That was the ultimate 'throwing yourself on a hand grenade' moment for Saurez...very smart play. Should be directing anger on Gyan for missing that one...
This rule is actually what I thought of when I saw that handball.
http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/penaltysummaries
Yeah and every time a player breaks the rules in the game it´s cheating?lol @ "it's not cheating because the rules dictate a specific way to handle the violation."
To say that it is not cheating when someone intentionally violates the rules of the game to prevent an otherwise unavoidable loss is absurd. I can't wrap my head around saying that it's not cheating because it's just a violation of the rules. If that handball was not cheating, what is?
Using performance enhancing drugs is not cheating in any sport; it's just a calculated risk, because the rules prescribe a specific punishment - right?
That was not fair play.
The difference though is that steroid use is against Federal law. And as much as we (baseball) might not like it, juicers do not get their HR's, hits, wins, etc. removed.
lol @ "it's not cheating because the rules dictate a specific way to handle the violation."
To say that it is not cheating when someone intentionally violates the rules of the game to prevent an otherwise unavoidable loss is absurd. I can't wrap my head around saying that it's not cheating because it's just a violation of the rules. If that handball was not cheating, what is?
Using performance enhancing drugs is not cheating in any sport; it's just a calculated risk, because the rules prescribe a specific punishment - right?
That was not fair play.
That difference is not relevant to whether or not it is cheating.
But in my example, no player came off the bench.
Yeah and every time a player breaks the rules in the game it´s cheating?
In a game where so very few goals are scored, goaltending is a much more serious issue than tackling fouls. Both happen to be rewarded with a penalty kick if they occur within the box, but the fact that you can stop a sure goal illegally so that the ensuing penalty carriers at least a small chance of defensive reward is pathetic. It should be at the discretion of the referee to be able to award goals in such cases, in much the same way that basketball awards goaltending and football four downs at the goal line if defensive pass interference occurs in the endzone (a rough equivalent). There is no reason that player should be able to gamble like this in a game of skill. Combined with terrible officiating, theatrics, and such unsportsmanlike play, FIFA needs to step up and reconsider their approach to such tactics.
Really? You read that and concluded that the only situation where it would apply is if a player comes off the bench? :hmm: That was an example. Read the rule.
"When Referee determines a palpably unfair act deprived a team of a touchdown"
What we saw was a palpably unfair act. To dispute that would be absurd. Unfortunately the rules of soccer allow palpably unfair acts to alter the outcome of a game. Unfortunately for Ghana that is, fortunately for Uruguay. Ghana deserved to win that game, and they were robbed by the deficient rules of soccer.
No. See above. A sensible person can easily recognize the difference between cheating and simply violating the rules.
In a game where so very few goals are scored, goaltending is a much more serious issue than tackling fouls. Both happen to be rewarded with a penalty kick if they occur within the box, but the fact that you can stop a sure goal illegally so that the ensuing penalty carriers at least a small chance of defensive reward is pathetic. It should be at the discretion of the referee to be able to award goals in such cases, in much the same way that basketball awards goaltending and football four downs at the goal line if defensive pass interference occurs in the endzone (a rough equivalent). There is no reason that player should be able to gamble like this in a game of skill. Combined with terrible officiating, theatrics, and such unsportsmanlike play, FIFA needs to step up and reconsider their approach to such tactics.
In a game where so very few goals are scored, goaltending is a much more serious issue than tackling fouls. Both happen to be rewarded with a penalty kick if they occur within the box, but the fact that you can stop a sure goal illegally so that the ensuing penalty carriers at least a small chance of defensive reward is pathetic. It should be at the discretion of the referee to be able to award goals in such cases, in much the same way that basketball awards goaltending and football four downs at the goal line if defensive pass interference occurs in the endzone (a rough equivalent). There is no reason that player should be able to gamble like this in a game of skill. Combined with terrible officiating, theatrics, and such unsportsmanlike play, FIFA needs to step up and reconsider their approach to such tactics.
Maybe if a player is guilty of a handball in the goal area, in addition to the red card & suspension, the team should not be allowed to substitute for him, so the game is played 10 on 11?
Isn't that almost exactly the same thing as awarding a penalty kick? :hmm:
KT
Maybe if a player is guilty of a handball in the goal area, in addition to the red card & suspension, the team should not be allowed to substitute for him, so the game is played 10 on 11?
It's already that way. Red card means you're a man down for the rest of the match. The Australia hand ball happened against Ghana (go figure) and Gyan made the PK that time. It was in the 24th minute so they played with 10 men against Ghana for the rest of the match.
What do the cards in soccer mean?
In: Football - Soccer
In soccer a yellow card is used for a minor foul.
If you get two yellow cards in one game, you are given a red card.
If a red card is given the player has to leave the game and a substitute has to enter the playing field.
Are you sure? It looked pretty even to me, but then again I was also working on the kitchen so my attention was divided.
From WikiAnswers:
Wiki fail. Red card means you are down a man.
KT