Jump to content

Midweek Football 7/10 March


andykeenan

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, bobzy said:

No idea about the latter part, but I feel we're in a weird situation in football with these challenges.

Too much is made of "studs" and too much emphasis is put on the reaction of the "fouled" player.  Fabinho rolls around in pain and as soon as the red card is shown, he's helped up by TAA and walks away without even a limp.  There's no excessive force, there's no recklessness.  We need to accept that sometimes players will take knocks in challenges and stop this weird obsession with "studs showing".  If it's excessive force, fine - it's actually dangerous but that challenge just isn't at all.

 

Agreed about excessive force, but "excessive force" and "dangerous" are straight red offences, which isn't what was given, it was a second yellow. Reckless tackles are a yellow, and of course it's one of those arbitrary things about "well, what's reckless", but for me if you're off the ground and unable to control your movement and clatter an opponent because you can't control your momentum, it's reckless. He didn't mean to go studs first into his man, he tries to back out, but he can't because he's completely out of control by jumping in with both feet off the ground, he can't slow his momentum. I disagree about studs being up as well, that immediately raises the risk of any tackle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, rjw63 said:

Two penalties though, have we even had that many all season?

I didn't know that you only have to have one foot in the area for a foul to result in a penalty.

In England close penalty calls seem entirely arbitrary.

Watching a Forest game recently, a defender had Keinan's shirt stretched out a couple of feet behind him, at a corner, and the commentator never thought it was worth mentioning.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Agreed about excessive force, but "excessive force" and "dangerous" are straight red offences, which isn't what was given, it was a second yellow. Reckless tackles are a yellow, and of course it's one of those arbitrary things about "well, what's reckless", but for me if you're off the ground and unable to control your movement and clatter an opponent because you can't control your momentum, it's reckless. He didn't mean to go studs first into his man, he tries to back out, but he can't because he's completely out of control by jumping in with both feet off the ground, he can't slow his momentum. I disagree about studs being up as well, that immediately raises the risk of any tackle.

agree with most of this with this being the key part

he's shaped his foot to win the ball, which he does, it then has to come down somewhere, unfortunately it was on matip

its a hard one because he's not actually tackling, he's not jumped in to matip, its a follow through after he's stretched to play the ball, if he tackled with his body in that shape then i think fair enough its dangerous but im leaning more towards it being unintentional and unlucky and therefore 2nd yellow probably is about right to be fair, straight red would be harsh - i do then disagree with your other post, i dont think he's naïve, i think he's solely thinking about winning the ball, he's not taken matip in to consideration 

id want that given against us 100%

Edited by villa4europe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, villa4europe said:

and no one talking about the greatest defender in the history of world football marking the imaginary striker behind him rather than closing down martinez?

not a clue what that was from van dijk

Yep if that was Mings this place would be uproar. Matip getting most of the stick but was pathetic defending from Van Dijk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â