Page 164 of 165 FirstFirst ... 64114154162163164165 LastLast
Results 2,446 to 2,460 of 2475

Thread: Sergio Ramos

  1. #2446
    Senior Member
    FinBarcelonafan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Turku
    Posts
    7,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe View Post
    So it's a case of doping standing on the fact that someone didn't submit the right paper?
    Right before CL final you forget. Hmm. Good timing to forget.

  2. #2447
    Senior Member
    Catta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,120
    Real Madrid and cheating in the CL, wow, color me surprised.

  3. #2448
    Villarato!
    Wolfe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,383
    Quote Originally Posted by FinBarcelonafan View Post
    Right before CL final you forget. Hmm. Good timing to forget.
    Well it isn't good because if it got filed there wouldn't be a case since the substance isn't illegal.

    Basically some accountant forgot to send an email that would make a whole thing moot and journalists only have a story since he didn't do it
    Last edited by Wolfe; 8th March 2020 at 12:11 PM.
    People are boring.

  4. #2449
    Villarato!
    Wolfe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,383
    He's playing on BDO level almost through the entire season.

    Won't be mentioned though will it?
    People are boring.

  5. #2450
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,707
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe View Post
    He's playing on BDO level almost through the entire season.

    Won't be mentioned though will it?

    Maybe, if we somehow knock out City.
    League play isnt enough for a top 3 if you are a cb.

  6. #2451
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,707
    Wait, people in here said Ramos is suspended for Bilbao?
    I cant find anything about it when searching, so i guess he is not?

  7. #2452
    Senior Member
    Vilarrubi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Morten View Post
    Wait, people in here said Ramos is suspended for Bilbao?
    I cant find anything about it when searching, so i guess he is not?
    Yeah he’s on 9 so not suspended.

  8. #2453
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,707
    Suspended for Alaves, so who is gonna take the penalty in that match?

  9. #2454
    Valverde Cultist
    Messigician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,474
    The ice man

  10. #2455
    You're welcome
    Horatio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Basque Country
    Posts
    9,209
    Quote Originally Posted by Messigician View Post
    The ice man
    Disrespectful towards Bergkamp.

  11. #2456
    Villarato!
    Wolfe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,383
    BTW
    an official statement was made by RFEF's Arbitration Committee (CTA) member Carlos Velasco Carballo regarding Iturralde's allusion that Spanish referees are confused by the rules translated from English and that IFAB (International Football Association Board) deems the Raul Garcia incident to be a penalty - categorically refuting this is the case and doing so with support of IFAB officials:

    Note this is translated from Spanish, anything in [] I've added
    "Recklessness" is not, in itself, a violation - it must be linked to an offense or violation, since "reckless" is simply a judgement of the "seriousness" of the violation. So, the referee must first decide if an infraction has occurred [which must fall under 1 of the following 7 criteria]:

    • body check;
    • jump on [a player];
    • kick or try [to kick];
    • push;
    • hitting or trying [to hit] (head butts included);
    • make [an entry/challenge] or contest the ball;
    • trip or try [to trip]

    Only if the referee decides that one of the previous offenses has occurred, the following section will be considered referring to carelessness, recklessness or excessive force, also necessary to sanction the direct or penalty kick.

    Concluding and as a literal summary of IFAB's position in this regard:

    • If there is accidental contact and it is not considered by the referee as one of the 7 listed offenses, recklessness or excessive force are NOT CONSIDERED or NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. ”
    • "Recklessness" is not an offense: it must be linked to an offense, as it is a measure of the "seriousness / intensity" of the offense.
    • The Spanish referees and this CTA cannot have been confused about a translation of a term that should not even be taken into account in case there is no first offense or fault.

    In this sense, a stomp can only be evaluated under the heading of fouls for “making an entry or contesting the ball”, in English: “tackle or challenge”.

    In both cases, the Laws of the Game are clear on page 198:
    "Tackle-Tackle: Dispute with the foot for the ball (at ground level or in the air)."
    "Disputa-Challenge: Action with which a player fights with an opponent for a close ball in order to take it away from them."

    Therefore, in the specific case of a stomp, the dispute of the ball must be considered so that it can be considered a “Tackle / Challenge”, and therefore can be punishable.

    In case of accidental stomping if it does not affect the opponent's immediate ability to play or dispute the ball, there is no offense, there is no infraction and the interpretation of recklessness or not is absolutely indifferent, on which it is stated that our group is supposedly confused.

    Finally, if a stomp occurs without the dispute of the ball and it is not accidental but intentional, the referee must assess if there is violent conduct that requires a direct red card according to the rule 12 established on page 125.

    All of the above is NOT AN OPINION or an interpretation of this by CTA, but the official position of the body in charge of preparing the Laws of the Game, IFAB, which is absolutely consistent, as it cannot be otherwise, with this Referees Committee and its arbitrators who have not made any translation errors.
    https://as.com/futbol/2020/07/07/pri...85_437700.html


    -------------------------


    In other words, the referees in the VAR room deemed this accidental, for which there's very good supporting evidence, it's not been a dispute for the ball hence VAR couldn't be used if the act doesn't constitute violent conduct, which it obviously wasn't, thereby no foul.

    Case closed.
    Last edited by Wolfe; 8th July 2020 at 05:59 PM.
    People are boring.

  12. #2457
    Senior Member
    Vilarrubi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe View Post
    BTW
    an official statement was made by RFEF's Arbitration Committee (CTA) member Carlos Velasco Carballo regarding Iturralde's allusion that Spanish referees are confused by the rules translated from English and that IFAB (International Football Association Board) deems the Raul Garcia incident to be a penalty - categorically refuting this is the case and doing so with support of IFAB officials:

    Note this is translated from Spanish, anything in [] I've added


    https://as.com/futbol/2020/07/07/pri...85_437700.html


    -------------------------


    In other words, the referees in the VAR room deemed this accidental, for which there's very good supporting evidence, it's not been a dispute for the ball hence VAR couldn't be used if the act doesn't constitute violent conduct, which it obviously wasn't, thereby no foul.

    Case closed.
    Okay. So if it's accidental and no pen, can you explain how this "foul" from Semedo is intentional and not accidental? Cheers


  13. #2458
    Villarato!
    Wolfe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,383
    Because both players are in active pursuit of the ball?

    It isn't intentional. Don't think anyone said it is?
    Last edited by Wolfe; 8th July 2020 at 06:05 PM.
    People are boring.

  14. #2459
    Senior Member
    Vilarrubi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe View Post
    Because both players are in active pursuit of the ball?

    It isn't intentional. Don't think anyone said it is?
    Okay, so do you think the Semedo one is a pen?

  15. #2460
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,707
    Why are we even discussing "intent"?
    A foul is a foul regardless?

Tags for this Thread