Zimmer
Un Moderador
+1,688|6797|Scotland

Stop it. Now. Your ignorance is seriously hurting my brain.

You aren't slovenian, and you aren't part of mainland Europe. It also seems that you don't give a shit about it. I ask, why not? He can get across in about 30 mins and back without hassle, and he probably enjoyed the day out.

It seems you think there is a huge gulf between bordering countries. It's like walking from your house to the shops ( which is done a lot from France to Switzerland for food ). Please, just shut up.
kptk92
u
+972|6449|tc_london

Zimmer wrote:

Stop it. Now. Your ignorance is seriously hurting my brain.

You aren't slovenian, and you aren't part of mainland Europe. It also seems that you don't give a shit about it. I ask, why not? He can get across in about 30 mins and back without hassle, and he probably enjoyed the day out.

It seems you think there is a huge gulf between bordering countries. It's like walking from your house to the shops ( which is done a lot from France to Switzerland for food ). Please, just shut up.
No I won't shut up because my original comment to .Sup was saying that I was amazed that he would travel across the border to go to wherever he was going just to watch a game of football on a giant TV and you thought that I didn't know Europe very well because I am not part of mainland Europe. I mean, .Sup could be on the most southern side of Slovenia, and I can't see why he would travel to Austria.

But of course you took things the other way when I wasn't aiming my question at you, so you can go ahead and ban me if you like to prove a point.
Zimmer
Un Moderador
+1,688|6797|Scotland

kptk92 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Stop it. Now. Your ignorance is seriously hurting my brain.

You aren't slovenian, and you aren't part of mainland Europe. It also seems that you don't give a shit about it. I ask, why not? He can get across in about 30 mins and back without hassle, and he probably enjoyed the day out.

It seems you think there is a huge gulf between bordering countries. It's like walking from your house to the shops ( which is done a lot from France to Switzerland for food ). Please, just shut up.
No I won't shut up because my original comment to .Sup was saying that I was amazed that he would travel across the border to go to wherever he was going just to watch a game of football on a giant TV and you thought that I didn't know Europe very well because I am not part of mainland Europe. I mean, .Sup could be on the most southern side of Slovenia, and I can't see why he would travel to Austria.

But of course you took things the other way when I wasn't aiming my question at you, so you can go ahead and ban me if you like to prove a point.
A. It's a day out.
B. It's easy.
C. It's where all the atmosphere is.
D. He felt like it.

You don't know Europe very well if you were amazed that he travelled across a tiny line separating 2 countries. End of.
kptk92
u
+972|6449|tc_london

Zimmer wrote:

D. He felt like it.
Well leave it at that then, I wasn't really looking to an argument about my knowledge of mainland Europe

I would of preferred .Sup to answer too tbh, it was his experience after all.
.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6494|The Twilight Zone

kptk92 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

liquidat0r wrote:

So?

Ireland neighbours my country, but I wouldn't go there to watch football on a TV. I can see where kptk is coming from.
Wow, again.... I wont even repeat the word...
We aren't in Britain, where moving over a border is like taking 20 million steps away from your house.

This is mainland Europe, people move from country to country daily.

I would have expected you to at least know that. Same applies with German and French borders and Swiss and French borders ( French work in Switzerland but live in France because it's cheaper ).

If you had just used your brain, you would have realised that mainland Europe isn't like Britain.

Also, Ireland is not your neighbouring country, you are separated by water, therefore it's not your neighbour. Like Frances' naighbour isn't the UK.
FINE LETS TALK ABOUT SCOTLAND THEN WE'RE NOT SEPARATED BY ANYTHING OR MAYBE WALES I DON'T KNOW ZIMMER THE POINT IS THAT IF I WAS SLOVENIAN I WOULD NOT TRAVEL ACROSS THE BORDER TO ANOTHER COUNTRY JUST TO WATCH 90 MINUTES OF FOOTBALL.

You see where I'm going?
@kptk i'm 1 hour away

Zimmer wrote:

You don't know Europe very well if you were amazed that he travelled across a tiny line separating 2 countries. End of.
It only separates us on map, its EU, no borders. No id needed.

Last edited by .Sup (2008-06-14 16:50:47)

https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
Benzin
Member
+576|6039
It was a Fan Zone. Something special about it. Though if you live in Vienna (like me), it's just a place for the foreigners to be corralled for easy extermination.


maef wrote:

Unfortunately, I seem to be quite a pessimist. While most other Austrians were fairly happy about the draw against Poland, I'm rather disappointed. Not just about this game, about our performance in the Euro in general.

I know, most of the people who read/post in this thread are well informed about the tournament anyway, but let me sum it up for you.
Disclaimer: Yes, I am going to refer to the Austrian national team as "us". Not just out of patriotism, also out of convenience.

Austria vs. Croatia:
Yes, the much-disputed penalty right at the start of the game. While I do think it was a tough decision to make that call, you can't really argue with it. He didn't necessarily have to blow the whistle, but it was definitely a justifiable call and well within the rules. He could have let it slide for the sake of the game, but well... sucks to be us.
After being completely dumbfounded for the next half hour, Austria started to get their act back together and dominated the game. Especially in the second half we had one chance after another, but failed to score. I'm not going to try and blame this on anyone but our own inability.
In overtime though, Kienast was massively held back by a Croatian player on an Austrian free-kick, essentially preventing him from getting in position for a decent header. The ball was coming towards him and the ref stood less than 5 meters away. This should definitely have been a penalty, especially when you consider the FIFA advised the refs to be strict on this kind of thing just before the Euro.

