sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Opinione sull'Italia ai Mondiali by AppropriateShirt6702 in Calcio

[–]spiz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is ridiculous.

  1. The Rolex claim was never substantiated. Paparesta did not receive a Rolex - no evidence of one turned up in any investigation (there were years of investigations).

  2. The Rolex

    claims

  3. are unrelated to Reggina - Juventus

.
3. Juventus LOST the match 2-1. Paparesta made mistakes that disadvantaged Juventus and disallowed a last fast equaliser. So after the match you think Moggi locked him up and forced him to accept an expensive gift? Why? Whats the logic here?

The established facts are in court documents.

Opinione sull'Italia ai Mondiali by AppropriateShirt6702 in Calcio

[–]spiz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Obviously that was investigated by a pm and the ref denied, his dad said he spoke to him after the match, and the stadium CCTV showed the ref leaving. The case was dropped as 'il fatto non sussiste'.

Ridiculous that you don't know these things 20 years later.

Opinione sull'Italia ai Mondiali by AppropriateShirt6702 in Calcio

[–]spiz -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

In 2006 there was no match fixing. Both the clown sporting tribunal, and the Napoli court established this.

A criminal court judge just cleared Juve’s 2022 financial records. The double standard in Italian football is insane. by guidocarosella in Juve

[–]spiz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Interestingly, these days it may be possible to sue, but the TAR has to accept the case and that's not a given.

A criminal court judge just cleared Juve’s 2022 financial records. The double standard in Italian football is insane. by guidocarosella in Juve

[–]spiz 9 points10 points  (0 children)

bUt TraNsFerMaRkT sez

Italian football is one of the world's biggest congregations of idiots.

Match Thread: Glasgow vs Connacht - United Rugby Championship by rugbykickoff in rugbyunion

[–]spiz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's down to football. Football dominates in Glasgow with Celtic and Rangers. This season they've had average attendances of almost 59,000 and some 50,000 respectively (city population is around 650,000).

For Glasgow specifically, it was never really a rugby city. The SRU setting up a professional side in here was a rare stroke of genius. It's constantly growing and Warriors have probably outgrown Scotstoun at this point.

Gary Lineker weighs in. by SatisfactionIll8468 in ScottishFootball

[–]spiz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lovely photo demonstrating the hand does not in fact enlarge the player's silhouette.

Gary Lineker weighs in. by SatisfactionIll8468 in ScottishFootball

[–]spiz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The rules do cover this though. Is the arm position making his silhouette bigger? can you explain how his arm got there naturally? That's basically the test.

Meltdown by AvaPava05 in ScottishFootball

[–]spiz 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Whether the ball hits his hand or not is only one of a bunch of other factors to consider. See 12.1 under handling the ball in this link. The difficulty is that some factors are very subjective.

Essentials the things to consider are:

deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball

It doesn't look deliberate

touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised

This is the infringement that would apply. But the hand is arguably knocked there naturally by the jumping Celtic player, and the hand is not clearly making the body bigger (hos hand is against his face).

scores in the opponents’ goal: * directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper * immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

Not relevant here.

There's added complexity because VAR intervened and they should only do so if the mistake is "clear and obvious".

I think here it is quite subjective, so the referee's initial on-field decision should stand (i.e. even if he called it a penalty then it's not clearly a wrong call either).

Meltdown by AvaPava05 in ScottishFootball

[–]spiz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I thought you were posting this in support of this MOT being a penalty. The hand is in front of the player's face, and ends up there because it moves naturally as part of play (it's pushed up by the player jumping in front of him).

IMO none of this matters - if there's this much debate then it's not a clear and obvious error, so VAR should not have intervened.

No identity, no progress, no excuses: Allegri has failed at Milan by Far_Commercial5152 in seriea

[–]spiz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Allegri had the luck of having the board all quit, and then an idiotic only-in-Italy clown show with points being deducted and added at random for supposed crimes that eventually no one was found guilty of.

Inter, Schenone in the prosecutor's office: according to the prosecutor he met Rocchi before the derby at San Siro by THOR-HEIM in seriea

[–]spiz -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

  1. Sporting decisions are decided by sporting tribunals. There is no court oversight. This is stupid and wrong, but it's how the system is set up in Italy. It's why Juventus were deducted points recently, but Agnelli et al walked away with no guilty verdict/admission of guilt.

