QuoteYes.
But there is a difference between 'should' and 'will'.
Should there be a replay?
(a) Yes
(b) No, the referee's decision is final.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
Yes.
But there is a difference between 'should' and 'will'.
You've got no fans.
You know what? Let's not have a poll.
Let's get out of this mindset of Sky text ins and radio phone ins and "We want your opinion". Let's instead get into a mindset that if you're wrong, you're wrong, and your wrong opinion is worthless.
The rules of the game are quite straightforward. We weren't crying out offering Georgia a replay when this happened -
- so the notion of demanding one from the French is utter hypocrisy. Why can people not accept this?
NO Replay.Originally Posted by MeathDrog
Henry Should be sanctioned.
Officials Should be moved back down the list
Last edited by Junior; 20/11/2009 at 3:57 PM.
I thought you were off the drink Ronnie?
"No, I drink to help me mind my own business....can I get you one? (c) Ronnie Drew
its not the same situation because of intent. its simple
the french goal came about after the clearest case of cheating you will ever see exacerbated by a poor ref decision. the penalty in the georgia game came about by a poor refs decision full stop.
us asking for georgia to be allowed replay is like expecting henry to go up to the ref just after the handball to tell him what he did. never going to happen.
What Irishman cheated for the penalty?
Should is different to will. I think we all know there won't be a replay.
I don't think there should be. I am embarrassed by the politicians getting involved. Referee's decision is final. Terrible and all as it is, I wouldn't favour a replay (apart from the fact that we'd lose it). Where do you draw the line?
Should there be a replay?
(a) Yes
(b) No, the referee's decision is final. 1 vote
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
No, the referee's decision is final
You can't go changing the rules of the game to suit us, simplez
If we were that interested in fair play (and the fair play statutes haev been quoted here I don't know how many times), we'd have acknowledged it was never a penalty and deliberately missed.
The referee's decision is final, and it has to be final to avoid mayhem. It really is as clear-cut as that.
I think magnitude of the decision and also the cheating element here are different to the georgia situation. The Fair play argument is similar, without the cheating element.
I vote for a replay.
As much as it pains me to say this but I'm fine with the no replay. It would start a dangerous precedent for the game.
I would happily trade a no replay for some serious action by FIFA on this. Something must be done to prevent this from happening again in such an important game. FFS, if other sports can effectively use technology to prevent such mistakes from happening, then why can't soccer? Either that or put an extra Ref in the box.
"Jacques Santini...will be greeted in every dugout of the country by "one-nil, one-nil" - Clive Tyldsley, 89th minute of France-England June 13, 2004.
"Ooooohhhh Nooooooo" Bobby Robson 91st minute.
Should there be a replay?
(a) Yes - 1 vote
(b) No, the referee's decision is final. 4 votes
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
The Georgia Penalty
Significalntly more fortuitous but nonetheless similar to getting a wrongly awarded free or throw in. It cant be classed in the same way as a player, whether acting instinctively or not, uses his hand to position the ball to gain an advantage. Are we seroiusly suggesting that players should have a moral fortitude that everytime they get the rub of the green they should put the hand up and immediatley call attention to it.
Now start looking at incidents - say the Eduardo dive - where it's hard to tell if a player was deliberately cheating or if it was just a bad ref call. You have people sueing for replays all over the shop. You have players sueing for slander if a replay is given (thus saying they were cheating).
Again, if Ireland were worried about fair play against Georgia, they could have overruled the ref's decision by missing the penalty. You could argue Ireland cheated to win that game. The players knew it wasn't a penalty, but scored it anyway.
I do agree Henry should pick up a two match ban or something (first two games of the World Cup). But people need to realise a replay would be setting an untterly unacceptable precedent in the game.
and what if the tv subsequently showed it should have been a pen in that match? i agree it wasnt now but in the stadium at the time i didnt know what it was for and i doubt the players did either. your argument is very weak
To be honest I still don't think it is unbelievably obvious that the ball didn't touch the Georgians arm at all and the player did lean his arm towards it as well + what jbyrne said
Yeah I agree. Once the match is over the Georgians should accept it and the Irish should realise that there is nothing more they can do, it's done and dusted so there's no need to offer a replay
two different situations. one was deliberate cheating and the other was a ref error. errors are part of the game but cheating is not
It was a poor call by the linesman that gave France the goal, not Henry's handball
The point, which loads seem to miss, is that if you wnat to talk about fair play and bringing a sense of justice to football then you have to back up your words with actions. Where were the FAI when Georgia were undone by an error from the referee? Where was the sense of injustice then?
If I remember correctly most Irish fans admitted it was one of the worst decisions they'd ever seen with a grin on their face
That's what I find so hypocritical about this angry mob you all have going at the moment
we were also on the end of a bad decision (andrews goal) in that game and id say most fans thought the two evened themselves out
so henrys handball had nothing to do with the goal? what drivel
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks