Wellington Phoenix Men

Lithuanian international ????

277 replies · 4,204 views
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Hard News wrote:
Does Troy Hearfield know his spot in the side is at risk ?


Don't know but I thought he didn't look too bad at training today!!!

also think that the young guy that Lia was marking is one for the future...quick and smart touches..
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
You mean Yellow Fever Scholarship winner Marco Rojas... seen travelling in style this week in the Fever mobile as well as staying at new friends of the Fever the Wellington YHA  ??

The Hearfield line was in reference to this:

You might confuse people into thinking that Astrauskas is here to form a "Strike Partnership" with Feverish on Courtney Place!

How's my driving? - Whine here

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Feverish wrote:
el grapadura wrote:
valeo wrote:
A drop kick is still a goal kick..
No. A goal-kick is a re-start of the game after the ball had gone out of play over the goal line, but not into the goal. A drop-kick/punt is a simple continuation of general play without the ball having gone out of play.

�

what about if its an own goal?


You mean a possible own goal from a goal kick? As in when you play at Ngatitoa, and the wind sends the keeper's goal-kick straight back into his own net?

Still wouldn't be a goal, it's a corner to the opposition.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
what if it hits the corssbar then hits the keepers back, then goes in?

Founder

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Hmm - not 100% off the top of my head, but if put on the spot I'd award an indirect free kick to the opposition because the keeper touched the ball twice without anyone else touching the ball in the meantime.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
But what if......
You are playing in the lower grades without a real referee and the guy who is doing the job for half a game says its a goal and everyone agrees with him because he doesnt have a ponsy coloured jersey,  then  its a goal because that is  the result that will go down  on the team card. Right?

We're Forever Causing Trouble

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Right. But al refs are perfect so that wouldn't happen.
You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
el grapadura wrote:
Hmm - not 100% off the top of my head, but if put on the spot I'd award an indirect free kick to the opposition because the keeper touched the ball twice without anyone else touching the ball in the meantime.
does the ball not have to leave the 18 yard box without touching anyone first, meaning a retaken goal kick? I could be completey wrong.
You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
uiron wrote:
But what if......You are playing in the lower grades without a real referee and the guy who is doing the job for half a game says its a goal and everyone agrees with him because he doesnt have a ponsy coloured jersey,� then� its a goal because that is� the result that will go down� on the team card. Right?


If it's on the scorecard, then it's on the scorecard.

Read it and weep.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Oska wrote:
el grapadura wrote:
Hmm - not 100% off the top of my head, but if put on the spot I'd award an indirect free kick to the opposition because the keeper touched the ball twice without anyone else touching the ball in the meantime.
does the ball not have to leave the 18 yard box without touching anyone first, meaning a retaken goal kick? I could be completey wrong.


Well, yes, the ball's not live to be played by another player until it leaves the penalty area.

But I would think even if the ball hadn't left the penalty area before the keeper played the ball for the second time, it's the latter offence that would be penalised. Or at least I would if I was the referee in that situation.
el grapadura2009-06-02 22:01:49
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
it did leave the area - but then blew back in

Founder

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
this is soo stupid haha eat my goal has all of theese moments
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Marco Rojas is quality.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
el grapadura wrote:
Oska wrote:
el grapadura wrote:
Hmm - not 100% off the top of my head, but if put on the spot I'd award an indirect free kick to the opposition because the keeper touched the ball twice without anyone else touching the ball in the meantime.
does the ball not have to leave the 18 yard box without touching anyone first, meaning a retaken goal kick? I could be completey wrong.


Well, yes, the ball's not live to be played by another player until it leaves the penalty area.

But I would think even if the ball hadn't left the penalty area before the keeper played the ball for the second time, it's the latter offence that would be penalised. Or at least I would if I was the referee in that situation.
What is awarded if it touches another player before lesving the area?
You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Just retake the kick.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I just realized that today is my wedding anniversary, so can't go to Porirua Park :(

VUW AFC - Victoria University Football for life

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
whipped
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
newzealandpower wrote:
I just realized that today is my wedding anniversary, so can't go to Porirua Park :(


Take the missus, a quality romantic night out under the lights, I  mean stars
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
what time is kick-off tonight? (sorry if this has been covered earlier.....)
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
newzealandpower wrote:
I just realized that today is my wedding anniversary, so can't go to Porirua Park :(
 
You just realized?  Oh dear.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
when does marco's time with the phoenix end?
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
newzealandpower wrote:
I just realized that today is my wedding anniversary, so can't go to Porirua Park :(
 
"Of course I didn't take my wife to see Rochdale as an anniversary present, it was her birthday. Would I have got married in the football season? Anyway, it was Rochdale reserves." 
 
- Bill Shankly

"Ive just re-visited this and once again realised that C-Diddy is a genius - a drunk, Newcastle bred disgrace - but a genius." - Hard News, 11:39am 4th June 2009

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
sign him up! if hes fast it could be a very key attribute for fifa 2010!!
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

2-1 to Nix as in other thread but I will stick with this one.Impressions..holds ball up well with some good layoffs.  Quite pacy.  Had a few chances but didnt connect well with any of them. Ran back well to defend at some corners.  Seemed to be carrying a niggle..groin?  Didnt do many carrying the ball from deep or running and shooting but pushed far enough forward so that midfield had attacking chnaces so that was good.

I would sign him on basis of comparison to other triallists last week...think he would be a good foil to Greenacre ala sight unseen.

Not a Smeltz though.

A small town in Europe........looking to bounce straight back up....well that aint going to happen

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Looked pretty good, very pacey indeed. Would like to see him finish chances next week though...

