fulham red Posted November 19, 2009 Report Share Posted November 19, 2009 Been thinking about this one. Were City as guilty in the Palace game as Thierry Henry? To my mind, there are two clear differences between the Palace incident and Henry last night. First no City player did anything wrong in the lead up to the goal. There was no foul, no hint of cheating. Henry handled the ball in a way that at least looks deliberate, even if it was the result of split-second instinct at the time. The other issue is whether City or Henry should have owned up. At the Palace game, although most City players (and most fans) thought it had probably gone in, there was still that small level of uncertainty - that feeling of 'that went in, didn't it? Or did it?' Where there is even a small level of uncertainty, it's hard to blame the City players for not giving Palace a goal. On the other hand, Henry clearly knew 100% he had handled. So although depressingly it's hardly possible to think of many players who would have done so, morally, Henry should have owned up, gone to the ref and admitted he had cheated. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dazzler Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 Been thinking about this one. Were City as guilty in the Palace game as Thierry Henry? To my mind, there are two clear differences between the Palace incident and Henry last night. First no City player did anything wrong in the lead up to the goal. There was no foul, no hint of cheating. Henry handled the ball in a way that at least looks deliberate, even if it was the result of split-second instinct at the time. The other issue is whether City or Henry should have owned up. At the Palace game, although most City players (and most fans) thought it had probably gone in, there was still that small level of uncertainty - that feeling of 'that went in, didn't it? Or did it?' Where there is even a small level of uncertainty, it's hard to blame the City players for not giving Palace a goal. On the other hand, Henry clearly knew 100% he had handled. So although depressingly it's hardly possible to think of many players who would have done so, morally, Henry should have owned up, gone to the ref and admitted he had cheated. Thoughts? Irish supporters will have to imagine how they would have reacted if Robbie Keane had done exactly the same thing down the other end and then crossed it for Doyle to put them into the World Cup Finals. And how they would have reacted if their own players had insisted that the referee disallowed the goal. As many of us said on here at the time of the Palace incident, we knew we got away with it (and we were quite happy about that!) Unitl we get video replays (which would probably slow the game down less than all the howls of protest after dodgy decisions are made) this will continue. Most England exits from major tournaments seem to centre on controversial refereeing decisions (no more so than the Hand of god in 1986) and even when we won the bloody thing there was the controversy over the 3rd goal not being over the line and the Russian linesman. Either we have to introduce cricket-style "third umpire decisions" for the big decisions or carry on like we always have done with the controversy and unfairness that goes with it. As far as I am concerned video replays must be the future. Geting back to last night, after Ireland blew all their chances, the French were always going to qualify one way or another, in a tie they were never losing in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DanC Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 At teh time our players were told the goal was disallowed for a infringement, Not a lot we can do about that. Henry apparently said to the ref it was a handball but the ref replied your not the ref I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 My thoughts are here - http://fansonline.net/bristolcity/article.php?id=392. We simply must bring in video technology, its getting to the point of absurdity now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laner Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 At teh time our players were told the goal was disallowed for a infringement, Not a lot we can do about that. Henry apparently said to the ref it was a handball but the ref replied your not the ref I am. I do find it strange that many people seem to be absolving Henry of any real blame. He admitted it was hand ball after the game but then went on to suggest it wasn't his fault that the ref didn't see it. He clearly cheated. At some point he knew the ball was out of his reach and decided to use his hands. It was his choice... OK granted in the heat of the moment in a very important game but still it was his choice and to suggest it isn't because he wasn't spotted is also wrong. Does that mean an athlete is not cheating by taking drugs simply because the authorities haven't caught them yet? The introduction of video technology I'm sure will be the answer although I'd like to see the the use of 4 linesmen in the interim. Having officials closer to the play will hopefully help instead of one being on the other side of the pitch... as with the Henry incident, the linesman was on the other side; one on the same side of the pitch would have been in a far better position to spot the infringement. The only downside to video technology in league completions is that it wouldn't be available to ALL clubs in the English leagues. It does seem unfair that the top Prem sides would have the advantage of video technology whilst the lower clubs, whose games mean just as much to them (financially maybe more sometimes?) would be denied this fall-back style of officiating. When decisions go against them, they'd just have to accept it and that seems unfair to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the frampton balti Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 sorry if this is old ground, but what was the referees statement after the palace game.? Was there a referees statement.? As far as i am concerned the matter has not been resolved as to whether the officials thought it was a goal, and what the city players were saying to the ref when they rushed up to him. As for henry, well as the talent begins to fade you have to improvise somehow!