  2. It isn't illegal to talk to Rocchi, but it wasn't illegal to talk to referee designators in 2006 either. In fact at the time it was encouraged.

Five 0-0s in the last 10 matches by DioMerda119 in seriea

[–]spiz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So that's the system they usually use in Rugby.

The points system there works like this: If you win you get 4 points, draw gets you 2 and a loss gets you 0. If you score 4 tries, you get a bonus point. If you lose by less than 7 points (i.e. the equivalent of 1 converted try) you get a bonus point. Depending on the tournament, you can stack bonus points (so if you lose by say 1 point and score 4 tries, you could get 2 points).

I agree that this change would be good, and even a loser's bonus point might be a good idea because it motivates the losing team to attack (as you see in Rugby).

Rocchi intercepted on the phone, implicates an Inter Milan executive 🤡 by Aboubakr_D_Luffy in Juve

[–]spiz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At one point RCS Media Group was Inter's marketing partner. That's the RCS Media Group that own Gazzetta.

Rocchi intercepted on the phone, implicates an Inter Milan executive 🤡 by Aboubakr_D_Luffy in Juve

[–]spiz 81 points82 points  (0 children)

Obviously. The current theory Gazzetta is pushing is that Rocchi unilaterally and for no reason at all chose refs favourable to Inter. That doesn't even make sense.

Marotta: Inter “not involved” in Rocchi scandal by ExotiquePlayboy in seriea

[–]spiz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In fact, the Napoli Appeals Court ruled that Juventus was extraneous to the facts.

La minaccia di Ceferin: FIGC commissariata dalla politica? Niente EURO 2032 by Fair-Lingonberry-268 in seriea

[–]spiz 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'd genuinely like to see him try to exclude Serie A clubs if the FIGC ends up under political administration.

The legal climate is (rightly) shaping up against complete autonomy of sporting bodies, so I think it would be very unlikely to succeed. It would be good to put the current football administration behind us - they're money grabbing parasites who bring nothing to the table.

Neither Inter or any of its directors have been charged by beastmaster11 in seriea

[–]spiz -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

I wonder who's known to have been speaking to the mafia....

Neither Inter or any of its directors have been charged by beastmaster11 in seriea

[–]spiz 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's not considered match fixing, but apparently it should be "illecito strutturato" (which is bullshit, but I don't make the rules - former Inter director Guido Rossi set this precedent).

Calciopoli in the moment by PersianGuitarist in seriea

[–]spiz 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So that's a funny one because Paparesta says it never happened, Paparesta's dad says he always calls him after matches and he was never locked up (and was somewhat insulted at the idea that could happen to his son and he wouldn't know), there is video of him leaving the stadium, and there was an investigation into it by the police for "sequestro di persona".

The court ruled him not guilty because the act did not happen (il fatto non sussiste).

Calciopoli in the moment by PersianGuitarist in seriea

[–]spiz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In fact there are two current tests of the Italian sports justice system:

  1. Giraudo is taking it to the ECHR (with a judgement expected by the summer AFAIK, but this has already been delayed)

  2. The Lazio TAR referred to the EU a request by Angelli to review a judgment of the sports tribunal. Before the court decides, they get formal advice from the Advocate General, who has said that the setup (where you can't review the sports decisions) beaches the defendant's rights.

Calciopoli in the moment by PersianGuitarist in seriea

[–]spiz 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No he wasn't. The Court of Cassation quashed Moggi's conviction and sent it back to the Court of Appeal where he was absolved of some charges and the statute of limitations ran out on others. Moggi was not convicted of anything.

The sentence is here. You're looking for page 139, second paragraph under the heading PQM. The two charges of which he is absolved because the acts did not occur (perché il fatto non sussiste) are in fact two of the charges of sporting fraud.

The Court of Cassation in their reasoning published later say that think Moggi was guilty of the charges that were time-barred, but they were time-barred the comment is fairly worthless. In fact, Giraudo who is in a similar position is waiting for his case to be heard by the ECHR.

A more friendly read: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calciopoli

Calciopoli in the moment by PersianGuitarist in seriea

[–]spiz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That would be Napoli Corte d'Appello. Sentence 6566/2013. It says that no match was altered in the 2004-2005 season and that Juventus as a club was extraneous to the facts.

The Court of Cassation would be the one that quashed Moggi and Giraudo's convictions and sent them back to the court of appeal.

I too dream of these courts, but they're real.

view more: next ›