You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Oska wrote:

Looked pretty good, very pacey indeed. Would like to see him finish chances next week though...



Agree Oska.Hopefully by next week he will have settled in and can make a bit more of his chances... its good to have that "tall timber" up front though, I'd love to see him on the end of a few sweet crosses from Leo and Lochy.

  Improving,,on the up, a work in progress from Italiano and the Nix. Bring on the bathroom bling in '24! COYN!

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Eh, he can do the flashy stuff and burn off players and Greenacre can slot them in!

a.haak

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Not impressed. His touch is crap and for a tall guy he was losing a lot of headers - he seems to crouch down when he tries to header the ball. Also not very strong on the ball. If he can't shield the ball properly against the Hutt he'll have no chance in the A-League.

I guess he'd be ok in a team that plays counter attacking long balls that he can hoof after and outrun people but I don't see us playing that sort of game.. I hope!




Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Wibblebutt wrote:

Not impressed. His touch is crap and for a tall guy he was losing a lot of headers - he seems to crouch down when he tries to header the ball. Also not very strong on the ball. If he can't shield the ball properly against the Hutt he'll have no chance in the A-League.

I guess he'd be ok in a team that plays counter attacking long balls that he can hoof after and outrun people but I don't see us playing that sort of game.. I hope!

 
 
Give the guy a break!  He's only been in the country 5 days. New country, new team, jetlagged.
 
I thought he looked OK. His timing was a bit out as you would expect. He made some nice layoffs...kept the ball moving. he had one good shot on goal which was brilliantly saved and had a couple of headers off target. He looks to me like he could develop into some one very useful.
His pace will trouble A-league defenders.
The service he got was crap....crosses coming in at knee high or 10metres over his head.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
zinidane wrote:
Give the guy a break!  He's only been in the country 5 days. New country, new team, jetlagged.
 
I thought he looked OK. His timing was a bit out as you would expect. He made some nice layoffs...kept the ball moving. he had one good shot on goal which was brilliantly saved and had a couple of headers off target. He looks to me like he could develop into some one very useful.
His pace will trouble A-league defenders.
The service he got was crap....crosses coming in at knee high or 10metres over his head.
 
Yes the service was very poor. But if he's supposed to be a target man he's going to have to improve out of sight to what he was on Wednesday.
 
I didn't see any nice layoffs, unless it was in the first 20 mins of the game which I missed. More like complete mis controls that happened to land at a teammate's foot..
 
I saw him get 2 headers all night.. One was what I would consider a 'should score' at the back post which he missed my a long way, and the other was a nice little flick on for Rojas without anyone jumping with him.
 
I would add though he did seem to be suffering from a slight niggle, and I hope you're right it's jetlag and he plays well next week but I don't see it.



Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Sign him up - he has a cool name. Him and Viillazon - you can't be crap at football with a name as cool as that.

Who's better, Old or Felipe? See, exactly.
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Paladini or Sigmund? Cleberson or Brown? Hey, you're right!
You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:

Sign him up - he has a cool name. Him and Viillazon - you can't be crap at football with a name as cool as that.

Who's better, Old or Felipe? See, exactly.


This man speaks sense.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Oska wrote:
Paladini or Sigmund? Cleberson or Brown? Hey, you're right!



I know dude.
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Based on the newly unearthed logic, I think it's time to sign Danny at all costs
You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Oska wrote:
Based on the newly unearthed logic, I think it's time to sign Danny at all costs


only if we wanna win the motherflippin' league!!
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:
Oska wrote:
Based on the newly unearthed logic, I think it's time to sign Danny at all costs


only if we wanna win the motherflippin' league!!




I can see it now...

MEMO: To all players-Wellington Phoenix Player Contract Amendment-Compulsory Name Change

In line with the new policy, all current players who have not already done so are asked to return their Deed Poll name change forms with new playing names to Management office by 9am Monday.

Thanks Mark Impenetrable, Andy Durable, Manny Muscular and Tim Bronson for your prompt action.
Sorry Vince ..  Lee Invincible is too close to an existing player's name .
 F'Keen Furyous is... just not right for our Club. Another club might like it...perhaps something lost in translation?.. try again Neri....
Thanks again

 Tony Pugilistic  CEO    Rocki Heroic Head Coach

**
sorry chaps..obviously online for too long tonight.normal transmission will resume in the morning.

RedGed2009-06-08 11:28:27

  Improving,,on the up, a work in progress from Italiano and the Nix. Bring on the bathroom bling in '24! COYN!

Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
RedGed wrote:
Cosimo wrote:
Oska wrote:
Based on the newly unearthed logic, I think it's time to sign Danny at all costs


only if we wanna win the motherflippin' league!!




I can see it now...

MEMO: To all players-Wellington Phoenix Player Contract Amendment-Compulsory Name Change

In line with the new policy, all current players who have not already done so are asked to return their Deed Poll name change forms with new playing names to Management office by 9am Monday.

Thanks Mark Inpenetrable, Andy Durable,Manny Muscular and Tim Bronson for your prompt action.
Sorry Vince ..  Lee Invincible is too close to an existing player's name .
 F'Keen Furyous is... just not right for our Club. Another club might like it..perhaps something lost in translation?.. try again Neri....
Thanks again

 Tony Pugilistic  CEO    Rocki Heroic Head Coach

**
sorry chaps..obviously online for too long tonight.normal transmission will resume in the morning.



This is why Tony P needs to read these forums...
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
A quick question, the lith's touch was sh*t, but how was the pitch he was playing on??
 
The ring of fire will be in alot better state than the training pitches used for friendlies which have more holes in it than the plot in TERMINATOR 4.
 
 
Permalink Permalink