UEFA Champions League/Europa League ** Spoilers ** [11/12/13 December 2018]

BaZ87 said:
You're right, it's either but he does neither imo. I'm not sure how much lower his foot could have been - it's only a few inches off the ground when he makes contact with the ball (and that's because the ball has bobbled up off the ground) and then Mertens, it's only after the contact with Mertens does it almost bounce up a few inches more. He's having to make up ground so he can't make a block tackle with his foot planted and I'm not sure it's humanly possible for him to have slid in, in any other way than he did. He's not even directly challenging Mertens - he's clearly trying to slide across the front of him and used the outside of his foot to block the ball but as both players momentum has carried them forward he's made the contact. Had he thrown himself into the tackle with unneccesary force and or been directly going into Mertens, meaning contact was guaranteed (as opposed ot across the front of him, where contact was more unfortunate than guaranteed) then I'd agree, it's a red.

I'm not convinced he gets sent off at Napoli either and it's nothing to do with the challenge or any home/away advantage - European refs have been a joke in the last couple of years. I mentioned after the PSG game, they just look for the easy decision that doesn't upset anybody too much. They both give nothing free-kicks and try, wherever possible not to send players off, no matter how bad the challenge. This challenge perfectly sums up European refs actually - at first he didn't even give a free-kick, then saw Mertens rolling around so thought he better give something.
Click to expand...

That's fair, I can't really argue with anything you've said, it's just one of those challenges I've seen players given red cards for, that's all I was getting at. VVD certainly isn't a dirty player so I have no reason to think it was anything other than him trying to play the ball, it's more unlucky than anything. I think part of the European refs being poor is that they bow to whoever pressures them the most, so that's what I meant by him being more likely to be sent off were the game in Napoli, because you'd have the whole crowd baying for him to go. That was the case in Paris in the away leg against PSG, they were confident they'd get all the nonsense decisions, and I think part of that is that the ref caved to crowd (and player) pressure.
 
If that was against a Liverpool player I'd want a red card, its seriously unlucky for VVD as its an unreal interception and simply couldn't get hit foot like an inch lower. Its such a weird one because 99/100 you win the ball and either don't touch the player or actually your leg nails them and its not deemed as severe.

But yeah its better he doesn't attempt the tackle if its going to hit someone's ankle like that.

Not related but still laughing at Merten's in general, pre match comments, gets nailed early on, does nothing and goes out :D
 
BaZ87 said:
I've never known somebody that can write so much in reply to something somebody didn't say. As soon as you grasp basic comprehension then I'll start taking physics lessons from you DM.

As I said, VVD's challenge didn't use excessive force. You will see 10 challenges per match with more force than that.
Click to expand...


Right, you didn't say there was very little force because he was grounded (complete nonsense) and you didn't reply to that claiming he stopped (nope) after 1 metre (nope) and got up himself in one movement, which you were implying again meant there was little force. Right, everything I typed was in response to those statements specifically and apparently you didn't say those things specifically so I can't comprehend english.


BaZ87 said:
He did make contact :confused: And there was no injury as there was very little force in the challenge. His body weight is fully grounded and he's not gone flying into the challenge.
Click to expand...


BaZ87 said:
That's simply nonsense. He's gone in with so much force that he's been able to stop himself and stand up in 1 movement within a metre (as if a meter was a lot?) of making contact with the ball:

edit: There was absolutely nothing that VVD could do differently in that situation. He has to make that tackle and he's not gone in with excessive force nor was he out of control. The height of the ball has meant he's foot is at that height and unfortunately he cannot stop instantly after making the challenge, that coupled with Mertens run has lead to the contact. You cannot always stop physical contact but it wasn't done maliciously nor was there any unnecessary force in the challenge - it was just unfortunate. It's a yellow.
Click to expand...



Nope you didn't say these things at all. I left the edit in also as I hadn't seen it before. What could he do differently. Errm, not go in that hard, not lock out his leg, not go to ground at all... but no he had no choice and couldn't have done anything differently. Wow, the excuse making for a Liverpool player is insane. Everything about it was unnecessary, the way he launched in meant regardless of getting the ball he was going to destroy the player, it wasn't unfortunate, it was completely and utterly avoidable and not at all necessary.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Right, you didn't say there was very little force because he was grounded....
Click to expand...
No, learn to read. I said there was little force in the challenge - his body was grounded and he didn't fly into the challenge. For those that find it difficult to comprehend simple things, being grounded doesn't therefore mean there was little force in the challenge, it's one of two factors.
 
BaZ87 said:
No, learn to read. I said there was little force in the challenge - his body was grounded and he didn't fly into the challenge. For those that find it difficult to comprehend simple things, being grounded doesn't therefore mean there was little force in the challenge, it's one of two factors.
Click to expand...

BaZ87 said:
He did make contact :confused: And there was no injury as there was very little force in the challenge. His body weight is fully grounded and he's not gone flying into the challenge.
Click to expand...


