FRANCE - Summer 2012 thread

Laudable Laudrup wrote:Prof,
What do you expect to see here? People have been very generous in only slating him as a cheat.

Get into 606, and see for yourself that France are worse than Nazis. Henry is the worst human, rivaling Hitler.

I wonder what the reaction was after Michael owen's dive against Argentina in the world cup....

I've never read so much shit from one person. I can't be arsed with it.

Who cares about Owen?

That didnt happen last night. Henry is a c**t.

Factomundo.

borocooper wrote:That didnt happen last night. Henry is a c**t.

Factomundo.

The Professor wrote:

Laudable Laudrup wrote:Prof,
What do you expect to see here? People have been very generous in only slating him as a cheat.

Get into 606, and see for yourself that France are worse than Nazis. Henry is the worst human, rivaling Hitler.

I wonder what the reaction was after Michael owen's dive against Argentina in the world cup....

Rightly or wrongly, people judge things on the context.

a. England lost the match.
b. It had the counterbalances of the Beckham incident (remember Beckham was the most hated man in England for a while after that) and the disallowed Campbell goal.

If France won the match last night 1-0 with Henry's goal, it would have caused some fuss, but nowhere near as much, because it wouldn't have been the decisive factor.

The Owen dive helped England get a draw in the 90 mins, but that was a crazy game - and that incident certainly did not settle the match in the way Henry's flagrant cheating did yesterday

debaser wrote:If France won the match last night 1-0 with Henry's goal, it would have caused some fuss, but nowhere near as much, because it wouldn't have been the decisive factor.

So over the course of 180 minutes there was no other moment where Ireland could have changed the outcome?

Look it is cheating and it shouldn't be accepted but Ireland couldn't even manage to score a goal in the first leg in Ireland against a French team that is sh!t. They played well last night but they missed a hatful of chances. By the time Henry handled the ball they could have been ahead 0-2 or 0-3.

When was the last time France actually played a good match? Have France become Germany in blue, or a Africanized version of Italy? France used to be so good to watch at!

Anyway I thought the celebrations in Paris and Marseille were a bit too much last night, though I found out that was cause Algeria qualified

@Jaime

We could talk hypotheticals all day...point was that the only thing separating the sides over two legs was an illegitimate goal. Hence that goal was decisive.

that Ireland should have scored more themselves is pretty much irrelevant.

debaser wrote:@Jaime

We could talk hypotheticals all day...point was that the only thing separating the sides over two legs was an illegitimate goal. Hence that goal was decisive.

that Ireland should have scored more themselves is pretty much irrelevant.

But the only reason it mattered was because Ireland failed to score at all in Dublin and squandered loads of chances in the first 90 minutes. Even if the goal were disallowed, Ireland wasn't necessarily qualified. They always needed a second goal, which they couldn't score.

The Professor wrote:

BoBo Vieri 32 wrote:

The Professor wrote:
I'm sure u didn't celebrate Italy's world cup victory after cheating their way against Australia

Again, just because Grosso cheated against Australia doesn't justify what Henry did.

It doesn't make it right, and i have said what Henry did was not ok, but i was just pointing out that was what 99.99% of footballers would have done.

No, i doubt 99.99% of footballers would've resorted to cheating in that case, though you'd be right in saying that a fair few players would also cheat. But like you said, it doesn't make it right so it's a moot point.

BoBo Vieri 32 wrote:

They are for thinking anyone in their right mind would own up under similar circumstances.

So basically, anyone who disagrees with you is a thick deluded c**t. That's all you had to say.

But anyway, what you said originally was a player who admitted to such a handball is thick deluded c**t. Now my question was how does him being honest and telling the truth make him a thick deluded c**t? Please answer

No.

But in this case if a player from my country does that in a crucial world cup qualifier i'll call him thick and deluded. That's simply because even a 12 year old could have seen the cheating going on by both sides and known fully well that the opposition would not have owned up either if they were in a similar situation. St lager's and Duff's comments prove my last sentence right.

I'd say he was honest. Though i guess the fact that he was deliberately cheating meant he was never likely to admit it afterwards.

Jaime wrote:

debaser wrote:@Jaime

We could talk hypotheticals all day...point was that the only thing separating the sides over two legs was an illegitimate goal. Hence that goal was decisive.

that Ireland should have scored more themselves is pretty much irrelevant.

But the only reason it mattered was because Ireland failed to score at all in Dublin and squandered loads of chances in the first 90 minutes. Even if the goal were disallowed, Ireland wasn't necessarily qualified. They always needed a second goal, which they couldn't score.

You can say the same for France - they proved themselves unable to score at home without cheating. But if they'd scored twice in Ireland they would've won without ET. As I say, hypotheticals all day.

At the moment Henry handled, it was 1-1 - that is the only relevance of past goals/misses/anything.

If France don't score, there's a bit of extra time remaining, and penalties to follow. This is how it should have gone.

But they do score - it settles the match. Decisive goal.

debaser wrote:

Jaime wrote:

debaser wrote:@Jaime

We could talk hypotheticals all day...point was that the only thing separating the sides over two legs was an illegitimate goal. Hence that goal was decisive.

that Ireland should have scored more themselves is pretty much irrelevant.

But the only reason it mattered was because Ireland failed to score at all in Dublin and squandered loads of chances in the first 90 minutes. Even if the goal were disallowed, Ireland wasn't necessarily qualified. They always needed a second goal, which they couldn't score.

You can say the same for France - they proved themselves unable to score at home without cheating. But if they'd scored twice in Ireland they would've won without ET. As I say, hypotheticals all day.

At the moment Henry handled, it was 1-1 - that is the only relevance of past goals/misses/anything.

If France don't score, there's a bit of extra time remaining, and penalties to follow. This is how it should have gone.

But they do score - it settles the match. Decisive goal.

Yes, it was the decisive goal but surely over 180 minutes the Irish had plenty of chances to win the tie convincingly. That's my point. They aren't going to the WC and perhaps they've been a bit unfortunate not just last night but with Anelka's deflected shot in the first leg. But I don't think you can point to Henry's (cheating c*nt that he is) handball well if the ensuing goal was disallowed Ireland would be going to the WC.

but they would've gone out fairly, at the very least.

borocooper wrote:Who cares about Owen?

That didnt happen last night. Henry is a c**t.

Factomundo.

I do.

Owen should have been lynched in a similar manner no matter what the outcome of the match was. A cheat is a cheat. Henry cheated, Owen did the same, they should all be treated equally.

Well invent us a fucking time machine then you gibbon.

Truth hurts.

That makes absolutely no sense.

It does. Absolutely.

I agree with Professor that Owen should've received criticism for both the dives he did against Argentina.

Still it seems like you're trying to divert all the attention from Henry by bringing up other players who have cheated.

Let the Henry bashing continue.

Normally I dont get involved with this sort of thing..but you are acting like some sort of spastic at the moment, Professor.

How does that make sense?

Do I like Michael Owen? No.

Does it hurt me to know that he dived in a game that we didnt win 11 years ago? No.

Would I slag the little c**t off if he did it tomorrow? Definitely.

Had I been older than 10 at the time and been interested enough to have slagged him off had I known the full extent of what he'd done, would I have? Yes.

I think people were probably too busy lynching one of our other players sadly.


So no, no sense in what you said there. Stop acting the spastic.

Admit Henry is a c**t who deserves lynching and be done with it.

Never has this forum been so united against two people - both the professor and henry. I think we can all agree that they're both c**ts.

borocooper wrote:Normally I dont get involved with this sort of thing..but you are acting like some sort of spastic at the moment, Professor.

How does that make sense?

Do I like Michael Owen? No.

Does it hurt me to know that he dived in a game that we didnt win 11 years ago? No.

Would I slag the little c**t off if he did it tomorrow? Definitely.

Had I been older than 10 at the time and been interested enough to have slagged him off had I known the full extent of what he'd done, would I have? Yes.

I think people were probably too busy lynching one of our other players sadly.


So no, no sense in what you said there. Stop acting the spastic.

Admit Henry is a c**t who deserves lynching and be done with it.

You have just jumped in and started calling me names without really getteing my point.

My point was, u often get these hysterical reaction in England(from both the fans and press alike) when they are in the receiving end of cheating. Yet u hardly hear anything when it's one of their own doing the same. See Rooney´s dive against us at OT, see Crouch´s goal against Trinidad Tobago etc

I´m all for going after cheats but your media should not pick and choose when to do it. we had the farce with Eduardo this season, and there have been incidents of cheating yet no one has been lynched half as much as Eduardo was

I will continue to jump in and call you names from here on.

Especially when you saying something as spasticated as "truth hurts"

I can do the same u know. It doesn´t take much effort to type a few words.

The Professor wrote: It doesn´t take much effort to type a few words.

Prove it

borocooper wrote:

The Professor wrote: It doesn´t take much effort to type a few words.

Prove it

Are u a mathematician

Lots of effort in that one.

I'm not sure what your point is, are you saying we should get hysterical about every incident of cheating, or that we should dismiss all incidents of cheating because we would probably do the same?

The fact is if there is cheating in a big game then whoever the cheat is they will recieve a disproportionate amount of hate, when Eduardo cheated all eyes were on that game, last night all eyes were on Irelands game, that's the way it is. I know all about cheating going ignored, when Howard Webb inexplicably robbed us of our league status and £50m last season it didn't even get a mention on MOTD, no one gave a shit. Not reacting to cheating is much worse than going over the top about it.

Ballack wrote:Never has this forum been so united against two people - both the professor and henry. I think we can all agree that they're both c**ts.

I think we can all see who´s the c**t here Bllack

Calling someone names for merely stating an opinion

This is why we love football, no?