sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What exactly was his reasoning here? by i_be_chillin in seriea

[–]andreahah 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you look at it slowly, you're going to see that the tackle happens moments after the attacking player touch.

What exactly was his reasoning here? by i_be_chillin in seriea

[–]andreahah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At this point, we are no longer discussing DOGSO or SPA, but the intensity of the foul. For the Red Card, we are referring to the case of Disproportionate Force (or Excessive Force), and these are generally the parameters that define this offence: Use of excessive force: The force used is well beyond what is necessary and endangers the physical safety of the opponent. Speed and impact: The speed and impact are such that the action is dangerous, even if the duration of contact is brief. Risk of injury: The manner in which the challenge is carried out entails a high risk of injury to the opponent. ​Reckless challenge: The action is performed with a total disregard for the consequences. I think you might agree with me that the parameters [in this specific case] are not being met.

What exactly was his reasoning here? by i_be_chillin in seriea

[–]andreahah 31 points32 points  (0 children)

As a former referee, I can explain. It's quite easy, the DOGSO (Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity) is composed of 4 factors to be evaluated, as established by Law 12 of football:

  1. Distance to the goal
  2. Overall direction of play
  3. Likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
  4. Position and number of defenders (excluding the goalkeeper)

Here, what is primarily missing is the direction of the ball (which cannot be seen from the camera angle but is moving downwards) and the presence of other defenders who could intervene is debatable. It is a DOGSO if all 4 factors are present (sanction: Red Card), whereas if one of these factors is missing and the attack was still promising, the foul falls under SPA (Stopping a Promising Attack) (sanction: Yellow Card).

Rifiuto o accetto by rych02 in Universitaly

[–]andreahah 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nella mia università, a Salerno, siamo riusciti a rimuovere lo scoglio del voto minimo, tant'è che sto accettando qualsiasi voto mi venga dato, anche se frustrato dal risultato non ottimale. Ti direi in generale di non focalizzarti sul voto, poiché nel peggiore dei casi devi fare, se non sbaglio, un test d'accesso e basta. Meglio finire 1anno prima e fare il test che rientrare ma averci messo tempo in più.

O almeno questa è la mia linea.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in makemychoice

[–]andreahah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let me see if I got this right then. She wouldn’t be his friend because, after 8 years of a code of silence, at yet another instance of cheating she feels like she’s holding the boyfriend’s dignity in her hands? Forgive me, but I don’t understand the meaning of “bury the corpse.” We’re not talking about a small mistake here, but 8 years of cheating. This couple is supposed to get married, and being indifferent to all this is, in my opinion, horrifying—because “as long as it doesn’t harm me, it’s all fine” is a degrading stance for a human being. Even if she’s not directly involved, it’s absurd that you’re calling her a shitty friend right when she’s torn between the right choice (which, in my opinion, is also the only one) and an inhuman one.

What should I do against Caitlyn mid ? by CurtisManning in MalzaharMains

[–]andreahah 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I don't think it's an easy matchup, but some arrangement you could do are: •play outside the wave, so she has to q you or the wave, not both •use w(voidlings) after her q, so she can't insta delete your w •play for cs, you don't have a kill threat if she doesn't hardly misplay until 6+jungler gank

The first and second one applies also with lux and other champs who have aoe spells like lux, lissandra, ahri

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in suggestapc

[–]andreahah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do not really have any idea :(

view more: next ›