The Liverpool FC Thread XII
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Lúcio
i would've preferred you to respond to the entire post rather than isolate a single sentence that does in to way portray my own opinion.
if you're going to disagree in whatever fashion, please do so in a more detailed post rather than aiming to take cheap shots.
if you're going to disagree in whatever fashion, please do so in a more detailed post rather than aiming to take cheap shots.
Saying ridiculous is suddenly a cheap shot. Wow.
The reason I didn't explain further is because what you said was in my opinion very stupid. Controversy is in no way a good addition to football. The game should be fair. Just because it is a part of football doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. Just because people talk about it doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. I'd rather they try to improve it and fail than not try at all.
Also the contradiction is unreal:
Original post by Lúcio
leave things as they are since controversy is a part of football and gives major talking points
Original post by Lúcio
as a fan, what i hate most in the world is losing unjustly - the game changing from a terrible refereeing decision.
Is Sterling going to start tomorrow?
(Totally not asking this for my Fantasy team)
(Totally not asking this for my Fantasy team)
Original post by sr90
Is Sterling going to start tomorrow?
(Totally not asking this for my Fantasy team)
(Totally not asking this for my Fantasy team)
lol of course he is. With Sturridge, Can and Allen out (iirc), Coutinho will move back into centre-mid, with Sterling and either Lallana/Markovic will start on the other wing. I would think Lallana would play the first 60 minutes if fit enough, with Markovic coming on for the last 30.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by TH3-FL45H
Saying ridiculous is suddenly a cheap shot. Wow.
The reason I didn't explain further is because what you said was in my opinion very stupid. Controversy is in no way a good addition to football. The game should be fair. Just because it is a part of football doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. Just because people talk about it doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. I'd rather they try to improve it and fail than not try at all.
Also the contradiction is unreal:
The reason I didn't explain further is because what you said was in my opinion very stupid. Controversy is in no way a good addition to football. The game should be fair. Just because it is a part of football doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. Just because people talk about it doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. I'd rather they try to improve it and fail than not try at all.
Also the contradiction is unreal:
that's your opinion i guess, however i don't think you understand what i'm saying properly.
i never said i personally think we should leave it as it is, i said the two options should be either to leave it as it is now or to fix it in the right way (i.e: give review opportunities to referees/their team rather than giving managers the ability to appeal).
i was merely trying to justify why some people may want to keep controversy (e.g: talking points), even though i don't agree myself.
it's called seeing things from other's point of view.
if something is my opinion, i will say "personally" or "in my opinion" - your error was assuming that the "leave it as it is" quote was what i believe should be done, because my view is the entire opposite.
in the future, i advise that you take more care to make sure you understand fully before insulting somebody's post, however i'll talk no more about that.
i agree with you 100% - i don't like controversy.
i don't like losing a game because somebody can't do their job.
i don't care if it would be considered overly strict to monitor and review significant events in real time
as far as i'm concerned, the team who overall played the best football should win a match, not because a referee ruined a game by making a bad call.
Original post by Lúcio
that's your opinion i guess, however i don't think you understand what i'm saying properly.
i never said i personally think we should leave it as it is, i said the two options should be either to leave it as it is now or to fix it in the right way (i.e: give review opportunities to referees/their team rather than giving managers the ability to appeal).
i was merely trying to justify why some people may want to keep controversy (e.g: talking points), even though i don't agree myself.
it's called seeing things from other's point of view.
if something is my opinion, i will say "personally" or "in my opinion" - your error was assuming that the "leave it as it is" quote was what i believe should be done, because my view is the entire opposite.
in the future, i advise that you take more care to make sure you understand fully before insulting somebody's post, however i'll talk no more about that.
i agree with you 100% - i don't like controversy.
i don't like losing a game because somebody can't do their job.
i don't care if it would be considered overly strict to monitor and review significant events in real time
as far as i'm concerned, the team who overall played the best football should win a match, not because a referee ruined a game by making a bad call.
i never said i personally think we should leave it as it is, i said the two options should be either to leave it as it is now or to fix it in the right way (i.e: give review opportunities to referees/their team rather than giving managers the ability to appeal).
