a captain of example

[Chaz]

I know I was just ****ing about at the terms reckless and excessive on a tackle that didnt even touch the player.
I get why Rooney jumped out of the way.
The only thing I dont get is why, upon landing from his lofty 3 foot leap, he chose to fall on his keester instead of landing on his feet.

Theatricals will more often get you penalties. Honesty rarely does. Rooney's clearly been taking lessons from Ashley Young.

The keeper gave the ref a decision to make and was stupid, but the way Rooney took off and then slid around ten yards was disgraceful. Yes it was probably a penalty, but yes, he also dived.

 

[Christiansmith]

Theatricals will more often get you penalties. Honesty rarely does. Rooney's clearly been taking lessons from Ashley Young.

The keeper gave the ref a decision to make and was stupid, but the way Rooney took off and then slid around ten yards was disgraceful. Yes it was probably a penalty, but yes, he also dived.

No it wasn't disgraceful and not even remotely a dive. He had to take evasive action or else he would have been severely injured.

 

[Bodinki]

No it wasn't disgraceful and not even remotely a dive. He had to take evasive action or else he would have been severely injured.

Dont know if I would call it disgraceful, I just found it funny that he jumped three feet in the air and couldnt land on his feet.
I get why he jumped....

 

[Chaz]

Dont know if I would call it disgraceful, I just found it funny that he jumped three feet in the air and couldnt land on his feet.
I get why he jumped....

As do I. What christiansmith is missing in his blinkered and selective reading is that it was a penalty, but why Rooney needed to go for the distance record having successfully evaded the challenge is beyond me, and certainly was done to further ensure the ref gave the decision his way. By all definitions it was a dive, irrespective of whether the referee was correct in giving a penalty. Would have served Rooney right had he not been given the decision after that.

 

[Christiansmith]

As do I. What christiansmith is missing in his blinkered and selective reading is that it was a penalty, but why Rooney needed to go for the distance record having successfully evaded the challenge is beyond me, and certainly was done to further ensure the ref gave the decision his way. By all definitions it was a dive, irrespective of whether the referee was correct in giving a penalty. Would have served Rooney right had he not been given the decision after that.

It was a penalty whether he dived or not. So what are we arguing about?

That he jumped out of the way?

That he dived?

That he took evasive action?

That he run?

That he should have stood still?

That he should only jumped on the spot?

That he exagerated the offence?

 

[Chaz]

It was a penalty whether he dived or not. So what are we arguing about?

That he jumped out of the way?

That he dived?

That he took evasive action?

That he run?

That he should have stood still?

That he should only jumped on the spot?

That he exagerated the offence?

Those two.

 

[Christiansmith]

It was a penalty so he didn't get anything that wasn't deserved..??

 

[Bodinki]

He dived......and it was a penalty.
He just dived for no reason to make doubly sure he got it.
But the ref called it right, it was a peno imo.
Still, he still dived, because he could have stayed on his feet but made a decision not too.

 

[Chaz]

It was a penalty so he didn't get anything that wasn't deserved..??

Not the point I'm making, and you know it.

The point is, that the game contains far too many players who will cheat to get stuff they don't deserve by diving, by surrounding and haranguing the ref, by waving imaginary cards, etc. Irrespective of whether the penalty in this instance was or wasn't justified, the point is Rooney didn't need to dive, as he had already evaded the keeper's lunge. He certainly didn't need to slide ten yards on his gut. He was exaggerating the offence to influence the ref. What makes him even more stupid is that in this instance, he didn't need to, but it seems it's an automatic response these days. That's what I find so hard to accept.

 

[Christiansmith]

He dived......and it was a penalty.
He just dived for no reason to make doubly sure he got it.
But the ref called it right, it was a peno imo.
Still, he still dived, because he could have stayed on his feet but made a decision not too.

So he should have stood still when he saw that 6ft+ GK rushing out towards him?

 

[Chaz]

So he should have stood still when he saw that 6ft+ GK rushing out towards him?

No, he should jump out of the way, which he did. Then he dived and slid ten yards.

 

[Bodinki]

So he should have stood still when he saw that 6ft+ GK rushing out towards him?

FFS.
No, he should have jumped over him....and landed on his feet, its not like he jumped out of an aeroplane at 50,000 feet, he jumped two feet in the air....he should have jumped over the keeper and landed on his feet, there was no need for the swan lake impression.

 

[Chaz]

FFS.
No, he should have jumped over him....and landed on his feet, its not like he jumped out of an aeroplane at 50,000 feet, he jumped two feet in the air....he should have jumped over the keeper and landed on his feet.

Who'd have thought I'd be here agreeing with a Chelsea fan... It's a strange world...

 

[Christiansmith]

Not the point I'm making, and you know it.

The point is, that the game contains far too many players who will cheat to get stuff they don't deserve by diving, by surrounding and haranguing the ref, by waving imaginary cards, etc. Irrespective of whether the penalty in this instance was or wasn't justified, the point is Rooney didn't need to dive, as he had already evaded the keeper's lunge. He certainly didn't need to slide ten yards on his gut. He was exaggerating the offence to influence the ref. What makes him even more stupid is that in this instance, he didn't need to, but it seems it's an automatic response these days. That's what I find so hard to accept.

We are all agreed that he didn't get anything that wasn't deserved.

We are arguing whether he exagerated the fall or not, whether he should stayed on his feet or jumped out of the way? The ref gave the right decision by all accounts.

It is not as if he fell like Gerrard, Sterling or Sturridge with no one within 3 yards, is it?

 

[Swarbs]

Not the point I'm making, and you know it.

The point is, that the game contains far too many players who will cheat to get stuff they don't deserve by diving, by surrounding and haranguing the ref, by waving imaginary cards, etc. Irrespective of whether the penalty in this instance was or wasn't justified, the point is Rooney didn't need to dive, as he had already evaded the keeper's lunge. He certainly didn't need to slide ten yards on his gut. He was exaggerating the offence to influence the ref. What makes him even more stupid is that in this instance, he didn't need to, but it seems it's an automatic response these days. That's what I find so hard to accept.

This is true.

But equally there are far too many players who will not get what they do deserve by being honest. Had Rooney just jumped over the keeper and kept running, the referee would 90% have not given him a penalty despite the foul. Is it any better for the keeper to get away with a wild lunge that could cause injury than it is for the striker to get away with a dive for a penalty?

Pretty sure a few seasons back the referees union gave guidance to players that if they feel they have been fouled they need to go to ground else it is hard for the ref to give the decision in their favour. Ergo Rooney did need to fall down, as otherwise he probably wouldn't have gotten the penalty.

 

[Bodinki]

Who'd have thought I'd be here agreeing with a Chelsea fan... It's a strange world...

This is true.

But equally there are far too many players who will not get what they do deserve by being honest. Had Rooney just jumped over the keeper and kept running, the referee would 90% have not given him a penalty despite the foul. Is it any better for the keeper to get away with a wild lunge that could cause injury than it is for the striker to get away with a dive for a penalty?

Pretty sure a few seasons back the referees union gave guidance to players that if they feel they have been fouled they need to go to ground else it is hard for the ref to give the decision in their favour. Ergo Rooney did need to fall down, as otherwise he probably wouldn't have gotten the penalty.

Thats one of the most ******ed and insane thing I have heard all week.
Surely if a lunge is dangerous, a referee should be capable of spotting it regardless of whether the player is lying on the ground flailing his arm like a spacko.

 

[Christiansmith]

FFS.
No, he should have jumped over him....and landed on his feet, its not like he jumped out of an aeroplane at 50,000 feet, he jumped two feet in the air....he should have jumped over the keeper and landed on his feet, there was no need for the swan lake impression.

So he is running at full speed and some giant GK comes hurtling towards him , he just jumps out of the way, trying his hardest to stay on his feet? And by common agreement that he would not have cheated a penalty?

 

[Chief]

Thats one of the most ******ed and insane thing I have heard all week.
Surely if a lunge is dangerous, a referee should be capable of spotting it regardless of whether the player is lying on the ground flailing his arm like a spacko.

How dreadfully un PC!!

The simple fact of the matter is that had Rooney not jumped out of the way contact with his ankle would have occurred so what's he to do? As he was running full pelt more or less he stumbled when he landed and went over.

As ANY player in the country would have done under those circumstances.

Is the story because it's Wayne Rooney, England captain or Wayne Rooney Manchester United player?

Or is it really just a non story?

 

[Swarbs]

Thats one of the most ******ed and insane thing I have heard all week.
Surely if a lunge is dangerous, a referee should be capable of spotting it regardless of whether the player is lying on the ground flailing his arm like a spacko.

Surely the ref should be perfect. But in fact they aren't. Here's what happens when a player is fouled and doesn't go to ground:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/west-hams-matt-jarvis-hammered-3420556

Note the comments at the bottom of the article from a former referee, essentially saying that a player staying on their feet and getting a penalty is "alien to everything that happens at the moment".

It may not be nice to admit, but with the amount of diving going on from all players in the game nowadays, referees simply don't believe that a player will get fouled and not dive.

 

[Bodinki]

How dreadfully un PC!!

The simple fact of the matter is that had Rooney not jumped out of the way contact with his ankle would have occurred so what's he to do? As he was running full pelt more of less he stumbled when he landed and went over.

As ANY player in the country would have done under those circumstances.

Is the story because it's Wayne Rooney, England captain or Wayne Rooney Manchester United player?

Or is it really just a non story?

Oh its a non story to be sure.
It was a peno, and it was rightly given, the ref made the right call and it didnt affect the outcome of the game by Rooney doing a powerslide.....but its fun to talk about.