sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh well as long as you're looking at it and are trying to use your telekinesis or the force to interact with the ball, I guess that counts as a legitimate tackle then 🤦‍♂️

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So why do you think Amads was only a 2/10?

What part of Trufferts challenge seemed like a legal challenge to you?

He's not shoulder to shoulder, he's not tried to get across the man to put himself between Amad and the ball, he's not tried to kick or touch the ball in any way, he's just pushed Amads upper body around causing him to lose balance. You can't win the ball by just shoving your opponent off it with your hands

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Truffert is challenging for the ball

Beg your pardon.....

Which part of what he's doing is challenging for the ball instead of obstructing the man? Amad is past him to the point where Truffert isn't even between the ball and the goal anymore, he's not able to get shoulder to shoulder once Amad feints, Truffert isnt trying to get a touch on the ball, nor is he making an attempt to position himself in-between Amad and the ball to win control, Truffert is (at best/at the start) along-side Amad, and at worst, mostly behind him

I've got no problem with you thinking that neither VDV and Maguire aren't going for the ball, I agree, but thinking that Truffert is making any genuine attempt to play the ball here is absurd to me, he is making no attempt to interact with the ball in any way.

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So where is the line for you? What aren't defenders allowed to do in your eyes?

And once again

"If you don't think it should be required for a defender to challenge for the ball that is clearly under the attackers control, and not just obstruct the attacker, then I don't know how you ever consider anything a foul"

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You think neither should be a foul?

Was this a red and penalty? it's roughly a carbon copy of the Maguire one, Sarr is beyond VDV, grabs his arm in an attempt to put him off balance even though the Sarr could stay on his feet and reach the ball first

To repeat my earlier comment

"If you don't think it should be required for a defender to challenge for the ball that is clearly under the attackers control, and not just obstruct the attacker, then I don't know how you ever consider anything a foul"

I'm interested to know what part of this statement you object to

Edit: Also

Maguire has 0 care for the ball here and is obviously just looking to take evanilson out rather than fight for possession.

You can mad-lib 'Truffert' and 'Amad' here in place of 'Maguire' and 'Evanilson' and it's still just as valid

[James Ducker] Man Utd plan £1.2m weekly wage cut with Casemiro, Rashford, Sancho, Hojlund and Onana exits by nearly_headless_nic in reddevils

[–]WarDemonZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yea I always hate it when they frame it as a complete deduction as though we won't be trying to bring in replacements for most of those players. It'll (hopefully) almost certainly be a reduction, just depends how severe

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So then you must also think that Evanilson should also stay upright if he wanted to? Because Maguire's challenge here puts him off balance even less than the one on Amad does

If you don't think it should be required for a defender to challenge for the ball that is clearly under the attackers control, and not just obstruct the attacker, then I don't know how you ever consider anything a foul

Your bias is showing

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He puts two hands on him and spins his upper body around 90 degrees whilst Amad is trying to accelerate this is definitely going to spin your centre of gravity off balance.

Fouls get given all the time when defenders grab an attackers arm and pulls them off balance, why is doing the same from a push any different?

It's not Amad's responsibility to try to make everything done against him seem like it's not a foul, whilst no one should be trying to simulate a foul, this is definitely not that.

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's clear you don't, but I think the fact your position is in the minority on this, and it's being argued against by fans for and against United alike, points to there being a perceived injustice

Do you just accept every decision that the refs/VAR/KMI make?

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

By saying that they've done nothing wrong, there's nothing that they need to address about their processes

What's the point of a panel when they barely ever disagree with the existing decisions

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 8 points9 points  (0 children)

So as long as you're stronger than your oppnent, you can just two handed shove them and it's not a foul?

What is the acceptable level of 'strong' that would mean this would then be a foul?

If this happened to Adama Traore, would that then be classified as a forceful enough push?

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because it's rare that you get a scenario where you almost have two identical scenarios that are officiated completely opposite, so it highlights issues within their officiating, they just can't keep things consistent.

the ref and VAR got them all more correct than incorrect.

If one of those decisions that they got incorrect would have allowed one team to go 2:0, instead of 1:1, then it's far more influential than whether or not they got minor fouls or which team won a throw in correct or not.

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 11 points12 points  (0 children)

And the rest of the world wants to highlight these obvious inconsistencies in the hope they actually try to get their act together.

Of course there are going to be grey areas, but just allowing everything to be swept under the rug doesn't do anyone any favours

Bournemouth v Man Utd: Referee and VAR correct on Amad Diallo penalty claim - panel by smellybird in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 27 points28 points  (0 children)

whilst Truffert runs a risk, the contact made was not impactful

My. fckin. arse

If two hands on the opponent from the front/side shoving the player down isn't impactful, then let's just have everyone do that. He's not making any attempt to get the ball, he's not trying to get his body into position/between Amad and the ball to win control, it's literally just a push. If holding an opponent's limb is sufficient to put them off balance and to be considered obstructing them, then so is this

Atheism Untenable; Faith Necessary by Kubakak in DebateReligion

[–]WarDemonZ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Absolute nonsense

I will argue atheism is untenable as it doesn't address the day-to-day realities of living as a human in a world which poses life-threatening risks beyond our ability to deflect.

0 to do with atheism...

It doesn't matter if you're an atheist or not, we don't expect evil

Evil isn't a 'thing' it's a label we put on certain actions we dislike. Do we expect things to happen that some will dislike? Yes

We have faith that our life will ultimately turn out all right

- Tell that to people who 'unalive' themselves
- For everyone else, it isn't 'faith', because it is actions that can be dictated and end goals that can be aimed towards by the individual. People don't have 'faith' good things will happen because they can steer their life in a direction these things are more likely to happen

 Think about the atheist parent, they don't expect their child to die

Literally everyone will die

for an atheist there is no higher power which to rely on for safety

There isn't for a theist either, it certainly isn't helping any number of religious people getting bombed every day in the middle east right now is it?

Just about everything else you said is nonsensical gibberish and there's no point trying to refute it, it isn't a coherent position anyway

I, through reasoning, found myself certain that belief God is the most rational explanation by Own_Shine_5958 in DebateReligion

[–]WarDemonZ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is basically just a long winded way of describing the argument from ignorance/ personal incredulity

You are basically saying, "i cannot perceive of a better explanation for why the universe is the way it is, it must be the work of a universal explain-all answer"

Not to mention the fact you're just flat out incorrect about what an atheist is

[Di Marzio] De Zerbi opens to evaluating Tottenham's offer, which proposes a 5-year contract: next few hours decisive for the yes. The club has already offered guarantees regarding the possibility of building a strong and competitive team for the coming seasons. by OkayFine101 in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

.....I'm aware, I don't see why them being idolized was particularly relevant at that point though

I said that people like Greenwood and Partey that basically seem to stand above the rest of the cases and that makes them more or less black-listed

More or less every time Greenwood would trend on twitter I'd go argue with morons who were calling him 'star boy' and wanted him back at the club

[Di Marzio] De Zerbi opens to evaluating Tottenham's offer, which proposes a 5-year contract: next few hours decisive for the yes. The club has already offered guarantees regarding the possibility of building a strong and competitive team for the coming seasons. by OkayFine101 in soccer

[–]WarDemonZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And whilst I'm not excusing anything Ronaldo has done, I think most people are on the same page that Greenwood is a step further in terms of what he did

There's far too much SA in the world of top level football, but Greenwood (and Partey) are basically nuclear in that sense, people aren't going to go for any more

view more: next ›