Student or Learner
MANCHESTER UNITED 0 READING 0
A false start for the champions against opponents who finished with 10 men, but manager Alex Ferguson will be more worried about the injury to England striker Wayne Rooney -- as will national coach Steve McClaren.
United completely dominated but lacked the finishing needed to take the points, even after Dave Kitson was dismissed in the 72nd minute for a bad foul on United's Patrice Evra -- just seconds after the Reading striker had come off the bench.
Englishpage.com states that:
If the Past Perfect action did occur at a specific time, the Simple Past can be used instead of the Past Perfect when "before" or "after" is used in the sentence. The words "before" and "after" actually tell you what happens first, so the Past Perfect is optional.
In the report the PP (had come off) is used. But if we follow the rule below it, we can use the simple past as we know that the player was sent off just seconds after he came in as a substitute in the 72nd minute. Is that right?
here's another example:
Wigan 1-1 Fulham
"On 11 minutes, Clint Dempsey got on to the end of a Diomansy Kamara cross and fired home to put Fulham ahead.
Wigan had already been rocked two minutes earlier when striker Emile Heskey was forced off injured. ..."
I think the simple past can replace PP here too - sportswriters usually use PP in situations like this as I have noticed, but is there a subtle difference between the two tenses? Why do you think they choose PP over the SP?
AmE speakers' take is welcome too.
Last edited by retro; 20-Sep-2007 at 03:10.