Team of the world cup so far

[Original Dub]

Christ Almighty Rag_Hater, just press the quote button and the rest is done for you. How on God's Holy earth do you keep fucking that up, it makes for some near impossible reading?!

Anyway, on topic, I don't think its a dull world cup, I just think the early first round fixtures were mainly shit and we were let down by one or two games that should have been better, like brazil v portugal.

However, I've really enjoyed almost every Argentina match so far and thought england v germany was pulsating for the most part. At half time, I thought it was gonna be one of those all time greats, but the second half was a different story as we all know.

There aren't as many goals and the vuvus are ear bleeders but for me, its a slow build and I'm optomistic that we could yet see the best semis/final for years.

I'll judge it at the end.

[Slim]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _55753.pdf

I think you should give Law 12 a bit of a study.Theres a bit on page 114 which will make a bit clearer for you

That's in reference to dangerous play you muppet.

Six pages back they talk about charging and when it is or isn't a foul.

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.

PHYSICAL CONTACT.

In short, you are a fucking waster, fuck off.

[lets all have a disco]

Argentina.

[Rag_hater]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _55753.pdf

I think you should give Law 12 a bit of a study.Theres a bit on page 114 which will make a bit clearer for you

That's in reference to dangerous play you muppet.

Six pages back they talk about charging and when it is or isn't a foul.

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.

PHYSICAL CONTACT.

In short, you are a fucking waster, fuck off.

Learn to read.
Why do you think a ref gives a foul when there is minmal contact.Cos contacting the player before the ball is a foul you fucking waster.

[Slim]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _55753.pdf

I think you should give Law 12 a bit of a study.Theres a bit on page 114 which will make a bit clearer for you

That's in reference to dangerous play you muppet.

Six pages back they talk about charging and when it is or isn't a foul.

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.

PHYSICAL CONTACT.

In short, you are a fucking waster, fuck off.

Learn to read.
Why do you think a ref gives a foul when there is minmal contact.Cos contacting the player before the ball is a foul you fucking waster.

And when a player goes shoulder to shoulder with another player and pushes him off before touching the ball, is that a foul?

What about when players jump for a header or a keeper slides into a players feet to get the ball? Only one of them got to the ball first, however neither player is called for a foul.

And I think I have spent 5 minutes on this subject replying to you, I mean what the fuck was I thinking? Can I have my 5 minutes back? Reply, don't...I honestly don't give a fuck. You are without a doubt the least knowledgeable person on here on football, I think without conscious thought I saved this picture just for you.

[Rag_hater]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _55753.pdf

I think you should give Law 12 a bit of a study.Theres a bit on page 114 which will make a bit clearer for you

That's in reference to dangerous play you muppet.

Six pages back they talk about charging and when it is or isn't a foul.

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.

PHYSICAL CONTACT.

In short, you are a fucking waster, fuck off.

Learn to read.
Why do you think a ref gives a foul when there is minmal contact.Cos contacting the player before the ball is a foul you fucking waster.

And when a player goes shoulder to shoulder with another player and pushes him off before touching the ball, is that a foul?

What about when players jump for a header or a keeper slides into a players feet to get the ball? Only one of them got to the ball first, however neither player is called for a foul.

And I think I have spent 5 minutes on this subject replying to you, I mean what the fuck was I thinking? Can I have my 5 minutes back? Reply, don't...I honestly don't give a fuck. You are without a doubt the least knowledgeable person on here on football, I think without conscious thought I saved this picture just for you.

When a keeper slides into a players feet and does't get the ball its a pen, retard and if the guy heading the ball scores a goal by hitting the other player first the goal is disallowed, retard.No retard you cant have your five minutes back.You are one of those "experts" who haven't a fuckin clue what your talking using foul language to cover up your retardness.

[Blue Blood]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _55753.pdf

I think you should give Law 12 a bit of a study.Theres a bit on page 114 which will make a bit clearer for you

That's in reference to dangerous play you muppet.

Six pages back they talk about charging and when it is or isn't a foul.

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.

PHYSICAL CONTACT.

In short, you are a fucking waster, fuck off.

Learn to read.
Why do you think a ref gives a foul when there is minmal contact.Cos contacting the player before the ball is a foul you fucking waster.

And when a player goes shoulder to shoulder with another player and pushes him off before touching the ball, is that a foul?

What about when players jump for a header or a keeper slides into a players feet to get the ball? Only one of them got to the ball first, however neither player is called for a foul.

And I think I have spent 5 minutes on this subject replying to you, I mean what the fuck was I thinking? Can I have my 5 minutes back? Reply, don't...I honestly don't give a fuck. You are without a doubt the least knowledgeable person on here on football, I think without conscious thought I saved this picture just for you.

