# EUFA Not Lifting Champions League Final Suspensions - Unbelievable!!!!!!



## Lex Foutish (11 May 2009)

I'll preface my remarks by saying I don't like Man. Utd. very much. A legacy of growing up with a few of their fans! I just heard on the radio that EUFA are not going to lift the bans on Darren Fletcher of Man. Utd. and the Barcelona defender Abidal, both of whom received red cards in the Champions League semi finals. TV replay showed that Fletcher got the ball before Fabregas was touched and Anelka tripped himself up before Abigal was sent off.

Isn't it absolutely daft that the referee, in these televised situations, doesn't know what really happened, and can dismiss players in this fashion, while the millions watching on tv have a clear view and numerous replays of the incidents in question? If there was any justice in the world, both of these players would have their suspensions overturned, as neither of them should have been sent off in the first place.

FIFA President, Sepp Blatter, is totally opposed to having tv replays for referees (many feel that he runs a one man show) and EUFA doesn't allow an appeal of a red card decision!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Justice? 

I took the following from The Guardian's website:-

_Uefa spokesman Rob Faulkner said that while United had the right to protest against the decision, there was nothing in the governing body's rules that would allow Fletcher to escape the ban._
_Faulkner said: "Manchester United have the right to protest the decision within 24 hours of the match. However the protest is only admissible if the referee made an error and mistakenly identified and cautioned or sent off the wrong player._
_"There cannot be an appeal against a factual decision taken by the referee, and there is nothing to indicate that the referee made a mistake in identifying Fletcher as the player he penalised last night."_
_Even if Rosetti was to admit his decision was wrong, the red card would still stand under article 44.4 of Uefa's disciplinary regulations, which only allows red cards to be rescinded for cases of mistaken identity._



Is it any surprise that so many former soccer afficionados have become so disillusioned by top level soccer these days? It has become poisoned by money, greed, diving, cheating and cynicism.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSGPP_zk4AY



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgtzSe6mU9Y


----------



## MrMan (12 May 2009)

> Is it any surprise that so many former soccer afficionados have become so disillusioned by top level soccer these days? It has become poisoned by money, greed, diving, cheating and cynicism


 
I understand your grievance with the bans, but I don't understand the link between UEFA not rescinding the red cards and your above quote?


----------



## mathepac (12 May 2009)

Lex Foutish said:


> ... I took the following from The Guardian's website:- ...


I didn't realise The Nenagh Guardian had a Euro soccer journalist.


----------



## burger1979 (12 May 2009)

In fairness even Sir Alex thought it was a peno from where he was standing and even thought the referee had got it right from the where the ref was standing on the pitch. its a big loss for Sir Alex and for Fletcher but there was no hope of them getting the red card recinded. as for abidal i didnt see that one so cant comment on it. (i dont have access to youtube in work internet).


----------



## csirl (12 May 2009)

As the OP referred to in the original post - UEFA does not have the authority to overturn red cards unless there is a case of mistaken identity. There was no case of mistaken identity in this incident.

While there may be a case made that the decision was incorrect, you cannot single out specific matches in a tournament of 100s of matches and apply different rules to them. I'm sure there have been mistakes made in other CL matches this season. You cannot change the rules mid tournament and all the teams were aware of the rules going into the tournament. 

Not defending UEFA, I personally believe a video reply system should be introduced, but there decision not to overturn the card in this case was 100% correct as per their rules.


----------



## NorthDrum (12 May 2009)

Didnt stop Uefa from changing the rules for Liverpool when they won the CL and let them get into the CL the next season with 5 entries from England . . .

If it suits UEFA, they will bend the rules, if it doesnt you dont have a chance (its not about whats right or wrong with that shower) . .

As far as TV replays go, I would think that something like tennis has (where a player can contest 2 decisions a game) would be better then changing the whole way the games played. If Fergie could of contested that decision, would the ref of changed his mind, possibly not as it was in the emirates, so there are other variables (you would be better off with a 4th qualified ref to make the decision). 

Since not all soccer games are on TV you are going to have to decide which level of games have to have this technology.

Either way it is sad that players miss possibly the biggest games of their careers because refs are too shy, proud or ignorant to admit their mistakes. .


----------



## Latrade (12 May 2009)

NorthDrum said:


> Didnt stop Uefa from changing the rules for Liverpool when they won the CL and let them get into the CL the next season with 5 entries from England . . .
> 
> If it suits UEFA, they will bend the rules, if it doesnt you dont have a chance (its not about whats right or wrong with that shower) . .
> 
> ...


 
The Liverpool case was different, though I take your point, as they changed the rules immediately after so that the holders would automatically be selected and then the remaining three. UEFA assumed that other countries would follow the Spanish example when something similar happened with Real Madrid. They, and most people, never expected a nation to not select the cup holders among its nominees. 

However, this situation is greatly different. The governing body would be on very tricky ground with this. How many players have missed games due to unjust decisions and suspensions? OTT red cards happen all the time, I'm not saying I've no sympathy, but over-turning these would cause too much trouble later on and also, in this litigious age, a whole rake of claims for past suspensions.

We know all governing bodies tend to favour the decisions of their referees, even in the face of some bad ones. I can understand that view, even when sometimes it feels a bit unjust.

I still think Fletcher's was a foul and can therefore see how a red card was produced.


----------



## NorthDrum (12 May 2009)

Latrade said:


> The Liverpool case was different, though I take your point, as they changed the rules immediately after so that the holders would automatically be selected and then the remaining three. UEFA assumed that other countries would follow the Spanish example when something similar happened with Real Madrid. They, and most people, never expected a nation to not select the cup holders among its nominees.
> 
> However, this situation is greatly different. The governing body would be on very tricky ground with this. How many players have missed games due to unjust decisions and suspensions? OTT red cards happen all the time, I'm not saying I've no sympathy, but over-turning these would cause too much trouble later on and also, in this litigious age, a whole rake of claims for past suspensions.
> 
> ...


 
My point was that UEFA are happy to change the rules when it suits their needs. They didnt have to let liverpool back in. I would argue that considering it was Everton who got the 4th spot in England , they knew there would be civil war between the clubs if Everton got thrown out, so took the easy option and caved in. They really should of said , tough wombles Pool, take your grievances to the EPL, but for the sake of their own contradictory rules they changed them. I think it was actually the right thing to do under the circumstances, but that doesnt change the fact it was still "making things up as they went along".

I understand the gravity of this decision but I think that the whole fair play bs they force before games is totally lost on people, particularly when they dont even show any fair play to players in instances like this. 

Fletcher may never get a chance to play in a CL final again. I can think of Nedved, Scholes and Keane that missed CL finals, but there wasnt much ground to try to get these rescinded as they got yellows fair and square (there should be a yellow amnest from Semis onwards). Wheres the reward for law, disciplined abiding players like Fletcher who are model professionals in every sense of the word. Surely UEFA could of looked and seen this guy should be made an example of to all who act the tissy and constantly cause trouble by saying in light of the circumstances and Fletchers impeccible discipline record UEFA decided to let him play. They let teams that dont qualify into Europe, qualify by virtue of their disciplinary record over a season, why not have a similar system for good players.

Dont know how anybody could think that was a red card, even by the letter of the law. He got the ball, then the man. Rule states if you get the ball first its a legitimate tackle. The very fact there has been such heated debate and only ABU's and Refs have come out in support of the decision speaks for itself. Nobodys saying it wasnt a tough call, just that common sense should of prevailed but as usual UEFA hide behind the corrodors (probably because of the exact same reason you mentioned, afraid to get some flack for actually doing the right thing).


----------



## Lex Foutish (12 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> I understand your grievance with the bans, but I don't understand the link between UEFA not rescinding the red cards and your above quote?


 
I can see what you mean MrMan. Part of my point was that UEFA's reluctance to go down the road of real justice in cases like this is consistent with their unwillingness to tackle things like the diving and cheating we seem to see consistently in televised matches. They know these 2 guys are not guilty of sending off offenses but they're still going to have to serve a ban. I'm not a legal expert but I can't see how not being able to appeal a red card offence is legal. Surely tv evidence should be allowed, as cctv footage is in a legal trial.

My money and greed reference was a wider one directed more at players and some clubs who seem to be driven by money and bleeding the fans for every penny they have, thus turning many people off the game. Not directly related to EUFA, as you said. Will have to be clearer in future!


----------



## Mpsox (13 May 2009)

The GAA may have convuluted disciplinary procedures but at least in cases like this, players are cleared. Maybe Man U should have hired Frank Murphy from the Cork County Board !!!


----------



## mick1960 (14 May 2009)

The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL.
Fletcher plays for a team that is there because of it.
He got a red card he deserved and it stands because of the rules
If it was overturned by UEFA it would open the floodgates of appeals.
Maybe next season they will change that rule.
If tv evidence was produced and acted on would Man U and Barca still be in the final?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSGPP_zk4AY Fletcher could have got a Red for starting the move by pulling Fabergast by the arm,43sec
Also look a the position of Fabergast's leg in sec 47/48 lucky lad.


----------



## Sunny (14 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL.
> Fletcher plays for a team that is there because of it.


 
Eh, how do you work that one out?


----------



## NorthDrum (14 May 2009)

Sunny said:


> Eh, how do you work that one out?


 
ABU, dont even entertain it . . .


----------



## grahamo (14 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL.
> Fletcher plays for a team that is there because of it.


Rubbish!
Can you back up this claim? I bet you can't


----------



## Mpsox (14 May 2009)

I won't get into the specifics of whether or not diving and cheating got Man U into the final but one of the fundamental reasons I am going off football at the minute is the amount of "simulation" that is going on and one of (and I accept, not the only one) the key culprits is Ronaldo. The guy falls over so often it's embarrassing.


----------



## mick1960 (14 May 2009)

When a player cheats he gives his team unfair advantage.
They get goals,penalty's and disrupt the oppositions attack with it.
Therefore teams that lower themselves and cheat and get away with it go further.
Man U do more simulations than Nintendo hence their in the final.
Then when they want UEFA to Lift a ban for a foul...Unbelievable!!!
As for backing it up,watch the games without rose coloured glasses
and it will become clear.
The simulation or cheating has to stop it's ruining the game.


----------



## Sunny (14 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> When a player cheats he gives his team unfair advantage.
> They get goals,penalty's and disrupt the oppositions attack with it.
> Therefore teams that lower themselves and cheat and get away with it go further.
> Man U do more simulations than Nintendo hence their in the final.
> ...


 
And the award for the most ridiculous generalisation of the year goes to......!!!

So Man Utd and Barcelona dived their way to the final is what you are saying?


----------



## mick1960 (14 May 2009)

Sunny said:


> And the award for the most ridiculous generalisation of the year goes to......!!
> 
> So Man Utd and Barcelona dived their way to the final is what you are saying?



In order
No they are mostly facts not generalisation
 No,read the post.


----------



## Sunny (14 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> In order
> No they are mostly facts not generalisation
> No,read the post.


 
Give me the facts then. Examples of dives committed by either team that have got them to the final???


----------



## Sunny (14 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> Man U do more simulations than Nintendo hence their in the final.


 
That seems to suggest that Utd dived their way to the final


----------



## mick1960 (14 May 2009)

Simulation involves more than diving.
Examples of how every team went out or Advanced is a complex and large subject and would take to much time.It would be is easier to watch the matches yourself.
That cheating changes a game and puts teams in a position that they would not be in otherwise,this would include every team that cheats.
If you are Interested in diving though ,U tube has a whole section on it,and to my utter surprise,Ronaldo does feature in it.
The tackle on Fabergas was a red card and very few people can see that,so I am not surprised with your response,but very glad that UEFA stuck by their guns


----------



## Sunny (14 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> Simulation involves more than diving.
> Examples of how every team went out or Advanced is a complex and large subject and would take to much time.It would be is easier to watch the matches yourself.
> That cheating changes a game and puts teams in a position that they would not be in otherwise,this would include every team that cheats.
> If you are Interested in diving though ,U tube has a whole section on it,and to my utter surprise,Ronaldo does feature in it.
> The tackle on Fabergas was a red card and very few people can see that,so I am not surprised with your response,but very glad that UEFA stuck by their guns


 
I really don't get your point so I presume you are just trolling. So you can't provide one example of Man Utd or Barcelona cheating or 'simulating' in this years competition that explains why they are in the final apart from the fact that they deserve to be there?

