Huzzah!
UEFA Champions League/Europa League 16/17/18 April *** Spoilers ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
Huzzah!
Any toast going spare for spurs Rob
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,739
- Location
- Welling, London
The Hovis factory would struggle to keep up at this rateAny toast going spare for spurs Rob
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,932
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
At the end he literally did say it was a handball, only idiot to think so. The real kicker is he's one of the ones in the past few weeks who said the opposite, that those penalties given for the ball hitting an arm when it was sticking way out from the body weren't handballs, that everyone saying the opposite weren't players and just didn't understand. That players all knew those weren't handballs and refs were fools. Then tonight with a upper arm tucked right in and a forearm across his body, meaning if he had no right arm it would have hit his hip/stomach anyway, that he calls a handball. Guy is a complete and utter moron and completely biased.
The rules are the rules, the argument that "a player knows better" is from the basis that a player wants to get away with everything he can and wants the rules to work for him. As a pundit he should know that, the rules are the rules, players who hate the rules are not the best judges of rules. he's taken completely opposing and idiotic views on both that show a complete lack of understanding of the rules.
Llorente's goal was never in a million years a handball. However, bringing Llorente on almost cost them the game. He was absolutely abysmal, didn't run all game, zero effort in the press, didn't even make the effort to run a little faster to stay up with the few counter attacks. Sanchez did more in like 4 minutes than Llorente did. Spurs' bench was weak but Sanchez instead of Llorente was a no brainer, would have helped dominate in midfield, a million times stronger defensively, free up Alli to continue attacking with Son.
Eriksen was woeful again, constantly gave the ball away cheaply including almost setting up the goal that defeated them but for Silva sticking his leg out.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,739
- Location
- Welling, London
No Son or Kane for first leg is a bummer for spurs though
My brother and me happen to be in Barcelona on the 30th, in time for the semi final. I looked on stubhub and cheapest tickets are 380euros + each. I am considering it as it's once a lifetime kinda visit. What other sites should I check for tickets?
Agree with all of that (I was quoting Rio before he went full cray-cray)
The lack of depth in the squad combined with injuries means that players are shattered and there is also perverse lack of competition. Bizarrely, Llorente is getting the job done - his performance is terrible but he has a knack of getting a goal or assist .
That game has cost us a lot. We are down to Ali/Wanyama/Skipp as our available deeper midfielders. Our attack will be Llorente, Moura and Eriksen and our bench will be defenders and U21 for the first leg against Ajax
Could be bad news for Liverpool in the league, surely Spurs wont do City yet again on Saturday.
Yeah think it would crush a less experienced team but Pep is good and they’re used to getting dumped out of Europe anyway, could tear Spurs apart
They are going to be hungry for it.
Busy 14 days for spurs not much time to rest before the big day against Ajax now, having let others real us in a bit we don't have that nice cushion you would like to guarantee you CL football next season.
Barca's defending wasn't great, but still think they can outscore nearly any team they want to - even if it is heavily based at home
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,150
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Well technically City beat spurs lat night dont forget!!!
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,132
- Location
- Scotland
.I don't understand why the interpretation of the forthcoming handball rule would have cancelled Llorente's goal.
The new rule talks to scoring a goal using your arm/hand - this didn't happen, he scored with his hip
Then it goes on to say that you can't score a goal after controlling a ball with your hand/arm (intended or not) - I don't think he controlled the ball at all. The ball grazed his arm but at no point did Llorente have any control over that ball!
I completely see that no goal can be scored when the last touch was off a hand/arm. I can also see that where a ball hits and arm and bounces perfectly for a player to smash in, that needs to be disallowed.
It seems to accept that it isn't a problem if there is contact with the arm/hand but that contact had no material impact on plaiy ie control is not achieved .
The new rule talks to scoring a goal using your arm/hand - this didn't happen, he scored with his hip
Then it goes on to say that you can't score a goal after controlling a ball with your hand/arm (intended or not) - I don't think he controlled the ball at all. The ball grazed his arm but at no point did Llorente have any control over that ball!
I completely see that no goal can be scored when the last touch was off a hand/arm. I can also see that where a ball hits and arm and bounces perfectly for a player to smash in, that needs to be disallowed.
It seems to accept that it isn't a problem if there is contact with the arm/hand but that contact had no material impact on plaiy ie control is not achieved .
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,321
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
I think the best way to look at it is if the player had no arms. If Llorente had no arms the goal would have still happened. Hence why it stood. If Danny Rose had no arms in the previous game the shot would have gone towards goal. Hence the penalty.
Theyve specifically avoided drafting a rule that says it is a foul if the ball hits a player's hand/arm at any point.
Even with the new rule they have done the same - they have avoided saying that if the ball hits an attacker's hand in, say, the 30 second period before a goal is scored, it is a foul and the goal is ruled out. Therefore the intent of the legislation cannot be to rule out all goals where a ball hits a hand/arm.
Either the rule makers are really really really ignorant and don't understand basic rules of drafting legislation, or (and i think this is more likely), they are trying to allow for possibilities where goals are scored where there is incidental contact with the arm during build up.
The first rule is quite simple - if it goes in directly off your arm or hand, it is disallowed. It is the next bit, this concept of "control and possession", that is being overly simplified; a fundamental concept of being said to control or own something is the ability to influence it. For Llorente, at no point did he have control over the ball or possession of it as a result of it hitting his hand.
"What we are looking at particularly in attacking situations is where the player gets a clear unfair advantage by gaining possession or control of the ball, as a result of it making contact with their hand or arm." Where was the clear unfair advantage and when did Llorente have possession or control that ball?