Claudia Gentile Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 Really good game despite Atwell trying to take centre stage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudia Gentile Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 Just now, DA Baracus said: Why, and indeed how, is Budweiser the 'official beer of England'? It's weak, fizzy and pish? 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirkieRR Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 That Geoff Hurst ad again. I may have to start drinking so that I can boycott Budweiser, 'official beer of England'. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendricks Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 7 minutes ago, The Other Foot said: The final should really be in this stadium. Although of course I'm hoping they are out before then, seeing 40k+ Dutch supporters celebrating beating the English in Dortmund in the semi-final would be rather enjoyable! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 3 minutes ago, Jambomo said: Not getting this whole “Denmark have been cheated” thing tbh. Germany have been better tbh, should have had a couple more goals. Denmark certainly didn't do enough after going behind to have major complaints - and could easily have gone 1-0 down within the first five minutes too. They've also shown very little throughout the tournament to support progressing to the QFs. But goals change games and Denmark going 1-0 up rather than Germany getting an 80% chance of going ahead early in the second half is a huge turning point. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSJ.84 Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 2 minutes ago, KirkieRR said: That Geoff Hurst ad again. I may have to start drinking so that I can boycott Budweiser, 'official beer of England'. I’d suggest boycotting it whether it’s the official beer of England or not. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Kite Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 (edited) 9 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Why, and indeed how, is Budweiser the 'official beer of England'? I have avoided all the product placement and just saw this. WTF? Sir Geoff should be behind the bar promoting a nice draft real ale that you can get a widget version of, for match consumption. Edited June 29 by Red Kite 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 The circus theme song should be playing while this desperate wagon-circling is in progress. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 So proximity isn't a thing anymore? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alert Mongoose Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 (edited) Christina setting that out pretty clearly there. Not an 'andball according to Ian 'wrighty' Wright. Edited June 29 by Alert Mongoose 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroundskeeperWillie Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 8 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Why, and indeed how, is Budweiser the 'official beer of England'? Exactly, all the gammons down south will be in a frothing range that a beer from across the pond is considered officially their beer instead of the CAMRA stuff, or even something brewed up in Steve from Sarf Lahdon's basement (although it probably also drinks better than Budweiser...) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 I was watching this on some random African channel on a fire stick. It was some laugh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 Holy f**k Aye it's definitely the defender's fault for not whipping back his arm before a ball gets blasted off it from 1 fucking yard. IFAB and VAR: football run by fucking lawyers. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 (edited) The American ref (I missed her name) is explaining this pretty well to be fair. Edited June 29 by Jambomo 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 32 minutes ago, craigkillie said: This simply isn't true. Pulling someone's shirt 90 yards from the ball is still a foul. VAR might not choose to intervene on ones which don't directly impact the ball on the "obvious error" basis, but it is absolutely still a foul. Pulling someone's shirt is not, in itself, a foul. Like it or not that is a fact. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyro Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 Just now, Jambomo said: The American ref is explaining this pretty well to be fair. Was thinking that, she's done well in a tricky spot 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroundskeeperWillie Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 1 minute ago, Alert Mongoose said: Christina setting that out pretty clearly there. Not an 'andball according to Ian 'wrighty' Wright. As much as it is sometimes good to get the perspective from a former referee, there is no way she is going to say Michael Oliver (or Stuart Atwell for that matter) ballsed up. On this occasion she may well have a point, as they are only following the LOTG as now laid down, but the whole VAR thing in general is just proving a case of Fifa and UEFA feeling the need to implement change for change's sake, rather than utilise video technology in ways that truly require it (to my mind it really only should ever come into play when someone has been leathered off the ball and none of the officials have seen it, or for decisions so blatantly wrong that it requires intervention) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgecutter Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 Listening to that, I can't imagine what's going through the head of the misogynistic racist Reform-voting football fan right now. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 1 minute ago, Mark Connolly said: So proximity isn't a thing anymore? Nope. All about hand/arm position. But likewise you can't be punished for handball because you "had time" to get out the way. You just need to keep your arms down near you body. Mourinho went mental when Roma didn't get this as a pen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said: Cheers. I had it in my head that the UK nations had signed up to a gentleman's agreement not to use the residency qualification or have I made that up? I think this relates to the fact that a player eligible for England in this way is, under the UEFA / FIFA rules, eligible for any and all of the Home Nations as they are part of the UK. The agreement I'm sure is that Scotland (for example) would not select a player who became eligible through living in England. England could select them, though. Edited June 29 by Todd_is_God 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.