iMacc

其實圍球証都會有好多種唔同嘅情況~

我諗最重要嘅係當時班球員嘅態度....同埋每個球証嘅接受情度都唔同...唔可以一概而論~

球証問旁証我就更加覺得無問題...球証睇唔清楚就梗係會問吓旁証架啦...唔係要個旁証嚟做咩~

呢場波個問題係個旁証根本就唔係太肯定係手球...如果唔係就一早舉咗旗啦...但係睇到都唔奇...起碼我睇直播睇得好清楚係手球...重喺度諗緊球証點會睇唔到...有時唔一定話要好清楚睇到個球員手球先判...因為有時個波離哂身咁都控到其實經驗豐富嘅球証都會判斷到係唔係手球~

我記憶所及今季有一場波就真係離哂大譜喇...嗰場巴路士用手控個波落嚟先射....慢鏡所見球証拉利重要兜口兜面咁跑緊埋去巴路士度....

點解又話d球証針對車仔呢~?
我又好唔明...今季泰利三番四次禁區手球都無判12碼喎...今次加拿斯嗰球根本就唔係要波~

重有我今場發現一樣嘢...就係車仔唔知係咪唔慣輸波...今場輸得好無品...先有林伯想打人咁樣...之後再有加拿斯要腳唔要波...

最後想講唔知大家覺唔覺得其實摩連奴都應該睇到手球...係咁叫d球員返中圈開波...好似作賊心虛咁好搞笑~

iMacc

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2006-3-22 10:32:

細哨輸緊波都搵個頭撞人啦,細哨係大家眼中咁神聖都會咁做咯,更何況係其他球員呀

依家既問題係話球證去問旁證梗係唔清楚既情況下先問嫁啦,咁既然係場內既球證都睇唔清楚咁場外既旁證點會清楚?難道球證經驗就唔豐富?只不過依家球證係判得o岩,根本冇錯判

我就覺得細哨有球味但唔係話好踢得好乾淨嗰隻我都唔小次見佢踢人後腳....如果講乾淨我諗非連尼加莫屬...我就覺得唔係話輸波就有權發脾四~

好難講嘅...有時係角度問題...有時又會有人遮住...唔一定話球証一定睇得清楚過球証嘅....只不過球証可以好主動咁走去跟住個波啫~

iMacc

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2006-3-22 10:28:

教練一定係幫自己球隊嫁啦........

佢心態我好明白不過嗰一刻佢個表情真係好搞鬼~

iMacc

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2006-3-22 11:12:

細哨球味係有,不過唔夠大哨咁乾淨囉,冇乜邊d球員可以做到大哨咁,比人剷都唔出聲

咁又係~但球證咁做好難唔令人覺得奇怪囉

大哨唔出聲係因為而家掂一掂佢都會跌....唔嘈得咁多...

其實爭拗係話點解兩個球証即時都無反應...但之後傾完個共識係手球呢~?

我就覺得大家都無親眼睇到係手球...但係兩個人一齊都判斷到個波個位置係唔係幾可能用心口攞個波落嚟先判手球...但我覺得一定唔關班球員圍球証事...因為如果判錯咗...你話個賽後報告點寫...

iMacc

Originally posted by MingLai at 2006-3-25 16:45:


最錯係球證，當時點只得一個富咸...

加拿斯嗰腳要腳唔要波都叫情有可原....