When a keeper slides into a players feet and does't get the ball its a pen, retard and if the guy heading the ball scores a goal by hitting the other player first the goal is disallowed, retard.No retard you cant have your five minutes back.You are one of those "experts" who haven't a fuckin clue what your talking using foul language to cover up your retardness.

Umm pot. kettle. black.

You just swore then moaned about foul language in the same sentence.

*sigh* Theres always one....

[Rag_hater]

Playing in a dangerous manner involves no physical contact between the
players. If there is physical contact, the action becomes an offence punishable
with a direct free kick or penalty kick. In the case of physical contact, the
referee should carefully consider the high probability that misconduct has also
been committed.
Thats been copied from FIFA's site

[Slim]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _55753.pdf

I think you should give Law 12 a bit of a study.Theres a bit on page 114 which will make a bit clearer for you

That's in reference to dangerous play you muppet.

Six pages back they talk about charging and when it is or isn't a foul.

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.

PHYSICAL CONTACT.

In short, you are a fucking waster, fuck off.

Learn to read.
Why do you think a ref gives a foul when there is minmal contact.Cos contacting the player before the ball is a foul you fucking waster.

And when a player goes shoulder to shoulder with another player and pushes him off before touching the ball, is that a foul?

What about when players jump for a header or a keeper slides into a players feet to get the ball? Only one of them got to the ball first, however neither player is called for a foul.

And I think I have spent 5 minutes on this subject replying to you, I mean what the fuck was I thinking? Can I have my 5 minutes back? Reply, don't...I honestly don't give a fuck. You are without a doubt the least knowledgeable person on here on football, I think without conscious thought I saved this picture just for you.

When a keeper slides into a players feet and does't get the ball its a pen, retard and if the guy heading the ball scores a goal by hitting the other player first the goal is disallowed, retard.No retard you cant have your five minutes back.You are one of those "experts" who haven't a fuckin clue what your talking using foul language to cover up your retardness.

Where did I say the keeper didn't get the ball? You said it's a non-contact sport, all three are examples of how contact can be made legally without fouls being called. How come you didn't reply to those examples?

I am no expert, as I have said many times this is my opinion based on my understanding of the game, if you see me as some sort of expert well thank you, I appreciate that, and people are quite welcome to prove me wrong. As for language I only use it to emphasize my point, in this instance, that you are a retard.

Hope that clears it up for you.

[Ted Hughes]

Playing in a dangerous manner involves no physical contact between the
players. If there is physical contact, the action becomes an offence punishable
with a direct free kick or penalty kick. In the case of physical contact, the
referee should carefully consider the high probability that misconduct has also
been committed.
Thats been copied from FIFA's site

Why do you persist with this kind of shit? You must spend your life in some kind of fucking coccoon, isolated from reality. You don't seem to have any concept of putting things into context or understand even the basic ideas of half things you quote. Seriously, why the fuck do you do it?

[Rag_hater]

Where did I say the keeper didn't get the ball? You said it's a non-contact sport, all three are examples of how contact can be made legally without fouls being called. How come you didn't reply to those examples?

I am no expert, as I have said many times this is my opinion based on my understanding of the game, if you see me as some sort of expert well thank you, I appreciate that, and people are quite welcome to prove me wrong. As for language I only use it to emphasize my point, in this instance, that you are a retard.

Hope that clears it up for you.[/quote]











I did answer your question retard but you seem to have read it how you want to in a similar way to only reading what FIFA have written as their rules,which I have quoted so there would be little less doubt
And I was only being a pot calling you back what you had called me.
Hope that clears it up for you.
And I'm repeating you because it seems to be the only way you understand retard.

[Dameerto]

I refer you to my previous post - an exercise in logic - why list in the rules types of contact that are illegal if you say the game is non-contact (and therefore ALL contact is illegal)? It blows your argument out of the water.

[Rag_hater]

I refer you to my previous post - an exercise in logic - why list in the rules types of contact that are illegal if you say the game is non-contact (and therefore ALL contact is illegal)? It blows your argument out of the water.

Why are the rules so hard for you to understand.Football is a non-contact sport.There are a few instances where it is tolerated and once a player has played the ball any resulting contact is not a foul.Those are the rules.I think you need to pay a little more attention to the next game you watch and see what the referee blows up as a foul.

[Ted Hughes]

I refer you to my previous post - an exercise in logic - why list in the rules types of contact that are illegal if you say the game is non-contact (and therefore ALL contact is illegal)? It blows your argument out of the water.

Why are the rules so hard for you to understand.Football is a non-contact sport.There are a few instances where it is tolerated and once a player has played the ball any resulting contact is not a foul.Those are the rules.I think you need to pay a little more attention to the next game you watch and see what the referee blows up as a foul.

How the fuck can a sport where there's contact every two seconds be a non contact sport ?

The problem is, there are millions upon millions of people who've watched & played football over the last 100 + years, the majority of whom realise that it's much harder & much cleverer to accomplish skill on the ball when people are actually trying to tackle you rather than being afraid to try in case you chuck yourself on the floor at get them carded. Every tackle involves contact with various parts of the body often before during & after the ball is played.

A minority of people including Sepp Blatter are trying to re interpret the rules of the game so it turns into fucking netball because a few of you prefer it that way. To those of us who watched the great players of the past doing fantastic tricks AND riding tackles etc it devalues the whole thing when players drop to the floor & squeal like little girls under the slightest contact. Sepp Blatter admires such cheating & thinks it's clever.

For most of it's existence, football has been as much about hard tackling & contact as about the skill to get away from it. The fact that it's a tough game is what makes the ability to perform the skills so admirable (lots of people can juggle a football on their own, better than Lionel Messi but he can do it under CONTACT.) Once the tackling etc goes so does the soul of a sport which has been the most popular team game for over a century.

[gillie]

I refer you to my previous post - an exercise in logic - why list in the rules types of contact that are illegal if you say the game is non-contact (and therefore ALL contact is illegal)? It blows your argument out of the water.

Why are the rules so hard for you to understand.Football is a non-contact sport.There are a few instances where it is tolerated and once a player has played the ball any resulting contact is not a foul.Those are the rules.I think you need to pay a little more attention to the next game you watch and see what the referee blows up as a foul.

In tonights game Dani Alves wins the ball but the opposition players leg hits Alves leg afterwards and the Ref blows for a foul.So your insistance that if a player plays the ball its not a foul is shot down on this example.

[Rag_hater]

In tonights game Dani Alves wins the ball but the opposition players leg hits Alves leg afterwards and the Ref blows for a foul.So your insistance that if a player plays the ball its not a foul is shot down on this example.[/quote]










So the ref gives a foul cos the guy defending hits his leg.You given any thought to why that might be.Maybe its because there was contact and Alves didn't gain any advantage from it so the ref thought it would be right to blow for the foul.Its always upto the ref.




making contact with an opponent before touching the ball when tackling an opponent to gain possession of the ball (Note: it is always a foul if the tackler contacts the ballhandler before touching the ball. However, it can still be a direct kick foul if the ball is touched first but the tackler was "careless, reckless, or used excessive force" and was judged to have kicked, tripped, charged or jumped at the ballhandler. Or, if the Referee believes the tackler played in a "dangerous manner", an indirect kick can be awarded),

That last bit is out of a ref's manuel by the way

[Ted Hughes]

In tonights game Dani Alves wins the ball but the opposition players leg hits Alves leg afterwards and the Ref blows for a foul.So your insistance that if a player plays the ball its not a foul is shot down on this example.

So the ref gives a foul cos the guy defending hits his leg.You given any thought to why that might be.Maybe its because there was contact and Alves didn't gain any advantage from it so the ref thought it would be right to blow for the foul.Its always upto the ref.




making contact with an opponent before touching the ball when tackling an opponent to gain possession of the ball (Note: it is always a foul if the tackler contacts the ballhandler before touching the ball. However, it can still be a direct kick foul if the ball is touched first but the tackler was "careless, reckless, or used excessive force" and was judged to have kicked, tripped, charged or jumped at the ballhandler. Or, if the Referee believes the tackler played in a "dangerous manner", an indirect kick can be awarded),

That last bit is out of a ref's manuel by the way[/quote]

So if his hand touches the player's hand before he gets the ball it's a foul. Simple.

It's not though is it? So it's bollocks isn't it? It's down to interpretation. But why the fuck am I wasting my time trying to tell you, when everyone else on the fucking planet already knows?

[Dameerto]

I refer you to my previous post - an exercise in logic - why list in the rules types of contact that are illegal if you say the game is non-contact (and therefore ALL contact is illegal)? It blows your argument out of the water.

Why are the rules so hard for you to understand.Football is a non-contact sport.There are a few instances where it is tolerated and once a player has played the ball any resulting contact is not a foul.Those are the rules.I think you need to pay a little more attention to the next game you watch and see what the referee blows up as a foul.

Let's stay with the the logic exercise and assume you are right - IF that was the case the rules would set down a list of contact that was allowed, NOT disallowed. Now do you see my point? I'm starting to guess that you don't.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Here I am, sitting on my boat in a nice island, sipping Cuba Libre (well white rum and Pepsi Max, but you get the picture) and I still can't get it out of my head that someone would consider football a non-contact sport. I need to get a life and you need to get some sense.

[john@staustell]

R-H we have missed you! Soon be time for a whole new round of Robinho threads!!!!