Austria vs. Poland:
We started off incredibly strong with one great chance after another. Again, there's no one to blame but ourselves for not going ahead at least 2:0 right then and there.
About half an hour into the game Poland scores on us. From an offside position. The side-ref has to do nothing at that point but check for offsides, so again there's no excuse for overseeing it. At least this time we handled the score a bit better, not being completely stumped for the rest of the half.
At some point, Ivanschitz storms into Poland's box all by himself and the defender grabs him by his shirt to rip him to the ground. Again, a penalty in my opinion, but no call.
In overtime, we get the previously discussed penalty. A justified call if you ask me, even though Prödl was held back less than Kienast was in the game against Croatia.

Sidenote: What I really don't get is: How in the world can people and even newspapers from Poland complain about that penalty? They said the referee "stole" the victory from them.
Not only were the refs advised to be strict on those things, what's worse is that their goal was an offside. Penalties are a matter of interpretation, offside is a goddamn fact. While some might call the penalty a harsh decision, their goal was definitely irregular.
He basically gave them a goal that wasn't supposed to count and they still bitch around. I just don't get it.



tl;dr: We should have gotten 3 penalties in those 2 games, one of which was called, and wasted loads of chances to score. A little more luck and ref decisions going more in favor and we could already have 6 points and be qualified for the quarter-finals.
Considering that, I just can't be happy about the outcome of Thursday's game.
I agree with you on all points. No argument from me at all.

And here's proof of the Poland offsides goal:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/CapnNismo/DSC00151.jpg
.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6494|The Twilight Zone
That match was a total farce Nismo. The score is fair.
https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
Zimmer
Un Moderador
+1,688|6797|Scotland

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6851|Nårvei

Calm down kids ... it isn't a question about geography, the issue was about whether one should travel to see a game of football ... some would and some wouldn't - easy as that, .Sup did it, i would have done it and prolly Zimmer would have done it, kptk would not have done it ... end of story!
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6851|Nårvei

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
I think there should be a rule that says you can't possibly be offside inside the 5 meter box ... that would help the refs alot ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6662|London, England
Things would be so much easier to remember if the USSR and Yugoslavia were still around.

Last edited by Mek-Stizzle (2008-06-15 04:16:49)

.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6494|The Twilight Zone

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

Things would be so much easier to remember if the USSR and Yugoslavia were still around.
lol what do you mean by that?
https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
Surgeons
U shud proabbly f off u fat prik
+3,097|6530|Gogledd Cymru

.Sup wrote:

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

Things would be so much easier to remember if the USSR and Yugoslavia were still around.
lol what do you mean by that?
That when the USSR broke up, there were a lot more countries, mek sucks at geography.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6662|London, England
You try and remember all those new countries. And not just the USSR, Yugoslavia too. Everyday there is a new country being made in the Balkans, Kosovo being the latest.
Benzin
Member
+576|6039

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Proof? I can't find that story anywhere on the EURO 2008 website. I just looked through all the news up to Thursday before the game.
^*AlphA*^
F*ckers
+3,135|6779|The Hague, Netherlands

just read one page from my return from Germany,

one thing I noticed:

ZIMMER TAKE A FREAKING CHILLPILL!
https://bf3s.com/sigs/36eac2cb6af70a43508fd8d1c93d3201f4e23435.png
B-Scimitar
Defeating your warriors.
+116|6450|Espoo, Finland

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Please explain page 103, picture 1.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder … _10565.pdf
.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6494|The Twilight Zone

B-Scimitar wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Please explain page 103, picture 1.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder … _10565.pdf
Man i was a goalkeeper but can't remember all rules anymore.
https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
Benzin
Member
+576|6039

B-Scimitar wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Please explain page 103, picture 1.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder … _10565.pdf
There are so many "BURN!" pictures, or "OWNED"/"PWNED" pictures that I could post right now ... but somehow, it would just be a waste of icing.

Instead, I shall merely congratulate Scimitar on finding this proof and thus proving that Zimmer is wrong.

https://www.aerotraining.com/applause.gif
Zimmer
Un Moderador
+1,688|6797|Scotland

B-Scimitar wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Please explain page 103, picture 1.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder … _10565.pdf
Oh shi-, sorry, wrong game.... it was another offside.... I can't remember what game... but the UEFA certainly confirmed that it wasn't offside. This one was. Apologies.
.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6494|The Twilight Zone

Zimmer wrote:

B-Scimitar wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Please explain page 103, picture 1.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder … _10565.pdf
Oh shi-, sorry, wrong game.... it was another offside.... I can't remember what game... but the UEFA certainly confirmed that it wasn't offside. This one was. Apologies.
Not many people admit their mistakes.

https://www.aerotraining.com/applause.gif
https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
maef
Member
+67|6724|Tulln, Austria

Zimmer wrote:

B-Scimitar wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Nismo : Wrong, the goal was legal because his foot was behind the goalkeeper, which automatically puts him onside - rule is, if you are behind everyone AND the keeper, you are still onside.
The UEFA confirmed that.
Please explain page 103, picture 1.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder … _10565.pdf
Oh shi-, sorry, wrong game.... it was another offside.... I can't remember what game... but the UEFA certainly confirmed that it wasn't offside. This one was. Apologies.
I think the one you meant was Italy vs. Netherlands, where the scorer would have been offside if it wasn't for that defender who was laying behind the goal line after colliding with his goalie.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6662|London, England
Interesting match ahead, Czech vs Turkiye - Both teams have the same goal difference, so if the game is a draw it's a penalty shoot out to determine who goes through with Portugal.
Benzin
Member
+576|6039
60 minute in the game and the Czechs lead 1-0.
kptk92
u
+972|6449|tc_london
80 minutes in the game and the Czechs lead 2-1


PORTUGAL ARE LOSING 2-0 TO SWITZERLAND LOOOLOLOLOLOLOLL

Last edited by kptk92 (2008-06-15 13:30:31)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard