LakotaDakota Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 Simple yellow card tackle 99% of the time. Happens multiple times every week, Nowhere near the goal, Plenty of other players around. Crap ref evening things up for his earlier mistake with Traore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 He really is bang average. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, LakotaDakota said: Simple yellow card tackle 99% of the time. Happens multiple times every week, Nowhere near the goal, Plenty of other players around. Crap ref evening things up for his earlier mistake with Traore. I think we would win an appeal on that but it was a stupid foul to make , a simple trip would have sufficed . A massive let down since he arrived and nothing like the player he was at forest . Edited September 13, 2017 by Eastie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taxahunter Posted September 13, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 13, 2017 I thought he played well last night, one of our best players. Was really unlucky not to score and should have had a penalty imo. We really cant blame us not winning on him as we had 60-65 minutes before that, to try and win the game. The tackle he made should only have been a yellow, but he gave the referee a chance to even things out as somebody said earlier in this thread. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) I disagree with those that say it was a yellow. Yes you make that challenge at times but you have to at least look like you are trying to win the ball. He went straight for the back of the legs. No way should we appeal. If anything the club should punish him for wreckless behaviour. Edit: just watched it again and can see how some refs may have given yellow. But considering it was worse that Adama's tackle he had to go. Edited September 13, 2017 by Vive_La_Villa 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted September 13, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: I disagree with those that say it was a yellow. Yes you make that challenge at times but you have to at least look like you are trying to win the ball. He went straight for the back of the legs. No way should we appeal. If anything the club should punish him for wreckless behaviour. Edit: just watched it again and can see how some refs may have given yellow. But considering it was worse that Adama's tackle he had to go. It happens every week in almost every game in every professional league in the country. it's a yellow card. If a tackle like that got a red card in a Man United game they'd be talking about it for months. And on what planet was it worse than Adama's tackle?! Edited September 13, 2017 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: It happens every week in almost every game in every professional league in the country. it's a yellow card. If a tackle like that got a red card in a Man United game they'd be talking about it for months. And on what planet was it worse than Adama's tackle?! At least Adama went for the ball, he just followed through with his trailing leg. Lansbury lunged at the back of that guys leg. I have no idea how you can compare the Lansbury tackle to your standard professional foul stopping an attack. Edit: actually looking again Adamas was pretty wreckless. They were probably both yellow but still stupid of Lansbury when you know ref will look to even things up. Edited September 13, 2017 by Vive_La_Villa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted September 13, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 13, 2017 59 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: I have no idea how you can compare the Lansbury tackle to your standard professional foul stopping an attack. Because it was exactly the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCU Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said: I disagree with those that say it was a yellow. Yes you make that challenge at times but you have to at least look like you are trying to win the ball. He went straight for the back of the legs. No way should we appeal. If anything the club should punish him for wreckless behaviour. Edit: just watched it again and can see how some refs may have given yellow. But considering it was worse that Adama's tackle he had to go. And that is what you call shit refereeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Stevo985 said: Because it was exactly the same. It really wasn't but we could go on all day so will have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 43 minutes ago, Warnock said: And that is what you call shit refereeing. Agree but it's no secret refs will even things up when they've made a s**t decision. As soon as I saw that challenge I thought what the hell was that?, he's off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 3 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Lansbury lunged at the back of that guys leg. I have no idea how you can compare the Lansbury tackle to your standard professional foul stopping an attack. I have no idea how you can think it's anything but. Yes, he makes absolutely zero attempt to win the ball, but it's a yellow card tackle in pretty much every game all the time ever. It's not malicious or dangerous or anything. (As an aside, I'd actually like to see red cards given for these tackles as they have no purpose other than to stop an attack by unfair means.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 20 minutes ago, bobzy said: I have no idea how you can think it's anything but. Yes, he makes absolutely zero attempt to win the ball, but it's a yellow card tackle in pretty much every game all the time ever. It's not malicious or dangerous or anything. (As an aside, I'd actually like to see red cards given for these tackles as they have no purpose other than to stop an attack by unfair means.) Just watched it again. Maybe it's not as bad as I first thought. He has just gone for the back of his leg though. It's not your usual trip. It's more of a hack. Anyway it shouldn't have affected the result. We're still shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) Villa have confirmed we will appeal the red card on the grounds of wrongful dismissal. Edited September 13, 2017 by Eastie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilbertoAVFC Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Honestly, we will get done for frivilous appeal here. On what planet is this not a red? Just because people get away with this kind of behaviour at Sunday league it does not justify it being "just a yellow" here where there are standards to uphold and referees are under more obligation to make these decisions that risk injury. It's a disgusting challenge. I firmly believe that Adama's red had no bearing on the ref's decision. Maybe it's the angle on the replay (I have only seen one), but for me: - Cynical. Yes, not last man, but 100% a yellow if he just tugged his shirt, which is not in the least bit dangerous but the rule. - Dangerous. He has literally c**ted him from behind in the back of the knee. The phrase gets banded around too often, but if you are the attacker and not expecting the contact, you are risking a serious injury. - Malicious. Not only dangerous, but 100% deliberate and done out of pure anger. It is a nasty, nasty challenge which, for me ticks all of the main boxes for a red card. It's not a trip, it's a lunge. There is not a chance in hell this gets rescinded, and is far more likely to result in a lengthier ban. The only reason this has been done is a desperate attempt to save face on Bruce's part. Genuinely baffled by this appeal. It's embarrassing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted September 13, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 13, 2017 3 minutes ago, gilbertoAVFC said: Honestly, we will get done for frivilous appeal here. On what planet is this not a red? Just because people get away with this kind of behaviour at Sunday league it does not justify it being "just a yellow" here where there are standards to uphold and referees are under more obligation to make these decisions that risk injury. It's a disgusting challenge. I firmly believe that Adama's red had no bearing on the ref's decision. Maybe it's the angle on the replay (I have only seen one), but for me: - Cynical. Yes, not last man, but 100% a yellow if he just tugged his shirt, which is not in the least bit dangerous but the rule. - Dangerous. He has literally c**ted him from behind in the back of the knee. The phrase gets banded around too often, but if you are the attacker and not expecting the contact, you are risking a serious injury. - Malicious. Not only dangerous, but 100% deliberate and done out of pure anger. It is a nasty, nasty challenge which, for me ticks all of the main boxes for a red card. It's not a trip, it's a lunge. There is not a chance in hell this gets rescinded, and is far more likely to result in a lengthier ban. The only reason this has been done is a desperate attempt to save face on Bruce's part. Genuinely baffled by this appeal. It's embarrassing. I couldn't disagree with you more. I'm not confident we'll win the appeal, but it's certainly worth a go. It's never a red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czechlad Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, gilbertoAVFC said: Honestly, we will get done for frivilous appeal here. On what planet is this not a red? Just because people get away with this kind of behaviour at Sunday league it does not justify it being "just a yellow" here where there are standards to uphold and referees are under more obligation to make these decisions that risk injury. It's a disgusting challenge. I firmly believe that Adama's red had no bearing on the ref's decision. Maybe it's the angle on the replay (I have only seen one), but for me: - Cynical. Yes, not last man, but 100% a yellow if he just tugged his shirt, which is not in the least bit dangerous but the rule. - Dangerous. He has literally c**ted him from behind in the back of the knee. The phrase gets banded around too often, but if you are the attacker and not expecting the contact, you are risking a serious injury. - Malicious. Not only dangerous, but 100% deliberate and done out of pure anger. It is a nasty, nasty challenge which, for me ticks all of the main boxes for a red card. It's not a trip, it's a lunge. There is not a chance in hell this gets rescinded, and is far more likely to result in a lengthier ban. The only reason this has been done is a desperate attempt to save face on Bruce's part. Genuinely baffled by this appeal. It's embarrassing. Ok so this is just wrong and spreading false information. Lansbury didn't tug the player because the player was at full sprint and was much faster than Lansbury. This was the only way to stop him from sprinting at Chester in a 1v1 situation. Dangerous? He tripped him. He did not cleat him in the back of the knee as you are saying. A trip is not a nasty challenge. Out of anger? What are you talking about? There was no anger in this. Lansbury got up and was ready to accept his yellow. This was a clear attempt at stopping a counter and it worked. There was no malicious intent in the tackle whatsoever. Lansbury literally did it just to stop the counter attack. You can clearly see Lansbury's leg is not going in the back of the player as you mentioned. He did not cleat him as you mentioned. Lansbury caught the trailing leg, and hooked him down. It was a trip. Stop spreading lies. Edited September 13, 2017 by Czechlad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Yellow in my opinion but lucky not to get booked for diving earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 My initial reaction during the game was that it's the classic yellow card, deliberate foul but he's done it so badly I hope the ref doesn't overreact and make it more. I worried about the red before it came out and for that Lamsbury is stupid because whether it was right call he gave the ref a decision to make (ie whether it deserved more than the usual yellow) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 10 hours ago, Eastie said: I think we would win an appeal on that but it was a stupid foul to make , a simple trip would have sufficed . A massive let down since he arrived and nothing like the player he was at forest . A team shackled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts