Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by xparaparafreakx, Jun 4, 2007.
The game was tied but nooooo, had to be given to Sweden for the attack.
Well, you figure Sweden would have probably scored the penalty to make it 4-3.
I'm wondering if this wont set a dangerous precedent. What is to stop an away fan dressing up in home colors, charging the field, and getting FIFA to award a victory to the away team?
That's unbelievable... with a minute to go, surely there's another ref that can take over if the existing ref cannot play on.
The ref wasn't hurt, I think it was more the fact that he was worried about safety.
I worry that they may gives fan that idea on doing that.
I always learned that the penalty shot won't mean they will score. Also Denmark did come back and may tied it up again.
I think what the ref should have done was take the players off the field while they emptied the stadium, and then played the remaining time with no crowd.
I think there have been far more dangerous games in the past... if perhaps it was a whole group of fans chasing after the ref, sure, that'd be an issue, but 1 fan ?
Admittedly I haven't read an article about it yet, so don't know all the facts, but with a minute to go and taking into account the fans at other European stadiums being much worse, I think the ref should be reprimanded.
That would of been appropriate.
i can't believe anyone would argue that denmark shouldn't forfait this game.
it is irrelevant what the score was or if the ref abandoned or not
if denmark was winning 10-0 and they went on and finished the game, they would still forfait the game and lose 0-3.
and it would be totally correct.
last thing we need is sending a message that it is ok to assail the ref, depending on circumstances.
and this not going to "set a precedent". please. there are tons of precedents for teams being penalized because of something their moronic fans did.
We are not saying that it is okay for the ref to be attacked but the game should go on. It was only one person that came on to the field and time was also running down.
Of course I'm pretty biased, but this was a wrong way to end an otherwise great match. There are other ways to penalize the home team than to ignore 89 minutes of game time, and let a referee decide the result.
The ref should simply have let the Swedes take their penalty shot, and then finished the game. It's not like he was hurt or anything by that moron who thought it to be great to get on live television.
I was on the stadium, the greatest match I've ever seen live, and everyone, including the swedes, thought it to be a terrible way to decide an incredible game.
I was not saying that what the fan did wasn't dangerous. All I was saying is, that people might take note that all it took for Denmark to forfeit this game was one Danish fan to attack the ref. Surely some less that stellar members of society are going to realize that they could use this to their advantage by, when their team is on the road, dressing as an home team fan and rushing the ref, thus getting a forfeit win for their team.
While we don't want to send the message that it is ok for a fan to attack the ref, we also don't want to send a message that one fan can influence the result of a game.
Obviously the major concern is safety, which is why the ref ended the game. But surely pausing the game while the stadium is emptied and then re-starting would also serve the same purpose.
But where is the line, then? Should the game be continued if it were the 85th minute? The 70th? The 1st?
Of course when it occurred should have no impact.
I am still worried about what might happen now. I realize that safety is the most important thing to everyone but what is going to give future idiots incentive to do the same thing, watching it have no impact on the game or watching it get the game abandoned? I think the later gives more incentive to future idiots to try the same thing - especially away fans disguised as home fans.
Stewards, one would hope.
Presumably the fan was taken off by stewards / police and asked for proof of ID.
If he claimed to be a Dane supporter but lived in Sweden, that would look rather fishy no?
it's not like this is the first case of a game that is disrupted by the fans, causing their team to forfait a game.
Happened tons of times at all levels.
Yet, you don't see dozens of morons in disguise trying to influence games.
how is this different other than it involves your team? it isn't and it's not setting a precedent, just adding to an unfortunate list of idiots.
A precedent WOULD be set if, as you and others here propose, the episode would have been waived off.
Maybe the ref could have let the penalty be shot and finish the game.
but the match should still end up to be 0-3, exactly because you don't want to set a precedent. I think denmark will consider them lucky if they only get the 0-3.
the ref is in the stadium basically surrounded by tens of thousands of "enemy" fans (from both sides). a sizeable fraction of whom are drunken morons.
you have to send out a message, loud and clear, that the ref is untouchable "OR ELSE". If you don't you can't expect them to ref objectively.
And give some credit to the authorities/stewards that they might be able to crack to misterious case of the travelling rocket scientist who disguised himself as home fan to have the home team penalized. please.
i understand the frustration, but you should complain with the drunkard, the stewards that didn't stop him or with Poulsen who criminally triggered the entire chain of events (talk about sportmanship), not with the ref or the sporting authorities.
Thinking about it, there was a similar(ish) situation here at the end of last season involving Leeds United when they played Ipswich. There had been a couple of minor pitch invasions involving a few people as the match progressed, but in added time as a corner kick was about to be taken there was a massed pitch invasion of a couple of hundred Leeds ‘supporters’ trying to disrupt the game (they had to win to be in with a chance of avoiding relegation, see, but why they wanted to disrupt their team taking a potentially match-saving set piece escapes me).
Anyway, in this instance the ref did the right thing – he took all the players off the pitch, waited until order had been restored, then brought the players out and allowed the match to be continued, even though there was only about 30 seconds left on the clock. All in all, the delay took about half-an-hour. It was pretty nerve-wracking as Hull needed Leeds to lose in order to help ensure we avoid relegation ourselves, so it wasn’t a pleasant half hour as we waited to learn our fate!
Anyway, that’s what the official should have done in this latest incident. The man running onto the pitch was an isolated affair, once he’d been removed there was no reason not to continue the game.
This has nothing to do with my team, I am neither Danish nor Swedish. I just simply think the referee over-reacted in abandoning the match rather than continuing once the (isolated) incident was over.
Just put a moat around the field and fill it with pudding.
On the other hand, this is a great incentive for the home team to take enough security precautions so that nobody from either team can jump on the field.
He actually lives in Sweden....