WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Moderators: Moderator Team, phpBB2 - Administrators
WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
You are a genius for only you to think about such rubbish.
Murds, where is the weed smoking emoticons?
Murds, where is the weed smoking emoticons?
The Lord is my Shepherd. I shall not be in want.
-
- Eaglet
- Posts: 29486
- Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 10:39 am
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
See what joblessness can do. The man needs to find a gaddem JOB.1naija wrote:You are a genius for only you to think about such rubbish.
Murds, where is the weed smoking emoticons?
OCCUPY NFF!!
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Just Wowjette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
"Learn from others whom have walked the path before you, but be smart enough to know when to cut your own trail."
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
How about the players also giving the officials yellow and red card whenever they make mistakes? . Nwanne, I'm seriously worried about your sanity. It is well oooo.jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
GOD BLESS CANADA, THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Ekorian wrote:How about the players also giving the officials yellow and red card whenever they make mistakes? . Nwanne, I'm seriously worried about your sanity. It is well oooo.jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
it's not surprising that you cant see pass the blindfold its perfectly normal after a life time with it on
Last edited by jette1 on Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Baba I have said it before and will say it again, you too do and you need to calm down. Haba!jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
DEM GO HEAR WEN!!! © Robbynice
We don't all have to serve or even honor the call to serve but don't boo those that choose to honor the call to serve...© Cellular 2009
"I do not think I know everything about football but I have massive experience." - Arsene Wenger
We don't all have to serve or even honor the call to serve but don't boo those that choose to honor the call to serve...© Cellular 2009
"I do not think I know everything about football but I have massive experience." - Arsene Wenger
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
I'm on vacation dude got plenty time on handRobbynice wrote:Baba I have said it before and will say it again, you too do and you need to calm down. Haba!jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
- danfo driver
- Eaglet
- Posts: 27005
- Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:48 pm
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
You should spend your vacation wisely. perhaps, busy yourself between the legs of a woman?jette1 wrote:I'm on vacation dude got plenty time on handRobbynice wrote:Baba I have said it before and will say it again, you too do and you need to calm down. Haba!jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
"it is better to be excited now and disappointed later, than it is to be disappointed now and later." - Marcus Aurelius, 178AD
metalalloy wrote: Does the SE have Gray, Mahrez or Albrighton on our team or players of their caliber?
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Based on your Ajegule logic, should a penalty be awarded against an attacker who handles the ball in the opposing team's penalty box?
Nwabali -- Aina, Bassey, TroostEkong, Sanusi --- Chukwueze, Aribo, Ndidi, Iwobi --- Osimhem, Sadiq Umar
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Baba in heaven, is it too much to ask? Please find him anoda forum, we don tire for his matajette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
Super Eagles - Fly Above The Storm!!!
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
yesRawlings wrote:Based on your Ajegule logic, should a penalty be awarded against an attacker who handles the ball in the opposing team's penalty box?
otherwise justify for me why a defender should bear more loss than an attacker for the same offense or vice vasa. reality is when inside a bubble you don't really know it. we have gotten use to same thing and cant see pass that
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Because, in soccer, the "punishment" takes place at the place or the vicinity of the "crime"jette1 wrote:yesRawlings wrote:Based on your Ajegule logic, should a penalty be awarded against an attacker who handles the ball in the opposing team's penalty box?
otherwise justify for me why a defender should bear more loss than an attacker for the same offense or vice vasa. reality is when inside a bubble you don't really know it. we have gotten use to same thing and cant see pass that
Nwabali -- Aina, Bassey, TroostEkong, Sanusi --- Chukwueze, Aribo, Ndidi, Iwobi --- Osimhem, Sadiq Umar
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
the vicinity in relation to given violation can be mutually exclusive and even so goal keepers could be switched. Football as we know it could be even more interesting than it already is. VAR is already opening up football to a range of possibilities and perhaps adaptations,Rawlings wrote:Because, in soccer, the "punishment" takes place at the place or the vicinity of the "crime"jette1 wrote:yesRawlings wrote:Based on your Ajegule logic, should a penalty be awarded against an attacker who handles the ball in the opposing team's penalty box?
otherwise justify for me why a defender should bear more loss than an attacker for the same offense or vice vasa. reality is when inside a bubble you don't really know it. we have gotten use to same thing and cant see pass that
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
-
- Egg
- Posts: 3026
- Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 12:51 am
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
,jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
Hmm but in one case the defender is stopping an attacker from scoring (as the current rules are) whilst the other scenario, the attacker is just bored and decides to sit on a defender, who is miles away from the opposition box ( your suggestion) and has no chance scoring when fouled. Or am I getting this theory wrong?
Last edited by uglyoneiamagain on Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
I think you are missing the genius value in his suggestion He mearnt if the foul happens in one 18, take it to the offending ,attacker’s, 18 and kick the penalty. Or better yet play the penalty from the defending teams 18 and bring the other keeper over to try to stop it and resume with the keeper going back to his post on the other side of the field.uglyoneiamagain wrote:,jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
Hmm but in once case the defender is stopping an attacker from scoring (as the current rules are) whilst the other scenario, the attacker is just bored and decides to sit on a defender, who is miles away from the opposition box ( your suggestion) and has no chance scoring when fouled. Or am I getting this theory wrong?
Confused? Nah wait until you hear the other option. If an attacker fouls in defenders 18, play a penalty on the penalty spot of the defender while aiming for the attackers goal post on the other side of the field. All players bar keepers should leave the field of play to avoid encroachment. That’s the best version of this suggestion.
"Learn from others whom have walked the path before you, but be smart enough to know when to cut your own trail."
Re: WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS
Many people have & still do.jette1 wrote:obviously when you foul someone inside 18 if it gets called - it results in penalty and often yellow card.
under the same theory if a striker fouls a defender inside the 18 and gets a yellow a penalty kick should be awarded to the defenders team against the offenders team.
why should strikers be the only victims deserving award of penalty since both offences occur inside the 18 like when that french girl kicked ebi and got yellow whereas had ebi been the offender it would had been penalty against us.
There is no logic enough to defend this injustice against defenders
They just let go of these kinds of thoughts once they become sober.