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff65 Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 Henry now enters into history as a cheat along with Maradonna and Schumaker. Deliberately cheating and not giveing a toss afterwards but reaping the rewards. Henry do the right thing and retire immediately from international football and tell the world that this is the reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 I think the situations are totally different. The actions of our players didn't make the ball go into the net and come out again, the the actions of Henry did make a goal. He knowingly prevented the ball going out of play by controlling with his hand which is against the rules. He is a cheat. What goes around comes around and this has tarnished a player who has brought much to the game, but that's down to himself and he has to live with what follows. Basically from what he has said since,and I understand why he has chosen his words carefully, I don't think he set out to cheat. He did however find himself in a situation where he used unlawful means to gain an advantage. Yup, the Irish half of me is upset, upset for football and believe the world cup is now a farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 If City players had turned to the ref and said "it went in guv'nor", there's no way he'd have changed his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 From what I can remember, the City players all turned on their heels, looked disappointed and Ashton Gate went pretty quiet. The team didn't start playing on until they realised that something wasn't right. In contrast, Henry started celebrating straight away and the Stade de France went mad. It's a shame because I have a massive respect for Henry's talents and he absolutely lit up the Premier League. If he had walked up to the ref and admitted the handball he could have become an absolute legend but his reputation will be tarnished. Not quite as badly as Maradona but close to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 Been thinking about this one. Were City as guilty in the Palace game as Thierry Henry? To my mind, there are two clear differences between the Palace incident and Henry last night. First no City player did anything wrong in the lead up to the goal. There was no foul, no hint of cheating. Henry handled the ball in a way that at least looks deliberate, even if it was the result of split-second instinct at the time. The other issue is whether City or Henry should have owned up. At the Palace game, although most City players (and most fans) thought it had probably gone in, there was still that small level of uncertainty - that feeling of 'that went in, didn't it? Or did it?' Where there is even a small level of uncertainty, it's hard to blame the City players for not giving Palace a goal. On the other hand, Henry clearly knew 100% he had handled. So although depressingly it's hardly possible to think of many players who would have done so, morally, Henry should have owned up, gone to the ref and admitted he had cheated. Thoughts? Thierry Henry belongs to species of spineless. That's my one and only comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 sorry if this is old ground, but what was the referees statement after the palace game.? Was there a referees statement.? As far as i am concerned the matter has not been resolved as to whether the officials thought it was a goal, and what the city players were saying to the ref when they rushed up to him. As for henry, well as the talent begins to fade you have to improvise somehow!! Odd thing. After incident FA played the big drum suspending the ref and the linesmen. But can fans read refs report once the dust has settled? No way. Big joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gater2 Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 I must admit (and this will sound controversial), that I think errors are part of the game and I wouldn't bring in video reffing. Although it's a horrible feeling when you've lost by a bad decision, there is something quite satisfying in the helpless sense of righteous indignation I feel after this; kind of thinking the whole world is against us can be quite comforting, if not very gutting, and I think this is part of sport. I know you can bring up the argument about players' wages hanging on decisions etc., but from my perspective as a fan, I think errors are part of the game (obviously we should do all we can to get ref-standards up), but I am against video reffing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 I must admit (and this will sound controversial), that I think errors are part of the game and I wouldn't bring in video reffing. Although it's a horrible feeling when you've lost by a bad decision, there is something quite satisfying in the helpless sense of righteous indignation I feel after this; kind of thinking the whole world is against us can be quite comforting, if not very gutting, and I think this is part of sport. I know you can bring up the argument about players' wages hanging on decisions etc., but from my perspective as a fan, I think errors are part of the game (obviously we should do all we can to get ref-standards up), but I am against video reffing. It's really sad that the ref did not had mind presence to confront the player. Clearly the Irish was upset and their captain should have suggested it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 I must admit (and this will sound controversial), that I think errors are part of the game and I wouldn't bring in video reffing. Although it's a horrible feeling when you've lost by a bad decision, there is something quite satisfying in the helpless sense of righteous indignation I feel after this; kind of thinking the whole world is against us can be quite comforting, if not very gutting, and I think this is part of sport. I know you can bring up the argument about players' wages hanging on decisions etc., but from my perspective as a fan, I think errors are part of the game (obviously we should do all we can to get ref-standards up), but I am against video reffing. You obviously weren't there for the hand of god goal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 It's really sad that the ref did not had mind presence to confront the player. Clearly the Irish was upset and their captain should have suggested it. Referees arent allowed to make decisions on what they are told... The rules are explicit that they can only call make a decision based on what they see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 Referees arent allowed to make decisions on what they are told... The rules are explicit that they can only call make a decision based on what they see Clearly it was something wrong in this case and if Henry in the name of honesty had told the ref that he deliberately handballed I'm sure the ref would have used his common sense and disallowed the goal. Who cares about the rules if he make the right decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 I would like to se the cheater lie to half Europe in front of the tv cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 Do you think at any point during the campaign that any Irish player didn't own up to doing something? Didn't put their hand up for a throw in they knew wasn't theirs? Didn't creep forward along the touchline or spot the ball in the wrong place? Nearly all, probably all professional players cheat. This is just because it's a potentially pivotel moment in a long campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Man In Black Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Referees arent allowed to make decisions on what they are told... The rules are explicit that they can only call make a decision based on what they see Absolute rubbish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boadle Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Absolute rubbish Absolute fact. FIFA Laws of the Game - Rule 5 The Referee. The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or, at his discretion, on the advice of an assistant referee or the fourth official, provided that he has not restarted play or terminated the match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfcheadingly Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Absolute fact. Surely if Henry told the ref the ref would then "realise that it is incorrect" and could have disallowed the goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Surely if Henry told the ref the ref would then "realise that it is incorrect" and could have disallowed the goal. As you can see, he cannot change a decision based on what he is told by a player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Humble Realist Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 Absolute fact. spot on mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 I think the situations are totally different. The actions of our players didn't make the ball go into the net and come out again, the the actions of Henry did make a goal. He knowingly prevented the ball going out of play by controlling with his hand which is against the rules. He is a cheat. What goes around comes around and this has tarnished a player who has brought much to the game, but that's down to himself and he has to live with what follows. Basically from what he has said since,and I understand why he has chosen his words carefully, I don't think he set out to cheat. He did however find himself in a situation where he used unlawful means to gain an advantage. Yup, the Irish half of me is upset, upset for football and believe the world cup is now a farce. Would you say Michael Owen is a cheat? After all, he dived when untouched against the argies in 2002...no different, yet when it goes in your favour, you tend to forget these small matters of cheating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest david wka Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Get over it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted November 25, 2009 SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Referees arent allowed to make decisions on what they are told... The rules are explicit that they can only call make a decision based on what they see Actually, I saw this very point being discussed on German TV on Saturday night, when they went into the ethics of the Henry case in quite some depth. Their resident refereeing expert is Urs Meier (not England fans' favourite ref, but nevertheless a man with more experience of refereeing at international level than, I dare say, anyone on this forum). They showed quite clearly with graphics that the referee could not have seen the handball. Meier, however, said that the referee's mistake had been not to ask Henry outright if he had handled the ball. As was said in the studio, a player asked that question knowing that everything he has done has been filmed by dozens of cameras is unlikely to lie. Meier was adamant that the referee was allowed to ask a player such a question and to act upon the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 As you can see, he cannot change a decision based on what he is told by a player Ok so Henri goes and tells the linesman or 4th official, who then tells the ref. Surely the rules of football make some allowance for the application of common sense - don't they?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 I would like to se the cheater lie to half Europe in front of the tv cameras. I think we will all see this happen when Tony Blair goes in front of the Iraq war enquiry in the New Year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Rgearding this, I know the Palace issue was a good while back, but if memory serves I read a piece from the time itself the other day in which Henry Winter essentially pointed the finger at us. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...lowed-goal.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.