them... they still control their own destiny.... two wins and they are assured to go through
True.

But they'll need to shore up their defense against France. Especially if Henry and Vieira come back.

I think that game on the 17th will be a tie... and that spells disaster for Italy.

AD is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:04 PM
  #54
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
I'm gonna bet that they'll be talking about the "goal that shouldn't have been".






By the way.. I think the goal is good.
Actually the early reports are bashing the team.

Craig Forrest just said on TSN that he thought the goal should not have counted, but we shouldn't take the word of an international keeper, right?

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:04 PM
  #55
thrillhous
Registered User
 
thrillhous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsKraut View Post
It was really weird today: I was watching the game with about 200 people outside a bar and pretty much everybody was cheering for Oranje, myself included.
Hey, we're talking about a German crowd here ... cheering for the Netherlands?!
Must be the lesser of 2 evils.
But it felt good!
And the Dutch played really well!!
Glad to hear!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaydee96 View Post
what a horrible first half, Italy would have lost to the montreal impact.

lost the second half too but at least they showed life.
They really should have gotten one, VDS was awesome and the ball just didn't bounce Italy's way in a couple of goalmouth scrambles. I think the game really could have been 5-2 if all of the major chances were converted. Both keepers made some big saves.

thrillhous is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:06 PM
  #56
habfan4
Registered User
 
habfan4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Deus Amat Pretzel
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beakermania View Post
The tie in the other game helps them... they still control their own destiny.... two wins and they are assured to go through.
The tie in the other game doesn't hurt them as much as France/Romania win would have, however wins against Romania and France are not a certainty.

habfan4 is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:06 PM
  #57
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob-KingsVisnovsky View Post
5 players, wow...Sneijder is still young.
Van Basten has always said, since he became the coach that Euro 2008 would be the moment, that's where he wants to make it happen. And the team played great.

Over 20 years is a bit much...
It's one game and the Dutch side have done nothing since 88'. That's a fact.

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:08 PM
  #58
Beakermania*
 
Beakermania*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kingston or Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillhous View Post
They really should have gotten one, VDS was awesome and the ball just didn't bounce Italy's way in a couple of goalmouth scrambles. I think the game really could have been 5-2 if all of the major chances were converted. Both keepers made some big saves.
It could have easily been 2-1 Italy.... Right before the 2nd and 3rd goals Italy had some big chances and the goals came via counterattack.

Regardless though we'll never know what would've happened had the first goal not gone in.... Part of the Dutch breakthroughs was the fact that it was 2-0 and the Italians were forced to press a little.... a 2-0 score definetely effects the way you play defence.

Beakermania* is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:08 PM
  #59
AD
Registered User
 
AD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bigassofficetower
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 14,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Actually the early reports are bashing the team.

Craig Forrest just said on TSN that he thought the goal should not have counted, but we shouldn't take the word of an international keeper, right?
So wait.

Any player that takes himself out of the play (and that can come back at any time by the way) should not count for offside purposes?

What if he had just jumped behind the line for 2 seconds right when Van Nistelrooy was behind the defense. Would that make him offside?!

AD is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:08 PM
  #60
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
True.

But they'll need to shore up their defense against France. Especially if Henry and Vieira come back.

I think that game on the 17th will be a tie... and that spells disaster for Italy.
I agree they should look to win, but if France does not beat Holland on Friday and Italy manage to beat Romania (not assuming that, especially after today) then a tie will be enough.

This thing is far from over, for any teams in Group C (or the tournament for that matter).

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:08 PM
  #61
habfan4
Registered User
 
habfan4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Deus Amat Pretzel
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Actually the early reports are bashing the team.

Craig Forrest just said on TSN that he thought the goal should not have counted, but we shouldn't take the word of an international keeper, right?
I deleted my post which contained a link to FIFA's site and the relevant rule because it appeared that you had dropped the question of whether the call was correct, should I dig it back up?

habfan4 is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:09 PM
  #62
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
So wait.

Any player that takes himself out of the play (and that can come back at any time by the way) should not count for offside purposes?

What if he had just jumped behind the line for 2 seconds right when Van Nistelrooy was behind the defense. Would that make him offside?!
Dude you can't seriously consider "jumping behind the line" and being off injured 4-5 seconds before the ball comes in the same, right?

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:11 PM
  #63
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habfan4 View Post
I deleted my post which contained a link to FIFA's site and the relevant rule because it appeared that you had dropped the question of whether the call was correct, should I dig it back up?
Exactly what Forrest said. He said that UEFA will stand behind that rule, but the spirit of the rule should have allowed for the ref or linesman to use discretion.

Whatever, I don't care. Holland deserved to win - goal or not.

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:12 PM
  #64
habfan4
Registered User
 
habfan4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Deus Amat Pretzel
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Dude you can't seriously consider "jumping behind the line" and being off injured 4-5 seconds before the ball comes in the same, right?
So the Netherlands should be penalized because a collision with Buffon put Pannuci off the pitch behind the goal line?

habfan4 is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:15 PM
  #65
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habfan4 View Post
So the Netherlands should be penalized because a collision with Buffon put Pannuci off the pitch behind the goal line?
No it's whether the player is off the pitch voluntarily or not. If you think that Panucci left the field on purpose so as to gain an advantage then so be it.

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:16 PM
  #66
Beakermania*
 
Beakermania*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kingston or Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Dude you can't seriously consider "jumping behind the line" and being off injured 4-5 seconds before the ball comes in the same, right?
Exactly

Quote:
Originally Posted by habfan4 View Post
The tie in the other game doesn't hurt them as much as France/Romania win would have, however wins against Romania and France are not a certainty.
No they are not a certainty... but the ability to hold that destiny in your own hands still is a positive.... If France/Romania had won there remains a possibility of Italy winning both games.... and 3 teams ending up 2-0-1 with a fourth team 0-3.... Italy would not have control of their own destiny...

Now if they go 2-0-1 they are guaranteed 2nd place at worst.

Beakermania* is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:17 PM
  #67
AD
Registered User
 
AD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bigassofficetower
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 14,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Dude you can't seriously consider "jumping behind the line" and being off injured 4-5 seconds before the ball comes in the same, right?
1- I don't believe that Panucci was injured.

2- The concept of being injured for 4 seconds is completely foreign to me.

It is pretty obvious that the officials did not stop the play because of an injury. At that point you have to consider Panucci as any player who can stand up and come back in. And therefore he's closer to the net that Van N.

The officials either (A) stop the play because of the injury, or (B)allow Panucci to leave the pitch because of the injury, or (C) they don't react to the injury.

A or B make Van N offside.

C means he's onside.




Since they decided C in the game, then he's onside.


(I'm just practicing my argumentation when I go back to work tomorrow to my italian friends...)

AD is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:19 PM
  #68
Travis Moen
Registered User
 
Travis Moen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Montréal
Posts: 1,816
vCash: 500
Buffon should have move forward (futher than VN) and it would have been offside.

As it is, the correct decision was made.

Travis Moen is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:19 PM
  #69
Brisk-Illusion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
No it's whether the player is off the pitch voluntarily or not. If you think that Panucci left the field on purpose so as to gain an advantage then so be it.
I translate this situation to hockey, so maybe people can understand it.

Team A's defenseman runs over Team A's goalie with no interference from team B. Team B then scores into an open net.

Should the goal be disallowed ?

Brisk-Illusion is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:19 PM
  #70
habfan4
Registered User
 
habfan4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Deus Amat Pretzel
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
No it's whether the player is off the pitch voluntarily or not. If you think that Panucci left the field on purpose so as to gain an advantage then so be it.
Offsides are tough enough to call without the referee or his assistant having to make a judgement on whether a player is out of play voluntarily. If Panucci had collided with a Dutch player then I think you might have a better argument, it was a bit of bad luck for the Italians, but the officials got the call right.

At any rate, moving on.

habfan4 is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:22 PM
  #71
Hockey-Freak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Germany
Posts: 226
vCash: 500
The official rule says it was a regular goal.

But in my opinion it doesn´t make a difference since van nistelreu was tripped by buffon just minutes before and if he would have fallen down, 99 out of 100 refs would give him the penalty shot.

Hockey-Freak is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:25 PM
  #72
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
1- I don't believe that Panucci was injured.

2- The concept of being injured for 4 seconds is completely foreign to me.

It is pretty obvious that the officials did not stop the play because of an injury. At that point you have to consider Panucci as any player who can stand up and come back in. And therefore he's closer to the net that Van N.

The officials either (A) stop the play because of the injury, or (B)allow Panucci to leave the pitch because of the injury, or (C) they don't react to the injury.

A or B make Van N offside.

C means he's onside.




Since they decided C in the game, then he's onside.


(I'm just practicing my argumentation when I go back to work tomorrow to my italian friends...)
You don't beleive he was injured yet he stayed down at a dangerous point for his team.

He wasn't injured for 4 seconds. I said the ball went it about 4 seconds after he was off the pitch.

The argument to be made was did he go off on his own (no) and was he still part of the play (no).

You may want to re-think your argument if you are going to say he wasn't injured.

gusfring is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:28 PM
  #73
Galchenyuk x 27
Registered User
 
Galchenyuk x 27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,807
vCash: 1976
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey-Freak View Post
The official rule says it was a regular goal.

But in my opinion it doesn´t make a difference since van nistelreu was tripped by buffon just minutes before and if he would have fallen down, 99 out of 100 refs would give him the penalty shot.
re-watch that play.
I thought he was tripped by Buffon too but he clearly was not.

Galchenyuk x 27 is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:32 PM
  #74
AD
Registered User
 
AD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bigassofficetower
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 14,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
The argument to be made was did he go off on his own (no) and was he still part of the play (no).

You may want to re-think your argument if you are going to say he wasn't injured.
The Italian player went out of the play because he collided with another Italian player.

The officials obviously called that play with him as an active player. Because they did not whistle for the injury and they did not make a call to allow him to leave the pitch. Panucci was still an active player and therefore no offside.


The discretion by the officials isn't to call him offside or nor, it is to call him injured or not.

Once the decision is made to call him uninjured (and therefore active), the onside call is a no-brainer.

That said.

Do you believe he was injured? Injured because Buffon touched him on the corner defense?

AD is offline  
Old
06-09-2008, 07:34 PM
  #75
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD View Post
The Italian player went out of the play because he collided with another Italian player.

The officials obviously called that play with him as an active player. Because they did not whistle for the injury and they did not make a call to allow him to leave the pitch. Panucci was still an active player and therefore no offside.


The discretion by the officials isn't to call him offside or nor, it is to call him injured or not.

Once the decision is made to call him uninjured (and therefore active), the onside call is a no-brainer.

That said.

Do you believe he was injured? Injured because Buffon touched him on the corner defense?
Do you watch soccer? When does the ref whistle when there is an injury? When's the last time you saw that? It's VERY rare.

Why else would Panucci be on his back off the field? Because he wanted to gain advantage on a play he could not even see?

You may want to watch soccer more and not just every 2 or 4 years.

Goal or not you should have fun in your arguments tomorrow. What team do you cheer for?

gusfring is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:47 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.