|
Post by stockytwo on Jul 11, 2024 11:58:25 GMT
Awesome, take it you're going to try for the final ?
|
|
|
Post by Waldorf on Jul 11, 2024 12:02:01 GMT
The defender's foot was side on to Kane and his studs only made contact because of the full extension of Kane's follow through. It wasn't like he was lunging towards him studs showing. He was trying to get his foot in front of him to block the ball. View AttachmentHe got nowhere near the ball, your photo shows his studs on Harry's foot, I'm even more convinced now. Agree. If I was on the other side of the argument I'm not sure I'd be posting that picture.
|
|
|
Post by countyingermany on Jul 11, 2024 12:04:35 GMT
Ironically, I'm actually back in the UK this weekend visiting family before flying to Pinatar on Tuesday...I booked it ages ago before I did the maths on the dates! Have been toying with the idea of how I could work it round to get there but don't think it'll be possible so I've given someone else my access code for the ticket
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,306
|
Post by Mozzer on Jul 11, 2024 12:06:43 GMT
I'm not having this 'anywhere else on the pitch it's a foul' argument. No, it isn't. Kane's leg swings into the defender's foot after the ball has gone. Neither are high and the defender has every right to try to block that. Let me put it this way, if England had had that awarded against us we'd be moaning about it for a very long time. The Dutch are right to do so. That being said, we were the better team over the 90mins. It was a lucky decision, but we weren't lucky to win. Yes you are having it. Studs up. Foul anywhere else in the pitch. The ref got to look at it again and said it was a foul so pen and yellow card. The VAR ref thought the same too or wouldn’t have called the ref over. Av it! Ah, right. Well, if VAR got involved and a ref was having a look, it must be right. Except for the expert ITV have who said it wasn't. His foot is up but he's not leading with his studs - any time any player lifts their foot up exposes the studs. That's not the same as going into a tackle leading with them. You can start giving free kicks all over the show if this is where we're now at. Soft as f*ck that penalty. I'm not an advocate for a return to 1970s football - the game is better for having removed that borderline criminal violence involved on the pitch. But a foul for putting your foot up to try to block a ball and getting it kicked is pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by atmosphere on Jul 11, 2024 12:21:52 GMT
It would never get given in real time.
VAR is re-refereeing the game.
I'd be livid if that had gone against my team.
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Jul 11, 2024 12:22:29 GMT
Yes you are having it. Studs up. Foul anywhere else in the pitch. The ref got to look at it again and said it was a foul so pen and yellow card. The VAR ref thought the same too or wouldn’t have called the ref over. Av it! Ah, right. Well, if VAR got involved and a ref was having a look, it must be right. Except for the expert ITV have who said it wasn't. His foot is up but he's not leading with his studs - any time any player lifts their foot up exposes the studs. That's not the same as going into a tackle leading with them. You can start giving free kicks all over the show if this is where we're now at. Soft as f*ck that penalty. I'm not an advocate for a return to 1970s football - the game is better for having removed that borderline criminal violence involved on the pitch. But a foul for putting your foot up to try to block a ball and getting it kicked is pathetic. Agree. Thought it was very soft last night, nothing I've seen since has changed my mind. Didn't even consider it could be a penalty until they zoomed in on the ref (was watching it in a bar last night and couldn't hear the commentary).
|
|
|
Post by atmosphere on Jul 11, 2024 12:29:15 GMT
How do we think Southgate's going to celebrate if we win on Sunday?
A top manager would be snorting coke off a Lap Dancers arse cheek with the players lining up behind him to follow suit.
That's another question mark I have over the man. Too boring.
|
|
|
Post by gatleyhatter on Jul 11, 2024 12:45:17 GMT
How do we think Southgate's going to celebrate if we win on Sunday? A top manager would be snorting coke off a Lap Dancers arse cheek with the players lining up behind him to follow suit. That's another question mark I have over the man. Too boring. Probably do a spot of ironing or something.
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,306
|
Post by Mozzer on Jul 11, 2024 12:50:32 GMT
How do we think Southgate's going to celebrate if we win on Sunday? A top manager would be snorting coke off a Lap Dancers arse cheek with the players lining up behind him to follow suit. That's another question mark I have over the man. Too boring. Better than the question mark that hung over his immediate predecessor... There's a lot to be said for boring people in important jobs. Boris Johnson wasn't boring. Liz Truss wasn't boring. Rishi Sunak.. well, okay, he was boring. But still.
|
|
|
Post by stockytwo on Jul 11, 2024 12:51:56 GMT
How do we think Southgate's going to celebrate if we win on Sunday? Maybe he'll surprise everyone and the shackles will come off. From the stadium ubers straight to the Berghain, takes a couple of old school Mitsis and raves his tits off for 48 hours to some precise german techno
|
|
|
Post by muddywaters on Jul 11, 2024 13:16:09 GMT
How do we think Southgate's going to celebrate if we win on Sunday? A top manager would be snorting coke off a Lap Dancers arse cheek with the players lining up behind him to follow suit. That's another question mark I have over the man. Too boring. He'll be desperate to get home and cut the grass !!
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Jul 11, 2024 13:22:07 GMT
And if that defender just puts his foot there to prevent the shot rather than play the ball the striker has every right to follow through, however that's not what Kane did. If a defender was clearing a ball, a striker tried to block it and the defender's follow through hit the foot of the striker, you'd never expect a foul to be given against the striker. It's madness. Defenders may as well not try and block shots because they're either going to give away a point blank range handball or a foul because the striker collided with them. You could say absolutely the same as this when a defender mistimes a challenge "the defender was trying to win the ball". It's absolutely the same. If the "defender was trying to block the ball" he would have BLOCKED THE BALL. The reality is he tried, missed, failed, and kicked Kane. This business of Kane kicking him is bollocks by the way. His studs literally connected with Kane's foot AFTER the ball had been set off, not the other way around. Absolute stone wall penalty. Some of you guys need a trip to Specsavers! Couldn't give the penalty without VAR. But these are the type of situations that VAR is absolutely there for.
|
|
|
Post by mustafapoint on Jul 11, 2024 13:23:56 GMT
I have just one word for those against VAR and other technology.
Maradona.
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,306
|
Post by Mozzer on Jul 11, 2024 13:28:12 GMT
Not arsed. 'Wembley' is a word for County fans. VAR can still take a running jump.
|
|
|
Post by mustafapoint on Jul 11, 2024 13:31:08 GMT
VAR would have stopped la mano de un tramposo (the hand of a cheat).
We had a very gppd team in '86 (Lineker, Barnes et al) and I think we could have won the WC that year.
|
|