Republic ask for extra cup place

Fr Tod Umptious

everdead.ie wrote: »

Didn't know where to stick this one but it was actually a very good response from the FAI
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5g9aMKFpJ8YGOABxHnMY7zGAn2aPw

The Football Association of Ireland have hit out at FIFA president Sepp Blatter for making public details of private discussions over the nation's bid for World Cup justice.

FAI chiefs have revealed they had asked on Tuesday that their request for the Republic of Ireland to
be included as the 33rd team at next summer's finals not be raised at Wednesday's meeting of the governing body's executive
committee in Cape Town. A statement said: "The Football Association of Ireland acknowledges that the suggestion of an additional place at the World Cup is not a possibility and has requested yesterday (Tuesday) that it will not be raised at today's (Wednesday) FIFA executive committee meeting."

It continued: "The FAI has already clarified that this matter was peripheral, was not raised in any of its formal written submissions to FIFA, and was explored only fleetingly as part of a wide-ranging 90-minute discussion with that body.
"Regrettably, the matter appears to have been singled out in public by Mr Blatter despite his assurances that the meeting would remain private."
Ireland were denied a place at the finals in South Africa when Swedish referee Martin Hansson failed to spot France skipper Thierry Henry handling the ball in the run-up to William Gallas' decisive goal in the play-off second leg clash between the two sides at the Stade de France on November 18.

The FAI asked for the game to be replayed amid a public outcry, but both FIFA and the French Football Federation declined.
Having finally admitted defeat, the FAI, who were already angry at the late decision to seed the play-offs which handed the Republic a tougher draw than they might have had, have instead submitted a series of proposals to the executive committee in an effort to prevent a repeat.
The statement continued: "Instead of diverting attention, we would prefer that Mr Blatter uses this opportunity to deal with the issues which have been raised formally for the benefit of football worldwide.



"1. Ensure that FIFA's rules cannot be changed mid-way through a tournament, for whatever reason, commercial or otherwise. 2. Introduce video technology for matches at the highest level which has been resisted for too long and which would have avoided the error that led, in part, to the meeting. 3. Implement additional goal line assistant referees for all FIFA international matches. 4. In future, introduce stronger sanctions for players involved in match defining breaches of the Laws of the Game. 5. Issue a clear statement that FIFA does not condone breaches of the Laws of the Game. For a man in Mr Blatter's position to empathise with someone who scored a goal by cheating is inappropriate."
Copyright © 2009 The Press Association. All rights reserved.

I think this is a fitting ending to this whole saga

The FAI by not letting the matter drop have hopefully accelerated the introducing of enhanced officiating in the game and have shown Blatter up as being a not very nice man.

As I said on another thread, when they write the history of soccer John Delaney will have a staring role

BaZmO*

evad_lhorg wrote: »

begging for a place? this is just pathetic.

As the post below yours shows, it was just a point that was fleetingly raised during a meeting with FIFA and was never part of an official proposal by the FAI. Blatter just tried to make a mockery out of the FAI (and God knows they generally do a good enough job of that themselves!) by suggesting that they had officially asked to be the turdy-turd team.

Rondolfus

Töpher wrote: »

Robbie Keane actively appealed for a penalty that never was, which put added pressure on the referee at that moment in time to award one. Robbie Keane then took said penalty, surely knowing it should not have been awarded. It may not be as blatant as the handball, but it is an attempt to dupe the officials and get one over on the opposition. I'm not saying he cheated, but it's an example of Ireland benefiting from a lack of fair play - fair play seemingly being hugely important to all involved in the Ireland setup.

Eh... no he didn't. Watch the clip again.

An attempt to dupe the officials? How??? By playing to the whistle?? Nobody dived, and nobody even appealed for the penalty.

Futhermore it wasn't an example of Ireland benefiting by lack of "fair play". It was Ireland benefiting from a bad ref!

Fair play is a team and its players, playing within the rules of Fifa. Ireland didn't beak ANY rules in relation to that penalty. Thats a fact!! Henry controlled the ball twice with his hand!! That is against the rules and hence is not fair play... Its really not difficult.

Töpher wrote: »

Both decisions effected the course of qualifying for the World Cup. Both were shocking decisions. Both were accepted with open arms from the benefiting sides, and disgust from the victims, as happens in football around the world on a daily basis. It's not fair, but having the officials that represent football in your country crying about it like a child crying over split milk that it never actually had really is gut churning.

You're missing the point. Firstly the Georgians weren't annoyed with the Irish, they were annoyed with the ref! Because it was the Refs fault not Irelands!!!

Secondly the focus in the France game is not so much the decision, but the behaviour of one of the worlds highest profile players. The poster boy for the "fair play" campaign Thierry Henry. He blatantly cheated. There's no doubt about that.


