Giles Smith\'s Midweek View<br/>史密斯周中观点<br/>Wed, 22nd Aug 2007<br/><br/>新闻来源:<a href=\"http://www.chelseafc.com/page/NewsHomePage/0\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.chelseafc.com/page/NewsHomePage/0</a>,,10268~1097203,00.html<br/>新闻翻译:fall_ark<br/>版权声明:切尔西中文网 - -<br/><br/>Chelsea season ticket holder and columnist Giles Smith is in empathetic mood this week, but still has some post-Anfield arguments to make. <br/>切尔西的季票拥有者与周三专栏作家吉尔斯·史密斯本周多少能感受到利物浦球迷们的心情……但对于安菲尔德,他还是有几句话要说。<br/><br/>Liverpool fans, I feel your pain. Of course it wasn\'t a penalty - not in a month of slow-motion replays on Sky. Accordingly, when the book of condolence opens, as most likely it will, consider my name down.<br/>利物浦的球迷们,我能感受到你们的痛苦,那当然不是个点球――尤其是在天空电视台上被慢动作重放整整一个月之后(记得前些年埃辛的飞铲被反复重放了一个多月吗?)。既然如此,当你们准备填吊唁宾客簿的时候――对这一事件的发生我颇有把握――放心吧,我也会签下自己的名字的。<br/><br/>Trust me, I know what it feels like to suffer travesty. We\'ve all been there, haven\'t we? For me, it was a Champions League semi, a shot that didn\'t cross the line, a goal wrongly given… but I don\'t want to go into that here, except in as much as to say: injustice at Anfield - who\'d have thought?<br/>相信我,我完全理解遭遇荒唐判罚的心情,毕竟我们都经历过这样的事,对不?比如我经历的,是某一场冠军联赛的半决赛,一个没过线的射门,和随之而来错误的判罚……不过我不想再多提这陈年旧事,请允许我点到为止地说一句:在安菲尔德有不公的判罚――谁能想得到哇??<br/><br/>In my experience, the only consolation one can usefully offer at a moment like this is the old truth that what goes around comes around, and that these things tend to cancel themselves out over the course of a season or two. <br/>以我多年的经验,在这样的时刻我们能给出的唯一有意义的安慰就是那句老话――运气是公平的,别看谁吃了亏谁占了便宜,一两个赛季过去总会相互抵消。(RP守恒定律)<br/><br/>Indeed, sometimes they cancel themselves out even more quickly than that. Remember the first Saturday of 2007-08? Liverpool fans are hot on their history - they tend to find it helps - so they probably recall clearly enough their opening fixture at Aston Villa, when Steven Gerrard took all the points in the dying seconds with one of his specialist, long-range hit-and-hopes - this time from a direct free kick that, it was amply demonstrated afterwards, should not have been given.<br/>的确,有时这些东西急得等不了一个赛季就会报应不爽了,记不记得2007-2008赛季的第一个星期六?我知道利物浦球迷们热衷于他们的历史――说不定他们都还清楚地记得他们在阿斯顿维拉的揭幕战中,杰拉德凭借他招牌的“超远距离踢上一脚然后看运气”式任意球在补时阶段硬是夺走了三分――这个得了分的直接任意球,随之被大量事实证明根本是子虚乌有。<br/><br/>So there you go then: two points cheekily filched at Villa - two points humbly handed back over the counter at home to us. Bank makes error in your favour: bank sends the boys round. Football never lets you down, does it?<br/>那接下来就是做算术咯:在维拉公园无耻地偷走两分――然后在主场对我们的比赛中又悄声不响地把这两分交给我们。银行不小心多给了你点东西:于是他们把这些不该得的要回去。在这方面足球从不会使你失望,对不对?<br/><br/>Of course, when I say that two points hinged on Sunday\'s wrongly-awarded penalty, I\'m assuming that the game would have remained at 1-0 to Liverpool if the penalty hadn\'t been given - a somewhat unstable assumption given the clear chances squandered, prior to the incident, by Terry, Pizarro and Drogba, to name only those, and the general sense, shared around the ground, that an equaliser was coming.<br/>当然咯,当我说周日那个不该有的点球交还了两分时,我的前提是假设利物浦没被吹这个点球,1比0的比分会一直维持到终场――这个假设能有没有实现的可能却要存疑,毕竟在点球之前我们已经浪费了大把机会,比如说特里的、皮萨罗的、德罗巴的等等等等,而当时全场上下也毫无疑问意识得到,比分马上就要被扳平了。<br/><br/>It\'s worth bearing in mind, too, the usual counter-argument from Liverpool fans regarding the non-existent Champions League semi-final goal - namely that, if the ref hadn\'t given the goal, he would have given a penalty and they would have scored from that. <br/>还有一件值得考虑的东西,利物浦球迷们对那个不存在的冠军联赛半决赛进球的常见反驳――简单地说,即使裁判认为这个球没进,他也会给切赫吹个点球,于是利物浦照样会得分。<br/><br/>We are, of course, deep in the realm of fantasy consequences here - a game which famously led Ruud Gullit to point out that his aunt would, in certain other circumstances, have been his uncle. Nevertheless, on the Liverpool model, let\'s at least point out that, at the moment when Rob Styles misguidedly blew his whistle on Sunday, the ball was just coming to an unmarked Didier Drogba, 10 yards out. <br/>这,当然,对于事件后果的推论已接近于奇幻――这场比赛促使路德·古力特写下了那段著名的评论,他指出“难道在某种特殊的情况下,我舅妈会变成我舅舅?”总之,若以利物浦球迷们的逻辑来思考,我只想指出一点:当罗伯·斯代尔斯在周日错误地吹起他的哨子时,球正飞向离门只十码、且无人盯防的德罗巴。<br/><br/>Styles has been wildly victimised, I feel, in the wake of one simple misinterpretation of a collision between Malouda and Finnan, and the ensuing non-controversy of the \'second yellow card\'. Whereas it seems to me that, if you wanted to criticise the referee on more substantial grounds, it would be for failing to play the advantage and denying us the pleasure of an uncontroversial (indeed, beautifully crafted) goal in open play. Who knows? We could well have pushed on to win it from there.<br/>我觉得,在对于马卢达与芬南身体接触这一个简单的观察失误和随后根本无关痛痒的“两张黄牌”事件后,斯代尔斯以非常错误的理由受到了舆论的迫害。因为在我看来,这名裁判真正应该被责难之处是,他没有遵循有利球的规则、让我们能够享受一个不会有争议(并且非常漂亮的)运动战进球。谁知道哪?说不定这么漂亮的进球鼓舞了士气,我们最后还能翻盘哪。<br/><br/>But you can\'t have everything. For example, one day I would like us to play Liverpool with a full-strength back four, though I can see that it\'s a pipe dream, and unlikely to happen within my lifetime. Ah, well. We do well enough as it is.<br/>但你不能指望事事如意,比如说,我很希望有一天我们在对阵利物浦时能有一条实力完整的后防线,不过我自己也知道这个梦想遥远得过头,我想我这辈子是看不到的了。诶,也罢,反正就算这样我们表现也不错来着。<br/><br/>We also have to accept that, when Liverpool play us, passions among fans will run high, and reason will, from time to time, go out the window. And understandably so. It might just be another fixture on the league schedule as far as we\'re concerned, but it\'s their Cup Final. <br/>我们还需要接受一个事实:当利物浦碰上我们时,他们的球迷们总会群情激愤、血往上冲,每次都会把理性和智慧抛得荡然无存。当然咯,这可以理解,毕竟对我们来说这或许只是联赛赛程表上多出来的一场比赛,而对他们来说,没了杯赛可就什么都不剩了!<br/><br/>In this context, let me merely mention the view of BBC-salaried experts with no obvious axe to grind on this topic, such as Alan Hansen (623 appearances for Liverpool) and Mark Lawrenson (332 appearances for Liverpool, making a massive, combined, BBC-tastic 955 appearances for Liverpool in total) - namely, that, despite dropping two points at home to us, Liverpool nevertheless demonstrated that they have the mettle to put in a proper challenge for the league, and could possibly even go on to win the title for the first time in the modern era. <br/>谈及此事,请允许我再引用一下那些拿BBC工资、对于这一话题并无特别用心与偏向的专家们、比如说阿兰·汉森(为利物浦出场623次)和马克·劳伦森(为利物浦出场332次,假如算上在BBC为利物浦解说的场次……合计“出场”将达到可怕的955次)的观点――简单地说,虽然在主场对我们没能全取三分,利物浦仍然展示了他们完全拥有联赛争冠者行列的气质,甚至有可能就此取得第一个“现代”的联赛冠军。<br/><br/>They may well be right, and good luck to them in their astrology, though, for what it\'s worth, I can\'t really see it myself. Yes, Liverpool seem to have strengthened themselves up front a little with the signing of Torres - a solid enough, goal in every three or four games kind of striker. But the problem, as I see it, is that they\'ve still got the same manager (the beard doesn\'t fool anyone). And don\'t forget, the Premier League doesn\'t go to penalties.<br/>他们说的或许没错,祝他们占星术师般的预言灵验,不过,姑妄说一句,我实在没法认同。是的,利物浦的前场实力似乎有所增强,因为他们签下了托雷斯――一名稳定保持每三到四场进一球的前锋。但我觉得问题的关键在于,他们没能换一个教练(别以为留了胡子我们就不认识你),而且别忘了,英超联赛可不会靠踢点球来决胜。<br/> |