leicsmac Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Best possible draw for ROI. Potential utter carnage from Balkan-state matchups averted then too. Damn shame - football stadia always look better when the seating is being torn up and used to beat other people round the head with.
Bert Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Hoping Ireland will get through now, no excuses either. Hoping Czech's can get through too.
purpleronnie Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Great stuff, good luck ireland. Tournaments aren't the same without the irish. Plus I'm sure the local bars want them to get through.
ScouseFox Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Would like the Irish to get through, massive amounts of Irish people round here, obviously, so would be decent.
Joe. Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Don't worry, he'll be there for when we amble out in the last 16.
Guest Bilo Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Don't worry, he'll be there for when we amble out in the last 16. First round then. Sounds about right. Whatever though, he is quite clearly the thickest man on the planet.
davieG Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 We're not going to win it so we should leave him at home I'm sure Fergy wont mind.
StanSP Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Nugent and Vassell up front? You know what to do, Fabio.
Guest shearfox Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Massive blow for Rooney to be given a three match ban, just stupidity from the man, shows we can't really rely on him, it doesn't matter how good he is.
Guest ttfn Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Three matches is an obscene punishment. He was stupid, but a three game punishment in a league season is around 8% of the season. Assuming England make the final (unlikely), Rooney will be banned for 50% of the tournament. The punishment absolutely does not fit the crime here.
Finnegan Posted 13 October 2011 Author Posted 13 October 2011 Anyone who thinks a three game ban is either excessive or surprising is a fucking idiot. And Phil Neville can pack it in with the "ITS ONLY COS WER ENGURLISH" shit as well. Get off your collective frickin' horses, take your heads out of your arses and face it - there's no conspiracy theories, UEFA doesn't hate England, only person to blame here is the knuckle-dragging chav with emotional problems who decided to kick another athlete like a spoilt child. Jesus wept, he's a horrible little ned.
Alexikokopops Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Three matches is an obscene punishment. He was stupid, but a three game punishment in a league season is around 8% of the season. Assuming England make the final (unlikely), Rooney will be banned for 50% of the tournament. The punishment absolutely does not fit the crime here. Taking Arshavin's suspension at the last Euros (or was in World Cup?) as a precedent you'd expect two matches. However, maybe it will teach Rooney that he can't always be such a petulant child.
StanSP Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Three matches is an obscene punishment. He was stupid, but a three game punishment in a league season is around 8% of the season. Assuming England make the final (unlikely), Rooney will be banned for 50% of the tournament. The punishment absolutely does not fit the crime here. Sorry, but that's just bull-shit. How is it obscene? He kicked out at another player. It's violent conduct! Who gives a shit about percentages of a league season compared to an international tournament? Rooney being banned for 50% is his own flipping fault. How does the punishment not fit the crime? The phrase 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' fits perfectly. Rooney's just an idiot for needlessly kicking out at the player and now he's facing the consequences. Him writing a letter to UEFA to cut the ban down is just laughable.
Finnegan Posted 13 October 2011 Author Posted 13 October 2011 Sorry, but that's just bull-shit. How is it obscene? He kicked out at another player. It's violent conduct! Who gives a shit about percentages of a league season compared to an international tournament? Rooney being banned for 50% is his own flipping fault. How does the punishment not fit the crime? The phrase 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' fits perfectly. Rooney's just an idiot for needlessly kicking out at the player and now he's facing the consequences. Him writing a letter to UEFA to cut the ban down is just laughable.
Alexikokopops Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Sorry, but that's just bull-shit. How is it obscene? He kicked out at another player. It's violent conduct! Who gives a shit about percentages of a league season compared to an international tournament? Rooney being banned for 50% is his own flipping fault. How does the punishment not fit the crime? The phrase 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' fits perfectly. Rooney's just an idiot for needlessly kicking out at the player and now he's facing the consequences. Him writing a letter to UEFA to cut the ban down is just laughable. Compared to the precedent set before (Arshavin getting banned for two matches for a violent conduct red card when he kicked out at another player) then you could argue it's a touch harsh, especially given that the referee acknowledged that he took the red like a champ. That said, Rooney's still an arse.
Guest ttfn Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Anyone who thinks a three game ban is either excessive or surprising is a fucking idiot. And Phil Neville can pack it in with the "ITS ONLY COS WER ENGURLISH" shit as well. Get off your collective frickin' horses, take your heads out of your arses and face it - there's no conspiracy theories, UEFA doesn't hate England, only person to blame here is the knuckle-dragging chav with emotional problems who decided to kick another athlete like a spoilt child. Jesus wept, he's a horrible little ned. Where did I say there was a conspiracy? I have no doubt that similar justice would be dished out to anyone. Doesn't make it right. As for the percentage of the season, of course that matters. That is the basis on which the whole idea of suspensions are founded. Why are red cards (for violent conduct) in the Premier League a 3 matches and not 19? It's because banning a player for half of a tournament is obscene, and that 3 matches serves to punish his team for an appropriate portion of the season. Why any team should be deprived of a player for what was (a fairly tame) moment of madness for half of a tournament is totally beyond me. I imagine England will appeal, and given the Arshavin precedent, it may be reduced to two. If it is, we can only hope Rooney responds in the same way that Arshavin did when he lit up Euro 2008.
Guest Bilo Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Sorry, but that's just bull-shit. How is it obscene? He kicked out at another player. It's violent conduct! Who gives a shit about percentages of a league season compared to an international tournament? Rooney being banned for 50% is his own flipping fault. How does the punishment not fit the crime? The phrase 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' fits perfectly. Rooney's just an idiot for needlessly kicking out at the player and now he's facing the consequences. Him writing a letter to UEFA to cut the ban down is just laughable. That must have been one fucking hard working spell check.
StanSP Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 Compared to the precedent set before (Arshavin getting banned for two matches for a violent conduct red card when he kicked out at another player) then you could argue it's a touch harsh, especially given that the referee acknowledged that he took the red like a champ. That said, Rooney's still an arse. When was the Arshavin incident, just out of interest? I'm glad UEFA are taking a tougher stance in this latest incident. (However if they accept the FA's appeal, it just shows how weak they really are). Whether he took the red like a champ or not is also a confounding issue. It doesn't matter what he does after the incident. I don't believe that him acting all sympathetic afterwards should matter, and I reckon that would be the main basis of his letter that he wrote to UEFA. And again as said above, I believe it's laughable if that's the case. I don't know what else he could have written in his letter to persuade a lesser ban.
Guest ttfn Posted 13 October 2011 Posted 13 October 2011 The phrase 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' fits perfectly. The time is one game, to be reviewed in exceptional circumstances. Nowhere is a three-game ban clearly defined as "the time", not even in precedent. I'm sure Rooney wasn't thinking of the consequences of his moronic actions, but part of the problem here is a blanket one game ban which is retrospectively reviewed.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.