i was merely trying to justify why some people may want to keep controversy (e.g: talking points), even though i don't agree myself.
it's called seeing things from other's point of view.
if something is my opinion, i will say "personally" or "in my opinion" - your error was assuming that the "leave it as it is" quote was what i believe should be done, because my view is the entire opposite.
in the future, i advise that you take more care to make sure you understand fully before insulting somebody's post, however i'll talk no more about that.
i agree with you 100% - i don't like controversy.
i don't like losing a game because somebody can't do their job.
i don't care if it would be considered overly strict to monitor and review significant events in real time
as far as i'm concerned, the team who overall played the best football should win a match, not because a referee ruined a game by making a bad call.
If you were trying to talk about what others think you would not put it in the imperative
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by TH3-FL45H
If you were trying to talk about what others think you would not put it in the imperative
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
He was simply being the devils advocate....
That is the general opposing arguement to such a system though. Football wouldn't be the same without controversy but I would love for the system to be implemented if it means **** decisions like Sterlings "offside" goal against Man City at the Etihad last season were overturned.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by TH3-FL45H
Saying ridiculous is suddenly a cheap shot. Wow.
The reason I didn't explain further is because what you said was in my opinion very stupid. Controversy is in no way a good addition to football. The game should be fair. Just because it is a part of football doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. Just because people talk about it doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. I'd rather they try to improve it and fail than not try at all.
Also the contradiction is unreal:
The reason I didn't explain further is because what you said was in my opinion very stupid. Controversy is in no way a good addition to football. The game should be fair. Just because it is a part of football doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. Just because people talk about it doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed. I'd rather they try to improve it and fail than not try at all.
Also the contradiction is unreal:
Flash he will not listen he's got a victim complex.
He's the best troll to have graced this forum. annoying that the ignore list allows me to see quotes.
Original post by jam278
Flash he will not listen he's got a victim complex.
He's the best troll to have graced this forum. annoying that the ignore list allows me to see quotes.
He's the best troll to have graced this forum. annoying that the ignore list allows me to see quotes.
Surely not better than tommyjw
Those 5 page arguments
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by TH3-FL45H
not on jws level but he didn't have a victim complex he was just a super ****.
miss him jokes how he tried to change his name so he can post his bull**** on here
Tommyjw was biased beyond anyones belief and really was an utter dick, would personally insult you if you disagree with his views...
Would of love to have him here last season so we could of wummed his ass.
Would of love to have him here last season so we could of wummed his ass.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by samir12
Tommyjw was biased beyond anyones belief and really was an utter dick, would personally insult you if you disagree with his views...
Would of love to have him here last season so we could of wummed his ass.
Would of love to have him here last season so we could of wummed his ass.
jw knew his team were going to do ****.
The idea of leaving things how they are because "controversy is part of the game" is so ****ing stupid
Original post by sr90
Basically...
- Ribery announces retirement from international football
- Deschamps is bitter and calls him up anyway
- Plaitini threatens to ban Ribery from club games if he ignores the call up, saying players don't get to choose when they retire.
- Ribery announces retirement from international football
- Deschamps is bitter and calls him up anyway
- Plaitini threatens to ban Ribery from club games if he ignores the call up, saying players don't get to choose when they retire.
except... they do
what a ****
Original post by TH3-FL45H
If you were trying to talk about what others think you would not put it in the imperative
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
come on man.
this is what i hate about TSR - you try to get a talking point started, something that fans of any club can talk about with bias and this is the kind of response you get?
no victim complex here but i can't decide whether it's a negative perception on me that means people must ridicule my posts more for lols than anything else, or if you were just bored and wanted a laugh.
the funny thing is that i completely agree with your views on the subject matter, but rather than expanding and developing the talking point with your own input, we're arguing about something ridiculously trivial as a result of misunderstanding...
Original post by samir12
He was simply being the devils advocate....
That is the general opposing arguement to such a system though. Football wouldn't be the same without controversy but I would love for the system to be implemented if it means **** decisions like Sterlings "offside" goal against Man City at the Etihad last season were overturned.
