Callum McManaman

[gza the genius]

If I made an error that resulted in a builder or colleague being injured, due to my own incompetence or lack of basic understanding of my job, I'd be sacked.

Anyone who saw that tackle and didn't think it was a red card shouldn't be allowed near a football pitch, for the safety of everyone else on it.

I mean, I see what you're saying, but the ref's mistake didn't lead to Haidara being injured. Haidara is injured no matter what the ref does at that point.

Granted he was completely wrong, and there should be some sort of punishment, most likely just a demotion to lower leagues for a set period of time or something like that.

 

[Ainu]

Madness. If I was Newcastle or Haidara I'd definately look at my legal options. I hope the clubs and players take some sort collective stance against this sort of thing. How can you even walk onto the pitch knowing that a madman can break your bones unpunished?

 

[Sewelly The Geordie]

Disgusting.

 

[Carl]

No punishment?

 

[Ole's_toe_poke]

Now they might be charging John Carver with misconduct.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Shambolic, moronic stuff (yet again from the FA) that only goes further to highlight both it's ridiculousness, and the absurdity of the disciplinary procedures it currently adheres to.

The F.A want referee's to be treated with respect. They want players and fans to realise these people are human and will make mistakes, but ultimately, we need them in the game... yet they don't have the balls or respect for said officials themseves to help them out/take the pressure off/ compensate for the fact that they are human when errors like this occur. They are effectively, saying these officials are god, and there word/sight is final, nothing we can do here, and washing their hands of any responsibility, so that the limelight stays with the officials for getting it so horribly wrong in the first place.

It's a massive joke... not least because the FA picks and chooses when to follow and when not to follow these ludicrious rules/restrictions they've set themselves. I mean, it's as if they are saying..."well there's nothing they can do" ... of course there fecking is! Change your own pahtetic system and clamp down on stuff like this to stop it happening, and also take pressure of the officials.

Finally, imagine if McManaman playes next weekend and ends someones career (I doubt he will, but speak hypothetically)... who is then accountable? If that happens, I'd be sueing the FA for every penny.

 

[RedCanuck]

It's time to take the officials and the administration away from the 'amateur' game.
The professional leagues should take over the administration of the rules and officials in order to:

a) Come up with a set of rules that reflect the desires of the paying customers, the fans, not the 'amateur' administrators and refs.
b) Reflects a fair and equitable administration of those rules in whatever competition is being held.
c) Follows a concept of 'natural justice' where the correct rules are applied to the action and not the circumstances.
d) Allows for technology.

 

[Amir]

This is quite interesting:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ld-take-retrospective-action-next-season.html

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

I guess I'm in the minority who isn't that surprised he didn't receive a ban. Even though it was a horrific tackle, which wouldn't have surprised me to a ban given, it looks like a genuine attempt to clear the ball.

To me it's clear that he was aiming for the ball, and if Haidara didn't flick the ball away, McMannaman would have made contact with the ball. Studs were clearly showing, which does make me think = instant red card. But the only reason I can see why the FA have decided not to punish it is because they can genuinely see that he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away. I'm not trying to say "IT'S HAIDARA'S FAULT!" because that is just stupid.

I'm looking at it the same way as Nani's red card. Nani clearly tried to control the ball, but he hit Arbeloa instead (with his studs I believe?). It may seem as if McMannaman's is more dangerous due to a potential leg-break, but a boot to the abdomen could quite easily cause internal bleeding; (I'm not saying Nani's foul was so dangerous it could have caused internal bleeding).

Nani tried to go for the ball. Red carded. We complained for injustice.
McMannaman tried to go for the ball. No red card. We call for ban.
Hardly fair.

An awful post this in terms of grammar. I apologise.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

I agree with your general point.

Personally, I think it was a bad tackle. I think he should have gotten a red card. But I don't see any intent to injure his opponent. He was looking at the ball the entire time but it was a completely shit tackle.

Best solution would have been a red card, 3 match ban with Mcmanamanaman just admitting that it was a horrible tackle and deserved his red, but he didn't mean it and has apologized.

Then I think we'd all have gotten over it.

 

[Rowem]

The FA are an absolute joke. Nothing new here.

 

[Marching]

I guess I'm in the minority who isn't that surprised he didn't receive a ban. Even though it was a horrific tackle, which wouldn't have surprised me to a ban given, it looks like a genuine attempt to clear the ball.

To me it's clear that he was aiming for the ball, and if Haidara didn't flick the ball away, McMannaman would have made contact with the ball. Studs were clearly showing, which does make me think = instant red card. But the only reason I can see why the FA have decided not to punish it is because they can genuinely see that he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away. I'm not trying to say "IT'S HAIDARA'S FAULT!" because that is just stupid.

I'm looking at it the same way as Nani's red card. Nani clearly tried to control the ball, but he hit Arbeloa instead (with his studs I believe?). It may seem as if McMannaman's is more dangerous due to a potential leg-break, but a boot to the abdomen could quite easily cause internal bleeding; (I'm not saying Nani's foul was so dangerous it could have caused internal bleeding).

Nani tried to go for the ball. Red carded. We complained for injustice.
McMannaman tried to go for the ball. No red card. We call for ban.
Hardly fair.

An awful post this in terms of grammar. I apologise.

I'm sorry, because we are all entitled to our opinions, BUT that is the biggest load of steaming shit I have read in a long time.

"....he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away."

The second gif you posted shows quite clearly McManaman gets nowhere near the ball unlike Haidara who quite clearly gets the ball and is trying to move it on.

IMO it is the most blatent red card and 3+ games ban you can imagine and I hope NUFC & Haidara sue McManaman.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

I'm sorry, because we are all entitled to our opinions, BUT that is the biggest load of steaming shit I have read in a long time.

"....he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away."

The second gif you posted shows quite clearly McManaman gets nowhere near the ball unlike Haidara who quite clearly gets the ball and is trying to move it on.

IMO it is the most blatent red card and 3+ games ban you can imagine and I hope NUFC & Haidara sue McManaman.

That post is spot on!

Plus I don't know if it's been posted but Mcmanaman has done this before in a youth game. Why the feck didn't the coaches of the so called 'footballing' Wigan identify that the lad is clearly prone to reckless challenges and aim to iron it out. Instead we get this poxy diatribe that he's a 'lovely lad' and 'it was his debut etc' from Martinez and 'he gets the ball' nonsense from Whelan

 

[Sewelly The Geordie]

He straightens his leg towards the player while going in at full force. It's not a natural attempt to get the ball, and if it is he needs teaching that he's doing it fecking wrong. By being banned.

 

[RK]

In my opinion it should've been a red card (and nothing more) but I can understand the FA not retrospectively acting on it, if you think about it it's actually a concerted effort to remain consistent which is fair enough. At the end of the day it was the official(s)'s mistake, and there's not point trying to fix them all (which is the can of worms they don't want to open).

I do think it's a bit ridiculous that Newcastle want to sue though.

 

[Randall Flagg]

Rules need to be changed. But we all know them. If one of the officials see the incident nothing can be done. They cannot change the rules based on one incident.

I think the player will have learnt his lesson even without punishment and I will be surprised if he does it again.

But does anyone really think he set out to break his leg?

 

[Amir]

Plus I don't know if it's been posted but Mcmanaman has done this before in a youth game.

All we know is he got someone injured. We don't know that 'he did it before' because we don't know how it actually went.

I agree with Hernandez - BFA and I've written it a few days ago (though I did go to the extreme, saying I'm not sure I'd dish out a red card because I think it's unlucky more than anything). We KNOW the FA have shown before they will take retrospective decisions in extreme cases, and the one I know about is Mendes-Thatcher. But even though the result here is horrible, I don't think it's the sort of thing that should make the FA go against their own rules.

Which doesn't mean they shouldn't change their rules.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

I'm sorry, because we are all entitled to our opinions, BUT that is the biggest load of steaming shit I have read in a long time.

"....he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away."

The second gif you posted shows quite clearly McManaman gets nowhere near the ball unlike Haidara who quite clearly gets the ball and is trying to move it on.

IMO it is the most blatent red card and 3+ games ban you can imagine and I hope NUFC & Haidara sue McManaman.

The second GIF isn't as good of a view as the first one. Looking at the first one, he was directly heading for the ball.

As I said, a part of me does indeed believe it warranted a red card because it was studs showing and dangerous. But, the footage really does tell me he was genuinely going for the ball.

It reminds me of Keane's challenge on Haaland - its around about the same area. I guess I'm just comparing the two, and I can quite easily make out that McMannaman's attempting to go for the ball. It was a foolish tackle, and at the time I would have called for a red card.

All I'm saying is that I'm not surprised the FA deem it non-bannable as on second reviewing, they probably can see there wasn't intent.

If you believe that intent for going for the ball doesn't matter I hope you believe Nani's red card was deserved then otherwise it's showing a bit of double-standard.

 

[Marching]

In my opinion it should've been a red card (and nothing more) but I can understand the FA not retrospectively acting on it, if you think about it it's actually a concerted effort to remain consistent which is fair enough. At the end of the day it was the official(s)'s mistake, and there's not point trying to fix them all (which is the can of worms they don't want to open).

I do think it's a bit ridiculous that Newcastle want to sue though.

But the FA do act restrospectively...and it would be silly if they didn't because ref's are human (alledgedly) and therefore make mistakes which the FA then put right.

Why shouldn't NUFC/Haidara sue...the club have lost a player for X number of weeks and the player will lose out financially.

Anichebe accepted £100,000 in an out of court settlement for this 'tackle' from Nolan.

 

[noodlehair]

Sorry, but if he's ONLY trying to clear the ball, why does his non kicking foot leave the floor when he flies into the tackle? Why does he stick his studs in the direction of the ball instead of his laces? Has no one taught him how to kick a football yet?

He's a premiership footballer who hasn't learnt to use his standing foot for balance or which side of his foot he's supposed to kick the ball with?

Do players regularly go around the pitch flying karate kicking the ball in the direction they want it to go?

I don't think I've seen a player do this, ever?

 

[The Neviller]

I guess I'm in the minority who isn't that surprised he didn't receive a ban. Even though it was a horrific tackle, which wouldn't have surprised me to a ban given, it looks like a genuine attempt to clear the ball.

To me it's clear that he was aiming for the ball, and if Haidara didn't flick the ball away, McMannaman would have made contact with the ball. Studs were clearly showing, which does make me think = instant red card. But the only reason I can see why the FA have decided not to punish it is because they can genuinely see that he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away. I'm not trying to say "IT'S HAIDARA'S FAULT!" because that is just stupid.

I'm looking at it the same way as Nani's red card. Nani clearly tried to control the ball, but he hit Arbeloa instead (with his studs I believe?). It may seem as if McMannaman's is more dangerous due to a potential leg-break, but a boot to the abdomen could quite easily cause internal bleeding; (I'm not saying Nani's foul was so dangerous it could have caused internal bleeding).

Nani tried to go for the ball. Red carded. We complained for injustice.
McMannaman tried to go for the ball. No red card. We call for ban.
Hardly fair.

An awful post this in terms of grammar. I apologise.

feck sake, even if he'd gotten the ball, the angle, height and force of the tackle meant he'd still have nailed the guy.

Ridiculous tackle, and similarly ridiculous post.

 

[Sewelly The Geordie]

Sorry, but if he's ONLY trying to clear the ball, why does his non kicking foot leave the floor when he flies into the tackle? Why does he stick his studs in the direction of the ball instead of his laces? Has no one taught him how to kick a football yet?

He's a premiership footballer who hasn't learnt to use his standing foot for balance or which side of his foot he's supposed to kick the ball with?

Do players regularly go around the pitch flying karate kicking the ball in the direction they want it to go?

I don't think I've seen a player do this, ever?

Spot on.

 

[alastair]

I'm sorry, because we are all entitled to our opinions, BUT that is the biggest load of steaming shit I have read in a long time.

"....he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away."

The second gif you posted shows quite clearly McManaman gets nowhere near the ball unlike Haidara who quite clearly gets the ball and is trying to move it on.

IMO it is the most blatent red card and 3+ games ban you can imagine and I hope NUFC & Haidara sue McManaman.

Absolutely.

I thought the debate in this thread would be whether it merited more than 3 games, not whether it was a foul or not.

 

[Marching]

The second GIF isn't as good of a view as the first one. Looking at the first one, he was directly heading for the ball.

As I said, a part of me does indeed believe it warranted a red card because it was studs showing and dangerous. But, the footage really does tell me he was genuinely going for the ball.

It reminds me of Keane's challenge on Haaland - its around about the same area. I guess I'm just comparing the two, and I can quite easily make out that McMannaman's attempting to go for the ball. It was a foolish tackle, and at the time I would have called for a red card.

All I'm saying is that I'm not surprised the FA deem it non-bannable as on second reviewing, they probably can see there wasn't intent.

If you believe that intent for going for the ball doesn't matter I hope you believe Nani's red card was deserved then otherwise it's showing a bit of double-standard.

I've seen the incident from a number of angles and they all show that it was reckless beyond belief...who goes into a tackle with a straight leg and studs showing? There was no way in hell the wigan player was ever going to get that ball.

I think I'm right in saying that the word intent doesn't come in to deciding whether a tackle is punishable...the word reckless does and McManaman was defintely reckless.

Nani's red card v RM was totally different...he didn't see the player coming in whereas McManaman clearly did.

 

[gza the genius]

The second GIF isn't as good of a view as the first one. Looking at the first one, he was directly heading for the ball.

As I said, a part of me does indeed believe it warranted a red card because it was studs showing and dangerous. But, the footage really does tell me he was genuinely going for the ball.

It reminds me of Keane's challenge on Haaland - its around about the same area. I guess I'm just comparing the two, and I can quite easily make out that McMannaman's attempting to go for the ball. It was a foolish tackle, and at the time I would have called for a red card.

All I'm saying is that I'm not surprised the FA deem it non-bannable as on second reviewing, they probably can see there wasn't intent.

If you believe that intent for going for the ball doesn't matter I hope you believe Nani's red card was deserved then otherwise it's showing a bit of double-standard.

There's a world of difference between Nani's challenge and this one, the biggest one being Nani actually never even sees Arbeloa. There really is almost no resemblance/connection between the two tackles at all.

With McManaman even if he would have gotten the ball he was still going to get Haidara. He went in full speed with his studs at knee height. There's absolutely no need to ever go in to a challenge like that if you have any kind of respect for your opponent. I played as a defender and I wouldn't even go in to a tackle like that with a player I absolutely hated.

 

[Maagge]

I've seen the incident from a number of angles and they all show that it was reckless beyond belief...who goes into a tackle with a straight leg and studs showing? There was no way in hell the wigan player was ever going to get that ball.

I think I'm right in saying that the word intent doesn't come in to deciding whether a tackle is punishable...the word reckless does and McManaman was defintely reckless.

Nani's red card v RM was totally different...he didn't see the player coming in whereas McManaman clearly did.

Well and then the fact that Nani wasn't using excessive force which McManaman was.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

Well either way, not once did I say that I wholeheartly believed it wasn't a red-card offence. All I said was that I wasn't completely surprised the FA didn't ban him. That's all.

LEAVE ME ALONE YOU GUYS!

 

[noodlehair]

Newcastle have been on the receiving end of similar legal action, paying Everton striker Victor Anichebe a six-figure sum in an out of court settlement after he was seriously injured by a two-footed tackle from former Magpie captain Kevin Nolan back in February 2009.


It seems the FA can take retrospective action in "extreme circumstances"....not sure why they don't think the Wigan incident extreme.

But do the player or club have a case to sue the FA for failing their duty?

I mean, to make a mistake is one thing, but they're actually saying there's nothing wrong with the challenge in the circumstances and that they're unwilling to act on it.

In other words he can do the same thing again next week and the week after, and it's tough luck to whoever's career he ends. This is an acceptable way for players to behave on a football pitch as long as they're slightly sneaky about it, according to FA directive which is now out in the public, in writing.

The FA are saying this is a stance they took back in the summer when given the option by Fifa not to, which for me shifts the responsability directly on to them.

I mean, I see what you're saying, but the ref's mistake didn't lead to Haidara being injured. Haidara is injured no matter what the ref does at that point.

Granted he was completely wrong, and there should be some sort of punishment, most likely just a demotion to lower leagues for a set period of time or something like that.

Alright, look at it this way.

Supposing you run a shop, and one of your employees is brutally assaulted and injured, right in front of an on duty police officer. The Police officer does nothing about it. Later when CCTV footage is shown to him and the suspect identified, he turns round and says "yes I saw it, I don't think it was a crime" and so nothing is done.

Would you want him policing the streets anymore, let alone anywhere near your shop? Should he be allowed to carry on doing his job?

Why should lower league players have to put up with officials who think it's ok for opponents to break their legs. Are their legs somehow less important to them?

In my opinion it should've been a red card (and nothing more) but I can understand the FA not retrospectively acting on it, if you think about it it's actually a concerted effort to remain consistent which is fair enough. At the end of the day it was the official(s)'s mistake, and there's not point trying to fix them all (which is the can of worms they don't want to open).

I do think it's a bit ridiculous that Newcastle want to sue though.

It's not consistent at all. They rescind red cards on appeal, banned John Terry and Luis Suarez for incidents the officials were partially witness to at the time of them taking place. It's completely inconsistent.

A legal case wouldn't be ridiculous either. It would depend on the extent of the injury. If the player's career is damaged or shortened by the challenge then there's a case to sue for loss of earnings due to wrecklessness. It's happened before plenty of times. Sir Alex has given evidence in court in support of at least one player in the past for the same thing.

You don't become immune to the law just because you're on a football pitch. Even if the FA think you do.

 

[gamma1]

I don’t understand how the FA can deem that tackle to be an indisputable attempt to win the ball without any hint of irresponsible behavior from McManaman. I view it as a reckless challenge that deserved a red card and the three match ban that goes along with the sending off. A retroactive ban should have been enforced based on television footage; the fact that the referee missed the full extent of the incident doesn’t justify the FA’s failure to administer punishment in light of the visibly damning evidence. If such dangerous tackling from callous defenders goes unpunished, there is a real risk of several players incurring career threatening injuries on a regular basis. The FA has the ultimate responsibility in guaranteeing the safety of players in the league; it is in their best interests to offer adequate protection and to resolutely uphold the integrity of the competition.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

I've seen the incident from a number of angles and they all show that it was reckless beyond belief...who goes into a tackle with a straight leg and studs showing? There was no way in hell the wigan player was ever going to get that ball.

I think I'm right in saying that the word intent doesn't come in to deciding whether a tackle is punishable...the word reckless does and McManaman was defintely reckless.

Nani's red card v RM was totally different...he didn't see the player coming in whereas McManaman clearly did.

OK if you don't think intent should come into it, and only recklessness - then why is Nani's any different? True, he didn't see the player but some might argue that the foot was high enough to cause damage and could have potentially harmful for Arbeloa. Reckless surely?

For what it's worth, I should once again emphasize that I don't think McMannaman's wasn't a red card offence; neither do I think Nani's was. I'm just conjuring up a topic of comparison.

 

[Maagge]

OK if you don't think intent should come into it, and only recklessness - then why is Nani's any different? True, he didn't see the player but some might argue that the foot was high enough to cause damage and could have potentially harmful for Arbeloa. Reckless surely?

For what it's worth, I should once again emphasize that I don't think McMannaman's wasn't a red card offence; neither do I think Nani's was. I'm just conjuring up a topic of comparison.

We have to stop talking about recklessness given that playing recklessly only gets you cautioned whereas using excessive force gets you sent off.
Now try the comparison with the Nani situation again

 

[RK]

But the FA do act restrospectively...and it would be silly if they didn't because ref's are human (alledgedly) and therefore make mistakes which the FA then put right.

Why shouldn't NUFC/Haidara sue...the club have lost a player for X number of weeks and the player will lose out financially.

Anichebe accepted £100,000 in an out of court settlement for this 'tackle' from Nolan.

Spoiler

Being honest I didn't know about the Anichebe settlment. However I can't see Wigan settling and I can't see Newcastle getting anywhere with a court case given that the sport's governing body has decided that it's been dealt with. In this situation I see it going down as part of the inherent risk in professional football. Not that I'm a lawyer.

Sorry, but if he's ONLY trying to clear the ball, why does his non kicking foot leave the floor when he flies into the tackle? Why does he stick his studs in the direction of the ball instead of his laces? Has no one taught him how to kick a football yet?

He's a premiership footballer who hasn't learnt to use his standing foot for balance or which side of his foot he's supposed to kick the ball with?

Do players regularly go around the pitch flying karate kicking the ball in the direction they want it to go?

I don't think I've seen a player do this, ever?

It's a poor tackle that deserved a red, but it's fairly clear that he just tried to twat the ball as quickly and as hard as possible, but essentially air-kicked. Look how his lower-leg appears to bend in the second GIF - that's a sign that he was expecting contact with a ball that wasn't there.

It's not consistent at all. They rescind red cards on appeal, banned John Terry and Luis Suarez for incidents the officials were partially witness to at the time of them taking place. It's completely inconsistent..

It is consistent. The referees did not have all the information for the Terry and Suarez incidents, and would've acted had they heard the racist abuse. Red cards are rescinded on appeal but I'm not aware of it happening without the referee changing his original stance given new evidence.

 

[kouroux]

How the feck can the FA do nothing when the official (prick) who claimed he saw the incident didn't even have a proper look at it ???
What'll prevent dumb officials from using that line each time they fail to red card a player who commits an extremely dangerous tackle then ?
Football is directed and refereed by incompetent and hypocrites

 

[finneh]

I got some criticism for saying that Shawcross' tackle on Ramsey was not a "dangerous" tackle... But that is an exceptionally dangerous tackle and warrants a 5-6 game ban in my opinion. Straight legged, over the top, knee high, excessive force/speed, grossly negligent... It's just about every possible thing that could be poor/dangerous about a challenge rolled into one.

He shouldn't get the ban just as a punishment, but as a period of time where the club can educate him before he plays again.

 

[.Phil1968]

Awful challenge and unbelievable the FA are doing nothing yet are charging the 2 coaches for handbags. Couldn't make it up really.

 

[Marching]

But do the player or club have a case to sue the FA for failing their duty?

I mean, to make a mistake is one thing, but they're actually saying there's nothing wrong with the challenge in the circumstances and that they're unwilling to act on it.

In other words he can do the same thing again next week and the week after, and it's tough luck to whoever's career he ends. This is an acceptable way for players to behave on a football pitch as long as they're slightly sneaky about it, according to FA directive which is now out in the public, in writing.

The FA are saying this is a stance they took back in the summer when given the option by Fifa not to, which for me shifts the responsability directly on to them.

Fecked if I know who can sue who? Certainly the FA have made themselves look stupid by making a decision based on their officials only seeing part of the incident. Not sure how that works. but does that open them up for legal action? Dunno.

I wonder if the officials can be sued? Halsey apparantly apologised to Pardew at halftime for missing the incident due a player running across his line of sight...so it's down to the linesmen.

It's more likely Wigan get sued as the players employers...I hope they do and then Wigan get relegated.

 

[Donaldo]

I guess I'm in the minority who isn't that surprised he didn't receive a ban. Even though it was a horrific tackle, which wouldn't have surprised me to a ban given, it looks like a genuine attempt to clear the ball.

To me it's clear that he was aiming for the ball, and if Haidara didn't flick the ball away, McMannaman would have made contact with the ball. Studs were clearly showing, which does make me think = instant red card. But the only reason I can see why the FA have decided not to punish it is because they can genuinely see that he was aiming for the ball and was just unfortunate that Haidara flicked the ball away. I'm not trying to say "IT'S HAIDARA'S FAULT!" because that is just stupid.

I'm looking at it the same way as Nani's red card. Nani clearly tried to control the ball, but he hit Arbeloa instead (with his studs I believe?). It may seem as if McMannaman's is more dangerous due to a potential leg-break, but a boot to the abdomen could quite easily cause internal bleeding; (I'm not saying Nani's foul was so dangerous it could have caused internal bleeding).

Nani tried to go for the ball. Red carded. We complained for injustice.
McMannaman tried to go for the ball. No red card. We call for ban.
Hardly fair.

An awful post this in terms of grammar. I apologise.

What fecking tosh. That's a horrible tackle.

 

[SER19]

My take is that this debacle has highlighted to everpresent problems associated with the game and people that follow it.

Firstly, the FA problem. It highlights absolutely astronomical levels of inconsistency in punishments and makes you wonder what type of utter vacuums are running that process. It was a criminally bad tackle, clear as day a red card, not given on the pitch and should be punished. The linesman saw it, so fecking what, he's human and he got it wrong. Yes judge, the way I saw it at the time he was helping an old woman with her shopping, now that I see it on CCTV he was violently violating her. Let him off.

Secondly, it highlights the pests amongst football fans. The controversialists, the strays, the outside the box, swim against the tide attention seeking idiots. Bias is a funny thing. That tackle was disgraceful. There is simply no other way of looking at it. It if had happened to a United player who was now in some sort of career limbo as the swelling is so bad they cant diagnose it, the very same idiots would be calling for his head. The way he went in, the way the rest of his body moved even ignoring his leg,the savageness of it. It was a clear red card offence and having priors of something similar means he shouldnt be allowed near a pitch for a long time. There is no can of worms to be opened, there is no gray area. Some tackles are just clear as days violent conduct. Nobody is asking for retrospective bands for the likes of shelveys red this season or an extended punishment. This tackle was sheer force to injure. Any twat on defending it in any shape or form is just looking for attention or trying to offere an alternative view in a case where there simply isnt any.

I genuinely cant believe that this one went unpunished on the pitch or off. Its near a final straw for me with what you can tolerate within the game. Its an overused phrase, but that decision is an embarrassment to the sport.

 

[ghaliboy]

Seriously, if I'm a manager I'd want to know who the official was who saw the incident and what's being done about them, because no way would I want my players on a pitch under their duristiction at any point in the future.

, every A-League ref ever!

 

[Ainu]

I don't get how anyone could even try to make excuses for that tackle. It's a horrendous tackle with excessive force and it was always going to go through the player's legs. It's astonishingly horrible. If ever there was tackle where you'd turn away in utter disgust it's this one.