90:00+6:58 CITY CHEATED OUT A DRAW *FACT*
scoopex
Jellore
> The final whistle is blown by the referee.
Just as well, it could have ended in a 5-3 win for United.
The Magician
"scoopex" <sco...@scoopex.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7hmu1sF...@mid.individual.net...
> The final whistle is blown by the referee.
hey scoops they just ran it real time on MUTV, and luckily for you I have
sky plussed it back to give you the........... FAHCTS
89:54 goal by bellamy
91:18 restart of game
92:02 carrick on for anderson (30 seconds gets added like all games)
So the game should end at 95:48
Owen (cheers for him Scoops, top Scouser Mikey) was 95:14
So the ref added 30 seconds for the United goal also and finished the game
at 96:18, which would be 100% correct.
So it seems you are talking utter shit, but its always nice to ram it down
your throats as we know how hard it is for you to watch MO seal it for us,
and probably the title, and 19 will be all ours.
Sleep well
pmls :)
two times 3 in a row
LOL
"The Magician" <su...@wigan.com> wrote in message
news:DKSdnczNxLfF3ivX...@bt.com...
Paul C
wrote:
Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
The Magician
"Paul C" <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote in message
news:7lpcb55428ub6j2lo...@4ax.com...
has always been this way
want a link ?
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/2497/2d0zbltjpg.gif
DC
You do know that when the board goes up it indicateds the minimum period of
injury time not the maximum.
Paul C
You do know it indicatates 4-4.59 mins, not 4-6.58 mins.
The Scrutineer
Doesn;t Answer WHY
Also, WHY does it apply to second halves only???
DC
You do know its 4 minutes minimum not 4 minutes maximum.
DC
"DC" <d...@c.com> wrote in message
news:4ab66...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
The clue is in the minimum.
Paul C
It indicates 4 minutes board indicates 4-4.59 minutes of added time.
Where did the other two minutes come from?
Paul C
And why was time not added on after MU's 4th goal?
The truth is time is not added on for goals scored.
Zfs..
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:55:19 +0100, "DC" <d...@c.com> wrote:
>
> >"DC" <d...@c.com> wrote in message
> >news:4ab66...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>
> >>news:mgqcb515ngqj6u9qs...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:41:18 +0100, "DC" <d...@c.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>news:7lpcb55428ub6j2lo...@4ax.com...
> >>>>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:59:42 +0100, "The Magician" <su...@wigan.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
The fact City scored and took time to celebrate and the sub that was
made... Anyways its at the refs discretion as to how much is added on
after the minimum allowed has been put up....
The Magician
celebrated.
89'55" Bellamy scores. Spends 85 secs larging it in front of the fans and
fannying about getting back in his own half.
91'20" Game restarts. No... added time has yet been played.
92'30" Sub. Only 1 minute 10 added time played.
93'00" Game restarts.
95'30" Mickey bloody Owen scores. 3'40" added time played
96'20" Game restarts. 20 secs added time left.
96'40" 4 mins up - Full Time.
DC
I dont think you are grasping the minimum rule.
When the board goes up indicating 4 minute it means a minimum of 4 minutes
of injury time not that there will be 4 minutes of injury time. It allows
the ref to add further time where necassary. So for instance he may of had
in his mind 4.59 minutes to add on initialy (btw he could have had in mind
ten minutes and still put up 4 minutes as like I say its a minimum not a
maximum.). Then utd make a sub which means he now has to add a further
thirty seconds now he is up to 5.29 minutes. Apparently it was ruled citys
goal celebration was excessivly long which happened after the 4 minutes was
decided so he may of added another 20 secs who knows. United then score
within this time which mean he has to wait for the restart to blow a further
40-50 seconds. It soon adds up.
the apostate
point is the timekeeping was shit as anyone except a person with ther
tongue up taggart's arse would notice
The Scrutineer
win for united, and as a neutral, a Great Game!!!
DC
"the apostate" <apos...@goodstadt.co.uk> wrote in message
news:P9ydnXyk9NS56SvX...@brightview.com...
