8 Sept 2009

FOOTBALL CHEATS: No 15 - Cristiano Ronaldo (Manchester United v Blackburn - 2009)

Another blatant, cynical dive from the world's most expensive footballer cheat.



Ronaldo was rightfully booked for his cynical dive but still had the chutzpah to question the booking after the game.

As you can see from the video, there was no contact whatsoever but Ronaldo hurled himself to the floor anyway! Cheating, pure and simple.



22 comments:

  1. Oh wait I see what happened....He tripped over that rogue blade of grass hahaha

    ReplyDelete
  2. looking forward to the stevie me videos - where will you start?!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm pretty sure he also had an elbow on one of the Blackburn players either just before that incident, which was a definite booking so he should have been off for the dive. Then the horrible turd went on to score the winner.

    ReplyDelete
  4. gerrad world biggest diver!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ive just found out why you concentrate on these clips on youtube.
    You are based in the United States and therefor never go to a game,!!!
    Bet U delete this!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oooh, step aside Sherlock Holmes, there's a new player in town!

    My ISP is based in the States; I am not.

    Nice try though ;)


    (You're banned from posting comments but I let this one through so I could respond).

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ronaldo... The boys got talent but lets be serious, he's a spoilt little cry baby!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Look at Wayne the Honest. He points at the spot! He is so sure it was a foul, isnt he? He stood just few yards away...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Steven Gerard, champions league final, istanbul.

    ReplyDelete
  10. jaime...why is this site called liverpool kop? you constantly slate LFC, Rafa the players - except the ones who've left or failed which you then blame on Rafa...have you ever been to Anfield, ever heard of LFC before 2005? Do you even like football? If you've got so much unfounded bile for LFC maybe you should go support some fashionable club like Chelsea or Arsenal...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Change the record.  This type of 'query' has entered the realms of cliche now.  I've justified myself a million times, I can't be bothered to do it again.

    You clearly have a very narrow-minded view of being a fan entails.

    If you don't like this site, don't visit.  Simple, no?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Brendan, irregardless of whether Jaimie is a Liverpool fan, he does follow football with passion and has the right to question a manager's tactics, decisions, formations and so on. 

    If you feel that he is writing crap, then feel free to challenge his articles/comments and back them up with facts/stats (otherwise it would just be an argument based upon opinions, which almost always ends in "agree to disagree"). If he has written something that is baseless or have no substance, surely it would be easy for people to pick his posts apart.


    Getting back on topic: It's a dive almost similar to the one Pires did against Portsmouth to win a penalty. All footballers dive though; at least Cristiano is a smart one when he does it (see Gilardino and Gamst Pedersen).

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks Chiatriani - it's refreshing to see someone who gets it.  And you're spot on - if people think I'm wrong or I've written something that's baseless, they should challenge the argument with their own counter-argument.

    The whole point of this site is to challenge people and, in some ways, force people to justify their views. This has made for some great debates and lots of people stating some very interesting viewpoints.

    And I agree with you about the dive - definitely guilty.  I still can't believe that Gilardino dive even now.  He's a decent footballer and the sad thing is he's always going to be remembered for that dive.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Here's the link to the Gilardino one:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W00d3yJKl4

    Here's one that you will want to watch:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdgRIIN-6I0

    ReplyDelete
  15. justified? by one of your friends questioning my post? thats not justification its sad...all of jaimes articles are opinion - he is not the manager and does not have access to the information that rafa and his team have when making decisions about LFC. any facts that jaime presents are generally distorted to 'prove' whatever argument he has decided to run with on a particular day. I asked a question and got no answer...i made an informed observation and got no response of any intelligence (you should be able to defend your own point of view). you dont support liverpool, you dont support the manager or the team...i am an LFC fan, have been attending games since 1985 approx 10  a season (not bad for someone from dublin)...do you attend games? do you provide any financial support to the team. do you have anything positive to say about something which is more important to me and many other fans...i support but not blindly, i know there are faults with this team and with the management style but i know when and where to shut up and get behind my team...i also know that I am not the manager, never won an FA cup, la liga, a champions league....havent even coached at under 11...have you? do you have any experience with professional footballers? their development? a professional football team whether on the admin or playing side? please i await your response with baited breath, at least then i will have the reaasurance that you actually know what youre talking about. thanks and regards

    ReplyDelete
  16. oh yeah and it is not irregardless if jaime is an LFC fan...he claims to be and if he's not then he should not be posting articles on cheats when he is lying..lying and cheating are the same...i wont be back to check responses because its not worth my while when he hasnt dealt with the initial questions...this site is unqualified, not endorsed and totally counter to the idea of being a fan...walk alone

    ReplyDelete
  17. irregardless isnt a real word anyway...do you mean irrespective?

    ReplyDelete
  18. ooh how predictable...my responses were deleted

    ReplyDelete
  19. irregardless is not a word

    ReplyDelete
  20. But it should be!

    Brendan - your posts are pre-moderated now befor going live.  Any posts you make that stick to the issues will be allowed through; any that waste time slagging me/the site off will stay offline.

    ReplyDelete
  21. <span style=" line-height: 20px;">
    <ul style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: inherit; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">
    <li style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; font-weight: normal; line-height: 16px; list-style-type: none; padding: 2px; margin: 0px;">Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less <input class="au" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 4px; margin-left: 0px; background-image: url(http://mw4.m-w.com/images/audio.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; cursor: pointer; height: 11px; vertical-align: bottom; width: 16px; background-position: 0% 50%; padding: 0px; border: 0px initial initial;" title="Listen to the pronunciation of irregardless" onclick="return au('irrega01', 'irregardless');" type="button"/></li>
    <li style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; font-weight: normal; line-height: 16px; list-style-type: none; padding: 2px; margin: 0px;">Pronunciation: <span style="">\ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\</span></li>
    <li style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; font-weight: normal; line-height: 16px; list-style-type: none; padding: 2px; margin: 0px;">Function: adverb</li>
    <li style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; font-weight: normal; line-height: 16px; list-style-type: none; padding: 2px; margin: 0px;">Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless</li>
    <li style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; font-weight: normal; line-height: 16px; list-style-type: none; padding: 2px; margin: 0px;">Date: circa 1912</li>
    </ul>
    <p style="">nonstandard : regardless
    <div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that there is no such word. There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.</div>
    <div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">
    </div>
    <div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', 'Times Serif', serif; font-size: inherit; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Courtesy of www.Merriam-Webster.com</div>
    </span>

    ReplyDelete