By the way, I never said Fletchers wasn't a red card. Harsh but could understand it. I don't support Utd so couldn't care less if he plays or not. Having said that I don't write off one teams achievements or entire sport on the basis of one or more players. 

What teams do you reckon deserved to be in the final by the way?


----------



## mick1960 (14 May 2009)

It would be should be easier to give examples of games that they did not simulate in,but I can not find one,that's the sad thing,it distracts from the game and obvious skill of the players.Now it accepted as the norm.On the rules as they stand now the two teams that have cheated are in it.So as Man U and Barca are in the final and that's perfect.If cheating is part of your game it distracts from the whole and Man U are a team.To try and make it clearer.

A boxer is deducted points if he hits below the belt,If two equally skilful boxers meet and one keeps 'simulating' being hit below the belt and wins because of it,is he still the champion? Is it right?Does it not take away from his achievements?is he not just cheating? same goes with any sport.


----------



## MrMan (15 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> It would be should be easier to give examples of games that they did not simulate in,but I can not find one,that's the sad thing,it distracts from the game and obvious skill of the players.Now it accepted as the norm.On the rules as they stand now the two teams that have cheated are in it.So as Man U and Barca are in the final and that's perfect.If cheating is part of your game it distracts from the whole and Man U are a team.To try and make it clearer.
> 
> A boxer is deducted points if he hits below the belt,If two equally skilful boxers meet and one keeps 'simulating' being hit below the belt and wins because of it,is he still the champion? Is it right?Does it not take away from his achievements?is he not just cheating? same goes with any sport.


 
OK so you don't like United we understand but your arguments are totally flawed and I think you may now realise that your argument is based on bitterness rather than fact. 

I'll answer your fact(less) argument with facts.

I'll start with the 1/4 final v's Porto
1st leg 2-2.
Rooney scored from a back pass mistake by Porto defender.
Tevez scored at near post from rooney flick.
No fouls or frees in lead up to either.

2nd leg 0-1
Ronaldo picks up the ball in open play near half way line and thunders in candidate for goal of the year from 35 yards out.

Semi-Finals v's Arsenal.
1st leg 1-0
John O'Shea scores from a corner kick that is not cleared properly. (I presume you accept that cheating doesn't result in corners).

2nd leg 1-3
Ji-Sung park benefits from a defensive slip and scores opener.
Ronaldo doubles lead from 40 yards with free kick. 
Ronaldo scores the third, this one came from United defending a corner and breaking away to score another excellent goal.

Van Persie scores consolation from the penalty spot.


So to re-cap all bar one of uniteds goals came from open play and no penalties were given but one was given against.

If I go back further I will find even more holes in your argument, but why bother when you don't back up any statements yourself.

Who do you support by the way?


----------



## NorthDrum (15 May 2009)

good response MR Man. 

Simple answer . . Troll . . . 

Riduculous generalisation.


----------



## S.L.F (15 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> It would be should be easier to give examples of games that they did not simulate in,but I can not find one,that's the sad thing,it distracts from the game and obvious skill of the players.Now it accepted as the norm.On the rules as they stand now the two teams that have cheated are in it.So as Man U and Barca are in the final and that's perfect.If cheating is part of your game it distracts from the whole and Man U are a team.To try and make it clearer.
> 
> A boxer is deducted points if he hits below the belt,If two equally skilful boxers meet and one keeps 'simulating' being hit below the belt and wins because of it,is he still the champion? Is it right?Does it not take away from his achievements?is he not just cheating? same goes with any sport.


 
I know almost nothing about football but I'm inclined to agree with you mick


----------



## MrMan (15 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> I know almost nothing about football but I'm inclined to agree with you mick


 
Well if you know almost nothing then you know a little bit more than Mick.


----------



## NorthDrum (16 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> I know almost nothing about football but I'm inclined to agree with you mick


 
I see your up the dubs signature.

Im a big GAA fan aswell , but simulation has also reared its ugly head in GAA. Funnily enough some of the supposed toughest players in the game love to jump around after getting grazed by an opponent . . Its like its been infected by soccer . .


----------



## mick1960 (16 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> OK so you don't like United we understand but your arguments are totally flawed and I think you may now realise that your argument is based on bitterness rather than fact.
> 
> I'll answer your fact(less) argument with facts.
> 
> ...