I hear the Gillingham fans laughing at this comment right now.
Mentalguy2k8
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:51:03 GMT, "The Scrutineer"
> <vla...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>>> has always been this way
>>
>>Doesn;t Answer WHY
>>
>>Also, WHY does it apply to second halves only???
>>
> And why was time not added on after MU's 4th goal?
Because it put them in the lead, silly!
Rule 234b states that play shall continue until Man U have more goals than
the opposition, at which point the game must be ended immediately. Rule 234c
applies the same law to Chelsea, unless they are playing Man U in which case
rule 234b takes preference. If no winning goal is scored after 3 days, a
replay will be scheduled, whereupon United will be granted a 6-0 aggregate
lead.
the apostate
differenct between the fans of city and the fans of MANUre - we have no
problem in recognising these things.
DC
Find me a true Utd fan that claims that the spurs goal that was disallowed a
few seasons back that was clearly over the line was never a goal and that
spurs were not robbed in the game
and I take your point.
The added time today was right if you take in that the 4 minutes was a
minimum, then the sub, and "excessive" goal celebrations.
Utd have had benifit from dodgy decisions in the past and have been robbed
this isnt one of them.
the apostate
Sadly I work with one.
> The added time today was right if you take in that the 4 minutes was a
> minimum, then the sub, and "excessive" goal celebrations.
"Excessive" - inconsistent on this point. Sub? If they took that long
surely ManUre need sanctions imposing
> Utd have had benifit from dodgy decisions in the past and have been
> robbed this isnt one of them.
>
>
REally not convinced. they get far too many games where they "win" with
the last kick of the match
The Scrutineer
> the opposition, at which point the game must be ended immediately. Rule
> 234c applies the same law to Chelsea, unless they are playing Man U in
> which case rule 234b takes preference. If no winning goal is scored after
> 3 days, a replay will be scheduled, whereupon United will be granted a 6-0
> aggregate lead.
Great Post!!!!
The Scrutineer
*Rule 234b states that play shall continue until Man U have more goals than
lead.*
I hate the fact that Man Utd are top Dogs, but i am starting to hate
Manchester as a whole!!!
DC
He may be a post 93 glory hunter with a United duvet and matching wallpaper.
I meant true fan. You city fans may find out what that is like should the
money buy some success.
>
>> The added time today was right if you take in that the 4 minutes was a
>> minimum, then the sub, and "excessive" goal celebrations.
>
> "Excessive" - inconsistent on this point. Sub? If they took that long
> surely ManUre need sanctions imposing
Like I say in the other post excessive is interpretable and down to an
individual it would be impossible to be consistent with wording like
excessive. The sub is standard 30 secs just the way it is.
>
>> Utd have had benifit from dodgy decisions in the past and have been
>> robbed this isnt one of them.
>>
>>
> REally not convinced. they get far too many games where they "win" with
> the last kick of the match
When City gel you will find yourselves winning a few more like that.
DC
"The Scrutineer" <vla...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:H5vtm.41837$ze1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
That fellow poster was a bitter Kopite. He is just bitter that since the
anti Liverpool backpass rule was passed they have come no where near a
league title.
ste...@totalise.co.uk
> "Paul C" <p...@thersgb.net> wrote in message
>
> news:crrcb5lgf8d3n65fo...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:55:19 +0100, "DC" <d...@c.com> wrote:
>
> >>"DC" <d...@c.com> wrote in message
> >>news:4ab66...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>
> >>>news:mgqcb515ngqj6u9qs...@4ax.com...
> >>>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:41:18 +0100, "DC" <d...@c.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>news:7lpcb55428ub6j2lo...@4ax.com...
> >>>>>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:59:42 +0100, "The Magician" <su...@wigan.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
>
Pure bullshit. 4 minutes means 4 minutes, not 5 minutes. Here's teh
rules, and you won't find anything about there being an additional
minute, because I've looked:
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/81/42/36/lawsofthegameen.pdf
It only says "minimum" to allow for additional stoppages, such as
substitutions. You're just inventing rules that aren't there. Are you
related to Fergie?
> Then utd make a sub which means he now has to add a further
> thirty seconds now he is up to 5.29 minutes.
You've invented that a substitution gets 30 seconds added on. It
doesn't get 30 seconds at all, it gets however many seconds the
substitution takes to happen, and that substitution took about 10
seconds.
> Apparently it was ruled citys
> goal celebration was excessivly long which happened after the 4 minutes was
> decided so he may of added another 20 secs who knows.
Who knows? Not you, obviously. Mark Hughes said he timed the goal
celebration and it lasted 45 seconds, and I'm far more inclined to
believe him than I am some red cunt who's inventing thigns as he goes
along without actually having the first clue about whether he's right
or not.
> United then score
> within this time which mean he has to wait for the restart to blow a further
> 40-50 seconds. It soon adds up.
45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
You're 30 seconds short.
John W
> Nothing will be done, its 4-3 to United, and as a fellow poster wrote:
>
> *Rule 234b states that play shall continue until Man U have more goals than
> the opposition, at which point the game must be ended immediately. Rule
> 234c
> applies the same law to Chelsea, unless they are playing Man U in which
> case
> rule 234b takes preference. If no winning goal is scored after 3 days, a
> replay will be scheduled, whereupon United will be granted a 6-0 aggregate
> lead.*
What action will the FA take for the throwing of items at the Man City
players at half time? Give you a clue it's the square root of F all
The Magician
45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
You're 30 seconds short.
what a sweet sweet victory :D
DC
>45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
>+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
>You're 30 seconds short.
Allowance is made in either period for all time lost through:
. substitutions
. assessment of injury to players
. removal of injured players from the fi eld of play for treatment
. wasting time
. any other cause
The allowance for time lost is at the discretion of the referee.
That last one allows a ref to add time for any cause of delay that causes
time to be lost including goals and its at the discretion of the ref. Thanks
for prooving the point.
4 minutes minimum time to add. How do you know he was not adding 4 minutes
59 seconds?
Ren
"John W" <Liverp...@europe.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7hnf3vF...@mid.individual.net...
lmao, that is seriously funny and i may steal it from you for future use :)
Ren
ste...@totalise.co.uk
> <snip illinformed bitter shite>
Oh, so it's "ill-informed" to quote teh fucking rule book at you, is
it?
> >45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
> >+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
> >You're 30 seconds short.
>
> Allowance is made in either period for all time lost through:
> . substitutions
> . assessment of injury to players
> . removal of injured players from the fi eld of play for treatment
> . wasting time
> . any other cause
>
> The allowance for time lost is at the discretion of the referee.
But something actually had to happen for him to add time for, and
other than the substitution and the goal celebration there wasn't
anything, so you can stick your "at the discretion of the referee" up
your arse unless you can think of something that needed more time
adding on.
> That last one allows a ref to add time for any cause of delay that causes
> time to be lost including goals and its at the discretion of the ref. Thanks
> for prooving the point.
You haven't proved fuck all, and that's because by the things that
you've said yourself you're still at least 30 seconds short and
probably more like a minute short if you're allowed to celebrate a
goal for say 15 seconds.
> 4 minutes minimum time to add. How do you know he was not adding 4 minutes
> 59 seconds?
It says in the rules that the number of minutes is a minimum *to allow
for other stoppages*, such as substitutions and goal celebrations. 4
minutes is 4 minutes + other stoppages. It is not 5 minutes +
stoppages.
DC
>But something actually had to happen for him to add time for, and
>other than the substitution and the goal celebration there wasn't
>anything, so you can stick your "at the discretion of the referee" up
>your arse unless you can think of something that needed more time
>adding on.
The point being its at the discretion of the ref what he adds time on for
and how much he adds. Not you, not Hughes, not Fergie.
You say the sub took 10 seconds the ref could add 30 you say the goal
celebrations was 45 seconds I believe Sky had it at about a minute. There is
your 30 seconds already.
> That last one allows a ref to add time for any cause of delay that causes
> time to be lost including goals and its at the discretion of the ref.
> Thanks
> for prooving the point.
>You haven't proved fuck all, and that's because by the things that
>you've said yourself you're still at least 30 seconds short and
>probably more like a minute short if you're allowed to celebrate a
>goal for say 15 seconds.
well the goal was scored in normal time and the kick off was 91:20 so 15
seconds seems a bit rich. Besides the ref is well within his rights to add
the full stoppage.
> 4 minutes minimum time to add. How do you know he was not adding 4 minutes
> 59 seconds?
>It says in the rules that the number of minutes is a minimum *to allow
>for other stoppages*, such as substitutions and goal celebrations. 4
>minutes is 4 minutes + other stoppages. It is not 5 minutes +
>stoppages.
Try again word for word
The announcement of the additional time does not indicate the exact amount
of time left in the match.
Paul C
><snip illinformed bitter shite>
>
>
>>45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
>>+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
>
>>You're 30 seconds short.
>
>Allowance is made in either period for all time lost through:
>. substitutions
>. assessment of injury to players
>. removal of injured players from the fi eld of play for treatment
>. wasting time
>. any other cause
>
>The allowance for time lost is at the discretion of the referee.
>
>That last one allows a ref to add time for any cause of delay that causes
>time to be lost including goals and its at the discretion of the ref. Thanks
>for prooving the point.
It also allows the ref to add 3 minutes if MU are only drawing at home
at the end of regulation time.
Jellore
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:55:19 +0100, "DC" <d...@c.com> wrote:
>
> >"DC" <d...@c.com> wrote in message
> >news:4ab66...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>
> >>news:mgqcb515ngqj6u9qs...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:41:18 +0100, "DC" <d...@c.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>news:7lpcb55428ub6j2lo...@4ax.com...
> >>>>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:59:42 +0100, "The Magician" <su...@wigan.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
It has been explained to you above.
Baxter
wrote:
>
>45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
>+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
>
>You're 30 seconds short.
4-3 to Utd. You're 2 goals short of a win, get over it.
Jussi Uosukainen
>
> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any book
about the laws of the game.
The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
--
/jussi
Dogbert: I'm going back to my old job as a network systems administrator.
Dilbert: Why?
Dogbert: I'm attracted by the potential for reckless abuse of power.
* Scott Adams: Dilbert
Inbedwithared
"The Fuckwit" <sco...@scoopex.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7hmu1sF...@mid.individual.net...
> The final whistle is blown by the referee.
Correct........and????
What with all this toing and froing in this debate, the end result remains;
Manchester United 4 Manchester City 3
United get 3 competition points, City get nowt.
Check out the league table, at least that doesn't lie, unlike The Fuckwit.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/default.stm
Snigger
Inbedwithared
Diablos Rojos
"Jussi Uosukainen" <ju...@iki.fi> wrote in message
news:4ab6b44f$0$6298$7b1e...@news.nbl.fi...
> In rec.sport.soccer Paul C <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
>
> When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
>
> Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
> tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
> stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any book
> about the laws of the game.
>
> The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
> --
Of course they were <rolls eyes>, the bitter outpourings about injustice
from the Berties and you kopites is the cherry on the cake after yesterdays
result a worthy result for United who laid siege to City in the second half
and should have had a hatful.
City got a spawny equaliser 2 seconds before normal time was up the game was
3-3 either team could have scored in those added minutes seems City were
waiting for the whistle whereas we kept on pushing.
Justice was served....
penco
It is in the best interest for the EPL to see MAN U do well. Without
MAN U the EPL is nothing. The cheating you saw Sunday is just the tip
of the iceberg when it comes to MAN U.
Diablos Rojos
"penco" <pen...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b2d1f9a1-7a1b-46e0...@m11g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They're all out today FFS, is this because of the crosspost to RSC, or has
this result genuinely brought out the bitter loons?
Baldoni
> It is in the best interest for the EPL to see MAN U do well. Without
> MAN U the EPL is nothing. The cheating you saw Sunday is just the tip
> of the iceberg when it comes to MAN U.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> They're all out today FFS, is this because of the crosspost to RSC, or has
> this result genuinely brought out the bitter loons?
Not loons but maybe reasonable and fair minded people whose only wish
is to see the game played fairly with equal quarter applied to both
teams.
--
Count Baldoni
In hoc signo vinces
Red Rackham
<ste...@totalise.co.uk>
Pure bullshit. 4 minutes means 4 minutes, not 5 minutes. Here's teh
rules, and you won't find anything about there being an additional
minute, because I've looked:
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/81/42/36/lawsofthegameen.pdf
It only says "minimum" to allow for additional stoppages, such as
substitutions. You're just inventing rules that aren't there. Are you
related to Fergie?
----
There was a substitution. It is accepted that a substitution adds 30
seconds.
> Then utd make a sub which means he now has to add a further
> thirty seconds now he is up to 5.29 minutes.
You've invented that a substitution gets 30 seconds added on. It
doesn't get 30 seconds at all, it gets however many seconds the
substitution takes to happen, and that substitution took about 10
seconds.
------
No. You are quite wrong. A substitution adds on 30 seconds.
> Apparently it was ruled citys
> goal celebration was excessivly long which happened after the 4 minutes
> was
> decided so he may of added another 20 secs who knows.
Who knows? Not you, obviously. Mark Hughes said he timed the goal
celebration and it lasted 45 seconds, and I'm far more inclined to
believe him than I am some red cunt who's inventing thigns as he goes
along without actually having the first clue about whether he's right
or not.
---
Well, I'm more inclined to believe the BBC and Sky Sports than a bitter blue
and they both timed the celebration at well over a minute.
> United then score
> within this time which mean he has to wait for the restart to blow a
> further
> 40-50 seconds. It soon adds up.
45 seconds for the goal celebration + 10 seconds for the substitution
+ 4 minutes added time = 4 mins 55 seconds.
You're 30 seconds short.
-----
No. Owen scored within the time allowed by the ref. Perhaps City should have
tried this.
Diablos Rojos
"Baldoni" <Baldo...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:7hpdo2F...@mid.individual.net...
reasonable and fair minded... LMFAO!
What a lot seem to be failing to realise is that both teams were still
playing City had just scored and there was nothing stopping them from doing
the same again.
I don't know how many times I've heard it said it always happens with United
and then they point out the injury time Stevie Bruce Goals..... That was
what 18 years ago? surely if it always happens they can come up with some
more recent examples of refs adding on time till United win. We've been
knocked out of the Champions League with injury time goals, we've lost
points to injury time goals they are all completely forgotten about though
just a massive issue made on the very odd occasion that we gain from it.
SteveH
> > And why was time not added on after MU's 4th goal?
>
> Because it put them in the lead, silly!
>
> Rule 234b states that play shall continue until Man U have more goals than
> the opposition, at which point the game must be ended immediately. Rule 234c
> applies the same law to Chelsea, unless they are playing Man U in which case
> rule 234b takes preference. If no winning goal is scored after 3 days, a
> replay will be scheduled, whereupon United will be granted a 6-0 aggregate
> lead.
Rule 23b?
'No female official shall sniff the saddles of the exercise bikes at
Carrington training ground'
Rule 23c?
'All members of male playing staff must wear adequately protective
underwear under their playing kit'
;-)
--
SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
Alfa 156 TSpark Sportwagon Veloce Selespeed - Alfa 75 TSpark Lusso -
Ducati 750SS - BMW R100RT - Toyota Prius T-Spirit
Legend11
> In rec.sport.soccer Paul C <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote:
>
>> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
>
> When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
>
> Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
> tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
> stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any book
> about the laws of the game.
>
> The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
I can't understand how you're coming to the conclusion that the added
time benefited United more than City. It was there for *both* teams to
make use of. They used it to wait for the whistle and we used it to earn
three points. That is what you call justice, my good man.
--
Legend11
Manchester United - Premiership Champions Three Times Running.
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 13 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
Paul C
<Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Jussi Uosukainen wrote:
>> In rec.sport.soccer Paul C <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
>>
>> When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
>>
>> Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
>> tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
>> stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any book
>> about the laws of the game.
>>
>> The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
>
>I can't understand how you're coming to the conclusion that the added
>time benefited United more than City. It was there for *both* teams to
>make use of. They used it to wait for the whistle and we used it to earn
>three points. That is what you call justice, my good man.
What simplistic rubbish. Ground advantage favours home teams. Playing
additional time is of more benefit to the home team than the away
team. Statistically the home team is more likely to score than the
away team.
Baldoni
Damn right.
The ref clearly gave Utd an advantage.
Red Rackham
Statistically the advantage is with United home and away as they're a better
team than City.
HTH
Legend11
Blah, whine, boo hoo....[ad infinitum]
B'Jesus this is getting old...fast.
The Magician
"Legend11" <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:h98f00$51c$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Paul C wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:25:38 +0100, Legend11
>> <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jussi Uosukainen wrote:
>>>> In rec.sport.soccer Paul C <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
>>>> When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
>>>>
>>>> Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
>>>> tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
>>>> stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any
>>>> book about the laws of the game.
>>>>
>>>> The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
>>> I can't understand how you're coming to the conclusion that the added
>>> time benefited United more than City. It was there for *both* teams to
>>> make use of. They used it to wait for the whistle and we used it to earn
>>> three points. That is what you call justice, my good man.
>>
>> What simplistic rubbish. Ground advantage favours home teams. Playing
>> additional time is of more benefit to the home team than the away
>> team. Statistically the home team is more likely to score than the
>> away team.
>
>
> Blah, whine, boo hoo....[ad infinitum]
>
> B'Jesus this is getting old...fast.
they told us that City outclassed us though, so surely that means they were
the better team, so would get most advantage from time played
:D
Baldoni
This guy should be on "Mastermind", what made you come to that
conclusion ? Did you look at the fact that Utd have won the title for
the last 3 years ? Did you also look at the fact that Utd have a
better squad and that City have a very suspect defence ?
Paul C
Jellore
Penco/Lord of War first starred in "One flew over the cuckoos nest".
REDD...@nospam.net
Baldoni is a fellow loon
The Doctor
Legend11 <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Jussi Uosukainen wrote:
>> In rec.sport.soccer Paul C <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
>>
>> When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
>>
>> Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
>> tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
>> stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any book
>> about the laws of the game.
>>
>> The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
>
>I can't understand how you're coming to the conclusion that the added
>time benefited United more than City. It was there for *both* teams to
>make use of. They used it to wait for the whistle and we used it to earn
>three points. That is what you call justice, my good man.
For ManCorruption United fan like you.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca
Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God, Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Never Satan President Republic!
For the latest World News go to http://www.cuttingedge.org/
Diablos Rojos
"The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message
news:h99004$qpc$1...@gallifrey.nk.ca...
> In article <h989e0$3on$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Legend11 <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>Jussi Uosukainen wrote:
>>> In rec.sport.soccer Paul C <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since when did scoring a goal result in time being added on?
>>>
>>> When the Scum need a goal at home to win. Duh.
>>>
>>> Seriously, there have been some guidelines for some international
>>> tournaments, where some suggestions on how much incidents should add
>>> stoppage times. But these are not rules, and cannot be found in any book
>>> about the laws of the game.
>>>
>>> The added time was very excessive, and citeh were hard done by.
>>
>>I can't understand how you're coming to the conclusion that the added
>>time benefited United more than City. It was there for *both* teams to
>>make use of. They used it to wait for the whistle and we used it to earn
>>three points. That is what you call justice, my good man.
>
> For ManCorruption United fan like you.
> --
Another wisdom filled post from the Doctor, (Fraudonis pet quarterwit.)
The Doctor
TRolls for you like Slitheen/Legends11 and Diablos Rojos.