No news today - there was the odd story about Rooney's fitness for England duty but nothing worth writing. Luckily I tuned into 5 Live last night for some segment in which they discussed the "crisis" in refereeing with Graham Poll.
The whole thing degenerated into an opportunity to slag of Christiano Ronaldo for diving, which was a rather odd turn of events given the build-up to the segment which featured 3 incidents: the Watford-Reading "ghost goal", the Rob Styles awful penalty decision for us and the Wigan-Man City penalty in which the Wigan player (I forget who) did the world's most outrageous dive. So in the discussion there were at least two (again I forget) people who phoned in to say that they wanted to defend Rob Styles. And how did they do this? By saying that it was hard for him because of Ronaldo's diving. I'm sorry? Diving? In that incident there was absolutely no inkling of a dive. The ball was won, Ronaldo's run took him over the outstretched leg, he went over and didn't even look for a penalty. I mean, in a situation in which the defender wins the ball from the front what would be the point of diving? He's won the ball, it's not a foul anyway, dive or no dive. Are these people insane? The main point here being that neither Poll or the presenter (I forget...) said, "But Ronaldo didn't dive, if you want to talk about diving talk about the Wigan player". But no. They just carried on as if if it was fact that Ronaldo dived in that incident. Insanity Abounds. (I don't even need to point out that even Gary Megson said that Ronaldo didn't dive, it might have been nice if the BBC had though... they even played a bit of the interview with Megson, but not that bit: No agenda there then...
The whole thing degenerated into an opportunity to slag of Christiano Ronaldo for diving, which was a rather odd turn of events given the build-up to the segment which featured 3 incidents: the Watford-Reading "ghost goal", the Rob Styles awful penalty decision for us and the Wigan-Man City penalty in which the Wigan player (I forget who) did the world's most outrageous dive. So in the discussion there were at least two (again I forget) people who phoned in to say that they wanted to defend Rob Styles. And how did they do this? By saying that it was hard for him because of Ronaldo's diving. I'm sorry? Diving? In that incident there was absolutely no inkling of a dive. The ball was won, Ronaldo's run took him over the outstretched leg, he went over and didn't even look for a penalty. I mean, in a situation in which the defender wins the ball from the front what would be the point of diving? He's won the ball, it's not a foul anyway, dive or no dive. Are these people insane? The main point here being that neither Poll or the presenter (I forget...) said, "But Ronaldo didn't dive, if you want to talk about diving talk about the Wigan player". But no. They just carried on as if if it was fact that Ronaldo dived in that incident. Insanity Abounds. (I don't even need to point out that even Gary Megson said that Ronaldo didn't dive, it might have been nice if the BBC had though... they even played a bit of the interview with Megson, but not that bit: No agenda there then...
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment