Bookmarks

Yahoo Gmail Google Facebook Delicious Twitter Reddit Stumpleupon Myspace Digg

Search queries

golf club grace before meals, golf graces before meals, seymore butts ass hunt tylene buck, katharine mcphee ugly vagina, dinner grace at golf club, grace for golf club dinner, stephen a smith intro song, tylene buck interview, Tina fey anal, hqpron

Links

XODOX
Impressum

#1: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 12:13:00 by Paul C

<a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>

Report this message

#2: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 13:05:52 by nmdc69

Paul C wrote:
&gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>

Great article. Sums up nicely and concisely all there is to say about
this incident.

Report this message

#3: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 13:39:08 by Shelf Blatter

<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a> a écrit :
&gt; Paul C wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt;<a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Great article. Sums up nicely and concisely all there is to say about
&gt; this incident.
&gt;

Fuck your sister, fuck your newspaper, fuck yourself and eat your
mother's dick, french loser.

Report this message

#4: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 13:49:35 by claudio.serra

France: 1 WC
England: 1 WC (stolen)
ITALY: 4 WC

France + England = 1/2* Italy

Report this message

#5: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 14:16:51 by nmdc69

Shelf Blatter wrote:
&gt; <a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a> a =E9crit :
&gt; &gt; Paul C wrote:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;<a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Great article. Sums up nicely and concisely all there is to say about
&gt; &gt; this incident.
&gt; &gt;
&gt;
&gt; Fuck your sister, fuck your newspaper, fuck yourself and eat your
&gt; mother's dick, french loser.

maybe you should learn English?

Report this message

#6: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 14:57:31 by aaa

Shelf Blatter wrote:
&gt;
&gt; Fuck your sister, fuck your newspaper, fuck yourself and eat your
&gt; mother's dick, french loser.

Watch your mouth, son. You might be headbutted for this. L

Report this message

#7: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 17:48:50 by Irish Rover

&quot;Paul C wrote

&gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>

Sheesh, what utter piece of crapola. The only thing sullied is the
Guardian's reputation to publish such grossly biased unsubstantiated opinion
piece. I laugh at the hypocrisy of these people who one day claim they want
to clean the game because so and so grabbed their face insteasd of their
chest, and the next day show they'd rather drag an icon of the game through
the mud rather than celebrate Fifa finally taking symbolic action again the
&quot;end-justify-the-mean&quot; football goons. Shame on you.

Report this message

#8: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 17:53:55 by unknown

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Report this message

#9: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 18:26:26 by Irish Rover

&quot;yitzak&quot; wrote

&gt; X-No-archive: yes
&gt;
&gt; Its becuase they feel bad after they branded MM a racist. There were
&gt; arguments aginst MM earlier in the week. When Latin lip readers - not
&gt; French or English - ones showed he did not mention terrorist. (See
&gt; redeGlobo which matches the bits we know much better)

So they decided to do a hatchet job on ZZ to make up for the one they did on
MM? Very professional ..

&gt;
&gt; Rather than say sorry oops I lost it - he tried playing the victim game
&gt; and did it v.well. I find that even more cowardly.

You have nothing to substantiate this. You don't know what was said by
Materazzi, which btw is held by a standard of proof, yet your hunch should
be sufficient to unilaterally condemn ZZ? What a crock of shit. You people
have lost it.

&gt;
&gt; Well done the guardian

certainly not.

&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &quot;Paul C wrote
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Sheesh, what utter piece of crapola. The only thing sullied is the
&gt; &gt; Guardian's reputation to publish such grossly biased unsubstantiated
opinion
&gt; &gt; piece. I laugh at the hypocrisy of these people who one day claim they
want
&gt; &gt; to clean the game because so and so grabbed their face insteasd of their
&gt; &gt; chest, and the next day show they'd rather drag an icon of the game
through
&gt; &gt; the mud rather than celebrate Fifa finally taking symbolic action again
the
&gt; &gt; &quot;end-justify-the-mean&quot; football goons. Shame on you.
&gt;

Report this message

#10: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 18:42:23 by nmdc69

Bob wrote:
&gt; &quot;yitzak&quot; wrote
&gt;
&gt; &gt; X-No-archive: yes
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Its becuase they feel bad after they branded MM a racist. There were
&gt; &gt; arguments aginst MM earlier in the week. When Latin lip readers - not
&gt; &gt; French or English - ones showed he did not mention terrorist. (See
&gt; &gt; redeGlobo which matches the bits we know much better)
&gt;
&gt; So they decided to do a hatchet job on ZZ to make up for the one they did on
&gt; MM? Very professional ..
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Rather than say sorry oops I lost it - he tried playing the victim game
&gt; &gt; and did it v.well. I find that even more cowardly.
&gt;
&gt; You have nothing to substantiate this. You don't know what was said by
&gt; Materazzi, which btw is held by a standard of proof, yet your hunch should
&gt; be sufficient to unilaterally condemn ZZ? What a crock of shit. You people
&gt; have lost it.
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Well done the guardian
&gt;
&gt; certainly not.
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt; &quot;Paul C wrote
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Sheesh, what utter piece of crapola. The only thing sullied is the
&gt; &gt; &gt; Guardian's reputation to publish such grossly biased unsubstantiated
&gt; opinion
&gt; &gt; &gt; piece. I laugh at the hypocrisy of these people who one day claim they
&gt; want
&gt; &gt; &gt; to clean the game because so and so grabbed their face insteasd of their
&gt; &gt; &gt; chest, and the next day show they'd rather drag an icon of the game
&gt; through
&gt; &gt; &gt; the mud rather than celebrate Fifa finally taking symbolic action again
&gt; the
&gt; &gt; &gt; &quot;end-justify-the-mean&quot; football goons. Shame on you.
&gt; &gt;

You Zidane lovers are funny.

Report this message

#11: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 18:58:23 by nmdc69

Bob wrote:
&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; &gt; Bob wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt;
&gt; Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football


Your momma.
By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
article?

Report this message

#12: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 18:58:51 by Irish Rover

&lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; Bob wrote:

&gt; You Zidane lovers are funny.

Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football

Report this message

#13: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 19:16:41 by Irish Rover

&lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt;
&gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Your momma.
&gt; By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
&gt; article?

There is no evidence presented in this opinion piece. The points put forward
have already been refuted many times. It's interesting to note that some of
you claimed for &quot;proof&quot; before Materazzi be punished, yet now that Fifa
shoved this thing under the rug, you cannot wait but condemn Zidane without
a shred of evidence (in fact to be fair, you condemned Zidane withoiut
evidence the entire time). All of this makes complete sense since your goal
has always been to defend Materazzi no matter what. Like in football your
motto seems to be &quot;the end justify the means&quot;.

Report this message

#14: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 20:11:09 by nmdc69

Bob wrote:
&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Your momma.
&gt; &gt; By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
&gt; &gt; article?
&gt;
&gt; There is no evidence presented in this opinion piece. The points put forward
&gt; have already been refuted many times. It's interesting to note that some of
&gt; you claimed for &quot;proof&quot; before Materazzi be punished, yet now that Fifa
&gt; shoved this thing under the rug, you cannot wait but condemn Zidane without
&gt; a shred of evidence (in fact to be fair, you condemned Zidane withoiut
&gt; evidence the entire time). All of this makes complete sense since your goal
&gt; has always been to defend Materazzi no matter what. Like in football your
&gt; motto seems to be &quot;the end justify the means&quot;.

Who is &quot;you&quot;? methinks you are a little sloppy in your &quot;reasoning&quot;.
So all those who criticise Zidane are equal, and all bad.

anyway, you are wrong again:
proof of what Zidane did are the images of the headbutt.
proof of what he said is the interview.
proof that Materazzi said something racist has not been produced. Such
claim has been denied by M, Z, and Fifa.

you have an empty case.

i'm bored, bye

Report this message

#15: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 20:21:34 by MH

Bob wrote:
&gt; &quot;yitzak&quot; wrote
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;X-No-archive: yes
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;Its becuase they feel bad after they branded MM a racist. There were
&gt;&gt;arguments aginst MM earlier in the week. When Latin lip readers - not
&gt;&gt;French or English - ones showed he did not mention terrorist. (See
&gt;&gt;redeGlobo which matches the bits we know much better)
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; So they decided to do a hatchet job on ZZ to make up for the one they did on
&gt; MM? Very professional ..
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Rather than say sorry oops I lost it - he tried playing the victim game
&gt;&gt;and did it v.well. I find that even more cowardly.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; You have nothing to substantiate this. You don't know what was said by
&gt; Materazzi,

Only Materazzi knows what he said. Zidane only knows what he heard, or
thought he heard (in a language he hasn't been speaking regularly for 5
years, and for all I know may never have spoken all that well).

The Guardian's point, and I agree, is that punishment of a player in an
incident where there is no evidence (no tapes, no video, no referee
report), for insults (which are acknowledged to be common in the game),
is hypocritical.

If it hadn't been Zidane or a player of similar iconic stature within
FIFA, there would have been no investigation.

which btw is held by a standard of proof, yet your hunch should
&gt; be sufficient to unilaterally condemn ZZ? What a crock of shit. You people
&gt; have lost it.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Well done the guardian
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; certainly not.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;&quot;Paul C wrote
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;Sheesh, what utter piece of crapola. The only thing sullied is the
&gt;&gt;&gt;Guardian's reputation to publish such grossly biased unsubstantiated
&gt;&gt;
&gt; opinion
&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;piece. I laugh at the hypocrisy of these people who one day claim they
&gt;&gt;
&gt; want
&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;to clean the game because so and so grabbed their face insteasd of their
&gt;&gt;&gt;chest, and the next day show they'd rather drag an icon of the game
&gt;&gt;
&gt; through
&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;the mud rather than celebrate Fifa finally taking symbolic action again
&gt;&gt;
&gt; the
&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;&quot;end-justify-the-mean&quot; football goons. Shame on you.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;
&gt;

Report this message

#16: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 20:26:00 by MH

Bob wrote:
&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;&lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;Your momma.
&gt;&gt;By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
&gt;&gt;article?
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; There is no evidence presented in this opinion piece. The points put forward
&gt; have already been refuted many times. It's interesting to note that some of
&gt; you claimed for &quot;proof&quot; before Materazzi be punished, yet now that Fifa
&gt; shoved this thing under the rug, you cannot wait but condemn Zidane without
&gt; a shred of evidence

??? Zidane's condemnation is for an act of violence on the pitch.
You are telling me that didn't happen ?

Given his past track record of red card, mostly for violence and
retaliation, I don't see how Zidane has any credibility at all in this
story.

Materazzi is a thug (on the field anyway). But that doesn't mean he
should be punished by a two game suspension when there is no precedent
for this. Was Poulsen suspended for provoking Totti into spitting ?
Was Simeone suspended for his provocation of Beckham ?
How about Haaland for getting Roy Keane so worked up he delivered &quot;that&quot;
tackle ?




(in fact to be fair, you condemned Zidane withoiut
&gt; evidence the entire time). All of this makes complete sense since your goal
&gt; has always been to defend Materazzi no matter what. Like in football your
&gt; motto seems to be &quot;the end justify the means&quot;.
&gt;
&gt;

Report this message

#17: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 20:54:57 by Irish Rover

&quot;MH&quot; wrote

&gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football
&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;Your momma.
&gt; &gt;&gt;By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
&gt; &gt;&gt;article?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; There is no evidence presented in this opinion piece. The points put
forward
&gt; &gt; have already been refuted many times. It's interesting to note that some
of
&gt; &gt; you claimed for &quot;proof&quot; before Materazzi be punished, yet now that Fifa
&gt; &gt; shoved this thing under the rug, you cannot wait but condemn Zidane
without
&gt; &gt; a shred of evidence
&gt;
&gt; ??? Zidane's condemnation is for an act of violence on the pitch.
&gt; You are telling me that didn't happen ?

No, I have always said that Zidane was wrong for headbutting MM. I never
contested ZZ's red card and the subsequent 3 game suspension. However, I
strongly protest the character assassination of Zidane based on non-evidence
(&quot;the insult were not that bad&quot;, &quot;he was pissed because he couldn't score&quot;,
....)

&gt;
&gt; Given his past track record of red card, mostly for violence and
&gt; retaliation, I don't see how Zidane has any credibility at all in this
&gt; story.

credibility for what? He fessed up to the violence, he didn't hide it and he
accepted the sanctions. Zidane always acknowledged his blow outs. Zidane's
has strong credibity for being honest.

&gt;
&gt; Materazzi is a thug (on the field anyway). But that doesn't mean he
&gt; should be punished by a two game suspension when there is no precedent
&gt; for this. Was Poulsen suspended for provoking Totti into spitting ?
&gt; Was Simeone suspended for his provocation of Beckham ?
&gt; How about Haaland for getting Roy Keane so worked up he delivered &quot;that&quot;
&gt; tackle ?

No precedent? Dirty tactics (shirt pulling, diving, faking injury, throwing
insults to destabilize an opponent) should all be banned out of the game.
This was an instance when the offender acknowledged the use of insults. He
was justly sanctionned along with Zidane who retaliated.

Report this message

#18: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 20:55:33 by Irish Rover

&lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Your momma.
&gt; &gt; &gt; By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
&gt; &gt; &gt; article?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; There is no evidence presented in this opinion piece. The points put
forward
&gt; &gt; have already been refuted many times. It's interesting to note that some
of
&gt; &gt; you claimed for &quot;proof&quot; before Materazzi be punished, yet now that Fifa
&gt; &gt; shoved this thing under the rug, you cannot wait but condemn Zidane
without
&gt; &gt; a shred of evidence (in fact to be fair, you condemned Zidane withoiut
&gt; &gt; evidence the entire time). All of this makes complete sense since your
goal
&gt; &gt; has always been to defend Materazzi no matter what. Like in football
your
&gt; &gt; motto seems to be &quot;the end justify the means&quot;.
&gt;
&gt; Who is &quot;you&quot;? methinks you are a little sloppy in your &quot;reasoning&quot;.

I said &quot;some of you&quot; to describe the italian fans who have spent the last
couple of week desperately defending Materazzi for what is utterly
undefendable, and i think you belong to 'some' if my memory serves me well.
You'll need more to sustain your assertion of my &quot;sloppy reasoning&quot;

&gt; So all those who criticise Zidane are equal, and all bad.

so you were talking about &quot;sloppy reasonning&quot; when your problem appears to
be basic reading?

&gt;
&gt; anyway, you are wrong again:
&gt; proof of what Zidane did are the images of the headbutt.
&gt; proof of what he said is the interview.
&gt; proof that Materazzi said something racist has not been produced. Such
&gt; claim has been denied by M, Z, and Fifa.

Fifa sanctionned MM because of the insults he used against ZZ. If you are
going to use the results of the enquiry, use all of the results of the
enquiry. No cherry picking what suits your argument, and leaving out what
doesn't fit your preconceived notion.

Report this message

#19: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 21:06:39 by Irish Rover

&quot;MH&quot; wrote

&gt; Only Materazzi knows what he said. Zidane only knows what he heard, or
&gt; thought he heard (in a language he hasn't been speaking regularly for 5
&gt; years, and for all I know may never have spoken all that well).
&gt;
&gt; The Guardian's point, and I agree, is that punishment of a player in an
&gt; incident where there is no evidence (no tapes, no video, no referee
&gt; report), for insults (which are acknowledged to be common in the game),
&gt; is hypocritical.

No evidence? Materazzi acknowledged he insulted Zidane. Materazzi appeared
in front of FIFA who suspended him 2 games for provoking Zidane. Do you know
what was said at that meeting? does the Guardian writer know what the
insults were? of course not.

&gt;
&gt; If it hadn't been Zidane or a player of similar iconic stature within
&gt; FIFA, there would have been no investigation.

Not entirely true. There was investigation mostly because an icon of
football committed an outrageous act in front of billions of viewers during
a world cup final. It's a gift that Zidane inadvertantly gave us upon his
departure.

Report this message

#20: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 22:07:59 by Irish Rover

&quot;Paul C&quot; wrote in

&gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>

&quot;Zidane complained that Marco Materazzi insulted him and should be punished.
He stressed that the insults were not racist, religious or political. In
other words, they were the sort of playground taunts that have been heard in
every sporting contest at every level since the dawn of time.&quot;

Zidane or Fifa never said that the insults were not &quot;racist, religious or
political&quot;. Materazzi said so in an interview to the press but we don't know
what he said in front of Fifa. Does the author really need to lie to make us
take the leap of faith required to believe they were innocuous &quot;playground
taunts&quot;?

Report this message

#21: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 22:48:05 by MH

Bob wrote:
&gt; &quot;MH&quot; wrote
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Only Materazzi knows what he said. Zidane only knows what he heard, or
&gt;&gt;thought he heard (in a language he hasn't been speaking regularly for 5
&gt;&gt;years, and for all I know may never have spoken all that well).
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;The Guardian's point, and I agree, is that punishment of a player in an
&gt;&gt;incident where there is no evidence (no tapes, no video, no referee
&gt;&gt;report), for insults (which are acknowledged to be common in the game),
&gt;&gt;is hypocritical.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; No evidence? Materazzi acknowledged he insulted Zidane.

This is true. But why should he even have to speak to the issue ? Why
does FIFA not believe in the right to remain silent ?

The fact that Materazzi says he insulted Zidane only proves that
Materazzi is reasonably honest

Materazzi appeared
&gt; in front of FIFA who suspended him 2 games for provoking Zidane. Do you know
&gt; what was said at that meeting?

No. But again, the press releases from FIFA say that it was not racist.

does the Guardian writer know what the
&gt; insults were? of course not.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;If it hadn't been Zidane or a player of similar iconic stature within
&gt;&gt;FIFA, there would have been no investigation.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Not entirely true. There was investigation mostly because an icon of
&gt; football committed an outrageous act in front of billions of viewers during
&gt; a world cup final.

Which is what I said ! Had DeRossi head-butted Thuram, we would not
even be talking about this - DeRossi would have got a lengthy suspension
and nobody would be making a fuss about it. Everbody would talk about
DeRossi's violent past (i.e. the McBride incident), but Zidane's
recurrent history of violence and over-reacting to provocation is
conveniently glossed over.

It's a gift that Zidane inadvertantly gave us upon his
&gt; departure.



&gt;
&gt;

Report this message

#22: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 23:00:48 by Paul C

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:07:59 -0700, &quot;Bob&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:no&#64;spam.com" target="_blank">no&#64;spam.com</a>&gt; wrote:


&gt;
&gt;Zidane or Fifa never said that the insults were not &quot;racist, religious or
&gt;political&quot;. Materazzi said so in an interview to the press but we don't know
&gt;what he said in front of Fifa. Does the author really need to lie to make us
&gt;take the leap of faith required to believe they were innocuous &quot;playground
&gt;taunts&quot;?
&gt;

It's a pity Zidane couldn't have learned from the game of cricket
where 'sledging' is an integral part of the game, usually intended to
distract the batsman. The true response is not a headbutt in the chest
but to think of a witty response:


McGrath (Australia) Hey Eddo, why are you so fucking fat?
Brandes (Zimbabwe) Because every time I fuck your wife she gives me a
biscuit.



Rodney Marsh (Australia) How's your wife and my kids?
Ian Botham (England) The wife's fine. The kids are retarded.

Report this message

#23: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-21 23:04:00 by Rolleston

Paul C &lt;<a href="mailto:paul&#64;thersgb.net" target="_blank">paul&#64;thersgb.net</a>&gt; writes:
&gt; It's a pity Zidane couldn't have learned from the game of cricket
&gt; where 'sledging' is an integral part of the game, usually intended to
&gt; distract the batsman. The true response is not a headbutt in the chest
&gt; but to

hit him in the head with a 100 mph cricket ball.

R.

Report this message

#24: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 00:50:13 by unknown

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Report this message

#25: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 03:44:39 by Fabiorossi5

MH wrote:
&gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&lt;<a href="mailto:nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com" target="_blank">nmdc69&#64;hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;You Zidane lovers are funny.
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;Better be a Zidane lover than a lover of goon football
&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;Your momma.
&gt; &gt;&gt;By the way, how about actually addressing the points in the Guardian
&gt; &gt;&gt;article?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; There is no evidence presented in this opinion piece. The points put forward
&gt; &gt; have already been refuted many times. It's interesting to note that some of
&gt; &gt; you claimed for &quot;proof&quot; before Materazzi be punished, yet now that Fifa
&gt; &gt; shoved this thing under the rug, you cannot wait but condemn Zidane without
&gt; &gt; a shred of evidence
&gt;
&gt; ??? Zidane's condemnation is for an act of violence on the pitch.
&gt; You are telling me that didn't happen ?
&gt;
&gt; Given his past track record of red card, mostly for violence and
&gt; retaliation, I don't see how Zidane has any credibility at all in this
&gt; story.
&gt;
&gt; Materazzi is a thug (on the field anyway). But that doesn't mean he
&gt; should be punished by a two game suspension when there is no precedent
&gt; for this. Was Poulsen suspended for provoking Totti into spitting ?
&gt; Was Simeone suspended for his provocation of Beckham ?
&gt; How about Haaland for getting Roy Keane so worked up he delivered &quot;that&quot;
&gt; tackle ?
&gt;


Zidane is a thug and has a history of hurting opponents. There is a
double standard here because Zidane is a Muslim.

If Materazzi had headbutted Zidane - Marco would be in jail.

Report this message

#26: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 07:15:59 by Irish Rover

&quot;Paul C&quot; wrote


&gt; It's a pity Zidane couldn't have learned from the game of cricket
&gt; where 'sledging' is an integral part of the game, usually intended to
&gt; distract the batsman. The true response is not a headbutt in the chest
&gt; but to think of a witty response:
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; McGrath (Australia) Hey Eddo, why are you so fucking fat?
&gt; Brandes (Zimbabwe) Because every time I fuck your wife she gives me a
&gt; biscuit.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Rodney Marsh (Australia) How's your wife and my kids?
&gt; Ian Botham (England) The wife's fine. The kids are retarded.

Well, we could all wish Zidane had been delt a different hand but would he
still be ZZ?

Report this message

#27: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 09:02:24 by unknown

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Report this message

#28: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 09:43:22 by Paul C

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 09:02:24 +0200, anders t
&lt;<a href="mailto:anthu_001&#64;No" target="_blank">anthu_001&#64;No</a>€SPaM€_hotmail.com&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt;You don't know what was said between ZZ and MM, and between FIFA, ZZ, and
&gt;MM.
&gt;
&gt;The Swede Lars-Ã…ke Lagrell, one of the members of 'jury' said it will
&gt;remain a secret.

Even Lars-Ã…ke doesn't know.

Report this message

#29: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 13:16:02 by Victoria Barrett

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 22:00:48 +0100, Paul C &lt;<a href="mailto:paul&#64;thersgb.net" target="_blank">paul&#64;thersgb.net</a>&gt; wrote:
&lt;snip&gt;
&gt;McGrath (Australia) Hey Eddo, why are you so fucking fat?
&gt;Brandes (Zimbabwe) Because every time I fuck your wife she gives me a
&gt;biscuit.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;Rodney Marsh (Australia) How's your wife and my kids?
&gt;Ian Botham (England) The wife's fine. The kids are retarded.

;)

There are many many examples of sledging in cricket, but at least
unlike Freddie Flintoff at 10 Downing, they don't involve booze. ;)

--
<a href="http://futuremd.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://futuremd.blogspot.com/</a>

Report this message

#30: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 15:49:36 by Irish Rover

&quot;MH&quot; wrote

&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Bob wrote:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; No evidence? Materazzi acknowledged he insulted Zidane.
&gt;
&gt; This is true. But why should he even have to speak to the issue ? Why
&gt; does FIFA not believe in the right to remain silent ?
&gt;
&gt; The fact that Materazzi says he insulted Zidane only proves that
&gt; Materazzi is reasonably honest

He had no choice. Denying everything would have lost him all pretense to
saying the truth because of hte video evidence. Unsurprisingly he admitted
to the minimum; even Fifa acknowledges the statements of the players didn't
agree on what was said.

&gt; &gt; Not entirely true. There was investigation mostly because an icon of
&gt; &gt; football committed an outrageous act in front of billions of viewers
during
&gt; &gt; a world cup final.
&gt;
&gt; Which is what I said ! Had DeRossi head-butted Thuram, we would not
&gt; even be talking about this - DeRossi would have got a lengthy suspension
&gt; and nobody would be making a fuss about it. Everbody would talk about
&gt; DeRossi's violent past (i.e. the McBride incident), but Zidane's
&gt; recurrent history of violence and over-reacting to provocation is
&gt; conveniently glossed over.