Listen, I think Ireland needs to move on as much as the next person, but Im not going accept the "Roy Keane" mentality that the Irish are hypocrites because the ref gave us a mystery penalty in the Georgia game. We didn't cheat, France did.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

BaZmO*

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You're just being ridiculous now.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Rondolfus

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Why would he say he made contact when he didn't? Anelka clearly went down looking for the penalty. There was no contact

podge018

There was blatant contact.

What about Keane's 4 or 5 handballs he was pulled up over in the 2 legs?

deisedevil

Rondolfus wrote: »

Why would he say he made contact when he didn't? Anelka clearly went down looking for the penalty. There was no contact

There was contact. But not at first as Anelka was hoping for, so when he didn't get the touch he stuck the leg out looking for it. That aint a penalty, if anything Anelka was the one who made the contact so free out if anything.

BaZmO*

podge018 wrote: »

What about Keane's 4 or 5 handballs he was pulled up over in the 2 legs?

The ones that the referee noticed and Keane didn't gain an advantage from? What about them?

everdead.ie

So Fifa said there going to meet FAI with the option of giving them a special award or a compliment wouldn't mind second seeds in the euros if it is going


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/8393544.stm

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

noodler

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Right, a handball by Keane which is borderline i.e. hits the area between your chest and Bicep is the same as what Henry did? Have you played football before? Have you ever tried to control a ball on the chest and have it touch toofar below your shoulder so the ref calls it?

Some perspective here, its not just that Henry's wasn't punished, its also that the two offences were not the same.

By the way, I don't know what planet you live on but the advantage gained from cheating is a massive part of it. N'Gog's dive is a peno wasn't given? Ditto Eduardo?

Mr Alan

everdead.ie wrote: »

So Fifa said there going to meet FAI with the option of giving them a special award or a compliment wouldn't mind second seeds in the euros if it is going


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/8393544.stm

wtf?!

this is ridiculous, can a line just not be drawn under the whole sorry affair tbh

noodler

Mr Alan wrote: »

wtf?!

this is ridiculous, can a line just not be drawn under the whole sorry affair tbh

Liverpool's owners for example?

Pot.Kettle.Black for example?

I'll agree a superthread should be produced but you definitely wouldn't / don't like it if someone jumps into the Liverpool thread and tells you to "get over" the fact the Yanks are in charge - to "draw a line under it" so to speak.

Mr Alan

wat on gods green earth are you on about?

please tell me you actually see just how different the two scenarios are?

Hank Scorpio

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Its called a foul

noodler

Mr Alan wrote: »

wat on gods green earth are you on about?

please tell me you actually see just how different the two scenarios are?

They are two football issues on a football messgae board on the internet. You really don't get to lecture people on how long they can be debated for.

IRISHSPORTSGUY

Embarrassing, yet I understand why they had a go, even though it was virtually pointless. If Delaney had convinced FIFA to let in us and Costa Rica he'd be a legend in my eyes. Can't blame them for exhausting every possible avenue, although they shouldn't have bothered wasting their ink.

Mr Alan

Noodler, i wasn't lecturing anyone, simply responding to the article that was posted up.

Which is quite clearly ridiculous & an insult.

Its like FIFA & the FAI are trying to outdo eachother with idiocy (although the FAIs recent statement seems to show they've copped themselves on somewhat)

noodler

Mr Alan wrote: »

Noodler, i wasn't lecturing anyone, simply responding to the article that was posted up.

Which is quite clearly ridiculous & an insult.

Its like FIFA & the FAI are trying to outdo eachother with idiocy (although the FAIs recent statement seems to show they've copped themselves on somewhat)

Okay, fair enough. I took it as yet another poster entering a thread on a subject they are tired off and advising people to stop talking about it. I didn't think you were talking about this sad compensation thing in isolation.

My apologies and I agree, the idea of moral compensation is almost as insulting as the laugh at the conference the other day.

BaZmO*

Is Moral Conpensation anything like Moral Courage?

Mitch Connor

BaZmO* wrote: »

Is Moral Conpensation anything like Moral Courage?

They'll give us an official moral victory, we've been claiming it for weeks anyway.

lostexpectation

a pat on the head for us?

see on sky news the presenter suggested we might get chance to play winners after the world cup is over in dublin, what if its france....

BaZmO*

lostexpectation wrote: »

see on sky news the presenter suggested we might get chance to play winners after the world cup is over in dublin, what if its france....

Well that will mean we offcially won the world cup and they will have to give us the trophy. We will also automatically qualify for the 2014 World Cup as th reigning champions.

everdead.ie

BaZmO* wrote: »

Well that will mean we offcially won the world cup and they will have to give us the trophy. We will also automatically qualify for the 2014 World Cup as th reigning champions.

No such luck the champs no longer automatically qualify Look at Italy

BaZmO*

Oh yeah. Talk about a blonde moment. I was even at both matches where we played them.

Leiva

FIFA (Blatter):

Moral Compansation from a federation that's Morally Bankrupt ???


NaMaaaaaaaaaaaaaa