I think you have missed the whole point of the argument.By the fact that the football at the time is in a position that any of these goals are scored are down to the fact that 'simulation' has been used by Man U to alter where the ball would other wise be on the pitch.Or are you saying that you have never seen any use of Simulation (cheating) in any Man u matches?


----------



## MrMan (16 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> I think you have missed the whole point of the argument.By the fact that the football at the time is in a position that any of these goals are scored are down to the fact that 'simulation' has been used by Man U to alter where the ball would other wise be on the pitch.Or are you saying that you have never seen any use of Simulation (cheating) in any Man u matches?


 
So the 'simulation' 5 mins earlier has altered the course of the match and later through this obvious cheating Ronaldo smacks one in from 35 yards and all this is down to play acting? 
I have seen cheating in every sport and in every match that I have seen or been involved in. some teams are higher profile so get more scrutiny, but it is petty or naive at least to suggest that a team can cheat its way to trophies. 
You never said who it is that you support?


----------



## Pique318 (16 May 2009)

I don't think it matters overly who he supports, be it Man U or Accrington Stanley.

Simulation/cheating/diving is prevalent in soccer and it's a bad thing for ALL. players and fans alike.


----------



## MrMan (16 May 2009)

Pique318 said:


> I don't think it matters overly who he supports, be it Man U or Accrington Stanley.
> 
> Simulation/cheating/diving is prevalent in soccer and it's a bad thing for ALL. players and fans alike.


Of course cheating is a bad thing, it is bad for every sport. Mick's argument is that Man Utd & Barcelona are in the final because they are the biggest cheats. It sounds like the tunnel visioned argument of an opposing fan which is why I asked the question.
He has yet to answer, maybe he is out celebrating United winning the league?


----------



## Pique318 (16 May 2009)

I'm not sure if thet's the way he meant it. Yes, they have the stereotypical divers, and yes they are in the final but one does not = the other. 

Poor decisions, simulation to get an advantage (preventing the opposition advancing or getting a dangerous free kick), and plain old simple talent got those sides through to the final.

I'm a Liverpool supporter and gutted as I am about having come so close to the PL, have to say...C'MON BARCA !!!


----------



## MrMan (17 May 2009)

Pique318 said:


> I'm not sure if thet's the way he meant it. Yes, they have the stereotypical divers, and yes they are in the final but one does not = the other.
> 
> Poor decisions, simulation to get an advantage (preventing the opposition advancing or getting a dangerous free kick), and plain old simple talent got those sides through to the final.
> 
> I'm a Liverpool supporter and gutted as I am about having come so close to the PL, have to say...C'MON BARCA !!!


 
Mick said the following 





> The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL.


He said that because utd dive/cheat more than anyone else that is what put them in the final. I am a united fan and agree that Ronaldo hits the deck to easily, that said he does get a fair bit of close attention. By and large the United team would not be a team that is known for diving so i don't see where the accusation is coming from unless it is that of a disgruntled abu or something.


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> So the 'simulation' 5 mins earlier has altered the course of the match and later through this obvious cheating Ronaldo smacks one in from 35 yards and all this is down to play acting?
> I have seen cheating in every sport and in every match that I have seen or been involved in. some teams are higher profile so get more scrutiny, but it is petty or naive at least to suggest that a team can cheat its way to trophies.
> You never said who it is that you support?[/quo
> 
> ...


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

NorthDrum said:


> good response MR Man.
> 
> Simple answer . . Troll . . .
> 
> Riduculous generalisation.




LOL Thats what all Forums need..... a cheerleader


----------



## S.L.F (17 May 2009)

NorthDrum said:


> I see your up the dubs signature.
> 
> Im a big GAA fan aswell , but simulation has also reared its ugly head in GAA. Funnily enough some of the supposed toughest players in the game love to jump around after getting grazed by an opponent . . Its like its been infected by soccer . .


 
The signature is not just for GAA it is for all Dublin people in general.



Pique318 said:


> Accrington Stanley.


 
Who?



Pique318 said:


> Simulation/cheating/diving is prevalent in soccer and it's a bad thing for ALL. players and fans alike.


 
I totally agree that cheating is bad for players and fans.

As for the two particular teams I feel that they might not have done so well if they hadn't spent so much time falling over.

Hardly a good example for our kids, if you pretend to fall you will get rewarded.

I don't really follow football but I really hate M.U.F.C.


----------



## Lex Foutish (17 May 2009)

You don't like Man. Utd., S.L.F. At last, we have something in common!!!! 

Back to my original post.... This happened in Scotland yesterday. *And look out for the cheat winking at the end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjAX3_g5JXs

Why, oh why, won't they bring in tv replays for referees?


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

Lex
Shocking 'but according to the posts on this thread this will not put Rangers into the CL.  This incident did not affect the match and the result that put Rangers at the top of their League,and you can not progress through the qualifiers with this tactic.Enough said.
As for balls crossing the goal line a tv replay would be a great help to the ref.
With someone being sent off and a pently being awarded ,that is a double punishment,better that the offending player stays on if the penalty is converted to a goal (with the obvious qualifiers).
I think that if you had a 5th video ref who the ref could consult in the periods where players are rolling about on the floor with mortal and life threatening injury's
or after head butts this would instantly put an end and curtail a lot of the acting,and keep the game free flowing and fair.


----------



## Lex Foutish (17 May 2009)

I'm amazed they won't have a 5th official reviewing incidents on tv. 

I can't take any more of the likes of Drogba rolling around the ground in agony with a broken boot lace!


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

Lex Foutish said:


> I'm amazed they won't have a 5th official reviewing incidents on tv.
> 
> I can't take any more of the likes of Drogba rolling around the ground in agony with a broken boot lace!



He would soon stop that if at the time the fifth official brought a previous incident to the ref's attention and one of his team mates was sent off,Drogba
and Ronaldo detract from the teams achievements and tarnish their teams record

But Drogba is a clown and should get a yellow card as soon a he sets foot on the pitch


----------



## Lex Foutish (17 May 2009)

I agree with you about Drogba. A sickening cheat. Take a look at this.......... I'll never know how he walked again after this tackle! It was that bad!!!!!! 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgbU2zejzgk


----------



## MrMan (18 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> MrMan said:
> 
> 
> > So the 'simulation' 5 mins earlier has altered the course of the match and later through this obvious cheating Ronaldo smacks one in from 35 yards and all this is down to play acting?
> ...


----------



## MrMan (18 May 2009)

> I totally agree that cheating is bad for players and fans.
> 
> As for the two particular teams I feel that they might not have done so well if they hadn't spent so much time falling over.
> 
> ...


 
You really believe that because a team 'falls over' as you put it, that has one tem a league and put them in the final?
Tell me which United players are responsible for this weekly act of conning the ref?


----------



## mick1960 (19 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> mick1960 said:
> 
> 
> > What my point is, is that no team can prosper simply through cheating, no team can sustain a season long campaign on the back of cheating.
> ...


----------



## MrMan (19 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> MrMan said:
> 
> 
> > My Rangers on top of league,post covers most of your post and others.
> ...


----------



## mick1960 (19 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> mick1960 said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't say United cheat, the sarcasm may have been lost on you. I agree with you that blatant cheating detracts from the game, but I don't agree with you that the teams who finish top are the ones who cheat the most, it makes no sense.
> ...


----------



## Feardorcha (20 May 2009)

Sorry mick but you said there that you dont think teams that cheat the most end up on top. What was your first post about so!!!


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

Feardorcha said:


> Sorry mick but you said there that you dont think teams that cheat the most end up on top. What was your first post about so!!!



My first post says nothing about the teams that cheat the most end up on top

Not here


> The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL


Which would probaly read better out of context as
The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL,thus having them appeal to UEFA
Or here


> Fletcher plays for a team that is there because of it.


Cheating effects games so therefore results,some teams cheat more than others,so even if you said that Man U never cheat(Though I have on good authority from their supporters on this thread that they do ),they
could still be in the final because of it,because it alters results

I hope that makes it clearer.


----------



## Sunny (20 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> My first post says nothing about the teams that cheat the most end up on top
> 
> Not here
> Which would probaly read better out of context as
> ...


----------



## Feardorcha (20 May 2009)

Sunny said:


>


 I'll second that!!


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

Confused? I will try to simplify it even more.There is a Knock out tournament
team  *A* cheats and is awarded a penalty the other team * B* is out.
They win 2 more games against* C* and *D* through cheating.
Then they meet* T*eam *E* who cheats as well and  team *E* wins from a free kick.
(So now we have *A B C D *teams out,*B C D* of which do not cheat and who are more skilled)
In the semi final the cheating team * E* does not get an opportunity to get an advantage through their cheating,and are beaten by team *F *who do not cheat
Team *F* are in the final.
Team* F* could have been beatenby* B C D  *but we can not know because they were put out by cheating.
Team *F* are in the Final because they did not meet *B C *or* D *because they were put out by cheating.
Therefore Team *F* are in the final because of cheating.

There are other Statments that can be made from that examples but it might confuse you again.
That I think is as simple as I can put it,but if I can be of any more help in explaining any other aspects of this I will


----------



## shanegl (20 May 2009)

I've got a better one:

A seemingly insane poster wastes electricity posting complete and utter drivel about cheating and destiny. 
The ESB have to increase output to compensate.
The extra heat dissipated in the national grid affects local weather patterns.
As a result of a gust of wind that should not have been, a startled butterfly lets a fart.
Chaos theory kicks in and there's now a storm over Rome next Wednesday.
A gust of wind displaces the ball just as Ronaldo is taking a penalty in a shoot-out. (The dire weather ruined the game as a spectacle, resulting in a boring 0-0 after 90 mins).
Barcelona end up winning.

Hope you're happy now.


----------



## S.L.F (20 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> Confused? I will try to simplify it even more.There is a Knock out tournament
> team *A* cheats and is awarded a penalty the other team *B* is out.
> They win 2 more games against* C* and *D* through cheating.
> Then they meet* T*eam *E* who cheats as well and team *E* wins from a free kick.
> ...


 
I need a drink after reading that!


----------



## S.L.F (20 May 2009)

shanegl said:


> I've got a better one:
> 
> A seemingly insane poster wastes electricity posting complete and utter drivel about cheating and destiny.
> The ESB have to increase output to compensate.
> ...


 
Barcelona won.

That's great good news


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

shanegl said:


> I've got a better one:
> 
> A seemingly insane poster wastes electricity posting complete and utter drivel about cheating and destiny.
> The ESB have to increase output to compensate.
> ...



On your first section 'I agree !00% what you posted there is complete and utter drivel, but you spoiled it by letting us know in the first line.

On the last bit
Thanks for asking about my happiness that's very kind,and can report that I am very well,and happy but this is more suited for the shooting the Breeze section.Also your worry s about your mental health can not be discussed either.


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> I need a drink after reading that!



So do I


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> Barcelona won.
> 
> That's great good news



Did they have to cheat to do so?


----------



## Feardorcha (21 May 2009)

shanegl said:


> I've got a better one:
> 
> A seemingly insane poster wastes electricity posting complete and utter drivel about cheating and destiny.
> The ESB have to increase output to compensate.
> ...


Brilliant


----------



## mick1960 (21 May 2009)

.It is great that Football has such a wide fan base because I seem to have stumbled accross the  ''I can't think for myself but I can laugh group ''
So you probably will be splitting your sides with laughter when Man u and Barca come on and fall around for 90 mins to the cheers of thousands of brain washed deluded disciples,wearing their compulsory uniform that they have been told to wear by their high priests,rather than the fleece that sheep normally wear,and chuckle with glee as their pantomine comes to a end,and the charactors in this wimsey manage to hold themself upright for long enough to recieve their clown badges and the cup of comedy and prean and pose like latter day gladiators,(all the time hoping that the assembled mass never get the ability to think or question for themselves) and then watch the WWF champions final and clap with mad frenzy as two men pretend to battle each other and one is crowned champion of the Universe then smile yourself to sleep totally pleased with the amazing comedy spectacle you have watched.

I on the other hand will see it for what it is two teams that are in a final because of cheating .

Adieus


----------



## micmclo (21 May 2009)

Eufa?


----------



## mick1960 (21 May 2009)

micmclo said:


> Eufa?



Bless you


----------



## Feardorcha (22 May 2009)

mick you seem to have pretty strong views on soccer,cheating in particular. Can I ask why it seems to get your goat up?


----------



## MrMan (22 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> Confused? I will try to simplify it even more.There is a Knock out tournament
> team *A* cheats and is awarded a penalty the other team *B* is out.
> They win 2 more games against* C* and *D* through cheating.
> Then they meet* T*eam *E* who cheats as well and team *E* wins from a free kick.
> ...


 
Thats all very interesting, but it might add a little (much needed) weight to your argument if you started including fact. Maybe if you used the teams that you have stated are in the final through cheating and walk us through how indeed, United & Barcelona are not in the final on merit but rather from there ecpertise in the art of cheating? I will presume that this is too complicated and even though I talked you through the 1/4 and semi final stages already.


----------



## MrMan (22 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> .It is great that Football has such a wide fan base because I seem to have stumbled accross the ''I can't think for myself but I can laugh group ''
> So you probably will be splitting your sides with laughter when Man u and Barca come on and fall around for 90 mins to the cheers of thousands of brain washed deluded disciples,wearing their compulsory uniform that they have been told to wear by their high priests,rather than the fleece that sheep normally wear,and chuckle with glee as their pantomine comes to a end,and the charactors in this wimsey manage to hold themself upright for long enough to recieve their clown badges and the cup of comedy and prean and pose like latter day gladiators,(all the time hoping that the assembled mass never get the ability to think or question for themselves) and then watch the WWF champions final and clap with mad frenzy as two men pretend to battle each other and one is crowned champion of the Universe then smile yourself to sleep totally pleased with the amazing comedy spectacle you have watched.
> 
> I on the other hand will see it for what it is two teams that are in a final because of cheating .
> ...


 
As a United fan I guess you are desribing me as a 'deluded sheep' for enjoying watching them play and looking forward to the final next week. You have an obvious disdain for the game which begs the question 'why do you watch it'? 
Do you support any soccer team?


----------



## mick1960 (23 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> Thats all very interesting, but it might add a little (much needed) weight to your argument if you started including fact. Maybe if you used the teams that you have stated are in the final through cheating and walk us through how indeed, United & Barcelona are not in the final on merit but rather from there ecpertise in the art of cheating? I will presume that this is too complicated and even though I talked you through the 1/4 and semi final stages already.


My argument does not need weight, it is people who are deluded enough to think that cheating had nothing to do with results who need to prove that.

Can you prove that cheating has nothing to do with results? Because your example has nothing to do with that,and is often described as Smoke screen.

As for my very simple example.It was for people who do not have the faintest idea about football ,or chose not to understand the argument.
If you read my example and using a bit of independent thinking they can both be in the final without cheating.If a simple argument and a simple example is to complicated,there is no point labouring the point.The plus side is that is'' ignorance is bliss'' there will be thousands of people in a blissful state,which can only be a good thing.

So the only way my I would be wrong is if you believe that cheating has nothing to do with football results!!!
If you do believe that cheating has no effect on results in football,have a blissful weekend


----------



## mick1960 (23 May 2009)

MrMan said:


> As a United fan I guess you are desribing me as a 'deluded sheep' for enjoying watching them play and looking forward to the final next week. You have an obvious disdain for the game which begs the question 'why do you watch it'?
> Do you support any soccer team?



*Deluded:* to mislead the mind or judgement .

''If the hat fits wear it'' is the saying

I love football that is why It should not be reduced to a farce.

Off topic


----------



## MrMan (23 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> My argument does not need weight, it is people who are deluded enough to think that cheating had nothing to do with results who need to prove that.
> 
> Can you prove that cheating has nothing to do with results? Because your example has nothing to do with that,and is often described as Smoke screen.
> 
> ...


 
Yes it was a very simple example, and the question i ask is also very simple, How has cheating been the reason that United are in the final? To assume this is true is to assume that they cheated more than everyone else or that they are the only ones to cheat. Either way I believe to be untrue.
My 'smokescreen' was based on fact and highlighted *actual events* that led to the final. You have yet to pinpoint any factual event that can underpin your point.
I believe that it is misleading and a sweeping generalisation to state that cheating is a factor in football results.


----------

