Originally posted by VargHenry overacted it, but it was a penalty nonetheless, at least to me. The ref was ok, we lost because we lacked a target man in the area or someone like Nuno Gomes who helps the wingers more than Pauleta.
Because the French goal was based on a very suspect decision - I think it was no penalty.
And, while Portugal had many chances, they didn't take them but would rather dive for a free kick.
Credit to the referee he tried to let the game run and ignore this - the Henry penalty was one of his only mistakes.
1 edit
Originally posted by sasquatch672That's a bad translation. If you knew the rules, advantage is never played if it's a penalty.
Yet another whining quote from a Portugal player, from yesterday's press conference:
Carvalho admitted he was to blame for the penalty, saying: 'It was my mistake. I know I made contact with Henry [b]but the referee could have played the advantage. He (Larrionda) did their job for them.'
From Law V, Referees:
The referee:
allows play who cost his team a chance at the final, and doesn't know the rules of the game he plays.[/b]
All Carvalho said was that he touched Henry but contact was minimal so the ref could have called either way. He also said that meant he accepted the ref's decision.
Perspectives.
6 edits
Originally posted by PalynkaPalynka is right. This appears to be the original quote:
That's a bad translation. If you knew the rules, advantage is never played if it's a penalty.
All Carvalho said was that he touched Henry but contact was minimal so the ref could have called either way. He also said that meant he accepted the ref's decision.
Perspectives.
“Foi um erro meu. Sei que toco no Henry, mas é daqueles lances em que o árbitro tanto podia marcar como deixar seguir."
Palynka can translate exactly, but a rough translation would be "It was my error-- I know that I touched Henry, but it was one of those (lances) that the referee could either call or let play continue"
That doesn't sound like whining at all to me, and it sure doesn't sound like he's talking about the advantage. It's a bad translation, and in general it's a bad idea to make inferences about the tone of translated material. It's too easy to go wrong, or to hear what you want to hear.
Originally posted by sasquatch672Perfect symbiosis between the puppet and the puppeteer.
Here you go, here's Scolari crying for the Ronaldo penalty-that-wasn't -
Two referee decisions put France in final
Portugal coach suggests that non-powerhouse teams don't get calls
Thomas Kienzle / AP
Updated: 7:54 p.m. ET July 5, 2006
MUNICH, Germany - Yet another big soccer game decided on a penalty call. Yet another spot kick turned do ...[text shortened]... rly shows Ronaldo vaulting himself in the air like a dolphin at Sea World looking for a fish.
I hope those strings aren't too unconfortable.
Originally posted by jgvaccaroThat makes sense to me.
It's a bad translation, but in general it's a bad idea to make inferences about the tone of translated material.
Besides, even if he said otherwise I wouldn't be too surprised. After all, if fans are biased it's only to expect that some players will be as well.
Carvalho is utter class and one of our best players. Rarely makes a foul and is a rock in defense.
Originally posted by jgvaccaroI don't agree, but I understand that him, as the coach, is sticking by his team and moving some of the heat upon him. Like you've never seen Sir Alex Ferguson do the same...
Well, Sasquatch should take back his description of Carvalho as "idiotic" and a "whiner," since it was based on his unwise reliance on a poor translation.
The criticism of Scolari seems on-target, however. He really has no business complaining about the officiating.