I was suggesting that the size of the audience and the stage for this
brouhaha mattered in the way it was resolved, which suggests you may be
overstating the importance of the superstar factor. Zidane's record got
plenty of air time and didn't get glossed over.

Report this message

#31: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 19:51:31 by spamsucks

Paul C &lt;<a href="mailto:paul&#64;thersgb.net" target="_blank">paul&#64;thersgb.net</a>&gt; wrote in news:m3a1c25ane0hkajpf9u14qb4k2kj7olich@
4ax.com:

&gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>

Much has been made of Materazzi's punishment being too harsh (i.e. not much
more lenient than Zidane's). Both players are culpable and deserve
punishment under the rules. I say &quot;under the rules&quot; because while &quot;yo
mamma&quot; shouldn't be blown up into a sanctionable offense (absent racist
taunts, etc), the fact is that the rules do forbid verbal abuse, which is
very vaguely (and therefore broadly) defined, and Materazzi *admitted*
verbally abusing Zidane. So Materazzi, who many know as a thug anyway
based on previous conduct, shouldn't whine about punishment. And perhaps
he hasn't, although much of Italy seems to have by this point (what a
surprise!). Maybe there's hope for Materazzi yet...he admitted his
conduct, albeit without specifics. If he'd stayed silent I doubt Fifa
could have justified punishing him based solely on Zidane's account of what
happened.

Report this message

#32: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-22 22:06:16 by unknown

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Report this message

#33: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-23 01:31:02 by MH

anders t wrote:
&gt; Quoting MH in rec.sport.soccer:
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Materazzi is a thug (on the field anyway). But that doesn't mean he
&gt;&gt;should be punished by a two game suspension when there is no precedent
&gt;&gt;for this. Was Poulsen suspended for provoking Totti into spitting ?
&gt;&gt;Was Simeone suspended for his provocation of Beckham ?
&gt;&gt;How about Haaland for getting Roy Keane so worked up he delivered &quot;that&quot;
&gt;&gt;tackle ?
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; You don't know what was said between ZZ and MM, and between FIFA, ZZ, and
&gt; MM.
&gt;

And neither do you. So why is the argument that MM MUST have said
something REALLY bad to get a reaction like that from ZZ so widely
accepted , given ZZ's penchant for retaliation and violence ?





&gt; The Swede Lars-Ã…ke Lagrell, one of the members of 'jury' said it will
&gt; remain a secret.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;

Report this message

#34: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-23 02:46:47 by Irish Rover

&quot;MH&quot; wrote

&gt;
&gt;
&gt; anders t wrote:
&gt; &gt; You don't know what was said between ZZ and MM, and between FIFA, ZZ,
and
&gt; &gt; MM.
&gt; &gt;
&gt;
&gt; And neither do you. So why is the argument that MM MUST have said
&gt; something REALLY bad to get a reaction like that from ZZ so widely
&gt; accepted , given ZZ's penchant for retaliation and violence ?

We know that MM said something bad enough to be suspended ar least 2 games.
It'd be nice to know what was said but Fifa doesn't want us to know. Any
idea why?

ZZ has a rep for occasional retaliatory violence and honesty. Both traits
point to MM having told him something that set him off. In turn, MM has a
reputation as a violent and *crafty* defender that'll do anything to win.

Your version of events require that ZZ be a short-fused liar. Our version of
events require that MM be a crafty liar. Which is more likely?

Report this message

#35: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-23 03:49:56 by MH

Bob wrote:
&gt; &quot;MH&quot; wrote

&gt;&gt;And neither do you. So why is the argument that MM MUST have said
&gt;&gt;something REALLY bad to get a reaction like that from ZZ so widely
&gt;&gt;accepted , given ZZ's penchant for retaliation and violence ?
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; We know that MM said something bad enough to be suspended ar least 2 games.
&gt; It'd be nice to know what was said but Fifa doesn't want us to know. Any
&gt; idea why?

Several explanations possible:
1) MM did say something horrible and racist, but FIFA doesn't want to
let us know, because then they'd be pressured to alter the result based
on section 55/
2) MM's insults were common and garden variety, but FIFA wanted to save
face and not have to reverse its decision on giving ZZ the golden ball
3) Something in between.

&gt;
&gt; ZZ has a rep for occasional retaliatory violence and honesty. Both traits
&gt; point to MM having told him something that set him off. In turn, MM has a
&gt; reputation as a violent and *crafty* defender that'll do anything to win.
&gt;
&gt; Your version of events require that ZZ be a short-fused liar. Our version of
&gt; events require that MM be a crafty liar. Which is more likely?

Nope my version of events is that we know ZZ to have head-butted MM
because we saw it. Whether any of the refs actually saw it is
debatable, but that's another story, and FIFA is not ever going to admit
video evidence was used if that indeed was the case.

We know Zidane has been sent off something like 14 times in his career,
including several stamping offences, and at least one other head butt. I
watched him regularly for a whole year in Spain, and he is quite a dirty
player when things are not going his way.

We know that Materazzi insulted ZZ in some way because we can see him
talking, and because he admitted insulting him.

That's about all we know for sure.

I admit the possibility that Materazzi may have been extremely
offensive, but since we have no proof of this (other than Zidane's
reaction, which I think is inadequate proof given ZZ's past history),
there must remain an element of &quot;innocent until proven guilty&quot; for
Materazzi. FIFA cobbling together a judgement in camera doesn't convince
me either way.

Speaking of incidents in important WC matches, does anybody know exactly
what happened in Italy / Argentina in 1990 . Giusti was sent off for an
alleged foul on Baggio behind the play, so it was in a sense similar to
this Zidane incident. However, there was no camera that caught the
incident, and I cannot to this day understand how the ref and linesman
arrived at the decision to send off Giusti. The ref certainly didn't
see it.



&gt;
&gt;

Report this message

#36: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-23 09:36:11 by unknown

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Report this message

#37: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-23 13:55:19 by nmdc69

C=2E Barnowe wrote:
&gt; Paul C &lt;<a href="mailto:paul&#64;thersgb.net" target="_blank">paul&#64;thersgb.net</a>&gt; wrote in news:m3a1c25ane0hkajpf9u14qb4k2kj7olic=
h@
&gt; 4ax.com:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>
&gt;
&gt; Much has been made of Materazzi's punishment being too harsh (i.e. not mu=
ch
&gt; more lenient than Zidane's). Both players are culpable and deserve
&gt; punishment under the rules. I say &quot;under the rules&quot; because while &quot;yo
&gt; mamma&quot; shouldn't be blown up into a sanctionable offense (absent racist
&gt; taunts, etc), the fact is that the rules do forbid verbal abuse, which is
&gt; very vaguely (and therefore broadly) defined, and Materazzi *admitted*
&gt; verbally abusing Zidane. So Materazzi, who many know as a thug anyway
&gt; based on previous conduct, shouldn't whine about punishment. And perhaps
&gt; he hasn't, although much of Italy seems to have by this point (what a
&gt; surprise!). Maybe there's hope for Materazzi yet...he admitted his
&gt; conduct, albeit without specifics. If he'd stayed silent I doubt Fifa
&gt; could have justified punishing him based solely on Zidane's account of wh=
at
&gt; happened.

I agree M was a fool admitting it. Maybe he thought Zidane would be
just as honorable and assume responsibility. IMHO M comes out the
bigger man by a mile (I never thought I'd say this about M). Anyway,
he=B4ll have a chance to take his revenge by scoring a couple of goals
against France in september.

Report this message

#38: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-23 20:33:59 by EvaHayworth

BRAVO !! I couldn't have said it any better!


Paul C wrote:
&gt; <a href="http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.html" target="_blank"> http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1825400,00.h tml</a>

Report this message

#39: Re: The Guardian's take on selfish Zidane

Posted on 2006-07-24 01:07:28 by Irish Rover

&quot;MH&quot; wrote

&gt; there must remain an element of &quot;innocent until proven guilty&quot; for
&gt; Materazzi.

a concept which should be reminded to those who want to assassinate Zidane's
character

Report this message