That is the general opposing arguement to such a system though. Football wouldn't be the same without controversy but I would love for the system to be implemented if it means **** decisions like Sterlings "offside" goal against Man City at the Etihad last season were overturned.
exactly, how is it that you understand what i was saying completely but the other guy doesn't?
not sure what jam's doing though; all he has been doing the last few weeks is post desperately mentioning his ignore list and the users on there.
don't really see the point in his ignore list if all he does is read the post's of his ignored users anyway...
but that's off topic, back to the original talking point.
i completely agree with you - for me i hate controversy, i hate watching a match knowing a certain team should have won, yet the scoreline shows otherwise.
don't get me wrong, i like upsets and i love the unpredictablity of football, but only when said things aren't acheived through unnecessary controversy.
however we all know that people at the top of FIFA hate change.
i agree to an extent that you shouldn't change a game too much too fast, but football is constantly evolving; new tactics arte being implemented, players have been getting stronger, costing more money over the years.
the rules must follow suit.
Original post by manchesterunited15
The idea of leaving things how they are because "controversy is part of the game" is so ****ing stupid
exactly, i agree - controversy isn't needed at all.
i was merely playing devils advocate (as samir stated) and offering an example about what some people who oppose the changes could argue.
i personally don't believe it, but as always you must think about the perspective of others.
Original post by Lúcio
exactly, i agree - controversy isn't needed at all.
i was merely playing devils advocate (as samir stated) and offering an example about what some people who oppose the changes could argue.
i personally don't believe it, but as always you must think about the perspective of others.
i was merely playing devils advocate (as samir stated) and offering an example about what some people who oppose the changes could argue.
i personally don't believe it, but as always you must think about the perspective of others.
Yeah I know you weren't saying it, but a lot of people do
It annoys me when the analysis of the game is mostly spent on whether decisions were correct
Original post by manchesterunited15
Yeah I know you weren't saying it, but a lot of people do
It annoys me when the analysis of the game is mostly spent on whether decisions were correct
It annoys me when the analysis of the game is mostly spent on whether decisions were correct
ahhh right, fair enough man
yeah exactly, why are we spending so much time on events that could be avoided quite simply with an instant review system?
often i'll watch a full match, watch MOTD later and notice that things are missing that they could've shown - oh yeah, they've spent too long on a stupid penalty decision so there's no time to highlight how good a particular player was in the game.
but this is what i'm saying - blatter has always seemed to be against change (i.e: goalline technology) but suddenly now that he wants to be re-elected, he's all for giving the people what they want (kind of).
it's the right technology but the wrong proposal of using it.
(edited 9 years ago)
Blatter is obviously promoting the system for the wrong reasons but atleast it's a positive change so we will see how it pans out.
Original post by samir12
Blatter is obviously promoting the system for the wrong reasons but atleast it's a positive change so we will see how it pans out.
i agree - i hope some form of review technology is implemented, but please don't make it be manager appeals.
i just worry that blatter doesn't want to seem like he's copying rubgy for example, even though their system is near perfect in my eyes.
Think it's cheap that blatter is using video replay analysis to go for re election but either way I can't complain if it's coming into place. No more ****ty offside goals and fake penalties
Also I'm all for manager/player appeals just as long as they are limited. e.g 3 per game per team at max
Posted from TSR Mobile
Also I'm all for manager/player appeals just as long as they are limited. e.g 3 per game per team at max
Posted from TSR Mobile
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- HELP !! Deciding whether I should do an apprenticeship or go to university for chem
- Working Class / Left wing football clubs?
- What is Your Favorite Football Club
- Bundesliga
- The Liverpool FC Thread XVII
- Liverpool vs Bristol for history
- UCAS Éducation Section
- Whats everyone up to?
- Latin Scansion in the Aeneid
- What team do you support and why?
- School Transcripts for UCAS Application- CBSE
- A Levels 2023 Personal Blog
- diary of a first year medic
- Year 13 Latin resources
- Make it More Princess-ey !!
- Cambridge requirements for Indian students
- Indian cbse student gets stuck on UCAS
- do i need to take an english test?
- Things EA Sports FC Needs To Change From FC 24
- rosarian v a-levels. ~r's gyg 2024⭐