I quoted it for you, you literally said his bodyweight was fully grounded. You have a comprehensive lack of understanding of physics and how force is applied. If you're standing still all your weight and force is working down towards the ground. If you're moving forwards you're body weight has a momentum both horizontally and vertically. Being 'grounded' doesn't mean anything. Aside from the fact that he wasn't fully grounded and only his knee and one arm was on the ground but he was sliding forwards fast and the massive majority of his body weight was working forwards into Merten's, not downwards into the ground.

You said there was little force and your justification was he was 'grounded', this is what all my responses have been based on. You think somehow the first sentence makes the second irrelevant even though you justified the first sentence with your second.

Also the first thing I said, literally the first sentence was

He's fully grounded so there isn't much force in it?
Click to expand...

Both referring to your statement of there was little force in it and the justification, because he was on the ground. anyway, bored now. As usual you try to backtrack via pedantry rather than discussion or admission.
 
drunkenmaster said:
I quoted it for you, you literally said his bodyweight was fully grounded....
Click to expand...
Omg! I really have no interest in going round and round in circles. You have spent all day arguing that being grounded doesn't therefore mean that there can't be any force in the challenge. I never said that was the case!

What I said was very clear and I thought very simple. I said there was little force in the challenge and gave the TWO reasons why there was no force. The force can either come from his body weight and gravity (hence the "he was grounded" argument) or it can be the physical force he puts into the challenge. There can be great force in a challenge that's completely on the ground if the player puts physical force into it and their can be great force in a challenge simply by leaving the ground. They are two separate factors! VVD is grounded hence his full body weight isn't going through his leg into the challenge and he didn't put a huge amount of physical force into the challenge by running in like a maniac.
drunkenmaster said:
As usual you try to backtrack via pedantry rather than discussion or admission.
Click to expand...
No, as usual you cannot understand simple points and spend ages writing rubbish in response to something you didn't understand.
 
BaZ87 said:
Omg! I really have no interest in going round and round in circles. You have spent all day arguing that being grounded doesn't therefore mean that there can't be any force in the challenge. I never said that was the case!

What I said was very clear and I thought very simple. I said there was little force in the challenge and gave the TWO reasons why there was no force. The force can either come from his body weight and gravity (hence the "he was grounded" argument) or it can be the physical force he puts into the challenge. There can be great force in a challenge that's completely on the ground if the player puts physical force into it and their can be great force in a challenge simply by leaving the ground. They are two separate factors! VVD is grounded hence his full body weight isn't going through his leg into the challenge and he didn't put a huge amount of physical force into the challenge by running in like a maniac.

No, as usual you cannot understand simple points and spend ages writing rubbish in response to something you didn't understand.
Click to expand...


So even though after you spending half the day saying I can't comprehend english, and after I comment to explain what that your initial post was a statement followed by a justification... you say I'm wrong, then immediately confirm that yes, being grounded was just justification for saying there was little force in the challenge. At this point you're just coming across as stupid and argumentative. You literally just argued I'm wrong again by confirming exactly what I stated before.

Also for the last time you don't understand physics, leaving the ground doesn't create great force, jumping up next to someone and brushing them coming down isn't dangerous, jumping in with speed does. being on the ground doesn't create great force, moving fast such that the slide still on the ground has lots of speed. In both cases it's body weight, in both cases the force is from horizontal speed. Being 'grounded' is a random piece of bull you came up with that means nothing. Unless you are stopped, the majority of your weight is working in the direction of your motion. When you're sliding along the ground most of your body weight is working in the direction you're sliding, not into the ground.

In both cases the force and danger comes from the momentum, the direction of movement and the force behind it. being on the ground or in the air makes exactly no difference here. Except you will slow down quicker when on the ground due to friction but if the contact is long before you've slowed down, it's basically irrelevant.
 
drunkenmaster said:
...
Click to expand...

Christ on a bike! How can it be so difficult to understand? Saying there was little force because his body weight was grounded AND he didn't fly into the challenge is not the same as saying because his body weight was grounded there was no force in the challenge!

You are right on one thing though, I am stupid. I'm an absolute moron for replying to you earlier today and wasting my time trying to explain something to you that you simply cannot comprehend. I'm not sure if there's a mental block or language barrier or you simply won't admit that you misunderstood my initial post but whatever the reason, I should have known that I'd end up losing the will to live debating anything with you.
 
Qarabag, and yes looking at the stadium you're one of maybe 16 people watching :p

Anyone watching notice one of the academy guys called Saka? Twitter seems to really enjoy the look of him.
 
Not sure what’s more bizzare Baz entering into discussion with DM or Andy sort of backing Spurs. Next people will be telling me Santa isn’t real :eek:
 
Shamikebab said:
How are the two red bull teams in the same group? Is that not a conflict of interest?
Click to expand...
Technically Salzburg aren't owned by Red Bull, they're now just sponsored by them iinm. IIRC it came to a head just over a year ago when there was the possibility of them both qualifying for the CL and Salzburg done some massive restructuring to prevent any issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom