Henry should be banned from the World Cup

pickarooney

mike65 wrote: »

French big buisness backs the cheat (well Gillette)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/article6923181.ece

That is one scary photo of the three boys. Just a little too... rapey for my liking.

mayordenis

eZe^ wrote: »

He is also partial to going down quite easily. All these antics make him a dislikable footballer, which is fair enough. But to call for him to be banned from a WC championships is utterly ridiculous. The only reason we are so abhorred is because this is directly affecting our circumstances. He cheated, but so did Maradona in a WC semi-final.

You're wrong actually - a retrospective 3-5 match competitive international ban is not in anyway ridiculous, not at all. A 3 match ban would mean no group stage for sure, and 5 would have a good chance of encompassing the whole of France's campaign.

It's not in anyway ridiculous and is the very least that should happen.

Mr Alan

its a handball!

we cant just start handing out 5 match bans to people for something so trivial just because it ****ed up our night!

are people for real!? i thought people would have calmed down by now, seemingly not!

Chucky the tree

mayordenis wrote: »

You're wrong actually - a retrospective 3-5 match competitive international ban is not in anyway ridiculous, not at all. A 3 match ban would mean no group stage for sure, and 5 would have a good chance of encompassing the whole of France's campaign.

It's not in anyway ridiculous and is the very least that should happen.

Did you call for a 3-5 ban for Ngog when he dived against Birmingham?

Johnny Utah

Mr Alan wrote: »

its a handball!

we cant just start handing out 5 match bans to people for something so trivial just because it ****ed up our night!

are people for real!? i thought people would have calmed down by now, seemingly not!

Get real Alan, this wasn't a "trivial" incident at all. Stop trying to stir shit.

Mr Alan

it was a handball in an attacking move that took place in a split second.

it was trivial, happens quite a lot (in fact a couple of times to our own Robbie Keane last night).

the fact that a goal came from it, or that we are out of the world cup should have no bearing on the matter.

mayordenis

Mr Alan wrote: »

its a handball!

we cant just start handing out 5 match bans to people for something so trivial just because it ****ed up our night!

are people for real!? i thought people would have calmed down by now, seemingly not!

Trivial? you obviously have no idea what the word means.

And yes an intentional hand ball in that way should be treated exactly the same as diving which is now being retroactively punished.
Cheating Alan, you're either for it or against it. Nor punishing a player is for it.

Trivial? seriously? of all the decisions in football games this is the least trivial.

mayordenis

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Did you call for a 3-5 ban for Ngog when he dived against Birmingham?

I was at the game and though it was a free when I saw it in real time, but after watching it I would call for a ban yes.

But very big of you to bring up what could still be considered a legitimate penalty as there was aplyer impeding his progress and he had to jump over the challenge either way.

Mr Alan

trivial = Ordinary; commonplace.

handballs happen multiple times every match that is played.

fits the definition for me.

aidan24326

TheDoc wrote: »

He has come out and admitted it happened, what more do we want in fairness?

Has he fcuk. He admitted he handled the ball alright, but he could hardly deny that part now could he! However he claims it wasn't intentional, even though tv replays clearly show him controlling the ball with his hand. 100% intentional.

I dont blame him, a million and one things were going through his head. How fast it happend I'd say it was instinctive, and to be honest I'd say he was desperate.

That part I more or less agree with, and I don't think there should be a big witch-hunt against Henry. What he did was a spur of the moment thing. The real culprits here are the ref and linesman, who should be suspended for their incompetence.

The refs and linesmen that officiate at the highest level nowadays are highly-paid professionals, not the downtrodden volunteers of old. They get well paid to get these sort of calls right, plain and simple. It's odd that they seem to be the only two people in the world that didn't see it. This wasn't your average handball, I mean he was practically playing basketball with the thing. How could they not have seen it? Is it possible the ref did see it but bottled the decision? I think that's a possibility.

For me I'm angry with the referee and Paul McShane. There was a rather blatant offside on two players when the ball was kicked.

But McShane had his eye on it the whole way through, and for some reason, let the ball bounce in the six yard box....thats shocking and un excuseable. He had ample opporunity to attack the ball with his head, or even hoof it out, avoiding this whole scenario, and things would be so different.

I hate to be slagging any of our players after such a great performance, but McShane is always an accident waiting to happen. I just don't think he's up to this level.

mayordenis

Mr Alan wrote: »

trivial = Ordinary; commonplace.

handballs happen multiple times every match that is played.

fits the definition for me.

What happens last night wasn't a standard hand ball, you know if someone cannoned the ball off his arm then of course that's trivial (which really means something of minor to nil importance in actuality as opposed to your merriamwebb.).
But cheating is certainly not something we should be considering ordinary or commonplace, Handball being the ball hitting your hand, cheating being using your hand on 2 occasions to get around a player to create a goal scoring oppotunity.

Mr Alan

what happened last night was among the most standard handballs around, the ball was going past Henry, instinctively he popped his arm out to stop it (the fact that it touched his hand twice is irrelevant, it was the same movement)...similar happened earlier in the game when the ball was going past keane when he was trying to chest it so he spread his arms out so it wouldnt.

wat was not standard was the implications of it & the huge over-reaction by the media. these should not be factors when judging if Henry should be punished or not.

mayordenis

Mr Alan wrote: »

what happened last night was among the most standard handballs around, the ball was going past Henry, instinctively he popped his arm out to stop it (the fact that it touched his hand twice is irrelevant, it was the same movement)...similar happened earlier in the game when the ball was going past keane when he was trying to chest it so he spread his arms out so it wouldnt.

wat was not standard was the implications of it & the huge over-reaction by the media. these should not be factors when judging if Henry should be punished or not.

Well your wrong but I'm not gonna change your mind.

SlickRic

Mr Alan wrote: »

it was a handball in an attacking move that took place in a split second.

it was trivial, happens quite a lot (in fact a couple of times to our own Robbie Keane last night).

the fact that a goal came from it, or that we are out of the world cup should have no bearing on the matter.

this is the least trivial incident i can remember. he purposely tapped the ball onto his own foot to screw us over and send his team through - as unsporting an incident as i've seen in a long time. and our country now doesn't get to go to the biggest competition in international football, and arguably world football (i think so, but some would argue Champions League, but that's another debate).

as i say, as far from trivial as i can imagine.

also, i have to say again what i said in the other thread.

i've seen you go overboard on more 'trivial' decisions than this, when talking about games Liverpool are involved in.

Mr Alan

Slick, the implications are not trivial, but the offence by Henry was...he handled the ball to seek an advantage. thats all.

the irish players all seem to agree with me that they cant clame him & would have tried the same thing.

aidan24326

On reflection I might have been harsh in saying the ref bottled it, as he had a good game up to that point. But it's surely time we had video technology like in rugby. There's hardly a weekend goes by without some controversy or other in the premier league. Balls crossing the line and not given, a goal being allowed even though the guy was a mile offside etc etc. It really is time they did something about it.

vorbis

He should get a three game ban. It was a deliberate handball that directly led to a goal. One of the most non trivial examples of cheating I have seen in a while.

kraggy

Carroller16 wrote: »

I'm definitely not buying a renault now.

Why would you think of buying one in the first place?!

SlickRic

Mr Alan wrote: »

the irish players all seem to agree with me that they cant clame him & would have tried the same thing.

i've not seen interviews of any of these irish players endorsing handling the ball, but if true, well, that in itself is a sad inditment on the state of the game.

LuckyLloyd

Mr Alan wrote: »

its a handball!

we cant just start handing out 5 match bans to people for something so trivial just because it ****ed up our night!

are people for real!? i thought people would have calmed down by now, seemingly not!

Last night's game was more important and significant than an individual group match in the World Cup Finals themselves. Even for the likes of Henry, it was one of very biggest games he will play in during his career. Unlike a league competition that is played over 30+ matches, or a cup competition that is played every year - the match offered a chance to the teams involved that only comes along once every four years. It carried huge financial ramifications for the winners / losers, and it offered a very important psychological boost to a nation mired in a horrendous recession.

"Trivial"? Did it make you feel good typing out that tripe?

mayordenis

Aye trivial indeed by june/july 2014 (next world cup)

Duff 35
Dunne 34
Keane 33
Given 38
Kilbane 37
Finnan 38
O shea 33
Andrews 33
Hunt 32
Doyle 30
Lawrence 32

eZe^

mayordenis wrote: »

You're wrong actually - a retrospective 3-5 match competitive international ban is not in anyway ridiculous, not at all. A 3 match ban would mean no group stage for sure, and 5 would have a good chance of encompassing the whole of France's campaign.

It's not in anyway ridiculous and is the very least that should happen.

You see, I would have no problem with a 3 to 5 match ban being applied if it was consistent with past decisions. But I really can't remember the last time a player cheated like that and was actually given a tangible punishment like a match ban. Even Eduardo (obviously in a match that was fffffaarrrr less important) was not punished. It was a blatant dive in that case, but still there seems to be a fear of taking the risk of punishing him.

I mean, they say there wasn't enough evidence for Eduardo, but it was clearly a dive, most cases will be less black and white than that. How can we expect 'subjective' diving to be scrutinised by officials (with video footage) if they aren't willing to make a decision on a dive that is 80/90% a dive.

It may seem like I was digressing, but all I ask for is consistency. I'm happy for Eduardo/ Henry to get banned for cheating (because they did), but it has to happen in EVERY case. And for that to happen officials need to have the balls to take a risk on something that they may only be 70% sure on. Henry himself is saying that he didn't do it deliberately, and there is no physical way of proving that (even though we all know he's lying about that).

I'm against Henry being banned now as a knee jerk reaction to this ONE case of cheating. However, if after this horrible officiating it meant that FIFA had the balls to change the system, and reprimand cheaters every way it possibly could, then I think it would be excellent for the game on a whole, you just HAVE to be consistent, otherwise it all becomes pointless.

Holsten

mayordenis wrote: »

Aye trivial indeed by june/july 2014 (next world cup)

Duff 35
Dunne 34
Keane 33
Given 38
Kilbane 37
Finnan 38
O shea 33
Andrews 33
Hunt 32
Doyle 30
Lawrence 32

Gutted for the lads, can't image how pissed of they are. :mad:

mayordenis

eZe^ wrote: »

You see, I would have no problem with a 3 to 5 match ban being applied if it was consistent with past decisions. But I really can't remember the last time a player cheated like that and was actually given a tangible punishment like a match ban. Even Eduardo (obviously in a match that was fffffaarrrr less important) was not punished. It was a blatant dive in that case, but still there seems to be a fear of taking the risk of punishing him.

I mean, they say there wasn't enough evidence for Eduardo, but it was clearly a dive, most cases will be less black and white than that. How can we expect 'subjective' diving to be scrutinised by officials (with video footage) if they aren't willing to make a decision on a dive that is 80/90% a dive.

It may seem like I was digressing, but all I ask for is consistency. I'm happy for Eduardo/ Henry to get banned for cheating (because they did), but it has to happen in EVERY case. And for that to happen officials need to have the balls to take a risk on something that they may only be 70% sure on. Henry himself is saying that he didn't do it deliberately, and there is no physical way of proving that (even though we all know he's lying about that).

I'm against Henry being banned now as a knee jerk reaction to this ONE case of cheating. However, if after this horrible officiating it meant that FIFA had the balls to change the system, and reprimand cheaters every way it possibly could, then I think it would be excellent for the game on a whole, you just HAVE to be consistent, otherwise it all becomes pointless.

I agree on consistancy - but all decisions had a first time, I'm not naive enough (contrary to popular belief) to think this is going to end in our favour, butthe eduardo dive ban appeared originally to be a step in the right direction, and yes EUFA decided they didn't have the balls to go ahead with it - but I think this is really something that is being scrutinised on the world scale, and every child in world starting to play football looks at this as the way to get ahead.

I don't think there should be replay for the record, but a ban should be forthcoming imo for Henry, there would be some poetic justice in them still going over there and Henry missing out on probably his last hoorah on the world stage, when if he had not of cheated they would still of had an incredibly good chance in the latter minutes of extra time and of course the lottery of penalites.

I think more than being an Irish football fan, more than being a football fan, essentially just being a person I want to see justice served here.

eZe^

I agree with you, and Henry is a player who currently plays for the team I support. I'm gutted for Ireland, absolutely gutted that they were cheated out of a WC, but a replay would almost be farcical in that it has never happened before when horribly dubious decisions were made (The Chelsea vs Barca match last year was a good example, but there was bad calls made both for AND against Barca in that, before any Chelsea fan comes in here complaining ).

But I hope some good can come out of this, and people start seriously considering the prospect of goal line technology, an extra official, proper analysis of goals, and punishments for retrospectively proven diving.

Chucky the tree

mayordenis wrote: »

I was at the game and though it was a free when I saw it in real time, but after watching it I would call for a ban yes.

But very big of you to bring up what could still be considered a legitimate penalty as there was aplyer impeding his progress and he had to jump over the challenge either way.

No it couldn't be considered a legitimate penalty.

Mrmoe

Fizman wrote: »

but Kevin Doyle and Souness both said that anyone who's ever played the sport will know that it was an instinctive thing to do.

An instinctive thing for cheaters to do maybe. I have played football all my life and I have NEVER done anything like what Cheater Hnery did.

Chucky the tree

Mrmoe wrote: »

An instinctive thing for cheaters to do maybe. I have played football all my life and I have NEVER done anything like what Cheater Hnery did.

Maybe that's the reason your not playing in a world cup?

OPENROAD

Mrmoe wrote: »

An instinctive thing for cheaters to do maybe. I have played football all my life and I have NEVER done anything like what Cheater Hnery did.

so was Kevin Doyle wrong to say that then

Mr Alan

SlickRic wrote: »

i've not seen interviews of any of these irish players endorsing handling the ball, but if true, well, that in itself is a sad inditment on the state of the game.

St Ledger wrote:

'I'm not sure (his reputation) has been tarnished - it doesn't look great but he's got his team to the World Cup finals.

'If it had been one of our team we'd have probably done the same.

'The blame doesn't necessarily fall on him but he's handled it, everyone can see it around the world.'

Kevin Doyle wrote:

'It's instinctive and if you can get away with it... I'm sure he was expecting the (free-kick to be given) and I can't believe it's not been caught.

'I don't blame him, so much as it not being seen.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Last night's game was more important and significant than an individual group match in the World Cup Finals themselves. Even for the likes of Henry, it was one of very biggest games he will play in during his career. Unlike a league competition that is played over 30+ matches, or a cup competition that is played every year - the match offered a chance to the teams involved that only comes along once every four years. It carried huge financial ramifications for the winners / losers, and it offered a very important psychological boost to a nation mired in a horrendous recession.

"Trivial"? Did it make you feel good typing out that tripe?

so you think punishments & the rules of the game should be changed depending on the importance of a match?

that's lunacy tbh.

Johnny Utah

So you think blatant cheating should be endorsed by Fifa?

That's lunacy tbh

OPENROAD

Johnny Utah wrote: »

So you think blatant cheating should be endorsed by Fifa?

That's lunacy tbh

No way but consistency

Johnny Utah

OPENROAD wrote: »

No way but consistency

Consistent cheating?

Yeah, they're pretty good at that alright!

OPENROAD

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Consistent cheating?

Yeah, they're pretty good at that alright!

I think you know what I mean, consistency with FIFA/UEFA, so we replay this match then you have to say other teams with have a right to ask for a replay.

Dont be at yourself

God, imagine how unfair it would be if every match which was decided by an incident blatant cheating was to be replayed. What an awful world that would be.

[/sarcasm]

Time for FIFA to grow a backbone.

Mr Alan

Johnny Utah wrote: »

So you think blatant cheating should be endorsed by Fifa?

That's lunacy tbh

No i think FIFA can't all of a sudden decide that its ok to replay a game because the ref/linesman got a decision wrong.

FIFA should use this incident to start the use of video technology & additional officials being used to help refs.

mayordenis

Mr Alan wrote: »

No i think FIFA can't all of a sudden decide that its ok to replay a game because the ref/linesman got a decision wrong.

FIFA should use this incident to start the use of video technology & additional officials being used to help refs.

You should accept that people aren't annoyed that a decision was called wrong, and that what happened was actual cheating and that is what irk's people.

If you do that your debating point can move forward if not your posts will continue to come across in a most ridiculous manner.

OPENROAD

mayordenis wrote: »

You should accept that people aren't annoyed that a decision was called wrong, and that what happened was actual cheating and that is what irk's people.

If you do that your debating point can move forward if not your posts will continue to come across in a most ridiculous manner.

In fairness cheating generally only annoys people when it effects their team, the rest of the time its a case well everyone is at it,it will even itself out, and this is clearly eveident in match threads during the season.

mayordenis

OPENROAD wrote: »

In fairness cheating generally only annoys people when it effects their team, the rest of the time its a case well everyone is at it,it will even itself out, and this is clearly eveident in match threads during the season.

No, not really.

Dont be at yourself

In fairness cheating generally only annoys people when it effects their team, the rest of the time its a case well everyone is at it,it will even itself out, and this is clearly eveident in match threads during the season.

Open your eyes. This act of cheating has annoyed not only Irish fans, but French fans, and fans from all over the world.

OPENROAD

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Open your eyes. This act of cheating has annoyed not only Irish fans, but French fans, and fans from all over the world.

Was specifically thinking of match threads on this board during the season.

OPENROAD

mayordenis wrote: »

No, not really.

I did use the world "generally" and as I said you only have to look at the match threads on here.

kinaldo

God. There would be none of all these never ending arguments about suspensions and replays if only FIFA would actually enter the 21st century and use video replays.

They don't even have to go the whole way with it - just give each manager 3 calls, like in tennis.

So simple.

OPENROAD

kinaldo wrote: »

God. There would be none of all these never ending arguments about suspensions and replays if only FIFA would actually enter the 21st century and use video replays.

They don't even have to go the whole way with it - just give each manager 3 calls, like in tennis.

So simple.

+1

Racing Flat

kinaldo wrote: »

They don't even have to go the whole way with it - just give each manager 3 calls, like in tennis.

So simple.

What if we'd already used up our 3 (and the extra 1 for extra time ) by the time of the hand-ball incident? Would be the same scenario as we have now.

Also teams 1-0 up might start using them for the sake of it in the last few mins, like bringing on subs to break the other teams momentum.

Be better let it be at the ref and the 4th officials discretion I think.

kinaldo

Racing Flat wrote: »

What if we'd already used up our 3 (and the extra 1 for extra time ) by the time of the hand-ball incident? Would be the same scenario as we have now.

Also teams 1-0 up might start using them for the sake of it in the last few mins, like bringing on subs to break the other teams momentum.

Be better let it be at the ref and the 4th officials discretion I think.

Tis more than enough to significantly reduce these sort of catastrophic decisions, while it would be up to each manager to use them wisely, and so what if they are mis-used - 3 is not a lot, and managers would only look foolish if they were proved wrong by video.

L'prof

Racing Flat wrote: »

What if we'd already used up our 3 (and the extra 1 for extra time ) by the time of the hand-ball incident? Would be the same scenario as we have now.

Also teams 1-0 up might start using them for the sake of it in the last few mins, like bringing on subs to break the other teams momentum.

Be better let it be at the ref and the 4th officials discretion I think.

I thought in tennis you have 3 challenges and you only lost 1 if your challenge was unsuccessful? Shouldn't be too hard to hang on to them then?

As for using them for the sake of it, teams will always find some way of wasting time. It's not a legitimate reason to disregard a suggestion!

Walsh

Football would be boring if there was no controversy, think about it...

L'prof

Walsh wrote: »

Football would be boring if there was no controversy, think about it...

There'll always be controversy in football, I'm fed up of hearing that argument. Ask any rugby fan if they think it's boring because they can appeal decisions!?!

heyjude

Racing Flat wrote: »

What if we'd already used up our 3 (and the extra 1 for extra time ) by the time of the hand-ball incident? Would be the same scenario as we have now.

Also teams 1-0 up might start using them for the sake of it in the last few mins, like bringing on subs to break the other teams momentum.

Be better let it be at the ref and the 4th officials discretion I think.

In American Football(NFL), each head coach(manager) has three challenges per half, but only the replay official(roughly an equivalent of the 4th official) can challenge a decision in the last two minutes of each half. So if you were going to allow managers to challenge decisions, you could adopt a similar system and for example, only allow the 4th official to challenge a decision in the last 5 minutes of each half, this would reduce the chances of the challenges being abused, besides some challenged decisions can be decided very quickly as like last night, they are very clear on the replay.

In the NFL, where a decision is challenged by a coach, the decision on the field is only overturned if there is clear evidence on the video replay that the original decision was wrong, otherwise the original decision stands. I don't know if you'd need 3 challenges per half in football, maybe 3 per team per game and strict limits on what decisions can be challenged.